Now you have a 21inch for near enough the same price...(when 21 inch monitors are dirt cheap...) when they could have had the 24 inch model as entry giving the consumer better value.
You really don't know what you are talking about in terms of keeping up with reality.
The reason why they removed the DVD is people weren't using them, and it's far cheaper in the long run to do it externally and to charge people for it, if they need it.
Secondly, Apple provides Thunderbolt port(s) standard, most PCs don't have Thunderbolt.
Apple has been providing more and faster SSD storage options which are faster and more reliable than HDD and HDD's are on their way out. I predict that HDDs will be a thing of the past completely in about 2 years in 99% of Apple's computers.
Apple is moving (obviously) away from giving a keyboard/ms on headless units. I think it's because they are seeing more and more people keeping their existing keyboard and mouse, or buying whatever they want.
Apple does their own research in terms of what people want and various price points they feel the market will bear.
And Apple is NOT going to be the low cost leader since there is NO money in that.
Seriously, you need to compare a like system as close as you can get and see what you get and don't get with each and figure out why one costs what it costs.
Otherwise, i think your posts are becoming a waste of MY time and others.
Blah, blah, blah...
You're posts have been a waste of time so far. Tell us something we don't know. Apple's desktop prices have been creeping upwards for a while now. Nobody said anything about Apple making a £399 top of the line iMac. So put that in yer yahoo.
It so happens that Apple's laptop line is far better value. You can get the best part of 3 laptops that include a screen for under a grand. YOU CAN'T SAY THAT FOR A SINGLE DESKTOP OFFERING!
That they haven't updated the Mini show's how transparent Apple's up sell greed machine works. (And why isn't the Mini 'junk?' It's 'cheap.')
Junk pricing. Fair pricing and taking the p*ss pricing are three different things.
Candidate for a used Mac? I have a top of the line iMac that I bought brand new. But you've given me an idea in buying used from now on. If few more Apple buyers do that...Apple might take the hint and cut consumers a better deal. It wasn't so long ago that the iMac was the shining star in a value driven desktop for consumers.
If my posts are a waste of time then 'DEAL WITH IT!' :P
I was responding to Lemon, he for some reason has a difficult time with that and he needs to have it pounded in his brain that Apple isn't going to go after the low end computer market,
B*ll*cks.
Many commentators had the iPad priced at £1000 before launch. Apple shocked everyone and gave it a £399 entry price. So, THEY CAN DO VALUE AND WELL MADE MACHINES.
The history of the iMac is ALL about VALUE. From the the colours to the white plastic to the initial alu machines.
I don't have a difficult time with Apple's own history. Maybe you need to have Apple's previous pricing history on the iMac pounded into your BRAIN with a bat...so you can get the idea what while Apple have never made a £399 desktop with keyboard, mouse and monitor...they did make one for £595 with the original iMac.
And they did have have a flat iMac design with integrated crappics and DVD player for £695.
So don't talk b*ll*cks about Apple's margins.
Hubris, upsell greed comes to mind. And they're selling more Macs than they did in those days. Far more. (That must mean prices are ok, right? Noted that they cut the prices on the retina line of MacBooks....why did they do that, eh? :P )
They've just about hit the glass ceiling on Mac growth. And that aint just down to iPads. Greedy b*st*rdness of Retina pricing, iMacs took the edge of Mac sales when they were outgrowing the PC market nicely.
It's like the 'they can't make an affordable' iPhone crap. The iPhone 4S is £350. That isn't cheap. But it is affordable compared to the flagship.
Just because I have a top of the line iMac doesn't mean I don't want a more affordable one either for my next upgrade or for other folks who want to buy a Mac for under a grand without being ass-reamed for a machine with a cheap ass 21 inch monitor and integrated crappics and no dvd player (only Apple could charge £60 for something they dropped and boot prices higher for the machine...) for £1150.
You're posts have been a waste of time so far. Tell us something we don't know. Apple's desktop prices have been creeping upwards for a while now. Nobody said anything about Apple making a £399 top of the line iMac. So put that in yer yahoo.
It so happens that Apple's laptop line is far better value. You can get the best part of 3 laptops that include a screen for under a grand. YOU CAN'T SAY THAT FOR A SINGLE DESKTOP OFFERING!
That they haven't updated the Mini show's how transparent Apple's up sell greed machine works. (And why isn't the Mini 'junk?' It's 'cheap.')
Junk pricing. Fair pricing and taking the p*ss pricing are three different things.
Candidate for a used Mac? I have a top of the line iMac that I bought brand new. But you've given me an idea in buying used from now on. If few more Apple buyers do that...Apple might take the hint and cut consumers a better deal. It wasn't so long ago that the iMac was the shining star in a value driven desktop for consumers.
If my posts are a waste of time then 'DEAL WITH IT!' :P
Lemon Bon Bon.
Actually, Apple prices have just come down.
They are also deploying more expensive and faster SSD storage than the PC mfg are doing, plus TB and they still have the best resolution screens for laptops.
Sorry, but you are just NOT going to convince me that Apple is raising prices.
They just DROPPED the prices on the new MacBookPros, MacBook Airs, iMacs, didn't they?
MBPRetina got a lot more features and they dropped the price of both the 13in and 15in models.
The MBAir got faster SSD, better processor, 802.11ac and they dropped the price.
The iMacs got faster SSD, better CPU/GPUs, 802.11ac and they are actually a little cheaper on some models. The one I bought is about the same price, only with better CPU/GPU, faster SSD, 802.11ac, so I don't know what your problem is.
Name one single product that they raised the price? Remember, you have to factor in more free s/w and OS updates. They are using faster SSD, 802.11ac, faster processors, etc. etc.
Maybe you should just put together your own DIY PC and run Windows 8.1 and quit putting out misleading BS. You OBVIOUSLY don't know much about the industry or how to compare models/prices. If you are consuming mind altering products, either get off of it or get a better supplier. Your brain doesn't think properly.
Sorry, but you are just NOT going to convince me that Apple is raising prices.
They just DROPPED the prices on the new MacBookPros, MacBook Airs, iMacs, didn't they?
MBPRetina got a lot more features and they dropped the price of both the 13in and 15in models.
The MBAir got faster SSD, better processor, 802.11ac and they dropped the price.
The iMacs got faster SSD, better CPU/GPUs, 802.11ac and they are actually a little cheaper on some models. The one I bought is about the same price, only with better CPU/GPU, faster SSD, 802.11ac, so I don't know what your problem is.
Name one single product that they raised the price? Remember, you have to factor in more free s/w and OS updates. They are using faster SSD, 802.11ac, faster processors, etc. etc.
Faster procesors and other updates are normal in something like tech. You cannot cite faster cpus as a reason for cost increases unless the new cpus cost more than the old ones. In most cases outside of bleeding edge tech, intel cpus hit the same relative price points year over year unless the class is changed. When they do see price increases, it often accompanies an absorption of other low wattage motherboard components into the cpu package. Sometimes that offsets the cost, sometimes it doesn't. I think you're off on your analysis of Xeons though. Not all Xeons are that expensive relative to the others. It's mostly at the top end where the pricing really escalates. 4-->6 cores is a 50% core increase, as is 8 to 12 cores, yet the 8 to 12 offers a much bigger price gap. Add Apple's markup on top of that and it's a very expensive machine. The same shouldn't really apply when we're looking at an E5-1620. There isn't a huge difference between Xeons and the i7 version of that processor. The Xeon version would accept ECC ram and may be tested for a higher duty cycle. Contrary to your prior suggestions, the i7 is actually $30 more going by recommended customer pricing. There would be no bulk discount, as these use a different socket than those used in the imacs.
These are all incremental updates, and ssds were swapped in when pricing became feasible to Apple. Note the 2011 imac. It was $100 cheaper than 2012 and on. 2013 they dropped discrete graphics entirely and still kept the starting price at $1300. The mac pro uses what look like chopped down pitcairn gpus in its lowest configuration. They cut out a bunch of stuff including keyboard and mouse. They still use the $300 cpu in the base model. Price rose $300 from old model to new. The 15" rmbp was a push. It dropped $200 and lost discrete graphics, but the charger was kind of underpowered for a machine using discrete graphics. The old 15" went away, so the effective price of a 15" notebook still starts $200 higher. Marvin was spot on in his prediction. As much as I hate some of his predictions, his logic is often impeccable. The airs stayed about the same, but their specs in terms of ram and storage didn't really change either.
That one maxes out at 1080p. A NEC 10bit goes upto 2560*1440. No idea what that adapter costs, but I don't think it'll be a problem for someone getting a $1400 monitor.
The history of the iMac is ALL about VALUE. From the the colours to the white plastic to the initial alu machines.
LOL…I doubt at any point in the iMac history has it been a better value than a Dell desktop if you don't take OSX and product design into account. It was more difficult to judge in the PPC days but for Intel the difference is easier to see.
It is a better value than any other AIO perhaps but the category itself is not a VALUE proposition.
We have always paid Apple more for the same horsepower to gain the advantages of OSX and the elegance of the design. It has always been worth it to me.
Many commentators had the iPad priced at £1000 before launch. Apple shocked everyone and gave it a £399 entry price. So, THEY CAN DO VALUE AND WELL MADE MACHINES.
The history of the iMac is ALL about VALUE. From the the colours to the white plastic to the initial alu machines.
I don't have a difficult time with Apple's own history. Maybe you need to have Apple's previous pricing history on the iMac pounded into your BRAIN with a bat...so you can get the idea what while Apple have never made a £399 desktop with keyboard, mouse and monitor...they did make one for £595 with the original iMac.
And they did have have a flat iMac design with integrated crappics and DVD player for £695.
So don't talk b*ll*cks about Apple's margins.
Hubris, upsell greed comes to mind. And they're selling more Macs than they did in those days. Far more. (That must mean prices are ok, right? Noted that they cut the prices on the retina line of MacBooks....why did they do that, eh? :P )
They've just about hit the glass ceiling on Mac growth. And that aint just down to iPads. Greedy b*st*rdness of Retina pricing, iMacs took the edge of Mac sales when they were outgrowing the PC market nicely.
It's like the 'they can't make an affordable' iPhone crap. The iPhone 4S is £350. That isn't cheap. But it is affordable compared to the flagship.
Just because I have a top of the line iMac doesn't mean I don't want a more affordable one either for my next upgrade or for other folks who want to buy a Mac for under a grand without being ass-reamed for a machine with a cheap ass 21 inch monitor and integrated crappics and no dvd player (only Apple could charge £60 for something they dropped and boot prices higher for the machine...) for £1150.
Lemon Bon Bon.
First off, I don't know what they charge in the UK, I live in the US. And I have no desire to start converting US currency into UK currency.
What you want and what Apple is going to do might be two different things and you need to come to grips with that.
If you want a computer under $1000, it's either a MacMini or you are going to have to buy used. The MacMini is still a decent value once they update it to the latest and greatest which hasn't happened yet. I'm sure that will get updated next year. I also think and agree that they should have a higher end MacMini with the guts of an iMac, but the higher end processors, etc., But those won't be under $1000, They'll probably have to start at $1000 and go up to around $2000 or so for a high end i7 processor, 32GB of RAM, SSD, etc.
I don't consider the 21 inch iMac to be over priced for what it is. I think it is reasonably priced. It's only $1300 US.
When I compare to Dell, either the specs aren't close enough and some of the Dells are actually a little more expensive, some of them are a little less, but there are some differences in the configuration to warrant the price. 802.11ac instead of 802.11n. Some of the Dells can't even get higher SSD storage (Apple is also shipping faster SSD in those configuration). A lot of the Dells are still shipping with the older generation i5/i7. There's a Dell 23inch for $999, but it's an i3 processor, which is REAL low end. Apple doesn't deal with i3 processors.
Of all of the AIO configurations between Dell and Apple, I see nothing wrong with Apple's pricing for what you get. If it's more money, the difference is not worth discussing. A $100 difference is not that much, and I still haven't seen a Dell AIO with 2 TB ports and 802.11ac, I've only seen 1 TB port, if any, and 802.11n.
If Apple was going to put out a $999 iMac, they would have to put in a i3 processor, 802.11n (which I doubt).
I'm going to explain the facts of life once again. They are NOT being as you say "Hubris, upsell greed comes to mind". To me, you have NO idea how to run and price products. Apple has their margins and they also have to please shareholders, analysts, as well as pricing products to satisfy the market. They have their costs. Do you know what their costs are? NO. The only people that know what Apple's costs are, is Apple.
Apple doesn't want to go down the tubes like every PC mfg. These PC mfg aren't making very good profits. In order to survive as a company and for members of upper management to keep their job, they have to make decent profits. Apple is trying to keep their profits where they SHOULD be. The PC mfg are going for market share and in doing so, dropping the price to the customers and they end up eroding their own Net Profits as well as selling lower end computers where there is NO PROFIT. That's FACT. Whether you like it or not, Apple is trying to stay away from eroding their profit margins and keeping their jobs and offering good products at a reasonable price and still being competitive.
So get off of your ignorant mentality, it's not going to change Apple's pricing and I see nothing on their price list that's outrageously priced for the current market, other than they need to update the MacMini, maybe come out with higher end headless i5/i7 models for those that want the higher end iMacs, but without a monitor. I think they would do well if they did.
That one maxes out at 1080p. A NEC 10bit goes upto 2560*1440. No idea what that adapter costs, but I don't think it'll be a problem for someone getting a $1400 monitor.
The older HDMI spec tops out at 1080p. To do 2560*1440 you need to use the display port option.
In any case the $799 PA271W-BK 2560x1440 (Amazon) does not come with HDMI but DP and Dual Link DVI.
Some of the higher res monitors that do have HDMI (the Dell 27" comes to mind) will top out at 1080p over HDMI since it uses the older HDMI spec (I think 1.2) without enough bandwidth. The newer/newest HDMI spec does have enough bandwidth to drive 2560x1440.
I don't consider the 21 inch iMac to be over priced for what it is. I think it is reasonably priced. It's only $1300 US.
Well…given you can't upgrade the RAM or HDD yourself later you kinda need to do the 1TB fusion/256GB SSD (I think I'd go with the 256 SSD) and the 16GB upgrade.
That makes it $1700.
Given that the 256GB Samsung 840 SSD is $192.99 on amazon the SSD price of $200 is decent. 16GB of Crucial DDR3 runs $140 so that could be better but pretty much it's $60 of apple tax.
It's just that you have to do it RIGHT NOW even though 8GB RAM is good enough for now. Just in 2017 maybe not so great.
Some of the higher res monitors that do have HDMI (the Dell 27" comes to mind) will top out at 1080p over HDMI since it uses the older HDMI spec (I think 1.2) without enough bandwidth. The newer/newest HDMI spec does have enough bandwidth to drive 2560x1440.
Good post! Informative.
I was only responding to Relics' NEC 10bit monitor adapter question. And the proposed model from Monoprice only does 1080, not the 'requested' 2560*1440.
Nice display BTW, with a higher contract but lower brightness than my 30" ACD. Although I don't think I could tell te difference. I wonder when OSX will support 10bit, I haven't read anything about it for 10.9
I was only responding to Relics' NEC 10bit monitor adapter question. And the proposed model from Monoprice only does 1080, not the 'requested' 2560*1440.
Nice display BTW, with a higher contract but lower brightness than my 30" ACD. Although I don't think I could tell te difference. I wonder when OSX will support 10bit, I haven't read anything about it for 10.9
Well…given you can't upgrade the RAM or HDD yourself later you kinda need to do the 1TB fusion/256GB SSD (I think I'd go with the 256 SSD) and the 16GB upgrade.
That makes it $1700.
Given that the 256GB Samsung 840 SSD is $192.99 on amazon the SSD price of $200 is decent. 16GB of Crucial DDR3 runs $140 so that could be better but pretty much it's $60 of apple tax.
It's just that you have to do it RIGHT NOW even though 8GB RAM is good enough for now. Just in 2017 maybe not so great.
Well, when you buy third party memory and storage, it then depletes your mfg warranty and for many of us, that's not something recommended.
Again, please don't cloud the issue with 3rd party products as the mfg can't warranty non-mfg supplied parts. Same goes with other name brand computer mfg.
The Apple tax is because THEY have THE components THEY use to THEIR specs and requirements and THEY warrant THEIR products, 3rd party products that are much less expensive are NOT always going to meet the mfg specs and actually may not test the same, which is why it's cheaper. Again, TOO MUCH IGNORANCE on the part of the consumer.
I will gladly pay a little extra for mfg supplied memory and storage because THEY support it under THEIR support contracts and past history has proven to me, that they have better reliability, especially in the area of RAM and Storage.
So, please don't mislead people into thinking that it's the same when you buy cheaper SSD, HDD, or RAM.
Color uniformity is meh but at 5ms it's probably meant to be more a gaming display than a graphics one.
you want to buy an ASUS monitor instead of an Apple monitor? I don't even want to spend my time researching another brand monitor. That by itself costs money in TIME. Plus Apple's AppleCare covers Apple's monitors when you buy them with an Apple computer. I always buy AppleCare, so for those that want to buy AppleCare, just stick with Apple products and don't increase the number of "throats to choke" when you have a problem. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has their monitors better calibrated than ASUS. To me, ASUS is NOT a top tier mfg of computer products, they are more for the home/hobbiest.
Just reading posts is now beginning to waste my time. TIME = MONEY. I guess since most children don't make any money, then their time is worthless to them.
you want to buy an ASUS monitor instead of an Apple monitor? I don't even want to spend my time researching another brand monitor. That by itself costs money in TIME. Plus Apple's AppleCare covers Apple's monitors when you buy them with an Apple computer. I always buy AppleCare, so for those that want to buy AppleCare, just stick with Apple products and don't increase the number of "throats to choke" when you have a problem. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has their monitors better calibrated than ASUS. To me, ASUS is NOT a top tier mfg of computer products, they are more for the home/hobbiest.
Just reading posts is now beginning to waste my time. TIME = MONEY. I guess since most children don't make any money, then their time is worthless to them.
I have mentioned NEC before. I mention them more than Quato or Eizo because their price points are similar to Apple. If the consistency and hardware features of the display are a factor in determining your own efficiency, you should be able to make up any additional research time. I wouldn't just automatically buy Apple without research either. They have different products, and you still have to determine whether or not one is suitable to your needs. It's primarily software that keeps me with them for everything but unattached displays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
He spams his incoherent opinions across multiple threads is a right wanker whenever he gets challenged just like above.
Pounded into your brain with a bat? Yeah, the kind of "good guy" you see in the football stands at Bristol.
I just looked back through those quotes. Sometimes when there's a lot of quibbling, I skim through most of it. I noticed that the subject of bats didn't originate there. Preceding it we have
Quote:
I was responding to Lemon, he for some reason has a difficult time with that and he needs to have it pounded in his brain that Apple isn't going to go after the low end computer market,
This is an issue of escalation. I don't typically see him responding with hostility at anyone on here, although sometimes it's directed at Adobe. His opinions are preachy at times, but I never thought of them as incoherent. I still see your point and wanted to acknowledge it, but I'm not going to argue it further.
I have mentioned NEC before. I mention them more than Quato or Eizo because their price points are similar to Apple. If the consistency and hardware features of the display are a factor in determining your own efficiency, you should be able to make up any additional research time. I wouldn't just automatically buy Apple without research either. They have different products, and you still have to determine whether or not one is suitable to your needs. It's primarily software that keeps me with them for everything but unattached displays.
I just looked back through those quotes. Sometimes when there's a lot of quibbling, I skim through most of it. I noticed that the subject of bats didn't originate there. Preceding it we have
This is an issue of escalation. I don't typically see him responding with hostility at anyone on here, although sometimes it's directed at Adobe. His opinions are preachy at times, but I never thought of them as incoherent. I still see your point and wanted to acknowledge it, but I'm not going to argue it further.
There are usually only a couple of higher end monitors I would suggest using over Apple's unless you don't care about getting an AppleCare warranty, which many people do or should when they didn't. Corporate customers I used to deal with eventually began buying support contracts because it was a LOT less expensive during the lifecycle to do it that way. I used to sell NEC, Viewsonic, and maybe a couple of other brands, but NEC and Viewsonic were the two biggest 3rd party. Apple does a nice job with their monitors and to get something with close specs, they are about the same cost, so why would someone not buy an Apple. I know there are a very small group of people that want/need something that Apple doesn't make, but those cases are very rare, otherwise, the people that go for 3rd party monitors are doing so based predominately on price and they don't always look at the specs.
What gets me is that people are NOT talking about the business perspective of buying 3rd party vs the mfg. That's the business aspects of buying a computer. But most techie people don't have much business sense as they only see the price of the item and not the total cost of ownership.
There are usually only a couple of higher end monitors I would suggest using over Apple's unless you don't care about getting an AppleCare warranty, which many people do or should when they didn't. Corporate customers I used to deal with eventually began buying support contracts because it was a LOT less expensive during the lifecycle to do it that way. I used to sell NEC, Viewsonic, and maybe a couple of other brands, but NEC and Viewsonic were the two biggest 3rd party. Apple does a nice job with their monitors and to get something with close specs, they are about the same cost, so why would someone not buy an Apple. I know there are a very small group of people that want/need something that Apple doesn't make, but those cases are very rare, otherwise, the people that go for 3rd party monitors are doing so based predominately on price and they don't always look at the specs.
I do remember when you mentioned selling some of these. NEC makes stuff over a pretty broad price range. When I mentioned a similar price range, I was thinking of something like a PA271w. It's not my favorite out there, but at that price point, that is what I would buy. I think they've shown up as cheap as 925 at times. Sadly Hitachi panels no longer appear in anything and NEC no longer designs their own panels like they did with some of the more expensive 80s and 90s series displays (used a 2190UXi at one point and a CG211 at a job I held concurrently at the time). They're also on 4 year warranties. I think Applecare may be easier to deal with when it comes to dissatisfaction with something that is on the edge of being within spec yet still bothersome. If NEC agrees to replace it, their more expensive ones have a 48 hour replacement. I just wanted to point out that I was referring to a smaller subset, mostly those in art production fields or in house art departments within ad agencies.
Quote:
What gets me is that people are NOT talking about the business perspective of buying 3rd party vs the mfg. That's the business aspects of buying a computer. But most techie people don't have much business sense as they only see the price of the item and not the total cost of ownership.
Comments
Just their decision.
Not 'JUST' their decision.
You could get the 24 inch for a decent price.
Now you have a 21inch for near enough the same price...(when 21 inch monitors are dirt cheap...) when they could have had the 24 inch model as entry giving the consumer better value.
Lemon Bon Bon.
"Geee Lemon you are making me use the define function in IOS.????????????????????"
Np, Wizard.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Lemon,
You really don't know what you are talking about in terms of keeping up with reality.
The reason why they removed the DVD is people weren't using them, and it's far cheaper in the long run to do it externally and to charge people for it, if they need it.
Secondly, Apple provides Thunderbolt port(s) standard, most PCs don't have Thunderbolt.
Apple has been providing more and faster SSD storage options which are faster and more reliable than HDD and HDD's are on their way out. I predict that HDDs will be a thing of the past completely in about 2 years in 99% of Apple's computers.
Apple is moving (obviously) away from giving a keyboard/ms on headless units. I think it's because they are seeing more and more people keeping their existing keyboard and mouse, or buying whatever they want.
Apple does their own research in terms of what people want and various price points they feel the market will bear.
And Apple is NOT going to be the low cost leader since there is NO money in that.
Seriously, you need to compare a like system as close as you can get and see what you get and don't get with each and figure out why one costs what it costs.
Otherwise, i think your posts are becoming a waste of MY time and others.
Blah, blah, blah...
You're posts have been a waste of time so far. Tell us something we don't know. Apple's desktop prices have been creeping upwards for a while now. Nobody said anything about Apple making a £399 top of the line iMac. So put that in yer yahoo.
It so happens that Apple's laptop line is far better value. You can get the best part of 3 laptops that include a screen for under a grand. YOU CAN'T SAY THAT FOR A SINGLE DESKTOP OFFERING!
That they haven't updated the Mini show's how transparent Apple's up sell greed machine works. (And why isn't the Mini 'junk?' It's 'cheap.')
Junk pricing. Fair pricing and taking the p*ss pricing are three different things.
Candidate for a used Mac? I have a top of the line iMac that I bought brand new. But you've given me an idea in buying used from now on. If few more Apple buyers do that...Apple might take the hint and cut consumers a better deal. It wasn't so long ago that the iMac was the shining star in a value driven desktop for consumers.
If my posts are a waste of time then 'DEAL WITH IT!' :P
Lemon Bon Bon.
B*ll*cks.
Many commentators had the iPad priced at £1000 before launch. Apple shocked everyone and gave it a £399 entry price. So, THEY CAN DO VALUE AND WELL MADE MACHINES.
The history of the iMac is ALL about VALUE. From the the colours to the white plastic to the initial alu machines.
I don't have a difficult time with Apple's own history. Maybe you need to have Apple's previous pricing history on the iMac pounded into your BRAIN with a bat...so you can get the idea what while Apple have never made a £399 desktop with keyboard, mouse and monitor...they did make one for £595 with the original iMac.
And they did have have a flat iMac design with integrated crappics and DVD player for £695.
So don't talk b*ll*cks about Apple's margins.
Hubris, upsell greed comes to mind. And they're selling more Macs than they did in those days. Far more. (That must mean prices are ok, right? Noted that they cut the prices on the retina line of MacBooks....why did they do that, eh? :P )
They've just about hit the glass ceiling on Mac growth. And that aint just down to iPads. Greedy b*st*rdness of Retina pricing, iMacs took the edge of Mac sales when they were outgrowing the PC market nicely.
It's like the 'they can't make an affordable' iPhone crap. The iPhone 4S is £350. That isn't cheap. But it is affordable compared to the flagship.
Just because I have a top of the line iMac doesn't mean I don't want a more affordable one either for my next upgrade or for other folks who want to buy a Mac for under a grand without being ass-reamed for a machine with a cheap ass 21 inch monitor and integrated crappics and no dvd player (only Apple could charge £60 for something they dropped and boot prices higher for the machine...) for £1150.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Blah, blah, blah...
You're posts have been a waste of time so far. Tell us something we don't know. Apple's desktop prices have been creeping upwards for a while now. Nobody said anything about Apple making a £399 top of the line iMac. So put that in yer yahoo.
It so happens that Apple's laptop line is far better value. You can get the best part of 3 laptops that include a screen for under a grand. YOU CAN'T SAY THAT FOR A SINGLE DESKTOP OFFERING!
That they haven't updated the Mini show's how transparent Apple's up sell greed machine works. (And why isn't the Mini 'junk?' It's 'cheap.')
Junk pricing. Fair pricing and taking the p*ss pricing are three different things.
Candidate for a used Mac? I have a top of the line iMac that I bought brand new. But you've given me an idea in buying used from now on. If few more Apple buyers do that...Apple might take the hint and cut consumers a better deal. It wasn't so long ago that the iMac was the shining star in a value driven desktop for consumers.
If my posts are a waste of time then 'DEAL WITH IT!' :P
Lemon Bon Bon.
Actually, Apple prices have just come down.
They are also deploying more expensive and faster SSD storage than the PC mfg are doing, plus TB and they still have the best resolution screens for laptops.
Sorry, but you are just NOT going to convince me that Apple is raising prices.
They just DROPPED the prices on the new MacBookPros, MacBook Airs, iMacs, didn't they?
MBPRetina got a lot more features and they dropped the price of both the 13in and 15in models.
The MBAir got faster SSD, better processor, 802.11ac and they dropped the price.
The iMacs got faster SSD, better CPU/GPUs, 802.11ac and they are actually a little cheaper on some models. The one I bought is about the same price, only with better CPU/GPU, faster SSD, 802.11ac, so I don't know what your problem is.
Name one single product that they raised the price? Remember, you have to factor in more free s/w and OS updates. They are using faster SSD, 802.11ac, faster processors, etc. etc.
Maybe you should just put together your own DIY PC and run Windows 8.1 and quit putting out misleading BS. You OBVIOUSLY don't know much about the industry or how to compare models/prices. If you are consuming mind altering products, either get off of it or get a better supplier. Your brain doesn't think properly.
Quit wasting everyone's time.
Sorry, but you are just NOT going to convince me that Apple is raising prices.
They just DROPPED the prices on the new MacBookPros, MacBook Airs, iMacs, didn't they?
MBPRetina got a lot more features and they dropped the price of both the 13in and 15in models.
The MBAir got faster SSD, better processor, 802.11ac and they dropped the price.
The iMacs got faster SSD, better CPU/GPUs, 802.11ac and they are actually a little cheaper on some models. The one I bought is about the same price, only with better CPU/GPU, faster SSD, 802.11ac, so I don't know what your problem is.
Name one single product that they raised the price? Remember, you have to factor in more free s/w and OS updates. They are using faster SSD, 802.11ac, faster processors, etc. etc.
Faster procesors and other updates are normal in something like tech. You cannot cite faster cpus as a reason for cost increases unless the new cpus cost more than the old ones. In most cases outside of bleeding edge tech, intel cpus hit the same relative price points year over year unless the class is changed. When they do see price increases, it often accompanies an absorption of other low wattage motherboard components into the cpu package. Sometimes that offsets the cost, sometimes it doesn't. I think you're off on your analysis of Xeons though. Not all Xeons are that expensive relative to the others. It's mostly at the top end where the pricing really escalates. 4-->6 cores is a 50% core increase, as is 8 to 12 cores, yet the 8 to 12 offers a much bigger price gap. Add Apple's markup on top of that and it's a very expensive machine. The same shouldn't really apply when we're looking at an E5-1620. There isn't a huge difference between Xeons and the i7 version of that processor. The Xeon version would accept ECC ram and may be tested for a higher duty cycle. Contrary to your prior suggestions, the i7 is actually $30 more going by recommended customer pricing. There would be no bulk discount, as these use a different socket than those used in the imacs.
These are all incremental updates, and ssds were swapped in when pricing became feasible to Apple. Note the 2011 imac. It was $100 cheaper than 2012 and on. 2013 they dropped discrete graphics entirely and still kept the starting price at $1300. The mac pro uses what look like chopped down pitcairn gpus in its lowest configuration. They cut out a bunch of stuff including keyboard and mouse. They still use the $300 cpu in the base model. Price rose $300 from old model to new. The 15" rmbp was a push. It dropped $200 and lost discrete graphics, but the charger was kind of underpowered for a machine using discrete graphics. The old 15" went away, so the effective price of a 15" notebook still starts $200 higher. Marvin was spot on in his prediction. As much as I hate some of his predictions, his logic is often impeccable. The airs stayed about the same, but their specs in terms of ram and storage didn't really change either.
Anyway be nice to Lemon. He's a good guy.
That one maxes out at 1080p. A NEC 10bit goes upto 2560*1440. No idea what that adapter costs, but I don't think it'll be a problem for someone getting a $1400 monitor.
The history of the iMac is ALL about VALUE. From the the colours to the white plastic to the initial alu machines.
LOL…I doubt at any point in the iMac history has it been a better value than a Dell desktop if you don't take OSX and product design into account. It was more difficult to judge in the PPC days but for Intel the difference is easier to see.
It is a better value than any other AIO perhaps but the category itself is not a VALUE proposition.
We have always paid Apple more for the same horsepower to gain the advantages of OSX and the elegance of the design. It has always been worth it to me.
Anyway be nice to Lemon. He's a good guy.
Since when? He's as abusive as anyone else:
Quote:
B*ll*cks.
Maybe you need to have Apple's previous pricing history on the iMac pounded into your BRAIN with a bat...
So don't talk b*ll*cks about Apple's margins.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Blah, blah, blah...
You're posts have been a waste of time so far.
So put that in yer yahoo.
He spams his incoherent opinions across multiple threads is a right wanker whenever he gets challenged just like above.
Pounded into your brain with a bat? Yeah, the kind of "good guy" you see in the football stands at Bristol.
B*ll*cks.
Many commentators had the iPad priced at £1000 before launch. Apple shocked everyone and gave it a £399 entry price. So, THEY CAN DO VALUE AND WELL MADE MACHINES.
The history of the iMac is ALL about VALUE. From the the colours to the white plastic to the initial alu machines.
I don't have a difficult time with Apple's own history. Maybe you need to have Apple's previous pricing history on the iMac pounded into your BRAIN with a bat...so you can get the idea what while Apple have never made a £399 desktop with keyboard, mouse and monitor...they did make one for £595 with the original iMac.
And they did have have a flat iMac design with integrated crappics and DVD player for £695.
So don't talk b*ll*cks about Apple's margins.
Hubris, upsell greed comes to mind. And they're selling more Macs than they did in those days. Far more. (That must mean prices are ok, right? Noted that they cut the prices on the retina line of MacBooks....why did they do that, eh? :P )
They've just about hit the glass ceiling on Mac growth. And that aint just down to iPads. Greedy b*st*rdness of Retina pricing, iMacs took the edge of Mac sales when they were outgrowing the PC market nicely.
It's like the 'they can't make an affordable' iPhone crap. The iPhone 4S is £350. That isn't cheap. But it is affordable compared to the flagship.
Just because I have a top of the line iMac doesn't mean I don't want a more affordable one either for my next upgrade or for other folks who want to buy a Mac for under a grand without being ass-reamed for a machine with a cheap ass 21 inch monitor and integrated crappics and no dvd player (only Apple could charge £60 for something they dropped and boot prices higher for the machine...) for £1150.
Lemon Bon Bon.
First off, I don't know what they charge in the UK, I live in the US. And I have no desire to start converting US currency into UK currency.
What you want and what Apple is going to do might be two different things and you need to come to grips with that.
If you want a computer under $1000, it's either a MacMini or you are going to have to buy used. The MacMini is still a decent value once they update it to the latest and greatest which hasn't happened yet. I'm sure that will get updated next year. I also think and agree that they should have a higher end MacMini with the guts of an iMac, but the higher end processors, etc., But those won't be under $1000, They'll probably have to start at $1000 and go up to around $2000 or so for a high end i7 processor, 32GB of RAM, SSD, etc.
I don't consider the 21 inch iMac to be over priced for what it is. I think it is reasonably priced. It's only $1300 US.
When I compare to Dell, either the specs aren't close enough and some of the Dells are actually a little more expensive, some of them are a little less, but there are some differences in the configuration to warrant the price. 802.11ac instead of 802.11n. Some of the Dells can't even get higher SSD storage (Apple is also shipping faster SSD in those configuration). A lot of the Dells are still shipping with the older generation i5/i7. There's a Dell 23inch for $999, but it's an i3 processor, which is REAL low end. Apple doesn't deal with i3 processors.
Of all of the AIO configurations between Dell and Apple, I see nothing wrong with Apple's pricing for what you get. If it's more money, the difference is not worth discussing. A $100 difference is not that much, and I still haven't seen a Dell AIO with 2 TB ports and 802.11ac, I've only seen 1 TB port, if any, and 802.11n.
If Apple was going to put out a $999 iMac, they would have to put in a i3 processor, 802.11n (which I doubt).
I'm going to explain the facts of life once again. They are NOT being as you say "Hubris, upsell greed comes to mind". To me, you have NO idea how to run and price products. Apple has their margins and they also have to please shareholders, analysts, as well as pricing products to satisfy the market. They have their costs. Do you know what their costs are? NO. The only people that know what Apple's costs are, is Apple.
Apple doesn't want to go down the tubes like every PC mfg. These PC mfg aren't making very good profits. In order to survive as a company and for members of upper management to keep their job, they have to make decent profits. Apple is trying to keep their profits where they SHOULD be. The PC mfg are going for market share and in doing so, dropping the price to the customers and they end up eroding their own Net Profits as well as selling lower end computers where there is NO PROFIT. That's FACT. Whether you like it or not, Apple is trying to stay away from eroding their profit margins and keeping their jobs and offering good products at a reasonable price and still being competitive.
So get off of your ignorant mentality, it's not going to change Apple's pricing and I see nothing on their price list that's outrageously priced for the current market, other than they need to update the MacMini, maybe come out with higher end headless i5/i7 models for those that want the higher end iMacs, but without a monitor. I think they would do well if they did.
That one maxes out at 1080p. A NEC 10bit goes upto 2560*1440. No idea what that adapter costs, but I don't think it'll be a problem for someone getting a $1400 monitor.
The older HDMI spec tops out at 1080p. To do 2560*1440 you need to use the display port option.
In any case the $799 PA271W-BK 2560x1440 (Amazon) does not come with HDMI but DP and Dual Link DVI.
http://www.necdisplay.com/p/desktop-monitors/pa271w-bk
Some of the higher res monitors that do have HDMI (the Dell 27" comes to mind) will top out at 1080p over HDMI since it uses the older HDMI spec (I think 1.2) without enough bandwidth. The newer/newest HDMI spec does have enough bandwidth to drive 2560x1440.
I don't consider the 21 inch iMac to be over priced for what it is. I think it is reasonably priced. It's only $1300 US.
Well…given you can't upgrade the RAM or HDD yourself later you kinda need to do the 1TB fusion/256GB SSD (I think I'd go with the 256 SSD) and the 16GB upgrade.
That makes it $1700.
Given that the 256GB Samsung 840 SSD is $192.99 on amazon the SSD price of $200 is decent. 16GB of Crucial DDR3 runs $140 so that could be better but pretty much it's $60 of apple tax.
It's just that you have to do it RIGHT NOW even though 8GB RAM is good enough for now. Just in 2017 maybe not so great.
Good post! Informative.
I was only responding to Relics' NEC 10bit monitor adapter question. And the proposed model from Monoprice only does 1080, not the 'requested' 2560*1440.
Nice display BTW, with a higher contract but lower brightness than my 30" ACD. Although I don't think I could tell te difference. I wonder when OSX will support 10bit, I haven't read anything about it for 10.9
Good post! Informative.
I was only responding to Relics' NEC 10bit monitor adapter question. And the proposed model from Monoprice only does 1080, not the 'requested' 2560*1440.
Nice display BTW, with a higher contract but lower brightness than my 30" ACD. Although I don't think I could tell te difference. I wonder when OSX will support 10bit, I haven't read anything about it for 10.9
Amazingly it's only $800 or so on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/NEC-PA271w-bk-27-Inch-2560-1440/dp/B003LD1QRY
The 27" Dell is only $600 but is 8-bit…which for OSX is probably good enough. There is an ASUS with HDMI 1.4 which will handle 2560*1440 over HDMI.
http://www.amazon.com/PB278Q-27-Inch-LED-lit-Professional-Graphics/dp/B009C3M7H0
Color uniformity is meh but at 5ms it's probably meant to be more a gaming display than a graphics one.
Well…given you can't upgrade the RAM or HDD yourself later you kinda need to do the 1TB fusion/256GB SSD (I think I'd go with the 256 SSD) and the 16GB upgrade.
That makes it $1700.
Given that the 256GB Samsung 840 SSD is $192.99 on amazon the SSD price of $200 is decent. 16GB of Crucial DDR3 runs $140 so that could be better but pretty much it's $60 of apple tax.
It's just that you have to do it RIGHT NOW even though 8GB RAM is good enough for now. Just in 2017 maybe not so great.
Well, when you buy third party memory and storage, it then depletes your mfg warranty and for many of us, that's not something recommended.
Now, what's the Samsung 840 SSD storage rated at in terms of speed? It's not 800Mbps, it's more like 540 MB/s for read and 330MB/s for Write according to Samsung's technical information regarding the 840 series SSD, so you aren't getting the same speed as what Apple is using. http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/SSD/global/download/Samsung_SSD_White_Paper.pdf
Again, please don't cloud the issue with 3rd party products as the mfg can't warranty non-mfg supplied parts. Same goes with other name brand computer mfg.
The Apple tax is because THEY have THE components THEY use to THEIR specs and requirements and THEY warrant THEIR products, 3rd party products that are much less expensive are NOT always going to meet the mfg specs and actually may not test the same, which is why it's cheaper. Again, TOO MUCH IGNORANCE on the part of the consumer.
I will gladly pay a little extra for mfg supplied memory and storage because THEY support it under THEIR support contracts and past history has proven to me, that they have better reliability, especially in the area of RAM and Storage.
So, please don't mislead people into thinking that it's the same when you buy cheaper SSD, HDD, or RAM.
Amazingly it's only $800 or so on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/NEC-PA271w-bk-27-Inch-2560-1440/dp/B003LD1QRY
The 27" Dell is only $600 but is 8-bit…which for OSX is probably good enough. There is an ASUS with HDMI 1.4 which will handle 2560*1440 over HDMI.
http://www.amazon.com/PB278Q-27-Inch-LED-lit-Professional-Graphics/dp/B009C3M7H0
Color uniformity is meh but at 5ms it's probably meant to be more a gaming display than a graphics one.
nht, can you do me a HUGE favor? Please don't use the term "meh". I really don't like that word, I'm really MEH about the word MEH. Thank you.
Amazingly it's only $800 or so on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/NEC-PA271w-bk-27-Inch-2560-1440/dp/B003LD1QRY
The 27" Dell is only $600 but is 8-bit…which for OSX is probably good enough. There is an ASUS with HDMI 1.4 which will handle 2560*1440 over HDMI.
http://www.amazon.com/PB278Q-27-Inch-LED-lit-Professional-Graphics/dp/B009C3M7H0
Color uniformity is meh but at 5ms it's probably meant to be more a gaming display than a graphics one.
you want to buy an ASUS monitor instead of an Apple monitor? I don't even want to spend my time researching another brand monitor. That by itself costs money in TIME. Plus Apple's AppleCare covers Apple's monitors when you buy them with an Apple computer. I always buy AppleCare, so for those that want to buy AppleCare, just stick with Apple products and don't increase the number of "throats to choke" when you have a problem. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has their monitors better calibrated than ASUS. To me, ASUS is NOT a top tier mfg of computer products, they are more for the home/hobbiest.
Just reading posts is now beginning to waste my time. TIME = MONEY. I guess since most children don't make any money, then their time is worthless to them.
Quote:
you want to buy an ASUS monitor instead of an Apple monitor? I don't even want to spend my time researching another brand monitor. That by itself costs money in TIME. Plus Apple's AppleCare covers Apple's monitors when you buy them with an Apple computer. I always buy AppleCare, so for those that want to buy AppleCare, just stick with Apple products and don't increase the number of "throats to choke" when you have a problem. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple has their monitors better calibrated than ASUS. To me, ASUS is NOT a top tier mfg of computer products, they are more for the home/hobbiest.
Just reading posts is now beginning to waste my time. TIME = MONEY. I guess since most children don't make any money, then their time is worthless to them.
I have mentioned NEC before. I mention them more than Quato or Eizo because their price points are similar to Apple. If the consistency and hardware features of the display are a factor in determining your own efficiency, you should be able to make up any additional research time. I wouldn't just automatically buy Apple without research either. They have different products, and you still have to determine whether or not one is suitable to your needs. It's primarily software that keeps me with them for everything but unattached displays.
He spams his incoherent opinions across multiple threads is a right wanker whenever he gets challenged just like above.
Pounded into your brain with a bat? Yeah, the kind of "good guy" you see in the football stands at Bristol.
I just looked back through those quotes. Sometimes when there's a lot of quibbling, I skim through most of it. I noticed that the subject of bats didn't originate there. Preceding it we have
This is an issue of escalation. I don't typically see him responding with hostility at anyone on here, although sometimes it's directed at Adobe. His opinions are preachy at times, but I never thought of them as incoherent. I still see your point and wanted to acknowledge it, but I'm not going to argue it further.
Quote:
I have mentioned NEC before. I mention them more than Quato or Eizo because their price points are similar to Apple. If the consistency and hardware features of the display are a factor in determining your own efficiency, you should be able to make up any additional research time. I wouldn't just automatically buy Apple without research either. They have different products, and you still have to determine whether or not one is suitable to your needs. It's primarily software that keeps me with them for everything but unattached displays.
I just looked back through those quotes. Sometimes when there's a lot of quibbling, I skim through most of it. I noticed that the subject of bats didn't originate there. Preceding it we have
This is an issue of escalation. I don't typically see him responding with hostility at anyone on here, although sometimes it's directed at Adobe. His opinions are preachy at times, but I never thought of them as incoherent. I still see your point and wanted to acknowledge it, but I'm not going to argue it further.
There are usually only a couple of higher end monitors I would suggest using over Apple's unless you don't care about getting an AppleCare warranty, which many people do or should when they didn't. Corporate customers I used to deal with eventually began buying support contracts because it was a LOT less expensive during the lifecycle to do it that way. I used to sell NEC, Viewsonic, and maybe a couple of other brands, but NEC and Viewsonic were the two biggest 3rd party. Apple does a nice job with their monitors and to get something with close specs, they are about the same cost, so why would someone not buy an Apple. I know there are a very small group of people that want/need something that Apple doesn't make, but those cases are very rare, otherwise, the people that go for 3rd party monitors are doing so based predominately on price and they don't always look at the specs.
What gets me is that people are NOT talking about the business perspective of buying 3rd party vs the mfg. That's the business aspects of buying a computer. But most techie people don't have much business sense as they only see the price of the item and not the total cost of ownership.
There are usually only a couple of higher end monitors I would suggest using over Apple's unless you don't care about getting an AppleCare warranty, which many people do or should when they didn't. Corporate customers I used to deal with eventually began buying support contracts because it was a LOT less expensive during the lifecycle to do it that way. I used to sell NEC, Viewsonic, and maybe a couple of other brands, but NEC and Viewsonic were the two biggest 3rd party. Apple does a nice job with their monitors and to get something with close specs, they are about the same cost, so why would someone not buy an Apple. I know there are a very small group of people that want/need something that Apple doesn't make, but those cases are very rare, otherwise, the people that go for 3rd party monitors are doing so based predominately on price and they don't always look at the specs.
I do remember when you mentioned selling some of these. NEC makes stuff over a pretty broad price range. When I mentioned a similar price range, I was thinking of something like a PA271w. It's not my favorite out there, but at that price point, that is what I would buy. I think they've shown up as cheap as 925 at times. Sadly Hitachi panels no longer appear in anything and NEC no longer designs their own panels like they did with some of the more expensive 80s and 90s series displays (used a 2190UXi at one point and a CG211 at a job I held concurrently at the time). They're also on 4 year warranties. I think Applecare may be easier to deal with when it comes to dissatisfaction with something that is on the edge of being within spec yet still bothersome. If NEC agrees to replace it, their more expensive ones have a 48 hour replacement. I just wanted to point out that I was referring to a smaller subset, mostly those in art production fields or in house art departments within ad agencies.
Yeah I understood that.