in one can't win



  • Reply 20 of 29
    ptrashptrash Posts: 296member
    I pretty much fit into the class of "Prosumer." I use a Mac at work, but don't make my living off it-I could just as well do my web work on a PC, since it' nothing fancy. At the same time, I want a machine at home that I can customize. In fact, I've done that with my PTP, adding memory and hard drives, and upgrading the processor, video, input and scsi (probably spending $400 total).

    A G4 tower would be fine, and I would buy one, if the price came down to $1099-maybe even $1299. (One thing about these Tower cases and MBs-they've been around long enough for Apple to recoop the R & D invested on them.) Once the G5s come out, there's absolutely no reason why Apple couldn't sell G4 towers for a $1099-1299 price range. It would give us "prosumers" the power and upgrade/expandability we need.
  • Reply 22 of 29
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    This is a great idea. Get a G5 with a fancy new mobo out there and then sell a "crippled" G4 tower with a 133 MHZ bus.

    I still think there's a market of IT workers looking for a new platform, but they're not willing to dump $5000 on an Apple server to test it. Give them a $999 machine and let them Linux it up, Darwin it up, OS X Server it up, whatever.

    I also think there's a market of consumers that might not like the look of the iMac, but won't pay a premium for a PowerMac since it doesn't offer them much that they need. Some average people that might like the iPod or something.

    [ 01-07-2002: Message edited by: bunge ]</p>
  • Reply 23 of 29
    programmerprogrammer Posts: 3,409member
    A slotted, headless, low-cost Mac might have a market... but if the prosumers in question are like me then we'd always lust after the fastest processor going.
  • Reply 24 of 29
    big macbig mac Posts: 480member
    There is general consensus for a pro-sumer tower in the Apple line-up, but Apple seems to not want to go there. With set standard hardware configurations, Apple can only please a certain segment of people. Yet, there's a really easy way to please a large percentage of the people who are currently not satisfied: Enhanced BTO options through the Apple stores. The only question is whether or not Apple wishes to do it.

    Apple should create a totally new section of the Apple Online Store that would basically allow for the custom configuration of every aspect of a given machine. Want a cool Apple tower case? That will come at a premium. Want a beige, no frills, regular style case? Comes at a discount. Want the latest motherboard? It's a premium. A lower end motherboard is much cheaper. Maybe you want a regular beige case with the fastest motherboard and a dual G4 configuration. There would be some overhead associated with the custom configuration process, and that could be passed to the consumer in the final price. Apple would certainly see a great return on investment from all of the people not content with Apple's current offerings. The only reason Apple wouldn't want to go that route would be if the company is terribly concerned about revealing their profit margins. In any case, that's my solution; it's what I've advocated for a long time, and I don't see any better way to go.
  • Reply 25 of 29
    4fx4fx Posts: 258member
    I think Apple has done great with this new machine. Really, look at what its done.

    A. Added a SuperDrive

    B. Added more standard memory

    C. Added more HD space


    E. Added faster G4 processors

    Now, this fits all that most "prosumers" need. However, the "consumer" is still out to lunch cause the lowest cost is $1299. A $999 iMac would sell sooooooo many more. Seriously... the majority of people dont give a rats ass what computer they buy as long as the PRICE COMPARISON is good. Apple just doesnt do this. Theyve done great with this new iMac, but its just a tad too expensive. You COULD buy a Compaq with the same features, granted ugly and not as powerful (but they wont know the diff) for about $999 or less. Why cant Apple compete? Ive heard it all... "stop complaining, its better". Ok, I agree. But MONEY matters. I had to work my ass off to buy an iMac. Sure I would love a PoweMac, but I dont have the money. Not everyone is rich!!! Apple seems to forget this most of the time.

    [ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: 4fx ]

    [ 01-08-2002: Message edited by: 4fx ]</p>
  • Reply 26 of 29
    orb24orb24 Posts: 41member
    I think apple needs to continue doing what they have been for the last couple of years. making a clear distinction between the two. Both want power and features but never the same kind of power or features. Entirely different needs. Apple's release today is eveidence of their awareness on that level.
  • Reply 27 of 29
    gamringamrin Posts: 114member
    You know, to me, this whole prosumer thing does have merit, especially in light of the new iMac. Go over to and look at the iMac's specs. One thing I noticed (and, forgive me if this has already been mentioned) is that the new iMac has two RAM slots: one "factory-installed" DIMM and one "user-accessable" DIMM. So, if I understand correctly, this is like the dual USB iBook. It's also a step backwards versus the older CRT iMacs that have two user-accessable RAM slots. Thus, if you want to put 1 GB of RAM in your new iMac, you've got to get a 512 RAM DIMM from Apple (for an extra $200), or settle with the 128 or 256 they give you. On the plus side, it looks as if the new iMac speakers are not USB, freeing up a USB port and being (at least in my opinion) much less annoying than the original pro speakers (believe me, I own a cube).

    Considering that I'm looking to get a new computer soon, I was anxious to see Apple's new line-up. I like the new iMac a lot, but I do a fair amount of graphic and layout work for the small small business I own. I need something larger than a 15" monitor, but I don't want to have to shell out a minimum of $1700 for the priveledge (sp?). Sure, there's the argument: Apple's a better computer, expect to pay more, jackass... And, I do expect to pay more. But $1700 is too much for the simple, perhaps inalienable, computer user "right" to be able to change out one's monitor without having to buy a new system. As someone mentioned above, there are millions of Macintosh users, all with different needs. However, this is exactly the reason to offer a few more choices. I'm not saying to expand the product grid to six or eight boxes or whatever. I'm not calling for a PDA or a tablet. I simply want to add whatever amount of RAM I want from whatever vender I want. I want to have the option to use a different monitor. The ability to switch out a graphics card would also be nice, but I'm not married to computer games. Does this make me a prosumer? Does this make me a pro user? Just because most folks don't crack open their computer boxes shouldn't mean that they should have a premium for the actual ability to do so when and if the time comes to upgrade.

    It's just a shame for consumers that the cheapest Apple solution to the above problems starts at $1700 when a (dare I suggest) PC solution starts at about half that. I definitely see the opportunity for a prosumer mac (even if Apple just makes it so that you can use different sized LCD screens on the iMac). Such a machine would have the power, the RAM slots, and monitor choices. It's still the same computer. There's still a four quadrant product matrix. Fortunately, with the iMac's new design, of course, it will be much easier to add larger LCD screens down the road. Hopefully, the RAM issue I mentioned earlier will also be fixed. Perhaps the iMac WILL eventually reach farther into the prosumer territory. Here's hoping!

    Still, when the original iMac was introduced, it had practically everything the beige towers and desktops had. The major features it lacked was the ability to upgrade the monitor and video card and it could hold less RAM. If the new iMac goes this direction as well, fine, but it should keep its specs near the towers. Otherwise, you have the current situation in which there's not a "prosumer Mac." If the new iMac doesn't follow this trend and ends up with much weaker specs than the towers (as later CRT iMacs did), it should at least be cheap. Time will tell, I guess.

    Just some thoughts.

  • Reply 28 of 29
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Moving to General Discussion.
  • Reply 29 of 29
    wrong robotwrong robot Posts: 3,907member
    [quote]Originally posted by Cobra:


    The Cube was this magical machine and it failed.

    I don't buy this "need a middle range" machine crap.


    Apple is still selling the CRT Macs as well. Check the site.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    the CRT iMac does make a nice intro computer, the LCD iMac a nice mid range(not perfect but nice) and the next pmacs will surely round off a nice pro end

    Like a speaker

    subWoofer for bass

    tweeters for treble

    midranges for everything else

    the human ear can hear from 50hz-80khz or something like that right?
Sign In or Register to comment.