Sounds like Steve Jobs telling educators that they need an eMac.
Heh. Apple said they listened to educators and came up with the eMac.
We don't really believe that, do we Amorph
I can hear it now, 'Oops. You know, Jonathon... We couldn't make the iMac2 cheap enough...I know...I know...you 'told me so'...so y'know that low-carb iMac design? We didn't make it? (Jonathon: 'You said you wanted a 'sunflower' instead...) How about that lard-ass 17 inch iMac prototype that we've got in storage...?' (Jonathon: '...er...okay Steve...but I was pished when I designed it...')
Sounds like Steve Jobs telling educators that they need an eMac.
Heh. Apple said they listened to educators and came up with the eMac.
We don't really believe that, do we Amorph
Actually, we do. (I'm an Administrator. I get to use the Royal We. ) Specifically, the eMac was what the Los Angeles Unified School District demanded, or they'd go WinTel.
It's engineered as a perfect school machine. The #1 problem with it is that it doesn't run Windows, and the current tide in education is to get kids using the same computers that are used in business, and yadda yadda yadda.
I predict that a $499 headless Apple box will go nowhere in schools, because it doesn't address the problem. The problem is political.
the problem is that tech programs are churning out Windows Certified Retards faster than you can shake a stick at them.
of course, they're deathly afraid of anything other than Windows, so push hard for it. it's really annoying.
if IT folks weren't deathly afraid of the Mac OS they'd make a lot more headway. although i think OSX has done more for Macs than anything else possible could have. hard to pooh pooh Unix.
I predict that a $499 headless Apple box will go nowhere in schools, because it doesn't address the problem. The problem is political.
I harbor the same fear, because of the politics, but I still think the headless option should be there. eMac's on borrowed time anyway, should have been here two years ago. LCD's are the future, even in grade-schools, heck they're already the present, most of the new boxes aound my campuses have LCD's, not the greatest LCD's, but LCD's nonetheless. Better to cover the two potential markets, AIO, and headless/component with two seperate models rather than create overlap with two very similar models.
eMacs exist for edu almost exclusively due to price. I know for a fact that even in elementary schools we are now recommending LCD's over CRT's for health/ergo reasons. The so called demand for a "rugged" CRT is almost entirely spin based on early, and ill founded fears about LCD durability, back when LCD's were a lot more expensive. They've fallen enough now that we can look at a handful of 15" models for 300 Canadian, and will be looking at 200-250 Canadian by the end of '03 or '04. Apple will say they tailored it to meet certain "ruggedness" criteria, but that's jut a bunch of crock, they needed something to sell cheap yet could let them eek out a little extra margin. With 15" LCD prices set to bottom out, the cost of builing a bulkier CRT eMac, and storing and shipping it, probably won't be worth it at all in 18 months time.
I'd rather see an iMac and iCube offered to consumers, and a PMac and PCube offered to pros/umers. Choice is not the enemy.
I'd rather see an iMac and iCube offered to consumers, and a PMac and PCube offered to pros/umers. Choice is not the enemy.
Well, I was going to quote Amorph's last line. But I'll quote Matsu's last line instead
I think Matsu's iCube pro and con' is a good antidote to Apple's current 'splodge' approach with the iMac2/eMac. Essentially the same machine, give or take a chrome arm. (And the eMac for £999 is a much better deal than the 17 incher for £1400 odd. Almost five hundred extra for a chrome arm and the same 17 inch viewing space?) Still offer the eMac and see how well it does against the iCube consumer. An iCube and PCube would really fill that massive void underneath the low-end 'power'Mac which isn't sufficiently covered by the iMac2 or eMac. It would give the consumer much more choice. And by early 2004, Apple will have the scalability with the 970 to bring it about.
Scrap the eMac/iMac2? Maybe. Or rather, keep them as a choice people who want that kind of limited AIO.
The PCube/iCube could cover the same price range as the 'Twins of Evil' and give many of the Wintel 'Tower' owning switchers more flexibility and options to come over.
Maybe it's not an either/or proposition..?
Part of the problem is political, Amorph and you are well positioned to see it. As is Matsu... As is my lemonee self.
Yes, our LCD 'super fast' Pentium 4 suite of computers was a political choice. 'We want the same as everybody else'. Basically. But even WHEN badgered to consider the alternative. Price. Two for one. Performance. Two for one. LCD space saver vs CRT bulkiness. Perception that Apple is behind. Choice vs Lack of Choice. Need I go on? Yes, the end result can be 'political'. But that catch all masks many of the things Apple aint doing for educators (but they are doing many fine things such as the teacher workshops run in the UK...Jag' and software for Teachers offer...attending the Betts conference etc...)
The 'headless' iCube won't be a 'catch all' either. But not having that choice...not being in that price bracket. Not having a decent cpu...well, it takes its toll from edu' to the consumer markets and ultimately Apple's bottom line. Essentially, it boils down to the fact that Apple isn't competing as well as it should on price or performance. Luckily, I think Apple is taking measures to address this behind the scenes. Busting an engineering gut to transition their entire line to 970 by 2004 if they have any sense. And advertise? Many UK educators have no idea about Apple let alone the choice.
Hopefully 970 and Panther will finally get everything else moving. Four years of hardware stagnation doesn't help any of Apple's causes.
At least with Panther and 970, Apple is finally poised to attack?
the problem is that tech programs are churning out Windows Certified Retards faster than you can shake a stick at them.
of course, they're deathly afraid of anything other than Windows, so push hard for it. it's really annoying.
if IT folks weren't deathly afraid of the Mac OS they'd make a lot more headway. although i think OSX has done more for Macs than anything else possible could have. hard to pooh pooh Unix.
Well, the Roman Empire was probably very afraid of the Barbarians. It won't matter. In the end...I think we'll plunder 'Rome'.
Call me insane, but I think the apple chord will bring the 'sound of inevitability' to the M$ Empire.
They all crumble in the end. 'Empires' bigger than M$ have fallen.
While this thread meanders around about transistor counts, I return to the original premise, and opine that Apple has yet to master the $1000 expandable computer, so I'm not entirely optimistic they'll get to the $600 level anytime soon.
. . . Apple has yet to master the $1000 expandable computer, so I'm not entirely optimistic they'll get to the $600 level anytime soon.
Right. Apple hasn't even attempted it. Possibly the CPU selection Apple has to work with is limiting design options. Now that I think about it, there is not much difference between say a 900 MHz G3 and a 1 GHz, single processor, G4 Power Mac, when they executing 'run of the mill' code not optimized for AltiVec. It would be hard to differentiate between a low cost expandable G3 Mac and the low end of the Power Macs.
When the 970 is in the Power Mac line, and maybe the Powerbooks too, it opens up possibilities for low end Macs that do not compete with high end Macs. It will be interesting to see what develops.
I think what will devlop is that Apple still won't have an effective commodity-level computer, and will still expect budget-constrained buyers to choose their expansion-crippled products (iThis, eThat, etc), or to buy a used Mac, thus surrendering a potential sale to their own re-sale market.....
This is the point in the discussion where someone tells me that people who don't buy multi-thousand dollar towers don't need expansion, but I'd rather the buyer decided what he needs rather than the seller, no?
I think what will devlop is that Apple still won't have an effective commodity-level computer, and will still expect budget-constrained buyers to choose their expansion-crippled products (iThis, eThat, etc), or to buy a used Mac, thus surrendering a potential sale to their own re-sale market.....
This is the point in the discussion where someone tells me that people who don't buy multi-thousand dollar towers don't need expansion, but I'd rather the buyer decided what he needs rather than the seller, no?
Yep. I still use the beige G3 and have been waiting for something with PCI slots that is a little smaller and less expensive than the Power Macs. With Power Macs becoming more of a workstation, running the IBM 970, it could happen. I mean, Apple must know what people want, unless they keep their eyes closed and ears plugged. If not, I may do what you say and consider the used PowerMac market. I'll just have to put up with the bigger box. I think prices will get better on the older Macs.
It somewhere between stupid and idiotic that Apple would rather a re-seller make a sale on a cheaper machine, than make the money themselves. But what do I know? I'm not as smart as Steve Jobs......
Comments
*fill-in-what-I-want*
Sounds like Steve Jobs telling educators that they need an eMac.
Heh. Apple said they listened to educators and came up with the eMac.
We don't really believe that, do we Amorph
I can hear it now, 'Oops. You know, Jonathon... We couldn't make the iMac2 cheap enough...I know...I know...you 'told me so'...so y'know that low-carb iMac design? We didn't make it? (Jonathon: 'You said you wanted a 'sunflower' instead...) How about that lard-ass 17 inch iMac prototype that we've got in storage...?' (Jonathon: '...er...okay Steve...but I was pished when I designed it...')
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Sounds like Steve Jobs telling educators that they need an eMac.
Heh. Apple said they listened to educators and came up with the eMac.
We don't really believe that, do we Amorph
Actually, we do. (I'm an Administrator. I get to use the Royal We.
It's engineered as a perfect school machine. The #1 problem with it is that it doesn't run Windows, and the current tide in education is to get kids using the same computers that are used in business, and yadda yadda yadda.
I predict that a $499 headless Apple box will go nowhere in schools, because it doesn't address the problem. The problem is political.
of course, they're deathly afraid of anything other than Windows, so push hard for it. it's really annoying.
if IT folks weren't deathly afraid of the Mac OS they'd make a lot more headway. although i think OSX has done more for Macs than anything else possible could have. hard to pooh pooh Unix.
Originally posted by Amorph
I predict that a $499 headless Apple box will go nowhere in schools, because it doesn't address the problem. The problem is political.
I harbor the same fear, because of the politics, but I still think the headless option should be there. eMac's on borrowed time anyway, should have been here two years ago. LCD's are the future, even in grade-schools, heck they're already the present, most of the new boxes aound my campuses have LCD's, not the greatest LCD's, but LCD's nonetheless. Better to cover the two potential markets, AIO, and headless/component with two seperate models rather than create overlap with two very similar models.
eMacs exist for edu almost exclusively due to price. I know for a fact that even in elementary schools we are now recommending LCD's over CRT's for health/ergo reasons. The so called demand for a "rugged" CRT is almost entirely spin based on early, and ill founded fears about LCD durability, back when LCD's were a lot more expensive. They've fallen enough now that we can look at a handful of 15" models for 300 Canadian, and will be looking at 200-250 Canadian by the end of '03 or '04. Apple will say they tailored it to meet certain "ruggedness" criteria, but that's jut a bunch of crock, they needed something to sell cheap yet could let them eek out a little extra margin. With 15" LCD prices set to bottom out, the cost of builing a bulkier CRT eMac, and storing and shipping it, probably won't be worth it at all in 18 months time.
I'd rather see an iMac and iCube offered to consumers, and a PMac and PCube offered to pros/umers. Choice is not the enemy.
I'd rather see an iMac and iCube offered to consumers, and a PMac and PCube offered to pros/umers. Choice is not the enemy.
Well, I was going to quote Amorph's last line. But I'll quote Matsu's last line instead
I think Matsu's iCube pro and con' is a good antidote to Apple's current 'splodge' approach with the iMac2/eMac. Essentially the same machine, give or take a chrome arm. (And the eMac for £999 is a much better deal than the 17 incher for £1400 odd. Almost five hundred extra for a chrome arm and the same 17 inch viewing space?) Still offer the eMac and see how well it does against the iCube consumer. An iCube and PCube would really fill that massive void underneath the low-end 'power'Mac which isn't sufficiently covered by the iMac2 or eMac. It would give the consumer much more choice. And by early 2004, Apple will have the scalability with the 970 to bring it about.
Scrap the eMac/iMac2? Maybe. Or rather, keep them as a choice people who want that kind of limited AIO.
The PCube/iCube could cover the same price range as the 'Twins of Evil' and give many of the Wintel 'Tower' owning switchers more flexibility and options to come over.
Maybe it's not an either/or proposition..?
Part of the problem is political, Amorph and you are well positioned to see it. As is Matsu... As is my lemonee self.
Yes, our LCD 'super fast' Pentium 4 suite of computers was a political choice. 'We want the same as everybody else'. Basically. But even WHEN badgered to consider the alternative. Price. Two for one. Performance. Two for one. LCD space saver vs CRT bulkiness. Perception that Apple is behind. Choice vs Lack of Choice. Need I go on? Yes, the end result can be 'political'. But that catch all masks many of the things Apple aint doing for educators (but they are doing many fine things such as the teacher workshops run in the UK...Jag' and software for Teachers offer...attending the Betts conference etc...)
The 'headless' iCube won't be a 'catch all' either. But not having that choice...not being in that price bracket. Not having a decent cpu...well, it takes its toll from edu' to the consumer markets and ultimately Apple's bottom line. Essentially, it boils down to the fact that Apple isn't competing as well as it should on price or performance. Luckily, I think Apple is taking measures to address this behind the scenes. Busting an engineering gut to transition their entire line to 970 by 2004 if they have any sense. And advertise? Many UK educators have no idea about Apple let alone the choice.
Hopefully 970 and Panther will finally get everything else moving. Four years of hardware stagnation doesn't help any of Apple's causes.
At least with Panther and 970, Apple is finally poised to attack?
Lemon Bon Bon
the problem is that tech programs are churning out Windows Certified Retards faster than you can shake a stick at them.
of course, they're deathly afraid of anything other than Windows, so push hard for it. it's really annoying.
if IT folks weren't deathly afraid of the Mac OS they'd make a lot more headway. although i think OSX has done more for Macs than anything else possible could have. hard to pooh pooh Unix.
Well, the Roman Empire was probably very afraid of the Barbarians. It won't matter. In the end...I think we'll plunder 'Rome'.
Call me insane, but I think the apple chord will bring the 'sound of inevitability' to the M$ Empire.
They all crumble in the end. 'Empires' bigger than M$ have fallen.
Lemon Bon Bon
I am Fred.
Originally posted by I, Fred
. . . Apple has yet to master the $1000 expandable computer, so I'm not entirely optimistic they'll get to the $600 level anytime soon.
Right. Apple hasn't even attempted it. Possibly the CPU selection Apple has to work with is limiting design options. Now that I think about it, there is not much difference between say a 900 MHz G3 and a 1 GHz, single processor, G4 Power Mac, when they executing 'run of the mill' code not optimized for AltiVec. It would be hard to differentiate between a low cost expandable G3 Mac and the low end of the Power Macs.
When the 970 is in the Power Mac line, and maybe the Powerbooks too, it opens up possibilities for low end Macs that do not compete with high end Macs. It will be interesting to see what develops.
This is the point in the discussion where someone tells me that people who don't buy multi-thousand dollar towers don't need expansion, but I'd rather the buyer decided what he needs rather than the seller, no?
Originally posted by I, Fred
I think what will devlop is that Apple still won't have an effective commodity-level computer, and will still expect budget-constrained buyers to choose their expansion-crippled products (iThis, eThat, etc), or to buy a used Mac, thus surrendering a potential sale to their own re-sale market.....
This is the point in the discussion where someone tells me that people who don't buy multi-thousand dollar towers don't need expansion, but I'd rather the buyer decided what he needs rather than the seller, no?
Yep. I still use the beige G3 and have been waiting for something with PCI slots that is a little smaller and less expensive than the Power Macs. With Power Macs becoming more of a workstation, running the IBM 970, it could happen. I mean, Apple must know what people want, unless they keep their eyes closed and ears plugged. If not, I may do what you say and consider the used PowerMac market. I'll just have to put up with the bigger box. I think prices will get better on the older Macs.