iMacs of 2003

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 89
    Obviously, Steve needs to rejuvenate the consumer desktop lines at MWSF. I have an idea that would get everyone talking and feeling good about eMacs and iMacs the way we currently feel about the iBooks and Powerbooks.



    Remember when the iceBook was first introduced? The whole line had a lot of bang for the buck and it was rightfully cheered by both customers and pundits. What struck me at the time was how every model had the same 500 Mhz G3 processor. The only difference between the models was optical drive, RAM and hard drive size. It was kind of weird, but it really worked.



    Fast forward to MWSF 2003 when the consumer desktops need a shot in the arm. So Steve does the same thing with the eMacs and iMacs by giving every model a 1 Ghz G4. Now 1 Ghz ain't what it used to be, but once we hit '03, selling ANY desktop computer at ANY price with a sub Gig chip is pretty unthinkable from a marketing standpoint.



    So here's my MWSF 2003 consumer desktop line. 1 Ghz G4 on a 133 bus across the board with the only differentiation being screen type and size, graphics card, optical drive and memory.

    (G3 CRT iMac and all 15" flat panel iMacs are discontinued.)



    1 Ghz G4 eMac Combo/128/40/gForce4MX32 $999



    1 Ghz G4 eMac Superdrive/256/60/gForce4MX32 $1299



    1 Ghz G4 iMac 17" Combo/256/60/gForce4MX32 $1399



    1 Ghz G4 iMac 17" Superdrive/256/80/gForce4MX64 $1699



    1 Ghz G4 iMac 19" (1600x1024) Superdrive/256/100/gForce4MX64 $1999





    LCD prices are plummeting, R&D on the flat panel iMac design is paid off, and Apple needs to move as many consumer machines as possible. They'll sell like hotcakes!



    Anyone bemoaning the loss of the CRT and 15" flat panel iMacs, look at those three bottom models. There's a lot to like for the price.
  • Reply 22 of 89
    Apple didn't make price cuts on iMacs. Are they thinking they will reduce their stock for the christmas holidays?
  • Reply 23 of 89
    I don't think we will see a 19 inch iMac. Would canabalize Tower and Screen purchases.



    Do you all think they should kill the original g3 iMac or keep selling it?
  • Reply 24 of 89
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    They should only continue selling the CRT iMac if they're going to update it. They've gotten much cheaper, but they're also less capable - 600 MHz vs. 700 MHz last year, as well as a plain CD-ROM drive instead of a CD-RW.



    I think they could make a minor redesign of the CRT iMac that would make it a bit smaller and much better - just adapt it to use the iBook's logic board. While they're at it, they may as well replace the crappy old shadow mask CRT (my Performa Plus is better... honestly!) and use a Trinitron instead. They'd save money because they'd only have to produce iBook logic boards, instead of dedicating assembly lines to making boards for CRT iMacs. And the computer would be better - just equip it like the low end iBook and sell it for $200-$300 less. Maybe even style it like the eMac so it's like a little eMac Jr.
  • Reply 25 of 89
    If they replace the current $1999 model with a 19-inch LCD, I will snap one up immediately!
  • Reply 26 of 89
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    I wonder if a 19" LCD will even fit on that stalk? Everyone talks about a 19" model.



    If we get a 19" one I bet people will start speculating on a 21" or 22" one... or perhaps 19" really is the limit. Maybe they'll be able to make it super thin like on the TiBook.
  • Reply 27 of 89
    <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> I wonder what the screen size limit fot the iMac would be... People thought the 17-inch screen looked disproportionate. I personally think there's nothing wrong with a 23-inch HDTV Studio Display attached to the iMac's arm.
  • Reply 28 of 89
    jcgjcg Posts: 777member
    [quote]Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:

    <strong>I wonder if a 19" LCD will even fit on that stalk? Everyone talks about a 19" model.



    If we get a 19" one I bet people will start speculating on a 21" or 22" one... or perhaps 19" really is the limit. Maybe they'll be able to make it super thin like on the TiBook.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Apple needs to turn video spanning on for the iMac's, it will make it a more attractive product. Yes they might loose a few low-end PowerMac sales to the upper end iMacs, but I imagine that the profit margin one the top end iMacs is close to the bottom end PowerMacs anyway.
  • Reply 29 of 89
    In the interests of being cost-effective, it would make sense to give all of the iMacs a 1Ghz G4 and give them all the same video cards and video memory. Cut the product line down to three models and make the choice of optical drive, memory, hard drive, and screen size be the differences between the three models.



    If they do this, then each machine will have the exact same motherboard which reduces cost and makes inventory easier to manage. A minor bump around the 6-month mark would then be in order. Unfortunately, you really don't want to go any faster on a 133Mhz bus and anythng higher requires DDR memory which is not a minor revision.



    Also, I'd say a price cut is in order. The low end needs to come down to $999, and the high end shouldn't be much above $1500.



    I'm sure they've found ways to simplify and reduce costs in the manufacturing process and to simplify the insides so they take up less space as well. I think there might be a minor case/appearance revision, and everything interally will probably be improved upon.



    [ 12-02-2002: Message edited by: rogue27 ]</p>
  • Reply 30 of 89
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    Here are some iMac screen exaggerations:



    <a href="http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=326"; target="_blank">http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=326</a>;



    <a href="http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=3168"; target="_blank">http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=3168</a>;



    <a href="http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=526"; target="_blank">http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=526</a>;



    Anything larger than 19" would look ridiculous. Even 19" might be a bit high, but it would be awesome to use.
  • Reply 31 of 89
    From a gamers perspective I would like this:



    CPU:1ghz G4 or +

    GPU:Gforce4ti (4200-&gt; this baby ownz)

    or Radeon 9500 (is not so cheap either but has more power then 4600 for less $$$)

    not a MX because it sux big time

    a fast fsb would come in handy to (133-166)



    HD is fine

    Looks 10/10
  • Reply 32 of 89
    noseynosey Posts: 307member
    The end of the line white imac is still an important asset for schools and companies which want a lab of computers, cheap, to hook up to one server they all boot from.

    Sometimes you don't want people moving the monitors around.

    Sometimes speed isn't an issue.

    If you could buy twenty of last years models for the same price as ten of the ultimae wonder-macs, well... I think I know where most cash strapped schools would go...

    The older imacs are not for every school. Neither are the emacs. If you buy twenty imacs instead of emacs, at a savings of $200US per unit, (or $450Cdn) you have enough to buy a decent server... Or other useful bit of computer lab equipment.



    And, don't forget, there are a lot of other countries in the world that need cheap, dependable computers where schools don't need speed or fancy gimicks.



    If anything, I would say the imac would become a schools-only device, possibly discontinued in north america, but still available to educators in the rest of the world.



    Just my 2 cents, canadian... or 0.5 cents us...
  • Reply 33 of 89
    [quote]Originally posted by Murder By Syntax:

    <strong>From a gamers perspective I would like this:



    CPU:1ghz G4 or +

    GPU:Gforce4ti (4200-&gt; this baby ownz)

    or Radeon 9500 (is not so cheap either but has more power then 4600 for less $$$)

    not a MX because it sux big time

    a fast fsb would come in handy to (133-166)



    HD is fine

    Looks 10/10</strong><hr></blockquote>





    only problem(s)

    the geforce 4 ti 4200 is not available through apple and I doubt it will be(though I would be stoked if it was)

    same with the Radeon 9500

    and the radeon 9500 does not out perform a Geforce 4 ti 4600 the 9700 barely does(and only in some areas)

    the Geforce 4 ti 4600 is still top dog and with the nv30 or whatever is coming next from nvidia, I would say that nvidia will remain top dog with Ati nipping right behind.



    I'm getting a radeon 9000 for my tower which I intend to upgrade in the future to whatever makes it to mac first.
  • Reply 34 of 89
    stoostoo Posts: 1,490member
    Just because Apple won't sell you a Ti 4200 doesn't mean that they can't stick them into future products. AFAIK, all the GeForce 4 Ti 4200 is a clocked down 4600.
  • Reply 35 of 89
    There is a nice post about the new iMac over at MOSR, <a href="http://www.macosrumors.com"; target="_blank">www.macosrumors.com</a> . Check it out and tell me what you think...
  • Reply 36 of 89
    pbpb Posts: 4,233member
    There exists a new rumor site, <a href="http://www.looprumors.com"; target="_blank">Looprumors</a>, started its life very recently. Their first speculation is about the new iMacs to be presented at MWSF 2003. Very interesting, but I would like to see what do you think, is there some basis or all they saying are random words?
  • Reply 37 of 89
    Well, ...If the Rumor (or is it a guess..) , that eMac, iMac and PowerMacs will be updated is in fact true. I feel maybe it is possible that Apple may release not a G5 processor, but a new, redesigned G4 which will be embedded into the new iMac. And yes, maybe even a dual iMac... Would a dual iMac make sense? I would like to think so...
  • Reply 38 of 89
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Looprumors is just like MOSR. Asking questions, speculating on what the answers might be, saying silly stuff like "stay tuned for more info..." (as we make more unfounded crap up), etc.



    :confused:



    I don't believe Apple rumors anymore. I think it's a lost art or dead-end. It's more fun just to speculate and debate amongst ourselves and wait for the stuff to come out. Any website touting "inside scoop" and "rumors" is usually full of crap, either purposely so or simply because they - like us - are winging it and making their best guess.



    No one really knows, do they? I mean really.
  • Reply 39 of 89
    Here's what i'm betting on for MWSF 2003.

    changes across the board will probably include...

    -slot loading optical drives

    -power switch in the front(probably on the display itself)

    -133Mz System wide bus



    -Entry level

    733 MHz G4

    15" stnadard LCD

    ComboDrive

    256MB RAM

    40GB HD

    GeForce4 MX w/ 32MB VRAM

    $1199



    -MidRange

    867Mhz G4

    17" Wide aspect Ratio

    Superdrive

    256MB RAM

    60GB HD

    GeForce4 MX w/ 32 MB VRAM

    $1499



    -High end (Special Edition)

    933 Mhz G4

    19" wide aspect ratio

    Superdrive

    512MB RAM

    80GB HD

    Radeon 9000 w/ 64MB VRAM

    $1899

    (im thinking a slightly different form factor here..... maybe a stealth black color option or something or comes with the SoundSticks standard)



    I have to stress that i doubt that the iMac will reach 1Ghz this time around. The pro laptop line have just recently reached that mark, and the pro desktops are barely over that mark right now.



    [ 12-03-2002: Message edited by: Hawkeye_a ]</p>
  • Reply 40 of 89
    addisonaddison Posts: 1,185member
    [quote]Originally posted by Wrong Robust:

    <strong>I hope they don't release an iMac that trumps over the towers and is cheaper...cause I'm getting a dual ghz. Tower this week!</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Well I hope that they do. Apple needs to sell new faster machines. You have to make a choice, if you are not happy with what is on offer NOW, don't buyit. If it doesn't meet your needs, just wait for within a year we are likely to see machines on offer that will make EVERY existing machine obsolete.
Sign In or Register to comment.