So The iMac Is Next, Right?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Well people, now that the G5 hubbub is dying down , looks like the next desktop revision we have to look forward to is the iMac. So what's it to be? The old G4 motherboard with 167 MHz bus or the new 7457? Larger screens? Lower prices?



And most importantly, when?



Here's my guess:



15" Discontinued



New 17" 1.25 GHz G4 256/80 Combo drive Radeon 9000 64 MB $1,399



New 17" 1.42 GHz G4 512/100 Superdrive GeForce FX 5200 64 MB $1,799



This leaves the eMac line to handle the entire $799-&1,299 range and gets rid of the problem of the current $1299 Superdrive eMac being "better" than the current 15" Combo drive iMac.



First week in August?
«134567

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 128
    ast3r3xast3r3x Posts: 5,012member
    I could see the emac dropping $100 and the top two models dropping $200 would be nice and kinda make a position of nice easy hardware gain at most price points with no major gaps and less runover of product lines
  • Reply 2 of 128
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    The eMac is late, 2 years too late. In a year, they should hit commodity prices (sans superdrive). Apple needs to start blowing these out a UNDER 799. They don't have to give it a great update, it just has to get cheaper.



    The 17" iMac is a horrible deal right now. A G4 tower plus third party LCD offers much better performance and expansion for less money. Both 12" powerbooks offer spanning and mobility for less or equal money, and even the 15" Ti 867 could be seen as a better deal if you favor mobility over DVD burning. And then, if you favor DVD burning, you could do worse than an eMac with nearly the same screen real-estate.



    The 17" iMac needs to come down to 1299, the 15" to 999, and the eMac to 799, just to start. Why anyone would choose a combo e/iMac over an iBook, or a superdrive over the 12"PB is beyond me. The PB actually offers MORE display flexibility than the either of the AIO's while still offering portability.



    I can pick up a superdrive 12 for over 400 Canadian less than an iMac. I would say that the iMac needs to come down in price by AT LEAST that much for a superdrive version. In 6 months I'll be able to get a 17" LCD retail for that much, good ones are already down to 600 Canadian (Retail)
  • Reply 3 of 128
    addisonaddison Posts: 1,185member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ensign Pulver





    Here's my guess:



    15" Discontinued



    New 17" 1.25 GHz G4 256/80 Combo drive Radeon 9000 64 MB $1,399



    New 17" 1.42 GHz G4 512/100 Superdrive GeForce FX 5200 64 MB $1,799



    This leaves the eMac line to handle the entire $799-&1,299 range and gets rid of the problem of the current $1299 Superdrive eMac being "better" than the current 15" Combo drive iMac.



    First week in August?




    I dissagree, I thnk we will see the MPC7475 at whatever clock rates they make an appearence and a price reduction. I do not expect to see any change in video cards. Apple has been traditionally very slow to put it's money into expensive video cards, and since they only really benifit "Gamers", Apples traditional customers will not need higher performance video cards. Yes a faster video card is nice but it is not a deal breaker.
  • Reply 4 of 128
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    I think the Xserve (updated to G5) or PowerBooks (update to 7457 G4) will be next, leaning slightly towards the Xserve going first only because I don't know how close Apple is to being able to get the 7457s in quantity.



    After Xserve and PowerBook... then the iMac. Sooner if updated 7457 G4, a little longer if G5. Running at 1.2 or 1.4 GHz with a single G5 processor, I don't think heat will be a problem for the iMac. As a mid range product with a high price in the eyes of many consumers, the iMac could really use the bang-for-your-buck boost of a G5. If it's at all practical to for Apple to redesign the mobo quickly and get a sufficient supply of G5s from IBM, they should go for it.



    Keeping the iMac at 1.2-1.4 GHz, single G5 processor, and having less expansion should be sufficient differentiation from the Power Mac line, so I don't see any strategic difficulties with quickly moving to the G5 in the iMac.
  • Reply 5 of 128
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Not happening, take a look at that heat sink and bus on the PM's again.



    iMacs will never be substantially faster than PB's.
  • Reply 6 of 128
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    The eMac is late, 2 years too late. In a year, they should hit commodity prices (sans superdrive). Apple needs to start blowing these out a UNDER 799. They don't have to give it a great update, it just has to get cheaper.



    I don't think I've seen a single post by you that isn't about prices
  • Reply 7 of 128
    yevgenyyevgeny Posts: 1,148member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by JLL

    I don't think I've seen a single post by you that isn't about prices



    Matsu's post about the iMacs being too expensive for the features is completely true. They are horrible machines when it comes to price/performance. They need a price reduction and a 19 inch LCD on the high end.



    iMacs are horrible deals right now, and I would expect them to be upgraded in the next few weeks before school begins.
  • Reply 8 of 128
    jlljll Posts: 2,709member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Yevgeny

    Matsu's post about the iMacs being too expensive for the features is completely true.



    Did I say that it wasn't?
  • Reply 9 of 128
    anandanand Posts: 285member
    Yes, it is not the cheapest machine and you can get a PC with better numbers, but I still think the 17 inch iMac is a nice computer. A machine that I happly push to people. Of course I wold agree that with a 200 MHZ bus and a 7457 it would be an even better deal. If you people like PC so much, go buy one. It is all about what you want.
  • Reply 10 of 128
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu



    The 17" iMac is a horrible deal right now. A G4 tower plus third party LCD offers much better performance and expansion for less money





    actually no. How cheap can you get a 17" widescreen LCD for?

    (I have priced them, they are very expensive and usually lower resolution).

    that is probably the biggest cost on the 17" imac.
  • Reply 11 of 128
    shetlineshetline Posts: 4,695member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    Not happening, take a look at that heat sink and bus on the PM's again.



    iMacs will never be substantially faster than PB's.




    The Power Macs will run up to dual 2.0 GHz G5s. Their heat sinks could well be overkill for what's currently slated, leaving room for speed bumps before the 90 nm die shrink. I don't think you can use the heat engineering of the new Power Macs to guess what the thermal issues might be for single 1.2-1.4 GHz G5s in an iMac.



    As for the bus speed, it would scale with the processor speed down to 600-700 MHz. Perhaps a small performance trade-off could be made (creating a further distinction between the Power Mac and iMac lines) where an intermediate bus controller throttles the effective bus speed down to 300-350 MHz... still fast enough to benefit from DDR RAM better than the old G4 PMs did.
  • Reply 12 of 128
    keyboardf12keyboardf12 Posts: 1,379member
    Yes. I think they are overpriced too. After all i can buy a pc clone for half price AND still run all the iApps,OSX and the apple music store correct?



    The broken record plays on....



    iMacs perfectly priced? Nope.

    When comparing apples to orange PCs do people _constantly_ leave out the best of breed iApps and the OSX user experience? Yep.
  • Reply 13 of 128
    lemon bon bonlemon bon bon Posts: 2,383member
    Quote:

    Matsu's post about the iMacs being too expensive for the features is completely true. They are horrible machines when it comes to price/performance. They need a price reduction and a 19 inch LCD on the high end.



    iMacs are horrible deals right now, and I would expect them to be upgraded in the next few weeks before school begins.



    While unique and a looker...the imac2 is need of some fundamental addressing. Something is stopping it from being in the same ballpark as the original iMac.



    My guess?



    Cost. Cost. Cost.



    Only 1 model under a k. Pathetic. The iMac2 needs to be where the eMac line is. From bottom to top. LCDs and specs of the iMac don't cost THAT much.



    I kinda agreed with Matsu's post. Apple have got to work harder on forcing eMac and iMac2 pricing down...with upgrades!



    Sales figures do not lie.



    The POWERMac G5 dual 2 gigger is 3rd on Apple Store sales charts. Hmmm. Why? Good spec. Good price.



    iMac 2? Poor spec. Poor price.



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 14 of 128
    cubistcubist Posts: 954member
    I don't think Matsu is saying the iMac is expensive compared to a PC, he's saying it's expensive compared to the PowerBook 12" and the PowerMac - and it lacks the portability of the former and the expandability/upgradability of the latter.



    I'd love a display with an arm like the iMac's, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the expandability. I did once (with the Cube), and now I want a tower.
  • Reply 15 of 128
    matty-omatty-o Posts: 5member
    hopefully the focus during steve's G5 presentation on price/performance comparisons with dell's means that they're aware of the "overpriced and underspec'd" perception of apple, and will try to work on that in their consumer lines as well.



    if apple can get their hands on a bunch of the 1.0-1.2 GHz PPC 970's, the lower heat and power consumption might allow them to push the next gen processor into 'books and imacs before waiting for the 90nm switch.



    back to lurking -

    matty-o
  • Reply 16 of 128
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cubist

    I don't think Matsu is saying the iMac is expensive compared to a PC, he's saying it's expensive compared to the PowerBook 12" and the PowerMac - and it lacks the portability of the former and the expandability/upgradability of the latter.







    Bingo, I've been saying that since forever, hell, if you've got a display anywhere in the house, even a 1.6GHz G5 is worth strecthing to meet over the iMac.



    Why would I recommend any portable from the 867Ti down to the iBook, and the 1.25Ghz single G4 tower, if I thought they were horrible deals. The iMac is a very weak offering relative to the rest of the line-up, that's all
  • Reply 17 of 128
    lemon bon bonlemon bon bon Posts: 2,383member
    Quote:

    I'd love a display with an arm like the iMac's, but I'm not willing to sacrifice the expandability. I did once (with the Cube), and now I want a tower.



    Maybe a Cube or 'Matsu' Mini-Tower concept with a monitor on an iMac like chrome arm instead of those polycarbonate peg legs.



    ie separate the monitor and Cube the dome. And you got Cube the iMac 3.



    ?



    At least the Cube had limited expandability.



    There's a reason why the Powerbook 12 inch is on of Apple's top sellers...



    Lemon Bon Bon
  • Reply 18 of 128
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,148member
    I think Apple could take that entry eMac down to $599.



    So the matrix would then look like this:



    $599 G4 GHz eMac/256/32 MB Video/CD

    $799 G4 1.25 eMac/256/64 MB Video/Combo

    $999 G4 1.25 eMac/512/64 MB Video/SuperDrive



    $1199 G4 1 GHZ iMac FP 15/256 MB/64 MB Video/Combo

    $1599 G4 1.25 GHZ iMac FP 17/512 MB/64 MB Video/SuperDrive



    $1,299 G4 1.25 Power Mac tower, etc...
  • Reply 19 of 128
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I doubt that the 17" panel is too costly any more, or that it's aspect drives up the price. Square 17" panels can be had for as little as 600-650 Canadian, and the same 17" widescreen panel has recently popped up in a 1999 laptop (albeit a 10 pound one!). Just this afternoon, in my local Costco, I saw the same panel used in Widescreen flat panel TV/Monitor for 1000 Canadian. When you strip out the remote, speakers, RGB, Scart connectors from the TV component, the panels itself obviously isn't anything to much more costly than a 15"



    It actually has less surface area than a square 17, and since panels are paid for by the square inch, I suspect it costs less than the better 5:4 17" displays.
  • Reply 20 of 128
    ensign pulverensign pulver Posts: 1,193member
    What this all boils down to is what's Apple going to do with the 1299-1799 price range - the sweet spot for high margin consumer sales. It's currently occupied by the iMac line, but right now it's not really up to the task. If Apple is commited to keeping the iMac line as the official mid range machine, then they need to pump it up.



    The only thing that will make that happen is a lower power, lower heat .09 G5 and larger screens. This won't happen right away though, we'll definitely get one more ho-hum G4 speedbump with the same displays.



    Early next year however, the Power Macs will be in the 2.5 GHz range with more dual configs and .09 G5s at 1.4 -1.6 will be available to iMacs without threatening tower sales. If the G5 chip actually costs less than a G4 and Superdrives are no longer so expensive, then how's this for a desktop lineup 9 months from now:



    1.3 GHz 7457 G4 eMac Combo Drive 256/80 $799

    1.3 GHz 7457 G4 eMac Superdrive 256/100 $999



    1.4 GHz G5 17" iMac Superdrive 256/100 $1,399

    1.6 GHz G5 20" iMac Superdrive 512/120 $1,799



    1.8 Single G5 Power Mac $1799

    2.0 Dual G5 Power Mac $2,299

    2.5 Dual G5 Power Mac $2,999



    By then they'll ship with a bug-free, very polished 10.3.3 or 10.3.4. These would be excellent boxes from top to bottom.



    Sound good, or should Apple give up on the iMac and bring back the Cube?
Sign In or Register to comment.