Shetline. Good Rebuttal. Honestly both of your points are valid. Market conditions will dictate what Apple does. Right now they have options.
G5 computers seem to offer lots of performance. Consumers will tell themselves that they want a G5 at their price point. Apple may choose to push G4s but Mac users are Legendary in their ability two wait...wait....wait. Apple needs to retrain it's users to pull the trigger. Product cycles need to be updated no more than 8 months apart. That isolates Apple from anger from the consumer about missing out on a latest update. It's alot easier to swallow not having the fastest on the block of you can point to the poor bloke who puchased the model before yours just 8 months prior.
G4's will not be competitive with X86 next year. $1300 PC computers will have 800Mhz Busses and 3Ghz processors with Hyperthreading. If Apple continues to slack in the under $1500 market then they obviously don't believe in their Switch Campaign. I reiterate the G5 needs to be in an iMac by next summer. That gives Apple one more G4 refresh in the line.
That also sets Apple up to move to the 980 in 24-30 months. The Power 5 will be here next year, and possibly the 980 the year after, I wouldnt count on 18 months but 24 might be a realistic "earliest we could see them" ship time for a 980 based Mac. Though I fear that Apple will stick with the G4 for 2 more updates (summer 03 and winter 04 anouncements) for the iMac.
Longer. at least three other products are ahead of th iMac in the G5 queue. The Xserve, a minor matter for the leaf blower. The "Headless" space currently occupied by the PMG4, and the Powerbooks. iMacs will almost certainly get the same CPU as Powerbooks stripped of a few features, when the time for their G5 finally arrives. PB's will take 12 months, iMacs will take longer, 16-18. Jan '05, mebbe Xmas '04.
Consider these premises, admittedly some just guesswork:The iMac can handle currently available 1.2-1.4 GHz G5s, the PowerBook cannot. iMac sales need much more help than PowerBook sales. Using G5s at 1.2-1.4 GHz would improve the perceived value of the iMacs, without encroaching on Power Mac territory. Apple?s engineering can quickly put together a viable iMac G5 mobo using currently-available G5s, well before doing so for the PowerBook, which is likely waiting on 90 nm versions of the 970. Are you saying that even if all of the above were true, Apple would still let the iMac languish with the G4 for as much as a year or more, waiting for PowerBooks to catch up, just to follow a particular pattern, just to maintain some artificial ?G5 = pro? distinction, just to be able to use particular slogans at particular times?
I agree with this. I see a lot of posts mentioning the iMac using a 1.4 GHz G4 but that makes no sense to me because the 1.4 GHz 7455 runs way too hot to stick in an iMac. A 1.2 GHz G5 would run cooler and would be far more powerful. Some people also mention putting an L3 cache into the iMac along with some version of a G4. L3 cache adds to the cost and the G5 doesn't need it.
If the iMac is going to stick with a G4 in the next revision, due in August, I suspect, it'll be a 7457 at perhaps 1.2 GHz. Just how thrilling would sales be then? Maybe if the price were reduced?
I've also seen posts about a .09µ version of the 970. Is that really going to happen? I can see the 970 going to 2.4 GHz in January but still at .13µ. 6 months after that, there'll be a .09µ 980 G6 at 3 GHz. Is it worth it to refab the 970 at .09µ and if so, how soon would that be? I've been hearing spring, at the earliest. If there's going to be a G5 PB in Jan., it'd probably be 1.4 GHz using a .13µ 970. Some clever way will have been found to deal with the heat. Aside from cooling fans, they'll probably find ways to step down the power with a reworked controller.
Anyway, I'd hate to see the iMac held up by the PB. Sure, maybe for marketing reasons but technically, there's no reason why the iMac couldn't go G5 now.
I've also seen posts about a .09µ version of the 970. Is that really going to happen? I can see the 970 going to 2.4 GHz in January but still at .13µ. 6 months after that, there'll be a .09µ 980 G6 at 3 GHz. Is it worth it to refab the 970 at .09µ and if so, how soon would that be? I've been hearing spring, at the earliest. If there's going to be a G5 PB in Jan., it'd probably be 1.4 GHz using a .13µ 970. Some clever way will have been found to deal with the heat. Aside from cooling fans, they'll probably find ways to step down the power with a reworked controller.
Anyway, I'd hate to see the iMac held up by the PB. Sure, maybe for marketing reasons but technically, there's no reason why the iMac couldn't go G5 now.
Couple of things: where have you heard anything about the 980 other than pure speculation; nothing from IBM. As for the iMac going G5 now, Apple learned it's lesson and won't release an iMac so soon after Power Mac G5 introductions. People will buy them up left and right, and ignore the Power Mac yet again! Not going to happen soon. Later, much later.
BTW, all the Powerbooks have processor speed and voltage step downs already.
Apple's screwing the pooch. They need to look at their products like this.
Xserve/Xraid- High Margin + Service Packages
Powermacs- High Margin
iMacs/eMacs- Low Margin high volume(Promote iTMS, .mac services hard!)
a 1.2-1.4Ghz G5 in an iMac is simply not going to compete with a Powermac. And anyone who would chose a G5 iMac over a G5 Powermac propably really only needs that iMac. Apple ...sell the appropriate machine for the appropriate person.
A 1.2-1.4Ghz G5 in an iMac is simply not going to compete with a Powermac. And anyone who would chose a G5 iMac over a G5 Powermac propably really only needs that iMac. Apple ...sell the appropriate machine for the appropriate person.
Wasn't the intro of the G4 iMac LCD pretty much the nail in the PowerMac G4 coffin? Same CPU, same video, superdrive, AND LCD for around the same price!
Wasn't the intro of the G4 iMac LCD pretty much the nail in the PowerMac G4 coffin? Same CPU, same video, superdrive, AND LCD for around the same price!
Yes it was. But now Apple has more "range" in which to place their product.
1.2-1.4Ghz for iMacs while the PMs are 2.0-3.0Ghz in a year. No danger at all. PM SHOULD be overkill for most people and hence..priced accordingly.
Imacs should be low margin high volume. Marketshare builders.
G4's will not be competitive with X86 next year. $1300 PC computers will have 800Mhz Busses and 3Ghz processors with Hyperthreading. If Apple continues to slack in the under $1500 market then they obviously don't believe in their Switch Campaign. I reiterate the G5 needs to be in an iMac by next summer. That gives Apple one more G4 refresh in the line.
Agree. Totally.
1.3 G4 on crap bus against Prescott and its bus?
How stupid would that be? No. Apple are going to have to think different.
Getting to 0.09 970 is imperative for Apple. That iMac needs it. The Powerbook needs it. I think their whole line needs it.
A 0.09 1.8 G5 iMac2 in no way competes with a 3 gig dual 970. This isn't the incremental G4, people! Heat, smeat. Dell seems to find a way for those Pentium 4 firebreathers to fit into x86 laptops and AIOs. A don't think a 1.2 970 is going to need 9 fans. I don't think a .09 970 is going to need 9 fans. For a start, I don't see an iMac being a dual 2 gig firebreather...
Apple must address the price of their consumer desktops...and the performance. Or the unit sales will continue to get a kicking. They need to show the same aggression as the laptop line. Up performance...drive down price...and at least one headless/semi-expandable Mac?
The next 6 months may not see the G5 in anything but Apple's 'heavy-iron' line. But I think first six months of 04? That's gotta change...
I await Apple's next 2 quarter sales with great interest.
I concur with the last few posts...the G5 needs to be in the iMac ASAP. If anything, the G5 points out even further how far behind the G4 is to the P4. (Not that I wouldn't rather have a G4 based Mac than a P4 based PC any day of the week.)
All the talk of Apple's lines "competing" with each other I think is misleading. Most of the people here who have a G4 tower bought it because they wanted expandability that the iMac G4 didn't offer. The reality is that the 1 GHz G4 iMac is MORE than enough computer for many home and small business customers who insisted they "needed" the PowerMac. But some will always buy the tower because of legitimate need, or for some just the "wang" factor.
An iMac G5 won't have PCI-X slots, will have only 2 RAM slots, non-upgradable video, and 1.6 GHz/800 MHz bus at the very best in the first release. That machine, while potentially stealing some sales away from the 1.6 GHz tower for those who really don't need slots, is not even remotely going to satisfy those looking at the 1.8 and Dual 2.0 GHz machines. And as long as Apple keeps the best iMac at the same speed as the slowest single-CPU tower, this formula won't change.
Though there will always be a small percentage who are on the fence over the iMac and PowerMac and would skip buying a tower if the iMac G5 was available, that is probably a tiny portion of the entire market. There's far more to the AIO vs. tower decision than the processor, and to "embargo" the G5 from any other machine for that reason alone is very bad business.
The problem Apple has now is that the G5 is both a blessing and a curse. Mostly a blessing, of course, but in the short term the G5 must be causing some major headaches at Apple as they try to strategize upgrading the rest of their line-up following the G5 Power Macs.
Before, the G4 simply looked bad when compared to the Intel/AMD world had to offer. Now it even looks bad within Apple's own line-up -- the G3 in the iBooks looks even worse. Apple's going to have dance a tricky dance while waiting for cooler-running G5s, doing what upgrading it can do with what it's got, and trying to keep the products that don't get upgraded right away from looking too bad compared to the products that do.
All the talk of Apple's lines "competing" with each other I think is misleading. Most of the people here who have a G4 tower bought it because they wanted expandability that the iMac G4 didn't offer. The reality is that the 1 GHz G4 iMac is MORE than enough computer for many home and small business customers who insisted they "needed" the PowerMac. But some will always buy the tower because of legitimate need, or for some just the "wang" factor.
Do you really think if they plopped a 1.2GHz G5 in an iMac that Power Mac G5 sales wouldn't be cannabalized? Assuming they are priced as they have always been, who wouldn't buy an iMac in that case, assuming you didn't need expandability? And by that, I mean PCI (PCI-X) cards! That's it - everything else can be firewire (400/800), wireless, bluetooth, USB2, etc... Who's adding a bunch of internal hard drives these days?
I agree that it sucks that you have to buy a Power Mac to get a G5 right now, but that is what Apple wants and needs. I'd love to buy a PowerBook G5, but can't, just as I can't get an iMac G5. It's the high end. I know Apple should be trying to compete a little better with Wintel, but right now is not the proper time. Mac users like Macs and will spend the $ to get a Power Mac plain and simple. Give it 2 or 3 months, for the buyers that immediately hand over their cash to subside a bit then bump the others. The Power Mac is their ace in the hole right now; long term, I agree, but not just yet. I am sure other stock holders of AAPL would agree.
When upgrading a product line, Apple has to consider Panther performance. The type of CPU, GPU, memory and bus speed will make a huge difference in performance. Then there's software performance. What will be the user experience differences between using a G4 and a G5 when using iMovie and iDVD? How about iChat AV performance?
The iMac sales have been in decline for a while. What would it take to get them moving again? Sure, performance will be incrementally improved by going to the 7457 with its higher speed and greater L2 cache but how sexy is that? I'd hate to see the iMac stuck with a G4 for another 6 months to a year.
I think if Apple wants to boost sales, it needs to sex up the iMac with a G5 and a different shell for that dome.
The iMac sales have been in decline for a while. What would it take to get them moving again? Sure, performance will be incrementally improved by going to the 7457 with its higher speed and greater L2 cache but how sexy is that? I'd hate to see the iMac stuck with a G4 for another 6 months to a year.
I think if Apple wants to boost sales, it needs to sex up the iMac with a G5 and a different shell for that dome.
Maybe replace that dome with an expandable cube...? Detach the monitor from the base?
iCube3?
I agree. The iMac2 stormed out the gates. Languished for the best part of 13 months with the same spec. Stupifying in any market...but in the computer market? Insane!
Let's hope that Apple can make it cheaper. Make it more powerful...
It IS a sexy computer. On the outside at least...
But the price and the specs aren't...'sexy'. Simple. Apple are now competing in the real world. In real stores. And people who come into those stores have clippings of PCs that include faster cpus...more ram, better graphics card...cheaper price...and Apple have got to match that.
The G5 shows what CAN be done. IT IS THE MAC-TRICKS RELOADED!!! The consumer desktop line needs a fundamental re-boot.
Do you really think if they plopped a 1.2GHz G5 in an iMac that Power Mac G5 sales wouldn't be cannabalized? Assuming they are priced as they have always been, who wouldn't buy an iMac in that case, assuming you didn't need expandability? And by that, I mean PCI (PCI-X) cards! That's it - everything else can be firewire (400/800), wireless, bluetooth, USB2, etc... Who's adding a bunch of internal hard drives these days?
That's just the point! Apple is trying to get users who want iMacs AND speed to buy Powermacs. That's wrong. In 6 months we should see 90nm 970s. This should increase yields and allow Apple to make 2/3rds or all the Powermac Line Dual configs. Having a low mhz(1.2-1.4Ghz) won't cannibalize too much. The Pro line can then be differentiated by Dual vs Single and extra options. The G4 didn't scale well enough to create much differentiation...Apple had an excuse. If they make the same mistake again then it's Apples fault. They have an opportunity here to ship lots of boxes.
What's missing right now from Apple is agressiveness. They have the products...they have the Sofware. It's time to start pushing the Pro Apps on Pro Hardware and consumer apps on consumer hardware. Both should offer speed relative to their markets. When iChat Video requires a 600mhz G3-5 processor then it's obvious that people should be getting a little more speed than they have been.
Getting to 0.09 970 is imperative for Apple. That iMac needs it. The Powerbook needs it. I think their whole line needs it.
Ya, I agree with that. The entire line would benefit from G5's. Maybe there'll be new cooling designed cases for the entire line so they can update them sooner?? \
I think Apple will find a way to stuff that G5 into just about anything.... PB, iMac, eMac, you name it....
I would still like them to put a faster one in the powerbooks though...that would be nice...
Getting to 0.09 970 is imperative for Apple. That iMac needs it. The Powerbook needs it. I think their whole line needs it.
Quote:
Originally posted by Shetline
Before, the G4 simply looked bad when compared to the Intel/AMD world had to offer. Now it even looks bad within Apple's own line-up -- the G3 in the iBooks looks even worse.
These two statements sum the whole problem up nicely. The mere existence of a G5 based Mac makes buying a G4 based Mac a very tough sell, no matter what the price points. Take this horrifying example:
1 GHz G4 Combo drive eMac $1,000
1.6 Ghz G5 Combo Drive Power Mac + 17" CRT display $2,000
Even at twice the cost, the G5 is a no brainer. Sell blood if you have to, but buying the Power Mac gets you a cutting edge machine that will last for years and years instead of an already outdated, non-expandable, non-upgradeable low end consumer box.
As others have pointed out, the solution to this mess comes in 2004 with the .09 G5. Assuming that this chip at 1.6-2.0 GHz is low power, low heat and low cost, it can be Apple's low-end chip. Put it in iMacs, eMacs and even iBooks. Save the 2.5 and 3.0 chips for the Power Macs of course, especially as duals, but the whole line must go G5 as soon as possible.
One chip in all Macs. Consumer machines differentiated from pro machines how they always should have been; not by the type of processor, but by clock speed, multi-processing, I/O, upgradeability and expandability.
This time next year:
1.6 GHz G5 Combo Drive eMac $999
1.6 GHz G5 Combo Drive 17" iMac $1,399
1.8 GHz G5 Superdrive 17" iMac $1,799
Single 2.0 GHz G5 Superdrive Power Mac $1,799
Dual 2.5 GHz G5 Superdrive Power Mac $2,399
Dual 3.0 GHz G5 Superdrive Power Mac $2,999
G5 eMacs and iMacs for consumers, small business, education and switchers; Power Macs for pros with no cannibalization in either direction. Everybody wins.
This time next year.. should see .09 G5's and Low power G4's..
I'd look for
eMac: Single 1.6 - 2.0 G4
iBook: Single 1.6 - 2.0 G4
iMac: Single 2, 2.4 G5
PBook: Single 2, 2.4 G5
PMac: Single 2.4, Dual 2.4, Dual 3.0
As much as there might be a certain amount of feeling against Moto, Apple is making the wrong noises to be leaving them entirely, so expect the G4 to still be around.
All this is predicated on a .09u G5, and that WILL change things, but we haven't got one yet, and in any case, the Powerbook will get one BEFORE the iMac. And also, the new "headless" tier currently occupied by the PMG4 will also get a G5 before the iMac.
None of us knows what Moto will bring, but I do not think that they will be let out. They are testing .09u on their 200mm fab, and an older design, and if they have such a profound die shrink ready, it will come with other improvements whenthey move it to a new fab. The .13u part is already done, it will be in the next PB revs, it cuts G4 power consumption in half, at .09u savings will be even greater. You may laugh, but I think you may even see a "G5" class chip from moto within 2 years. Probably not an IBM level CPU, but some hybrid of the 64 bit 8xxx's FSB and memory adress space and the G4's low power consumption, think G5 light.
Comments
Originally posted by hmurchison
Shetline. Good Rebuttal. Honestly both of your points are valid. Market conditions will dictate what Apple does. Right now they have options.
G5 computers seem to offer lots of performance. Consumers will tell themselves that they want a G5 at their price point. Apple may choose to push G4s but Mac users are Legendary in their ability two wait...wait....wait. Apple needs to retrain it's users to pull the trigger. Product cycles need to be updated no more than 8 months apart. That isolates Apple from anger from the consumer about missing out on a latest update. It's alot easier to swallow not having the fastest on the block of you can point to the poor bloke who puchased the model before yours just 8 months prior.
G4's will not be competitive with X86 next year. $1300 PC computers will have 800Mhz Busses and 3Ghz processors with Hyperthreading. If Apple continues to slack in the under $1500 market then they obviously don't believe in their Switch Campaign. I reiterate the G5 needs to be in an iMac by next summer. That gives Apple one more G4 refresh in the line.
That also sets Apple up to move to the 980 in 24-30 months. The Power 5 will be here next year, and possibly the 980 the year after, I wouldnt count on 18 months but 24 might be a realistic "earliest we could see them" ship time for a 980 based Mac. Though I fear that Apple will stick with the G4 for 2 more updates (summer 03 and winter 04 anouncements) for the iMac.
Originally posted by shetline
Consider these premises, admittedly some just guesswork:The iMac can handle currently available 1.2-1.4 GHz G5s, the PowerBook cannot.
iMac sales need much more help than PowerBook sales.
Using G5s at 1.2-1.4 GHz would improve the perceived value of the iMacs, without encroaching on Power Mac territory.
Apple?s engineering can quickly put together a viable iMac G5 mobo using currently-available G5s, well before doing so for the PowerBook, which is likely waiting on 90 nm versions of the 970.
Are you saying that even if all of the above were true, Apple would still let the iMac languish with the G4 for as much as a year or more, waiting for PowerBooks to catch up, just to follow a particular pattern, just to maintain some artificial ?G5 = pro? distinction, just to be able to use particular slogans at particular times?
I agree with this. I see a lot of posts mentioning the iMac using a 1.4 GHz G4 but that makes no sense to me because the 1.4 GHz 7455 runs way too hot to stick in an iMac. A 1.2 GHz G5 would run cooler and would be far more powerful. Some people also mention putting an L3 cache into the iMac along with some version of a G4. L3 cache adds to the cost and the G5 doesn't need it.
If the iMac is going to stick with a G4 in the next revision, due in August, I suspect, it'll be a 7457 at perhaps 1.2 GHz. Just how thrilling would sales be then? Maybe if the price were reduced?
I've also seen posts about a .09µ version of the 970. Is that really going to happen? I can see the 970 going to 2.4 GHz in January but still at .13µ. 6 months after that, there'll be a .09µ 980 G6 at 3 GHz. Is it worth it to refab the 970 at .09µ and if so, how soon would that be? I've been hearing spring, at the earliest. If there's going to be a G5 PB in Jan., it'd probably be 1.4 GHz using a .13µ 970. Some clever way will have been found to deal with the heat. Aside from cooling fans, they'll probably find ways to step down the power with a reworked controller.
Anyway, I'd hate to see the iMac held up by the PB. Sure, maybe for marketing reasons but technically, there's no reason why the iMac couldn't go G5 now.
Originally posted by Rolo
I've also seen posts about a .09µ version of the 970. Is that really going to happen? I can see the 970 going to 2.4 GHz in January but still at .13µ. 6 months after that, there'll be a .09µ 980 G6 at 3 GHz. Is it worth it to refab the 970 at .09µ and if so, how soon would that be? I've been hearing spring, at the earliest. If there's going to be a G5 PB in Jan., it'd probably be 1.4 GHz using a .13µ 970. Some clever way will have been found to deal with the heat. Aside from cooling fans, they'll probably find ways to step down the power with a reworked controller.
Anyway, I'd hate to see the iMac held up by the PB. Sure, maybe for marketing reasons but technically, there's no reason why the iMac couldn't go G5 now.
Couple of things: where have you heard anything about the 980 other than pure speculation; nothing from IBM. As for the iMac going G5 now, Apple learned it's lesson and won't release an iMac so soon after Power Mac G5 introductions. People will buy them up left and right, and ignore the Power Mac yet again! Not going to happen soon. Later, much later.
BTW, all the Powerbooks have processor speed and voltage step downs already.
Xserve/Xraid- High Margin + Service Packages
Powermacs- High Margin
iMacs/eMacs- Low Margin high volume(Promote iTMS, .mac services hard!)
a 1.2-1.4Ghz G5 in an iMac is simply not going to compete with a Powermac. And anyone who would chose a G5 iMac over a G5 Powermac propably really only needs that iMac. Apple ...sell the appropriate machine for the appropriate person.
Originally posted by hmurchison
A 1.2-1.4Ghz G5 in an iMac is simply not going to compete with a Powermac. And anyone who would chose a G5 iMac over a G5 Powermac propably really only needs that iMac. Apple ...sell the appropriate machine for the appropriate person.
Wasn't the intro of the G4 iMac LCD pretty much the nail in the PowerMac G4 coffin? Same CPU, same video, superdrive, AND LCD for around the same price!
Originally posted by Rhumgod
Wasn't the intro of the G4 iMac LCD pretty much the nail in the PowerMac G4 coffin? Same CPU, same video, superdrive, AND LCD for around the same price!
Yes it was. But now Apple has more "range" in which to place their product.
1.2-1.4Ghz for iMacs while the PMs are 2.0-3.0Ghz in a year. No danger at all. PM SHOULD be overkill for most people and hence..priced accordingly.
Imacs should be low margin high volume. Marketshare builders.
G4's will not be competitive with X86 next year. $1300 PC computers will have 800Mhz Busses and 3Ghz processors with Hyperthreading. If Apple continues to slack in the under $1500 market then they obviously don't believe in their Switch Campaign. I reiterate the G5 needs to be in an iMac by next summer. That gives Apple one more G4 refresh in the line.
Agree. Totally.
1.3 G4 on crap bus against Prescott and its bus?
How stupid would that be? No. Apple are going to have to think different.
Getting to 0.09 970 is imperative for Apple. That iMac needs it. The Powerbook needs it. I think their whole line needs it.
A 0.09 1.8 G5 iMac2 in no way competes with a 3 gig dual 970. This isn't the incremental G4, people! Heat, smeat. Dell seems to find a way for those Pentium 4 firebreathers to fit into x86 laptops and AIOs. A don't think a 1.2 970 is going to need 9 fans. I don't think a .09 970 is going to need 9 fans. For a start, I don't see an iMac being a dual 2 gig firebreather...
Apple must address the price of their consumer desktops...and the performance. Or the unit sales will continue to get a kicking. They need to show the same aggression as the laptop line. Up performance...drive down price...and at least one headless/semi-expandable Mac?
The next 6 months may not see the G5 in anything but Apple's 'heavy-iron' line. But I think first six months of 04? That's gotta change...
I await Apple's next 2 quarter sales with great interest.
Lemon Bon Bon
All the talk of Apple's lines "competing" with each other I think is misleading. Most of the people here who have a G4 tower bought it because they wanted expandability that the iMac G4 didn't offer. The reality is that the 1 GHz G4 iMac is MORE than enough computer for many home and small business customers who insisted they "needed" the PowerMac. But some will always buy the tower because of legitimate need, or for some just the "wang" factor.
An iMac G5 won't have PCI-X slots, will have only 2 RAM slots, non-upgradable video, and 1.6 GHz/800 MHz bus at the very best in the first release. That machine, while potentially stealing some sales away from the 1.6 GHz tower for those who really don't need slots, is not even remotely going to satisfy those looking at the 1.8 and Dual 2.0 GHz machines. And as long as Apple keeps the best iMac at the same speed as the slowest single-CPU tower, this formula won't change.
Though there will always be a small percentage who are on the fence over the iMac and PowerMac and would skip buying a tower if the iMac G5 was available, that is probably a tiny portion of the entire market. There's far more to the AIO vs. tower decision than the processor, and to "embargo" the G5 from any other machine for that reason alone is very bad business.
-- Ensoniq
Before, the G4 simply looked bad when compared to the Intel/AMD world had to offer. Now it even looks bad within Apple's own line-up -- the G3 in the iBooks looks even worse. Apple's going to have dance a tricky dance while waiting for cooler-running G5s, doing what upgrading it can do with what it's got, and trying to keep the products that don't get upgraded right away from looking too bad compared to the products that do.
Originally posted by Ensoniq
All the talk of Apple's lines "competing" with each other I think is misleading. Most of the people here who have a G4 tower bought it because they wanted expandability that the iMac G4 didn't offer. The reality is that the 1 GHz G4 iMac is MORE than enough computer for many home and small business customers who insisted they "needed" the PowerMac. But some will always buy the tower because of legitimate need, or for some just the "wang" factor.
Do you really think if they plopped a 1.2GHz G5 in an iMac that Power Mac G5 sales wouldn't be cannabalized? Assuming they are priced as they have always been, who wouldn't buy an iMac in that case, assuming you didn't need expandability? And by that, I mean PCI (PCI-X) cards! That's it - everything else can be firewire (400/800), wireless, bluetooth, USB2, etc... Who's adding a bunch of internal hard drives these days?
I agree that it sucks that you have to buy a Power Mac to get a G5 right now, but that is what Apple wants and needs. I'd love to buy a PowerBook G5, but can't, just as I can't get an iMac G5. It's the high end. I know Apple should be trying to compete a little better with Wintel, but right now is not the proper time. Mac users like Macs and will spend the $ to get a Power Mac plain and simple. Give it 2 or 3 months, for the buyers that immediately hand over their cash to subside a bit then bump the others. The Power Mac is their ace in the hole right now; long term, I agree, but not just yet. I am sure other stock holders of AAPL would agree.
The iMac sales have been in decline for a while. What would it take to get them moving again? Sure, performance will be incrementally improved by going to the 7457 with its higher speed and greater L2 cache but how sexy is that? I'd hate to see the iMac stuck with a G4 for another 6 months to a year.
I think if Apple wants to boost sales, it needs to sex up the iMac with a G5 and a different shell for that dome.
The iMac sales have been in decline for a while. What would it take to get them moving again? Sure, performance will be incrementally improved by going to the 7457 with its higher speed and greater L2 cache but how sexy is that? I'd hate to see the iMac stuck with a G4 for another 6 months to a year.
I think if Apple wants to boost sales, it needs to sex up the iMac with a G5 and a different shell for that dome.
Maybe replace that dome with an expandable cube...? Detach the monitor from the base?
iCube3?
I agree. The iMac2 stormed out the gates. Languished for the best part of 13 months with the same spec. Stupifying in any market...but in the computer market? Insane!
Let's hope that Apple can make it cheaper. Make it more powerful...
It IS a sexy computer. On the outside at least...
But the price and the specs aren't...'sexy'. Simple. Apple are now competing in the real world. In real stores. And people who come into those stores have clippings of PCs that include faster cpus...more ram, better graphics card...cheaper price...and Apple have got to match that.
The G5 shows what CAN be done. IT IS THE MAC-TRICKS RELOADED!!! The consumer desktop line needs a fundamental re-boot.
Lemon Bon Bon
Do you really think if they plopped a 1.2GHz G5 in an iMac that Power Mac G5 sales wouldn't be cannabalized? Assuming they are priced as they have always been, who wouldn't buy an iMac in that case, assuming you didn't need expandability? And by that, I mean PCI (PCI-X) cards! That's it - everything else can be firewire (400/800), wireless, bluetooth, USB2, etc... Who's adding a bunch of internal hard drives these days?
That's just the point! Apple is trying to get users who want iMacs AND speed to buy Powermacs. That's wrong. In 6 months we should see 90nm 970s. This should increase yields and allow Apple to make 2/3rds or all the Powermac Line Dual configs. Having a low mhz(1.2-1.4Ghz) won't cannibalize too much. The Pro line can then be differentiated by Dual vs Single and extra options. The G4 didn't scale well enough to create much differentiation...Apple had an excuse. If they make the same mistake again then it's Apples fault. They have an opportunity here to ship lots of boxes.
What's missing right now from Apple is agressiveness. They have the products...they have the Sofware. It's time to start pushing the Pro Apps on Pro Hardware and consumer apps on consumer hardware. Both should offer speed relative to their markets. When iChat Video requires a 600mhz G3-5 processor then it's obvious that people should be getting a little more speed than they have been.
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Agree. Totally.
Getting to 0.09 970 is imperative for Apple. That iMac needs it. The Powerbook needs it. I think their whole line needs it.
Ya, I agree with that. The entire line would benefit from G5's. Maybe there'll be new cooling designed cases for the entire line so they can update them sooner??
I think Apple will find a way to stuff that G5 into just about anything.... PB, iMac, eMac, you name it....
I would still like them to put a faster one in the powerbooks though...that would be nice...
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Getting to 0.09 970 is imperative for Apple. That iMac needs it. The Powerbook needs it. I think their whole line needs it.
Originally posted by Shetline
Before, the G4 simply looked bad when compared to the Intel/AMD world had to offer. Now it even looks bad within Apple's own line-up -- the G3 in the iBooks looks even worse.
These two statements sum the whole problem up nicely. The mere existence of a G5 based Mac makes buying a G4 based Mac a very tough sell, no matter what the price points. Take this horrifying example:
1 GHz G4 Combo drive eMac $1,000
1.6 Ghz G5 Combo Drive Power Mac + 17" CRT display $2,000
Even at twice the cost, the G5 is a no brainer. Sell blood if you have to, but buying the Power Mac gets you a cutting edge machine that will last for years and years instead of an already outdated, non-expandable, non-upgradeable low end consumer box.
As others have pointed out, the solution to this mess comes in 2004 with the .09 G5. Assuming that this chip at 1.6-2.0 GHz is low power, low heat and low cost, it can be Apple's low-end chip. Put it in iMacs, eMacs and even iBooks. Save the 2.5 and 3.0 chips for the Power Macs of course, especially as duals, but the whole line must go G5 as soon as possible.
One chip in all Macs. Consumer machines differentiated from pro machines how they always should have been; not by the type of processor, but by clock speed, multi-processing, I/O, upgradeability and expandability.
This time next year:
1.6 GHz G5 Combo Drive eMac $999
1.6 GHz G5 Combo Drive 17" iMac $1,399
1.8 GHz G5 Superdrive 17" iMac $1,799
Single 2.0 GHz G5 Superdrive Power Mac $1,799
Dual 2.5 GHz G5 Superdrive Power Mac $2,399
Dual 3.0 GHz G5 Superdrive Power Mac $2,999
G5 eMacs and iMacs for consumers, small business, education and switchers; Power Macs for pros with no cannibalization in either direction. Everybody wins.
This time next year:
1.6 GHz G5 Combo Drive eMac $999
1.6 GHz G5 Combo Drive 17" iMac $1,399
1.8 GHz G5 Superdrive 17" iMac $1,799
Single 2.0 GHz G5 Superdrive Power Mac $1,799
Dual 2.5 GHz G5 Superdrive Power Mac $2,399
Dual 3.0 GHz G5 Superdrive Power Mac $2,999
This time next year.. should see .09 G5's and Low power G4's..
I'd look for
eMac: Single 1.6 - 2.0 G4
iBook: Single 1.6 - 2.0 G4
iMac: Single 2, 2.4 G5
PBook: Single 2, 2.4 G5
PMac: Single 2.4, Dual 2.4, Dual 3.0
As much as there might be a certain amount of feeling against Moto, Apple is making the wrong noises to be leaving them entirely, so expect the G4 to still be around.
None of us knows what Moto will bring, but I do not think that they will be let out. They are testing .09u on their 200mm fab, and an older design, and if they have such a profound die shrink ready, it will come with other improvements whenthey move it to a new fab. The .13u part is already done, it will be in the next PB revs, it cuts G4 power consumption in half, at .09u savings will be even greater. You may laugh, but I think you may even see a "G5" class chip from moto within 2 years. Probably not an IBM level CPU, but some hybrid of the 64 bit 8xxx's FSB and memory adress space and the G4's low power consumption, think G5 light.