All iMacs, eMacs EOL?

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 75
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    [quote]With all due respect, the iMac isn't going to be EOL'ed any time soon.

    Yeah sales are a bit weak, but that's because they haven't upgraded it. Apple's not going to spend all that development money on engineering the iMac only to let it die without a fight.<hr></blockquote>]



    Yeah, you misunderstand what I mean. It just means that the 'current models' are at the end of their cycle and are due for an upgrade.



    I am in no way saying that the form factor of the eMac or iMacs are going to change.
  • Reply 22 of 75
    gargar Posts: 1,201member
    [quote]Originally posted by BNOYHTUAWB:

    <strong>I want a blazing fast iMac! <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />



    [ 01-29-2003: Message edited by: BNOYHTUAWB ]</strong><hr></blockquote>



    me to, if the screen is a bit bigger. the 17" is to

    small real estate for me, maybe they can put the 20.1" on top of the imac and with one (or two) speedbump(s) it will also be fast enough...



    ... or i have to buy a 20.1" with a powermac but that would be a litlle bit more expensive and i don't need the pci slots and don't like the noise
  • Reply 23 of 75
    [quote]and don't like the noise<hr></blockquote>



    Thre noise probem has been addressed by Apple and the new PowerMacs are much quieter according to an Apple exec.



    [ 01-29-2003: Message edited by: MacsRGood4U ]</p>
  • Reply 24 of 75
    bodhibodhi Posts: 1,424member
    Yeah and they said the same thing about the Airport reception for every Powerbook since the 400/500 Titaniums and yes while it has improved SLIGHTLY it still sucks. Remember...this is coming to you from the same people that think that DDR ram throwing information at a processor that can only handle things at a 133 or 167MHz bus makes a HUGE difference.



    <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" />
  • Reply 25 of 75
    whisperwhisper Posts: 735member
    [quote]Originally posted by Bodhi:

    <strong>Yeah and they said the same thing about the Airport reception for every Powerbook since the 400/500 Titaniums and yes while it has improved SLIGHTLY it still sucks. Remember...this is coming to you from the same people that think that DDR ram throwing information at a processor that can only handle things at a 133 or 167MHz bus makes a HUGE difference.



    <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>

    I doubt they really think it makes that big of a difference. I also doubt it hurts
  • Reply 26 of 75
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    I can't say much about the next iMacs except this:



    With Apple halving the price on ADC displays, do you really think the iMac will keep the 15" display, or the 17" will stay high end?



    Also, CD-RWs are pretty useless nowdays. So many people want to watch, rip and burn DVDs.



    Barto
  • Reply 27 of 75
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    [quote]Originally posted by Barto:

    <strong>I can't say much about the next iMacs except this:



    With Apple halving the price on ADC displays, do you really think the iMac will keep the 15" display, or the 17" will stay high end?



    Also, CD-RWs are pretty useless nowdays. So many people want to watch, rip and burn DVDs.



    Barto</strong><hr></blockquote>



    i think it will be 17" across the imacs, with high-end 1 GHz, and low end 867 MHz. the hard drives will probably max out at 80 GB, and the video will be bumped to geforce 4 mx on the low end, and some sort of radeon 7500 or higher for the high-end. airport extreme, bluetooth (though no bluetooth keyboards yet). i would like them to integrate a subwoofer into the imac's base. come on, it's SO built for it. anyone have an old performa 6400? i do, and when it's hooked up to an apple a/v monitor, it STILL makes a wicked mp3 jukebox (it takes IDE drives - a rarity for its day).



    i also agree that with hard drive space gettign stupid-huge, backing up 740 MB off my 120 GB drive is about as impressive as when i could back up 1.44 MB off my 180 MB hard drive.



    [ 01-29-2003: Message edited by: rok ]</p>
  • Reply 28 of 75
    Barto says:

    -- Also CD-RW's are basically useless these days....



    Please note that the just-announced 'low-end' 1Ghz tower and the dual 1.25Ghz 'mid-range' tower do NOT include Superdrives - just Combo drives. (Although Superdrive can be added as BTO for +$200).



    As such, it appears that Apple does not yet think that EVERYONE wants to burn DVDs. Bear in mind that the two high-end towers (dual 1.42Ghz and dual 1.42Ghz Ultimate) DO include the new 4x Superdrive They burn DVD at 4x, but just as importantly, burn CD-R at 16x, which is a lot more reasonable these days...
  • Reply 29 of 75
    [quote]Originally posted by barbarella:

    <strong>



    Maybe not: The Apple Store for education has a promo going for eMacs/iMacs:



    Laser-sharp savings.



    From January 28, 2003, through April 30 2003, or while supplies last, buy a Macintosh and qualifying HP LaserJet printer and save up to $100 instantly.



    :confused: </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Hmm...well I know Apple plans to sell OS 9 booting machines to the education sector until June anyway. Maybe they will introduce new Machines with the promotion or restrict it to the older OS 9 booting models.
  • Reply 30 of 75
    algolalgol Posts: 833member
    You know I really wouldn't be surprised if we saw a 20.1" iMac. Not surprised at all.
  • Reply 31 of 75
    Follow-up to my previous post....



    What I'm getting at is that, while Barto is probably right about CD-RW, I suspect we'll still see Combo drives at the low end of the iMac/eMac line, just like in the towers.



    While combo drives keep the cost down and burn CD-R at 24x, I would prefer that Apple 'future-proof' new customers by including DVD burning in ALL their machines, consumer and pro. Remember, you can't add a Superdrive later.....Buy a combo today, and you'll never be able to burn DVD using iDVD (at least not until Apple changes it's policy).
  • Reply 32 of 75
    anandanand Posts: 285member
    You have a point there. Why limit the number of people with DVD burners if you are trying to sell software that needs an internal DVD burner. That has to a major oversight.
  • Reply 33 of 75
    murbotmurbot Posts: 5,261member
    Soon. Way beyond soon.



    [ 01-30-2003: Message edited by: murbot ]</p>
  • Reply 34 of 75
    [quote]Originally posted by murbot:

    <strong>Friday.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    What exactly? And how sure are you?
  • Reply 35 of 75
    20" iMac = $1799

    17" iMac = $1499

    15.4" iMac = $999
  • Reply 36 of 75
    [quote]Originally posted by Sceeter:

    <strong>20" iMac = $1799

    17" iMac = $1499

    15.4" iMac = $999</strong><hr></blockquote>





    Speculation or reality?
  • Reply 37 of 75
    Remember what macwhispers had the 20" price at? They were right, sorta...
  • Reply 38 of 75
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    Dude, do you have a reason we should believe you?



    Barto
  • Reply 39 of 75
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    I still can't wrap my head around the possibility of a 20.1" iMac for $1799. If Apple actually does that I imagine myself moving heaven and earth to buy one (unless Apple does something dumb, like ship it with Intel Accelerated Graphics! ).



    That's how much I paid for my Cube! :eek:



    So count me skeptical; on the other hand, count me giddy as a kid in a candy store if that prediction comes true.
  • Reply 40 of 75
    bodhibodhi Posts: 1,424member
    Tuesday. Friday is a no go.
Sign In or Register to comment.