A year or two ago all the iApps were really killer apps. Now windows have caught up and passed us by, certainly in the field of video editing on the cheap.
You're kidding right?
Show me anything in the "cheap" PC world that even comes close to the home video and DVD authoring experience available with iMovie 3 and iDVD 3.
The PB's can stay around at todays prices if they get a marginal performance boost. 867-1Ghz to 1.3 across the board.
The iMacs, even with such a boost, cannot remain at the prices at wich there sold. Nothing in the proposed upgrade should keep the price of the 15" from dropping to 999. The 17" needs to drop to 1199 and 1399 (combo and superdrive) to keep it in line with current Tower + 17"LCD bundles being sold on the wintel side, even if we call expansion vs design a wash (which it isn't, but might be for people in the AIO market)
1799 iMacs are way out of that AIO consumers comfort zone.
Does the G4 really have twice the real world performance of a Pentium 4? I think that the benchmarks are close to that on some tasks, especially AltiVec enhanced tasks but not across the board. For people who read benchmarks to make computer buying decisions that might be good, but for your average consumer they will look at the numbers and see that the iMac has half the "horse power" of the Wintel box at twice the price, and there you have another "lost sale" gone over to the dark side...
Not to mention the fact that many consumers may not use apps that benefit from Altivec. Granted word processing, e-mail, and net surfing doesn't Altivec, but you still have that consumer looking at a PC and saying "Its less than half the price has a faster CPU..."
Here is my take on the problems with the iMac line.
First; I beleive that many consumers realize the differrences in processor speed. So the arguments about MHz have little bearing, sales of the G5 pretty much confirm this. It's the total package that does not tally up when looking at purchasing the iMac. All of that being said; the days of 25% increases in clock rate being an acceptable rev are gone. NO matter how you look at it the PC world is walking away from Apple with regards to performance. At some point even MAC OS/X will not be worth the effort.
The most obvious problem that Apple has with the iMac is that they ship them with far to little memory. This means the average purchaser is put into a position of having to upgrade right away.
USB 2 is an obvious issue also and is one of the reasons I've put off buying any Mac in my price range. USB 2 is so important especially in the case of a computer targeted to consumers that it is simply silly to buy a machine that isn't capable of supporting this standard.
FW800 is a nice to have feature and may not be as pressing on this level of consumer machine, but one has to realize that this is and Apple developed standard. The fact that the machine is a closed unit and that Apple owns FW should pretty much dictate FW800 in the machine.
The closed expansion free design is always a concern. A PCMCIA slot at the front of the machine would do wonders. If nothing else it could be used as a card reader (compact flash).
Finally taken all of the above into account the iMacs are grossly over priced. In many ways you are paying top dollar for technologies that would considered new years ago. This is the issue; the sum of the features do not add up to a product worthy of investment. Its not the price but what you get for the price that is the problem.
Show me anything in the "cheap" PC world that even comes close to the home video and DVD authoring experience available with iMovie 3 and iDVD 3.
I wish I was, for instance have you seen Movie2Jack? Rip straight from DVd to PDA, very cool and it's a one click solution. I have a subscription to the UK magazine Computer Video, and they had reviews of both Macs and PC's and I would say they were very fair in their reviews although they seemed to be last on Apples UK lists to get review machines. Anyway each month they review mostly software and it is all too apparent that there is now much more Amateur video software for PC's than Macs. Most of it allows easy creation of VCD, SVCD and DVD's. they also support easy Menu creation on VCD and SVCD and support 16x9 anamorphic production which is something I still can't do with iMovie and iDVD
I am not a PC evangelist I just see it that way, and so do the public. there is no doubt that Apple had it first but now they have been copied and development on PC's is very fast and they have added functionality we simply don't have.
This is getting a bit OT.
If these new machines do have the MPC7457 the better architcture should provide a substantial speed boost, but they really need to get the G5 in there.
Normally I'd let locash handle the grammar moderation. . . .
Sorry, I can't resist. In your first post you say, "Definitely a weak refresh but I think we all pretty much new that the iMac needs at least one more small referesh . . ."
then again a 2.4 pentium is not twice as fast as a 1.2 or is it. Intel's marketing has been effective.
The fact is that the current macs have more than enough power for most people doing what most people are doing with their computers...
now add to the mix, all the iapps and there are some very happy people out there using their macs in creative / happy / non virus getting / non bllue screen tech support ways that make the added "cost" worth it to them.
people that use macs are doing neat things with their computers without so much of the pain ussually associated with computers in general.
bumps? sure. price drops? sure. Horribly inadequate machines for the masses. No way.
(I leave out the gamers and i don't play them and don't know what the games market is like)
My thoughts entirely. Apple have a real struggle on their hand now. iMac sales must be really struggling and I don't think this bump, if it is accurate is going to make any difference. PC's are so snappy right now the speed gap is just so obvious at consumer level.
...
As an interesting statistic, most of the popular Mac magazines have seen reductions in their circulation over the last five years. Which seems more worrying than market share figurers as it suggests that the numbers of users is falling.
Market Share. Apple needs to seriously address Mac Market Share. The iBook, new eMac, and Dual G5's are good values, but... Perhaps some good-performing <$700 Box would help.
Sorry, I can't resist. In your first post you say, "Definitely a weak refresh but I think we all pretty much new that the iMac needs at least one more small referesh . . ."
The past tense of know is knew.
Touche
What a gaffe. Well I'm open to all constructive criticism.
Quote:
The fact is that the current macs have more than enough power for most people doing what most people are doing with their computers...
Oh I agree but it's 3-5 years down the road where your machine drops off. New Compression techniques are arriving that require alot of horsepower. The problem with Apples consumer lineup is not really even the speed but lack of flexibility with Monitors, faster vid cards etc. So therefore we may as well get our speed because we don't have enough of the other options a typical user may request.
I suspect the next iMac will be a revised design. Perhaps an aluminum enclosure with no more stainless steel neck. I don't think there will be a G5 for the iMac until late in '04. There will need to be several generations of G5's in the Power line before that I believe.
KUNFURMED: Apple (probably) won't make they're consumer products brushed metal. They have this all planned out so Consumer and Pro have unique aesthetic touches to make the two look consistent within themselves.
Show me anything in the "cheap" PC world that even comes close to the home video and DVD authoring experience available with iMovie 3 and iDVD 3.
The thing with the iApps though is that if you don't have, or even want, a video camera then iMovie and iDvd are worthless to a potential computer buyer.
Apple simply cannot compete against Wintel boxes on a price/perfomance level.
Apple knows this, and has tried the software integration /design aesthetic approach. But as we know, that can only go so far.
It may be an issue of what type of consumer Apple is targeting. Surely, a 16 year old teenager who loves games and adding cards will gravitate to cheaper (and faster) PC box with slots. On the other hand, a more affluent working professional who's looking for a stylish, reliable (but slower) computer might give the iMac a look.
However, to make the case for the iMac compelling, Apple needs to bring prices down further by another $200-$300.
what strategy do you offer, some of you above, are you just able to whine feeding this mhz mith, are you apple supporters or what. some of this stuff some of you are saying sounds more like sour grapes. IWON'T GO WINTEL, I WON'T what apple supplies to consumers is still the best product, IT'S THE OS MAN...IT'S THE OS you are just feeding these "myths" ok ok some people are price sensitive, but I WANT TO THINK DIFFERENT and this may cost me more. but what gives me the best computer experience!!! what can't be done on these upgraded imacs????tell me please. No one talks about the iapps as an integral part of these machines, no one is saying gee because i have a mac, i can with .mac have a website that'
s cool easy to set up.... and I'M COOL NOW. Hey i have a kick butt website, i've got iDvd, iPhoto, etc. what does wintel offer. I have convinced more people to switch to apple by showing them how easy it is to set up ANYTHING, how about wireless, the best is airport, ease of use. Do you guys know that 25% of wintel buyers return there product for nonusablility. Give me apple, only apple and read in maccentral about "myths". I thinks it's great that apple gives me more. no one is making money at the lowend, commodity level of computers, give consumers VALUE, any mac does this in spades
the imac may look good but its laughably inadequate
in some ares
what is it with apples obsession with skimping on ram ?
i mean here you want to introduce people to user friendly
unix & all they see is a machine that crawls..
make it std 1gb ram across the line ...hey sdram is dirt
cheap ..make your customers happy
& throw in bluetooth(or not?). if you expect people to pay so much
more then give a little
i find it embarressing that apple can design a good looking
box & then cripple it
low ram i will give you. BUT, i think (and maybe some resellers can chime in here) the ram thing is deeper than it seems. Resellers make about 50 bucks an imac. Not much at all. they rely on software addons , printers, etc.
and one of the big etc.. is RAM. they (resellers) charge much for it then dealram etc... sometimes this either includes install or in some cases there is another setup fee.
what this means is RAM brings that $50 profit of an imac up to $200 or so. pretty decent now.who knows what are the exact give and takes of the apple/reseller realtionships? This could be one of them.
so before we all condem apple for another "crippling marketing strategy" maybe we can hear from some resellers to see if what i just suggested is true.
Apple simply cannot compete against Wintel boxes on a price/perfomance level.
Apple knows this, and has tried the software integration /design aesthetic approach. But as we know, that can only go so far.
It may be an issue of what type of consumer Apple is targeting. Surely, a 16 year old teenager who loves games and adding cards will gravitate to cheaper (and faster) PC box with slots. On the other hand, a more affluent working professional who's looking for a stylish, reliable (but slower) computer might give the iMac a look.
However, to make the case for the iMac compelling, Apple needs to bring prices down further by another $200-$300.
I just find it scary bad that we are talking about G5 iMacs late next year. If this happens, Apple will be dead in the water. Great, so high end G5 and Powerbook machines bring nice margins to Apple. But is Apple really happy to be confined to this market only? It will be if the only consumer desktop Mac you can buy this time next year is still a G4 machine.
Let's get real. New iMacs absolutely must be rolled out by the end of this year, at the 1.6 to 2Ghz level. With a good graphics card. With some kind of expandability built in. The *only* constraint that this seems to present is the availability of G5 chips. Once this has been achieved - go overboard on features. They don't cost much - you can have a reasonable premium price that doesn't break the bank if you had 512Mb as a starting RAM level, 120Gig HDD, Bluetooth, FW800 etc.
It's time to take back the consumer market by, uh, giving consumers what they want and need.
Comments
Originally posted by Addison
A year or two ago all the iApps were really killer apps. Now windows have caught up and passed us by, certainly in the field of video editing on the cheap.
You're kidding right?
Show me anything in the "cheap" PC world that even comes close to the home video and DVD authoring experience available with iMovie 3 and iDVD 3.
The iMacs, even with such a boost, cannot remain at the prices at wich there sold. Nothing in the proposed upgrade should keep the price of the 15" from dropping to 999. The 17" needs to drop to 1199 and 1399 (combo and superdrive) to keep it in line with current Tower + 17"LCD bundles being sold on the wintel side, even if we call expansion vs design a wash (which it isn't, but might be for people in the AIO market)
1799 iMacs are way out of that AIO consumers comfort zone.
Originally posted by JCG
Does the G4 really have twice the real world performance of a Pentium 4? I think that the benchmarks are close to that on some tasks, especially AltiVec enhanced tasks but not across the board. For people who read benchmarks to make computer buying decisions that might be good, but for your average consumer they will look at the numbers and see that the iMac has half the "horse power" of the Wintel box at twice the price, and there you have another "lost sale" gone over to the dark side...
Not to mention the fact that many consumers may not use apps that benefit from Altivec. Granted word processing, e-mail, and net surfing doesn't Altivec, but you still have that consumer looking at a PC and saying "Its less than half the price has a faster CPU..."
Form factor only gets Apple so far...
First; I beleive that many consumers realize the differrences in processor speed. So the arguments about MHz have little bearing, sales of the G5 pretty much confirm this. It's the total package that does not tally up when looking at purchasing the iMac. All of that being said; the days of 25% increases in clock rate being an acceptable rev are gone. NO matter how you look at it the PC world is walking away from Apple with regards to performance. At some point even MAC OS/X will not be worth the effort.
The most obvious problem that Apple has with the iMac is that they ship them with far to little memory. This means the average purchaser is put into a position of having to upgrade right away.
USB 2 is an obvious issue also and is one of the reasons I've put off buying any Mac in my price range. USB 2 is so important especially in the case of a computer targeted to consumers that it is simply silly to buy a machine that isn't capable of supporting this standard.
FW800 is a nice to have feature and may not be as pressing on this level of consumer machine, but one has to realize that this is and Apple developed standard. The fact that the machine is a closed unit and that Apple owns FW should pretty much dictate FW800 in the machine.
The closed expansion free design is always a concern. A PCMCIA slot at the front of the machine would do wonders. If nothing else it could be used as a card reader (compact flash).
Finally taken all of the above into account the iMacs are grossly over priced. In many ways you are paying top dollar for technologies that would considered new years ago. This is the issue; the sum of the features do not add up to a product worthy of investment. Its not the price but what you get for the price that is the problem.
Thanks
Dave
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
You're kidding right?
Show me anything in the "cheap" PC world that even comes close to the home video and DVD authoring experience available with iMovie 3 and iDVD 3.
I don't know if it's because I'm still on Puma, but iMovie is a really painful to use sometimes. >_<
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
You're kidding right?
Show me anything in the "cheap" PC world that even comes close to the home video and DVD authoring experience available with iMovie 3 and iDVD 3.
I wish I was, for instance have you seen Movie2Jack? Rip straight from DVd to PDA, very cool and it's a one click solution. I have a subscription to the UK magazine Computer Video, and they had reviews of both Macs and PC's and I would say they were very fair in their reviews although they seemed to be last on Apples UK lists to get review machines. Anyway each month they review mostly software and it is all too apparent that there is now much more Amateur video software for PC's than Macs. Most of it allows easy creation of VCD, SVCD and DVD's. they also support easy Menu creation on VCD and SVCD and support 16x9 anamorphic production which is something I still can't do with iMovie and iDVD
I am not a PC evangelist I just see it that way, and so do the public. there is no doubt that Apple had it first but now they have been copied and development on PC's is very fast and they have added functionality we simply don't have.
This is getting a bit OT.
If these new machines do have the MPC7457 the better architcture should provide a substantial speed boost, but they really need to get the G5 in there.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Normally I'd let locash handle the grammar moderation. . . .
Sorry, I can't resist. In your first post you say, "Definitely a weak refresh but I think we all pretty much new that the iMac needs at least one more small referesh . . ."
The past tense of know is knew.
then again a 2.4 pentium is not twice as fast as a 1.2
The fact is that the current macs have more than enough power for most people doing what most people are doing with their computers...
now add to the mix, all the iapps and there are some very happy people out there using their macs in creative / happy / non virus getting / non bllue screen tech support ways that make the added "cost" worth it to them.
people that use macs are doing neat things with their computers without so much of the pain ussually associated with computers in general.
bumps? sure. price drops? sure. Horribly inadequate machines for the masses. No way.
(I leave out the gamers and i don't play them and don't know what the games market is like)
Originally posted by Addison
My thoughts entirely. Apple have a real struggle on their hand now. iMac sales must be really struggling and I don't think this bump, if it is accurate is going to make any difference. PC's are so snappy right now the speed gap is just so obvious at consumer level.
...
As an interesting statistic, most of the popular Mac magazines have seen reductions in their circulation over the last five years. Which seems more worrying than market share figurers as it suggests that the numbers of users is falling.
Market Share. Apple needs to seriously address Mac Market Share. The iBook, new eMac, and Dual G5's are good values, but... Perhaps some good-performing <$700 Box would help.
Originally posted by snoopy
Sorry, I can't resist. In your first post you say, "Definitely a weak refresh but I think we all pretty much new that the iMac needs at least one more small referesh . . ."
The past tense of know is knew.
Touche
What a gaffe. Well I'm open to all constructive criticism.
The fact is that the current macs have more than enough power for most people doing what most people are doing with their computers...
Oh I agree but it's 3-5 years down the road where your machine drops off. New Compression techniques are arriving that require alot of horsepower. The problem with Apples consumer lineup is not really even the speed but lack of flexibility with Monitors, faster vid cards etc. So therefore we may as well get our speed because we don't have enough of the other options a typical user may request.
Originally posted by MacsRGood4U
I suspect the next iMac will be a revised design. Perhaps an aluminum enclosure with no more stainless steel neck. I don't think there will be a G5 for the iMac until late in '04. There will need to be several generations of G5's in the Power line before that I believe.
KUNFURMED: Apple (probably) won't make they're consumer products brushed metal. They have this all planned out so Consumer and Pro have unique aesthetic touches to make the two look consistent within themselves.
Yes, the displays are unexplained.
Dual processors in the towers and singles in the iMacs, that would make the most sense. Hopefully it will happen by early 2004.
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
Show me anything in the "cheap" PC world that even comes close to the home video and DVD authoring experience available with iMovie 3 and iDVD 3.
The thing with the iApps though is that if you don't have, or even want, a video camera then iMovie and iDvd are worthless to a potential computer buyer.
Apple knows this, and has tried the software integration /design aesthetic approach. But as we know, that can only go so far.
It may be an issue of what type of consumer Apple is targeting. Surely, a 16 year old teenager who loves games and adding cards will gravitate to cheaper (and faster) PC box with slots. On the other hand, a more affluent working professional who's looking for a stylish, reliable (but slower) computer might give the iMac a look.
However, to make the case for the iMac compelling, Apple needs to bring prices down further by another $200-$300.
what strategy do you offer, some of you above, are you just able to whine feeding this mhz mith, are you apple supporters or what. some of this stuff some of you are saying sounds more like sour grapes. IWON'T GO WINTEL, I WON'T what apple supplies to consumers is still the best product, IT'S THE OS MAN...IT'S THE OS you are just feeding these "myths" ok ok some people are price sensitive, but I WANT TO THINK DIFFERENT and this may cost me more. but what gives me the best computer experience!!! what can't be done on these upgraded imacs????tell me please. No one talks about the iapps as an integral part of these machines, no one is saying gee because i have a mac, i can with .mac have a website that'
s cool easy to set up.... and I'M COOL NOW. Hey i have a kick butt website, i've got iDvd, iPhoto, etc. what does wintel offer. I have convinced more people to switch to apple by showing them how easy it is to set up ANYTHING, how about wireless, the best is airport, ease of use. Do you guys know that 25% of wintel buyers return there product for nonusablility. Give me apple, only apple and read in maccentral about "myths". I thinks it's great that apple gives me more. no one is making money at the lowend, commodity level of computers, give consumers VALUE, any mac does this in spades
the imac may look good but its laughably inadequate
in some ares
what is it with apples obsession with skimping on ram ?
i mean here you want to introduce people to user friendly
unix & all they see is a machine that crawls..
make it std 1gb ram across the line ...hey sdram is dirt
cheap ..make your customers happy
& throw in bluetooth(or not?). if you expect people to pay so much
more then give a little
i find it embarressing that apple can design a good looking
box & then cripple it
Originally posted by madmax559
someone above (dave?) hit the nail on the head..
the imac may look good but its laughably inadequate
in some ares
what is it with apples obsession with skimping on ram ?
i mean here you want to introduce people to user friendly
unix & all they see is a machine that crawls..
make it std 1gb ram across the line ...hey sdram is dirt
cheap ..make your customers happy
& throw in bluetooth(or not?). if you expect people to pay so much
more then give a little
i find it embarressing that apple can design a good looking
box & then cripple it
low ram i will give you. BUT, i think (and maybe some resellers can chime in here) the ram thing is deeper than it seems. Resellers make about 50 bucks an imac. Not much at all. they rely on software addons , printers, etc.
and one of the big etc.. is RAM. they (resellers) charge much for it then dealram etc... sometimes this either includes install or in some cases there is another setup fee.
what this means is RAM brings that $50 profit of an imac up to $200 or so. pretty decent now.who knows what are the exact give and takes of the apple/reseller realtionships? This could be one of them.
so before we all condem apple for another "crippling marketing strategy" maybe we can hear from some resellers to see if what i just suggested is true.
Heck, and it even came around faster than the last update did!
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
I don't know what you guys are complaining about...it looks like a fantastic update to the imac2!
Heck, and it even came around faster than the last update did!
Lemon Bon Bon
Where ya been, I havn't seen your odd uncalled for optimistic posts lately!
Originally posted by satchmo
Apple simply cannot compete against Wintel boxes on a price/perfomance level.
Apple knows this, and has tried the software integration /design aesthetic approach. But as we know, that can only go so far.
It may be an issue of what type of consumer Apple is targeting. Surely, a 16 year old teenager who loves games and adding cards will gravitate to cheaper (and faster) PC box with slots. On the other hand, a more affluent working professional who's looking for a stylish, reliable (but slower) computer might give the iMac a look.
However, to make the case for the iMac compelling, Apple needs to bring prices down further by another $200-$300.
I just find it scary bad that we are talking about G5 iMacs late next year. If this happens, Apple will be dead in the water. Great, so high end G5 and Powerbook machines bring nice margins to Apple. But is Apple really happy to be confined to this market only?
Let's get real. New iMacs absolutely must be rolled out by the end of this year, at the 1.6 to 2Ghz level. With a good graphics card. With some kind of expandability built in. The *only* constraint that this seems to present is the availability of G5 chips. Once this has been achieved - go overboard on features. They don't cost much - you can have a reasonable premium price that doesn't break the bank if you had 512Mb as a starting RAM level, 120Gig HDD, Bluetooth, FW800 etc.
It's time to take back the consumer market by, uh, giving consumers what they want and need.