I agree completely on the USB/FW frontal ports (concealed though). As for the white case, change to clear polymer casing or possibly polished steel? That way, just dust or wipe clean. Of course, material costs come into play with those cases.
But after a year it has lost some appeal to me. The arm is great. Can't imagine something better than that at this point. But the base is bland and unimaginative. The white is even blander...</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know what I've never liked about the latest iMac design? The base shape. A circular shape does not match the rectangular shape of the screen. It would be better to have curves in the base design, but have it be it somewhat rectangular. A slot drive would also look better than that big mouth. The ports on the back are in the wrong place when you want to plug something, but I like them back there where the cords are hidden from sight. The base could easily be ala G4 Tower for expandability, smaller than a G4 Tower off course, but it could easily be bigger than it's current size, even more so if you go with a rectangular shaped base rather than a circular one.
Let me rotate the monitor so I can see an entire page of text as a portrait, instead of a landscape format.
That was the one thing that impressed me about seeing a Compaq tablet in a cradle, was how it looked so neat as a monitor... vertical instead of horizontal. (Course, once I picked it up, realized the weight and discovered just how slippery that plastic could be, I lost interest in tablets... yech!)
Maybe someone could release an LCD monitor which is built to be portrait, or recognize when you turn it and adjust things accordingly.
The iMac2 is unsurpassed in terms of its industrial design as far as I am concerned. The only thing in the same ball park was the beautiful and sadly missed (for me...) Cube.
However, the 'DESIGN' maybe 'perfect'...but...
Cost.
Expandability.
I expected Apple to drive the price of the base model to £850 inc VAT. They didn't. They 'merely' dropped one model down the pecking order for a cheaper price. The entry level became sliiiiightly better specced with a crummy 100mhz bump and a CD/DVD drive. Great. 'Great...'
They should have at least had two models under the k mark. Yeesh.
A bump to the graphic card. (£2000 smackers for a Geforce 4mx... <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> )
If the iMac doesn't have the ability to upgrade the screen, the cpu or graphics card, it needs to be a helluva lot cheaper or built of components that are more future proof.
Maybe if Apple can't do this...maybe the design of the iMac 2 isn't THAT great and needs work.
The 'death of the crt' eMac is still holding the iMac2 in the 'Cube' prosumer category. The iMac was a true consumer machine. The iMac 2 is barely there with the base model.
I saw a 15 inch LCD screen for £150 the other day. There's no way Apple's entry level should be £999 inc VAT. The only cutting edge item on there is the bloody chrome arm.
Or. Just 'Cube' the design with a detachable monitor. But then, there'd be a cube and no imac. Hmmm. Apple need to be careful with the iMac...or it's going to be 'Son of Cube'. Sales figures for it aren't even comparing to the last round of iMac original sales figures.
It took Apple 13 months to get to the current iMac2. A disappointing upgrade. Is the design of the iMac holding them back? Does the design cost too much to manufacture?
In two years, will the iMac2 design be dropped for a 19 inch widescreen laptop?
As it stands now, if I was asked to choose between the gorgeous iMac2 (top end model) and the 17 inch Powerbook...I'd rather pay the extra and get the 'book'. It REALLY is cutting edge. The iMac 2 is in danger of becoming a failed star.
I have no idea how Apple could possibly make the iMac better than it is now. Sure, we all want lower prices and better specs... they will arrive in time. Once LCDs get really cheap (I'm talking as cheap as CRTs are now, $50-$80 for a 15" and $100-$150 for a 17"), they should drop the eMac to a single $799 configuration (like the CRT iMac) and make the iMac span all the price points.
I think Apple might never make a reasonably priced and expandable yet full featured and headless computer. Absolutely will NOT buy a desktop from them untill they do and neitehr should you.
The only iMac I would consider buying would have a 20" LCD minimum and a DVI-in so that when it grew long in the tooth I could use it as the monitor for another machine and at least recycle something. If it ain't a laptop, there's no justification for the lack of expansion. Faster firewire may finally obviate the need for PCI, but more user accessible RAM slots, a PPC daughtercard and AGP slot are a must. Say powermac? Say 999, get sale. Everything else, waste of cash.
why not the cube? ultimately it has all the features of an LCD imac plus a monitor of your choice. didn't the cube begat the imac anyway?
the crt imac should be given away to schools, colleges, charities etc.
if there is one thing the imac needs its power. even for simple things like wp, surfing, iaging etc a typical no name pc blow it out of the water.
finally they white thing. at the end of each week when our students have finished pawing the macs we have to clean them all up - that white gets grubby soo quick!
[[[However, the 'DESIGN' maybe 'perfect'...but...Cost.
Expandability. ]]]
Expandability? Don't be silly... you can expand it with many standard options... Printers, external drives... That falls under expandable and after all, these are the things that MOST people add or change.
[[[If the iMac doesn't have the ability to upgrade the screen, the CPU or graphics card,]]]
Ahh... expandability is different from upgradable. Not many people I know are upgrading their computer's theses days, and the PC people that I know that were BIG into "upgrading" simply don't even bother anymore... The new kick was to simply get another machine.. Well, that seems to be a dying fad too. I went to a local "computer show" recently ... empty.
[[[it needs to be a helluva lot cheaper or built of components that are more future proof.]]]
Future proof? Not everyone is like us. ANY system you buy today should last you a least 5 years easy. *You* might need it for Lightwave... I might need it for Photoshop, but in all honest, it seems to have gotten to the point of diminishing return with respect to noticed performance in any machine. I mean is a 3 GHz. P4 noticeably faster than a 1.5 GHz. P4? I not convinced *most* people can tell. So, it appears that the OEMs are trying to cater to the increasing shrinking minority who feel that more MHz clocks will get them something. I'm not saying that Apple couldn't use a speed boost (and I'm hoping for a 970 soon). However, what it comes down to for most people that shop for PCs is *perception* and to that, Intel salesman play on the customer's ignorance. Needs and wants are two completely different things... After all, I do WANT a quad 970 ;-) Do I *need* it? Of course not.
Matsu writes...
[[[The only iMac I would consider buying would have a 20" LCD minimum and a DVI-in so that when it grew long in the tooth I could use it as the monitor for another machine and at least recycle something. ]]]
Good Lord... some people are never satisfied... I men now I'm forced to ask the question... "What's the perfect/best/optimum screen size?" I'm not talking resolution, I'm talking screen real-estate... I mean there comes a point where having something *too* big starts to get unwieldy... So, Matsu, I'm putting your answer on the record... Because I have a sneaking suspicion that if a 20" iMac were to arrive the next rev. you'll be bitching for a 21" or 23" Jeeeesz!
[[[If it ain't a laptop, there's no justification for the lack of expansion. ]]]
Again, stop being silly. The iMac is expandable. It isn't upgradable as far as CPU, mobo etc.. and who really does that anymore? It's a dying trend dude. Computers are cheap enough where people buy entire systems for what a hard disk used to cost! MOST consumers can get by with ANY given system these days. These aren't the people looking to upgrade the CPU, mobo yadda yadda yadda... these people want an appliance. Period.
[[[a PPC daughtercard and AGP slot are a must. ]]]
Why? this makes no sense for a machine aimed at a basic consumer. This sounds like one of *your* wants...
Bzzzzzzzzzz! Wrong! No soup for you! Look again and then get back to us. Hint: you can start with Gateway.
[[[2.) aimed at the "basic consumer"? its priced from 1300-1800. far above what the "basic consumer" would tend to be looking at ]]]
Wrong again.... \tI don't think this is totally true. Poor reasoning... How many people do you know that actually walk out of a store with a sub $1000.00 system? No one I know. Perhaps I'm occupying different circles. Most people are *lured* in by a sub $1000.00 price and are quickly moved up into a system that ends up being significantly more money. Again, these sub $1000.00 systems should be FLYING off the shelves, they're not.
[quote] Good Lord... some people are never satisfied... I men now I'm forced to ask the question... "What's the perfect/best/optimum screen size?" I'm not talking resolution, I'm talking screen real-estate... I mean there comes a point where having something *too* big starts to get unwieldy... So, Matsu, I'm putting your answer on the record... Because I have a sneaking suspicion that if a 20" iMac were to arrive the next rev. you'll be bitching for a 21" or 23" Jeeeesz! <hr></blockquote>
If only there was some way to make computers so that the monitor could be connected by a detachable cable. Then the buyer could choose. To make things as simple as possible, it would be nice to have video, power and usb all bundled in one cable. Wait a minute!
Seriously though, I do think there are certain times when future proofing is very important. This is one of them. USB1 and Firewire are on the way out. Apple may or may not f-up the Firewire 2 phase-in, and USB2 is here bigtime.
I think that the average consumer DOES want some expansion. I think a lot of them have some resentment that their investments become so worthless so quickly.
Design-wise: the progression should have gone: iMac original --> flat panel iMac --> Cube and monitor. The fact that Apple got things out of order chronologically is all right, but right now it is time for a Cube like object.
<strong>[[[1.) All "consumer" PCs have an AGP slot ]]]
Bzzzzzzzzzz! Wrong! No soup for you! Look again and then get back to us. Hint: you can start with Gateway.
[[[2.) aimed at the "basic consumer"? its priced from 1300-1800. far above what the "basic consumer" would tend to be looking at ]]]
Wrong again.... \tI don't think this is totally true. Poor reasoning... How many people do you know that actually walk out of a store with a sub $1000.00 system? No one I know. Perhaps I'm occupying different circles. Most people are *lured* in by a sub $1000.00 price and are quickly moved up into a system that ends up being significantly more money. Again, these sub $1000.00 systems should be FLYING off the shelves, they're not.
--
Ed M.</strong><hr></blockquote>
before you try to be a smart ass it would help if you actually backed yourself up.
here's a little look at competition.... STARTING WITH GATEWAY
$1299 Gateway 700S WITH AGP (15 inch LCD included)
$1499 Gateway 500X WITH AGP (17 inch LCD included)
only their absolute CHEAPEST systems (300 series) dont have AGP slots but have integrated graphics these are sub 1000 dollar machines 449 and 549 with CRT and 849 and 1049 with 15 inch LCD
DELL
Dimension 2350 is only one without an AGP slot... these machines are 499 and up. starting at the 799 price point (dimension 4550) all dell's have AGP slots
HP
pavilion 500 series is only one without an AGP slot and starts at 409 and goes up. the pavillion 700 which starts at $740 has an AGP slot and so do all machines above it.
as you can see it is understandable for the iMac classic and maybe even the eMac to not have AGP slots.... but the iMac LCD at 1300 dollars and 1800 dollars should have AGP slots to be more competitive.
sub 1000 pcs are outselling more expensive PCs BY FAR.... i dont have the numbers to back it up... im sure someone else does but i also remember seeing a number around 700 of the average pc purchase.
Seriously, I think you called it. Most everyone I know is buying £1,000 and sub computers. Nobody is buying £1500 to £2000 computers anymore. They don't have to. In a seveal months you can usually get a 3 gig cpu with a decent graphics card for much less.
Sure, a sub £500 quid PC I may not be able to upgrade the graphics card...but you can on many in this price range. Apple charge almost 4 times that for the top iMac and you still don't get that upgradability. What a laugh. Bad joke.
I can replace the motherboard/cpu/graphics card. I don't need a new hard drive or dvd drive or cd rom...they work fine. Sound card. Fine.
For several hundred I've got a new PC.
That aside, the above point about Apple having got the transition from iMac to Cube to iMac2 wrong may have a point. I've become rather disallusioned with the iMac2. If I could have a cube with 1.4 or dual 1.4 die shrunk G4s in with an upgradeable Graphics card in a slightly bigger enclosure....vs the current iMac2...I'm beginning to think I'd take it.
Look, the Cube had its flaws...but rework them...kill the iMac2 and you have a headless solution that gives you access to a 20 inch or 23 inch LCD!
I like the sound of that.
£1,800 smackers for a machine whose monitor, cpu or graphics card you can't upgrade...well, it isn't very good.
Cube. The design was compromised.
The iMac2. Apple almost but not quite. It doesn't look like they've learned its lesson.
'Son of Cube' anyone? You're paying alot for great design and less than industry average specs.
No thanks. It'll remain overpriced, underspecced. Apple might surprise me. They did with 'power'Macs (but they were kinda forced into that...) and LCD price chopping.
Give me that 970 G5 with a 23 inch LCD.
Many wintel drones aren't the mindless 'drones' they once were. The 'upgrade' guys in the Yellow Pages are always busy when I ring them! Even 'mhz' people who didn't use to talk about improving their graphics and cpus do talk about that now. PC users are becoming more literate as they become the PC owning generation. They aint 'stupid' anymore. That's the thing.
It's incredible Apple don't offer a 'decent' desktop solution. They cut out this entire market of PC users who just 'want it' whether they 'use it' or not.
I like the iMac2 but the last round of updates says Apple haven't learned from their iMac or cube mistakes.
The 'power'Macs were roundly and deservedly critised for a poor upgrade last Summer. The iMac 2 update, unnoticed by everyone it seems, it just as bad!
And the eMac gets a price cut but no spec upgrade. Pathetic. Most PC companies give more for less every 6 months. Apple still offer the same built in slow cpu and built in obselesence 13 months later.
The iMac 2 needs to move on...or the sales figures are going to get worse.
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. Ed M, why shouldn't Matsu, Applenut or I want more..? If consumers didn't want more we'd still be on the original Apple computer..! BBBZZZZZZZ! No-prize! 20 inch iMac2? Why not? Geeze were you one of the guys saying it would be impossible to make a bigger than 15 inch CRT iMac without destroying its enigma?
And you want a 970 don'tcha?
Instant boot, instant rendering, faster browsing...instant iMovie rendering? I have no idea what we might use faster components for...
And please use proper quote marks!!!!
(Hey, folks, I know you're wondering how I said that with a straight face...)
I thought about this in the heyday of the original iMac, but didn't think much of it because that display sucked -- 15" CRT was obsolete almost 3 years ago. But ever since the advent of the FP iMacs, I've thought seriously about it again.
Wouldn't an iMac make a great monitor? OK, so 15" is a little small by tommorow's standards, but I don't think anyone sees displays FOR THE DESKTOP going much past the 19-24" range, with 17-18" becoming a sort of baseline size. If an iMac had DVI-in, when the guts became a little older and slower you could effectively turn your iMac into the display for another machine. If I had an iMac, after 3 years I'd even consider buying a 3rd party hack that let me tap into the video cord and put a small KVM switch in the base. While in 3 years time LCD's will again be better still, they're already pretty good now. What a cool way to recycle an iMac, as a display for your next machine. Assuming the panel is digital it shouldn't be too hard to bodge together such a hack. Anyway, that's why I'd want an unexpandable/unupgradeable machine to have as large a display as possible. I want to reuse "something" the iMac is way too expensive for a disposable desktop.
Every consumer (1000 Canadian! or about 660USD) tower I see has an AGP slot, not to mention other expansion features.) Most people WANT to know that the expansion and upgradability is there even if they never use it. iMacs are less than 1% of all computers sold, MOST people want something the iMac isn't, not just myself, Applenut, Lemon etc etc... I'd take a reasonably priced Cube redux in a second! Something a bit simpler, no funky heat sensitive button or convection cooling, slightly larger to take a larger AGP card, front loading optical tray, room for a second HDD, same replaceable PPC daughtercard, plenty of RAM slots, either faster firewire (1600+) or one PCI slot. There's no way such a thing wouldn't be cheaper to make than an iMac. A little 10x10 cube built with off the shelf parts that can be updated without a Mobo revision, no custom dome, minitiature PS, 2-sided round mobo wafer, chrome arm, NO ATTACHED LCD! You could box the things up and ship 'em or stack 'em high on store shelves in cute little boxes no bigger than Gamecube box. 999. take it home, add a display or two of your choice and off you go!
That, I'd buy, and so would many other people. Stratospherically priced original cubes and hermetically sealed AIO's each have a market smaller than the other. Laptops are/will outsell either of those two genres handily in the coming years.
Desktops for the consumer MUST be affordable and upgradable/expandable, that is what defines them.
I'll give you an example, my own personal one. MY dog-gamned minibook isn't here yet, but my edu price came in a full 250 Canadian cheaper than the edu prce on an iMac17 (1Ghz). I get a slightly slower computer with a smaller HDD and a combo instead of a superdrive, but I get dual display support and ultra-portability. That's insane! Any way you look at it, a desktop computer should not be that expensive relative to a laptop unless it offers three times the power.
Knowing Apple, they'll try to cure this problem by making laptops more expensive, but their laptops are already a touch too expensive (excpet for some models). Mac desktops just cost too much for what you get. And an AIO isn't even a desktop, it's a home bound, bed ridden laptop, too fat to get out of the house on it's own power.
[quote]I'll give you an example, my own personal one. MY dog-gamned minibook isn't here yet, but my edu price came in a full 250 Canadian cheaper than the edu prce on an iMac17 (1Ghz). I get a slightly slower computer with a smaller HDD and a combo instead of a superdrive, but I get dual display support and ultra-portability. That's insane! Any way you look at it, a desktop computer should not be that expensive relative to a laptop unless it offers three times the power.
<hr></blockquote>
I beg to differ. The iMac is pretty good bang for the buck.
Its faster than an iBook. Bigger HD. Has a Superdrive (yes, the 12" can have one), bigger screen. Don't forget that the 12" lacks a DVI port.
Not to say the 12" PB isn't sweet. It is. The bang for buck is pretty good.
The towers look rather pathetic in comparison. It will cost you 600+ dollars more for an equivalent Powermac rig. Yeah, the PM is a little faster but you don't get the cool widescreen dispaly with the tower set up unless you fork over another 600 for the 20" Cinema.
Comments
Otherwise, I love the floating flat panel!
<strong>Lats year when the iMac was introduced...
But after a year it has lost some appeal to me. The arm is great. Can't imagine something better than that at this point. But the base is bland and unimaginative. The white is even blander...</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know what I've never liked about the latest iMac design? The base shape. A circular shape does not match the rectangular shape of the screen. It would be better to have curves in the base design, but have it be it somewhat rectangular. A slot drive would also look better than that big mouth. The ports on the back are in the wrong place when you want to plug something, but I like them back there where the cords are hidden from sight. The base could easily be ala G4 Tower for expandability, smaller than a G4 Tower off course, but it could easily be bigger than it's current size, even more so if you go with a rectangular shaped base rather than a circular one.
That was the one thing that impressed me about seeing a Compaq tablet in a cradle, was how it looked so neat as a monitor... vertical instead of horizontal. (Course, once I picked it up, realized the weight and discovered just how slippery that plastic could be, I lost interest in tablets... yech!)
Maybe someone could release an LCD monitor which is built to be portrait, or recognize when you turn it and adjust things accordingly.
Wasn't there a CRT that did that, way back when?
However, the 'DESIGN' maybe 'perfect'...but...
Cost.
Expandability.
I expected Apple to drive the price of the base model to £850 inc VAT. They didn't. They 'merely' dropped one model down the pecking order for a cheaper price. The entry level became sliiiiightly better specced with a crummy 100mhz bump and a CD/DVD drive. Great. 'Great...'
They should have at least had two models under the k mark. Yeesh.
Cheaper entry level model. (10% price cut, ooops, there goes Apple's margin.)
Rotate the screen to view true A4 portrait.
All cpus above 1 gig. (How embarrassing...)
A bump to the graphic card. (£2000 smackers for a Geforce 4mx... <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> )
If the iMac doesn't have the ability to upgrade the screen, the cpu or graphics card, it needs to be a helluva lot cheaper or built of components that are more future proof.
Maybe if Apple can't do this...maybe the design of the iMac 2 isn't THAT great and needs work.
The 'death of the crt' eMac is still holding the iMac2 in the 'Cube' prosumer category. The iMac was a true consumer machine. The iMac 2 is barely there with the base model.
I saw a 15 inch LCD screen for £150 the other day. There's no way Apple's entry level should be £999 inc VAT. The only cutting edge item on there is the bloody chrome arm.
Or. Just 'Cube' the design with a detachable monitor. But then, there'd be a cube and no imac. Hmmm. Apple need to be careful with the iMac...or it's going to be 'Son of Cube'. Sales figures for it aren't even comparing to the last round of iMac original sales figures.
It took Apple 13 months to get to the current iMac2. A disappointing upgrade. Is the design of the iMac holding them back? Does the design cost too much to manufacture?
In two years, will the iMac2 design be dropped for a 19 inch widescreen laptop?
As it stands now, if I was asked to choose between the gorgeous iMac2 (top end model) and the 17 inch Powerbook...I'd rather pay the extra and get the 'book'. It REALLY is cutting edge. The iMac 2 is in danger of becoming a failed star.
A Jupiter.
Lemon Bon Bon
higher resolution or larger screen (20")
Yep.
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
The only iMac I would consider buying would have a 20" LCD minimum and a DVI-in so that when it grew long in the tooth I could use it as the monitor for another machine and at least recycle something. If it ain't a laptop, there's no justification for the lack of expansion. Faster firewire may finally obviate the need for PCI, but more user accessible RAM slots, a PPC daughtercard and AGP slot are a must. Say powermac? Say 999, get sale. Everything else, waste of cash.
the crt imac should be given away to schools, colleges, charities etc.
if there is one thing the imac needs its power. even for simple things like wp, surfing, iaging etc a typical no name pc blow it out of the water.
finally they white thing. at the end of each week when our students have finished pawing the macs we have to clean them all up - that white gets grubby soo quick!
Expandability. ]]]
Expandability? Don't be silly... you can expand it with many standard options... Printers, external drives... That falls under expandable and after all, these are the things that MOST people add or change.
[[[If the iMac doesn't have the ability to upgrade the screen, the CPU or graphics card,]]]
Ahh... expandability is different from upgradable. Not many people I know are upgrading their computer's theses days, and the PC people that I know that were BIG into "upgrading" simply don't even bother anymore... The new kick was to simply get another machine.. Well, that seems to be a dying fad too. I went to a local "computer show" recently ... empty.
[[[it needs to be a helluva lot cheaper or built of components that are more future proof.]]]
Future proof? Not everyone is like us. ANY system you buy today should last you a least 5 years easy. *You* might need it for Lightwave... I might need it for Photoshop, but in all honest, it seems to have gotten to the point of diminishing return with respect to noticed performance in any machine. I mean is a 3 GHz. P4 noticeably faster than a 1.5 GHz. P4? I not convinced *most* people can tell. So, it appears that the OEMs are trying to cater to the increasing shrinking minority who feel that more MHz clocks will get them something. I'm not saying that Apple couldn't use a speed boost (and I'm hoping for a 970 soon). However, what it comes down to for most people that shop for PCs is *perception* and to that, Intel salesman play on the customer's ignorance. Needs and wants are two completely different things... After all, I do WANT a quad 970 ;-) Do I *need* it? Of course not.
Matsu writes...
[[[The only iMac I would consider buying would have a 20" LCD minimum and a DVI-in so that when it grew long in the tooth I could use it as the monitor for another machine and at least recycle something. ]]]
Good Lord... some people are never satisfied... I men now I'm forced to ask the question... "What's the perfect/best/optimum screen size?" I'm not talking resolution, I'm talking screen real-estate... I mean there comes a point where having something *too* big starts to get unwieldy... So, Matsu, I'm putting your answer on the record... Because I have a sneaking suspicion that if a 20" iMac were to arrive the next rev. you'll be bitching for a 21" or 23" Jeeeesz!
[[[If it ain't a laptop, there's no justification for the lack of expansion. ]]]
Again, stop being silly. The iMac is expandable. It isn't upgradable as far as CPU, mobo etc.. and who really does that anymore? It's a dying trend dude. Computers are cheap enough where people buy entire systems for what a hard disk used to cost! MOST consumers can get by with ANY given system these days. These aren't the people looking to upgrade the CPU, mobo yadda yadda yadda... these people want an appliance. Period.
[[[a PPC daughtercard and AGP slot are a must. ]]]
Why? this makes no sense for a machine aimed at a basic consumer. This sounds like one of *your* wants...
--
Ed M.
Why? this makes no sense for a machine aimed at a basic consumer. This sounds like one of *your* wants...
--
Ed M.[/QB][/QUOTE]
1.) All "consumer" PCs have an AGP slot
2.) aimed at the "basic consumer"? its priced from 1300-1800. far above what the "basic consumer" would tend to be looking at
Bzzzzzzzzzz! Wrong! No soup for you! Look again and then get back to us. Hint: you can start with Gateway.
[[[2.) aimed at the "basic consumer"? its priced from 1300-1800. far above what the "basic consumer" would tend to be looking at ]]]
Wrong again.... \tI don't think this is totally true. Poor reasoning... How many people do you know that actually walk out of a store with a sub $1000.00 system? No one I know. Perhaps I'm occupying different circles. Most people are *lured* in by a sub $1000.00 price and are quickly moved up into a system that ends up being significantly more money. Again, these sub $1000.00 systems should be FLYING off the shelves, they're not.
--
Ed M.
[quote] Good Lord... some people are never satisfied... I men now I'm forced to ask the question... "What's the perfect/best/optimum screen size?" I'm not talking resolution, I'm talking screen real-estate... I mean there comes a point where having something *too* big starts to get unwieldy... So, Matsu, I'm putting your answer on the record... Because I have a sneaking suspicion that if a 20" iMac were to arrive the next rev. you'll be bitching for a 21" or 23" Jeeeesz! <hr></blockquote>
If only there was some way to make computers so that the monitor could be connected by a detachable cable. Then the buyer could choose. To make things as simple as possible, it would be nice to have video, power and usb all bundled in one cable. Wait a minute!
Seriously though, I do think there are certain times when future proofing is very important. This is one of them. USB1 and Firewire are on the way out. Apple may or may not f-up the Firewire 2 phase-in, and USB2 is here bigtime.
I think that the average consumer DOES want some expansion. I think a lot of them have some resentment that their investments become so worthless so quickly.
Design-wise: the progression should have gone: iMac original --> flat panel iMac --> Cube and monitor. The fact that Apple got things out of order chronologically is all right, but right now it is time for a Cube like object.
<strong>[[[1.) All "consumer" PCs have an AGP slot ]]]
Bzzzzzzzzzz! Wrong! No soup for you! Look again and then get back to us. Hint: you can start with Gateway.
[[[2.) aimed at the "basic consumer"? its priced from 1300-1800. far above what the "basic consumer" would tend to be looking at ]]]
Wrong again.... \tI don't think this is totally true. Poor reasoning... How many people do you know that actually walk out of a store with a sub $1000.00 system? No one I know. Perhaps I'm occupying different circles. Most people are *lured* in by a sub $1000.00 price and are quickly moved up into a system that ends up being significantly more money. Again, these sub $1000.00 systems should be FLYING off the shelves, they're not.
--
Ed M.</strong><hr></blockquote>
before you try to be a smart ass it would help if you actually backed yourself up.
here's a little look at competition.... STARTING WITH GATEWAY
$1299 Gateway 700S WITH AGP (15 inch LCD included)
$1499 Gateway 500X WITH AGP (17 inch LCD included)
only their absolute CHEAPEST systems (300 series) dont have AGP slots but have integrated graphics these are sub 1000 dollar machines 449 and 549 with CRT and 849 and 1049 with 15 inch LCD
DELL
Dimension 2350 is only one without an AGP slot... these machines are 499 and up. starting at the 799 price point (dimension 4550) all dell's have AGP slots
HP
pavilion 500 series is only one without an AGP slot and starts at 409 and goes up. the pavillion 700 which starts at $740 has an AGP slot and so do all machines above it.
as you can see it is understandable for the iMac classic and maybe even the eMac to not have AGP slots.... but the iMac LCD at 1300 dollars and 1800 dollars should have AGP slots to be more competitive.
sub 1000 pcs are outselling more expensive PCs BY FAR.... i dont have the numbers to back it up... im sure someone else does but i also remember seeing a number around 700 of the average pc purchase.
dont be naive
Seriously, I think you called it. Most everyone I know is buying £1,000 and sub computers. Nobody is buying £1500 to £2000 computers anymore. They don't have to. In a seveal months you can usually get a 3 gig cpu with a decent graphics card for much less.
Sure, a sub £500 quid PC I may not be able to upgrade the graphics card...but you can on many in this price range. Apple charge almost 4 times that for the top iMac and you still don't get that upgradability. What a laugh. Bad joke.
I can replace the motherboard/cpu/graphics card. I don't need a new hard drive or dvd drive or cd rom...they work fine. Sound card. Fine.
For several hundred I've got a new PC.
That aside, the above point about Apple having got the transition from iMac to Cube to iMac2 wrong may have a point. I've become rather disallusioned with the iMac2. If I could have a cube with 1.4 or dual 1.4 die shrunk G4s in with an upgradeable Graphics card in a slightly bigger enclosure....vs the current iMac2...I'm beginning to think I'd take it.
Look, the Cube had its flaws...but rework them...kill the iMac2 and you have a headless solution that gives you access to a 20 inch or 23 inch LCD!
I like the sound of that.
£1,800 smackers for a machine whose monitor, cpu or graphics card you can't upgrade...well, it isn't very good.
Cube. The design was compromised.
The iMac2. Apple almost but not quite. It doesn't look like they've learned its lesson.
'Son of Cube' anyone? You're paying alot for great design and less than industry average specs.
No thanks. It'll remain overpriced, underspecced. Apple might surprise me. They did with 'power'Macs (but they were kinda forced into that...) and LCD price chopping.
Give me that 970 G5 with a 23 inch LCD.
Many wintel drones aren't the mindless 'drones' they once were. The 'upgrade' guys in the Yellow Pages are always busy when I ring them! Even 'mhz' people who didn't use to talk about improving their graphics and cpus do talk about that now. PC users are becoming more literate as they become the PC owning generation. They aint 'stupid' anymore. That's the thing.
It's incredible Apple don't offer a 'decent' desktop solution. They cut out this entire market of PC users who just 'want it' whether they 'use it' or not.
I like the iMac2 but the last round of updates says Apple haven't learned from their iMac or cube mistakes.
The 'power'Macs were roundly and deservedly critised for a poor upgrade last Summer. The iMac 2 update, unnoticed by everyone it seems, it just as bad!
And the eMac gets a price cut but no spec upgrade. Pathetic. Most PC companies give more for less every 6 months. Apple still offer the same built in slow cpu and built in obselesence 13 months later.
The iMac 2 needs to move on...or the sales figures are going to get worse.
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. Ed M, why shouldn't Matsu, Applenut or I want more..? If consumers didn't want more we'd still be on the original Apple computer..! BBBZZZZZZZ! No-prize! 20 inch iMac2? Why not? Geeze were you one of the guys saying it would be impossible to make a bigger than 15 inch CRT iMac without destroying its enigma?
And you want a 970 don'tcha?
Instant boot, instant rendering, faster browsing...instant iMovie rendering? I have no idea what we might use faster components for...
And please use proper quote marks!!!!
(Hey, folks, I know you're wondering how I said that with a straight face...)
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[ 02-09-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]
[ 02-09-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
Wouldn't an iMac make a great monitor? OK, so 15" is a little small by tommorow's standards, but I don't think anyone sees displays FOR THE DESKTOP going much past the 19-24" range, with 17-18" becoming a sort of baseline size. If an iMac had DVI-in, when the guts became a little older and slower you could effectively turn your iMac into the display for another machine. If I had an iMac, after 3 years I'd even consider buying a 3rd party hack that let me tap into the video cord and put a small KVM switch in the base. While in 3 years time LCD's will again be better still, they're already pretty good now. What a cool way to recycle an iMac, as a display for your next machine. Assuming the panel is digital it shouldn't be too hard to bodge together such a hack. Anyway, that's why I'd want an unexpandable/unupgradeable machine to have as large a display as possible. I want to reuse "something" the iMac is way too expensive for a disposable desktop.
Every consumer (1000 Canadian! or about 660USD) tower I see has an AGP slot, not to mention other expansion features.) Most people WANT to know that the expansion and upgradability is there even if they never use it. iMacs are less than 1% of all computers sold, MOST people want something the iMac isn't, not just myself, Applenut, Lemon etc etc... I'd take a reasonably priced Cube redux in a second! Something a bit simpler, no funky heat sensitive button or convection cooling, slightly larger to take a larger AGP card, front loading optical tray, room for a second HDD, same replaceable PPC daughtercard, plenty of RAM slots, either faster firewire (1600+) or one PCI slot. There's no way such a thing wouldn't be cheaper to make than an iMac. A little 10x10 cube built with off the shelf parts that can be updated without a Mobo revision, no custom dome, minitiature PS, 2-sided round mobo wafer, chrome arm, NO ATTACHED LCD! You could box the things up and ship 'em or stack 'em high on store shelves in cute little boxes no bigger than Gamecube box. 999. take it home, add a display or two of your choice and off you go!
That, I'd buy, and so would many other people. Stratospherically priced original cubes and hermetically sealed AIO's each have a market smaller than the other. Laptops are/will outsell either of those two genres handily in the coming years.
Desktops for the consumer MUST be affordable and upgradable/expandable, that is what defines them.
I'll give you an example, my own personal one. MY dog-gamned minibook isn't here yet, but my edu price came in a full 250 Canadian cheaper than the edu prce on an iMac17 (1Ghz). I get a slightly slower computer with a smaller HDD and a combo instead of a superdrive, but I get dual display support and ultra-portability. That's insane! Any way you look at it, a desktop computer should not be that expensive relative to a laptop unless it offers three times the power.
Knowing Apple, they'll try to cure this problem by making laptops more expensive, but their laptops are already a touch too expensive (excpet for some models). Mac desktops just cost too much for what you get. And an AIO isn't even a desktop, it's a home bound, bed ridden laptop, too fat to get out of the house on it's own power.
But I would really see something of a melding of the Cube and one of those Shuttle based PC systems.
Give me one AGP slot and 1 PCI slot. Give me the ability to change out the optical drive and hard drives easily.
I know it will never happen but I would like that.
<hr></blockquote>
I beg to differ. The iMac is pretty good bang for the buck.
Its faster than an iBook. Bigger HD. Has a Superdrive (yes, the 12" can have one), bigger screen. Don't forget that the 12" lacks a DVI port.
Not to say the 12" PB isn't sweet. It is. The bang for buck is pretty good.
The towers look rather pathetic in comparison. It will cost you 600+ dollars more for an equivalent Powermac rig. Yeah, the PM is a little faster but you don't get the cool widescreen dispaly with the tower set up unless you fork over another 600 for the 20" Cinema.