I would be interested, but not for myself. It would be great to be able to offer a cheap Mac to a semi-interested client. Someone who knows enough to know Apple exists, but wouldn't know anything else. Bait and switch.
Ok, back to the original question. Would this peak your interest? A low-cost Mac without the frills of the e/iMac? That was the whole intent. If there is great interest, then there must be a way for Apple to bring this to us.
FYI, you're hoping it would pique your interest. It's a word we borrowed from the French.
Now, topically: First of all, the one-on-one notebook deals Apple is making with schools ignore retail price and even educational price - in some cases, the school are leasing iBooks, which of course obviates the purchase price altogether. Apple will cheerfully underbid Dell, given the chance to. Every time you see a Mac->PC migration, it's accompanied by the boilerplate rhetoric about "what business is using," or a recent infusion of corporate IT people. Any cost savings is supposed to come from only having to support a single platform (ignoring, of course, whether that single platform is more expensive to support). Often, Apple is shut out of these decisions entirely. In these cases, it really doesn't matter what Apple offers at what price, because it's not Windows. The only solution is for Apple to get enough of a market share - especially in business - to be seen as a viable "real world" platform by IT people and administrators.
As to the rest, I have the distinct impression that Apple is not going to launch any initiative built around a low-end desktop, AIO or otherwise. That's a profitless playground for commodity hardware that's steadily losing ground to laptops on all fronts. If anything, you'll see Apple push the iBook more aggressively. When it gets a SuperDrive, it will have arrived as Apple's primary consumer/education machine.
Speaking personally, I don't see anything interesting about that machine. Given the choice, I'd save my pennies for a 17" iMac or a notebook.
I personally hate the small, thin Dell boxes that are found in a lot of schools nowadays. The "xStation" idea is no more than an imitator of these little crappy boxes. The nice thing about the eMac is that it is a sealed machine and you've only got to plug it in to the wall, jack in the ethernet, and hook up the keyboard an mouse. The option for Airport Extreme is also nice. When I'm in a school computer lab, I primarily do email, word processing, and some web surfing. If people need to do Photoshop, Final Cut, etc, then it is best to buy a tower (G4, G5), not a slim little box.
I think it is perfectly conceivable to have a G4 tower at around $999 at some point in the future. That's a good price for an expandable machine, but the AIO eMac likely will offer similar features and a built-in CRT for less. I mean, the eMac is just $1100 with a Superdrive. If you think it's getting any cheaper than that just by knocking off the CRT, I've got a bridge to sell you. Could the eMac use some upgrades? Certainly. I'd love to see the eMac and iMac add headphone jacks, firewire, and USB ports up front for easy access. That'll make them more appealing to students.
As for the sales figures from last quarter, I'd sure appreciate a link for verification. Seeing as I can't seem to find new iMac CRTs for sale much of anywhere, I doubt those numbers. Even so, they disprove many points made here: The biggest sellers are the most expensive Macs!!! What purpose would a cheap box serve? I think none at all.
If the iMac does go G5, as rumored, early next year, that will allow the eMac to become a much better machine (same for the iMac). It will also allow for a nice upgrade to the G4 tower. A lineup like this is quite nice:
PowerMac G5 (for those who need the power and expandability)
iMac G5 (some added expandablity - as rumored, but mainly for those who want a compact system, AIO, that works great out of the box)
PowerBook (portable power, whether G4 or G5)
PowerMac G4 (maybe renamed at some point, at low pricepoint G4 tower with expandability - low price point is probably $1099-$1199)
iBook G4 (consumer laptop)
eMac (the computer for the average computer user - would be nice to see a redesign that uses an LCD at some point).
Nor do dumb ass posts that provide no kind of usefulness whatsoever.
All I am saying is that even if you could get all of AI to agree that this is the best thing since sliced bread, it still might not be a good move for Apple. Why? Because they would need to sell hundreds of thousands of these. Apple is not stupid, they make products to fill markets. If there R&D team thought a pizza-box mac would be a good move, and big seller, we woudl have one. Its a bummer the iBox (corebox) never took off, as that is the perfect soultion for you.
If everyone on AI got there way, Apple would have 20 different machine setups, and it would be like the "good" old days.
I personally hate the small, thin Dell boxes that are found in a lot of schools nowadays. The "xStation" idea is no more than an imitator of these little crappy boxes. The nice thing about the eMac is that it is a sealed machine and you've only got to plug it in to the wall, jack in the ethernet, and hook up the keyboard an mouse. The option for Airport Extreme is also nice. When I'm in a school computer lab, I primarily do email, word processing, and some web surfing. If people need to do Photoshop, Final Cut, etc, then it is best to buy a tower (G4, G5), not a slim little box.
So, what does the box matter if you are emailing, typing in a document, or surfing? It could be the Eniac for all you'd care. And since you could hook up anything from an old shitty 15" CRT to a 23" Cinema HD LCD, the monitor dictates more than the box, your computing experience. The box benefits the school by saving them money and the administrator/staff's backs when they have to move the damn things.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
As for the sales figures from last quarter, I'd sure appreciate a link for verification. Seeing as I can't seem to find new iMac CRTs for sale much of anywhere, I doubt those numbers. Even so, they disprove many points made here: The biggest sellers are the most expensive Macs!!! What purpose would a cheap box serve? I think none at all.
Well, I did link to the latest sales numbers too, above. I will link it again, here.
The numbers show the iMac/eMac sales decline and the PowerMac and PowerBook sales increases. Now, without any hints, why do you think that is? Shhhhhh, comeon, no helping here.
Ok, the PowerMac and PowerBook have been refreshed and seriously updated, in the PM's case, in the past 3 months. The iMac/eMac haven't in years. That, and the iMac is WAAAAY overpriced. That is why Apple needs to refocus on the markets they are losing!
So, what does the box matter if you are emailing, typing in a document, or surfing? It could be the Eniac for all you'd care. And since you could hook up anything from an old shitty 15" CRT to a 23" Cinema HD LCD, the monitor dictates more than the box, your computing experience. The box benefits the school by saving them money and the administrator/staff's backs when they have to move the damn things.
As has been stated before, by not including a monitor, Apple may be able to cut cost by $70 at max. That's not a lot of money in the long run. It also takes less space than a combo job, is easier to set up, and more aesthetically pleasing.
Second, Apple should look different from the PC world. I don't think Apple should enter the cheap machine fray. They are a cut above it. I know I would purchase an eMac before I'd ever purchase a thing like the xStation concept.
Quote:
Well, I did link to the latest sales numbers too, above. I will link it again, here.
The numbers show the iMac/eMac sales decline and the PowerMac and PowerBook sales increases. Now, without any hints, why do you think that is? Shhhhhh, comeon, no helping here.
Ok, the PowerMac and PowerBook have been refreshed and seriously updated, in the PM's case, in the past 3 months. The iMac/eMac haven't in years. That, and the iMac is WAAAAY overpriced. That is why Apple needs to refocus on the markets they are losing!
Funny, the iMac/eMac slot is still the top selling of all Apple computer segments, even with little update and stiff competition from the G5 PowerMac. Maybe the "lost" markets are actually choosing a G5 PowerMac or the PowerBooks. Apple's sales have increased over the last quarter, so I don't see your argument. If they're selling a boatload of higher margin machines, I see no problem. Why would they want to move a bunch of little boxes with no money in them. My bet is they could make more money selling the current iMac/eMac. When the iMac gets a G5 (and I'm confident we'll see one in January - I have my sources), we'll see the eMac be slightly redesigned with a faster bus and better memory. We'll also see a better G4 tower - so there is no need for a slim box with little to no expandability. The future eMac and iMacs will allow for greater expansion, so what's the need? Macintosh was built on AIO ease-of-use and, according to polls, the iMac is still the most desired machine amongst young people. Why get away from this and become like all the other PeeCee manufacturers? Apple needs to differentiate themselves with creative design and ease-of-use. An "xStation" would be a tremendous step backwards.
I really believe a product like this would give Apple's consumer line a tremendous sales increase. a cheap, headless machine is the one thing everyone else offers that Apple does not. Isn't that reason enough for them to make a headless, cheap machine? Let me outline a few reasons why:
1. Allowing a buyer to pick a machine that starts at $599 and configure it up to $1,799 is going to sell more machines. Right now, If you want to customize a Mac, your starting prices are $1,299 for a G4 or $1,999 for a G5. That's scaring away a lot of would-be buyers. Let College Kid Eddie pick the xStation at $599, add his souped up Graphics card and a single 2.5Ghz G5 and 1GB of RAM at the online Apple Store. The fastest graphics cards and processors should NOT be exclusive only to the Powermac line. Dual processors can be exclusive to the Powermac line, and that'll keep the current "Power" users from purchasing xStations instead of Powermacs.
2. All in One units are great and all, but they're just too bizarre and "artsy" for Businessman Bob and his conservative office of accountants. Businessman Bob is going to take one look at the eMac and giggle. If Apple offered a cheap, headless system that was more in keeping with what PC companies have to offer, Bob would would take Apple much more seriously. Then, you've got him interested. That's when you can sell him on the fact that there are no viruses for OS X, and all the other software advantages on our Mac side. I believe this applies to the education market, as well.
A few things would be key for such a products success:
The $599 starting price. Some say it's impossible to drop the price by $200 below the eMac if you're adding AGP and PCI and subtracting the CRT, but there's a few reasons why I think they could pull it off. For one, building a pizza box like this would(should) be cheaper and easier than the eMac, considering it's simplicity compared to the eMac's design. Secondly, it's low weight would dramatically reduce Apple's shipping costs for getting this things from their overseas factories and to their stores. Yes?
I also think the scalability I mentioned above would be very important. Let these things pan the entire low and midrange desktop price range. If Apple wants to keep the iMac and eMac around, they could make the xStation an Online Apple Store exclusive to avoid flooding the channel with too many desktop options and keeping custom built orders under control. Market it on billboards and the inside cover of Time Magazine and Newsweek as the "First Fully Customizable Macintosh. Starting at $599. Apple.com". They'd sell a billion of these things.
If I'm wrong, Apple discontinues the xStation ala Cube. No harm done. But if I'm right, Apple's marketshare would double in a year. Who cares if the iMac and eMac no longer sell. In the big picture, Apple would be selling more computers and making more money than they have in years.
I really believe a product like this would give Apple's consumer line a tremendous sales increase. a cheap, headless machine is the one thing everyone else offers that Apple does not. Isn't that reason enough for them to make a headless, cheap machine? Let me outline a few reasons why:
1. Allowing a buyer to pick a machine that starts at $599 and configure it up to $1,799 is going to sell more machines. Right now, If you want to customize a Mac, your starting prices are $1,299 for a G4 or $1,999 for a G5. That's scaring away a lot of would-be buyers. Let College Kid Eddie pick the xStation at $599, add his souped up Graphics card and a single 2.5Ghz G5 and 1GB of RAM at the online Apple Store. The fastest graphics cards and processors should NOT be exclusive only to the Powermac line. Dual processors can be exclusive to the Powermac line, and that'll keep the current "Power" users from purchasing xStations instead of Powermacs.
A pizza box is not going to hold a G5 - sorry. They're too hot. Take a look at the heatsinks on the G5. They're twice as thick as a pizza box and a quarter the size. A pizza box is also not going to hold a high-end graphics card - they get too hot as well. You need a tower to do it, so why try to compete with the PowerMac. Why not just have a G4 tower and a G5 tower? Use the old design of the PowerMac, maybe modified. Solves that problem - and allows businesses to buy higher end units and not be forced to buy an AIO or a crummy little pizza box. BTW, Apple limiting configurations improves overall stability and makes programming the OS easier. The great variety of builds available on the PC are a boon, to be sure, but are also the platform's Achilles' Heel.
Quote:
2. All in One units are great and all, but they're just too bizarre and "artsy" for Businessman Bob and his conservative office of accountants. Businessman Bob is going to take one look at the eMac and giggle. If Apple offered a cheap, headless system that was more in keeping with what PC companies have to offer, Bob would would take Apple much more seriously. Then, you've got him interested. That's when you can sell him on the fact that there are no viruses for OS X, and all the other software advantages on our Mac side. I believe this applies to the education market, as well.
Businessman Bob doesn't give a crap about aesthetics because he already buys bulky boxes that look like they were designed by UPS. Businessman Bob cares about the bottom line. If Apple can provide solid software solutions, a more stable OS, and can prove that using a Mac is more productive (it is and has been proven) and cheaper in the long run (that has been proven too) then he doesn't care. The biggest issue is the control of Windows in the market, and Apple is doing fine with this. I think we'll see the biggest issue is increase of speed on Apple for the price. There are many that are ready to move over, and I think we'll see an increase of marketshare this year with the eMac leading the lower-end.
Quote:
A few things would be key for such a products success:
The $599 starting price. Some say it's impossible to drop the price by $200 below the eMac if you're adding AGP and PCI and subtracting the CRT, but there's a few reasons why I think they could pull it off. For one, building a pizza box like this would(should) be cheaper and easier than the eMac, considering it's simplicity compared to the eMac's design. Secondly, it's low weight would dramatically reduce Apple's shipping costs for getting this things from their overseas factories and to their stores. Yes?
No. The shipping is inconsequential because Apple has a contract on it, so they pretty much pay the same no matter what, so axe that assumption. BTW, what kind of video output should the xStation come with? If you want to accomodate you using whatever display you want than you'll need to have at least an ADC - which means you'll need to buy a converter to get it to VGA or DVI. If you want to include them all then you just raised the price, you didn't lower it. The eMac is nice (as is the iMac) because you already have drivers for the monitors ready to go and the output to them is standard, and THAT saves money. And if you want to have a pizza box able to use a great variety of chips then the cost of engineering a solid case would be enormous - because you have to accomodate everyone. It really means that creating a pizza box will cost more, and lose the company money for the price you want to sell it at. PC prices are going to be going up in the near future. The current market is killing companies. Gateway is likely to pull out. Sony is pulling out. Dell is getting into consumer electronics because the computer margins stink. eMachines may finally go bankrupt and their machines are so crummy that Apple needn't compete with them. In another year, PC prices will come back up to Apple's current range and Apple will be sitting pretty and looking like the geniuses they are.
Quote:
I also think the scalability I mentioned above would be very important. Let these things pan the entire low and midrange desktop price range. If Apple wants to keep the iMac and eMac around, they could make the xStation an Online Apple Store exclusive to avoid flooding the channel with too many desktop options and keeping custom built orders under control. Market it on billboards and the inside cover of Time Magazine and Newsweek as the "First Fully Customizable Macintosh. Starting at $599. Apple.com". They'd sell a billion of these things.
Scalability is not important to most people, that's why they buy non-scalable machines from Dell, eMachines, and everyone else. Power users want it, and they'll pay more. That's why they'd buy a G4 or G5 tower. I've talked to dozens of people about switching to Apple and all love the iMac and eMac - none have complained. All are average users that don't care about what us nerds care about.
Quote:
If I'm wrong, Apple discontinues the xStation ala Cube. No harm done. But if I'm right, Apple's marketshare would double in a year. Who cares if the iMac and eMac no longer sell. In the big picture, Apple would be selling more computers and making more money than they have in years.
You're not right. Apple isn't stupid. Knowing some people who have worked in Cupertino, Apple has done plenty of research into building what you're talking about, but the interest has always been shown as minimal and not worth the risk. They'd have to spend millions to design the box, design motherboards for it, and find a way to cool it, then they'd have to market it. I used to think something like this was needed, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that it was unnecessary. A redesign of the eMac and iMac (with an upgrade to G5)n will increase Apple's sales greatly next year - the pizza box would only confuse their lineup and take away sales from a new iMac -- which I'm sure will be gorgeous, more beautiful than the current iteration.
A pizza box is not going to hold a G5 - sorry. They're too hot. Take a look at the heatsinks on the G5. They're twice as thick as a pizza box and a quarter the size. A pizza box is also not going to hold a high-end graphics card - they get too hot as well. You need a tower to do it, so why try to compete with the PowerMac. Why not just have a G4 tower and a G5 tower? Use the old design of the PowerMac, maybe modified. Solves that problem - and allows businesses to buy higher end units and not be forced to buy an AIO or a crummy little pizza box. BTW, Apple limiting configurations improves overall stability and makes programming the OS easier. The great variety of builds available on the PC are a boon, to be sure, but are also the platform's Achilles' Heel.
I'm well aware of the G5's heatsink size, and that it wouldn't work in anything smaller at this time. Obviously the G5 is going to come down in size and get cooler, and that's the time that I see something like this hitting the market. When they can put a G5 in the iMac, they'd certainly be able to put a G5 into this xStation we're discussing. As far as the graphics card goes, I don't think I'm imagining this xStation as small as others here are. What I invision is essentially what you'd have left if you took the G5 case and cut out all the excessive space required for PCI slots, additional drive expandibility, and those enormous heatsinks. Let's say two Mac OS X Panther boxes stuck side by side - that seems doable. As far as limiting configurations, this xStation wouldn't offer any combination of components that you couldn't find in Apple's other products. Same processors, same graphics cards, same hard drives, etc.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
Businessman Bob doesn't give a crap about aesthetics because he already buys bulky boxes that look like they were designed by UPS. Businessman Bob cares about the bottom line. If Apple can provide solid software solutions, a more stable OS, and can prove that using a Mac is more productive (it is and has been proven) and cheaper in the long run (that has been proven too) then he doesn't care. The biggest issue is the control of Windows in the market, and Apple is doing fine with this. I think we'll see the biggest issue is increase of speed on Apple for the price. There are many that are ready to move over, and I think we'll see an increase of marketshare this year with the eMac leading the lower-end.
Apple needs to offer something cheap that Businessman Bob couldn't possibly look at and say, "wow, that's ugly". The eMac and iMac to Businessman Bob are ugly because they don't look like a computer should and because bob doesn't have the ability to understand that their beauty stems from their fantastic functionality. Bob can't possibly dislike a small tower.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
The shipping is inconsequential because Apple has a contract on it, so they pretty much pay the same no matter what, so axe that assumption.
Fair enough. It was just a guess
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
BTW, what kind of video output should the xStation come with? If you want to accomodate you using whatever display you want than you'll need to have at least an ADC - which means you'll need to buy a converter to get it to VGA or DVI. If you want to include them all then you just raised the price, you didn't lower it.
ADC and DVI ports on the card, with a DVI to VGA adapter in the box. Apple includes these with a lot of their computers, including the iBook. No reason it couldn't be included here.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
And if you want to have a pizza box able to use a great variety of chips then the cost of engineering a solid case would be enormous - because you have to accomodate everyone. It really means that creating a pizza box will cost more, and lose the company money for the price you want to sell it at.
Just assure the case is large enough to cool the fastest single processor G5 available alongside the fastest graphics card available and you're set. Again, I'm not imagining this xStation quite as small as others are. Just a baby tower.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
Scalability is not important to most people, that's why they buy non-scalable machines from Dell, eMachines, and everyone else. Power users want it, and they'll pay more. That's why they'd buy a G4 or G5 tower. I've talked to dozens of people about switching to Apple and all love the iMac and eMac - none have complained. All are average users that don't care about what us nerds care about.
It's not so much the scalability that I'm concerned with as I am the ability to start with a cheap machine and work my way up comfortably, slowly convincing myself to add this feature and that feature to my computer which started out dirt cheap. Let's say I'm a PC User and I walk into the Apple Store because I saw an ad for their $799 eMac. All right, I see the thing but I want a fast processor and a fast graphics card so I can play games. Then, the Apple rep tells me I can't customize it. If I want the best graphics card I've got to look at the Powermac G5's, which start at $2,000 and that still doesn't include the fastest graphics card I can buy. That's when I go home and order a Dell.
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
You're not right. Apple isn't stupid. Knowing some people who have worked in Cupertino, Apple has done plenty of research into building what you're talking about, but the interest has always been shown as minimal and not worth the risk. They'd have to spend millions to design the box, design motherboards for it, and find a way to cool it, then they'd have to market it. I used to think something like this was needed, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that it was unnecessary. A redesign of the eMac and iMac (with an upgrade to G5)n will increase Apple's sales greatly next year - the pizza box would only confuse their lineup and take away sales from a new iMac -- which I'm sure will be gorgeous, more beautiful than the current iteration.
This box doesn't contain anything that couldn't be found in every Mac Apple sells. Of all of Apple's computer products, this xStation would most likely require the least amount of design and engineering, as all the work would have already been done for the Powermacs. Having said all this, I greatly look forward to the next generation of iMacs, and hope to purchase a replacement for this flat-panel iMac in the coming months. I'm not interested in this xStation thing for myself - it's for all the PC users that surround me
The biggest sellers are the most expensive Macs!!!
This is commonly stated, but poorly understood. The reason that the more expensive macs tend to outsell the cheaper ones is that the mac buyer has already decided to buy a mac (for a host of reasons)
The general computer buyer on a budget first chooses a price and then shops for a machine. When that price falls on the absolutely miserable low end AIO's that Apple offers, then obviously the majority of those buyers buy similarly priced PC's that offer a far more for the same price.
Overall, the iMac is not doing well with consumers, even though it may be doing marvelously well with "boutique" type buyers.
If Apple can't get the AIO prices WAY WAY DOWN, things are only going to get worse. It isn't an insular world of mac buyers (nor of PC buyers) plenty of people in either camp would switch to the machine that offers the price/specs they're after.
I'm well aware of the G5's heatsink size, and that it wouldn't work in anything smaller at this time. Obviously the G5 is going to come down in size and get cooler, and that's the time that I see something like this hitting the market. When they can put a G5 in the iMac, they'd certainly be able to put a G5 into this xStation we're discussing. As far as the graphics card goes, I don't think I'm imagining this xStation as small as others here are. What I invision is essentially what you'd have left if you took the G5 case and cut out all the excessive space required for PCI slots, additional drive expandibility, and those enormous heatsinks. Let's say two Mac OS X Panther boxes stuck side by side - that seems doable. As far as limiting configurations, this xStation wouldn't offer any combination of components that you couldn't find in Apple's other products. Same processors, same graphics cards, same hard drives, etc.
I still say that is too small. I believe a tower could be smaller than the current G4 PowerMac form factor, but the size of two Panther boxes won't take a 90nm G5, not at 2GHZ - unless liquid cooling is installed, but that won't decrease cost, it'll increase it. The iMac may get one, but this is a redesigned iMac, not the current form. If we have an single G5 iMac and a single PowerMac G5 available, there is not need for a xStation G5. In fact, if one exists it will just pull people away from these products - products that Apple has spent lots of jack developing. I'd like to see the price at $1799 for a single G5 PowerMac, and about the same for an iMac. Both would address this need and make everyone happy.
Quote:
Apple needs to offer something cheap that Businessman Bob couldn't possibly look at and say, "wow, that's ugly". The eMac and iMac to Businessman Bob are ugly because they don't look like a computer should and because bob doesn't have the ability to understand that their beauty stems from their fantastic functionality. Bob can't possibly dislike a small tower.
That would be the PowerMac G4. They're $1299 now. I see no reason they can't start a little lower and even allow for dual G4s up the line. I also think they could use the same G4 form factor (mirror doors) and maybe create a smaller as well with a single drive bay. I think we pretty much agree here, but I still so no need to develop a brand new box when Apple has already got something they can use, and that will save money.
Quote:
Fair enough. It was just a guess
Never hurts to try to see where Apple can cut costs. Shipping may go up or down soon as they renegotiate their contract. I know about the Airborne Express deal because of talking to some Apple guys and to AirBorne Express when I got my iBook back from Apple. The shipping company gets a guaranteed amount of $$$ from Apple yearly for shipping.
Quote:
ADC and DVI ports on the card, with a DVI to VGA adapter in the box. Apple includes these with a lot of their computers, including the iBook. No reason it couldn't be included here.
I have an iBook, and these don't come with ADC, DVI adapters. I have a mini-VGA jack and a plug that turns it into a standard VGA jack; that's it. The Powerbooks come with adapters for DVI to VGA and have DVI built-in. The 15" and greater have s-video jacks and come with s-video to composite adapters. Of course, the PowerBooks start at $1599. No low end Apple comes with those kind of adapters. The iBook uses standard VGA cabling, as does the eMac. I believe the iMac uses a digital connection to its LCD. To include ADC and DVI capability would only increase cost, as would including a DVI-to-VGA adapter. The cheap alternative would be to use only VGA at that kind of a low cost. I'd only include DVI in models above $1000.
Quote:
Just assure the case is large enough to cool the fastest single processor G5 available alongside the fastest graphics card available and you're set. Again, I'm not imagining this xStation quite as small as others are. Just a baby tower.
As I stated, I don't see the need. We'll have a G4 tower, we'll have a G5 PowerMac - where's the need?
Quote:
It's not so much the scalability that I'm concerned with as I am the ability to start with a cheap machine and work my way up comfortably, slowly convincing myself to add this feature and that feature to my computer which started out dirt cheap. Let's say I'm a PC User and I walk into the Apple Store because I saw an ad for their $799 eMac. All right, I see the thing but I want a fast processor and a fast graphics card so I can play games. Then, the Apple rep tells me I can't customize it. If I want the best graphics card I've got to look at the Powermac G5's, which start at $2,000 and that still doesn't include the fastest graphics card I can buy. That's when I go home and order a Dell.
Well, if someone wants to play games, they're best to stick with the PC anyways. The Macs don't currently have anywhere near as strong a base in games. If Apple can lure more ports that are good, then they should offer the options. I'd like to see another option on the eMac for graphics cards -and I think that'll come. Rumors persist of greater expandability on future eMacs and iMacs, so that might solve the problem without having to muddle the picture. Oh, and you can still buy a PowerMac G4 1.25 for $1299 and go buy a nice AGP card if you want.
Quote:
This box doesn't contain anything that couldn't be found in every Mac Apple sells. Of all of Apple's computer products, this xStation would most likely require the least amount of design and engineering, as all the work would have already been done for the Powermacs. Having said all this, I greatly look forward to the next generation of iMacs, and hope to purchase a replacement for this flat-panel iMac in the coming months. I'm not interested in this xStation thing for myself - it's for all the PC users that surround me
I can understand that. I'd like to see more people switch too, but I'm not too sure that $599 is reachable without damaging Apple's overall price structure; that structure is important to maintaining Apple's R & D budget and keeping them way ahead of everyone else. Here's the heirarchy I imagine:
PowerMac G5 -- Top dog
iMac G5 -- prosumer machine, nice AIO design for good balance of performance, convenience and space.
PowerMac G4 -- hopefully renamed -- slight redesign, G4s with even dual configuration and AGP graphics, PCI slots, etc.
eMac -- redesigned with an LCD sometime next year since the G5 differentiates the iMac quite a bit. G4s until a G6 goes into the iMac or G5 goes above 2GHZ in the iMac.
I think that lineup gives users plenty of options. Someone who only cares about what they're paying for a machine won't appreciate the finer things Apple brings nor the integration in the OS. These things are also worth money. iLife is an amazing suite. A future version of Appleworks could compete with Office and may come with new machines. There are benefits to owning a Mac that make me willing to pay a little more. I don't think Apple wants to attract those crowds. Nor do they want to do what Dell does because they don't sell their machines exclusively. When you have to provide for distribution channels you can't offer all those configurations, not can you offer the cheap prices. You've got to give profits to your retailers because you're not the only reseller. Comparisons to Dell are not good ones. Check out the variety you get at Best Buy and CompUSA. Very little because of the retail channels. Apple has to deal with that. They do offer some configuration at the store online, but the limitations allow for more cost control.
This is commonly stated, but poorly understood. The reason that the more expensive macs tend to outsell the cheaper ones is that the mac buyer has already decided to buy a mac (for a host of reasons)
The general computer buyer on a budget first chooses a price and then shops for a machine. When that price falls on the absolutely miserable low end AIO's that Apple offers, then obviously the majority of those buyers buy similarly priced PC's that offer a far more for the same price.
Overall, the iMac is not doing well with consumers, even though it may be doing marvelously well with "boutique" type buyers.
If Apple can't get the AIO prices WAY WAY DOWN, things are only going to get worse. It isn't an insular world of mac buyers (nor of PC buyers) plenty of people in either camp would switch to the machine that offers the price/specs they're after.
No they don't. Trust me, in another year PC prices will go way, way up. And people who just shop for price shouldn't buy a Mac anyways. I have gotten over two dozen people to buy Macs in the last 6 months because they were convinced by the Mac's ease-of-use and integration. You win people buy educating them, not buy entering the "let's price eachother out of business" fray of the PC industry. I also disagree that the eMac is crummy. I think it is a nice machine. For $1100 bucks I can edit my own movies and burn DVDs while connecting to the internet and being able to do everything the average computer user needs to do. I also don't have to hassle with pricing out monitors or deal with configuring something I don't understand (meaning the average computer user), so I don't get suckered into buying what I don't need.
Dell suckered a couple departments at my university into upgrading their little boxes to 2.4 GHZ P4s with 64MB nVidia chips, and 80GB HDDs - all for labs meant for email, internet, and word processing. The eMac, by its very design, is not meant to sucker you into getting what you don't need. It's cheaper than the Dells we bought.
Currently the Dell Dimension 2400 with Celeron 2.4GHZ is $629 with a DVD burner and 17" monitor, and one year warranty. Nice price, right? But wait, the memory is generic, the video and audio are integrated and use shared memory. The DVD burner is not the greatest of quality either. Essentially, we've managed to build a cheap PC with cheap parts and low quality. We also end up having a box, external speakers, and a big monitor - and this is all direct from the manufacturer who doesn't have to adjust prices for retail distribution. I also will have to wait two weeks for shipping and literally have to go through hundreds of little radio buttons because there are too many choices. I'm a guy who's worked in the industry and I'd still take the eMac. It doesn't have integrated video. It doesn't use cheap RAM. I don't have wires everywhere AND I get iLife, and good quality SuperDrive, and Mac OSX. Because I'm educated, I know this is a better deal. Too many people decide what to buy by the least expensive. This is silly to do in the computer industry, and its best Apple not cater to them. Educating people and getting Apple products out there will bring yields, as will the increase in PC prices as companies go bankrupt. In two years time there will likely only be a couple of PC manufacturers left and lack of direction in that market as the x86 begins to be phased out and AMD attempts to move PC users towards the PowerPC. I trust Apple here. They have longterm vision and are concerned with the longterm picture, not the shortterm. They'll maintain margins that are the envy of the computer industry. They will continue to innovate and make all other manufacturers look inferior and archaic. And when the prices go up on the other side and Intel begins to fail, they'll be ready to take over a larger share of the market. BTW, watch their marketshare grow in 2004. It will happen.
That's completely wrong. How is a 629 Dell not cheaper than a 1100 eMac? Because it sells you stuff you don't need ??? Hello, anybody home?
The Dell offers more features, at the price, period. And you've built the cheapest piece of scrap computer, Apple doesn't even have anything in that range. If you build a 1000 USD desktop PC, you build an excellent machine that outclasses the eMac in every way. Apple can't sell low end AIO's for that very simple reason -- Customers in the 1000 USD cutoff can't get very much to recommend an Apple desktop to them.
I've rarely argued that Apple has to produce bargain basement machines -- only the original gumdrop in fact, which could have easily been lowered to 500 USD and sold as an impulse buy -- but, if Apple is going to price a machine 900-1200 dollars then it better compete with other machines in the 900-1200 range.
Your contention that PC prices will go way up is equally ludicrous, just as the entry level PC made rapid and dramatic drops in price over the last 2 years, so has the fully featured home desktop. When I had to pick up a desktop (for work) I bought an HP. It has been 100% reliable. For the price of a mid level eMac (in Canada) I got a machine with a 17" LCD, (compared to a horrible CRT), DVD+CDRW+6-in1-card reader (versus combo drive), All the same I/O except the HP also had USB2 (at the time neither the eMac nor iMac did), 120GB HDD vs 40/60 in the eMac, 512MB DDR-RAM, vs 256 in the eMac, 64MB 8X AGP nVidia5200 vs GF2MX of the then eMac (32MB, 2X AGP) And I have open bays for 2 more HDD's and I can swap out the opticals/Gfx card or add PCI cards without difficulty. Even my video is not crippled, and If I choose to I can just buy and span a second monitor without any iffy hacks.
I was ready to give a desktop mac a try, use mac Office (and Virtual PC to clean up any loose ends). I'm typing this on a 12"PB because, at the time of purchase, it was the best computer for the price (in it's segment), the eMac/iMac, however, weren't even close.
It's rather sad that Apple can get it so right when building laptops but still hasn't figured it out on the consumer desktop end.
That's completely wrong. How is a 629 Dell not cheaper than a 1100 eMac? Because it sells you stuff you don't need ??? Hello, anybody home?
I never said the eMac was cheaper. I said it had better quality components. I also said that Apple doesn't do only direct sellings, so they have to build in profits not only for themselves but for retailers as well. They also have to build in costs for a large R&D budget that gives you stuff like the iPod.
Quote:
The Dell offers more features, at the price, period. And you've built the cheapest piece of scrap computer, Apple doesn't even have anything in that range. If you build a 1000 USD desktop PC, you build an excellent machine that outclasses the eMac in every way. Apple can't sell low end AIO's for that very simple reason -- Customers in the 1000 USD cutoff can't get very much to recommend an Apple desktop to them.
And the $1000 machine still uses bad, generic parts. Once you introduce cheap parts, your whole product line becomes infected. Dell will use anything that is cheaper to increase their margins because they are so, so low. Having been a Systems Analyst and dealing with these things on a day to day basis side by side with an assortment of eMacs, iMacs (CRT and LCD), and PowerMacs (G3s and G4s, up to mirrored doors) I can tell you that the Macs are far more reliable. They break less. Last year I had to order 150 of those far superior $1000 Dells. Within 3 months 60% had failed, and it took 2 months to get Dell to finally get all working onces again - and by that time another 10 machines had failed. If you think features are more important that build quality, great. Our failure rate for the Macs over a one year period was at 2%. I left to go back to school, but still keep in contact. The Dells are now all gone, replaced by more expensive iMacs and eMacs that have proven to be of a higher quality and lower failure rate. The school I attend, the 13th largest in the nation, regrets ever switching over to Dell and plans to switch back to Apple after their lease is up. Maybe that Dell offers nice configurations isn't enough. Hmmm, maybe that's why they've entered consumer electronics - they don't see a future in the PC industry.
Quote:
I've rarely argued that Apple has to produce bargain basement machines -- only the original gumdrop in fact, which could have easily been lowered to 500 USD and sold as an impulse buy -- but, if Apple is going to price a machine 900-1200 dollars then it better compete with other machines in the 900-1200 range.
I agree but think the biggest problem here has not been Apple's but has been Motorola's. Once processor speeds scale at a reasonable rate we'll see greater speeds in lower end models. Even now, however, the Mac has got one thing Intel can't touch, and that's OS X. And, to correct, the low-end eMac is $799 with a 1GHZ G4. I'd like to see memory and bus speed increase, but that's not Apple's doing, they've been limited by Moto here.
Quote:
Your contention that PC prices will go way up is equally ludicrous, just as the entry level PC made rapid and dramatic drops in price over the last 2 years, so has the fully featured home desktop. When I had to pick up a desktop (for work) I bought an HP. It has been 100% reliable. For the price of a mid level eMac (in Canada) I got a machine with a 17" LCD, (compared to a horrible CRT), DVD+CDRW+6-in1-card reader (versus combo drive), All the same I/O except the HP also had USB2 (at the time neither the eMac nor iMac did), 120GB HDD vs 40/60 in the eMac, 512MB DDR-RAM, vs 256 in the eMac, 64MB 8X AGP nVidia5200 vs GF2MX of the then eMac (32MB, 2X AGP) And I have open bays for 2 more HDD's and I can swap out the opticals/Gfx card or add PCI cards without difficulty. Even my video is not crippled, and If I choose to I can just buy and span a second monitor without any iffy hacks.
Gateway is leaving the PC fray next year. HP/Compaq are leaving the consumer market by the end of next year. Sony is getting ready for an exit. eMachines will not survive for all that much longer. That leaves very few left. The PC industry represents the best and worst of a capitalist system. The prices we have now are nice for consumers, but the price wars are killing the corporations that have engaged in them, hoping to gain a larger marketshare. Basic economics rules are these: whatever goes up must come down and whatever goes down must go up. Anyone who think that prices won't be going up in the near future is ignorant in regards to market fluctuations and the reality of how pricing works. How did the Japanese gain such a large marketshare? The sold stuff for cheap, lost money and, once most of the competition was eliminated, jacked up their prices. The days of cheap PCs will be over by 2005. Heck, the days of PCs may be winding down at that point as the Itanium vs. PPC wars heat up and the x86 is put to rest. But increased prices are a stone cold lock.
Quote:
I was ready to give a desktop mac a try, use mac Office (and Virtual PC to clean up any loose ends). I'm typing this on a 12"PB because, at the time of purchase, it was the best computer for the price (in it's segment), the eMac/iMac, however, weren't even close.
I can agree here, but, once again, not Apple's fault. They've had a limited number of CPUs available to them that they've had to find a way to differentiate products. There'll be a much stronger lineup come summer of next year.
Quote:
It's rather sad that Apple can get it so right when building laptops but still hasn't figured it out on the consumer desktop end.
Strange, but all your arguments apply to laptops too. Maybe you do not attack because you need to rationalize the purchase?
This just in from the analyst meeting: Steve answered a question about low-end desktops, and he answered that the data says that, increasingly, they're being replaced with low-end notebooks.
Apple executives and Amorph make an excellent argument. Customers looking to buy low-end desktops increasingly end up buying low-end notebooks. Case in point, me:
I bought my last Mac desktop, a Color Classic, in 1993. In the fall of 1994, I bought a PowerBook 520c and never looked back. I've been a PowerBook/iBook user ever since. I currently use in iBook (Dual USB). Then, I recently became a "mixer" and got a Wintel box with a 17" LCD. An $800 headless iMac would be a perfect addition since I already have the LCD.
However, I am going to get a 12-inch PowerBook, which I will use as a desktop with the LCD, and as a notebook on its own. Sure it'll be a bit more expensive. But as with the PowerBook Duo of old, I'll get the best of both worlds. If only Apple made a Duo-style Dock for the 12-inch PowerBook! (I'm actually planning on building my own Dock in the coming months. It's a feature I really want.)
Sorry MacPhisto, but Apple sells direct right from Apple.com. Apple also uses the same LCD panels, RAM, hard drives, opticals, video chipsets, and I/O ports as everyone else. Most of the computer in fact is just as cheap as anything from the Dell side of the equation.
If you're going to compare Dells in an institutional setting to the macs you use at home, well, sure the Dells will seem like clunkers. However, I've seen more than my share of mac labs that were also in total disarray -- not just software/systems side neglect, but outright hardware failure, bad displays, broken components, hardware that won't boot. Stuff in certain labs tends to get neglected after a while. If the PC's are set up right, they tend to work right, ditto the macs.
As for rationalizing? No, I don't think so. When I bought the PB, one of the first available 12" 867's, there wasn't a heck of a lot of PC competition, but there were a few models even then that were worth a try. Apple was in the game though, not the outright best for all purposes, but very good, and, to my mind, the best for anyone looking for a reliable compact machine. Today, if I were buying a laptop, I think the iBooks get the nod as the best value going, not for all buyers, but they compete. I'd consider one over my PB12, if I was in the market today. It's about what's the best at the time you're buying, nothing more. You'll have a hard time arguing that the e/iMacs are the best anything going. You can make a GREAT case for the iBooks and high end (G5) workstations in their respective segments. You can also make a very good case for the PB's (depending on use). The AIOs are pretty weak at the price, and that's that.
I think the 1.25 g4 is really over priced as well: Let's compare a Sony (similar quality level, similar multimedia vision)
g4 powermac
$1299
1.25 g4
256 RAM
80 GB hard drive
DVD/Combo drive
firewire and usb 1
Radeon 9000 64 mb
PCV-RS420
$1149
2.8 p4 with hyper-threading
512 RAM
120 GB hard drive
dvd +/- rw
cd-rom
2 firewire/8 usb 2.0
ATI RADEON 9200LE 8X 64MB
So I am Joe Consumer: for $150 less I can get a dual format DVD burner, 2x RAM, 40GB harddrive and Sony's picturegear/click2DVD and movie software for my movies. Why buy an overpriced apple.
Does not fit in very well. And the all-in-ones fair pretty similar in head to head comparisons.
Apple does not need to be the cheapest, but just similar in price. The g4 tower should realistically start at $999.
First off, any "XStation" would be a professional-class workstation, i.e. dual 64-bit processors and a real gpu like a quaddro or wildcat, not an econo-box.
Second, the major problem with the ever talked about Apple utility box is that a low price seems to promote consumer and Apple has a serious problem with the idea of consumers plugging in all sorts of undoubtedly crumby displays into a beautiful Apple machine. Not only that, but the Apple consumer computer is supposed to be elemental in its ease of set-up and operation. There's no way to even remotely ensure color accuracy if people are using cheap monitors. Also, ergonomically, it is tasteless to have all sorts of cables running every which way and Apple wants to minimize that sort of thing. These are not problems for the PowerMac since a pro at least should be using a quality display and at least should have no trouble setting up a display. Pros also usally have so many cables stuffed behind their desks that two more won't matter. There's also no way in hell a cheap box could or should have a slot-loading drive in it.
I'm not saying that Apple should not build such a box. I just think that it should only be available to business and education customers and focus on reliability and simplicity rather than speed or upgradibility.
I propose the following: A super-slim, up or down pizza box with no expansion slots, integrated graphics, and a tray-loading cd-rom. Basically, a G4 ibook motherboard with a full size hard drive and cd-rom drive. Corporations usually don't upgrade hard drives and graphics cards..that's typically consumers who need more storage for photos and music and better graphics for games. The inclusion of an expansion slot not only drives up the price, but would also encourage pros to use these as utility servers and second-tier workstations. Integrated graphics because this machine is suppsed to be for checking email, surfing the web, and typing documents, not playing Unreal Tournament. A configuration like this is actually possible at $500.
Comments
Originally posted by kupan787
50 geeks on an online message board does not equal great interest.
Nor do dumb ass posts that provide no kind of usefulness whatsoever.
Originally posted by Rhumgod
Ok, back to the original question. Would this peak your interest? A low-cost Mac without the frills of the e/iMac? That was the whole intent. If there is great interest, then there must be a way for Apple to bring this to us.
FYI, you're hoping it would pique your interest. It's a word we borrowed from the French.
Now, topically: First of all, the one-on-one notebook deals Apple is making with schools ignore retail price and even educational price - in some cases, the school are leasing iBooks, which of course obviates the purchase price altogether. Apple will cheerfully underbid Dell, given the chance to. Every time you see a Mac->PC migration, it's accompanied by the boilerplate rhetoric about "what business is using," or a recent infusion of corporate IT people. Any cost savings is supposed to come from only having to support a single platform (ignoring, of course, whether that single platform is more expensive to support). Often, Apple is shut out of these decisions entirely. In these cases, it really doesn't matter what Apple offers at what price, because it's not Windows. The only solution is for Apple to get enough of a market share - especially in business - to be seen as a viable "real world" platform by IT people and administrators.
As to the rest, I have the distinct impression that Apple is not going to launch any initiative built around a low-end desktop, AIO or otherwise. That's a profitless playground for commodity hardware that's steadily losing ground to laptops on all fronts. If anything, you'll see Apple push the iBook more aggressively. When it gets a SuperDrive, it will have arrived as Apple's primary consumer/education machine.
Speaking personally, I don't see anything interesting about that machine. Given the choice, I'd save my pennies for a 17" iMac or a notebook.
I think it is perfectly conceivable to have a G4 tower at around $999 at some point in the future. That's a good price for an expandable machine, but the AIO eMac likely will offer similar features and a built-in CRT for less. I mean, the eMac is just $1100 with a Superdrive. If you think it's getting any cheaper than that just by knocking off the CRT, I've got a bridge to sell you. Could the eMac use some upgrades? Certainly. I'd love to see the eMac and iMac add headphone jacks, firewire, and USB ports up front for easy access. That'll make them more appealing to students.
As for the sales figures from last quarter, I'd sure appreciate a link for verification. Seeing as I can't seem to find new iMac CRTs for sale much of anywhere, I doubt those numbers. Even so, they disprove many points made here: The biggest sellers are the most expensive Macs!!! What purpose would a cheap box serve? I think none at all.
If the iMac does go G5, as rumored, early next year, that will allow the eMac to become a much better machine (same for the iMac). It will also allow for a nice upgrade to the G4 tower. A lineup like this is quite nice:
PowerMac G5 (for those who need the power and expandability)
iMac G5 (some added expandablity - as rumored, but mainly for those who want a compact system, AIO, that works great out of the box)
PowerBook (portable power, whether G4 or G5)
PowerMac G4 (maybe renamed at some point, at low pricepoint G4 tower with expandability - low price point is probably $1099-$1199)
iBook G4 (consumer laptop)
eMac (the computer for the average computer user - would be nice to see a redesign that uses an LCD at some point).
That lineup should fill everyone's needs.
Originally posted by Rhumgod
Nor do dumb ass posts that provide no kind of usefulness whatsoever.
All I am saying is that even if you could get all of AI to agree that this is the best thing since sliced bread, it still might not be a good move for Apple. Why? Because they would need to sell hundreds of thousands of these. Apple is not stupid, they make products to fill markets. If there R&D team thought a pizza-box mac would be a good move, and big seller, we woudl have one. Its a bummer the iBox (corebox) never took off, as that is the perfect soultion for you.
If everyone on AI got there way, Apple would have 20 different machine setups, and it would be like the "good" old days.
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
I personally hate the small, thin Dell boxes that are found in a lot of schools nowadays. The "xStation" idea is no more than an imitator of these little crappy boxes. The nice thing about the eMac is that it is a sealed machine and you've only got to plug it in to the wall, jack in the ethernet, and hook up the keyboard an mouse. The option for Airport Extreme is also nice. When I'm in a school computer lab, I primarily do email, word processing, and some web surfing. If people need to do Photoshop, Final Cut, etc, then it is best to buy a tower (G4, G5), not a slim little box.
So, what does the box matter if you are emailing, typing in a document, or surfing? It could be the Eniac for all you'd care. And since you could hook up anything from an old shitty 15" CRT to a 23" Cinema HD LCD, the monitor dictates more than the box, your computing experience. The box benefits the school by saving them money and the administrator/staff's backs when they have to move the damn things.
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
As for the sales figures from last quarter, I'd sure appreciate a link for verification. Seeing as I can't seem to find new iMac CRTs for sale much of anywhere, I doubt those numbers. Even so, they disprove many points made here: The biggest sellers are the most expensive Macs!!! What purpose would a cheap box serve? I think none at all.
Well, I did link to the latest sales numbers too, above. I will link it again, here.
The numbers show the iMac/eMac sales decline and the PowerMac and PowerBook sales increases. Now, without any hints, why do you think that is? Shhhhhh, comeon, no helping here.
Ok, the PowerMac and PowerBook have been refreshed and seriously updated, in the PM's case, in the past 3 months. The iMac/eMac haven't in years. That, and the iMac is WAAAAY overpriced. That is why Apple needs to refocus on the markets they are losing!
Originally posted by Rhumgod
So, what does the box matter if you are emailing, typing in a document, or surfing? It could be the Eniac for all you'd care. And since you could hook up anything from an old shitty 15" CRT to a 23" Cinema HD LCD, the monitor dictates more than the box, your computing experience. The box benefits the school by saving them money and the administrator/staff's backs when they have to move the damn things.
As has been stated before, by not including a monitor, Apple may be able to cut cost by $70 at max. That's not a lot of money in the long run. It also takes less space than a combo job, is easier to set up, and more aesthetically pleasing.
Second, Apple should look different from the PC world. I don't think Apple should enter the cheap machine fray. They are a cut above it. I know I would purchase an eMac before I'd ever purchase a thing like the xStation concept.
Quote:
Well, I did link to the latest sales numbers too, above. I will link it again, here.
The numbers show the iMac/eMac sales decline and the PowerMac and PowerBook sales increases. Now, without any hints, why do you think that is? Shhhhhh, comeon, no helping here.
Ok, the PowerMac and PowerBook have been refreshed and seriously updated, in the PM's case, in the past 3 months. The iMac/eMac haven't in years. That, and the iMac is WAAAAY overpriced. That is why Apple needs to refocus on the markets they are losing!
Funny, the iMac/eMac slot is still the top selling of all Apple computer segments, even with little update and stiff competition from the G5 PowerMac. Maybe the "lost" markets are actually choosing a G5 PowerMac or the PowerBooks. Apple's sales have increased over the last quarter, so I don't see your argument. If they're selling a boatload of higher margin machines, I see no problem. Why would they want to move a bunch of little boxes with no money in them. My bet is they could make more money selling the current iMac/eMac. When the iMac gets a G5 (and I'm confident we'll see one in January - I have my sources), we'll see the eMac be slightly redesigned with a faster bus and better memory. We'll also see a better G4 tower - so there is no need for a slim box with little to no expandability. The future eMac and iMacs will allow for greater expansion, so what's the need? Macintosh was built on AIO ease-of-use and, according to polls, the iMac is still the most desired machine amongst young people. Why get away from this and become like all the other PeeCee manufacturers? Apple needs to differentiate themselves with creative design and ease-of-use. An "xStation" would be a tremendous step backwards.
Originally posted by Rhumgod
Nor do dumb ass posts that provide no kind of usefulness whatsoever.
wow, you're an ass.
1. Allowing a buyer to pick a machine that starts at $599 and configure it up to $1,799 is going to sell more machines. Right now, If you want to customize a Mac, your starting prices are $1,299 for a G4 or $1,999 for a G5. That's scaring away a lot of would-be buyers. Let College Kid Eddie pick the xStation at $599, add his souped up Graphics card and a single 2.5Ghz G5 and 1GB of RAM at the online Apple Store. The fastest graphics cards and processors should NOT be exclusive only to the Powermac line. Dual processors can be exclusive to the Powermac line, and that'll keep the current "Power" users from purchasing xStations instead of Powermacs.
2. All in One units are great and all, but they're just too bizarre and "artsy" for Businessman Bob and his conservative office of accountants. Businessman Bob is going to take one look at the eMac and giggle. If Apple offered a cheap, headless system that was more in keeping with what PC companies have to offer, Bob would would take Apple much more seriously. Then, you've got him interested. That's when you can sell him on the fact that there are no viruses for OS X, and all the other software advantages on our Mac side. I believe this applies to the education market, as well.
A few things would be key for such a products success:
The $599 starting price. Some say it's impossible to drop the price by $200 below the eMac if you're adding AGP and PCI and subtracting the CRT, but there's a few reasons why I think they could pull it off. For one, building a pizza box like this would(should) be cheaper and easier than the eMac, considering it's simplicity compared to the eMac's design. Secondly, it's low weight would dramatically reduce Apple's shipping costs for getting this things from their overseas factories and to their stores. Yes?
I also think the scalability I mentioned above would be very important. Let these things pan the entire low and midrange desktop price range. If Apple wants to keep the iMac and eMac around, they could make the xStation an Online Apple Store exclusive to avoid flooding the channel with too many desktop options and keeping custom built orders under control. Market it on billboards and the inside cover of Time Magazine and Newsweek as the "First Fully Customizable Macintosh. Starting at $599. Apple.com". They'd sell a billion of these things.
If I'm wrong, Apple discontinues the xStation ala Cube. No harm done. But if I'm right, Apple's marketshare would double in a year. Who cares if the iMac and eMac no longer sell. In the big picture, Apple would be selling more computers and making more money than they have in years.
Originally posted by Cory Bauer
I really believe a product like this would give Apple's consumer line a tremendous sales increase. a cheap, headless machine is the one thing everyone else offers that Apple does not. Isn't that reason enough for them to make a headless, cheap machine? Let me outline a few reasons why:
1. Allowing a buyer to pick a machine that starts at $599 and configure it up to $1,799 is going to sell more machines. Right now, If you want to customize a Mac, your starting prices are $1,299 for a G4 or $1,999 for a G5. That's scaring away a lot of would-be buyers. Let College Kid Eddie pick the xStation at $599, add his souped up Graphics card and a single 2.5Ghz G5 and 1GB of RAM at the online Apple Store. The fastest graphics cards and processors should NOT be exclusive only to the Powermac line. Dual processors can be exclusive to the Powermac line, and that'll keep the current "Power" users from purchasing xStations instead of Powermacs.
A pizza box is not going to hold a G5 - sorry. They're too hot. Take a look at the heatsinks on the G5. They're twice as thick as a pizza box and a quarter the size. A pizza box is also not going to hold a high-end graphics card - they get too hot as well. You need a tower to do it, so why try to compete with the PowerMac. Why not just have a G4 tower and a G5 tower? Use the old design of the PowerMac, maybe modified. Solves that problem - and allows businesses to buy higher end units and not be forced to buy an AIO or a crummy little pizza box. BTW, Apple limiting configurations improves overall stability and makes programming the OS easier. The great variety of builds available on the PC are a boon, to be sure, but are also the platform's Achilles' Heel.
Quote:
2. All in One units are great and all, but they're just too bizarre and "artsy" for Businessman Bob and his conservative office of accountants. Businessman Bob is going to take one look at the eMac and giggle. If Apple offered a cheap, headless system that was more in keeping with what PC companies have to offer, Bob would would take Apple much more seriously. Then, you've got him interested. That's when you can sell him on the fact that there are no viruses for OS X, and all the other software advantages on our Mac side. I believe this applies to the education market, as well.
Businessman Bob doesn't give a crap about aesthetics because he already buys bulky boxes that look like they were designed by UPS. Businessman Bob cares about the bottom line. If Apple can provide solid software solutions, a more stable OS, and can prove that using a Mac is more productive (it is and has been proven) and cheaper in the long run (that has been proven too) then he doesn't care. The biggest issue is the control of Windows in the market, and Apple is doing fine with this. I think we'll see the biggest issue is increase of speed on Apple for the price. There are many that are ready to move over, and I think we'll see an increase of marketshare this year with the eMac leading the lower-end.
Quote:
A few things would be key for such a products success:
The $599 starting price. Some say it's impossible to drop the price by $200 below the eMac if you're adding AGP and PCI and subtracting the CRT, but there's a few reasons why I think they could pull it off. For one, building a pizza box like this would(should) be cheaper and easier than the eMac, considering it's simplicity compared to the eMac's design. Secondly, it's low weight would dramatically reduce Apple's shipping costs for getting this things from their overseas factories and to their stores. Yes?
No. The shipping is inconsequential because Apple has a contract on it, so they pretty much pay the same no matter what, so axe that assumption. BTW, what kind of video output should the xStation come with? If you want to accomodate you using whatever display you want than you'll need to have at least an ADC - which means you'll need to buy a converter to get it to VGA or DVI. If you want to include them all then you just raised the price, you didn't lower it. The eMac is nice (as is the iMac) because you already have drivers for the monitors ready to go and the output to them is standard, and THAT saves money. And if you want to have a pizza box able to use a great variety of chips then the cost of engineering a solid case would be enormous - because you have to accomodate everyone. It really means that creating a pizza box will cost more, and lose the company money for the price you want to sell it at. PC prices are going to be going up in the near future. The current market is killing companies. Gateway is likely to pull out. Sony is pulling out. Dell is getting into consumer electronics because the computer margins stink. eMachines may finally go bankrupt and their machines are so crummy that Apple needn't compete with them. In another year, PC prices will come back up to Apple's current range and Apple will be sitting pretty and looking like the geniuses they are.
Quote:
I also think the scalability I mentioned above would be very important. Let these things pan the entire low and midrange desktop price range. If Apple wants to keep the iMac and eMac around, they could make the xStation an Online Apple Store exclusive to avoid flooding the channel with too many desktop options and keeping custom built orders under control. Market it on billboards and the inside cover of Time Magazine and Newsweek as the "First Fully Customizable Macintosh. Starting at $599. Apple.com". They'd sell a billion of these things.
Scalability is not important to most people, that's why they buy non-scalable machines from Dell, eMachines, and everyone else. Power users want it, and they'll pay more. That's why they'd buy a G4 or G5 tower. I've talked to dozens of people about switching to Apple and all love the iMac and eMac - none have complained. All are average users that don't care about what us nerds care about.
Quote:
If I'm wrong, Apple discontinues the xStation ala Cube. No harm done. But if I'm right, Apple's marketshare would double in a year. Who cares if the iMac and eMac no longer sell. In the big picture, Apple would be selling more computers and making more money than they have in years.
You're not right. Apple isn't stupid. Knowing some people who have worked in Cupertino, Apple has done plenty of research into building what you're talking about, but the interest has always been shown as minimal and not worth the risk. They'd have to spend millions to design the box, design motherboards for it, and find a way to cool it, then they'd have to market it. I used to think something like this was needed, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that it was unnecessary. A redesign of the eMac and iMac (with an upgrade to G5)n will increase Apple's sales greatly next year - the pizza box would only confuse their lineup and take away sales from a new iMac -- which I'm sure will be gorgeous, more beautiful than the current iteration.
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
A pizza box is not going to hold a G5 - sorry. They're too hot. Take a look at the heatsinks on the G5. They're twice as thick as a pizza box and a quarter the size. A pizza box is also not going to hold a high-end graphics card - they get too hot as well. You need a tower to do it, so why try to compete with the PowerMac. Why not just have a G4 tower and a G5 tower? Use the old design of the PowerMac, maybe modified. Solves that problem - and allows businesses to buy higher end units and not be forced to buy an AIO or a crummy little pizza box. BTW, Apple limiting configurations improves overall stability and makes programming the OS easier. The great variety of builds available on the PC are a boon, to be sure, but are also the platform's Achilles' Heel.
I'm well aware of the G5's heatsink size, and that it wouldn't work in anything smaller at this time. Obviously the G5 is going to come down in size and get cooler, and that's the time that I see something like this hitting the market. When they can put a G5 in the iMac, they'd certainly be able to put a G5 into this xStation we're discussing. As far as the graphics card goes, I don't think I'm imagining this xStation as small as others here are. What I invision is essentially what you'd have left if you took the G5 case and cut out all the excessive space required for PCI slots, additional drive expandibility, and those enormous heatsinks. Let's say two Mac OS X Panther boxes stuck side by side - that seems doable. As far as limiting configurations, this xStation wouldn't offer any combination of components that you couldn't find in Apple's other products. Same processors, same graphics cards, same hard drives, etc.
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
Businessman Bob doesn't give a crap about aesthetics because he already buys bulky boxes that look like they were designed by UPS. Businessman Bob cares about the bottom line. If Apple can provide solid software solutions, a more stable OS, and can prove that using a Mac is more productive (it is and has been proven) and cheaper in the long run (that has been proven too) then he doesn't care. The biggest issue is the control of Windows in the market, and Apple is doing fine with this. I think we'll see the biggest issue is increase of speed on Apple for the price. There are many that are ready to move over, and I think we'll see an increase of marketshare this year with the eMac leading the lower-end.
Apple needs to offer something cheap that Businessman Bob couldn't possibly look at and say, "wow, that's ugly". The eMac and iMac to Businessman Bob are ugly because they don't look like a computer should and because bob doesn't have the ability to understand that their beauty stems from their fantastic functionality. Bob can't possibly dislike a small tower.
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
The shipping is inconsequential because Apple has a contract on it, so they pretty much pay the same no matter what, so axe that assumption.
Fair enough. It was just a guess
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
BTW, what kind of video output should the xStation come with? If you want to accomodate you using whatever display you want than you'll need to have at least an ADC - which means you'll need to buy a converter to get it to VGA or DVI. If you want to include them all then you just raised the price, you didn't lower it.
ADC and DVI ports on the card, with a DVI to VGA adapter in the box. Apple includes these with a lot of their computers, including the iBook. No reason it couldn't be included here.
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
And if you want to have a pizza box able to use a great variety of chips then the cost of engineering a solid case would be enormous - because you have to accomodate everyone. It really means that creating a pizza box will cost more, and lose the company money for the price you want to sell it at.
Just assure the case is large enough to cool the fastest single processor G5 available alongside the fastest graphics card available and you're set. Again, I'm not imagining this xStation quite as small as others are. Just a baby tower.
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
Scalability is not important to most people, that's why they buy non-scalable machines from Dell, eMachines, and everyone else. Power users want it, and they'll pay more. That's why they'd buy a G4 or G5 tower. I've talked to dozens of people about switching to Apple and all love the iMac and eMac - none have complained. All are average users that don't care about what us nerds care about.
It's not so much the scalability that I'm concerned with as I am the ability to start with a cheap machine and work my way up comfortably, slowly convincing myself to add this feature and that feature to my computer which started out dirt cheap. Let's say I'm a PC User and I walk into the Apple Store because I saw an ad for their $799 eMac. All right, I see the thing but I want a fast processor and a fast graphics card so I can play games. Then, the Apple rep tells me I can't customize it. If I want the best graphics card I've got to look at the Powermac G5's, which start at $2,000 and that still doesn't include the fastest graphics card I can buy. That's when I go home and order a Dell.
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
You're not right. Apple isn't stupid. Knowing some people who have worked in Cupertino, Apple has done plenty of research into building what you're talking about, but the interest has always been shown as minimal and not worth the risk. They'd have to spend millions to design the box, design motherboards for it, and find a way to cool it, then they'd have to market it. I used to think something like this was needed, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that it was unnecessary. A redesign of the eMac and iMac (with an upgrade to G5)n will increase Apple's sales greatly next year - the pizza box would only confuse their lineup and take away sales from a new iMac -- which I'm sure will be gorgeous, more beautiful than the current iteration.
This box doesn't contain anything that couldn't be found in every Mac Apple sells. Of all of Apple's computer products, this xStation would most likely require the least amount of design and engineering, as all the work would have already been done for the Powermacs. Having said all this, I greatly look forward to the next generation of iMacs, and hope to purchase a replacement for this flat-panel iMac in the coming months. I'm not interested in this xStation thing for myself - it's for all the PC users that surround me
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
The biggest sellers are the most expensive Macs!!!
This is commonly stated, but poorly understood. The reason that the more expensive macs tend to outsell the cheaper ones is that the mac buyer has already decided to buy a mac (for a host of reasons)
The general computer buyer on a budget first chooses a price and then shops for a machine. When that price falls on the absolutely miserable low end AIO's that Apple offers, then obviously the majority of those buyers buy similarly priced PC's that offer a far more for the same price.
Overall, the iMac is not doing well with consumers, even though it may be doing marvelously well with "boutique" type buyers.
If Apple can't get the AIO prices WAY WAY DOWN, things are only going to get worse. It isn't an insular world of mac buyers (nor of PC buyers) plenty of people in either camp would switch to the machine that offers the price/specs they're after.
Originally posted by Cory Bauer
I'm well aware of the G5's heatsink size, and that it wouldn't work in anything smaller at this time. Obviously the G5 is going to come down in size and get cooler, and that's the time that I see something like this hitting the market. When they can put a G5 in the iMac, they'd certainly be able to put a G5 into this xStation we're discussing. As far as the graphics card goes, I don't think I'm imagining this xStation as small as others here are. What I invision is essentially what you'd have left if you took the G5 case and cut out all the excessive space required for PCI slots, additional drive expandibility, and those enormous heatsinks. Let's say two Mac OS X Panther boxes stuck side by side - that seems doable. As far as limiting configurations, this xStation wouldn't offer any combination of components that you couldn't find in Apple's other products. Same processors, same graphics cards, same hard drives, etc.
I still say that is too small. I believe a tower could be smaller than the current G4 PowerMac form factor, but the size of two Panther boxes won't take a 90nm G5, not at 2GHZ - unless liquid cooling is installed, but that won't decrease cost, it'll increase it. The iMac may get one, but this is a redesigned iMac, not the current form. If we have an single G5 iMac and a single PowerMac G5 available, there is not need for a xStation G5. In fact, if one exists it will just pull people away from these products - products that Apple has spent lots of jack developing. I'd like to see the price at $1799 for a single G5 PowerMac, and about the same for an iMac. Both would address this need and make everyone happy.
Apple needs to offer something cheap that Businessman Bob couldn't possibly look at and say, "wow, that's ugly". The eMac and iMac to Businessman Bob are ugly because they don't look like a computer should and because bob doesn't have the ability to understand that their beauty stems from their fantastic functionality. Bob can't possibly dislike a small tower.
That would be the PowerMac G4. They're $1299 now. I see no reason they can't start a little lower and even allow for dual G4s up the line. I also think they could use the same G4 form factor (mirror doors) and maybe create a smaller as well with a single drive bay. I think we pretty much agree here, but I still so no need to develop a brand new box when Apple has already got something they can use, and that will save money.
Fair enough. It was just a guess
Never hurts to try to see where Apple can cut costs. Shipping may go up or down soon as they renegotiate their contract. I know about the Airborne Express deal because of talking to some Apple guys and to AirBorne Express when I got my iBook back from Apple. The shipping company gets a guaranteed amount of $$$ from Apple yearly for shipping.
ADC and DVI ports on the card, with a DVI to VGA adapter in the box. Apple includes these with a lot of their computers, including the iBook. No reason it couldn't be included here.
I have an iBook, and these don't come with ADC, DVI adapters. I have a mini-VGA jack and a plug that turns it into a standard VGA jack; that's it. The Powerbooks come with adapters for DVI to VGA and have DVI built-in. The 15" and greater have s-video jacks and come with s-video to composite adapters. Of course, the PowerBooks start at $1599. No low end Apple comes with those kind of adapters. The iBook uses standard VGA cabling, as does the eMac. I believe the iMac uses a digital connection to its LCD. To include ADC and DVI capability would only increase cost, as would including a DVI-to-VGA adapter. The cheap alternative would be to use only VGA at that kind of a low cost. I'd only include DVI in models above $1000.
Just assure the case is large enough to cool the fastest single processor G5 available alongside the fastest graphics card available and you're set. Again, I'm not imagining this xStation quite as small as others are. Just a baby tower.
As I stated, I don't see the need. We'll have a G4 tower, we'll have a G5 PowerMac - where's the need?
It's not so much the scalability that I'm concerned with as I am the ability to start with a cheap machine and work my way up comfortably, slowly convincing myself to add this feature and that feature to my computer which started out dirt cheap. Let's say I'm a PC User and I walk into the Apple Store because I saw an ad for their $799 eMac. All right, I see the thing but I want a fast processor and a fast graphics card so I can play games. Then, the Apple rep tells me I can't customize it. If I want the best graphics card I've got to look at the Powermac G5's, which start at $2,000 and that still doesn't include the fastest graphics card I can buy. That's when I go home and order a Dell.
Well, if someone wants to play games, they're best to stick with the PC anyways. The Macs don't currently have anywhere near as strong a base in games. If Apple can lure more ports that are good, then they should offer the options. I'd like to see another option on the eMac for graphics cards -and I think that'll come. Rumors persist of greater expandability on future eMacs and iMacs, so that might solve the problem without having to muddle the picture. Oh, and you can still buy a PowerMac G4 1.25 for $1299 and go buy a nice AGP card if you want.
This box doesn't contain anything that couldn't be found in every Mac Apple sells. Of all of Apple's computer products, this xStation would most likely require the least amount of design and engineering, as all the work would have already been done for the Powermacs. Having said all this, I greatly look forward to the next generation of iMacs, and hope to purchase a replacement for this flat-panel iMac in the coming months. I'm not interested in this xStation thing for myself - it's for all the PC users that surround me
I can understand that. I'd like to see more people switch too, but I'm not too sure that $599 is reachable without damaging Apple's overall price structure; that structure is important to maintaining Apple's R & D budget and keeping them way ahead of everyone else. Here's the heirarchy I imagine:
PowerMac G5 -- Top dog
iMac G5 -- prosumer machine, nice AIO design for good balance of performance, convenience and space.
PowerMac G4 -- hopefully renamed -- slight redesign, G4s with even dual configuration and AGP graphics, PCI slots, etc.
eMac -- redesigned with an LCD sometime next year since the G5 differentiates the iMac quite a bit. G4s until a G6 goes into the iMac or G5 goes above 2GHZ in the iMac.
I think that lineup gives users plenty of options. Someone who only cares about what they're paying for a machine won't appreciate the finer things Apple brings nor the integration in the OS. These things are also worth money. iLife is an amazing suite. A future version of Appleworks could compete with Office and may come with new machines. There are benefits to owning a Mac that make me willing to pay a little more. I don't think Apple wants to attract those crowds. Nor do they want to do what Dell does because they don't sell their machines exclusively. When you have to provide for distribution channels you can't offer all those configurations, not can you offer the cheap prices. You've got to give profits to your retailers because you're not the only reseller. Comparisons to Dell are not good ones. Check out the variety you get at Best Buy and CompUSA. Very little because of the retail channels. Apple has to deal with that. They do offer some configuration at the store online, but the limitations allow for more cost control.
Originally posted by Matsu
This is commonly stated, but poorly understood. The reason that the more expensive macs tend to outsell the cheaper ones is that the mac buyer has already decided to buy a mac (for a host of reasons)
The general computer buyer on a budget first chooses a price and then shops for a machine. When that price falls on the absolutely miserable low end AIO's that Apple offers, then obviously the majority of those buyers buy similarly priced PC's that offer a far more for the same price.
Overall, the iMac is not doing well with consumers, even though it may be doing marvelously well with "boutique" type buyers.
If Apple can't get the AIO prices WAY WAY DOWN, things are only going to get worse. It isn't an insular world of mac buyers (nor of PC buyers) plenty of people in either camp would switch to the machine that offers the price/specs they're after.
No they don't. Trust me, in another year PC prices will go way, way up. And people who just shop for price shouldn't buy a Mac anyways. I have gotten over two dozen people to buy Macs in the last 6 months because they were convinced by the Mac's ease-of-use and integration. You win people buy educating them, not buy entering the "let's price eachother out of business" fray of the PC industry. I also disagree that the eMac is crummy. I think it is a nice machine. For $1100 bucks I can edit my own movies and burn DVDs while connecting to the internet and being able to do everything the average computer user needs to do. I also don't have to hassle with pricing out monitors or deal with configuring something I don't understand (meaning the average computer user), so I don't get suckered into buying what I don't need.
Dell suckered a couple departments at my university into upgrading their little boxes to 2.4 GHZ P4s with 64MB nVidia chips, and 80GB HDDs - all for labs meant for email, internet, and word processing. The eMac, by its very design, is not meant to sucker you into getting what you don't need. It's cheaper than the Dells we bought.
Currently the Dell Dimension 2400 with Celeron 2.4GHZ is $629 with a DVD burner and 17" monitor, and one year warranty. Nice price, right? But wait, the memory is generic, the video and audio are integrated and use shared memory. The DVD burner is not the greatest of quality either. Essentially, we've managed to build a cheap PC with cheap parts and low quality. We also end up having a box, external speakers, and a big monitor - and this is all direct from the manufacturer who doesn't have to adjust prices for retail distribution. I also will have to wait two weeks for shipping and literally have to go through hundreds of little radio buttons because there are too many choices. I'm a guy who's worked in the industry and I'd still take the eMac. It doesn't have integrated video. It doesn't use cheap RAM. I don't have wires everywhere AND I get iLife, and good quality SuperDrive, and Mac OSX. Because I'm educated, I know this is a better deal. Too many people decide what to buy by the least expensive. This is silly to do in the computer industry, and its best Apple not cater to them. Educating people and getting Apple products out there will bring yields, as will the increase in PC prices as companies go bankrupt. In two years time there will likely only be a couple of PC manufacturers left and lack of direction in that market as the x86 begins to be phased out and AMD attempts to move PC users towards the PowerPC. I trust Apple here. They have longterm vision and are concerned with the longterm picture, not the shortterm. They'll maintain margins that are the envy of the computer industry. They will continue to innovate and make all other manufacturers look inferior and archaic. And when the prices go up on the other side and Intel begins to fail, they'll be ready to take over a larger share of the market. BTW, watch their marketshare grow in 2004. It will happen.
The Dell offers more features, at the price, period. And you've built the cheapest piece of scrap computer, Apple doesn't even have anything in that range. If you build a 1000 USD desktop PC, you build an excellent machine that outclasses the eMac in every way. Apple can't sell low end AIO's for that very simple reason -- Customers in the 1000 USD cutoff can't get very much to recommend an Apple desktop to them.
I've rarely argued that Apple has to produce bargain basement machines -- only the original gumdrop in fact, which could have easily been lowered to 500 USD and sold as an impulse buy -- but, if Apple is going to price a machine 900-1200 dollars then it better compete with other machines in the 900-1200 range.
Your contention that PC prices will go way up is equally ludicrous, just as the entry level PC made rapid and dramatic drops in price over the last 2 years, so has the fully featured home desktop. When I had to pick up a desktop (for work) I bought an HP. It has been 100% reliable. For the price of a mid level eMac (in Canada) I got a machine with a 17" LCD, (compared to a horrible CRT), DVD+CDRW+6-in1-card reader (versus combo drive), All the same I/O except the HP also had USB2 (at the time neither the eMac nor iMac did), 120GB HDD vs 40/60 in the eMac, 512MB DDR-RAM, vs 256 in the eMac, 64MB 8X AGP nVidia5200 vs GF2MX of the then eMac (32MB, 2X AGP) And I have open bays for 2 more HDD's and I can swap out the opticals/Gfx card or add PCI cards without difficulty. Even my video is not crippled, and If I choose to I can just buy and span a second monitor without any iffy hacks.
I was ready to give a desktop mac a try, use mac Office (and Virtual PC to clean up any loose ends). I'm typing this on a 12"PB because, at the time of purchase, it was the best computer for the price (in it's segment), the eMac/iMac, however, weren't even close.
It's rather sad that Apple can get it so right when building laptops but still hasn't figured it out on the consumer desktop end.
Originally posted by Matsu
That's completely wrong. How is a 629 Dell not cheaper than a 1100 eMac? Because it sells you stuff you don't need ??? Hello, anybody home?
I never said the eMac was cheaper. I said it had better quality components. I also said that Apple doesn't do only direct sellings, so they have to build in profits not only for themselves but for retailers as well. They also have to build in costs for a large R&D budget that gives you stuff like the iPod.
The Dell offers more features, at the price, period. And you've built the cheapest piece of scrap computer, Apple doesn't even have anything in that range. If you build a 1000 USD desktop PC, you build an excellent machine that outclasses the eMac in every way. Apple can't sell low end AIO's for that very simple reason -- Customers in the 1000 USD cutoff can't get very much to recommend an Apple desktop to them.
And the $1000 machine still uses bad, generic parts. Once you introduce cheap parts, your whole product line becomes infected. Dell will use anything that is cheaper to increase their margins because they are so, so low. Having been a Systems Analyst and dealing with these things on a day to day basis side by side with an assortment of eMacs, iMacs (CRT and LCD), and PowerMacs (G3s and G4s, up to mirrored doors) I can tell you that the Macs are far more reliable. They break less. Last year I had to order 150 of those far superior $1000 Dells. Within 3 months 60% had failed, and it took 2 months to get Dell to finally get all working onces again - and by that time another 10 machines had failed. If you think features are more important that build quality, great. Our failure rate for the Macs over a one year period was at 2%. I left to go back to school, but still keep in contact. The Dells are now all gone, replaced by more expensive iMacs and eMacs that have proven to be of a higher quality and lower failure rate. The school I attend, the 13th largest in the nation, regrets ever switching over to Dell and plans to switch back to Apple after their lease is up. Maybe that Dell offers nice configurations isn't enough. Hmmm, maybe that's why they've entered consumer electronics - they don't see a future in the PC industry.
I've rarely argued that Apple has to produce bargain basement machines -- only the original gumdrop in fact, which could have easily been lowered to 500 USD and sold as an impulse buy -- but, if Apple is going to price a machine 900-1200 dollars then it better compete with other machines in the 900-1200 range.
I agree but think the biggest problem here has not been Apple's but has been Motorola's. Once processor speeds scale at a reasonable rate we'll see greater speeds in lower end models. Even now, however, the Mac has got one thing Intel can't touch, and that's OS X. And, to correct, the low-end eMac is $799 with a 1GHZ G4. I'd like to see memory and bus speed increase, but that's not Apple's doing, they've been limited by Moto here.
Your contention that PC prices will go way up is equally ludicrous, just as the entry level PC made rapid and dramatic drops in price over the last 2 years, so has the fully featured home desktop. When I had to pick up a desktop (for work) I bought an HP. It has been 100% reliable. For the price of a mid level eMac (in Canada) I got a machine with a 17" LCD, (compared to a horrible CRT), DVD+CDRW+6-in1-card reader (versus combo drive), All the same I/O except the HP also had USB2 (at the time neither the eMac nor iMac did), 120GB HDD vs 40/60 in the eMac, 512MB DDR-RAM, vs 256 in the eMac, 64MB 8X AGP nVidia5200 vs GF2MX of the then eMac (32MB, 2X AGP) And I have open bays for 2 more HDD's and I can swap out the opticals/Gfx card or add PCI cards without difficulty. Even my video is not crippled, and If I choose to I can just buy and span a second monitor without any iffy hacks.
Gateway is leaving the PC fray next year. HP/Compaq are leaving the consumer market by the end of next year. Sony is getting ready for an exit. eMachines will not survive for all that much longer. That leaves very few left. The PC industry represents the best and worst of a capitalist system. The prices we have now are nice for consumers, but the price wars are killing the corporations that have engaged in them, hoping to gain a larger marketshare. Basic economics rules are these: whatever goes up must come down and whatever goes down must go up. Anyone who think that prices won't be going up in the near future is ignorant in regards to market fluctuations and the reality of how pricing works. How did the Japanese gain such a large marketshare? The sold stuff for cheap, lost money and, once most of the competition was eliminated, jacked up their prices. The days of cheap PCs will be over by 2005. Heck, the days of PCs may be winding down at that point as the Itanium vs. PPC wars heat up and the x86 is put to rest. But increased prices are a stone cold lock.
I was ready to give a desktop mac a try, use mac Office (and Virtual PC to clean up any loose ends). I'm typing this on a 12"PB because, at the time of purchase, it was the best computer for the price (in it's segment), the eMac/iMac, however, weren't even close.
I can agree here, but, once again, not Apple's fault. They've had a limited number of CPUs available to them that they've had to find a way to differentiate products. There'll be a much stronger lineup come summer of next year.
It's rather sad that Apple can get it so right when building laptops but still hasn't figured it out on the consumer desktop end.
Strange, but all your arguments apply to laptops too. Maybe you do not attack because you need to rationalize the purchase?
Originally posted by Amorph
This just in from the analyst meeting: Steve answered a question about low-end desktops, and he answered that the data says that, increasingly, they're being replaced with low-end notebooks.
Apple executives and Amorph make an excellent argument. Customers looking to buy low-end desktops increasingly end up buying low-end notebooks. Case in point, me:
I bought my last Mac desktop, a Color Classic, in 1993. In the fall of 1994, I bought a PowerBook 520c and never looked back. I've been a PowerBook/iBook user ever since. I currently use in iBook (Dual USB). Then, I recently became a "mixer" and got a Wintel box with a 17" LCD. An $800 headless iMac would be a perfect addition since I already have the LCD.
However, I am going to get a 12-inch PowerBook, which I will use as a desktop with the LCD, and as a notebook on its own. Sure it'll be a bit more expensive. But as with the PowerBook Duo of old, I'll get the best of both worlds. If only Apple made a Duo-style Dock for the 12-inch PowerBook! (I'm actually planning on building my own Dock in the coming months. It's a feature I really want.)
Escher
If you're going to compare Dells in an institutional setting to the macs you use at home, well, sure the Dells will seem like clunkers. However, I've seen more than my share of mac labs that were also in total disarray -- not just software/systems side neglect, but outright hardware failure, bad displays, broken components, hardware that won't boot. Stuff in certain labs tends to get neglected after a while. If the PC's are set up right, they tend to work right, ditto the macs.
As for rationalizing? No, I don't think so. When I bought the PB, one of the first available 12" 867's, there wasn't a heck of a lot of PC competition, but there were a few models even then that were worth a try. Apple was in the game though, not the outright best for all purposes, but very good, and, to my mind, the best for anyone looking for a reliable compact machine. Today, if I were buying a laptop, I think the iBooks get the nod as the best value going, not for all buyers, but they compete. I'd consider one over my PB12, if I was in the market today. It's about what's the best at the time you're buying, nothing more. You'll have a hard time arguing that the e/iMacs are the best anything going. You can make a GREAT case for the iBooks and high end (G5) workstations in their respective segments. You can also make a very good case for the PB's (depending on use). The AIOs are pretty weak at the price, and that's that.
g4 powermac
$1299
1.25 g4
256 RAM
80 GB hard drive
DVD/Combo drive
firewire and usb 1
Radeon 9000 64 mb
PCV-RS420
$1149
2.8 p4 with hyper-threading
512 RAM
120 GB hard drive
dvd +/- rw
cd-rom
2 firewire/8 usb 2.0
ATI RADEON 9200LE 8X 64MB
So I am Joe Consumer: for $150 less I can get a dual format DVD burner, 2x RAM, 40GB harddrive and Sony's picturegear/click2DVD and movie software for my movies. Why buy an overpriced apple.
Does not fit in very well. And the all-in-ones fair pretty similar in head to head comparisons.
Apple does not need to be the cheapest, but just similar in price. The g4 tower should realistically start at $999.
Second, the major problem with the ever talked about Apple utility box is that a low price seems to promote consumer and Apple has a serious problem with the idea of consumers plugging in all sorts of undoubtedly crumby displays into a beautiful Apple machine. Not only that, but the Apple consumer computer is supposed to be elemental in its ease of set-up and operation. There's no way to even remotely ensure color accuracy if people are using cheap monitors. Also, ergonomically, it is tasteless to have all sorts of cables running every which way and Apple wants to minimize that sort of thing. These are not problems for the PowerMac since a pro at least should be using a quality display and at least should have no trouble setting up a display. Pros also usally have so many cables stuffed behind their desks that two more won't matter. There's also no way in hell a cheap box could or should have a slot-loading drive in it.
I'm not saying that Apple should not build such a box. I just think that it should only be available to business and education customers and focus on reliability and simplicity rather than speed or upgradibility.
I propose the following: A super-slim, up or down pizza box with no expansion slots, integrated graphics, and a tray-loading cd-rom. Basically, a G4 ibook motherboard with a full size hard drive and cd-rom drive. Corporations usually don't upgrade hard drives and graphics cards..that's typically consumers who need more storage for photos and music and better graphics for games. The inclusion of an expansion slot not only drives up the price, but would also encourage pros to use these as utility servers and second-tier workstations. Integrated graphics because this machine is suppsed to be for checking email, surfing the web, and typing documents, not playing Unreal Tournament. A configuration like this is actually possible at $500.