The major issue with the iMac is price. It has been since the G4 iMac debuted. The old iMac was a great deal; the new one... not so much.
When the G4 iMac first came out, it was an amazing deal. I remember people saying how it made the G4 towers look silly, as it was not much less powerful, and much cheaper. Pretty much in those days, you would only want to get a tower if you really, really needed the PCI slots or a separate monitor.
The iMac still has an amazing design. If they can get a G5 in it, it will be a great machine again.
When the G4 iMac first came out, it was an amazing deal. I remember people saying how it made the G4 towers look silly, as it was not much less powerful, and much cheaper. Pretty much in those days, you would only want to get a tower if you really, really needed the PCI slots or a separate monitor.
The iMac still has an amazing design. If they can get a G5 in it, it will be a great machine again.
That is part of the problem. It is only a good deal when it first comes out. That is a problem inherent in the design. It cannot be updated fast enough to keep up with the changing times. When the original iMac first came out, a budget PC was $1500 - $1700. Not, it's $500 - $800. The reality has changed but the product hasn't. At the time the new iMac was released, an 80 GB HD was OK for the low end. Now, the low end needs 120 GB. The same with every other spec. It simply can't keep pace which pretty much guarantees it will be out of step with the current reality for most of its life-span. That will not change by putting a G5 in it. Again, it will be awesome for about three months.
I guess many of you want an AIO where Apple can dictate what size of screen you need to buy.
I want choice.
Maybe I want a lower end configuration but a larger screen.
Then get a G4 tower. They are still available.
I agree though that a good portion of Apple's untapped enterprise market would like a small, low cost, decent performing system. Not a reason for the iMac to go away, though.
i love the LCD iMac and always have. sitting in front of one is still my very favorite computing experience, and i sit in front of them a lot (my GF has one, the lab here at school has the 17" version). not sure what it is, but something about the iMac experience would keep me in front of one whenever possible.
that said, i own an eMac! on my grad student budget, i couldn't justify the price/performance gap on the iMac line. I bought a used 1ghz eMac for around $650 back in October (okay, i traded for it, but $650 is the approximate value of what i traded), when at the time even an 800mhz iMac was around $950-$1000.
i guess that $300 wouldn't matter if i had the money, since i love the iMac so much. i, for one, would be very very sad to see the current form of iMac die.
That is part of the problem. It is only a good deal when it first comes out. That is a problem inherent in the design. It cannot be updated fast enough to keep up with the changing times. When the original iMac first came out, a budget PC was $1500 - $1700. Not, it's $500 - $800. The reality has changed but the product hasn't. At the time the new iMac was released, an 80 GB HD was OK for the low end. Now, the low end needs 120 GB. The same with every other spec. It simply can't keep pace which pretty much guarantees it will be out of step with the current reality for most of its life-span. That will not change by putting a G5 in it. Again, it will be awesome for about three months.
The problem is that for 2 years Apple has updated the internals of the computer once a year, and added a monitor size for a mid-year update. The computer no longer offers the value that the original did, and I would dare to say it is not designed/marketed with the same philosophy that the original iMac was. The original iMac offered a computer with near professional speed, in fact the high end iMacs kept pace with or surpassed the speed of the low end tower's. Other specs followed the PM's, but with regular updates that kept them more competitive than the G4 iMac is today.
At the same time Apple has not been about to lower the entry price of the G4 iMac, a problem that they have acknowledged. This may or may not be able to be fixed. 15" LCD prices have not fallen much, if at all in the last 12 months, so that is a limiting factor. The way I see it, the iMac G4 has fallen prey to the same marketing failures that the Cube did, though for different reasons...great design that doesn't sell due to high price. I would love to have a 17" or 20" display, but for the price (if I could afford one today) I would rather buy a G5 PM. I just couldn't justify spending that much money on a "throw-a-way" computer. At least with the PM/monitor purchase I could use the monitor with my next CPU purchase.
i, for one, would be very very sad to see the current form of iMac die.
Don't worry. I think it will only get better and cheaper over the next couple of years. I expect Apple is working very hard on refining the design so it can be manufactured for less money. Fred Anderson all but said so.
Don't worry. I think it will only get better and cheaper over the next couple of years. I expect Apple is working very hard on refining the design so it can be manufactured for less money. Fred Anderson all but said so.
I hope so. Can Apple re-invent the way we look at computers again like it has done with both iMac generations? Can they perhaps create a hybrid AIO/tower machine?
It boggles the mind to imagine Apple being able to retain all the attributes of the current iMac with it's ergonomic swivel screen, small footprint and then also add expandibility! That is one tall order.
I don't know what it means to the AIO, which should still find a place as a lab/edu/den/counter-top machine, but the console as home computer is coming.
The display tech to make it work is finally here.
There's a 1920x1080 DLP chip coming out this year. In 4-5 years a 3 chip set will deliver stunning large pictures in a cheap slim cabinet -- great clarity and precision, amazing viewing angle.
You won't just be able to use a data grade resolution on your "TV", you'll actually want to.
I don't know what it means to the AIO, which should still find a place as a lab/edu/den/counter-top machine, but the console as home computer is coming.
The display tech to make it work is finally here.
There's a 1920x1080 DLP chip coming out this year. In 4-5 years a 3 chip set will deliver stunning large pictures in a cheap slim cabinet -- great clarity and precision, amazing viewing angle.
You won't just be able to use a data grade resolution on your "TV", you'll actually want to.
I doubt we'll see 3 chip sets in "normal" consumer level hardware. More likely we'll see big improvements to 1 chip DLP/LCOS setups. Even at the current 1280x720 resolution, however, the current digital displays are very usable. The main issues are user input (do people want a keyboard in front of the TV), and the kind of work being done on the computer. I don't see the console & computer merging -- instead I think we'll see some functions stripped from the computer and moved to the console. Look at how weak the PC (and Mac even more so) game market is now compared to the current console market. This doesn't invalidate the existance of the PC/Mac, it just refocuses some of its attention.
The original iMac offered a computer with near professional speed, in fact the high end iMacs kept pace with or surpassed the speed of the low end tower's. Other specs followed the PM's, but with regular updates that kept them more competitive than the G4 iMac is today.
I think we often forget one important detail when we talk about performance of the iMac. The original iMac was G3-based, and if I am not mistaken, this processor had not the scaling nor the supply nor the power issues the G4 and G5 have. Simply Apple had no choice. When they upgrade a machine with a high clock frequency, they have to do it in bigger jumps to preserve an acceptable performance boost. Example:
going from G3@233 MHz to G3@266 MHz is a 14.2% increase (difference 33 MHz in clock speed); but to give a 14.2% increase in a 1 GHz machine, you have to go to 1.142 GHz (difference 142 Mhz in clock speed). And we know how well the G4 scaled .
The G5 on the other hand, has in its first generation very high power requirements. The second generation is of much lower power, as we know, but where is it? Yield issues here. Still waiting. IBM is hard at work to improve the processor yields, they said recently they have improvements but they are not yet at the point they wish to be. So, what do you expect Apple to do when the processor landscape is like that? Jump on the x86 train ?
I doubt we'll see 3 chip sets in "normal" consumer level hardware. More likely we'll see big improvements to 1 chip DLP/LCOS setups. Even at the current 1280x720 resolution, however, the current digital displays are very usable. The main issues are user input (do people want a keyboard in front of the TV), and the kind of work being done on the computer. I don't see the console & computer merging -- instead I think we'll see some functions stripped from the computer and moved to the console. Look at how weak the PC (and Mac even more so) game market is now compared to the current console market. This doesn't invalidate the existance of the PC/Mac, it just refocuses some of its attention.
You may not want to work on your office docs in front of the TV, but surfing from the couch would be possible without any special browser that reformats pages for limited (and fuzzy) analogue resolutions. Think WebTV, but good. Same with email messages. iMovie and iPhoto shows would be great. I could see that someone working on movies/DVD projects may actually want to see the project in HDTV as the work on it, just like some people "proof" on an NTSC set these days.
TI owns the technology and they may keep it expensive untill such a time that a competinag product forces their hand, but the low cost potential of DLP is immense. 1-3 small chips should be cheaper to make and package than even small notebook sized panels. Not yet, but eventually. Hell, I could see a DLP based AIO in the distant future. Imagine a 30"+ DLP based eMac/iMac. The cabinet would only have to be 6-8" deep at that size, there's no danger of burn-in, and even today it could probably be cheaper than a 30" panel. The LCD has a certain cachet, but DLP performs very well and can match it in large screen applications -- at a much lower cost.
If we're going to do some long range speculation on the future of the AIO. I'll put forward a large 30" plus DLP based consumer machine that is equally at home on the desktop, or disguised as a high end B&O looking "TV"
I hope so. Can Apple re-invent the way we look at computers again like it has done with both iMac generations? Can they perhaps create a hybrid AIO/tower machine?
It boggles the mind to imagine Apple being able to retain all the attributes of the current iMac with it's ergonomic swivel screen, small footprint and then also add expandibility! That is one tall order.
Not really too difficult. Basically, expand the iMac to a more conducive form factor for expanding, and make that swing arm/screen detachable and add an AGP or PCI-Express video card. More cost involved with the attachment, but hey, you could add whatever display you wanted to, if you would rather not shell out whatever "extra" would be for the Apple Swing Arm Display. Of course, the AIO could still be bought with the Swing Arm Display included or as an option. There are ways...
You may not want to work on your office docs in front of the TV, but surfing from the couch would be possible without any special browser that reformats pages for limited (and fuzzy) analogue resolutions. Think WebTV, but good. Same with email messages. iMovie and iPhoto shows would be great. I could see that someone working on movies/DVD projects may actually want to see the project in HDTV as the work on it, just like some people "proof" on an NTSC set these days.
Agreed. My point was merely that this is only some of a PC/Mac's applications.
Quote:
TI owns the technology and they may keep it expensive untill such a time that a competinag product forces their hand, but the low cost potential of DLP is immense. 1-3 small chips should be cheaper to make and package than even small notebook sized panels. Not yet, but eventually. Hell, I could see a DLP based AIO in the distant future. Imagine a 30"+ DLP based eMac/iMac. The cabinet would only have to be 6-8" deep at that size, there's no danger of burn-in, and even today it could probably be cheaper than a 30" panel. The LCD has a certain cachet, but DLP performs very well and can match it in large screen applications -- at a much lower cost.
The potential for LCOS is quite considerable and building those chips will be a lot cheaper than building the micromachines that DLP uses. LCD is fairly weak by comparison, in my opinion.
Quote:
If we're going to do some long range speculation on the future of the AIO. I'll put forward a large 30" plus DLP based consumer machine that is equally at home on the desktop, or disguised as a high end B&O looking "TV"
I don't know that DLP/LCOS is ever going to get thin enough to want to sit on my desk (I just got rid of the damn monster CRTs, after all!). In this arena direct LCD has a big advantage. At an RPTV, however, I agree with you.
This is right on the money. Every AI member should just read this post over and over until it finally sinks in. I'm looking at you, geekmeet
Amen. We can keep the iMac AIO as long is there is a tower/desktop/cube in the $1000-1500 price range with new components and reasonablt performance. None of this BS about getting a powermac g4. For $700 you get a tower with a DVD-burner on the PC side. I want a $1200 superdrive equipped mac where I can pick my own monitor!
...We can keep the iMac AIO as long is there is a tower/desktop/cube in the $1000-1500 price range with new components and reasonable performance...I want a $1200 superdrive equipped mac where I can pick my own monitor!
That would be nice but somehow I feel it's not gonna happen. Perhaps Apple will bring back the Cube someday when cool G5 chips are plentiful. It WAS a really nice computer.
If you want the same internals as a PowerMac, and presumably you want a G5 in there, then why don't you just get a PowerMac?
I think it's typical of spec whores, they want all the features and they want it cheap!
Can you blame them?
I'd be very pleased if Apple introduced a new cube-like Mac with a pretty quick G5, and no expansion capability other than memory, bluetooth and airport, for about $1000. Most people would whine that it's not as cheap as an expandable wintel PC. Thing is, expansion isn't really needed these days, with few exceptions.
Basically what you would have is what you get with an iMac, sans display. And, it would probably be nice and quiet, unlike most Power Macs.
Comments
Originally posted by spankalee
The major issue with the iMac is price. It has been since the G4 iMac debuted. The old iMac was a great deal; the new one... not so much.
When the G4 iMac first came out, it was an amazing deal. I remember people saying how it made the G4 towers look silly, as it was not much less powerful, and much cheaper. Pretty much in those days, you would only want to get a tower if you really, really needed the PCI slots or a separate monitor.
The iMac still has an amazing design. If they can get a G5 in it, it will be a great machine again.
I guess many of you want an AIO where Apple can dictate what size of screen you need to buy.
I want choice.
Maybe I want a lower end configuration but a larger screen.
Originally posted by CharlesS
When the G4 iMac first came out, it was an amazing deal. I remember people saying how it made the G4 towers look silly, as it was not much less powerful, and much cheaper. Pretty much in those days, you would only want to get a tower if you really, really needed the PCI slots or a separate monitor.
The iMac still has an amazing design. If they can get a G5 in it, it will be a great machine again.
That is part of the problem. It is only a good deal when it first comes out. That is a problem inherent in the design. It cannot be updated fast enough to keep up with the changing times. When the original iMac first came out, a budget PC was $1500 - $1700. Not, it's $500 - $800. The reality has changed but the product hasn't. At the time the new iMac was released, an 80 GB HD was OK for the low end. Now, the low end needs 120 GB. The same with every other spec. It simply can't keep pace which pretty much guarantees it will be out of step with the current reality for most of its life-span. That will not change by putting a G5 in it. Again, it will be awesome for about three months.
Originally posted by msantti
Apple needs a low cost machine sans monitor.
I guess many of you want an AIO where Apple can dictate what size of screen you need to buy.
I want choice.
Maybe I want a lower end configuration but a larger screen.
Then get a G4 tower. They are still available.
I agree though that a good portion of Apple's untapped enterprise market would like a small, low cost, decent performing system. Not a reason for the iMac to go away, though.
that said, i own an eMac! on my grad student budget, i couldn't justify the price/performance gap on the iMac line. I bought a used 1ghz eMac for around $650 back in October (okay, i traded for it, but $650 is the approximate value of what i traded), when at the time even an 800mhz iMac was around $950-$1000.
i guess that $300 wouldn't matter if i had the money, since i love the iMac so much. i, for one, would be very very sad to see the current form of iMac die.
Originally posted by Mac Voyer
That is part of the problem. It is only a good deal when it first comes out. That is a problem inherent in the design. It cannot be updated fast enough to keep up with the changing times. When the original iMac first came out, a budget PC was $1500 - $1700. Not, it's $500 - $800. The reality has changed but the product hasn't. At the time the new iMac was released, an 80 GB HD was OK for the low end. Now, the low end needs 120 GB. The same with every other spec. It simply can't keep pace which pretty much guarantees it will be out of step with the current reality for most of its life-span. That will not change by putting a G5 in it. Again, it will be awesome for about three months.
The problem is that for 2 years Apple has updated the internals of the computer once a year, and added a monitor size for a mid-year update. The computer no longer offers the value that the original did, and I would dare to say it is not designed/marketed with the same philosophy that the original iMac was. The original iMac offered a computer with near professional speed, in fact the high end iMacs kept pace with or surpassed the speed of the low end tower's. Other specs followed the PM's, but with regular updates that kept them more competitive than the G4 iMac is today.
At the same time Apple has not been about to lower the entry price of the G4 iMac, a problem that they have acknowledged. This may or may not be able to be fixed. 15" LCD prices have not fallen much, if at all in the last 12 months, so that is a limiting factor. The way I see it, the iMac G4 has fallen prey to the same marketing failures that the Cube did, though for different reasons...great design that doesn't sell due to high price. I would love to have a 17" or 20" display, but for the price (if I could afford one today) I would rather buy a G5 PM. I just couldn't justify spending that much money on a "throw-a-way" computer. At least with the PM/monitor purchase I could use the monitor with my next CPU purchase.
Originally posted by progmac
i, for one, would be very very sad to see the current form of iMac die.
Don't worry. I think it will only get better and cheaper over the next couple of years. I expect Apple is working very hard on refining the design so it can be manufactured for less money. Fred Anderson all but said so.
Originally posted by iDave
Don't worry. I think it will only get better and cheaper over the next couple of years. I expect Apple is working very hard on refining the design so it can be manufactured for less money. Fred Anderson all but said so.
I hope so. Can Apple re-invent the way we look at computers again like it has done with both iMac generations? Can they perhaps create a hybrid AIO/tower machine?
It boggles the mind to imagine Apple being able to retain all the attributes of the current iMac with it's ergonomic swivel screen, small footprint and then also add expandibility! That is one tall order.
The display tech to make it work is finally here.
There's a 1920x1080 DLP chip coming out this year. In 4-5 years a 3 chip set will deliver stunning large pictures in a cheap slim cabinet -- great clarity and precision, amazing viewing angle.
You won't just be able to use a data grade resolution on your "TV", you'll actually want to.
Originally posted by Matsu
I don't know what it means to the AIO, which should still find a place as a lab/edu/den/counter-top machine, but the console as home computer is coming.
The display tech to make it work is finally here.
There's a 1920x1080 DLP chip coming out this year. In 4-5 years a 3 chip set will deliver stunning large pictures in a cheap slim cabinet -- great clarity and precision, amazing viewing angle.
You won't just be able to use a data grade resolution on your "TV", you'll actually want to.
I doubt we'll see 3 chip sets in "normal" consumer level hardware. More likely we'll see big improvements to 1 chip DLP/LCOS setups. Even at the current 1280x720 resolution, however, the current digital displays are very usable. The main issues are user input (do people want a keyboard in front of the TV), and the kind of work being done on the computer. I don't see the console & computer merging -- instead I think we'll see some functions stripped from the computer and moved to the console. Look at how weak the PC (and Mac even more so) game market is now compared to the current console market. This doesn't invalidate the existance of the PC/Mac, it just refocuses some of its attention.
Originally posted by @homenow
The original iMac offered a computer with near professional speed, in fact the high end iMacs kept pace with or surpassed the speed of the low end tower's. Other specs followed the PM's, but with regular updates that kept them more competitive than the G4 iMac is today.
I think we often forget one important detail when we talk about performance of the iMac. The original iMac was G3-based, and if I am not mistaken, this processor had not the scaling nor the supply nor the power issues the G4 and G5 have. Simply Apple had no choice. When they upgrade a machine with a high clock frequency, they have to do it in bigger jumps to preserve an acceptable performance boost. Example:
going from G3@233 MHz to G3@266 MHz is a 14.2% increase (difference 33 MHz in clock speed); but to give a 14.2% increase in a 1 GHz machine, you have to go to 1.142 GHz (difference 142 Mhz in clock speed). And we know how well the G4 scaled
The G5 on the other hand, has in its first generation very high power requirements. The second generation is of much lower power, as we know, but where is it? Yield issues here. Still waiting. IBM is hard at work to improve the processor yields, they said recently they have improvements but they are not yet at the point they wish to be. So, what do you expect Apple to do when the processor landscape is like that? Jump on the x86 train
Originally posted by Programmer
I doubt we'll see 3 chip sets in "normal" consumer level hardware. More likely we'll see big improvements to 1 chip DLP/LCOS setups. Even at the current 1280x720 resolution, however, the current digital displays are very usable. The main issues are user input (do people want a keyboard in front of the TV), and the kind of work being done on the computer. I don't see the console & computer merging -- instead I think we'll see some functions stripped from the computer and moved to the console. Look at how weak the PC (and Mac even more so) game market is now compared to the current console market. This doesn't invalidate the existance of the PC/Mac, it just refocuses some of its attention.
You may not want to work on your office docs in front of the TV, but surfing from the couch would be possible without any special browser that reformats pages for limited (and fuzzy) analogue resolutions. Think WebTV, but good. Same with email messages. iMovie and iPhoto shows would be great. I could see that someone working on movies/DVD projects may actually want to see the project in HDTV as the work on it, just like some people "proof" on an NTSC set these days.
TI owns the technology and they may keep it expensive untill such a time that a competinag product forces their hand, but the low cost potential of DLP is immense. 1-3 small chips should be cheaper to make and package than even small notebook sized panels. Not yet, but eventually. Hell, I could see a DLP based AIO in the distant future. Imagine a 30"+ DLP based eMac/iMac. The cabinet would only have to be 6-8" deep at that size, there's no danger of burn-in, and even today it could probably be cheaper than a 30" panel. The LCD has a certain cachet, but DLP performs very well and can match it in large screen applications -- at a much lower cost.
If we're going to do some long range speculation on the future of the AIO. I'll put forward a large 30" plus DLP based consumer machine that is equally at home on the desktop, or disguised as a high end B&O looking "TV"
Originally posted by satchmo
I hope so. Can Apple re-invent the way we look at computers again like it has done with both iMac generations? Can they perhaps create a hybrid AIO/tower machine?
It boggles the mind to imagine Apple being able to retain all the attributes of the current iMac with it's ergonomic swivel screen, small footprint and then also add expandibility! That is one tall order.
Not really too difficult. Basically, expand the iMac to a more conducive form factor for expanding, and make that swing arm/screen detachable and add an AGP or PCI-Express video card. More cost involved with the attachment, but hey, you could add whatever display you wanted to, if you would rather not shell out whatever "extra" would be for the Apple Swing Arm Display. Of course, the AIO could still be bought with the Swing Arm Display included or as an option. There are ways...
Originally posted by Matsu
You may not want to work on your office docs in front of the TV, but surfing from the couch would be possible without any special browser that reformats pages for limited (and fuzzy) analogue resolutions. Think WebTV, but good. Same with email messages. iMovie and iPhoto shows would be great. I could see that someone working on movies/DVD projects may actually want to see the project in HDTV as the work on it, just like some people "proof" on an NTSC set these days.
Agreed. My point was merely that this is only some of a PC/Mac's applications.
TI owns the technology and they may keep it expensive untill such a time that a competinag product forces their hand, but the low cost potential of DLP is immense. 1-3 small chips should be cheaper to make and package than even small notebook sized panels. Not yet, but eventually. Hell, I could see a DLP based AIO in the distant future. Imagine a 30"+ DLP based eMac/iMac. The cabinet would only have to be 6-8" deep at that size, there's no danger of burn-in, and even today it could probably be cheaper than a 30" panel. The LCD has a certain cachet, but DLP performs very well and can match it in large screen applications -- at a much lower cost.
The potential for LCOS is quite considerable and building those chips will be a lot cheaper than building the micromachines that DLP uses. LCD is fairly weak by comparison, in my opinion.
If we're going to do some long range speculation on the future of the AIO. I'll put forward a large 30" plus DLP based consumer machine that is equally at home on the desktop, or disguised as a high end B&O looking "TV"
I don't know that DLP/LCOS is ever going to get thin enough to want to sit on my desk (I just got rid of the damn monster CRTs, after all!). In this arena direct LCD has a big advantage. At an RPTV, however, I agree with you.
and add a flange on the top of it for the Swing Arm Display to mount in:
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
This is right on the money. Every AI member should just read this post over and over until it finally sinks in. I'm looking at you, geekmeet
Amen. We can keep the iMac AIO as long is there is a tower/desktop/cube in the $1000-1500 price range with new components and reasonablt performance. None of this BS about getting a powermac g4. For $700 you get a tower with a DVD-burner on the PC side. I want a $1200 superdrive equipped mac where I can pick my own monitor!
Originally posted by jade
...We can keep the iMac AIO as long is there is a tower/desktop/cube in the $1000-1500 price range with new components and reasonable performance...I want a $1200 superdrive equipped mac where I can pick my own monitor!
That would be nice but somehow I feel it's not gonna happen. Perhaps Apple will bring back the Cube someday when cool G5 chips are plentiful. It WAS a really nice computer.
Originally posted by xsmi
Yes but that cheap tower must ahve the same internal design at least video slot, pci slots maybe less in number but same type for me to buy it.
If you want the same internals as a PowerMac, and presumably you want a G5 in there, then why don't you just get a PowerMac?
Originally posted by spankalee
If you want the same internals as a PowerMac, and presumably you want a G5 in there, then why don't you just get a PowerMac?
I think it's typical of spec whores, they want all the features and they want it cheap!
Can you blame them?
I'd be very pleased if Apple introduced a new cube-like Mac with a pretty quick G5, and no expansion capability other than memory, bluetooth and airport, for about $1000. Most people would whine that it's not as cheap as an expandable wintel PC. Thing is, expansion isn't really needed these days, with few exceptions.
Basically what you would have is what you get with an iMac, sans display. And, it would probably be nice and quiet, unlike most Power Macs.