Keynote: New iMac and headless (PowerMac) ?

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 43
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Matsu

    Shhh, don't let Apple hear you all off message, they may stop your cheques.



    Finally, an admidmission, or as close as we're ever likely to get, that the AIO is the source of Apple's difficulty with this model.




    Sorry, Matsu, but it's not very close. You'll just have to go on thinking that I'm getting checks from the Mothership.



    The odds of a headless iMac being sold: 0%. I'm positive of it.



    The odds that Apple will do something funky and unforeseen with the bundled screen: Not unlikely, if the new displays are any indication.



    Quote:

    Design a headless iMac with a power plug built in. My 7 year old PC has a socket for monitor power, it's not that hard.



    My PowerMac 8600 had one too. Those were deprecated a while ago because they're potentially hazardous. ADC was the safe way around that, because only Apple monitors supported it, so the odds that you'd plug in an out-of-spec monitor were basically nil. That's gone now, so we're back to plugging monitors into bricks, and plugging bricks into walls. There's no way around that yet, for separate displays.



    So, if anything, the retreat from ADC makes a headless iMac even less likely.



    Quote:

    Take one iMac 20" and subtract the cost of the panel. What's the worth of a headless superdrive iMac? 799.



    Introduce a widescreen 17" Al ACD at 499.




    Watch as no-one buys it, because it just got harder to buy and set up a Mac that still costs more than $999. Look at the low end offerings on any other major PC manufacturer: They're bundling monitors, not selling separately.



    Quote:

    Done. You cover all the points, you lower manufacturing costs, and also combat the perception of value proposition that keeps so many consumers away.



    You miss a few major points, and I have yet to see any evidence that this would lower manufacturing costs in aggregate (let alone shipping costs). As far as perception goes, it might get a few people in, but if they see a Mac with no monitor for the price of an entire PC system, what are they going to think? Consumers are capable of comparison and addition, especially when they're forking out this kind of money.
  • Reply 22 of 43
    gamblorgamblor Posts: 446member
    Quote:

    Look at the low end offerings on any other major PC manufacturer: They're bundling monitors, not selling separately.



    Nonsense. It's still entirely possible to by a low end PC without a monitor, even from the likes of Dell, Gateway, & HP.



    Quote:

    As far as perception goes, it might get a few people in, but if they see a Mac with no monitor for the price of an entire PC system, what are they going to think? Consumers are capable of comparison and addition, especially when they're forking out this kind of money.



    Let's see, consumers are going to notice a headless Mac costs what a PC with a monitor costs, but they're going to overlook the fact that the iMac costs twice what the PC costs? I honestly don't see why people here continue to insist on making Mac/PC price comparisons-- the Mac is always going to come out the loser. Macs will always have a 20% (or higher) price premium.
  • Reply 23 of 43
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gamblor

    Nonsense. It's still entirely possible to by a low end PC without a monitor, even from the likes of Dell, Gateway, & HP.



    That's not what I said. I said if you look at what they're offering, they're offering bundles. Of course it's possible to configure something else, but the last huge display in the nearby Staples was an entire PC system in a single (large) cardboard box, for example.



    That's what they're offering the consumer market.



    Quote:

    Let's see, consumers are going to notice a headless Mac costs what a PC with a monitor costs, but they're going to overlook the fact that the iMac costs twice what the PC costs?



    No. All I said was that Apple will gain nothing by shuffling numbers around, because the consumer will just add them back up to a too-high price. The problem is the cost of the entire PC, whether or not it's in an AIO factor.



    And an Apple premium is OK, within reason. The problem is that, for the iMac at least, it's not currently within reason. Splitting $1299 into $799 and $499 not only fails to address that very basic problem, it actually raises the price...
  • Reply 24 of 43
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,416member
    I like how you guys have read into this, even if it isn't true....



    I have a feeling apple is waiting for "cheaper" lcds. It has been rumored they were going to drop the prices on the 20" and 23" lcds.... they didn't... why? Perhaps the case? Pretty nice.



    AMorph has really good points, they are all well thought out... the iMac will be revived when its appropriate, however I seriously doubt they will put anything in there less than a g5, if they were going to do that... they would have already
  • Reply 25 of 43
    gamblorgamblor Posts: 446member
    Quote:

    That's not what I said. I said if you look at what they're offering, they're offering bundles. Of course it's possible to configure something else, but the last huge display in the nearby Staples was an entire PC system in a single (large) cardboard box, for example.



    That's what they're offering the consumer market.



    Right-- but they offer the option to buy a headless machine, which is something that Apple doesn't do for less than $1999. Sure, the people who do the "one click" purchase won't get it that way, but it's not too difficult to custom configure a low end machine at any of the major PC vendors without a monitor. That's something that Apple simply doesn't offer right now.



    Of course the majority of people in this price range are probably going to buy a monitor (which is why the bundles are offered in the first place), but at least people who don't want a monitor have an option with PCs-- they don't with Macs.



    Quote:

    No. All I said was that Apple will gain nothing by shuffling numbers around, because the consumer will just add them back up to a too-high price. The problem is the cost of the entire PC, whether or not it's in an AIO factor.



    No argument there. Apple desperately needs to improve price/performance in order to compete. They don't have to match what PCs offer, but they need to get much closer. Hopefully the G5 means we'll soon see an end to the days of half the power for twice the price, regardless of the form factor of the machine.
  • Reply 26 of 43
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gamblor

    Right-- but they offer the option to buy a headless machine, which is something that Apple doesn't do for less than $1999. Sure, the people who do the "one click" purchase won't get it that way, but it's not too difficult to custom configure a low end machine at any of the major PC vendors without a monitor. That's something that Apple simply doesn't offer right now.



    And do you know why the PC vendors do that? Because people want whole systems, so they make it as easy as possible to buy them. As an added bonus, it's easier on logistics and inventory to sell whole systems, because gluts or shortages of particular parts are much more unusual.



    The option to buy a bare machine is buried because there isn't a lot of demand for them.



    Quote:

    Of course the majority of people in this price range are probably going to buy a monitor (which is why the bundles are offered in the first place), but at least people who don't want a monitor have an option with PCs-- they don't with Macs.



    So you want Apple to offer options that hardly anyone will care about just for warm fuzzies? Keep in mind that many Mac users prefer Macs because they're relatively hassle-free (this also attracts a fair percentage of switchers), and so the percentage of Mac consumers interested in more hassle is probably even lower than it is on the PC side. Combine that with the relative size of the Mac market, and you don't have an option worth offering.



    Maybe, when Apple's the size of Dell, they can play around a little more. Right now they're running at a little better than breakeven, and they're (charitably) due for updating their flagship consumer desktop. This is not a time to lose focus. A good, solid, well-priced iMac offering will take care of the problem. The AIO form will play to Apple's strengths, and their brand recognition (which turns on elegance, simplicity, hassle-free operation - not infinite configurability).



    Quote:

    Hopefully the G5 means we'll soon see an end to the days of half the power for twice the price, regardless of the form factor of the machine.



    I'm sure that's the hope. Hell, never mind cross-platform comparisons: If the iMac could run Apple's own iApps snappily and quickly, the machine would become significantly more appealing.
  • Reply 27 of 43
    auroraaurora Posts: 1,142member
    I hate to mention this for Amorph but the way Apple is going they will never be the size of Dell. Today 3rd qtr results are suppose to be in and i think they will show that Apple has forgotten the consumers. they cater to pro's and have given up on consumers. I wouldnt be surprised at all if they hit 1% marketshare for last qtr. This is pathetic and in my eyes directly related to very poor marketing and a very poor line up and silly tier structure that tries to push people into high priced powermacs. Consumer machines should be selling at 10- 1 ratios of the pro machines but are selling at a 1-1 ratio. cupertino we have a problem. Its called the consumer line and the 1 year update cycle they have fallen into. another idea of Jobs? Make a machine that the user can configure instead of the nonsense of tier structure and crippling.
  • Reply 28 of 43
    gamblorgamblor Posts: 446member
    Quote:

    The option to buy a bare machine is buried because there isn't a lot of demand for them.



    Uh, I never denied that. I realize most people are going to want an entire system, but is that a reason to ignore everybody else? Besides, the option to dump the monitor is on the same page as all the other options-- not exactly buried. Should Apple stop selling BTO machines because most people just accept a default configuration?



    Quote:

    So you want Apple to offer options that hardly anyone will care about just for warm fuzzies?



    No, I want them to offer options because that's the kind of system that I'd actually buy. I don't want an AIO. I can't afford $2k for a new machine right now. It'll be a year before I can. On the other hand, a headless 1.8GHz G5 machine for less than $1200 (or so) would be pretty hard to resist. I don't think I'm alone in this...



    Quote:

    Maybe, when Apple's the size of Dell, they can play around a little more.



    Sorry, but unless they offer more options, they won't get to be the size of Dell. Sure, with a competitive iMac they'll certainly do better than they're doing now, but it'll only get them so far. Look at what happened last year with laptops-- Apple expands the powerbooks to three models, and their sales double year over year. I'm sure it wasn't the entire reason for the sales boost, but it's undeniable that increasing the options available to consumers played a pretty big part.
  • Reply 29 of 43
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aurora

    I hate to mention this for Amorph but the way Apple is going they will never be the size of Dell.



    Considering that they're firing on some cylinders, it's kind of hard to tell.



    After all, not even they predicted the iPod's success.



    However, the basic fallacy in your argument is that Apple's problem is that they're not shipping what everyone else is. This despite the simple fact that very few PC makers do all that well in the consumer sector either. They're all aimed at enterprise.



    I also expect Apple's results for this quarter to be fairly weak. There are two things to consider, though: First, the iMac currently costs too much for too little, even factoring in an "Apple premium." AIO or headless, $1299 is no longer a sane entry level price for a consumer system. As you point out, it's been slow to update as well. More telling for the long term is the fact that Eugene has pointed out, that except for the exceptional year 2000, Apple's sales have totalled to an essentially constant number. If one model does really well, another does poorly, and it all adds up to something in the neighborhood of 800,000 units at the end of the quarter. There's a resistance Apple has to shatter. Their "poor marketing" boils down to an inability so far to get past whatever's keeping them there. Every time they market something other than the Mac, they enjoy a great deal of success - the Apple brand has tremendous and overwhelmingly positive recognition, and of course the iPod is absolutely dominant despite the lack of any "hard-hitting" ads. In short, I don't think the problem is marketing.



    We're apparently close to an update, so we'll get to see what Apple's decided to do. I have a funny feeling they'll surprise us all, and disappoint anyone dead-set on a headless iMac.
  • Reply 30 of 43
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,416member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aurora

    I hate to mention this for Amorph but the way Apple is going they will never be the size of Dell. Today 3rd qtr results are suppose to be in and i think they will show that Apple has forgotten the consumers. they cater to pro's and have given up on consumers. I wouldnt be surprised at all if they hit 1% marketshare for last qtr. This is pathetic and in my eyes directly related to very poor marketing and a very poor line up and silly tier structure that tries to push people into high priced powermacs. Consumer machines should be selling at 10- 1 ratios of the pro machines but are selling at a 1-1 ratio. cupertino we have a problem. Its called the consumer line and the 1 year update cycle they have fallen into. another idea of Jobs? Make a machine that the user can configure instead of the nonsense of tier structure and crippling.



    Consumer machines aren't the only thing apple has fallen into a 1 year update cycle with.... just about every product they have has... ;/
  • Reply 31 of 43
    auroraaurora Posts: 1,142member
    I agree with Gamblor that Apple is missing the mark with the all in one, one size fits everyone and if it dont slap on a bigger monitor. Looking at this strategy i would think Apple is listening to only the pro users who wants the consumer to have a subpar machine as to not step on the toes of powermac. G4,Fx5200,1 upgrade memory slot, monitor forced on you is there any doubt that Apple is doing precisely this? they have alienated the consumer user and if you like to play games its 100% obvious. almost like saying to everyone(consumers) buy Powermac or you arent getting nothing but old stuff. This no way to treat the consumer. you know the ones who saved your company by buying millions of iMac crts.

    as a side note it must be stated that iMac(crt) was allready in the works before the return of ego maniac Jobs. I blame him for destroying Apple marketshare and destroying what iMac could have been.
  • Reply 32 of 43
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,416member
    Aurora,



    Destroying marketshare? Are you kidding me? Apple has more marketshare today than 6 years ago. Quit listening to "sales" market share. Because all that is, is sales quote for 1 OS... not how many people are using the computer compared to others... just new units. And it goes quarter to quarter. Fact is a mac user doesn't have to upgrade to a new machine every 8 months. So of course apple's "sales marketshare" is going to be low every month.



    As far as I'm concerned, apple has had problems this year with hardware, and that is due to their partners mainly. Apple is an all around company. They do so many different things it's crazy.

    BUT!!! Apple has done so many technologies this year. If you were at WWDC you would know this. This is for the future of the machine. This is for the future of apple.



    Apple will release the iMac when it is due. Apple has learned from the cube that catoring to a small group of people does not work.... for right now any ways.
  • Reply 33 of 43
    rhumgodrhumgod Posts: 1,289member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorph

    Their "poor marketing" boils down to an inability so far to get past whatever's keeping them there. Every time they market something other than the Mac, they enjoy a great deal of success - the Apple brand has tremendous and overwhelmingly positive recognition, and of course the iPod is absolutely dominant despite the lack of any "hard-hitting" ads. In short, I don't think the problem is marketing.



    We're apparently close to an update, so we'll get to see what Apple's decided to do. I have a funny feeling they'll surprise us all, and disappoint anyone dead-set on a headless iMac.




    Apple's marketing has been completely hit-and-miss, but at least since Jobs has returned they are marketing one type of device or service. Not like the brilliant, but lackluster "Think Different" cameo ads. They were great, don't get me wrong, but I think they didn't say much about a specific product. Look at the last 3 products Apple has seriously targeted for ads versus their sales numbers. iPod (the latest, wicked numbers), the PowerMac G5 (quite good numbers, despite IBM's lack of updates) and the iMac (not the LCD, but the CRT iMacs - I think I saw maybe 2 or 3 ads total for LCD iMacs).



    Now I am specifically talking about television ads and not print ads.



    Apple needs to cram some of their products down people's throats to get their attention. I swear sometimes Steve is right - people turn off their brains while watching TV. How many times have you seen an iPod commercial, like 100,000? It probably is approaching their iTunes sales numbers on their homepage.
  • Reply 34 of 43
    3.14163.1416 Posts: 120member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorph

    And do you know why the PC vendors do that? Because people want whole systems, so they make it as easy as possible to buy them.



    Many people do want whole systems, agreed. But many don't, and many who do don't want to pay $600 for a monitor, which is what they're forced to do with an iMac. IMO most of the problem is LCD prices haven't fallen as much as Apple expected them to, and as a result they're unable to hit a reasonable price point with any LCD AIO.
  • Reply 35 of 43
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Aurora

    I agree with Gamblor that Apple is missing the mark with the all in one, one size fits everyone and if it dont slap on a bigger monitor.



    Which is an interesting way of spinning the fact that the iMac does, in fact, offer a choice of monitor.



    Quote:

    Looking at this strategy i would think Apple is listening to only the pro users who wants the consumer to have a subpar machine as to not step on the toes of powermac.



    I don't think the pro users care one whit. Apple might care about pro users buying consumer machines, though: an iMac G5 would be a great machine for most of the work that Macs are classically used for. As it is, the iMac G4 ain't bad for that.



    Quote:

    G4,Fx5200,1 upgrade memory slot, monitor forced on you is there any doubt that Apple is doing precisely this? they have alienated the consumer user and if you like to play games its 100% obvious.



    Unfortunately for your argument, a much lower percentage of Mac users than PC users like to play games.



    As for the rest, I don't think it's deliberate of Apple at this point. They miscalculated with the iMac 2, and they've found that it's not an easy thing to fix. Product design for a PC takes 2-3 years, so they were necessarily stuck with the horse they bet on even after it started lagging.



    Quote:

    almost like saying to everyone(consumers) buy Powermac or you arent getting nothing but old stuff. This no way to treat the consumer.



    This is true, but it has nothing to do with whether the iMac is an AIO. After all, the very first iMac basically had the specs of the low-end PowerMac. It wasn't "last year's technology." I'd be happy to see it restored to that position again.



    Quote:

    as a side note it must be stated that iMac(crt) was allready in the works before the return of ego maniac Jobs. I blame him for destroying Apple marketshare and destroying what iMac could have been.



    This is a disputed point, not a fact. Amelio says something like the iMac was in the works, while Jobs and Ive say they started the work, but there is basically no dispute that what eventually emerged was a child of Jobs and Ive and a team of 100 that set to work after Steve took the reins.



    As for Amelio, he had something of an ego himself (most CEOs do; it comes with the territory) and he made his share of stupid decisions (and smart ones, to be fair). But if you want to look at what destroyed Apple's market share, look at the year 1995, and following.
  • Reply 36 of 43
    ionyzionyz Posts: 491member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by emig647

    Apple has learned from the cube that catoring to a small group of people does not work.... for right now any ways.



    Price killed the Cube, thats all. They wanted a small footprint, quiet and elegant design (sounds like the iMac 2 huh?). Splitting the motherboard into 4 pieces along with all the other unique aspects of the machine jacked the price over what it should have been.



    The iMac will remain an AIO after its update. I don't see them releasing an iMac AIO + another headless model of some kind, if anything they might remove the eMac from consumer space, who knows. They have a consumer notebook and a pro notebook, they should go back to having a (single) consumer desktop. AFAIK the only reason the eMac was designed was for schools and it was cheaper with LCD costs still high then.



    LCDs have become cheaper, I could see Apple moving the "stopgap" eMac back to EDU only when a new cheaper to make iMac AIO is released. AIO is simplicity and thats what their flagship will retain. A headless may be more practical, but I've never pegged Cupertino practical.
  • Reply 37 of 43
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Amorph



    I also expect Apple's results for this quarter to be fairly weak. There are two things to consider, though: First, the iMac currently costs too much for too little, even factoring in an "Apple premium." AIO or headless, $1299 is no longer a sane entry level price for a consumer system.




    I'm not dead set against the AIO. I'd even buy one, I did, come to figure, in the form of a portable...



    The problem is the price, in two ways.



    The AIO's they sell cost too much. iMacs cost way too much, eMacs would be about right, if they were iMacs!



    We hear that the 17" CRT was a design "feature". I say poppycock. Apple was trying to protect margins, not school property. You can make a durable LCD system too. No mobile arm to break, sheet of thick glass in front of the screen. Done.



    For 799 you ought to be getting a 15" LCD. For 999, you ought to be getting AT LEAST a 15" LCD, and depending on the value proposition, a 17" LCD unit. Apple has never been generous, at the low end, so if they could do something tomorrow, I'd take a 15 and be happy.



    iMacs cost WAY TOO MUCH, not just 300, but 500 too much.



    So how do you build them cheaper, sell them higher, and keep people happy.



    It's obvious, OFF WITH THEIR HEADS!



    You then advertise a low entry, and sell a mix of Apple and/or third party displays, and the people for whom configurability is important can buy those. The people who like AIO's, can buy an eMac-LCD. As it stands now, the people who like configurability can go fvck themselves, and those who like AIO's can choose between damaging their wallets or damaging their eyes.



    Selling a CRT based machine at those prices is simply insulting, sorry.



    In reality, it's the whole AIO line-up that needs a reworking, top to bottom, both the vowel-Macs, not just the iMac.







    ...



    PS, a note on power bricks. I actually don't mind them in the least, standardize a desktop PS, and drop it outboard. It would make replacing them far easier in the event of failure. Granted, they're probably reliable enough these days.



    As for putting the power socket onto the headless iMac, it's still eminently doable. I haven't seen Apple's new multi-ended video cord, but my guess is that it would be easy to have a plug that mates to the brick OR to another socket. Give this plug/socket a non standard shape, and no one will plug anything but Apple spec monitors into the headless iMacs. When plugging the monitor into the wall, it has to go into the brick first, when attached to an iMac, it could go straight into the computer.
  • Reply 38 of 43
    ipodandimacipodandimac Posts: 3,273member
    So i guess this "soeculation" was true!!!
  • Reply 39 of 43
    escherescher Posts: 1,811member




    Oh man! Steve wasn't just playing with our fragile little minds.



    Escher
  • Reply 40 of 43
    a_greera_greer Posts: 4,594member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by chromos

    SJ also used 'Half dome' (in Yosemite) as a search term... another indication of the iMac?



    And if I recall, he did that immediatley after searching for "iMac"

    to borrow a phrase from a poster, "YUM"
Sign In or Register to comment.