Apple and BMW are working together now so maybe the Missiles behind the headlights from "Tomarow Never Dies", sure would make traffic jams easier for BMW owners.
Isn't Airport Express designed to solve this problem in a different way?
I mean I already have a computer with all my music on it. Airport Express is perfect for this. I don't need to buy a new stereo.
Airport Express is just the first step to another product. Right now it is rather inconvienient to control you'r music from another room. I'm sure that Apple did not overlook this problem and has a solution in the works.
Airport Express is just the first step to another product. Right now it is rather inconvienient to control you'r music from another room. I'm sure that Apple did not overlook this problem and has a solution in the works.
I agree. They've plainly said they are trying to get Airport Express out there first. Some speculate about an iPod + WiFi type of thing (which may come to pass). I am expecting an iRemote which would be an iPod + WiFi - HD to wirelessly (RF) control iTunes from anywhere in the house. Maybe $49?
a_greer: Don't get stuck on the small screen. It won't be an iPod screen anyway.
Also, the studios are doing fine, record profits and record theater attendence, especially now that they can release Spiderman-like movies world wide in a matter of weeks and have the DVD ready in a month. Those DVD's are over half their revenues now.
Movie content is actually greater now then ever, but the market is more fragmented than ever....indies and foreign films are getting better and (thanks to Final Cut Pro and other apps) this will continue!! Popcorn sales are still strong at $5 a bag as ridiculous as that is, so don't use those as excuses for downloads.
Now think of all of the people from India or Europe who would like to see their movies....100's of millions wanting see the latest from Bollywood....they won't see them at thee local mall megacinema. They don't want to wait for the local international food shop to carry it. They will want to download it even if it takes all night, if they can OWN it the next day! That will be a huge market once it is tapped!!
So I believe your reasons for bootlegged video is incomplete and misses out on some very large trends that Apple could exploit.
People download movies because they can!!! They can then watch them whenever they want and not wait for the $25 DVD. They want to own the film. Just like Jobs sez about downloaded music. No one wants to rent content.
Chris: I'm not a Steve Jobs naysayer. What I see as his being on in the "wrong" right now has to do with his comments about small screen video and also his views of television.
What I see is that kids are using TV and games and videos in a way that is different from what we did (if you're over 30). I see my nephews and neices watching Disney and RugRats episodes over and over again....they are into repetition of video in the same way that I am into repetition of certain songs. They play games repeatedly. They are much more interested in specific TV programs and in their ability to control what they want to see. They don't wait for Saturday mornings to watch cartoons, they have it 24/7 whenever they want! Also the timespan of what they want to see and how much interaction they expect is changing. Half hour shows are a long time, 1.5 hour movies are an eternity.
Now all kids grow up and learn to do other things and watch 4 hour Lord of the Rings movies, no problem, but the point is that the formats for what people EXPECT and what they WANT is slowly changing. 15 minute videos, short films, short animations, music videos, etc. are becomeing very popular and broadband is plenty fast enough for those!
People download movie trailers all of the time and they are becoming an artform ... see the long ads on the internet by BMW and others. Advertisers as they try to distinguish their products ont he internet will continue to push that envelop so that ads will become entertainment even more.
And about TV ... what if you made an agreement with movie channels like HBO to be able to download episodes of The Sopranos? Just like choosing music at the iTunes Music Store. Those wouldn't take alot of memory. So that is the TiVo aspect of things.
For the Portable aspect, you just have to find out what the minimum size needs to be for the screen for a truly useful, enjoyable experience. It isn't the iPod screen obviously!! So stop complaining about us wanting tiny screens! I think a 4" screen is minimum.
You see people show 3"x5" photos of their kids, their cars, their family at Yosemite...why do you think it wouldn't be great to show folks 3x5 videos of the same things. Since QT7 will have scaleable HD, it will be able to automatically give you the most appropreate output on any screen resolution and size.
The kids of today would eat it up with animations and music videos and when they grow up they'll have their iPhotos and iMovies on them.
In the end what I see is that:
1. I don't want an iPod AV, really. I want an iVid of some size so that I can keep important video with me without the need of a laptop.
2. I also think that an iVid is not at the same place as the iPod of 3 years ago, in which the Walkman and others had already created a market. It is more like at the point of the first Walkman 25 years ago when all people expected was to listen to radio and maybe go home to listen to albums and tapes. The first Walkman revolutionized the FREEDOM to listen to anything everywhere. There WASN'T a market until Sony made that market. It is an important, though nuanced distinction. Apple can do the same.
3. Kids now and in the future will want their entertainment in a wider variety of formats than they have now and that market will be large even if many of us can't see it right now. Just ask anyone 12 or younger.
I can't believe it's not abundantly clear what the masses want regarding Video/Movies.
SIZE DOES MATTER!
We got to the theater, not because we love $5 popcorn or waiting in lines or sticky floors. We go because we love BIG SCREENS! People crave that 60 inch Plasma TV.
Understandably there is a contingent of people who crave the opposite. They cannot see how someone wouldn't want to carry around movies in their pocket to watch at a moments whim.
I'm a movie buff and I don't want it. Movies are about tapping into someones emotions without the need for dialogue. It's about the environment. Do people want to see this environment shrunk down to 3.5" LCDs???
I'm sure there would be thousands but in todays market you only get iPod like success selling in the millions.
Apple has all the tools to create a PVR. There would be far more success in this than creating portable video.
The iPod is too fragile and being that it's portable in nature it is lightweight and too small to read. What many of us are looking for is something like this.
1.A Set Top Box(STB) device that integrates well with our current stereo gear. It would be handy if it was 17" wide or close enough for aesthetic reasons. It would hook up via analog or digital I/O
<snip>
I know Apple is working on something. They've pushed the iPod into vehicles(Alpine, BMW) and soon they will be invading the home with support. I'm just impatient.
I recall an Apple rep said that something from left field was coming - but that was MWSF in January?, and still nothing.
Not that he would KNOW anything anyway!, but this would be definitely get my attention since the Airport Express is just another piece in the puzzle.
What is it that everyone wants from a so-called "headless iMac"? Is it ability to use a different monitor? Slots? Why slots? The PM has slots...so how is a slotted iMac different from a PM? Dropping slots isn't likely to save much in costs. A bit in the power supply and smaller case...but that's it.
Not shipping the applications isn't going to save Apple any costs.
Personally, I don't care about add-on slots at all. If I gamed, which I only do on Windows, I'd care about the graphics slot, but not anything else. The significant feature that is being asked for here is not attaching the friggin' monitor. I still use a monitor that was the *first* 19" CRT to mass market, the Hitachi CM751ET. It is now about seven years old, and has been used with four different computers. There have been no AIOs this size, and that is because they do not make sense. Now we have flat panels, so it is possible to make an AIO with a big screen, but it still stands that whether you want a small or big, expensive display, with an AIO you will pay for it every time you want a more powerful computer - and the computer will probably get old at least three times as soon as the display. This is why AIOs are really expensive over the lifetime of more than one computer.
There is also the possibility of using the computer as a server, firewall, etc. where it does not need a display.
...I still use a monitor that was the *first* 19" CRT to mass market, the Hitachi CM751ET....
At work in 9 years I have had 3 monitors. One died, one when I switched departments, and the third is still going strong. I have had over 5 computers in that same time. We still have some 20" montors that are well over 7 years old in current use, with no plans on switching to LCD's any time soon.
What is it that everyone wants from a so-called "headless iMac"? Is it ability to use a different monitor? Slots? Why slots? The PM has slots...so how is a slotted iMac different from a PM? Dropping slots isn't likely to save much in costs. A bit in the power supply and smaller case...but that's it.
Not shipping the applications isn't going to save Apple any costs.
As others have stated, the main reason for separating the computer from the monitor is that the monitor has a longer life than the computer. Look at the current flat panel iMac. In two years an 800MHz G4 will be far less powerful than current inexpensive processors while the flat panel display will still be viable.
You make a good point about the applications. It still does cost something to include them in the product, but not much. However, not including them does increase the cache of those computers which do include them.
My point is that this computer is not one you would use as a personal computer so there is no need for iLife applications. This would be for other applications where you most likely will not even attach a monitor.
The slots would be used for incorporating custom built hardware or instrument specific hardware such as DACs, ADCs and parallel I/O. This would be incorporated into any sort of experiment or engineering project that requires an intelligent node.
There is no way you would use a PowerMac for this. Not at $2,000 each and with hefty power requirements. PMs are also probably not very robust in harsher environments with all that air flowing through them. On the other hand, you could build in an 800MHz G4 and it might not even need a fan if you had a large heat sink and a small, low power GPU.
People already use PCs and data loggers for this kind of thing. However, if Apple makes something like this it would be a nice product as the technologies available for OS X (Applescript, rendezvous, networking, stability) add a lot and having something like this available makes it easier to use your PM or iMac as the center of the hub.
As others have stated, the main reason for separating the computer from the monitor is that the monitor has a longer life than the computer. Look at the current flat panel iMac. In two years an 800MHz G4 will be far less powerful than current inexpensive processors while the flat panel display will still be viable.
Another good reason, LOWER PRICE FOR ADVERTISING. I think more people would look at Macs if they say a CompUSA ad in the Sunday paper with an iMac at $999, or better yet $899 (even if the small print said monitor not included).
The name of the game in retail is to get the customer into the store, even if you are loosing a little money on the main product to get them in, and sell them a bunch of stuff they didn't come in for while they are there that you are making a higher margin on. That is why motor oil is so cheap on sale, you know that they will come in for it and purchase an oil and air filter, possibly a PCV valve, funnel, etc, etc...
Car dealers do it as well, sometimes not even haveing any of the model that is in the ad on the lot, I know that is what happened when I bought my Miata back in 99'. GM dealers go so far as to advertise in big type the price for GM employees, with the price for everyone else in smaller print below. Rebates and incentives are almost always added into those prices as well to make them look better.
Apple should take a good look at how to be successfull in the retail market, and why they may not have been as successfull as they have been even though they have a better looking, superior product that has not always been that much more expensive than the competition. Occasional sale prices help a lot. Rebates help as well, but only if those rebates make sense the the consumer. A combination of the above work even better becouse the retailer can print the combined price to make it appear to be lower than what the person is going to pay when they walk out of the store. Apple should give retailers a bit more leaway in discounting Apple computers for sales (not everyday low price, but a real sale possibly limited by the number of days a quarter they can offer a reduced price). They could also add in manufacturer rebates before the "EOL" of the computer, but keep it on the computer only and not on the purchase of a computer and monitor. If they want a rebate on the monitor offer one on that as well, possibly a slightly better rebate on the combination than they would get individually. Priceing doesn't have to be bargin basement, but they need to make consumers think that they are getting a better deal, that perception is the key and it does help generate sales.
The separate monitor is a good reason too, though I don't know that it would likely reduce the cost of an eMac much. But maybe...perhaps $150 in total when you factor in component costs, power supply, size and weight (shipping cost) reductions.
The reason I was asking is because I often see people spec out their idea of a headless iMac and it looks a lot like a PM to me. I could imagine Apple doing something like the cube again...only the AGP slot is upgradeable...but no other slots. Perhaps single G5 (not dual).
The separate monitor is a good reason too, though I don't know that it would likely reduce the cost of an eMac much. But maybe...perhaps $150 in total when you factor in component costs, power supply, size and weight (shipping cost) reductions.
The reason I was asking is because I often see people spec out their idea of a headless iMac and it looks a lot like a PM to me. I could imagine Apple doing something like the cube again...only the AGP slot is upgradeable...but no other slots. Perhaps single G5 (not dual).
$100 would bring the price of a headless eMac down to $699 leaving room for a $50 sale discount or rebate once or twice a quarter per retailer. I think this would go a long way to bring people into the Apple stores or the Apple section of CompUSA. As far as expansion, most suggest a single PCI slot and an AGP slot for graphics. It doesn't have to have a daughter card, though that would be nice as well. I think that these addition would also help sell the computers. People probably wouldnt upgrade them any more than they do now, especially if the tech advanced enough over a 2-3 year period, and the price of replacement stayed low enough to make it more affordable to replace instead of upgrading.
I think that one of the biggest problems with the iMac 2 as that it did not advance enough since its intro to make people want to replace them. Look at it this way, in the last 2 years we saw the PM go from a 1.4 Ghz G4 to a 2.5 Ghz G5, or just over 1 Ghz increase. In the same time the G4 iMac went from 800 mhz to 1.25 Ghz, or a little under 500 mhz. Sure it got bigger monitors and that probably attracted some people that wouldn't have considered buying an iMac before but that is a pretty slow pace for upgrades in speed for 24 months. To further hamper sales they were not even able to decrease the price of them due to the steady demand for 15" LCD pannels which have maintained a pretty steady price during that time due to increased demand in the desktop, laptop, and TV markets for these displays. At one time the high-end iMac had a respectible speed in comparison to the PowerMacs, today they are lagging behind quite a bit even when compared to the low end PM. I don't think that will change untill the iMac gets back to bieng as powerfull in comparison to the PM as it was 3-4 years ago. That means at least a 1.8 Ghz G5 processor in the high end iMac, or a 2.0-2.5 Ghz single G4 processor at the same price point that it is today with a low end model sitting below $1000.
I've seen the rocku device before and it looks pretty cool. I'd like to see an infared universal remote control that is based on a touchpad LCD. I'd like to play my music from my iPod (which is docked in my office) through my airport express and receiver in the living room...BUT I want the receiver to play the outside speakers (without having to walk inside to adjust the volume, track, artist etc.) while I'm BBQing on the Patio. I'd love to see the same stylish design in this sort of device as well as the same ease of use that has made me fall in love with apples products.
I've seen the rocku device before and it looks pretty cool. I'd like to see an infared universal remote control that is based on a touchpad LCD. I'd like to play my music from my iPod (which is docked in my office) through my airport express and receiver in the living room...BUT I want the receiver to play the outside speakers (without having to walk inside to adjust the volume, track, artist etc.) while I'm BBQing on the Patio. I'd love to see the same stylish design in this sort of device as well as the same ease of use that has made me fall in love with apples products.
RF not IR, you can't use IR through a wall, and the range is pretty limited, so you wouldn't be able to use it while cooking those steaks on the patio unless the Mac were there as well.
RF not IR, you can't use IR through a wall, and the range is pretty limited, so you wouldn't be able to use it while cooking those steaks on the patio unless the Mac were there as well.
I am predicting an iRemote that is basically an iPod like interface - HD + Wifi card for...$49? $59?
How about a Utilitarian Mac? This would be a simple box with one G4 ( 600MHz to 1GHz), 512MB memory, 10/100 Ethernet, FW400, USB, simple and cheap video card, at least three PCI slots. Maybe have one option with no PCI slots. Ships with no applications beyond the OS. Priced around $400. . .
I think this is an excellent suggestion. Presently, many low budget projects are forced to use an x86 PC because there is no suitable Mac to do the job -- for example, any application needing one or more PCI cards but having a budget in the eMac range. If such a Mac, as you suggest, were sold primarily on a built-to-order basis, it would not be a niche market however. It could become Apple's top selling product. Why not copy a little Dell for one model of Mac?
IT folk seem to like the expandability of PCI cards, if I can believe what I read. They like being able to configure a box in a variety of ways, which cannot be done with an AIO. (Maybe they like not paying for something unused, even if the price is the same.) Also, I hear they like PCI cards for maintainability. If the function on one card fails, they only need to replace that one card, not repair or replace the whole computer. It doesn't matter whether it works this way in practice or not. If that is the way IT folks think, that is what influences their buying decisions.
Apple could go one up on the x86 PC vendors when designing a low end, expandable Mac by only offering PCI express, no conventional PCI slots. This approach simplifies circuitry and cuts manufacturing cost. In fact, for any computer that has a PCI express X16 video card slot, adding two or three X1 PCI express slots is almost free -- just the cost of a tiny X1 connector and a rear panel cover piece for each slot.
Such a multi-purpose Mac might only have USB on the motherboard. Initially, Apple may have to build and offer some PCI express cards until the industry catches up. Here are the cards I think Apple would need for this model Mac. Likely, Apple would also offer cards that combine two or three of these functions, to cut cost more in certain configurations.
Basic Graphics: Very low price X16 card with VGA only out.
Digital Hub Graphics: eMac/iMac level of performance in an X16 card.
FireWire: FireWire 400 and 800 outputs.
Standard Network Card: 10/100 Ethernet.
Performance Network Card: 10/100/1000 Ethernet.
Modem Card: Standard 56K modem.
Another option could be choice of processor, either low cost or better performance. The better performance might be the same processor as, say, the eMac being sold at that time. As you can see, a very low priced model could be assembled for some applications. The pricing could be set to favor the AIO Macs, however. That is, if you assemble a multi-purpose Mac with the performance and features of, say, an eMac, the eMac would be cheaper. Such a multi-purpose Mac could serve many markets where Dell presently reigns as king.
RF not IR, you can't use IR through a wall, and the range is pretty limited, so you wouldn't be able to use it while cooking those steaks on the patio unless the Mac were there as well.
yep thats what I meant, Thanks. Would'nt that be a kick-ass device?
You can never rule out products for the adults. Such as, maybe, an iVibrator
Yes you can, Apple stores don't have an "other room" with a silk drape for a door...and I dont see them comeing soon either, although it does have a greater chance than the iPc, a sub $1000 Mac that runs windows
Comments
and steve shall call it:
iBOOM
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Isn't Airport Express designed to solve this problem in a different way?
I mean I already have a computer with all my music on it. Airport Express is perfect for this. I don't need to buy a new stereo.
Airport Express is just the first step to another product. Right now it is rather inconvienient to control you'r music from another room. I'm sure that Apple did not overlook this problem and has a solution in the works.
Originally posted by @homenow
Airport Express is just the first step to another product. Right now it is rather inconvienient to control you'r music from another room. I'm sure that Apple did not overlook this problem and has a solution in the works.
I agree. They've plainly said they are trying to get Airport Express out there first. Some speculate about an iPod + WiFi type of thing (which may come to pass). I am expecting an iRemote which would be an iPod + WiFi - HD to wirelessly (RF) control iTunes from anywhere in the house. Maybe $49?
Also, the studios are doing fine, record profits and record theater attendence, especially now that they can release Spiderman-like movies world wide in a matter of weeks and have the DVD ready in a month. Those DVD's are over half their revenues now.
Movie content is actually greater now then ever, but the market is more fragmented than ever....indies and foreign films are getting better and (thanks to Final Cut Pro and other apps) this will continue!! Popcorn sales are still strong at $5 a bag as ridiculous as that is, so don't use those as excuses for downloads.
Now think of all of the people from India or Europe who would like to see their movies....100's of millions wanting see the latest from Bollywood....they won't see them at thee local mall megacinema. They don't want to wait for the local international food shop to carry it. They will want to download it even if it takes all night, if they can OWN it the next day! That will be a huge market once it is tapped!!
So I believe your reasons for bootlegged video is incomplete and misses out on some very large trends that Apple could exploit.
People download movies because they can!!! They can then watch them whenever they want and not wait for the $25 DVD. They want to own the film. Just like Jobs sez about downloaded music. No one wants to rent content.
Chris: I'm not a Steve Jobs naysayer. What I see as his being on in the "wrong" right now has to do with his comments about small screen video and also his views of television.
What I see is that kids are using TV and games and videos in a way that is different from what we did (if you're over 30). I see my nephews and neices watching Disney and RugRats episodes over and over again....they are into repetition of video in the same way that I am into repetition of certain songs. They play games repeatedly. They are much more interested in specific TV programs and in their ability to control what they want to see. They don't wait for Saturday mornings to watch cartoons, they have it 24/7 whenever they want! Also the timespan of what they want to see and how much interaction they expect is changing. Half hour shows are a long time, 1.5 hour movies are an eternity.
Now all kids grow up and learn to do other things and watch 4 hour Lord of the Rings movies, no problem, but the point is that the formats for what people EXPECT and what they WANT is slowly changing. 15 minute videos, short films, short animations, music videos, etc. are becomeing very popular and broadband is plenty fast enough for those!
People download movie trailers all of the time and they are becoming an artform ... see the long ads on the internet by BMW and others. Advertisers as they try to distinguish their products ont he internet will continue to push that envelop so that ads will become entertainment even more.
And about TV ... what if you made an agreement with movie channels like HBO to be able to download episodes of The Sopranos? Just like choosing music at the iTunes Music Store. Those wouldn't take alot of memory. So that is the TiVo aspect of things.
For the Portable aspect, you just have to find out what the minimum size needs to be for the screen for a truly useful, enjoyable experience. It isn't the iPod screen obviously!! So stop complaining about us wanting tiny screens! I think a 4" screen is minimum.
You see people show 3"x5" photos of their kids, their cars, their family at Yosemite...why do you think it wouldn't be great to show folks 3x5 videos of the same things. Since QT7 will have scaleable HD, it will be able to automatically give you the most appropreate output on any screen resolution and size.
The kids of today would eat it up with animations and music videos and when they grow up they'll have their iPhotos and iMovies on them.
In the end what I see is that:
1. I don't want an iPod AV, really. I want an iVid of some size so that I can keep important video with me without the need of a laptop.
2. I also think that an iVid is not at the same place as the iPod of 3 years ago, in which the Walkman and others had already created a market. It is more like at the point of the first Walkman 25 years ago when all people expected was to listen to radio and maybe go home to listen to albums and tapes. The first Walkman revolutionized the FREEDOM to listen to anything everywhere. There WASN'T a market until Sony made that market. It is an important, though nuanced distinction. Apple can do the same.
3. Kids now and in the future will want their entertainment in a wider variety of formats than they have now and that market will be large even if many of us can't see it right now. Just ask anyone 12 or younger.
SIZE DOES MATTER!
We got to the theater, not because we love $5 popcorn or waiting in lines or sticky floors. We go because we love BIG SCREENS! People crave that 60 inch Plasma TV.
Understandably there is a contingent of people who crave the opposite. They cannot see how someone wouldn't want to carry around movies in their pocket to watch at a moments whim.
I'm a movie buff and I don't want it. Movies are about tapping into someones emotions without the need for dialogue. It's about the environment. Do people want to see this environment shrunk down to 3.5" LCDs???
I'm sure there would be thousands but in todays market you only get iPod like success selling in the millions.
Apple has all the tools to create a PVR. There would be far more success in this than creating portable video.
Originally posted by hmurchison
The iPod is too fragile and being that it's portable in nature it is lightweight and too small to read. What many of us are looking for is something like this.
1.A Set Top Box(STB) device that integrates well with our current stereo gear. It would be handy if it was 17" wide or close enough for aesthetic reasons. It would hook up via analog or digital I/O
<snip>
I know Apple is working on something. They've pushed the iPod into vehicles(Alpine, BMW) and soon they will be invading the home with support. I'm just impatient.
I recall an Apple rep said that something from left field was coming - but that was MWSF in January?, and still nothing.
Not that he would KNOW anything anyway!, but this would be definitely get my attention since the Airport Express is just another piece in the puzzle.
Time will tell
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
What is it that everyone wants from a so-called "headless iMac"? Is it ability to use a different monitor? Slots? Why slots? The PM has slots...so how is a slotted iMac different from a PM? Dropping slots isn't likely to save much in costs. A bit in the power supply and smaller case...but that's it.
Not shipping the applications isn't going to save Apple any costs.
Personally, I don't care about add-on slots at all. If I gamed, which I only do on Windows, I'd care about the graphics slot, but not anything else. The significant feature that is being asked for here is not attaching the friggin' monitor. I still use a monitor that was the *first* 19" CRT to mass market, the Hitachi CM751ET. It is now about seven years old, and has been used with four different computers. There have been no AIOs this size, and that is because they do not make sense. Now we have flat panels, so it is possible to make an AIO with a big screen, but it still stands that whether you want a small or big, expensive display, with an AIO you will pay for it every time you want a more powerful computer - and the computer will probably get old at least three times as soon as the display. This is why AIOs are really expensive over the lifetime of more than one computer.
There is also the possibility of using the computer as a server, firewall, etc. where it does not need a display.
Originally posted by Gon
...I still use a monitor that was the *first* 19" CRT to mass market, the Hitachi CM751ET....
At work in 9 years I have had 3 monitors. One died, one when I switched departments, and the third is still going strong. I have had over 5 computers in that same time. We still have some 20" montors that are well over 7 years old in current use, with no plans on switching to LCD's any time soon.
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
What is it that everyone wants from a so-called "headless iMac"? Is it ability to use a different monitor? Slots? Why slots? The PM has slots...so how is a slotted iMac different from a PM? Dropping slots isn't likely to save much in costs. A bit in the power supply and smaller case...but that's it.
Not shipping the applications isn't going to save Apple any costs.
As others have stated, the main reason for separating the computer from the monitor is that the monitor has a longer life than the computer. Look at the current flat panel iMac. In two years an 800MHz G4 will be far less powerful than current inexpensive processors while the flat panel display will still be viable.
You make a good point about the applications. It still does cost something to include them in the product, but not much. However, not including them does increase the cache of those computers which do include them.
My point is that this computer is not one you would use as a personal computer so there is no need for iLife applications. This would be for other applications where you most likely will not even attach a monitor.
The slots would be used for incorporating custom built hardware or instrument specific hardware such as DACs, ADCs and parallel I/O. This would be incorporated into any sort of experiment or engineering project that requires an intelligent node.
There is no way you would use a PowerMac for this. Not at $2,000 each and with hefty power requirements. PMs are also probably not very robust in harsher environments with all that air flowing through them. On the other hand, you could build in an 800MHz G4 and it might not even need a fan if you had a large heat sink and a small, low power GPU.
People already use PCs and data loggers for this kind of thing. However, if Apple makes something like this it would be a nice product as the technologies available for OS X (Applescript, rendezvous, networking, stability) add a lot and having something like this available makes it easier to use your PM or iMac as the center of the hub.
Originally posted by neutrino23
As others have stated, the main reason for separating the computer from the monitor is that the monitor has a longer life than the computer. Look at the current flat panel iMac. In two years an 800MHz G4 will be far less powerful than current inexpensive processors while the flat panel display will still be viable.
Another good reason, LOWER PRICE FOR ADVERTISING. I think more people would look at Macs if they say a CompUSA ad in the Sunday paper with an iMac at $999, or better yet $899 (even if the small print said monitor not included).
The name of the game in retail is to get the customer into the store, even if you are loosing a little money on the main product to get them in, and sell them a bunch of stuff they didn't come in for while they are there that you are making a higher margin on. That is why motor oil is so cheap on sale, you know that they will come in for it and purchase an oil and air filter, possibly a PCV valve, funnel, etc, etc...
Car dealers do it as well, sometimes not even haveing any of the model that is in the ad on the lot, I know that is what happened when I bought my Miata back in 99'. GM dealers go so far as to advertise in big type the price for GM employees, with the price for everyone else in smaller print below. Rebates and incentives are almost always added into those prices as well to make them look better.
Apple should take a good look at how to be successfull in the retail market, and why they may not have been as successfull as they have been even though they have a better looking, superior product that has not always been that much more expensive than the competition. Occasional sale prices help a lot. Rebates help as well, but only if those rebates make sense the the consumer. A combination of the above work even better becouse the retailer can print the combined price to make it appear to be lower than what the person is going to pay when they walk out of the store. Apple should give retailers a bit more leaway in discounting Apple computers for sales (not everyday low price, but a real sale possibly limited by the number of days a quarter they can offer a reduced price). They could also add in manufacturer rebates before the "EOL" of the computer, but keep it on the computer only and not on the purchase of a computer and monitor. If they want a rebate on the monitor offer one on that as well, possibly a slightly better rebate on the combination than they would get individually. Priceing doesn't have to be bargin basement, but they need to make consumers think that they are getting a better deal, that perception is the key and it does help generate sales.
Originally posted by JCG
Another good reason, LOWER PRICE FOR ADVERTISING.
This is a good reason.
The separate monitor is a good reason too, though I don't know that it would likely reduce the cost of an eMac much. But maybe...perhaps $150 in total when you factor in component costs, power supply, size and weight (shipping cost) reductions.
The reason I was asking is because I often see people spec out their idea of a headless iMac and it looks a lot like a PM to me. I could imagine Apple doing something like the cube again...only the AGP slot is upgradeable...but no other slots. Perhaps single G5 (not dual).
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
This is a good reason.
The separate monitor is a good reason too, though I don't know that it would likely reduce the cost of an eMac much. But maybe...perhaps $150 in total when you factor in component costs, power supply, size and weight (shipping cost) reductions.
The reason I was asking is because I often see people spec out their idea of a headless iMac and it looks a lot like a PM to me. I could imagine Apple doing something like the cube again...only the AGP slot is upgradeable...but no other slots. Perhaps single G5 (not dual).
$100 would bring the price of a headless eMac down to $699 leaving room for a $50 sale discount or rebate once or twice a quarter per retailer. I think this would go a long way to bring people into the Apple stores or the Apple section of CompUSA. As far as expansion, most suggest a single PCI slot and an AGP slot for graphics. It doesn't have to have a daughter card, though that would be nice as well. I think that these addition would also help sell the computers. People probably wouldnt upgrade them any more than they do now, especially if the tech advanced enough over a 2-3 year period, and the price of replacement stayed low enough to make it more affordable to replace instead of upgrading.
I think that one of the biggest problems with the iMac 2 as that it did not advance enough since its intro to make people want to replace them. Look at it this way, in the last 2 years we saw the PM go from a 1.4 Ghz G4 to a 2.5 Ghz G5, or just over 1 Ghz increase. In the same time the G4 iMac went from 800 mhz to 1.25 Ghz, or a little under 500 mhz. Sure it got bigger monitors and that probably attracted some people that wouldn't have considered buying an iMac before but that is a pretty slow pace for upgrades in speed for 24 months. To further hamper sales they were not even able to decrease the price of them due to the steady demand for 15" LCD pannels which have maintained a pretty steady price during that time due to increased demand in the desktop, laptop, and TV markets for these displays. At one time the high-end iMac had a respectible speed in comparison to the PowerMacs, today they are lagging behind quite a bit even when compared to the low end PM. I don't think that will change untill the iMac gets back to bieng as powerfull in comparison to the PM as it was 3-4 years ago. That means at least a 1.8 Ghz G5 processor in the high end iMac, or a 2.0-2.5 Ghz single G4 processor at the same price point that it is today with a low end model sitting below $1000.
Originally posted by Playmaker
I've seen the rocku device before and it looks pretty cool. I'd like to see an infared universal remote control that is based on a touchpad LCD. I'd like to play my music from my iPod (which is docked in my office) through my airport express and receiver in the living room...BUT I want the receiver to play the outside speakers (without having to walk inside to adjust the volume, track, artist etc.) while I'm BBQing on the Patio. I'd love to see the same stylish design in this sort of device as well as the same ease of use that has made me fall in love with apples products.
RF not IR, you can't use IR through a wall, and the range is pretty limited, so you wouldn't be able to use it while cooking those steaks on the patio unless the Mac were there as well.
Originally posted by JCG
RF not IR, you can't use IR through a wall, and the range is pretty limited, so you wouldn't be able to use it while cooking those steaks on the patio unless the Mac were there as well.
I am predicting an iRemote that is basically an iPod like interface - HD + Wifi card for...$49? $59?
Originally posted by neutrino23
How about a Utilitarian Mac? This would be a simple box with one G4 ( 600MHz to 1GHz), 512MB memory, 10/100 Ethernet, FW400, USB, simple and cheap video card, at least three PCI slots. Maybe have one option with no PCI slots. Ships with no applications beyond the OS. Priced around $400. . .
I think this is an excellent suggestion. Presently, many low budget projects are forced to use an x86 PC because there is no suitable Mac to do the job -- for example, any application needing one or more PCI cards but having a budget in the eMac range. If such a Mac, as you suggest, were sold primarily on a built-to-order basis, it would not be a niche market however. It could become Apple's top selling product. Why not copy a little Dell for one model of Mac?
IT folk seem to like the expandability of PCI cards, if I can believe what I read. They like being able to configure a box in a variety of ways, which cannot be done with an AIO. (Maybe they like not paying for something unused, even if the price is the same.) Also, I hear they like PCI cards for maintainability. If the function on one card fails, they only need to replace that one card, not repair or replace the whole computer. It doesn't matter whether it works this way in practice or not. If that is the way IT folks think, that is what influences their buying decisions.
Apple could go one up on the x86 PC vendors when designing a low end, expandable Mac by only offering PCI express, no conventional PCI slots. This approach simplifies circuitry and cuts manufacturing cost. In fact, for any computer that has a PCI express X16 video card slot, adding two or three X1 PCI express slots is almost free -- just the cost of a tiny X1 connector and a rear panel cover piece for each slot.
Such a multi-purpose Mac might only have USB on the motherboard. Initially, Apple may have to build and offer some PCI express cards until the industry catches up. Here are the cards I think Apple would need for this model Mac. Likely, Apple would also offer cards that combine two or three of these functions, to cut cost more in certain configurations.
Basic Graphics: Very low price X16 card with VGA only out.
Digital Hub Graphics: eMac/iMac level of performance in an X16 card.
FireWire: FireWire 400 and 800 outputs.
Standard Network Card: 10/100 Ethernet.
Performance Network Card: 10/100/1000 Ethernet.
Modem Card: Standard 56K modem.
Another option could be choice of processor, either low cost or better performance. The better performance might be the same processor as, say, the eMac being sold at that time. As you can see, a very low priced model could be assembled for some applications. The pricing could be set to favor the AIO Macs, however. That is, if you assemble a multi-purpose Mac with the performance and features of, say, an eMac, the eMac would be cheaper. Such a multi-purpose Mac could serve many markets where Dell presently reigns as king.
Originally posted by JCG
RF not IR, you can't use IR through a wall, and the range is pretty limited, so you wouldn't be able to use it while cooking those steaks on the patio unless the Mac were there as well.
Originally posted by psgamer0921
You can never rule out products for the adults. Such as, maybe, an iVibrator
Yes you can, Apple stores don't have an "other room" with a silk drape for a door...and I dont see them comeing soon either, although it does have a greater chance than the iPc, a sub $1000 Mac that runs windows