I can guarantee two things from Apple with regard to the new iMac:
1. it won't have much if any internal expansion or upgradability, and
2. they will do everything including gluing the monitor to the CPU to make sure you buy their monitor.
Unfortunately, you are correct and Apple's market share will remain fairly steady at whatever it is(maybe a short spike here and there) and they will not increase market share thus failing in their stated goal.
How about this. Take 2 ibooks make them a bit thicker, each a little over 2 inches thick. Have them connected w/ an arm that can fold nearly flat or raise the top slab much as one would a display.
You should be able to lay one slab atop the other w/ matching nubs on each that prevents the two from smashing the wires. The bottom slab would house a hard drive, cd/dvd drive and power supply, also would have a usb2 and firewire port on the front. The top slab would house the cpu, gpu and the rest of the mobo. Both slabs would be a very neutral color to go w/ the displays, I'm thinking a flat dark grey. Why? because the displays can now be different colors w/o needing to remake the entire iMac for each color, this would free Apple up to even put out limited edition displays (say something like one that looks like its in a picture frame).
The displays would connect to the top slab via slots or some other connection method. The iMac LCDs would be sold w/o a stand and the DVI cable would be very short to keep from dangling below the top slab where it would plug in. Apple would sell a display stand and DVI extension cable seperately. Apple wouldn't but guaranteed someone would make a 3rd party wall mount stand for these displays.
This would give Apple a 'pizza box' (albeit one about 5" thick), an AIO-style comp (the display would 'click' into place on the top slab) all while giving people a very good reason to buy an Apple display w/o forcing it on them. Also it would give Apple additional displays to market to consumers.
I can guarantee two things from Apple with regard to the new iMac:
1. it won't have much if any internal expansion or upgradability, and
2. they will do everything including gluing the monitor to the CPU to make sure you buy their monitor.
It doesn't preclude having a separate monitor or a detachable one, but dont expect for one instant that Apple is going to give up the monitor to customers. There is no direct correlation between these a la carte features and either price or user demand. I don't think Apple is going to lose a lot of customers for pushing a monitor with the new iMac whether it's glued on or not.
Oh, and whether the iMac is a pyramid or a cube or a dome is kind of spurious if you're just picking a cool shape. It's the old design from the inside-out so called "soap bubble" approach that informed the two iMacs before. Obviously, they were refine dfor how they look on the outside, but the rationale was internal first.
iPod owners have some money or they wouldn't have an iPod. What they want is COOL and EASY and FAST ENOUGH and REASONABLE PRICE. I guess pretty much what we all want, but at a certain sweet spot that the current iMac must not hit.
Software-wise Panther is COOL and EASY, but most iPod buyers run on Windows, and iTunes has made that platform suddenly cool and easy for at least the music part of their lives.
Hardware-wise the iMac crt was cool and the iMac lcd was .... kind of cool. I personallly think that white is terrible color for computers ... about as exciting as beige, but harder to keep clean ... and it reminds me of bathroom furnishings.
The iMac IS fast enough for everything an iPod owner would want outside of the biggest games, BUT "fast enough" only lasts one year now. Upgradeabiliy is important to people and if Apple would only have made upgrading RAM and CPU and GPU as easy access as the OS has made unix, we would have had a real winner. Consumer computers need to be plug and play upgradeable ... as easy as docking an iPod.
"Reasonably Priced" is a hard thing to define. People, especially iPod owners, will pay more for style and quality and I can't claim to know the price points, but I believe that a few years ago Steve Jobs was correct when he publicly was targeting a $500 iMac as a goal. That hasn't happened, but I hope the eMac can get there. At the very least an iPod owner, a switcher who uses Windows now or at work, needs something cool for less than $1k before she will make the jump and that is all it will take to be convinced that OSX (esp. Tiger) will make Windows feel like your father's Oldsmobile.
In other words maybe the new iPod owners need a cool cpu accessory for their iPod in the form of the iMac and that doesn't mean cheap, it means reasonable and that means cool and less than $1k.
Yeah Dubbya, I guess we need the United Nations after all....nit!
One thing that hasn't come up in the lastest threads (but was a mainstay of years ago) is the discussion of "What is an iMac?" I think the product lines and the "message" have gotten abit murky for the public.
The iMac WAS the quickest way to the internet and WAS for the (at that time) majority of folks who didn't have a computer. The iMac NOW is the hub of the digital lifestyle for switchers or people who already had a computer.
There is still a need for an easy AIO for those first timers to computing ... that so far is in the form of the eMac, but because there is no advertizing for it...no buzz, it is not making a BIG impact. It is doing surprisingly well, and here I think is where the Apple Stores work so well. Let switchers and newbies see the PBooks and PMacs - let them go ga ga over Panther/Tiger - and then when they see the price, lead them over to the eMac if they flinch.
I think making the eMac, even more enticing to first timers...and I don't care if it does use crt's or not as long as it is strudy and cheap for schools ... just add color and pizzaz and sell it loaded with the music from every Pixar movie and loaded with every Pixar short film and trailer and every Pixar-based game AND give special PC trade-in bundles with cheap 10gigiPods (you know they could still sell those at a profit) to really jump-start someone's digital life!! And make it as close to $500 as possible. This won't harm other Mac sales because the 500-crowd will never buy a $1400 iMac or laptop anyway!
Then you have the somewhat prosumer current iMac2. How do you make a digital hub for switchers and the "just bought an iPod" crowd? Well you make switching easier - offer tradeins and bundles as above, but maybe concentrate on more software aspects and yes ... add colors or metallics or something COOL!!!!!! Cube with armature would be awesome, but if it can't get to $1000 on the very low-end and have either upgradeability or the ability to have dual monitors, it won't convince the switchers enough.
Just like with the Cube and eMac, there is no reason to eliminate "old" but effective form-factors, when you bring out the next best thing. Apple no longer needs to artificially keep its product grid simple. It needs to be able to meet the expectations of almost everyone that walks in their stores, because that is the market the iPod is giving them.
...The iMac NOW is the hub of the digital lifestyle for switchers or people who already had a computer....
If that is their goal then the iMac 2 has failed miserably, probably more miserably than the Cube which was a "boutique" computer for executives when it was untimely to do so.
I have to agree that the new iMac will not be the machine tghat many are hoping for. Due to heat problems, I think Apple will stay with the G4 and crank it up to 1.5 GHz. They may also up the RAM to 512 MB. The HD will most likely remain at 80 GB as that's a pretty good sized HD for this computer. A Firewire 800 port wilol probably be added as well. You must remember, the iMac is a consumer machine meant for persons who want a good, reliable computer - not a user who wants the latest and greatest. For them, there is the PM.
Well, Apple said at their last financial broadcast that the next iMac would be G5.
I have a feeling that next year Apple is going to release "something" which will explain WHY Steve paid no attention to the fact that one of his slides during his Tiger presentation noted: xGrid (Built right into Tiger).
Amazing this has gotten no press OR AI forum attention yet!! (well, until right now ofcause )
Maybe the new iMac design will be built around the fact that soon, really soon now, we will all be able to make home-cluster-brain-child-Mac's
That pyramid has to be the single worst computer design ever. It's the exact opposite of the iMac. It's a perfect example of space inefficiency. And it really couldn't be worse looking. When Apple makes a computer like that, the apocalypse will be upon us.
How nice to quietly sit and read this topic, hear all the different opinions...and then suddenly out of nowhere you read something that throws your body clear across the room, laughing so loud no PC fan would even attempt to compete.
"When Apple makes a compute like that, the apocalypse will be upon us" - pretty straight forward statement there LOL!!!
I seriously think you are hitting the nail on the head with a Peter Gabriel "Sledge Hammer" in a MC Hammer "Hammer Time" ))
hey...I'm just missing my old iPod is all...
Quote:
Originally posted by MacGregor
I actually agree with Applenut, though the word "bullshit" is not a great substitute for logical reasoning.
iPod owners have some money or they wouldn't have an iPod. What they want is COOL and EASY and FAST ENOUGH and REASONABLE PRICE. I guess pretty much what we all want, but at a certain sweet spot that the current iMac must not hit.
Software-wise Panther is COOL and EASY, but most iPod buyers run on Windows, and iTunes has made that platform suddenly cool and easy for at least the music part of their lives.
Hardware-wise the iMac crt was cool and the iMac lcd was .... kind of cool. I personallly think that white is terrible color for computers ... about as exciting as beige, but harder to keep clean ... and it reminds me of bathroom furnishings.
The iMac IS fast enough for everything an iPod owner would want outside of the biggest games, BUT "fast enough" only lasts one year now. Upgradeabiliy is important to people and if Apple would only have made upgrading RAM and CPU and GPU as easy access as the OS has made unix, we would have had a real winner. Consumer computers need to be plug and play upgradeable ... as easy as docking an iPod.
"Reasonably Priced" is a hard thing to define. People, especially iPod owners, will pay more for style and quality and I can't claim to know the price points, but I believe that a few years ago Steve Jobs was correct when he publicly was targeting a $500 iMac as a goal. That hasn't happened, but I hope the eMac can get there. At the very least an iPod owner, a switcher who uses Windows now or at work, needs something cool for less than $1k before she will make the jump and that is all it will take to be convinced that OSX (esp. Tiger) will make Windows feel like your father's Oldsmobile.
In other words maybe the new iPod owners need a cool cpu accessory for their iPod in the form of the iMac and that doesn't mean cheap, it means reasonable and that means cool and less than $1k.
I missed it as far as the G5 in the new iMac is concerned. However, I think Apple will stay with the AIO concept for the iMac. A headless iMac seems to be on a lot of wish lists, though. I also agree that Apple needs a computer for new switchers - something more basic that the iMac and that's where the eMac comes in. Something tells me that Apple may start emphasizing the eMac as a "switcher's" computer, rather than as an educational machine. I also think the eMac is due for a major upgrade as well. A flat panel monitor would be nice.
...Apple may start emphasizing the eMac as a "switcher's" computer, rather than as an educational machine. I also think the eMac is due for a major upgrade as well. A flat panel monitor would be nice.
The eMac is a stop-gap machine that has recieved little R&D. What they need is a computer that reafirms their commitment to the consumer with a good price/performance ratio and will take advantage to potential interest generated in Apple computers generated by the success of the iPod and iTMS. To do this they will need to hit the "sweet spot" that Apple has admitted that they were not able to achieve with the iMac G4 with a mainstream product that recieves adequate marketing and advertising. The eMac is too low end to really achieve these goals, and its technology and design it too out of date.
Precisely the way I feel. That's why I said that Apple may shift more emphasis to the eMac and bring out some serious reworking. The flat panel monitor would be a start, along with an update of chips - possibly to a G5 (although that would have to wait untiol the iMac is out and established).
Precisely the way I feel. That's why I said that Apple may shift more emphasis to the eMac and bring out some serious reworking. The flat panel monitor would be a start, along with an update of chips - possibly to a G5 (although that would have to wait untiol the iMac is out and established).
A flat panel monitor would make it an iMac, and the other updates are long overdue anyway. The archetecture of the eMac is basically a slow evolution of the original iMac without the value of the original iMac in relation to the surrounding market that it needs to compete in. What it, and the iMac, really needs is a compleatly redesigned motherboard, which is a necessity with the G5, incorperating standard features that similarly priced computers have such. A lot of those would come about with the adoption of a G5 archetecture. The potential pit fall is that even with the G5 it does not achieve the price/performance goals that it needs to compete in the market place.
The original iMac was a success not just for it's simplicity or its trendy design, but also becouse it was a computer that performed well against its competators in the market place both in real world performance and in percieved performance "by the numbers." I'm not sure that even a single 1.6 Ghz G5 achieves these goals, even given that it gets 1.5 X clock speed vs. a pentium 4 in real world performance that only makes it equivelent to a 2.4 Ghz P4 CPU which can be purchased for about $870 with a 15" FM monitor.
What is really needed is an iMac that has a clock speed of 1.8Ghz for the low end, and 2.0 for the high end with an entry price of less than $1,000 (USD). At the same time Apple needs to address the "gap" left in their line-up with the entry PowerMac starting at $1999. There is definatly a market for a lower priced "headless" computer, and Apple has all but abandoned it.
I want to predict 1 or 2 models with integrated LCD and integrated graphics and the usua; but better performance and prices.
However, I have this image of Steve Jobs on stage about to unveil the new iMac and talking about what people have demanded to make the new iMac a success and going through a checklist as he has in the past of issues and checking each one off as being addressed (headless, upgradeable graphics, G5, cheaper, etc)
so, i really can't figure it out and usually I do pretty well with predictions. August will be a long wait.
I get the feeling we are missing something here. The original iMac and the Mac, itself, for that matter were revoluntionary machines. The iMac was great not just because it brought the AIO concept back in a great package, but also because it took USB and later Firewire and really forced these new technolgies to break through. All this while getting rid of those stupid floppies.
I think its time for another big surprise. Sure Apple could get away with a new package and a G5, but if they want to keep their revoluntionary mantel they need to break some new ground. How about some realistic but not obvious predictions.
What technology is ready for prime time but just hasn't had the push needed to go big? Unfortuneatly, all i can think of is my built-in iSight idea. All the peices are there and it really is something that needs critical mass (and broadband) to become something we can't live without. Remember Steve talking about how it has changed the way folks work at Apple. Imagine a world of folks video chating for work and play.
Lets assume it will be a good looking computer with an lcd and a G5. What else is sitting out their waitnng for the apple treatment.
The current iMac suffers bad sales because of it's lack of price to performance ratio and it fails to meet the needs of MOST CONSUMERS* and the lack of upgrade options to get the machine capeable of doing what they need.
By MOST CONSUMERS*, I mean gamers (which is no small number considering how HUGE the gaming market). Regardless of whether you play games or not, there are dozens of people for every one of you who do or would if their machines weren't already outdated in terms of performance.
Also, aside from the lucrative gaming market, Mac OS X is extremely graphics rich and demanding and more of the performance and "snapiness" will DEPEND on great GPU performance.
Here's what I propose...
Upgradeable video cards OR the current top graphics card soldered to the motherboard (ATI Radeo 9800).
If upgradeable...
PCI Express - ATI X300 with BTO option for ATI X600 (leave the X800 for PowerMac towers).
This allows customers to pick what level of video they need according to what they use it for. Having upgradeable video cards would give incentive to ATI and NVidia to make more cards compatible for us Mac users.
As for the fear of galvinizing sales from the PowerMac G5 towers...
a) get over it...don't lose sales to customers who are unwilling to pay $2000 plus to get decent hardware
b) there will be enough differences to make the distinction between consumer desktops and pro desktops
1) Single vs. Dual processors
2) Expansion slots
3) More RAM slots (up to 8GB on towers, up to 4 GB on iMacs)
4) Headless (allows choice of monitors)
5) Built-in Bluetooth and Airport Xtreme (build to order on iMacs)
c) Price point is key...more than eMacs and less than PowerMacs
New case should have USB2, FireWire, and headphone port on the front of
the case, maybe VESA mounted LCDs.
Good
17" LCD
G5 1.6
256MB RAM (DDR400), expandable to 4GB
60 GB Serial ATA HD
Combo DVD/CDRW Drive
NVidia 5200 32MB
$999
Better
17" LCD
G5 1.8
512MB RAM (2 256MB DDR 400), expandable to 4GB
80 GB Serial ATA HD
Combo DVD/CDRW Drive
ATI 9600 64MB
$1299
Best
17" LCD (maybe 20" as Best plus option for $350 more)
G5 2.0
512MB RAM (1 512 DDR 400 stick)
80 GB Serial ATA HD
SuperDrive
PCI Express ATI X300
$1599
Granted this setup would require PowerMac G5 towers to bump up their graphics cards (128 MB Video RAM as low end, 256 MB High end), and a minimum of 512 DDR 400 for the towers as well.
Not one of these suggestions would seriously hurt Apple's profit margin and would seriously attract sales.
Would YOU buy one of these machines in a slick new case?
Apples needs to include more ram in there systems for less money. Right Now all powermac's(except the Dual 1.8) should come with at least 1GB.
They won't. Pisses of the retailers because RAM is the most profitable accessory.
Chillimac-
prices are way too low. Unless Apple kills the eMac you simply won't see a iMac with a 17" at 999. Sure you can buy a PC with a 17" LCD for $999 but you'll quickly notice the LCD is a crappy analog model. Apple doesn't put crappy LCDs with their systems. They are all digital and look sharp. That kind of quality is an "upgrade" feature for PCs. Most of these PCs are shipping with analog LCDs that look "worse" than a decent CRT. We've taken a large step backward.
Also any computer $999 or over needs a DVD burner. Your not going to save that much money by dropping down to a Combo drive. The eMac today has DVD Burner in it's upper model. Apple will be DVD burner along the whole lineup IMO. Doesn't make any sense to do otherwise.
Comments
Originally posted by BuonRotto
I can guarantee two things from Apple with regard to the new iMac:
1. it won't have much if any internal expansion or upgradability, and
2. they will do everything including gluing the monitor to the CPU to make sure you buy their monitor.
Unfortunately, you are correct and Apple's market share will remain fairly steady at whatever it is(maybe a short spike here and there) and they will not increase market share thus failing in their stated goal.
You should be able to lay one slab atop the other w/ matching nubs on each that prevents the two from smashing the wires. The bottom slab would house a hard drive, cd/dvd drive and power supply, also would have a usb2 and firewire port on the front. The top slab would house the cpu, gpu and the rest of the mobo. Both slabs would be a very neutral color to go w/ the displays, I'm thinking a flat dark grey. Why? because the displays can now be different colors w/o needing to remake the entire iMac for each color, this would free Apple up to even put out limited edition displays (say something like one that looks like its in a picture frame).
The displays would connect to the top slab via slots or some other connection method. The iMac LCDs would be sold w/o a stand and the DVI cable would be very short to keep from dangling below the top slab where it would plug in. Apple would sell a display stand and DVI extension cable seperately. Apple wouldn't but guaranteed someone would make a 3rd party wall mount stand for these displays.
This would give Apple a 'pizza box' (albeit one about 5" thick), an AIO-style comp (the display would 'click' into place on the top slab) all while giving people a very good reason to buy an Apple display w/o forcing it on them. Also it would give Apple additional displays to market to consumers.
Originally posted by BuonRotto
I can guarantee two things from Apple with regard to the new iMac:
1. it won't have much if any internal expansion or upgradability, and
2. they will do everything including gluing the monitor to the CPU to make sure you buy their monitor.
It doesn't preclude having a separate monitor or a detachable one, but dont expect for one instant that Apple is going to give up the monitor to customers. There is no direct correlation between these a la carte features and either price or user demand. I don't think Apple is going to lose a lot of customers for pushing a monitor with the new iMac whether it's glued on or not.
Oh, and whether the iMac is a pyramid or a cube or a dome is kind of spurious if you're just picking a cool shape. It's the old design from the inside-out so called "soap bubble" approach that informed the two iMacs before. Obviously, they were refine dfor how they look on the outside, but the rationale was internal first.
"Form follows function"
iPod owners have some money or they wouldn't have an iPod. What they want is COOL and EASY and FAST ENOUGH and REASONABLE PRICE. I guess pretty much what we all want, but at a certain sweet spot that the current iMac must not hit.
Software-wise Panther is COOL and EASY, but most iPod buyers run on Windows, and iTunes has made that platform suddenly cool and easy for at least the music part of their lives.
Hardware-wise the iMac crt was cool and the iMac lcd was .... kind of cool. I personallly think that white is terrible color for computers ... about as exciting as beige, but harder to keep clean ... and it reminds me of bathroom furnishings.
The iMac IS fast enough for everything an iPod owner would want outside of the biggest games, BUT "fast enough" only lasts one year now. Upgradeabiliy is important to people and if Apple would only have made upgrading RAM and CPU and GPU as easy access as the OS has made unix, we would have had a real winner. Consumer computers need to be plug and play upgradeable ... as easy as docking an iPod.
"Reasonably Priced" is a hard thing to define. People, especially iPod owners, will pay more for style and quality and I can't claim to know the price points, but I believe that a few years ago Steve Jobs was correct when he publicly was targeting a $500 iMac as a goal. That hasn't happened, but I hope the eMac can get there. At the very least an iPod owner, a switcher who uses Windows now or at work, needs something cool for less than $1k before she will make the jump and that is all it will take to be convinced that OSX (esp. Tiger) will make Windows feel like your father's Oldsmobile.
In other words maybe the new iPod owners need a cool cpu accessory for their iPod in the form of the iMac and that doesn't mean cheap, it means reasonable and that means cool and less than $1k.
Yeah Dubbya, I guess we need the United Nations after all....nit!
yes.
The iMac WAS the quickest way to the internet and WAS for the (at that time) majority of folks who didn't have a computer. The iMac NOW is the hub of the digital lifestyle for switchers or people who already had a computer.
There is still a need for an easy AIO for those first timers to computing ... that so far is in the form of the eMac, but because there is no advertizing for it...no buzz, it is not making a BIG impact. It is doing surprisingly well, and here I think is where the Apple Stores work so well. Let switchers and newbies see the PBooks and PMacs - let them go ga ga over Panther/Tiger - and then when they see the price, lead them over to the eMac if they flinch.
I think making the eMac, even more enticing to first timers...and I don't care if it does use crt's or not as long as it is strudy and cheap for schools ... just add color and pizzaz and sell it loaded with the music from every Pixar movie and loaded with every Pixar short film and trailer and every Pixar-based game AND give special PC trade-in bundles with cheap 10gigiPods (you know they could still sell those at a profit) to really jump-start someone's digital life!! And make it as close to $500 as possible. This won't harm other Mac sales because the 500-crowd will never buy a $1400 iMac or laptop anyway!
Then you have the somewhat prosumer current iMac2. How do you make a digital hub for switchers and the "just bought an iPod" crowd? Well you make switching easier - offer tradeins and bundles as above, but maybe concentrate on more software aspects and yes ... add colors or metallics or something COOL!!!!!! Cube with armature would be awesome, but if it can't get to $1000 on the very low-end and have either upgradeability or the ability to have dual monitors, it won't convince the switchers enough.
Just like with the Cube and eMac, there is no reason to eliminate "old" but effective form-factors, when you bring out the next best thing. Apple no longer needs to artificially keep its product grid simple. It needs to be able to meet the expectations of almost everyone that walks in their stores, because that is the market the iPod is giving them.
Originally posted by MacGregor
...The iMac NOW is the hub of the digital lifestyle for switchers or people who already had a computer....
If that is their goal then the iMac 2 has failed miserably, probably more miserably than the Cube which was a "boutique" computer for executives when it was untimely to do so.
Originally posted by chipz
I have to agree that the new iMac will not be the machine tghat many are hoping for. Due to heat problems, I think Apple will stay with the G4 and crank it up to 1.5 GHz. They may also up the RAM to 512 MB. The HD will most likely remain at 80 GB as that's a pretty good sized HD for this computer. A Firewire 800 port wilol probably be added as well. You must remember, the iMac is a consumer machine meant for persons who want a good, reliable computer - not a user who wants the latest and greatest. For them, there is the PM.
Well, Apple said at their last financial broadcast that the next iMac would be G5.
Originally posted by onlooker
You could cluster in Panther from the get go.
I have a feeling that next year Apple is going to release "something" which will explain WHY Steve paid no attention to the fact that one of his slides during his Tiger presentation noted: xGrid (Built right into Tiger).
Amazing this has gotten no press OR AI forum attention yet!! (well, until right now ofcause
Maybe the new iMac design will be built around the fact that soon, really soon now, we will all be able to make home-cluster-brain-child-Mac's
Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
That pyramid has to be the single worst computer design ever. It's the exact opposite of the iMac. It's a perfect example of space inefficiency. And it really couldn't be worse looking. When Apple makes a computer like that, the apocalypse will be upon us.
How nice to quietly sit and read this topic, hear all the different opinions...and then suddenly out of nowhere you read something that throws your body clear across the room, laughing so loud no PC fan would even attempt to compete.
"When Apple makes a compute like that, the apocalypse will be upon us" - pretty straight forward statement there LOL!!!
hey...I'm just missing my old iPod is all...
Originally posted by MacGregor
I actually agree with Applenut, though the word "bullshit" is not a great substitute for logical reasoning.
iPod owners have some money or they wouldn't have an iPod. What they want is COOL and EASY and FAST ENOUGH and REASONABLE PRICE. I guess pretty much what we all want, but at a certain sweet spot that the current iMac must not hit.
Software-wise Panther is COOL and EASY, but most iPod buyers run on Windows, and iTunes has made that platform suddenly cool and easy for at least the music part of their lives.
Hardware-wise the iMac crt was cool and the iMac lcd was .... kind of cool. I personallly think that white is terrible color for computers ... about as exciting as beige, but harder to keep clean ... and it reminds me of bathroom furnishings.
The iMac IS fast enough for everything an iPod owner would want outside of the biggest games, BUT "fast enough" only lasts one year now. Upgradeabiliy is important to people and if Apple would only have made upgrading RAM and CPU and GPU as easy access as the OS has made unix, we would have had a real winner. Consumer computers need to be plug and play upgradeable ... as easy as docking an iPod.
"Reasonably Priced" is a hard thing to define. People, especially iPod owners, will pay more for style and quality and I can't claim to know the price points, but I believe that a few years ago Steve Jobs was correct when he publicly was targeting a $500 iMac as a goal. That hasn't happened, but I hope the eMac can get there. At the very least an iPod owner, a switcher who uses Windows now or at work, needs something cool for less than $1k before she will make the jump and that is all it will take to be convinced that OSX (esp. Tiger) will make Windows feel like your father's Oldsmobile.
In other words maybe the new iPod owners need a cool cpu accessory for their iPod in the form of the iMac and that doesn't mean cheap, it means reasonable and that means cool and less than $1k.
Originally posted by chipz
...Apple may start emphasizing the eMac as a "switcher's" computer, rather than as an educational machine. I also think the eMac is due for a major upgrade as well. A flat panel monitor would be nice.
The eMac is a stop-gap machine that has recieved little R&D. What they need is a computer that reafirms their commitment to the consumer with a good price/performance ratio and will take advantage to potential interest generated in Apple computers generated by the success of the iPod and iTMS. To do this they will need to hit the "sweet spot" that Apple has admitted that they were not able to achieve with the iMac G4 with a mainstream product that recieves adequate marketing and advertising. The eMac is too low end to really achieve these goals, and its technology and design it too out of date.
Originally posted by chipz
Precisely the way I feel. That's why I said that Apple may shift more emphasis to the eMac and bring out some serious reworking. The flat panel monitor would be a start, along with an update of chips - possibly to a G5 (although that would have to wait untiol the iMac is out and established).
A flat panel monitor would make it an iMac, and the other updates are long overdue anyway. The archetecture of the eMac is basically a slow evolution of the original iMac without the value of the original iMac in relation to the surrounding market that it needs to compete in. What it, and the iMac, really needs is a compleatly redesigned motherboard, which is a necessity with the G5, incorperating standard features that similarly priced computers have such. A lot of those would come about with the adoption of a G5 archetecture. The potential pit fall is that even with the G5 it does not achieve the price/performance goals that it needs to compete in the market place.
The original iMac was a success not just for it's simplicity or its trendy design, but also becouse it was a computer that performed well against its competators in the market place both in real world performance and in percieved performance "by the numbers." I'm not sure that even a single 1.6 Ghz G5 achieves these goals, even given that it gets 1.5 X clock speed vs. a pentium 4 in real world performance that only makes it equivelent to a 2.4 Ghz P4 CPU which can be purchased for about $870 with a 15" FM monitor.
What is really needed is an iMac that has a clock speed of 1.8Ghz for the low end, and 2.0 for the high end with an entry price of less than $1,000 (USD). At the same time Apple needs to address the "gap" left in their line-up with the entry PowerMac starting at $1999. There is definatly a market for a lower priced "headless" computer, and Apple has all but abandoned it.
I want to predict 1 or 2 models with integrated LCD and integrated graphics and the usua; but better performance and prices.
However, I have this image of Steve Jobs on stage about to unveil the new iMac and talking about what people have demanded to make the new iMac a success and going through a checklist as he has in the past of issues and checking each one off as being addressed (headless, upgradeable graphics, G5, cheaper, etc)
so, i really can't figure it out and usually I do pretty well with predictions. August will be a long wait.
I think its time for another big surprise. Sure Apple could get away with a new package and a G5, but if they want to keep their revoluntionary mantel they need to break some new ground. How about some realistic but not obvious predictions.
What technology is ready for prime time but just hasn't had the push needed to go big? Unfortuneatly, all i can think of is my built-in iSight idea. All the peices are there and it really is something that needs critical mass (and broadband) to become something we can't live without. Remember Steve talking about how it has changed the way folks work at Apple. Imagine a world of folks video chating for work and play.
Lets assume it will be a good looking computer with an lcd and a G5. What else is sitting out their waitnng for the apple treatment.
By MOST CONSUMERS*, I mean gamers (which is no small number considering how HUGE the gaming market). Regardless of whether you play games or not, there are dozens of people for every one of you who do or would if their machines weren't already outdated in terms of performance.
Also, aside from the lucrative gaming market, Mac OS X is extremely graphics rich and demanding and more of the performance and "snapiness" will DEPEND on great GPU performance.
Here's what I propose...
Upgradeable video cards OR the current top graphics card soldered to the motherboard (ATI Radeo 9800).
If upgradeable...
PCI Express - ATI X300 with BTO option for ATI X600 (leave the X800 for PowerMac towers).
This allows customers to pick what level of video they need according to what they use it for. Having upgradeable video cards would give incentive to ATI and NVidia to make more cards compatible for us Mac users.
As for the fear of galvinizing sales from the PowerMac G5 towers...
a) get over it...don't lose sales to customers who are unwilling to pay $2000 plus to get decent hardware
b) there will be enough differences to make the distinction between consumer desktops and pro desktops
1) Single vs. Dual processors
2) Expansion slots
3) More RAM slots (up to 8GB on towers, up to 4 GB on iMacs)
4) Headless (allows choice of monitors)
5) Built-in Bluetooth and Airport Xtreme (build to order on iMacs)
c) Price point is key...more than eMacs and less than PowerMacs
New case should have USB2, FireWire, and headphone port on the front of
the case, maybe VESA mounted LCDs.
Good
17" LCD
G5 1.6
256MB RAM (DDR400), expandable to 4GB
60 GB Serial ATA HD
Combo DVD/CDRW Drive
NVidia 5200 32MB
$999
Better
17" LCD
G5 1.8
512MB RAM (2 256MB DDR 400), expandable to 4GB
80 GB Serial ATA HD
Combo DVD/CDRW Drive
ATI 9600 64MB
$1299
Best
17" LCD (maybe 20" as Best plus option for $350 more)
G5 2.0
512MB RAM (1 512 DDR 400 stick)
80 GB Serial ATA HD
SuperDrive
PCI Express ATI X300
$1599
Granted this setup would require PowerMac G5 towers to bump up their graphics cards (128 MB Video RAM as low end, 256 MB High end), and a minimum of 512 DDR 400 for the towers as well.
Not one of these suggestions would seriously hurt Apple's profit margin and would seriously attract sales.
Would YOU buy one of these machines in a slick new case?
Comments welcome.
Originally posted by Altivec_2.0
Apples needs to include more ram in there systems for less money. Right Now all powermac's(except the Dual 1.8) should come with at least 1GB.
They won't. Pisses of the retailers because RAM is the most profitable accessory.
Chillimac-
prices are way too low. Unless Apple kills the eMac you simply won't see a iMac with a 17" at 999. Sure you can buy a PC with a 17" LCD for $999 but you'll quickly notice the LCD is a crappy analog model. Apple doesn't put crappy LCDs with their systems. They are all digital and look sharp. That kind of quality is an "upgrade" feature for PCs. Most of these PCs are shipping with analog LCDs that look "worse" than a decent CRT. We've taken a large step backward.
Also any computer $999 or over needs a DVD burner. Your not going to save that much money by dropping down to a Combo drive. The eMac today has DVD Burner in it's upper model. Apple will be DVD burner along the whole lineup IMO. Doesn't make any sense to do otherwise.