the true idiot is one who categorizes the uses and needs of an entire market and can't make a rebuttal without making an ass of himself
I agree with your formatc2,
Applenut, matsu is ignorant. To say the eMac has no place in the computing market. the eMac served our company great all around. From testing unix applications to cinema 4d to photoshop to perl to cocoa. It was a great machine and WELL worth the money.
Formatc2 is correct... it is the cheapest way to get away from viruses and spyware and still be able to do what most home users do.
I think I need to explain what I mean... When the Industry made the 17" and 19" CRT the standard, Apple dumped theres for the CD's. When it seemed everyone was pushing 15"LCD's apple dumped the 15"CD. Now that dell and everyone else is offering 17"LCD's, I think apple will keep up there tradition and not offer any 17"CD any where in there line. (I do not include eMacs in this statement). Apple likes to be the pace mark, and in so very many ways they are so I belive that the new iMac will have 20"CD with it. That is only what I think. I am probable way off the mark here, but it would follow the pattern from there past.
categorizes the uses and needs of an entire market
Were talking about the eMac here.
Do you think the eMac is a pro machine? Sure it is. I make a living with mine, but I don't think you'll be running Motion, Final Cut, Logic, Shake, etc. on this thing.
Sorry to go down to Matsu's level in my post, but I'm tired of people slamming the eMac.
What market am I missing? Education? Sure, it's awesome for that. Government? Sure it's supported by the Office of Management and Budget.
You're right, I missed a bunch. Matsu sent me over the edge.
Applenut, matsu is ignorant. To say the eMac has no place in the computing market. the eMac served our company great all around. From testing unix applications to cinema 4d to photoshop to perl to cocoa. It was a great machine and WELL worth the money.
Formatc2 is correct... it is the cheapest way to get away from viruses and spyware and still be able to do what most home users do.
never said i agreed with matsu....i don't. but formatc2 also shows a bit of ignorance, nevermind immaturity himself.
Yeah, the eMac is a stroke of genius. It's such a great model, pretty affordable, nice design. I like it very much. Death of the CRT? Yeah, right Steve.
Yeah, the eMac is a stroke of genius. It's such a great model, pretty affordable, nice design. I like it very much. Death of the CRT? Yeah, right Steve.
In Steve's defense LCD's had been falling at a pretty quick pace up untill around the release of the G4 iMac when demand really started outpacing supply. Since then 15" LCD's haven't dropped that much in price, and have seen a few increases due to high demand (though I don't know if they were always passed on to consumers). Right now there is still a high demand for 15" LCD's, especially since they are used in more laptops today than they were 24 months ago. Once supply (production capacity) increases or demand decreases (due to less expensive 17" displays for desktops) the prices should start coming down on the 15" screens again.
In Steve's defense LCD's had been falling at a pretty quick pace up untill around the release of the G4 iMac when demand really started outpacing supply. Since then 15" LCD's haven't dropped that much in price, and have seen a few increases due to high demand
theinquirer.net has reported that LCD manufacturers have been keeping the cost of smaller screens artificially high by constraining supply, in an effort to sell larger screens. This seems to have back fired, leaving them with an abundance on small screens that nobody wants due to the high price. Expect to see 15" and 17" screens drop in price as a result, even tho there is a shortage of screens.
the current iMac isn't doing all that well, not compared to the original iMac.
The people who want a machine like that go for the eMac.
It has a lot more bang for the buck, like the CRT iMac had
so:
iMac = interesting but overpriced for the market.
eMac = doing well but could do w/ a makeover since it is bulky.
the way I see this is that Apple are very much aware of this.
I think the two are gonna be merged.
Exit eMac, you have served us well, but the new iMac will be replacing your and its place in the product line. They only released you in the first place because there was such a cry for an 1G iMac kinda desktop after the latter was discontinued.
Current iMac, nice try, but too much of a gimmick for the time, that's what you get trying to be ahead of your time.... Albeit not usually the most rewarding strategy, kudos to you nonetheless.
Picture, the eMac, but then not so Deep, it will lose the CRT and get a LCD in stead, guts behind the screen..... a marriage between eMac and iMac.
Now think about the term: Pizza box...... doesn't sound all too weird anymore now does it?
...This seems to have back fired, leaving them with an abundance on small screens that nobody wants due to the high price. Expect to see 15" and 17" screens drop in price as a result, even tho there is a shortage of screens.
Isn't this contradictory, how can you have an abundance of small screens and a shortage of them at the same time? They eiter have an abundance, which at some point should lead to price cuts to decrease their inventory, or they have a shortage of the screens which should result in the price staying where it is or raising depending on the demand for the LCD panels.
eMac costs too much in consumer form. The edu optioned models, which make up the bulk of the sales of eMac, are good enough for edu. But that CRT has no place on a 999 machine. Needs to be an LCD. 17" CRT based systems of comparable spec sell for 500 CANADIAN. Less than half the price of an eMac. Nobody buying a computer for email and www browsing is interested. People buying a computer for something more, they know a little more, and typically opt for a better display. At 999, it's easy to spec a system with a 17 LCD panel.
I will never go back to using CRTs, NEVER. I still have one at work, which is soon to be replaced with a laptop, and then I will be CRT free.
It's such a horrible display choice, and ruins an otherwise perfectly good computer.
First off the eMac is 749 and 899 for edu / 799 and 999 for consumers. You forgot the low end model which is just as capable... just minus a superdrive and 40gb. That is hardly worth 150-200 dollars. Second of all, good CRTs make a world of a difference. Why do you think some 17" monitors are 300 dollars while others are 80 dollars? You get what you pay for. I am sitting pretty on a P95f+ Viewsonic Diamondtron display right now. I love this display more than my LCD at work. I like it because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR. It is hard to find clearity like this. Ask many graphics professionals and they will tell you the same thing.
When you say: "Nobody buying a computer for email and www browsing is interested.", don't you think thats a little ignorant? I know many people that love the eMac and its price and its CRT. Why? Because it is a cheap solution to get away from spyware, virii, and trojans. Why is the eMac so expensive? Many reseasons, first is design, second is because it can be. Sure this comptuer can drop another 100-200 and it would be great. But I don't believe it would have a huge effect. Apple has repeatedly admitted it doesn't want to be in the low-end market. Quality of a computer reduces quite drastically with computers in this field. Just look at dell. The 300-600 dollar computers made are extremely generic and poorly manufactured. The case sheet metal is thin, the motherboards are buggy, the plastic on the case breaks easily, etc.
Apple is doing fine with the eMac, only thing I wish they would do is add an eMac stand in the package. I would rather have them add that then drop the price down.
Right, the iMac works for edu, for pedagogical reasons, as it works for mac heads on a budget. It emphatically does not work as a machine that attracts new users to the fold. It is a consolation prize that slows the rate of defection, but it is far from ideal.
Apple actually sells the eMac a LOT cheaper than even 749 into the edu channel. And with opticals selling for a 20 in bulk, we know that they could sell the eMac for 60-75% of what they sell it at today. They already do it, just not for consumers, or edu consumers, but they do do it for educational institutions -- and that's where ALL the sales are, there ain't much in the consumer space.
999 is a great mark for a family computer. People will spend the money, but they expect a better display than a 17" CRT.
At 999, that has to be an iMac with some sort of LCD, even Apple has at least twice admitted that much.
It is not ignorant at all to say that nobody buying a computer for email/office/web is interested. Look at the sales, especially once you've removed heavily discounted institutional sales from the mix. Consumers JUST DO NOT want to spend a thousand dollars for a CRT. They expect an LCD. People buying a disposable computer for light use will pay a disposable price (500) on a 17" CRT bundle, and throw the machine away in two/three years, and just get another.
People spending a thousand expect more.
And let's not get into the low quality PC myth. Dell's boxes are very quiet, very reliable, and very cheap. They're ugly, sure, uninspiring, but they are fast enough, and reliable. I've seen 300 seat labs set up and deployed with no problems whatsoever. They get constant use in a campus of 35 000 plus students. They're locked down tight, and don't give any problems. The 15 and 17" LCD panels (on the systems) are also a lot nicer than the eMacs we got for the same price as those "crappy" Dells. I guess we need some anti-PC BS from time to time -- just be careful not to believe it.
PS, The CRT in the eMac is far from "good" It produces average refresh rates at 1024x768 and is too slow at 1152 and above. Got to be at least 85hz, that means XGA is the only ergonomically useable rez on the eMac. What's worse, it is not even a Trinitron type apeture grill, but an annoying shadow mask, and it produces a lot of moire. If you choose to ignore that, fine, either you're blind or uncritical enough not to see it. It's not better than the flat 17" CRT's that get bundled with a budget eMachines. In fact, the last eMachines I saw with a 17" CRT had a better display than that of the eMac. At best you couold say that the eMac's display is average for a flat screen. It's a budget item in a nice wrapper -- nothing more.
And let's not get into the low quality PC myth. Dell's boxes are very quiet, very reliable, and very cheap. They're ugly, sure, uninspiring, but they are fast enough, and reliable. I've seen 300 seat labs set up and deployed with no problems whatsoever.
I don't know what you mean by reliable. At home we've had, um... 6 Dell machines. 5 of them have been really faulty (CD-burner problems, keyboard problems, trackpad/trackpoint, hard disk, motherboard, LCDs gone bad, you name it. Unfortunately, I'm not making this up). That's one of the reasons I use a Mac today.
I've worked for the tech support department at my university campus, and I'd say Dell machines are just cheap and unreliable.
Reliable wouldn't be a word I'd use to describe a Dell machine. One thing Dell does do very well is replace faulty computers parts really fast. That's their upside.
Well, that's just the experience I've had. I'm aware everyone will speak from their observations and past experience. Just my $0.02.
And let's not get into the low quality PC myth. Dell's boxes are very quiet, very reliable, and very cheap. They're ugly, sure, uninspiring, but they are fast enough, and reliable. I've seen 300 seat labs set up and deployed with no problems whatsoever. They get constant use in a campus of 35 000 plus students. They're locked down tight, and don't give any problems. The 15 and 17" LCD panels (on the systems) are also a lot nicer than the eMacs we got for the same price as those "crappy" Dells. I guess we need some anti-PC BS from time to time -- just be careful not to believe it.
Certainly I've seen labs where anywhere from 10 - 30% of the Dells are out of commission due to mechanical faults. I'd hardly call them reliable.
As much as I hate the company dell... thats what we use at work (many many boxes...) and I have never seen one fail. Perhaps because they are only being used for office, outlook and internet access.
I asked our sysadmin why he chose dell, he said because a. they give the best bang for the buck, and b. because they have a local support center here (korea).
My experience with Dell boils down to this, they make uninspired solid equipment, and failures tend to be caused by faulty parts.
Apple is the opposite, they often have wonderful out there designs, with fundamental flaws. Components typical seem to go forever, given the chance.
Where they truly differ is quality of customer support. Ive never had a bad experience with Apple ( sometimes time consuming, but I never felt angry dealing with them ). Dell have similarly been great for providing business support ( next day replacement ), but as a consumer, dealing with Dell is like getting teeth pulled.
Look, it boils down this way: DELL makes perfectly reliable machines for stuff like student labs. The sys admin will lock down the network to avoid virii, spyware and other user induced nuissance, and the things will provide many years of trouble free use. This is not to say there aren't total POS shit PC labs/environs that some poor souls are forced to work in, but there's a similar proportion of bad Apples (pun, haha) on the mac side. There was a smurf tower lab in my old university that was total shit, every machine was buggered in one way or another. And the eMacs that went in (about 70) with the latest DELL lab (about 300) had much higher failure too -- could be a system admin failing, but it just goes to show, that for certain environs, your machines are only as good as your admin/support, no matter what platform you choose.
If we want to really talk about quality, or the lack thereof, we might want to recall the attrocious rate of video board failure on early eMacs, or logic board problems on numerous runs of iBook.
Apple is hardly immune.
The fact remains: eMac is a poor machine for consumers at the 799-999 range. 999 warrants an LCD. f they wish to have a cheaper CRT alternative in the line-up, the a 699 (max) eMac will do -- a combo-drive will suffice, as will a G4. They already sell eMacs much cheaper than this, just not to you and me.
Dell makes perfectly reliable machines if you pay over 800. Their machines under that figure are complete crap. The case is weak, the components they use are cheap and flakey... bottom line is you get what you pay for. They are the worst machines for linux or unix. The ones we had at school were shit.
Also no matter how good your IT is... pc's still get bugs. Remember the blaster virus? Yah no one saw that coming. Everyone got that even with the toughest firewall because of m$'s stupid communication ideas. This had EVERYTHING to do with windows and NOT IT. Every computer in our school's 4 campuses got nailed with it. That was a fun week.
This whole dell thing started because of people pointing out you can get them cheap and apple should too... fact is if you want to make a profit of any kind off of machines like that, you have to make a cheesy computer. This is fine if you want to have a bad reputation... I see why apple doesn't want to enter the low-end consumer market. More problems than it is worth.
Fact remains that Apple DOES sell the eMac MUCH CHEAPER to institutions. The only penalty is the deletion of an optical, and a slightly slower CPU. $50 in additional cost, at best, to treat the consumer machines in the same way. eMacs could easily sell for 599-699, they do not, not because the machine can't be sold at a profit at that price, most of the sales are at that price -- just not to consumers, or consumers-cum-"edu" consumers, ie teachers and students. The reason the eMac is 799-999 to consumers is to avoid making the iMac look like an abysmally bad deal. You don't want to win iMac customers away with a cheaper machine.
However, expect a 999 entry level iMac with the new redesign, expect the eMac to disappear from the consumer landscape (at least the high end eMac) within a few months of the iMac debut.
Comments
Originally posted by applenut
the true idiot is one who categorizes the uses and needs of an entire market and can't make a rebuttal without making an ass of himself
I agree with your formatc2,
Applenut, matsu is ignorant. To say the eMac has no place in the computing market. the eMac served our company great all around. From testing unix applications to cinema 4d to photoshop to perl to cocoa. It was a great machine and WELL worth the money.
Formatc2 is correct... it is the cheapest way to get away from viruses and spyware and still be able to do what most home users do.
Originally posted by applenut
categorizes the uses and needs of an entire market
Were talking about the eMac here.
Do you think the eMac is a pro machine? Sure it is. I make a living with mine, but I don't think you'll be running Motion, Final Cut, Logic, Shake, etc. on this thing.
Sorry to go down to Matsu's level in my post, but I'm tired of people slamming the eMac.
What market am I missing? Education? Sure, it's awesome for that. Government? Sure it's supported by the Office of Management and Budget.
You're right, I missed a bunch. Matsu sent me over the edge.
Originally posted by emig647
I agree with your formatc2,
Applenut, matsu is ignorant. To say the eMac has no place in the computing market. the eMac served our company great all around. From testing unix applications to cinema 4d to photoshop to perl to cocoa. It was a great machine and WELL worth the money.
Formatc2 is correct... it is the cheapest way to get away from viruses and spyware and still be able to do what most home users do.
never said i agreed with matsu....i don't. but formatc2 also shows a bit of ignorance, nevermind immaturity himself.
Originally posted by monkeyastronaut
Yeah, the eMac is a stroke of genius. It's such a great model, pretty affordable, nice design. I like it very much. Death of the CRT? Yeah, right Steve.
In Steve's defense LCD's had been falling at a pretty quick pace up untill around the release of the G4 iMac when demand really started outpacing supply. Since then 15" LCD's haven't dropped that much in price, and have seen a few increases due to high demand (though I don't know if they were always passed on to consumers). Right now there is still a high demand for 15" LCD's, especially since they are used in more laptops today than they were 24 months ago. Once supply (production capacity) increases or demand decreases (due to less expensive 17" displays for desktops) the prices should start coming down on the 15" screens again.
Originally posted by JCG
In Steve's defense LCD's had been falling at a pretty quick pace up untill around the release of the G4 iMac when demand really started outpacing supply. Since then 15" LCD's haven't dropped that much in price, and have seen a few increases due to high demand
theinquirer.net has reported that LCD manufacturers have been keeping the cost of smaller screens artificially high by constraining supply, in an effort to sell larger screens. This seems to have back fired, leaving them with an abundance on small screens that nobody wants due to the high price. Expect to see 15" and 17" screens drop in price as a result, even tho there is a shortage of screens.
the current iMac isn't doing all that well, not compared to the original iMac.
The people who want a machine like that go for the eMac.
It has a lot more bang for the buck, like the CRT iMac had
so:
iMac = interesting but overpriced for the market.
eMac = doing well but could do w/ a makeover since it is bulky.
the way I see this is that Apple are very much aware of this.
I think the two are gonna be merged.
Exit eMac, you have served us well, but the new iMac will be replacing your and its place in the product line. They only released you in the first place because there was such a cry for an 1G iMac kinda desktop after the latter was discontinued.
Current iMac, nice try, but too much of a gimmick for the time, that's what you get trying to be ahead of your time.... Albeit not usually the most rewarding strategy, kudos to you nonetheless.
Picture, the eMac, but then not so Deep, it will lose the CRT and get a LCD in stead, guts behind the screen..... a marriage between eMac and iMac.
Now think about the term: Pizza box...... doesn't sound all too weird anymore now does it?
Originally posted by mmmpie
...This seems to have back fired, leaving them with an abundance on small screens that nobody wants due to the high price. Expect to see 15" and 17" screens drop in price as a result, even tho there is a shortage of screens.
Isn't this contradictory, how can you have an abundance of small screens and a shortage of them at the same time? They eiter have an abundance, which at some point should lead to price cuts to decrease their inventory, or they have a shortage of the screens which should result in the price staying where it is or raising depending on the demand for the LCD panels.
I will never go back to using CRTs, NEVER. I still have one at work, which is soon to be replaced with a laptop, and then I will be CRT free.
It's such a horrible display choice, and ruins an otherwise perfectly good computer.
First off the eMac is 749 and 899 for edu / 799 and 999 for consumers. You forgot the low end model which is just as capable... just minus a superdrive and 40gb. That is hardly worth 150-200 dollars. Second of all, good CRTs make a world of a difference. Why do you think some 17" monitors are 300 dollars while others are 80 dollars? You get what you pay for. I am sitting pretty on a P95f+ Viewsonic Diamondtron display right now. I love this display more than my LCD at work. I like it because it is CRYSTAL CLEAR. It is hard to find clearity like this. Ask many graphics professionals and they will tell you the same thing.
When you say: "Nobody buying a computer for email and www browsing is interested.", don't you think thats a little ignorant? I know many people that love the eMac and its price and its CRT. Why? Because it is a cheap solution to get away from spyware, virii, and trojans. Why is the eMac so expensive? Many reseasons, first is design, second is because it can be. Sure this comptuer can drop another 100-200 and it would be great. But I don't believe it would have a huge effect. Apple has repeatedly admitted it doesn't want to be in the low-end market. Quality of a computer reduces quite drastically with computers in this field. Just look at dell. The 300-600 dollar computers made are extremely generic and poorly manufactured. The case sheet metal is thin, the motherboards are buggy, the plastic on the case breaks easily, etc.
Apple is doing fine with the eMac, only thing I wish they would do is add an eMac stand in the package. I would rather have them add that then drop the price down.
Apple actually sells the eMac a LOT cheaper than even 749 into the edu channel. And with opticals selling for a 20 in bulk, we know that they could sell the eMac for 60-75% of what they sell it at today. They already do it, just not for consumers, or edu consumers, but they do do it for educational institutions -- and that's where ALL the sales are, there ain't much in the consumer space.
999 is a great mark for a family computer. People will spend the money, but they expect a better display than a 17" CRT.
At 999, that has to be an iMac with some sort of LCD, even Apple has at least twice admitted that much.
It is not ignorant at all to say that nobody buying a computer for email/office/web is interested. Look at the sales, especially once you've removed heavily discounted institutional sales from the mix. Consumers JUST DO NOT want to spend a thousand dollars for a CRT. They expect an LCD. People buying a disposable computer for light use will pay a disposable price (500) on a 17" CRT bundle, and throw the machine away in two/three years, and just get another.
People spending a thousand expect more.
And let's not get into the low quality PC myth. Dell's boxes are very quiet, very reliable, and very cheap. They're ugly, sure, uninspiring, but they are fast enough, and reliable. I've seen 300 seat labs set up and deployed with no problems whatsoever. They get constant use in a campus of 35 000 plus students. They're locked down tight, and don't give any problems. The 15 and 17" LCD panels (on the systems) are also a lot nicer than the eMacs we got for the same price as those "crappy" Dells. I guess we need some anti-PC BS from time to time -- just be careful not to believe it.
PS, The CRT in the eMac is far from "good" It produces average refresh rates at 1024x768 and is too slow at 1152 and above. Got to be at least 85hz, that means XGA is the only ergonomically useable rez on the eMac. What's worse, it is not even a Trinitron type apeture grill, but an annoying shadow mask, and it produces a lot of moire. If you choose to ignore that, fine, either you're blind or uncritical enough not to see it. It's not better than the flat 17" CRT's that get bundled with a budget eMachines. In fact, the last eMachines I saw with a 17" CRT had a better display than that of the eMac. At best you couold say that the eMac's display is average for a flat screen. It's a budget item in a nice wrapper -- nothing more.
Originally posted by Matsu
And let's not get into the low quality PC myth. Dell's boxes are very quiet, very reliable, and very cheap. They're ugly, sure, uninspiring, but they are fast enough, and reliable. I've seen 300 seat labs set up and deployed with no problems whatsoever.
I don't know what you mean by reliable. At home we've had, um... 6 Dell machines. 5 of them have been really faulty (CD-burner problems, keyboard problems, trackpad/trackpoint, hard disk, motherboard, LCDs gone bad, you name it. Unfortunately, I'm not making this up). That's one of the reasons I use a Mac today.
I've worked for the tech support department at my university campus, and I'd say Dell machines are just cheap and unreliable.
Reliable wouldn't be a word I'd use to describe a Dell machine. One thing Dell does do very well is replace faulty computers parts really fast. That's their upside.
Well, that's just the experience I've had. I'm aware everyone will speak from their observations and past experience. Just my $0.02.
Originally posted by Matsu
And let's not get into the low quality PC myth. Dell's boxes are very quiet, very reliable, and very cheap. They're ugly, sure, uninspiring, but they are fast enough, and reliable. I've seen 300 seat labs set up and deployed with no problems whatsoever. They get constant use in a campus of 35 000 plus students. They're locked down tight, and don't give any problems. The 15 and 17" LCD panels (on the systems) are also a lot nicer than the eMacs we got for the same price as those "crappy" Dells. I guess we need some anti-PC BS from time to time -- just be careful not to believe it.
Certainly I've seen labs where anywhere from 10 - 30% of the Dells are out of commission due to mechanical faults. I'd hardly call them reliable.
I asked our sysadmin why he chose dell, he said because a. they give the best bang for the buck, and b. because they have a local support center here (korea).
My experience with Dell boils down to this, they make uninspired solid equipment, and failures tend to be caused by faulty parts.
Apple is the opposite, they often have wonderful out there designs, with fundamental flaws. Components typical seem to go forever, given the chance.
Where they truly differ is quality of customer support. Ive never had a bad experience with Apple ( sometimes time consuming, but I never felt angry dealing with them ). Dell have similarly been great for providing business support ( next day replacement ), but as a consumer, dealing with Dell is like getting teeth pulled.
If we want to really talk about quality, or the lack thereof, we might want to recall the attrocious rate of video board failure on early eMacs, or logic board problems on numerous runs of iBook.
Apple is hardly immune.
The fact remains: eMac is a poor machine for consumers at the 799-999 range. 999 warrants an LCD. f they wish to have a cheaper CRT alternative in the line-up, the a 699 (max) eMac will do -- a combo-drive will suffice, as will a G4. They already sell eMacs much cheaper than this, just not to you and me.
Also no matter how good your IT is... pc's still get bugs. Remember the blaster virus? Yah no one saw that coming. Everyone got that even with the toughest firewall because of m$'s stupid communication ideas. This had EVERYTHING to do with windows and NOT IT. Every computer in our school's 4 campuses got nailed with it. That was a fun week.
This whole dell thing started because of people pointing out you can get them cheap and apple should too... fact is if you want to make a profit of any kind off of machines like that, you have to make a cheesy computer. This is fine if you want to have a bad reputation... I see why apple doesn't want to enter the low-end consumer market. More problems than it is worth.
Fact remains that Apple DOES sell the eMac MUCH CHEAPER to institutions. The only penalty is the deletion of an optical, and a slightly slower CPU. $50 in additional cost, at best, to treat the consumer machines in the same way. eMacs could easily sell for 599-699, they do not, not because the machine can't be sold at a profit at that price, most of the sales are at that price -- just not to consumers, or consumers-cum-"edu" consumers, ie teachers and students. The reason the eMac is 799-999 to consumers is to avoid making the iMac look like an abysmally bad deal. You don't want to win iMac customers away with a cheaper machine.
However, expect a 999 entry level iMac with the new redesign, expect the eMac to disappear from the consumer landscape (at least the high end eMac) within a few months of the iMac debut.