I'd say that half (ok, maybe not quite half) of the fun of getting a new Mac is the screen. That's where a lot of the cool points are. A low end headless Mac makes me think "PC", which is the only group that it would really appeal to.
Weren't there rumors about there being an eMac model without a CD Rom, something teachers requested? Or at least having that option.
That's been an option for awhile. I believe they are only sold to schools, but every now and then an optically-challenged eMac will show up on the Special Deals page on the Apple store.
I'd say that half (ok, maybe not quite half) of the fun of getting a new Mac is the screen. That's where a lot of the cool points are. A low end headless Mac makes me think "PC", which is the only group that it would really appeal to.
i'm still waiting for the 20" iMacG5 i ordered the day after the philnote.
I doubt it, as well. Going by recent product line refreshes (the only one I can think off the top of my head is the PowerMac G5), it should be maybe 10 or 11 months. (I'm not counting the move from single to double 1.8's, that was more of a bump than a revision). Powerbooks, iBooks, eMacs, XServes all seem overdue for updates, so maybe Apple has decided to update a little less??? Who knows, just my one penny's worth... (my opinion's not worth the extra cent).
I doubt it, as well. Going by recent product line refreshes (the only one I can think off the top of my head is the PowerMac G5), it should be maybe 10 or 11 months. (I'm not counting the move from single to double 1.8's, that was more of a bump than a revision). Powerbooks, iBooks, eMacs, XServes all seem overdue for updates, so maybe Apple has decided to update a little less??? Who knows, just my one penny's worth... (my opinion's not worth the extra cent).
To this day apple has been consistant updating the ibooks and powerbooks... If they update them within the next month or two... they are still on time... with 6-7 month life cycles. The powermac has been out of their control... otherwise I'm sure they too would be 7-8 months too. I don't think iMacs and eMacs have ever been on a consistant life cycle.
If it wasn't for other companies... i'm sure apple would like to update to stay competitive with other companies... its hard when you don't sell that many computers... thought after posting the profits they did yesterday... I'm sure they could give a little on their prices or more updating
why do you expect apple to introduce a headless singleprocessor G5 (or G4) with some expansion options for less than $800 dollars? i think $1000 or slightly more is what you can expect to pay for a machine like that.
Because in the past, Apple's Fred Anderson stated that Apple wished to increase market share. It's all well and good that Apple is doing quite well for the moment, however, over the last few years their total sales of computers has leveled off, with a minor blip of an increase, I believe about 2%. The rest of the industry, PC's, has increased sales substantially more than 2%, so, even after Apple stated they wanted to increase market share they are actually losing market share while posting what I believe to be insignificant total unit sales increases.
Apple is not increasing market share, and I believe, once those consumers that like and want an AIO, upgrade or buy into this trend, sales will again level off, we will all be discussing this same topic again in about a year maybe 2.
I suspect Apple's total unit sales will continue to increase modestly, sustaining the company, but, and I hope I'm wrong, I do not expect Apple to ever increase market share until they offer what most consumers want rather than what they believe the consumers need. And on top of that, I really don't think Apple cares anyway, as long as they make a profit.
well, following yesterday's report, you can bet it'll start at around $899 or higher, since apple said they don't see them making very much money in the sub $800 PC market.
that having been said, it'd be kinda cool to have a classroom set up with fifty of these guys, and anytime someone had a question, the housing on their computer would light up. yeah, okay, cheesy, but why not...
To this day apple has been consistant updating the ibooks and powerbooks... If they update them within the next month or two... they are still on time... with 6-7 month life cycles. The powermac has been out of their control... otherwise I'm sure they too would be 7-8 months too. I don't think iMacs and eMacs have ever been on a consistant life cycle.
I stand corrected. For some reason, I had it in my head that the G4 iBooks of 10/03 were the last revision...I forgot about the April rev. Like I said, my opinion ain't worth much!
well, following yesterday's report, you can bet it'll start at around $899 or higher, since apple said they don't see them making very much money in the sub $800 PC market.
Well that is all fine and dandy that Apple can't figure out how to make money on low cost machines. I'd like to find out how and how much money they are making on their high cost lines. Certainly PowerMac sales have slipped enough that one has to question the economics of producing them.
Quote:
that having been said, it'd be kinda cool to have a classroom set up with fifty of these guys, and anytime someone had a question, the housing on their computer would light up. yeah, okay, cheesy, but why not...
Just like everything else great in this country.... apple will end eventually... unless they do something about growing their market share. You can only retain that size of a market share for so long. The iPod trend will only last for so long. The AIO trend will only last for so long. I hate to say it... but unless apple makes a Pro machine for less than 2k... they are screwed. 2k for a workstation is unacceptable. The rest of the industry won't move to OS X, even if it is a better OS, for that much money.
The eMac isn't the answer either. I hate the cube idea... because that was about as big as a failure as Lisa and the Newton.
Time for a new machine in the mix... This is getting us no where.
well, following yesterday's report, you can bet it'll start at around $899 or higher, since apple said they don't see them making very much money in the sub $800 PC market.
I remember reading somewhere that schools were moving towards laptops instead of traditional desktops. I'm sure Apple would be happier supplying schools with higher priced/margined iBooks than any eMac.
My thoughts on Apples market share lately have led me to think about other companies that have consistently only held a niche position in markets.
I think the easiest comparison is to car companies. Apple may be small, but it is the BMW/Acura of the computing world in a sense. It will never sell the number of computers that GM/Windows companies do, but those who are willing to shell out the (relatively small) extra expense, what they get is a much better product.
I would like to see Apple become the Toyota/Lexus (High quality, reliability, volume, and durability) one day. No one ever thought that one day Toyota would be breathing down GM's neck, but they may number one in as few as 11 years.
Unrelated tidbit, if you think the M$ money stash is impressive, you should check out Toyotas, something around $128 Billion!. Honda is way up there as well.
There is no reason why a determined Apple cannot beat up on a stumbling (and lately arrogant) Microsoft.
Just like everything else great in this country.... apple will end eventually... unless they do something about growing their market share. You can only retain that size of a market share for so long.
yep, only been working for them for, um, 20 years... apple, the only company that's been going out of business for two decades strong.
Quote:
Originally posted by emig647
The iPod trend will only last for so long. The AIO trend will only last for so long. I hate to say it... but unless apple makes a Pro machine for less than 2k... they are screwed. 2k for a workstation is unacceptable. The rest of the industry won't move to OS X, even if it is a better OS, for that much money.
well, apple has openly declared they don't WANT the rest of the industry. the only people who want the rest of the industry is apple's users, so we can stop hearing crap from our pc-using co-workers.
Quote:
Originally posted by emig647
The eMac isn't the answer either. I hate the cube idea... because that was about as big as a failure as Lisa and the Newton.
the eMac isn't meant to be "the answer." in fact, i think the iMac from '98-2000 was meant to be the answer, but then its charm waned and there was no building of switching people over. apple sold a hell of a lot of imacs to current mac owners, which, in and of itself, is still an accomplishment, because mac owners are notorious for holding onto their macs until the last bolt falls out. contrast that with certain software makers who will remain nameless who count on people to upgrade to fix bugs and security holes that should not be there in the first place.
yes, the cube flopped, and as apple finally admitted, it was a combo of price point and some design issues (non-standard length video slot hindered upgrading, the clean cube design was hampered when you had to daisy-chain 5 peripherals out the bottom, etc). the newton, functionally, was ahead of its time, with great ambitions, but too much girth and expense.
the ipod is TODAY'S "answer." and they'll have to come up with a new "answer" in 3-5 years when the market is saturated or novelty has faded. the market and consumers' tastes change in that span, and so does the question of "what will people want." apple is becoming sony, but whereas sony is trying to get into the computer business from media supply, apple is leveraging the computer experience to, first, test the market with mac users, and then build hype, and unleash on the pc using market.
Quote:
Originally posted by emig647
Time for a new machine in the mix... This is getting us no where.
how 'bout this... give the new iMac G5 a little more than a friggin' month, 'kay?
yep, only been working for them for, um, 20 years... apple, the only company that's been going out of business for two decades strong.
Quote:
Originally posted by rok
well, apple has openly declared they don't WANT the rest of the industry. the only people who want the rest of the industry is apple's users, so we can stop hearing crap from our pc-using co-workers.
Wrong!!! Apple's switcher campaign was aimed "at the other 95 percent". Apple most definitely wants (and probably needs) a higher market share, if only to encourage more developers to build for OS X.
Quote:
Originally posted by rok
how 'bout this... give the new iMac G5 a little more than a friggin' month, 'kay?
Wrong!!! Apple's switcher campaign was aimed "at the other 95 percent". Apple most definitely wants (and probably needs) a higher market share, if only to encourage more developers to build for OS X.
hmmm... i stand corrected. er, well, actually sit, slouching...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't Apple ALWAYS made an AIO? Orignal Mac, the fat Mac, Classic, SE, etc, various Performas, 5xxx series, AIO G3, iMac, eMac? 20 years is a looong trend in the computer world! Granted some of these are/were education-only market, but that's a market nonetheless, and they did sell in large numbers.
I've seen past and current PC's that are AIO, as well, so it's not an Apple-only trend.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a high end G4 in an eMac run almost as fast as a low end G5? Not only that, but wouldn't the power consumption also be lower, thus needing less fans, paving the way for a simpler design? Maybe: simpler design -> cheaper?
I dunno. My 2 cents.
Greetings:
From most the messages here, I don't really understand the fevor to soup up eMacs to "PowerMac" levels (why hitch an "ideal" PC-rival low price?), especially since most purchasers will scarcely notice any performance difference. Arizona MUG plays it dispassionately straight:
I think the easiest comparison is to car companies. Apple may be small, but it is the BMW/Acura of the computing world in a sense. It will never sell the number of computers that GM/Windows companies do, but those who are willing to shell out the (relatively small) extra expense, what they get is a much better product.
I would like to see Apple become the Toyota/Lexus (High quality, reliability, volume, and durability) one day. No one ever thought that one day Toyota would be breathing down GM's neck, but they may number one in as few as 11 years.
Gasoline is platform-independent, computer peripherals and software are not. That's why people are wondering about sustainability for Apple, and not so much for boutique car makers (even though you'll notice almost all of the smaller premium makers have been bought out.)
I do like your Toyota/Lexus analogy in terms of quality and reliability, although Apple doesn't even have to switch 'brands'. BMW now has Mini, and plans more Mini models beyond the Cooper. BMW also has a new 1 Series coming out with at least some BMW DNA (overall design, rear-wheel drive, handling.)
I think Steven Jobs would detest your Toyota comparison though- do you think he'd drive a Camry in a million years???
Comments
Originally posted by Xtremehkr
Weren't there rumors about there being an eMac model without a CD Rom, something teachers requested? Or at least having that option.
That's been an option for awhile. I believe they are only sold to schools, but every now and then an optically-challenged eMac will show up on the Special Deals page on the Apple store.
Originally posted by bucci
I'd say that half (ok, maybe not quite half) of the fun of getting a new Mac is the screen. That's where a lot of the cool points are. A low end headless Mac makes me think "PC", which is the only group that it would really appeal to.
Who out number us ninteen to one by the way.
Originally posted by Xtremehkr
Could the iMac be getting a major revision so early on?
what? hell no!!
i'm still waiting for the 20" iMacG5 i ordered the day after the philnote.
Originally posted by gar
what? hell no!!
i'm still waiting for the 20" iMacG5 i ordered the day after the philnote.
I doubt it, as well. Going by recent product line refreshes (the only one I can think off the top of my head is the PowerMac G5), it should be maybe 10 or 11 months. (I'm not counting the move from single to double 1.8's, that was more of a bump than a revision). Powerbooks, iBooks, eMacs, XServes all seem overdue for updates, so maybe Apple has decided to update a little less??? Who knows, just my one penny's worth... (my opinion's not worth the extra cent).
Originally posted by Uberspleef
I doubt it, as well. Going by recent product line refreshes (the only one I can think off the top of my head is the PowerMac G5), it should be maybe 10 or 11 months. (I'm not counting the move from single to double 1.8's, that was more of a bump than a revision). Powerbooks, iBooks, eMacs, XServes all seem overdue for updates, so maybe Apple has decided to update a little less??? Who knows, just my one penny's worth... (my opinion's not worth the extra cent).
To this day apple has been consistant updating the ibooks and powerbooks... If they update them within the next month or two... they are still on time... with 6-7 month life cycles. The powermac has been out of their control... otherwise I'm sure they too would be 7-8 months too. I don't think iMacs and eMacs have ever been on a consistant life cycle.
If it wasn't for other companies... i'm sure apple would like to update to stay competitive with other companies... its hard when you don't sell that many computers... thought after posting the profits they did yesterday... I'm sure they could give a little on their prices or more updating
Originally posted by gar
why do you expect apple to introduce a headless singleprocessor G5 (or G4) with some expansion options for less than $800 dollars? i think $1000 or slightly more is what you can expect to pay for a machine like that.
Because in the past, Apple's Fred Anderson stated that Apple wished to increase market share. It's all well and good that Apple is doing quite well for the moment, however, over the last few years their total sales of computers has leveled off, with a minor blip of an increase, I believe about 2%. The rest of the industry, PC's, has increased sales substantially more than 2%, so, even after Apple stated they wanted to increase market share they are actually losing market share while posting what I believe to be insignificant total unit sales increases.
Apple is not increasing market share, and I believe, once those consumers that like and want an AIO, upgrade or buy into this trend, sales will again level off, we will all be discussing this same topic again in about a year maybe 2.
I suspect Apple's total unit sales will continue to increase modestly, sustaining the company, but, and I hope I'm wrong, I do not expect Apple to ever increase market share until they offer what most consumers want rather than what they believe the consumers need. And on top of that, I really don't think Apple cares anyway, as long as they make a profit.
But then again that's just me rambling.
that having been said, it'd be kinda cool to have a classroom set up with fifty of these guys, and anytime someone had a question, the housing on their computer would light up. yeah, okay, cheesy, but why not...
Originally posted by emig647
To this day apple has been consistant updating the ibooks and powerbooks... If they update them within the next month or two... they are still on time... with 6-7 month life cycles. The powermac has been out of their control... otherwise I'm sure they too would be 7-8 months too. I don't think iMacs and eMacs have ever been on a consistant life cycle.
I stand corrected. For some reason, I had it in my head that the G4 iBooks of 10/03 were the last revision...I forgot about the April rev. Like I said, my opinion ain't worth much!
Originally posted by rok
well, following yesterday's report, you can bet it'll start at around $899 or higher, since apple said they don't see them making very much money in the sub $800 PC market.
Well that is all fine and dandy that Apple can't figure out how to make money on low cost machines. I'd like to find out how and how much money they are making on their high cost lines. Certainly PowerMac sales have slipped enough that one has to question the economics of producing them.
Quote:
that having been said, it'd be kinda cool to have a classroom set up with fifty of these guys, and anytime someone had a question, the housing on their computer would light up. yeah, okay, cheesy, but why not...
The eMac isn't the answer either. I hate the cube idea... because that was about as big as a failure as Lisa and the Newton.
Time for a new machine in the mix... This is getting us no where.
Originally posted by rok
well, following yesterday's report, you can bet it'll start at around $899 or higher, since apple said they don't see them making very much money in the sub $800 PC market.
I remember reading somewhere that schools were moving towards laptops instead of traditional desktops. I'm sure Apple would be happier supplying schools with higher priced/margined iBooks than any eMac.
I think the easiest comparison is to car companies. Apple may be small, but it is the BMW/Acura of the computing world in a sense. It will never sell the number of computers that GM/Windows companies do, but those who are willing to shell out the (relatively small) extra expense, what they get is a much better product.
I would like to see Apple become the Toyota/Lexus (High quality, reliability, volume, and durability) one day. No one ever thought that one day Toyota would be breathing down GM's neck, but they may number one in as few as 11 years.
Unrelated tidbit, if you think the M$ money stash is impressive, you should check out Toyotas, something around $128 Billion!. Honda is way up there as well.
There is no reason why a determined Apple cannot beat up on a stumbling (and lately arrogant) Microsoft.
Originally posted by emig647
Just like everything else great in this country.... apple will end eventually... unless they do something about growing their market share. You can only retain that size of a market share for so long.
yep, only been working for them for, um, 20 years... apple, the only company that's been going out of business for two decades strong.
Originally posted by emig647
The iPod trend will only last for so long. The AIO trend will only last for so long. I hate to say it... but unless apple makes a Pro machine for less than 2k... they are screwed. 2k for a workstation is unacceptable. The rest of the industry won't move to OS X, even if it is a better OS, for that much money.
well, apple has openly declared they don't WANT the rest of the industry. the only people who want the rest of the industry is apple's users, so we can stop hearing crap from our pc-using co-workers.
Originally posted by emig647
The eMac isn't the answer either. I hate the cube idea... because that was about as big as a failure as Lisa and the Newton.
the eMac isn't meant to be "the answer." in fact, i think the iMac from '98-2000 was meant to be the answer, but then its charm waned and there was no building of switching people over. apple sold a hell of a lot of imacs to current mac owners, which, in and of itself, is still an accomplishment, because mac owners are notorious for holding onto their macs until the last bolt falls out. contrast that with certain software makers who will remain nameless who count on people to upgrade to fix bugs and security holes that should not be there in the first place.
yes, the cube flopped, and as apple finally admitted, it was a combo of price point and some design issues (non-standard length video slot hindered upgrading, the clean cube design was hampered when you had to daisy-chain 5 peripherals out the bottom, etc). the newton, functionally, was ahead of its time, with great ambitions, but too much girth and expense.
the ipod is TODAY'S "answer." and they'll have to come up with a new "answer" in 3-5 years when the market is saturated or novelty has faded. the market and consumers' tastes change in that span, and so does the question of "what will people want." apple is becoming sony, but whereas sony is trying to get into the computer business from media supply, apple is leveraging the computer experience to, first, test the market with mac users, and then build hype, and unleash on the pc using market.
Originally posted by emig647
Time for a new machine in the mix... This is getting us no where.
how 'bout this... give the new iMac G5 a little more than a friggin' month, 'kay?
Originally posted by rok
yep, only been working for them for, um, 20 years... apple, the only company that's been going out of business for two decades strong.
Originally posted by rok
well, apple has openly declared they don't WANT the rest of the industry. the only people who want the rest of the industry is apple's users, so we can stop hearing crap from our pc-using co-workers.
Wrong!!! Apple's switcher campaign was aimed "at the other 95 percent". Apple most definitely wants (and probably needs) a higher market share, if only to encourage more developers to build for OS X.
Originally posted by rok
how 'bout this... give the new iMac G5 a little more than a friggin' month, 'kay?
I tried, but I ended up buying one anyway.
Originally posted by PBG4 Dude
Wrong!!! Apple's switcher campaign was aimed "at the other 95 percent". Apple most definitely wants (and probably needs) a higher market share, if only to encourage more developers to build for OS X.
hmmm... i stand corrected. er, well, actually sit, slouching...
Originally posted by emig647
The AIO trend will only last for so long.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't Apple ALWAYS made an AIO? Orignal Mac, the fat Mac, Classic, SE, etc, various Performas, 5xxx series, AIO G3, iMac, eMac? 20 years is a looong trend in the computer world!
I've seen past and current PC's that are AIO, as well, so it's not an Apple-only trend.
Originally posted by bucci
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't a high end G4 in an eMac run almost as fast as a low end G5? Not only that, but wouldn't the power consumption also be lower, thus needing less fans, paving the way for a simpler design? Maybe: simpler design -> cheaper?
I dunno. My 2 cents.
Greetings:
From most the messages here, I don't really understand the fevor to soup up eMacs to "PowerMac" levels (why hitch an "ideal" PC-rival low price?), especially since most purchasers will scarcely notice any performance difference. Arizona MUG plays it dispassionately straight:
http://www.amug.org/amug-web/html/am...icles/emac125/
James Greenidge
Originally posted by Xtremehkr
I think the easiest comparison is to car companies. Apple may be small, but it is the BMW/Acura of the computing world in a sense. It will never sell the number of computers that GM/Windows companies do, but those who are willing to shell out the (relatively small) extra expense, what they get is a much better product.
I would like to see Apple become the Toyota/Lexus (High quality, reliability, volume, and durability) one day. No one ever thought that one day Toyota would be breathing down GM's neck, but they may number one in as few as 11 years.
Gasoline is platform-independent, computer peripherals and software are not. That's why people are wondering about sustainability for Apple, and not so much for boutique car makers (even though you'll notice almost all of the smaller premium makers have been bought out.)
I do like your Toyota/Lexus analogy in terms of quality and reliability, although Apple doesn't even have to switch 'brands'. BMW now has Mini, and plans more Mini models beyond the Cooper. BMW also has a new 1 Series coming out with at least some BMW DNA (overall design, rear-wheel drive, handling.)
I think Steven Jobs would detest your Toyota comparison though- do you think he'd drive a Camry in a million years???