your reply has next to nothing to do what i was commenting on. you can't simply look at the price difference between a 20" and 23" display, and think that will be the sum total of the extra cost incurred by making a new 23" iMac.
I believe shanmugam was talking about SELLING price for a 23" iMac, not its development cost. His estimate is simple and pretty accurate, good enough for a first cut at product planning at Apple. Don't forget that the development cost for the iMac is already included in its price, usually amortized over the expected life of the product.
No there was the original iMac G5 with the back that came off, then they made a G5 with the current thinner sealed case (with iSight and Front Row), when the Intel iMac came out kept this casing. Thats why I was thinking the current case with iSight and Front Row could handle a Conroe.
I believe shanmugam was talking about SELLING price for a 23" iMac, not its development cost. His estimate is simple and pretty accurate, good enough for a first cut at product planning at Apple. Don't forget that the development cost for the iMac is already included in its price, usually amortized over the expected life of the product.
Exactly. The development cost is rolled in. So you can't just add the cost of a bigger display to the current 20" price and think it's going to work.
They'd need to redesign the enclosure, redesign the internal layout, set up new manufacturing lines... on and on and on.
It's not simple math. It's actually quite complex.
Exactly. The development cost is rolled in. So you can't just add the cost of a bigger display to the current 20" price and think it's going to work.
They'd need to redesign the enclosure, redesign the internal layout, set up new manufacturing lines... on and on and on.
It's not simple math. It's actually quite complex.
Where to start? "The development cost is rolled in." True. "They'd need to redesign the enclosure, redesign the internal layout, set up new manufacturing lines... on and on and on." True. All these costs are rolled into the selling price as fixed costs, and amortized over some time period, usually a number of years or possibly the expected life of the product.
When a new product comes along, like a 23" iMac, the development cost is spread out and a certain amount is allocated to each item sold, so it depends on the sales forecast from marketing. This process was done for the current iMac. There is no reason to expect the allocation to be any higher for a 23" iMac. If there is $40 in each iMac for engineering development, it would be about the same for a 23" iMac. The same process applies to the 20" and 23" displays.
Now, if the 23" display sells for $300 more than the 20", it means Apple needed to mark up the price because of the more expensive parts, mainly the larger LCD panel. It would be the same with the iMac. Apple would mark up the price of the 23" because of more expensive part, essentially the 23" panel. In this case, it is convenient that we know how much this mark up is because of the displays. If we know the added mark up, we know the selling price.
There is no reason to go through all the mathematics when we have such an example staring us in the face. Oh, and accounting is not complex, just very tedious.
You're entirely wrong when you assume it's merely a markeup for a larger LCD panel. That is the point. That $300 markup would certainly factor into the cost of a 23" iMac.
... and THEN you start adding in all the extra costs associated with making the new computers. More materials to mold the housing, a redesign of internal component layout, possibly a new foot, larger packaging and thus increased warehousing costs... Said costs will then inflate the price of the new iMac far beyond the $300 mark.
I think another thing that needs to be understood here is that Apple has made a concerted effort to minimize the amount of space their products take up in their stores. Larger iMacs mean you have less room to keep all your offerings on site. This may seem trivial to some, but clearly it is important to Apple.
You're entirely wrong when you assume it's merely a markeup for a larger LCD panel. That is the point. That $300 markup would certainly factor into the cost of a 23" iMac.
... and THEN you start adding in all the extra costs associated with making the new computers. More materials to mold the housing, a redesign of internal component layout, possibly a new foot, larger packaging and thus increased warehousing costs... Said costs will then inflate the price of the new iMac far beyond the $300 mark.
Please try to understand what I said in my last reply. Every time Apple develops a new model Mac, there are all these costs that you list here. These costs are amortized over all the computers sold. Their price is "inflated" (your word) by a certain amount to pay back the development cost. This was done on the current iMac and would be done on a new 23" iMac. I used the hypothetical amount of $40 to cover these costs. Only Apple knows the actual amount.
Since the current iMac's price includes this allocation of development costs, it is already in the current price. A 23" iMac would have such an allocation too. So there are no "extra costs associated with making [a new iMac]." Such a cost is always included in the price, of both current and future Macs.
Now it was my guess that the $40, or whatever the real amount is, will be the same for both the current iMac and a new 23" iMac. We could debate this issue, but unless you know some unusually large cost associated with developing a 23" iMac, you would not have much of a case.
Quote:
I think another thing that needs to be understood here is that Apple has made a concerted effort to minimize the amount of space their products take up in their stores. Larger iMacs mean you have less room to keep all your offerings on site. This may seem trivial to some, but clearly it is important to Apple.
I don't think a 23" iMac would be much larger than a 20", if at all. No more width or height is required for the hardware attached to the backside. The boarder around the LCD panel could be a lot smaller. But that's another subject.
Please try to understand what I said in my last reply. Every time Apple develops a new model Mac, there are all these costs that you list here. These costs are amortized over all the computers sold. Their price is "inflated" (your word) by a certain amount to pay back the development cost. This was done on the current iMac and would be done on a new 23" iMac. I used the hypothetical amount of $40 to cover these costs. Only Apple knows the actual amount.
Since the current iMac's price includes this allocation of development costs, it is already in the current price. A 23" iMac would have such an allocation too. So there are no "extra costs associated with making [a new iMac]." Such a cost is always included in the price, of both current and future Macs.
Quote:
Now it was my guess that the $40, or whatever the real amount is, will be the same for both the current iMac and a new 23" iMac. We could debate this issue, but unless you know some unusually large cost associated with developing a 23" iMac, you would not have much of a case.
Clearly I have no case then. Your guesses have obviously blown gaping holes in my concerns of upfront expenditure associated with the jarringly simple task of slamming a 23" display in white plastic and tossing in some computer parts behind it.
I concede defeat.
Quote:
I don't think a 23" iMac would be much larger than a 20", if at all. No more width or height is required for the hardware attached to the backside. The boarder around the LCD panel could be a lot smaller. But that's another subject.
Crossing fingers for the 5th, but thinking the 19th. A 23" iMac could be something very cool to lead off 2007 (MWSF)?
Just a thought. Gotta figure Apple has to have some other cool goodies up their sleeve for MWSF, right?
--DotComCTO
Haha, yeah. That's where their going to debut the (enter phone/tablet/dvr rumor here). My bet is an all Leopard MWSF with a cool "one more thing" no one saw coming, not a 23" iMac.
As much as I love my 20" iMac, there's nothing more I'd like than to have a revised 20" where they do away with the "chin". I'd take that before worrying about a 23".
Could not agree more re the 'chin', also some degree of screen flexibility or adjustment would be a great advance in any new model iMac
The chin gives the iMac it's distinctive look. I hope they keep it (knowing full well it'll be gone eventually). But curses to all who stick post-its on there!
The chin gives the iMac it's distinctive look. I hope they keep it (knowing full well it'll be gone eventually). But curses to all who stick post-its on there!
I would say just the opposite, I don't like the chin which means that they will keep it and probably make it more pronounced...
Maybe our opposing views will cancel each other out and they will leave it as is, at least till the next major redesign.
I believe shanmugam was talking about SELLING price for a 23" iMac, not its development cost. His estimate is simple and pretty accurate, good enough for a first cut at product planning at Apple. Don't forget that the development cost for the iMac is already included in its price, usually amortized over the expected life of the product.
yep snoopy, i am purely speculating on the price points ...
we can speculate more on the cost if we know what is the development, R&D, shipping and other cost associated with it. but the it will be developed from the 20" iMac with larger screen. Most of these costs are already observed and few will be added further like big storage and handling charges because of its larger size than 20", other than that i do not see a completely redesigned case or anything like that. i believe if it happens it applies to 17" and 20" model as well
Comments
I think that the Intel iMac is thinner than the original iMac G5.
I thought the intel iMac had a G5 in it for a short time before the Intel chip was inserted.
your reply has next to nothing to do what i was commenting on. you can't simply look at the price difference between a 20" and 23" display, and think that will be the sum total of the extra cost incurred by making a new 23" iMac.
I believe shanmugam was talking about SELLING price for a 23" iMac, not its development cost. His estimate is simple and pretty accurate, good enough for a first cut at product planning at Apple. Don't forget that the development cost for the iMac is already included in its price, usually amortized over the expected life of the product.
I believe shanmugam was talking about SELLING price for a 23" iMac, not its development cost. His estimate is simple and pretty accurate, good enough for a first cut at product planning at Apple. Don't forget that the development cost for the iMac is already included in its price, usually amortized over the expected life of the product.
Exactly. The development cost is rolled in. So you can't just add the cost of a bigger display to the current 20" price and think it's going to work.
They'd need to redesign the enclosure, redesign the internal layout, set up new manufacturing lines... on and on and on.
It's not simple math. It's actually quite complex.
Exactly. The development cost is rolled in. So you can't just add the cost of a bigger display to the current 20" price and think it's going to work.
They'd need to redesign the enclosure, redesign the internal layout, set up new manufacturing lines... on and on and on.
It's not simple math. It's actually quite complex.
Where to start? "The development cost is rolled in." True. "They'd need to redesign the enclosure, redesign the internal layout, set up new manufacturing lines... on and on and on." True. All these costs are rolled into the selling price as fixed costs, and amortized over some time period, usually a number of years or possibly the expected life of the product.
When a new product comes along, like a 23" iMac, the development cost is spread out and a certain amount is allocated to each item sold, so it depends on the sales forecast from marketing. This process was done for the current iMac. There is no reason to expect the allocation to be any higher for a 23" iMac. If there is $40 in each iMac for engineering development, it would be about the same for a 23" iMac. The same process applies to the 20" and 23" displays.
Now, if the 23" display sells for $300 more than the 20", it means Apple needed to mark up the price because of the more expensive parts, mainly the larger LCD panel. It would be the same with the iMac. Apple would mark up the price of the 23" because of more expensive part, essentially the 23" panel. In this case, it is convenient that we know how much this mark up is because of the displays. If we know the added mark up, we know the selling price.
There is no reason to go through all the mathematics when we have such an example staring us in the face. Oh, and accounting is not complex, just very tedious.
... and THEN you start adding in all the extra costs associated with making the new computers. More materials to mold the housing, a redesign of internal component layout, possibly a new foot, larger packaging and thus increased warehousing costs... Said costs will then inflate the price of the new iMac far beyond the $300 mark.
I think another thing that needs to be understood here is that Apple has made a concerted effort to minimize the amount of space their products take up in their stores. Larger iMacs mean you have less room to keep all your offerings on site. This may seem trivial to some, but clearly it is important to Apple.
another tuesday rolls by with no update
So...guessing 9/5 (pre-Paris Expo & tie in with "high security" shipment) or 9/19 (post-Paris Expo & post-iPod Nano promo).
Which date is smart money on now?
--DotComCTO
So...guessing 9/5 (pre-Paris Expo & tie in with "high security" shipment) or 9/19 (post-Paris Expo & post-iPod Nano promo).
Which date is smart money on now?
--DotComCTO
I'm hoping for the 5th based on what people who's orders have been delayed have said...
Perhaps that high security shipment is a 23" iMac with a fancy new design.
You're entirely wrong when you assume it's merely a markeup for a larger LCD panel. That is the point. That $300 markup would certainly factor into the cost of a 23" iMac.
... and THEN you start adding in all the extra costs associated with making the new computers. More materials to mold the housing, a redesign of internal component layout, possibly a new foot, larger packaging and thus increased warehousing costs... Said costs will then inflate the price of the new iMac far beyond the $300 mark.
Please try to understand what I said in my last reply. Every time Apple develops a new model Mac, there are all these costs that you list here. These costs are amortized over all the computers sold. Their price is "inflated" (your word) by a certain amount to pay back the development cost. This was done on the current iMac and would be done on a new 23" iMac. I used the hypothetical amount of $40 to cover these costs. Only Apple knows the actual amount.
Since the current iMac's price includes this allocation of development costs, it is already in the current price. A 23" iMac would have such an allocation too. So there are no "extra costs associated with making [a new iMac]." Such a cost is always included in the price, of both current and future Macs.
Now it was my guess that the $40, or whatever the real amount is, will be the same for both the current iMac and a new 23" iMac. We could debate this issue, but unless you know some unusually large cost associated with developing a 23" iMac, you would not have much of a case.
I think another thing that needs to be understood here is that Apple has made a concerted effort to minimize the amount of space their products take up in their stores. Larger iMacs mean you have less room to keep all your offerings on site. This may seem trivial to some, but clearly it is important to Apple.
I don't think a 23" iMac would be much larger than a 20", if at all. No more width or height is required for the hardware attached to the backside. The boarder around the LCD panel could be a lot smaller. But that's another subject.
Please try to understand what I said in my last reply. Every time Apple develops a new model Mac, there are all these costs that you list here. These costs are amortized over all the computers sold. Their price is "inflated" (your word) by a certain amount to pay back the development cost. This was done on the current iMac and would be done on a new 23" iMac. I used the hypothetical amount of $40 to cover these costs. Only Apple knows the actual amount.
Since the current iMac's price includes this allocation of development costs, it is already in the current price. A 23" iMac would have such an allocation too. So there are no "extra costs associated with making [a new iMac]." Such a cost is always included in the price, of both current and future Macs.
Now it was my guess that the $40, or whatever the real amount is, will be the same for both the current iMac and a new 23" iMac. We could debate this issue, but unless you know some unusually large cost associated with developing a 23" iMac, you would not have much of a case.
Clearly I have no case then. Your guesses have obviously blown gaping holes in my concerns of upfront expenditure associated with the jarringly simple task of slamming a 23" display in white plastic and tossing in some computer parts behind it.
I concede defeat.
I don't think a 23" iMac would be much larger than a 20", if at all. No more width or height is required for the hardware attached to the backside. The boarder around the LCD panel could be a lot smaller. But that's another subject.
Width = 21.0625"
Height =
Depth = 1.625"
Apple 20" Cinema Display
Width = Will measure at work tomorrow
Depth = ""
20" iMac G5 (1st Generation)
Width = 19.34375"
Height = 16.125"
Depth = 2.25"
17" iMac Core Duo
Width = 16.6875"
Height = 14.375"
Depth = Hard to measure
I'm hoping for the 5th based on what people who's orders have been delayed have said...
Perhaps that high security shipment is a 23" iMac with a fancy new design.
Crossing fingers for the 5th, but thinking the 19th. A 23" iMac could be something very cool to lead off 2007 (MWSF)?
Just a thought. Gotta figure Apple has to have some other cool goodies up their sleeve for MWSF, right?
--DotComCTO
Crossing fingers for the 5th, but thinking the 19th. A 23" iMac could be something very cool to lead off 2007 (MWSF)?
Just a thought. Gotta figure Apple has to have some other cool goodies up their sleeve for MWSF, right?
--DotComCTO
Haha, yeah. That's where their going to debut the (enter phone/tablet/dvr rumor here).
As much as I love my 20" iMac, there's nothing more I'd like than to have a revised 20" where they do away with the "chin". I'd take that before worrying about a 23".
Could not agree more re the 'chin', also some degree of screen flexibility or adjustment would be a great advance in any new model iMac
The chin gives the iMac it's distinctive look. I hope they keep it (knowing full well it'll be gone eventually). But curses to all who stick post-its on there!
I would say just the opposite, I don't like the chin which means that they will keep it and probably make it more pronounced...
Maybe our opposing views will cancel each other out and they will leave it as is, at least till the next major redesign.
Without the the chin the iMac would become a boring glossy white monitor
Hail to the chin!!!
Chin-lovers unite!!!
I believe shanmugam was talking about SELLING price for a 23" iMac, not its development cost. His estimate is simple and pretty accurate, good enough for a first cut at product planning at Apple. Don't forget that the development cost for the iMac is already included in its price, usually amortized over the expected life of the product.
yep snoopy, i am purely speculating on the price points ...
we can speculate more on the cost if we know what is the development, R&D, shipping and other cost associated with it. but the it will be developed from the 20" iMac with larger screen. Most of these costs are already observed and few will be added further like big storage and handling charges because of its larger size than 20", other than that i do not see a completely redesigned case or anything like that. i believe if it happens it applies to 17" and 20" model as well