Steve Jobs will be announcing that the iMac is dead and in its place they are releasing a revolutionary new computer that is light years ahead of anyone else!
While everyone else in PC land have been spending millions on R&D to develop "all in one" computers that comprise the Motherboard, CPU, Memory, Storage and LCD screen in one unit (of course to try and keep up with Apple) Apple will announce that their new desktop range will in fact comprise of a desktop unit the same size as a Mac Mini paired with a new 2cm thin LED LCD screen that will be bundled with the computer in a choice of 20,24 or 30".
While that news may come as a shock to most mac consumers that is not the revolutionary part, the revolutionary thing is that the new keyboards have a delete key that actually deletes!!! (okay that is not true but just occurred to me now while trying to delete something on my MBP)
So anyway, that is my guess and who knows, stranger things have happened!!!
What are you smoking? I'd like to get some. OOOOOH, you meant your post to be tongue-in-cheek.
Have you tried "Focus Factor"? It's free - it must be good.
We need a minitower of some sort, with decent graphics and CPU, without an integrated display, at the iMac price point.
Apple, you used to have these, they were called the low end G4 towers. What the heck happened? When the G5 came out, you stopped producing affordable towers forever.
This is insane. Not everyone needs a Mac Pro, but they need more power than a Mac Mini, WITHOUT an integrated display.
Let's have a Core 2 Duo minitower with a seperate graphics card and room for at least two hard drives. YOU CAN DO IT APPLE! YOU REALLY CAN!
Sigh.
THANK GOD, I'm not the only one that rocks in that boat!
"NOT EVERYONE WANTS AN INTEGRATED DISPLAY. We need a minitower of some sort, with decent graphics and CPU, without an integrated display, at the iMac price point!!!"
AND WE NEED IT NOW!!! Today!!! Not Tomorrow!!! TODAY!!! I need a new Mac TODAY!!! MY IBOOK is OLD!!!
THANK GOD, I'm not the only one that rocks in that boat!
"NOT EVERYONE WANTS AN INTEGRATED DISPLAY. We need a minitower of some sort, with decent graphics and CPU, without an integrated display, at the iMac price point!!!"
AND WE NEED IT NOW!!! Today!!! Not Tomorrow!!! TODAY!!! I need a new Mac TODAY!!! MY IBOOK is OLD!!!
Haven't you heard? Desktops are sooooooo yesterday, everyone is switching to laptops!
Meanwhile, there are unconfirmed last minute reports that Apple may extend the life of the Mac mini by squeezing another slight revision from the petite desktop's existing architecture.
According to those reports, such a move would be accompanied by significant price drops that would allow the forgotten Mac to linger for several more monthsas an extremely low cost, low performance offering.
-------------------
Do you think that Apple would sell Minis now and at some later date (like October when Leopard is on the shelves) introduce a Mini tower? Is Apple underhanded enough to do that? Will Apple show it's complete line up today or keep something back?
i think Apple's business strategy is changed in a way that forces consumer to "configure using us or else." I don't see Apple ever releasing cheap customizable tower, especially with the switch to Intel.
if Apple was still using IBM chips then I can kinda see them building a cheap tower because 3rd party customization option is slim to none. with Intel chip it's easy.
my prediction:
$1199
20 inch
2.2ghz
1gb RAM
250HD
8600 128mb
$1499
20 inch
2.4ghz
2gb RAM
250HD
8600 256mb
$1799
24inch
2.4ghz
2gb RAM
500HD
8600 256mb
all with superdrives.
and Apple might continue selling 17inch iMac without new enclosure for $999 until supplies run out. $999 iMac was for education and not for serious consumer anyway.
Meanwhile, there are unconfirmed last minute reports that Apple may extend the life of the Mac mini by squeezing another slight revision from the petite desktop's existing architecture.
According to those reports, such a move would be accompanied by significant price drops that would allow the forgotten Mac to linger for several more monthsas an extremely low cost, low performance offering.
-------------------
Do you think that Apple would sell Minis now and at some later date (like October when Leopard is on the shelves) introduce a Mini tower? Is Apple underhanded enough to do that? Will Apple show it's complete line up today or keep something back?
I don't think so. Why hold back? Get the sales now would be my preference, but then again I don't run a multibillion dollar company.
As opposed to what? going ahead and ordering a BTO Mac based on ones own made up spec?
As opposed to having to eat crow about claiming the demise of the mini these past few weeks before its officially bumped.
They're pitching it as "lingering" on but if Apple does a bump...yah right. If they bother with a bump its going to be here another product cycle and AI was wrong about the mini going away. Good thing too.
Hopefully this isn't coupled with "Yah, and our source on the Mini getting the axe? Let go from Apple this afternoon..."
Its expensive to buy a Mac here cause the taxes and the shipping, Still dont understand people in USA complaining about prices when those folks earn so much money, sure they have a higher cost in some services/stuff but its kind of lame.
Taxes are different per country, and, international shipping is not cheap. So, yes a certain Mac taxed at 7% in the US is cheaper than when you buy it in the EU with 20% tax.
However, taxes support services and what not that directly benefit the residents ... and so that means in the US you'll pay $1000/month out of your own pocket for basic health insurance. Where in Europe, most people don't even have a $1000/month net paycheck. Instead half of their bruto wage goes to taxes & services so you can get $100/year health insurance.
And, not everybody in the US is rich, by any means. Quite the contrary. Regardless of what you see on TV/Movies. The US consists of average working people with home loans, car loans and credit card bills. The US is very much a buy now, pay later economy.
Taxes are different per country, and, international shipping is not cheap. So, yes a certain Mac taxed at 7% in the US is cheaper than when you buy it in the EU with 20% tax.
However, taxes support services and what not that directly benefit the residents ... and so that means in the US you'll pay $1000/month out of your own pocket for basic health insurance. Where in Europe, most people don't even have a $1000/month net paycheck. Instead half of their bruto wage goes to taxes & services so you can get $100/year health insurance.
And, not everybody in the US is rich, by any means. Quite the contrary. Regardless of what you see on TV/Movies. The US consists of average working people with home loans, car loans and credit card bills. The US is very much a buy now, pay later economy.
Enough with the hyperbole. $1000/mo for what again? My insurance is $100/mo, but that's just for one person. Some fellow Americans like to overplay the perceived lower health care, I'm more convinced that they are carefully crafted talking points meant to scare people than has anything to do with reality.
Ok. NOT EVERYONE WANTS AN INTEGRATED DISPLAY. We need a minitower of some sort, with decent graphics and CPU, without an integrated display, at the iMac price point.
These statements are getting old and look retarded.
I think a $1499 tower would be nice but if it was ever reintroduced, it's not likely to light the tower dreams on fire, there's going to be considerable complaints.
touchy! jeez! so you're saying that a 512mb card won't run pro apps (such as motion and after effects) any better than a 256mb one?
that's not my logic at all. i'm not sure at all where you pulled that from.
i'm referring to the reports of MBP graphics cards being seen in XP as 512mb cards, rather than the apple advertised 256. i hadn't seen any definitive word on this, if there have been any developments feel free to enlighten me, but please don't bite my head off again.
I'm not touchy, you are. You didn't comment on what I said, I commented on what you said, remember? This is your touchy response to that.
And I am simply commenting on YOUR word "crippled" which means what I said. You're accusing all card makers that didn't put 512MB on their card as having crippled them, even though you only seem to want to blame Apple for it.
I know you said MBP, but you stated that it would be crippled with 256. I didn't say that.
I'm just getting tired of people saying that Apple crippled something if they don't include the very highest configuration. Almost no one includes the highest configurations.
If you read the various tech sites that do reviews of GPU boards, you will see that only the highest end GPU's benefit from that much RAM, the lower tier processors don't.
And, yes, it won't run Apple's pro apps any better.
Perhaps Shake might run a small bit better, but, even there, this is NOT the machine to do it with, you need a Mac Pro to run that properly. I have, so I know. Basic simple functions will do ok on an iMac but complex built-up modeled frames need more power all around.
The rest of Apple's programs will do quite fine with 256, most with 128.
Just had an observation: Do you ever notice how Mac owners always say stuff like 'My iBook is soo old' or 'My G3 is starting to show its age'? Then they happily want to buy a new shiny Mac.
Contrast that with PC owners who say things like (paraphrasing), 'Yeah, my PC died, piece of cr*p, I guess I'll go buy another piece of cr*p'. Then end up buying twice as many machines, and probably spending more, incidentally, as a typical Mac user.
Certainly not a revolutionary observation, just looking forward to the new 'shiny' today
Just had an observation: Do you ever notice how Mac owners always say stuff like 'My iBook is soo old' or 'My G3 is starting to show its age'? Then they happily want to buy a new shiny Mac.
Contrast that with PC owners who say things like (paraphrasing), 'Yeah, my PC died, piece of cr*p, I guess I'll go buy another piece of cr*p'. Then end up buying twice as many machines, and probably spending more, incidentally, as a typical Mac user.
Certainly not a revolutionary observation, just looking forward to the new 'shiny' today
Does anyone know if there will be a keynote on this?
1 more hour! If so, could you post a link! (to the public/keynote). Thanks!
Apple wouldn't really surprise me with this. They dropped their low end iBook at $999 and replaced it with the low end MacBook at $1099. More than a year later, it's the same price.
Keep in mind, if it's true, you'd be getting a bigger screen for your $200 in addition to whatever else might be improved.
The cost difference between 17" and 20" is too small to justify $200. Other improvements are expected because better chips can now be had at the same price as slower chips when the C2D iMac was released.
Comments
Steve Jobs will be announcing that the iMac is dead and in its place they are releasing a revolutionary new computer that is light years ahead of anyone else!
While everyone else in PC land have been spending millions on R&D to develop "all in one" computers that comprise the Motherboard, CPU, Memory, Storage and LCD screen in one unit (of course to try and keep up with Apple) Apple will announce that their new desktop range will in fact comprise of a desktop unit the same size as a Mac Mini paired with a new 2cm thin LED LCD screen that will be bundled with the computer in a choice of 20,24 or 30".
While that news may come as a shock to most mac consumers that is not the revolutionary part, the revolutionary thing is that the new keyboards have a delete key that actually deletes!!! (okay that is not true but just occurred to me now while trying to delete something on my MBP)
So anyway, that is my guess and who knows, stranger things have happened!!!
What are you smoking? I'd like to get some. OOOOOH, you meant your post to be tongue-in-cheek.
Have you tried "Focus Factor"? It's free - it must be good.
Gahhh. Damnit. I hope these rumours are wrong.
Repeat after me:
NOT EVERYONE WANTS AN INTEGRATED DISPLAY.
We need a minitower of some sort, with decent graphics and CPU, without an integrated display, at the iMac price point.
Apple, you used to have these, they were called the low end G4 towers. What the heck happened? When the G5 came out, you stopped producing affordable towers forever.
This is insane. Not everyone needs a Mac Pro, but they need more power than a Mac Mini, WITHOUT an integrated display.
Let's have a Core 2 Duo minitower with a seperate graphics card and room for at least two hard drives. YOU CAN DO IT APPLE! YOU REALLY CAN!
Sigh.
THANK GOD, I'm not the only one that rocks in that boat!
"NOT EVERYONE WANTS AN INTEGRATED DISPLAY. We need a minitower of some sort, with decent graphics and CPU, without an integrated display, at the iMac price point!!!"
AND WE NEED IT NOW!!! Today!!! Not Tomorrow!!! TODAY!!! I need a new Mac TODAY!!! MY IBOOK is OLD!!!
Apple sells *an experience*. They need to destiquish themselves from ordinary PC's. A tower would be too much PC like.
THANK GOD, I'm not the only one that rocks in that boat!
"NOT EVERYONE WANTS AN INTEGRATED DISPLAY. We need a minitower of some sort, with decent graphics and CPU, without an integrated display, at the iMac price point!!!"
AND WE NEED IT NOW!!! Today!!! Not Tomorrow!!! TODAY!!! I need a new Mac TODAY!!! MY IBOOK is OLD!!!
Haven't you heard? Desktops are sooooooo yesterday, everyone is switching to laptops!
Except for me and a few million holdouts.
Except for me and a few million holdouts.
Resistance is futile. You will be converted.
THEN WE'LL GET MEL.
By AppleInsider Staff
Mac mini rumors
Meanwhile, there are unconfirmed last minute reports that Apple may extend the life of the Mac mini by squeezing another slight revision from the petite desktop's existing architecture.
According to those reports, such a move would be accompanied by significant price drops that would allow the forgotten Mac to linger for several more months as an extremely low cost, low performance offering.
-------------------
Do you think that Apple would sell Minis now and at some later date (like October when Leopard is on the shelves) introduce a Mini tower? Is Apple underhanded enough to do that? Will Apple show it's complete line up today or keep something back?
if Apple was still using IBM chips then I can kinda see them building a cheap tower because 3rd party customization option is slim to none. with Intel chip it's easy.
my prediction:
$1199
20 inch
2.2ghz
1gb RAM
250HD
8600 128mb
$1499
20 inch
2.4ghz
2gb RAM
250HD
8600 256mb
$1799
24inch
2.4ghz
2gb RAM
500HD
8600 256mb
all with superdrives.
and Apple might continue selling 17inch iMac without new enclosure for $999 until supplies run out. $999 iMac was for education and not for serious consumer anyway.
Last minute iMac and Mac mini rumors
By AppleInsider Staff
Mac mini rumors
Meanwhile, there are unconfirmed last minute reports that Apple may extend the life of the Mac mini by squeezing another slight revision from the petite desktop's existing architecture.
According to those reports, such a move would be accompanied by significant price drops that would allow the forgotten Mac to linger for several more months as an extremely low cost, low performance offering.
-------------------
Do you think that Apple would sell Minis now and at some later date (like October when Leopard is on the shelves) introduce a Mini tower? Is Apple underhanded enough to do that? Will Apple show it's complete line up today or keep something back?
I don't think so. Why hold back? Get the sales now would be my preference, but then again I don't run a multibillion dollar company.
As opposed to what? going ahead and ordering a BTO Mac based on ones own made up spec?
As opposed to having to eat crow about claiming the demise of the mini these past few weeks before its officially bumped.
They're pitching it as "lingering" on but if Apple does a bump...yah right. If they bother with a bump its going to be here another product cycle and AI was wrong about the mini going away. Good thing too.
Hopefully this isn't coupled with "Yah, and our source on the Mini getting the axe? Let go from Apple this afternoon..."
Vinea
Its expensive to buy a Mac here cause the taxes and the shipping, Still dont understand people in USA complaining about prices when those folks earn so much money, sure they have a higher cost in some services/stuff but its kind of lame.
Taxes are different per country, and, international shipping is not cheap. So, yes a certain Mac taxed at 7% in the US is cheaper than when you buy it in the EU with 20% tax.
However, taxes support services and what not that directly benefit the residents ... and so that means in the US you'll pay $1000/month out of your own pocket for basic health insurance. Where in Europe, most people don't even have a $1000/month net paycheck. Instead half of their bruto wage goes to taxes & services so you can get $100/year health insurance.
And, not everybody in the US is rich, by any means. Quite the contrary. Regardless of what you see on TV/Movies. The US consists of average working people with home loans, car loans and credit card bills. The US is very much a buy now, pay later economy.
Taxes are different per country, and, international shipping is not cheap. So, yes a certain Mac taxed at 7% in the US is cheaper than when you buy it in the EU with 20% tax.
However, taxes support services and what not that directly benefit the residents ... and so that means in the US you'll pay $1000/month out of your own pocket for basic health insurance. Where in Europe, most people don't even have a $1000/month net paycheck. Instead half of their bruto wage goes to taxes & services so you can get $100/year health insurance.
And, not everybody in the US is rich, by any means. Quite the contrary. Regardless of what you see on TV/Movies. The US consists of average working people with home loans, car loans and credit card bills. The US is very much a buy now, pay later economy.
Enough with the hyperbole. $1000/mo for what again? My insurance is $100/mo, but that's just for one person. Some fellow Americans like to overplay the perceived lower health care, I'm more convinced that they are carefully crafted talking points meant to scare people than has anything to do with reality.
I am sitting at my old iMac that has only USB 1.0 While the newer models were upgraded to USB 2.0 weeks after I bought it
Ok. NOT EVERYONE WANTS AN INTEGRATED DISPLAY. We need a minitower of some sort, with decent graphics and CPU, without an integrated display, at the iMac price point.
These statements are getting old and look retarded.
I think a $1499 tower would be nice but if it was ever reintroduced, it's not likely to light the tower dreams on fire, there's going to be considerable complaints.
touchy! jeez! so you're saying that a 512mb card won't run pro apps (such as motion and after effects) any better than a 256mb one?
that's not my logic at all. i'm not sure at all where you pulled that from.
i'm referring to the reports of MBP graphics cards being seen in XP as 512mb cards, rather than the apple advertised 256. i hadn't seen any definitive word on this, if there have been any developments feel free to enlighten me, but please don't bite my head off again.
I'm not touchy, you are. You didn't comment on what I said, I commented on what you said, remember? This is your touchy response to that.
And I am simply commenting on YOUR word "crippled" which means what I said. You're accusing all card makers that didn't put 512MB on their card as having crippled them, even though you only seem to want to blame Apple for it.
I know you said MBP, but you stated that it would be crippled with 256. I didn't say that.
I'm just getting tired of people saying that Apple crippled something if they don't include the very highest configuration. Almost no one includes the highest configurations.
If you read the various tech sites that do reviews of GPU boards, you will see that only the highest end GPU's benefit from that much RAM, the lower tier processors don't.
And, yes, it won't run Apple's pro apps any better.
Perhaps Shake might run a small bit better, but, even there, this is NOT the machine to do it with, you need a Mac Pro to run that properly. I have, so I know. Basic simple functions will do ok on an iMac but complex built-up modeled frames need more power all around.
The rest of Apple's programs will do quite fine with 256, most with 128.
Motion is compute bound as well.
Resistance is futile. You will be converted.
THEN WE'LL GET MEL.
Good luck on that one brudder!
But, I have said that I would be interested in a small, lightweight, model.
Contrast that with PC owners who say things like (paraphrasing), 'Yeah, my PC died, piece of cr*p, I guess I'll go buy another piece of cr*p'. Then end up buying twice as many machines, and probably spending more, incidentally, as a typical Mac user.
Certainly not a revolutionary observation, just looking forward to the new 'shiny' today
Just had an observation: Do you ever notice how Mac owners always say stuff like 'My iBook is soo old' or 'My G3 is starting to show its age'? Then they happily want to buy a new shiny Mac.
Contrast that with PC owners who say things like (paraphrasing), 'Yeah, my PC died, piece of cr*p, I guess I'll go buy another piece of cr*p'. Then end up buying twice as many machines, and probably spending more, incidentally, as a typical Mac user.
Certainly not a revolutionary observation, just looking forward to the new 'shiny' today
Does anyone know if there will be a keynote on this?
1 more hour! If so, could you post a link! (to the public/keynote). Thanks!
Does anyone know if there will be a keynote on this?
1 more hour! If so, could you post a link! (to the public/keynote). Thanks!
I believe Macworld will be blogging live: http://www.macworld.com/news/2007/08...vent/index.php.
Apple wouldn't really surprise me with this. They dropped their low end iBook at $999 and replaced it with the low end MacBook at $1099. More than a year later, it's the same price.
Keep in mind, if it's true, you'd be getting a bigger screen for your $200 in addition to whatever else might be improved.
The cost difference between 17" and 20" is too small to justify $200. Other improvements are expected because better chips can now be had at the same price as slower chips when the C2D iMac was released.