Make the iMac a bargain: cut its head off.

synsyn
Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Seriously. Looking at the design, it wouldn't cost Apple too much in R&D to make an iMac without LCD. It would still look as cool, and if priced under 1k$, would sell like crazy IMO (G4 700 at that price +2mx is a real deal), especially to the crowd interested but for who it might be a bit expensive.



It would also, IMO, attract potential and waiting Wintel converts waiting for a real bargain.



Attaching a traditional CRT would of course look odd, but that isn't Apple's problem anymore. It's a cube without the price/performance problems.



Non?
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 42
    jerombajeromba Posts: 357member
    Good Idea Sin...

    But they must have the 2 ports for the screen in the back (VGA & ADC)... and maybe that's not possible technically.



    But what about different screen size ?

    THAT will be cool too. An iMac with a 15, 15.2 Wide or 17 inch LCD screen.

    Maybe apart from the processor this will be the next revision. THAT was not possible with the first iMac. but here i think the door as open to imagine anything... like maybe a removable LCD Touch/Tablet Screen...
  • Reply 2 of 42
    jrcjrc Posts: 806member
    [quote]Originally posted by SYN:

    <strong>Seriously. Looking at the design, it wouldn't cost Apple too much in R&D to make an iMac without LCD. It would still look as cool, and if priced under 1k$, would sell like crazy IMO (G4 700 at that price +2mx is a real deal), especially to the crowd interested but for who it might be a bit expensive.



    It would also, IMO, attract potential and waiting Wintel converts waiting for a real bargain.



    Attaching a traditional CRT would of course look odd, but that isn't Apple's problem anymore. It's a cube without the price/performance problems.



    Non?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Hey, make the iMac attractive...cut its BASE off.
  • Reply 3 of 42
    Just cutting the head off an iMac won't drop the price below a grand... the 15" LCD isn't accounting for $799 dollars...



    On the 15" monitor note... i believe that the 15" display is the perfect height, but that if it were TWICE as wide (note, that's a bigger aspect ratio than the C.D.) it would be the perfect monitor for me.



    But then it would be TWO iMac bases to hold it up:



    iChest
  • Reply 4 of 42
    jrcjrc Posts: 806member
    [quote]Originally posted by BerberCarpet:

    <strong>Just cutting the head off an iMac won't drop the price below a grand... the 15" LCD isn't accounting for $799 dollars...



    On the 15" monitor note... i believe that the 15" display is the perfect height, but that if it were TWICE as wide (note, that's a bigger aspect ratio than the C.D.) it would be the perfect monitor for me.



    But then it would be TWO iMac bases to hold it up:



    iChest</strong><hr></blockquote>



    On a $1299 iMac, I'd say they could ditch the head and come close to $1,000, don't you?
  • Reply 5 of 42
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    The new iMac shouldn't have it's 'head cut off'. Right now, the machine is already competing directly with the Power Macs. Apple needs to keep some reasons to buy the Power Mac over the iMac, and one of them is monitor size.



    Even if you did take the monitor away from the iMac, it would be bad for Apple. If you don't buy the Apple 15" LCD, they don't make as much money. If you buy any CRT, it won't be from Apple, and they don't make as much money. If you buy a larger Apple LCD 17", 22", then Apple loses the extra money they would have made off of the G4 tower.



    The majority of iMac users in 1998 didn't need more than a 15" CRT. The majority of iMac users in 2002 don't need more than a 15" LCD. If you needed a larger monitor than a 15" CRT in 1998, you bought a Power Mac. If you need a larger monitor than a 15" LCD in 2002, you should buy a Power Mac.
  • Reply 6 of 42
    jrcjrc Posts: 806member
    [quote]Originally posted by Fran441:

    <strong>The new iMac shouldn't have it's 'head cut off'. Right now, the machine is already competing directly with the Power Macs. Apple needs to keep some reasons to buy the Power Mac over the iMac, and one of them is monitor size.



    Even if you did take the monitor away from the iMac, it would be bad for Apple. If you don't buy the Apple 15" LCD, they don't make as much money. If you buy any CRT, it won't be from Apple, and they don't make as much money. If you buy a larger Apple LCD 17", 22", then Apple loses the extra money they would have made off of the G4 tower.



    The majority of iMac users in 1998 didn't need more than a 15" CRT. The majority of iMac users in 2002 don't need more than a 15" LCD. If you needed a larger monitor than a 15" CRT in 1998, you bought a Power Mac. If you need a larger monitor than a 15" LCD in 2002, you should buy a Power Mac.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    take money away from Apple? Then why do they give all these third-party software developers any TOOLS to write stuff that will not give Apple any money?
  • Reply 7 of 42
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    [quote]take money away from Apple? Then why do they give all these third-party software developers any TOOLS to write stuff that will not give Apple any money?<hr></blockquote>



    My point is that Apple needs to make money off of the iMac. It carried them for a few years and they are probably really dependent on it now. If you need a sub $1000 machine, buy the G3 iMac.
  • Reply 8 of 42
    jrcjrc Posts: 806member
    [quote]Originally posted by Fran441:

    <strong>



    My point is that Apple needs to make money off of the iMac. It carried them for a few years and they are probably really dependent on it now. If you need a sub $1000 machine, buy the G3 iMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I agree. They should cut the head off the G3.
  • Reply 9 of 42
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    Does the iMac G3 even have a head to cut off?
  • Reply 10 of 42
    jrcjrc Posts: 806member
    [quote]Originally posted by Fran441:

    <strong>Does the iMac G3 even have a head to cut off? </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Yes. It just has NO shoulders/neck
  • Reply 11 of 42
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    I agree with the iMac already competing directly with the tower right now. If they don´t ditch it very soom the 15" display will not be sold to others than macs already out there. It won´t be sold with new towers
  • Reply 12 of 42
    Heh. Sounds like everyone just wanted a Cube at the iMac's price point. I think that Apple would have done quite well with that, too.



    S
  • Reply 13 of 42
    nebagakidnebagakid Posts: 2,692member
    Just cut everything that does not have the vertical lines on the front off the entire. That is basically the monitor. you are left with an LC looking computer. Attach VGA, DVI, an ADC ports on the back, you have a 500 dollar computer that schools can use with their old monitors. Schools dont care about how their computers work, at least public schools dont



    OR

    Start producing a combo for educators that sell diskless iMacs that boot off a Mac OS X Sever Machine. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />



    word :cool:
  • Reply 14 of 42
    [quote]Originally posted by Nebagakid:

    <strong>Just cut everything that does not have the vertical lines on the front off the entire. That is basically the monitor. you are left with an LC looking computer. Attach VGA, DVI, an ADC ports on the back, you have a 500 dollar computer that schools can use with their old monitors. Schools dont care about how their computers work, at least public schools dont



    OR

    Start producing a combo for educators that sell diskless iMacs that boot off a Mac OS X Sever Machine. <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />



    word :cool: </strong><hr></blockquote>





    You can still get the old iMacs ... anyone who'd bothered to visit the Apple Store site knows this...
  • Reply 15 of 42
    [quote]Originally posted by JRC:

    <strong>



    On a $1299 iMac, I'd say they could ditch the head and come close to $1,000, don't you?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Yes... but i contend that the people interested in a headless iMac are not the ones who want the low-end one.
  • Reply 16 of 42
    I think it is f*ckin' hilarious that when the old iMac is out everyone cried because Apple never made a 17" iMac. Now you've got the viewable area the 17-incher would have had, and you're still whining.



    If you want/need a bigger screen than this, you need to get a PowerMac.



    So sick of the whiners.



    -S
  • Reply 17 of 42
    jrcjrc Posts: 806member
    [quote]Originally posted by SpiffyGuyC:

    <strong>I think it is f*ckin' hilarious that when the old iMac is out everyone cried because Apple never made a 17" iMac. Now you've got the viewable area the 17-incher would have had, and you're still whining.



    If you want/need a bigger screen than this, you need to get a PowerMac.



    So sick of the whiners.



    -S</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I'm so sick of the non-whiners!
  • Reply 18 of 42
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    [quote]Originally posted by SpiffyGuyC:

    <strong>I think it is f*ckin' hilarious that when the old iMac is out everyone cried because Apple never made a 17" iMac. Now you've got the viewable area the 17-incher would have had, and you're still whining.



    If you want/need a bigger screen than this, you need to get a PowerMac.



    So sick of the whiners.



    -S</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Hey, quit whining about the whiners!



    But seriously, I think what we're seeing is that some Mac (and Windows) users want a little freedom of choice, that's all. The all-in-one product should stay. The PowerMac should stay. But just because these two products are great doesn't mean all or even most consumer's needs are covered with a resonably priced computer.



    I haven't looked at PC prices in a while because I don't even consider them useful anymore. But I got a Dell catalogue in the mail yesterday and you can get a stand alone mini-tower for as little as $499. Apple doesn't have that product at any price. The best comparison is the low end PowerMac, but that's $1800. Obviously not a comparable computer.



    To get the next 5% Apple might not need an afordable mini-tower, but to get much more than that I think they do. It's a great idea to let schools, businesses and individuals invest in peripherials like Monitors that they can reuse with the next generation of machines.
  • Reply 19 of 42
    So, since people want that freedom, the obvious solution to me seems to be bringing back the Cube.



    Assuming Apple did this, what specs/price would be reasonable sans monitor? And do you think that putting it in the same price range as the iMac (maybe $100-$200 more for purchasing a separate monitor...total cost, that is, after a screen purchase), would cannibalize iMac sales?



    I personally would see it as a great option for those who already have a screen and want a cheaper or smaller desktop than the PowerMac. I think that making the total cost of Cube/Screen about $200 more than the equivalent iMac would be enough to separate those who really want/need the option of a larger monitor from those for whom it would merely be a convenience they'd likely never take advantage of.



    Might be even more enticing if Apple does the rumored killing of the 15" studio display and goes 17"/19"/Cinema.



    -S
  • Reply 20 of 42
    aphelionaphelion Posts: 736member
    [quote]Originally posted by SpiffyGuyC:

    <strong>Heh. Sounds like everyone just wanted a Cube at the iMac's price point. I think that Apple would have done quite well with that, too.



    S</strong><hr></blockquote>



    So bring back the Cube!



    GHz Apollo

    DVD-Combo Drive

    Dual Display Video Card

    80 GB 7200 RPM HD



    $1099.99




    [ 01-09-2002: Message edited by: Aphelion ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.