60 £ per week is kinda steep though for a couple months It's 900 £ for a year.
Heck, it's not like they wont have computers at school. Or ship her current mac out and she can ebay it when you ship the new one out. Heck, I bet she could sell it in England for more than the US anyway.
I thought about the Mini route, but discarded it.
But I hadn't thought about a rental plan. That looks interesting. I'll look into it.
I want to keep her current machine for when she comes home for holidays and the summer.
Using school computers is difficult for a photography major because she'll need it more than most, and her dorm is too far from the school to make long hours on it practical.
She may want one but needing one is a different story. Besides if she is really serious about photography what she really needs is a calibrated monitor of good reputation.
Actually, the 24" iMac screens are much better than you think. I calibrated hers here, and I plan to calibrate hers there as well.
Quote:
Well I hope so, at least in the sense of a Nehalem -derived- processor. Honestly though I'm not feeling real good about what Apple has up it's sleeve. We may get less than we are expecting.
It depends on how high your expectations are. I expect them to go the same route they've always gone with the machine, which is to say, a laptop chip.
Quote:
The power of negative thinking. Really you don't have to do anything, you could explore other options too.
Not really. But Vinea's idea of renting a machine looks like a good one.
Quote:
I have to ask why not? She could use it for a few months as is or enhance it with a better monitor. By the way if you read this thread you might start to see that second monitor as a good idea. IMacs aren't exactly the best choice for a budding photographer.
Dave
Because it's a pain to ship a large piece of electronics to another country for just a short while. Then she won't have it when she comes home for holidays and the summer, unless we ship it back again. Not worth it considering the expense and the risk of damage.
Actually 24" iMacs are used by quite a lot of professional photographers. It's considered to be a very good machine. I'm pretty familiar with this.
And when have you last lived in a dorm room? do you know how little room they have?
I don't think Apple considers the iMac anything other than a consumer level machine.
Thanks for bringing this flaw out into the open, I now know what to look for in case someone or myself is considering buying one.
The need to categorize everything is Apple's largest flaw and the reason the desktop lineup hasn't been nearly as successful as the laptops. In the desktop lineup its black and white, if you want a feature, you're automatically this and need corresponding other features. No room for overlap based on different requirements or preferences and if wants or needs outside Apple's line of thinking, you're pretty much screwed. Unfortunately, to offset the beautifully designed software and hardware, you have to deal with a lot of baggage and bias.
The price cut will be a slightly revamp of the existing 20" when they introduce Nehalem (SP? sorry) based iMac's, MacBook's etc.
As for the mini, it's price is set, margins are too low to adjust price. You want a cheaper Mini, it's gonna have to be a bigger mini then where's the love. The mini is a marvel. It's been on the scene for 5 years and still nobody can match it in terms of size power consumption/performance levels. In it's current form is just amazing.
The HOLE so to speak is between the Mini and the MacPro. It's been there for years and EVERYONE has cried for something there. The business market has been pleading and pleading for something inbetween the Mini and the Pro. Maybe we'll see something in the fall when the price drops on the current parts in the mini, maybe not. I think Apple feels the iMac would suffer since it occupies that lineup and in the PC world All-in-one's always fail because a desktop in the same price is always the better option.
Either way, the price dropped iMac, at this time, doesn't look like an updated model but merely a run-on of the current at the lower price point of $899-999.
FYI: Did you know the MFG cost of the 20" screen is only 8% more than a 17" but 21% less than a 24"? A 22" screen is the same cost of the 20" right now... 32" is almost half the cost of a 30".
Headless mac with performance equal to imac, no monitor and no laptop parts, small case (doesn't have to be miniscule, just much smaller the the Mac Pro), expandable to at least 8 gigs RAM, keyboard and mouse optional, user accessible guts.
I know this is slightly off-topic, but with the 13 inch unibody MacBooks becoming MacBook Pros, does Apple have plans for brand-new MacBooks in the near future? I'm guessing they might.
Every month this topic is off-topic. It gets old real fast this constant demand for a new laptop from Apple, while their desktop/workstation lines take a year or more to refresh.
Headless mac with performance equal to imac, no monitor and no laptop parts, small case (doesn't have to be miniscule, just much smaller the the Mac Pro), expandable to at least 8 gigs RAM, keyboard and mouse optional, user accessible guts.
Absolutely on the money. I think Steve Jobs is one of the most innovative, brilliant entrepreneurs we've ever seen. A great man, an original. But, when he gets something into his head, he refuses to let it go. |t's his strength but there is a negative aspect to it. The Cube was one of the few missteps for Jobs and Apple and I see the mini, which has been moderately successful, as a variation on the Cube. In other words a success, however moderate, replacing a failure.
Here's the problem. The mini, in some respects, is the computer nobody really asked for. I doubt anyone wanted the limitations inherent in using laptop components to wind up with a smaller form factor. I doubt that a computer along similar lines to the mini using desktop components would be all that larger. A computer that's a little bigger but with better specs at the same or lower cost would suit most of us just fine.
It isn't Steve Jobs' computer but it's the system we as consumers want. Maybe this is one case where Jobs would be well served to bend a little, even if the end result is something a little less distinctive.
The price cut will be a slightly revamp of the existing 20" when they introduce Nehalem (SP? sorry) based iMac's, MacBook's etc.
I'm worried that they won't go with Nehalem derived hardware. Whatever they do quad cores need to be in the mix.
Quote:
As for the mini, it's price is set, margins are too low to adjust price.
This is where I think you could use a little imagination. There is a lot of potential for increasing value in the Mini or lowering the price. One thing that would help is droping the optical drive. Another idea would be implementing a small SSD right on the motherbard for app storage. Other ideas come to mind but there is considerable potential in that box or even a smaller box. It is a matter of having acceptable trade offs for the consummer.
Quote:
You want a cheaper Mini, it's gonna have to be a bigger mini then where's the love. The mini is a marvel.
I really don't believe it has to get bigger to get cheaper. Simply rethinking what Mini is allows for alternative designs that fit the box.
Quote:
It's been on the scene for 5 years and still nobody can match it in terms of size power consumption/performance levels. In it's current form is just amazing.
Part of that is that nobody really wants to match Mini. Let's face it, the Mini is nothing more than a laptop in an alternative box. The hardware is available to all manufactures, the problem is selling that hardware to the PC community that loves big boxes.
Quote:
The HOLE so to speak is between the Mini and the MacPro. It's been there for years and EVERYONE has cried for something there. The business market has been pleading and pleading for something inbetween the Mini and the Pro.
I have to agree it is a very big hole, more of an ocean than a pond. I'm not sure the cries come from businesses though, I know many individuals like myself would like to see such a machine. The problem is the performance gap between the IMac / Mini and the Pro. That gap is beyound huge now.
Quote:
Maybe we'll see something in the fall when the price drops on the current parts in the mini, maybe not. I think Apple feels the iMac would suffer since it occupies that lineup and in the PC world All-in-one's always fail because a desktop in the same price is always the better option.
I really hope that Apple doesn't think that way as frankly it is stupid. Besides Apple has demonstrated a fine ability to obsolete old designs. That is if you think that iMac would suffer, this I'm not convinced of.
As to all in ones failing because of the expense I've never seen anything solid to indicate that. People want to believe that but there are advantages also to all in ones in large installations. My sense is that this is personal bias that is not based on an understanding of modern hardware. That and the occasional un ethical behavior in the corporate PC buying market.
Quote:
Either way, the price dropped iMac, at this time, doesn't look like an updated model but merely a run-on of the current at the lower price point of $899-999.
The hardware is due for an update so it is only a question of what we get for that update. This is a rumor anyways so this could all be bogus. The need for a significant update has never been more glaring so if Apple doesn't deliver iMac sales will suffer.
Quote:
FYI: Did you know the MFG cost of the 20" screen is only 8% more than a 17" but 21% less than a 24"? A 22" screen is the same cost of the 20" right now... 32" is almost half the cost of a 30".
So? I'm not sure what you are getting at here. I don't really believe the screen is a huge consideration in the final price of the machine. Certainly we are paying for better than average screens but that is the case across all sizes.
In any event it is obvious to the technically inclined that Apple hardware, on the desktop, is in sad shape. That is one of the reasons I'd expect a major update rather than dramatic price drops. Of course the coming Intel hardware may allow for that upgrade and a combo price drop. It's not a given though especially considering Apples deep interest in OpenCL. I can't see Apple offering hardware that can't agressively leverage OpenCL in anything more than the very lowest end.
Every month this topic is off-topic. It gets old real fast this constant demand for a new laptop from Apple, while their desktop/workstation lines take a year or more to refresh.
Apple is attentive to it's laptops for the simple reason that that is where the demand is. The are hot in all segements of interest to Apple. That is education, business, science and personal.
Now one could argue that Apple has poor desktop sales because of it's desktop line up. That is certainly the case but it doesn't explain the rest of the industry. For Apple to really do anything here they need to deliver a vastly rethought desktop. Much in the same way that iPhone broached new design ideas that moved industry in a different direction. I'm not talking the same old PC in a different box either.
Apple is attentive to it's laptops for the simple reason that that is where the demand is. The are hot in all segements of interest to Apple. That is education, business, science and personal.
Now one could argue that Apple has poor desktop sales because of it's desktop line up. That is certainly the case but it doesn't explain the rest of the industry. For Apple to really do anything here they need to deliver a vastly rethought desktop. Much in the same way that iPhone broached new design ideas that moved industry in a different direction. I'm not talking the same old PC in a different box either.
Apple is attentive to laptops because currently there are still margins there. Which is fading fast and you'll see Apple laptops become more and more niche...like the iMac and Mini are on the desktop. The loss of the "MacBook" lineup may be temporary or it's the start of the laptop lineup looking like the desktop one.
MB Air = Mini
MB Pro = Mac Pro (high end laptops only)
??? = iMac (consumer grade laptop)
What will be the mobile iMac? I'm guessing some kind of future tablet that is different enough from a normal laptop to command 30+% margins and immune to direct comparisons to commodity laptops from HP or Lenovo.
AIOs, SFF and workstations are the desktop segments where there are still margins. Which is why Apple has only these kinds of desktops.
Apple (or anyone) has limited ability in selling high margin towers and nearly no economies of scale (vs someone like HP) there unlike their current lineup which, aside from the Mac Pro, is a whole boatload of laptops in various configurations.
The line up plays to Apple's strengths, mitigates some of Apple's weaknesses in terms of volume and works very well with the strategy of going after the 20% of the market that generates 80% of the profit.
Making the thing damn near impossible for a normal person to service was a mistake, too.
I agree that their dropping of a 17 inch desktop was not ideal. There are situations where (a) 20" or more is just too big for the space, (b) a 17" would cost a bit less, allowing a lower starting point (IMO), (c) and would be more transportable. On this last point I know because I have transported several varieties of iMacs over the years. The larger and heavier ones are just hard to do that.
And since I am able to do internal memory, HD upgrades, making easier access would really be helpful. The current aluminum situation --having to take apart the entire monitor display and covers et al just to get at a hard drive is insane...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo
re. GMHut"
"Headless mac with performance equal to imac, no monitor and no laptop parts, small case (doesn't have to be miniscule, just much smaller the the Mac Pro), expandable to at least 8 gigs RAM, keyboard and mouse optional, user accessible guts."
Absolutely on the money. I think Steve Jobs is one of the most innovative, brilliant entrepreneurs we've ever seen. A great man, an original. But, when he gets something into his head, he refuses to let it go. |t's his strength but there is a negative aspect to it. ...
Here's the problem. The mini, in some respects, is the computer nobody really asked for. I doubt anyone wanted the limitations inherent in using laptop components to wind up with a smaller form factor. I doubt that a computer along similar lines to the mini using desktop components would be all that larger. A computer that's a little bigger but with better specs at the same or lower cost would suit most of us just fine.
It isn't Steve Jobs' computer but it's the system we as consumers want. Maybe this is one case where Jobs would be well served to bend a little, even if the end result is something a little less distinctive.
Agreed!
Conceptually, I like the idea of the Mac mini. I would almost even like to buy one. But so much is sacrificed all in the name of making the computer fit into some mythic 6.5"x6.5"x2" space form factor. To wit: laptop 2.5" HD, laptop Optical, onboard GPU with shared graphic memory.
As if droves of people go to the computer store and says : 'I want a computer, but dagnabit, its just GOT to fit into a 6-point-5-inch square space otherwise forget it!'
I would love to see an affordable not-quite-so-mini that uses better-performing, less-costly mainstream components (3.5"HD, Optical, dedicated GPU memory) and provides a bit more connectivity (read up on the user issues with the new mini-display port and connecting to monitors...). It could still take advantage of a smallish space (but not tiny), and reduced power (several vendors now with 'green' HD options, as WD GreenPower, etc).
Maybe the new Steve will be less tyrannical about our desktop choice being either iMac with screen, or else super-tiny-underpowered-mini or super-expensive-and-huge Pro Tower.
would love to see an affordable not-quite-so-mini that uses better-performing, less-costly mainstream components (3.5"HD, Optical, dedicated GPU memory) and provides a bit more connectivity (read up on the user issues with the new mini-display port and connecting to monitors...). It could still take advantage of a smallish space (but not tiny), and reduced power (several vendors now with 'green' HD options, as WD GreenPower, etc).
It wouldn't fly. It'd look like those Shuttle boxes and hey just don't have the aesthetic of the mini. It really take a certain type of person to like the mini. Perhaps you don't want a laptop but you don't want some atx desktop sitting on the floor sucking up dust.
Adding a 3.5" drive and full size optical is anti-thetical to the point the mini. It literally disappears from your desk and often I forget about it until I hear it whir into action. It doesn't bother me that I can't put a 2TB hard drive in it or the optical drive is commonly used in a laptop. What matters is quiet an unobtrusive computing. I laugh when I see desks with CPU holders ...what a waste of space.
Apple is attentive to laptops because currently there are still margins there. Which is fading fast and you'll see Apple laptops become more and more niche...like the iMac and Mini are on the desktop.
I have to reject the first sentence out of hand, Apple takes interest in it's laptops because that is where the industry is seeing the demand. Simply put there is growth in this part of the market.
As to niche products Mac OSX and the use of Intel hardware has done away with that issue, the market has seen the value in this combo.
Quote:
The loss of the "MacBook" lineup may be temporary or it's the start of the laptop lineup looking like the desktop one.
what loss. They just updated MacBook and rationalized the rest of the line up.
Quote:
MB Air = Mini
AIR is nothing but crap. On the otherhand the Mini is very useful.
Quote:
MB Pro = Mac Pro (high end laptops only)
that certainly isn't reflected in todays Mac Book Pro line up. The low end machines are even well configured and reasonable priced for what you get.
Quote:
??? = iMac (consumer grade)
What will be the mobile iMac? I'm guessing some kind of future tablet that is different enough from a normal laptop to command 30+% margins and immune to direct comparisons to commodity laptops from HP or Lenovo.
The problem I got is that the Mac hardware does compare well with equally positioned hardware from the PC manufactures. That is if you can even fing equivalent features on PC hardware.
Quote:
AIOs, SFF and workstations are the desktop segments where there are still margins. Which is why Apple has only these kinds of desktops.
I don't buy much of the above either.
Quote:
Apple (or anyone) has limited ability in selling high margin towers and nearly no economies of scale (vs someone like HP) there unlike their current lineup which, aside from the Mac Pro, is a whole boatload of laptops in various configurations.
Apple isn't doing to bad with economies of scale.
Quote:
The line up plays to Apple's strengths, mitigates some of Apple's weaknesses in terms of volume and works very well with the strategy of going after the 20% of the market that generates 80% of the profit.
I'm surprised at your focus on volume, I'm under the impression that Apple does realy well in this respect. Remember the PC manufactures have dozens of models to deal with and often models with unique parts. I don't think you will find huge differences in the cost to build items like mother boards for the laptops. From the internal pics of the latest laptops I'd say that they might even be cheaper than some PC laptops.
In anyevent I have a hard time accepting your arguement that Apples line up is based around margins and nothing else. Apple has demonstrated with it's laptops that the can produce agressive hardware that can command a premium when coupled with Mac OS/X.
It wouldn't fly. It'd look like those Shuttle boxes and hey just don't have the aesthetic of the mini. It really take a certain type of person to like the mini. Perhaps you don't want a laptop but you don't want some atx desktop sitting on the floor sucking up dust.
Adding a 3.5" drive and full size optical is anti-thetical to the point the mini. It literally disappears from your desk and often I forget about it until I hear it whir into action. It doesn't bother me that I can't put a 2TB hard drive in it or the optical drive is commonly used in a laptop. What matters is quiet an unobtrusive computing. I laugh when I see desks with CPU holders ...what a waste of space.
The point of the mini should be an affordable way to get into a mac for those of us who want to use a seperate monitor. If the mini came in a somewhat larger package that would not be a dealbreaker for me and I suspect many others.
Apple is so adept at packaging that I'm sure the device would be appealing.
My problem with the iMac is that the monitor will outlast the rest of the machine. That seems to to be such a waste.
Apple is attentive to laptops because currently there are still margins there. Which is fading fast and you'll see Apple laptops become more and more niche...like the iMac and Mini are on the desktop. The loss of the "MacBook" lineup may be temporary or it's the start of the laptop lineup looking like the desktop one.
MB Air = Mini
MB Pro = Mac Pro (high end laptops only)
??? = iMac (consumer grade laptop)
What will be the mobile iMac? I'm guessing some kind of future tablet that is different enough from a normal laptop to command 30+% margins and immune to direct comparisons to commodity laptops from HP or Lenovo.
AIOs, SFF and workstations are the desktop segments where there are still margins. Which is why Apple has only these kinds of desktops.
Apple (or anyone) has limited ability in selling high margin towers and nearly no economies of scale (vs someone like HP) there unlike their current lineup which, aside from the Mac Pro, is a whole boatload of laptops in various configurations.
The line up plays to Apple's strengths, mitigates some of Apple's weaknesses in terms of volume and works very well with the strategy of going after the 20% of the market that generates 80% of the profit.
MBP a niche ? Margins fading fast ???
My Friend apple is paying less and less for everything they buy . In many cases their overall costs have dropped while the item price has stayed the same . 29 billion in cash proves that apple can do anything they want. Anything. They even will produce their own chips very soon.
Apple makes an industry high profit or markup on every product they sell . 34% was they latest margin.
The MBP and MBA are selling very very well. This alum uni-body and More powerful chips with larger HDD bodes for many many more sales.
I have to reject the first sentence out of hand, Apple takes interest in it's laptops because that is where the industry is seeing the demand. Simply put there is growth in this part of the market.
There is massive growth in netbooks and no Apple interest. There won't be until Apple can make high margins on netbooks without cratering their notebook ASPs.
Quote:
As to niche products Mac OSX and the use of Intel hardware has done away with that issue, the market has seen the value in this combo.
People both overestimate and underestimate the value of OSX. It is a huge competitive advantage at the high end for that quality of user experience.
It isn't a competitive edge when competing at the commodity level against HP, Dell, etc where cost and not user experience is the primary driver.
In other words, OSX isn't enough for 30% margins on mid-towers when HP will offer the exact same box for $700 when Apple charges $1000.
They get away with this for AIOs because it's a different form factor.
Quote:
what loss. They just updated MacBook and rationalized the rest of the line up.
That white MB is likely going to end up like the Mini. Right now the Mini and MB are very close in performance to the MBP and iMac. They are very unlikely IMHO to get Nahelem and then the performance gaps will widen considerably.
Along with a likely 13" MBP price bump.
Quote:
AIR is nothing but crap. On the otherhand the Mini is very useful.
In your opinion the Air is crap. On the other hand, Air users tend to like it and it likely has high margins and increases Apples ASP (average sale price). Something important to Apple.
Quote:
that certainly isn't reflected in todays Mac Book Pro line up. The low end machines are even well configured and reasonable priced for what you get.
Today. But oddly I was talking about the future.
Quote:
The problem I got is that the Mac hardware does compare well with equally positioned hardware from the PC manufactures. That is if you can even fing equivalent features on PC hardware.
I presume you mean doesn't compare. It does...if you compare SFF with SFF and AIOs with AIOs and Workstations to Workstations. If you compare a mid range tower to an AIO the AIO will suck.
But the AIO has a higher ASP and higher margins. Something important to Apple's business model.
Quote:
I don't buy much of the above either.
You are free to refute it by posting the ASPs and margins for HP's tower desktops.
Quote:
Apple isn't doing to bad with economies of scale.
Because everything they sell are notebooks. Have have 0% desktop processor sales (ignoring Apple TV for the moment).
Quote:
I'm surprised at your focus on volume, I'm under the impression that Apple does realy well in this respect. Remember the PC manufactures have dozens of models to deal with and often models with unique parts. I don't think you will find huge differences in the cost to build items like mother boards for the laptops. From the internal pics of the latest laptops I'd say that they might even be cheaper than some PC laptops.
Apple sells about 1/3 or 1/4 of the top PC maker. But given that almost all of that is for notebook parts they are probably about par in terms of volume for the parts they buy.
This is how they do really well. Strip out the desktop sales to desktop chips and they lose parity in the notebook arena.
Quote:
In anyevent I have a hard time accepting your arguement that Apples line up is based around margins and nothing else. Apple has demonstrated with it's laptops that the can produce agressive hardware that can command a premium when coupled with Mac OS/X.
Today. Because laptops are not the commodity market that desktop towers are. With netbooks they are going that route.
Why? Because a $400 12" netbook isn't really a new market segment but in actuality the commoditization of the current more profitable notebook market. This is why the artificial limitations of Atom and Windows in netbooks
"That means that for the most part, every Netbook sold is one less Dual Core that Intel can sell at a higher price and higher margin.
...
Intel also wants to keep Netbooks at 10 inches or less. Some PC companies we’ve spoken with say that Intel doesn’t want Atom chips in devices bigger than 10 inches, and puts incredible pressure on them to keep Netbooks at 10 inches or less."
"Intel announcing that it's even thinking about retiring the newer Atom N280 processor and GN40 chipset entirely, leaving the older and more common N270 with its 945GSE as the main choice until September, when the new Pineview Atom chips might finally hit production."
Intel wants to use older chips for the 12-13" market and not Atom. Why? Because they have better margins and they make more money? Nah...that can't be the reason.
Everybody positions for margins. Apple's strategy is based on lower volumes with higher margins. Lower volumes with lower margins is obviously not so good.
Here's the current equation:
Windows will sell around 90% of the market until something REALLY upsets the apple cart. Just like IBM dominated until something really upset the apple cart.
When or what that will be, we don't know. But the high odds are it isn't some variety of unix (OSX or Linux). And it likely is a whole new form factor that obsoletes the PC anyway. Just like the PC era reduced the importance of heavy iron that allowed IBM to dominate computing.
So Apple will comfortably sell from 5-10% of the PC market. To be most successful as a 10% player with a different OS the winning play is to maximize margins.
And to use that money to try to find that apple cart upsetting paradigm change. You know, like maybe smartphones. Which, after years and years of fanciful (and mostly awkwardly broken) wearable computing prototypes and predictions is finally approaching useful reality.
I wear my iphone everywhere. Maybe not on my arm, but pretty danged close. I can't quite work on a keynote presentation or a word doc yet on my iphone but you know...maybe with this:
I just picked up the iMac "April 2008" (Previous Generation) 2.8 GHz 24" for $1,199 brand new (not a refurb) at J&R Music/Computer World. That's $200 less than Apple's Clearance price (Apple still has them in stock, Amazon sold out)! No tax and free shipping. That's $600 off the original price. Can't get a better deal than that.
Comments
Uh...ship her out with a mb or mini and have her visit the london apple store when the nahelem iMacs appear?
Or do this:
http://www.rentit.biz/specs/apple_imac_24_inch.htm
60 £ per week is kinda steep though for a couple months It's 900 £ for a year.
Heck, it's not like they wont have computers at school. Or ship her current mac out and she can ebay it when you ship the new one out. Heck, I bet she could sell it in England for more than the US anyway.
I thought about the Mini route, but discarded it.
But I hadn't thought about a rental plan. That looks interesting. I'll look into it.
I want to keep her current machine for when she comes home for holidays and the summer.
Using school computers is difficult for a photography major because she'll need it more than most, and her dorm is too far from the school to make long hours on it practical.
She may want one but needing one is a different story. Besides if she is really serious about photography what she really needs is a calibrated monitor of good reputation.
Actually, the 24" iMac screens are much better than you think. I calibrated hers here, and I plan to calibrate hers there as well.
Well I hope so, at least in the sense of a Nehalem -derived- processor. Honestly though I'm not feeling real good about what Apple has up it's sleeve. We may get less than we are expecting.
It depends on how high your expectations are. I expect them to go the same route they've always gone with the machine, which is to say, a laptop chip.
The power of negative thinking. Really you don't have to do anything, you could explore other options too.
Not really. But Vinea's idea of renting a machine looks like a good one.
I have to ask why not? She could use it for a few months as is or enhance it with a better monitor. By the way if you read this thread you might start to see that second monitor as a good idea. IMacs aren't exactly the best choice for a budding photographer.
Dave
Because it's a pain to ship a large piece of electronics to another country for just a short while. Then she won't have it when she comes home for holidays and the summer, unless we ship it back again. Not worth it considering the expense and the risk of damage.
Actually 24" iMacs are used by quite a lot of professional photographers. It's considered to be a very good machine. I'm pretty familiar with this.
And when have you last lived in a dorm room? do you know how little room they have?
I don't think Apple considers the iMac anything other than a consumer level machine.
Thanks for bringing this flaw out into the open, I now know what to look for in case someone or myself is considering buying one.
The need to categorize everything is Apple's largest flaw and the reason the desktop lineup hasn't been nearly as successful as the laptops. In the desktop lineup its black and white, if you want a feature, you're automatically this and need corresponding other features. No room for overlap based on different requirements or preferences and if wants or needs outside Apple's line of thinking, you're pretty much screwed. Unfortunately, to offset the beautifully designed software and hardware, you have to deal with a lot of baggage and bias.
Making the thing damn near impossible for a normal person to service was a mistake, too.
As for the mini, it's price is set, margins are too low to adjust price. You want a cheaper Mini, it's gonna have to be a bigger mini then where's the love. The mini is a marvel. It's been on the scene for 5 years and still nobody can match it in terms of size power consumption/performance levels. In it's current form is just amazing.
The HOLE so to speak is between the Mini and the MacPro. It's been there for years and EVERYONE has cried for something there. The business market has been pleading and pleading for something inbetween the Mini and the Pro. Maybe we'll see something in the fall when the price drops on the current parts in the mini, maybe not. I think Apple feels the iMac would suffer since it occupies that lineup and in the PC world All-in-one's always fail because a desktop in the same price is always the better option.
Either way, the price dropped iMac, at this time, doesn't look like an updated model but merely a run-on of the current at the lower price point of $899-999.
FYI: Did you know the MFG cost of the 20" screen is only 8% more than a 17" but 21% less than a 24"? A 22" screen is the same cost of the 20" right now... 32" is almost half the cost of a 30".
I know this is slightly off-topic, but with the 13 inch unibody MacBooks becoming MacBook Pros, does Apple have plans for brand-new MacBooks in the near future? I'm guessing they might.
Every month this topic is off-topic. It gets old real fast this constant demand for a new laptop from Apple, while their desktop/workstation lines take a year or more to refresh.
Headless mac with performance equal to imac, no monitor and no laptop parts, small case (doesn't have to be miniscule, just much smaller the the Mac Pro), expandable to at least 8 gigs RAM, keyboard and mouse optional, user accessible guts.
Absolutely on the money. I think Steve Jobs is one of the most innovative, brilliant entrepreneurs we've ever seen. A great man, an original. But, when he gets something into his head, he refuses to let it go. |t's his strength but there is a negative aspect to it. The Cube was one of the few missteps for Jobs and Apple and I see the mini, which has been moderately successful, as a variation on the Cube. In other words a success, however moderate, replacing a failure.
Here's the problem. The mini, in some respects, is the computer nobody really asked for. I doubt anyone wanted the limitations inherent in using laptop components to wind up with a smaller form factor. I doubt that a computer along similar lines to the mini using desktop components would be all that larger. A computer that's a little bigger but with better specs at the same or lower cost would suit most of us just fine.
It isn't Steve Jobs' computer but it's the system we as consumers want. Maybe this is one case where Jobs would be well served to bend a little, even if the end result is something a little less distinctive.
The price cut will be a slightly revamp of the existing 20" when they introduce Nehalem (SP? sorry) based iMac's, MacBook's etc.
I'm worried that they won't go with Nehalem derived hardware. Whatever they do quad cores need to be in the mix.
As for the mini, it's price is set, margins are too low to adjust price.
This is where I think you could use a little imagination. There is a lot of potential for increasing value in the Mini or lowering the price. One thing that would help is droping the optical drive. Another idea would be implementing a small SSD right on the motherbard for app storage. Other ideas come to mind but there is considerable potential in that box or even a smaller box. It is a matter of having acceptable trade offs for the consummer.
You want a cheaper Mini, it's gonna have to be a bigger mini then where's the love. The mini is a marvel.
I really don't believe it has to get bigger to get cheaper. Simply rethinking what Mini is allows for alternative designs that fit the box.
It's been on the scene for 5 years and still nobody can match it in terms of size power consumption/performance levels. In it's current form is just amazing.
Part of that is that nobody really wants to match Mini. Let's face it, the Mini is nothing more than a laptop in an alternative box. The hardware is available to all manufactures, the problem is selling that hardware to the PC community that loves big boxes.
The HOLE so to speak is between the Mini and the MacPro. It's been there for years and EVERYONE has cried for something there. The business market has been pleading and pleading for something inbetween the Mini and the Pro.
I have to agree it is a very big hole, more of an ocean than a pond. I'm not sure the cries come from businesses though, I know many individuals like myself would like to see such a machine. The problem is the performance gap between the IMac / Mini and the Pro. That gap is beyound huge now.
Maybe we'll see something in the fall when the price drops on the current parts in the mini, maybe not. I think Apple feels the iMac would suffer since it occupies that lineup and in the PC world All-in-one's always fail because a desktop in the same price is always the better option.
I really hope that Apple doesn't think that way as frankly it is stupid. Besides Apple has demonstrated a fine ability to obsolete old designs. That is if you think that iMac would suffer, this I'm not convinced of.
As to all in ones failing because of the expense I've never seen anything solid to indicate that. People want to believe that but there are advantages also to all in ones in large installations. My sense is that this is personal bias that is not based on an understanding of modern hardware. That and the occasional un ethical behavior in the corporate PC buying market.
Either way, the price dropped iMac, at this time, doesn't look like an updated model but merely a run-on of the current at the lower price point of $899-999.
The hardware is due for an update so it is only a question of what we get for that update. This is a rumor anyways so this could all be bogus. The need for a significant update has never been more glaring so if Apple doesn't deliver iMac sales will suffer.
FYI: Did you know the MFG cost of the 20" screen is only 8% more than a 17" but 21% less than a 24"? A 22" screen is the same cost of the 20" right now... 32" is almost half the cost of a 30".
So? I'm not sure what you are getting at here. I don't really believe the screen is a huge consideration in the final price of the machine. Certainly we are paying for better than average screens but that is the case across all sizes.
In any event it is obvious to the technically inclined that Apple hardware, on the desktop, is in sad shape. That is one of the reasons I'd expect a major update rather than dramatic price drops. Of course the coming Intel hardware may allow for that upgrade and a combo price drop. It's not a given though especially considering Apples deep interest in OpenCL. I can't see Apple offering hardware that can't agressively leverage OpenCL in anything more than the very lowest end.
Dave
Every month this topic is off-topic. It gets old real fast this constant demand for a new laptop from Apple, while their desktop/workstation lines take a year or more to refresh.
Apple is attentive to it's laptops for the simple reason that that is where the demand is. The are hot in all segements of interest to Apple. That is education, business, science and personal.
Now one could argue that Apple has poor desktop sales because of it's desktop line up. That is certainly the case but it doesn't explain the rest of the industry. For Apple to really do anything here they need to deliver a vastly rethought desktop. Much in the same way that iPhone broached new design ideas that moved industry in a different direction. I'm not talking the same old PC in a different box either.
Dave
Apple is attentive to it's laptops for the simple reason that that is where the demand is. The are hot in all segements of interest to Apple. That is education, business, science and personal.
Now one could argue that Apple has poor desktop sales because of it's desktop line up. That is certainly the case but it doesn't explain the rest of the industry. For Apple to really do anything here they need to deliver a vastly rethought desktop. Much in the same way that iPhone broached new design ideas that moved industry in a different direction. I'm not talking the same old PC in a different box either.
Apple is attentive to laptops because currently there are still margins there. Which is fading fast and you'll see Apple laptops become more and more niche...like the iMac and Mini are on the desktop. The loss of the "MacBook" lineup may be temporary or it's the start of the laptop lineup looking like the desktop one.
MB Air = Mini
MB Pro = Mac Pro (high end laptops only)
??? = iMac (consumer grade laptop)
What will be the mobile iMac? I'm guessing some kind of future tablet that is different enough from a normal laptop to command 30+% margins and immune to direct comparisons to commodity laptops from HP or Lenovo.
AIOs, SFF and workstations are the desktop segments where there are still margins. Which is why Apple has only these kinds of desktops.
Apple (or anyone) has limited ability in selling high margin towers and nearly no economies of scale (vs someone like HP) there unlike their current lineup which, aside from the Mac Pro, is a whole boatload of laptops in various configurations.
The line up plays to Apple's strengths, mitigates some of Apple's weaknesses in terms of volume and works very well with the strategy of going after the 20% of the market that generates 80% of the profit.
I think dropping the 17" model was a mistake.
Making the thing damn near impossible for a normal person to service was a mistake, too.
I agree that their dropping of a 17 inch desktop was not ideal. There are situations where (a) 20" or more is just too big for the space, (b) a 17" would cost a bit less, allowing a lower starting point (IMO), (c) and would be more transportable. On this last point I know because I have transported several varieties of iMacs over the years. The larger and heavier ones are just hard to do that.
And since I am able to do internal memory, HD upgrades, making easier access would really be helpful. The current aluminum situation --having to take apart the entire monitor display and covers et al just to get at a hard drive is insane...
re. GMHut"
"Headless mac with performance equal to imac, no monitor and no laptop parts, small case (doesn't have to be miniscule, just much smaller the the Mac Pro), expandable to at least 8 gigs RAM, keyboard and mouse optional, user accessible guts."
Absolutely on the money. I think Steve Jobs is one of the most innovative, brilliant entrepreneurs we've ever seen. A great man, an original. But, when he gets something into his head, he refuses to let it go. |t's his strength but there is a negative aspect to it. ...
Here's the problem. The mini, in some respects, is the computer nobody really asked for. I doubt anyone wanted the limitations inherent in using laptop components to wind up with a smaller form factor. I doubt that a computer along similar lines to the mini using desktop components would be all that larger. A computer that's a little bigger but with better specs at the same or lower cost would suit most of us just fine.
It isn't Steve Jobs' computer but it's the system we as consumers want. Maybe this is one case where Jobs would be well served to bend a little, even if the end result is something a little less distinctive.
Agreed!
Conceptually, I like the idea of the Mac mini. I would almost even like to buy one. But so much is sacrificed all in the name of making the computer fit into some mythic 6.5"x6.5"x2" space form factor. To wit: laptop 2.5" HD, laptop Optical, onboard GPU with shared graphic memory.
As if droves of people go to the computer store and says : 'I want a computer, but dagnabit, its just GOT to fit into a 6-point-5-inch square space otherwise forget it!'
I would love to see an affordable not-quite-so-mini that uses better-performing, less-costly mainstream components (3.5"HD, Optical, dedicated GPU memory) and provides a bit more connectivity (read up on the user issues with the new mini-display port and connecting to monitors...). It could still take advantage of a smallish space (but not tiny), and reduced power (several vendors now with 'green' HD options, as WD GreenPower, etc).
Maybe the new Steve will be less tyrannical about our desktop choice being either iMac with screen, or else super-tiny-underpowered-mini or super-expensive-and-huge Pro Tower.
I
would love to see an affordable not-quite-so-mini that uses better-performing, less-costly mainstream components (3.5"HD, Optical, dedicated GPU memory) and provides a bit more connectivity (read up on the user issues with the new mini-display port and connecting to monitors...). It could still take advantage of a smallish space (but not tiny), and reduced power (several vendors now with 'green' HD options, as WD GreenPower, etc).
It wouldn't fly. It'd look like those Shuttle boxes and hey just don't have the aesthetic of the mini. It really take a certain type of person to like the mini. Perhaps you don't want a laptop but you don't want some atx desktop sitting on the floor sucking up dust.
Adding a 3.5" drive and full size optical is anti-thetical to the point the mini. It literally disappears from your desk and often I forget about it until I hear it whir into action. It doesn't bother me that I can't put a 2TB hard drive in it or the optical drive is commonly used in a laptop. What matters is quiet an unobtrusive computing. I laugh when I see desks with CPU holders ...what a waste of space.
Apple is attentive to laptops because currently there are still margins there. Which is fading fast and you'll see Apple laptops become more and more niche...like the iMac and Mini are on the desktop.
I have to reject the first sentence out of hand, Apple takes interest in it's laptops because that is where the industry is seeing the demand. Simply put there is growth in this part of the market.
As to niche products Mac OSX and the use of Intel hardware has done away with that issue, the market has seen the value in this combo.
The loss of the "MacBook" lineup may be temporary or it's the start of the laptop lineup looking like the desktop one.
what loss. They just updated MacBook and rationalized the rest of the line up.
MB Air = Mini
AIR is nothing but crap. On the otherhand the Mini is very useful.
MB Pro = Mac Pro (high end laptops only)
that certainly isn't reflected in todays Mac Book Pro line up. The low end machines are even well configured and reasonable priced for what you get.
??? = iMac (consumer grade)
What will be the mobile iMac? I'm guessing some kind of future tablet that is different enough from a normal laptop to command 30+% margins and immune to direct comparisons to commodity laptops from HP or Lenovo.
The problem I got is that the Mac hardware does compare well with equally positioned hardware from the PC manufactures. That is if you can even fing equivalent features on PC hardware.
AIOs, SFF and workstations are the desktop segments where there are still margins. Which is why Apple has only these kinds of desktops.
I don't buy much of the above either.
Apple (or anyone) has limited ability in selling high margin towers and nearly no economies of scale (vs someone like HP) there unlike their current lineup which, aside from the Mac Pro, is a whole boatload of laptops in various configurations.
Apple isn't doing to bad with economies of scale.
The line up plays to Apple's strengths, mitigates some of Apple's weaknesses in terms of volume and works very well with the strategy of going after the 20% of the market that generates 80% of the profit.
I'm surprised at your focus on volume, I'm under the impression that Apple does realy well in this respect. Remember the PC manufactures have dozens of models to deal with and often models with unique parts. I don't think you will find huge differences in the cost to build items like mother boards for the laptops. From the internal pics of the latest laptops I'd say that they might even be cheaper than some PC laptops.
In anyevent I have a hard time accepting your arguement that Apples line up is based around margins and nothing else. Apple has demonstrated with it's laptops that the can produce agressive hardware that can command a premium when coupled with Mac OS/X.
It wouldn't fly. It'd look like those Shuttle boxes and hey just don't have the aesthetic of the mini. It really take a certain type of person to like the mini. Perhaps you don't want a laptop but you don't want some atx desktop sitting on the floor sucking up dust.
Adding a 3.5" drive and full size optical is anti-thetical to the point the mini. It literally disappears from your desk and often I forget about it until I hear it whir into action. It doesn't bother me that I can't put a 2TB hard drive in it or the optical drive is commonly used in a laptop. What matters is quiet an unobtrusive computing. I laugh when I see desks with CPU holders ...what a waste of space.
The point of the mini should be an affordable way to get into a mac for those of us who want to use a seperate monitor. If the mini came in a somewhat larger package that would not be a dealbreaker for me and I suspect many others.
Apple is so adept at packaging that I'm sure the device would be appealing.
My problem with the iMac is that the monitor will outlast the rest of the machine. That seems to to be such a waste.
Apple is attentive to laptops because currently there are still margins there. Which is fading fast and you'll see Apple laptops become more and more niche...like the iMac and Mini are on the desktop. The loss of the "MacBook" lineup may be temporary or it's the start of the laptop lineup looking like the desktop one.
MB Air = Mini
MB Pro = Mac Pro (high end laptops only)
??? = iMac (consumer grade laptop)
What will be the mobile iMac? I'm guessing some kind of future tablet that is different enough from a normal laptop to command 30+% margins and immune to direct comparisons to commodity laptops from HP or Lenovo.
AIOs, SFF and workstations are the desktop segments where there are still margins. Which is why Apple has only these kinds of desktops.
Apple (or anyone) has limited ability in selling high margin towers and nearly no economies of scale (vs someone like HP) there unlike their current lineup which, aside from the Mac Pro, is a whole boatload of laptops in various configurations.
The line up plays to Apple's strengths, mitigates some of Apple's weaknesses in terms of volume and works very well with the strategy of going after the 20% of the market that generates 80% of the profit.
MBP a niche ? Margins fading fast ???
My Friend apple is paying less and less for everything they buy . In many cases their overall costs have dropped while the item price has stayed the same . 29 billion in cash proves that apple can do anything they want. Anything. They even will produce their own chips very soon.
Apple makes an industry high profit or markup on every product they sell . 34% was they latest margin.
The MBP and MBA are selling very very well. This alum uni-body and More powerful chips with larger HDD bodes for many many more sales.
9
I have to reject the first sentence out of hand, Apple takes interest in it's laptops because that is where the industry is seeing the demand. Simply put there is growth in this part of the market.
There is massive growth in netbooks and no Apple interest. There won't be until Apple can make high margins on netbooks without cratering their notebook ASPs.
As to niche products Mac OSX and the use of Intel hardware has done away with that issue, the market has seen the value in this combo.
People both overestimate and underestimate the value of OSX. It is a huge competitive advantage at the high end for that quality of user experience.
It isn't a competitive edge when competing at the commodity level against HP, Dell, etc where cost and not user experience is the primary driver.
In other words, OSX isn't enough for 30% margins on mid-towers when HP will offer the exact same box for $700 when Apple charges $1000.
They get away with this for AIOs because it's a different form factor.
what loss. They just updated MacBook and rationalized the rest of the line up.
That white MB is likely going to end up like the Mini. Right now the Mini and MB are very close in performance to the MBP and iMac. They are very unlikely IMHO to get Nahelem and then the performance gaps will widen considerably.
Along with a likely 13" MBP price bump.
AIR is nothing but crap. On the otherhand the Mini is very useful.
In your opinion the Air is crap. On the other hand, Air users tend to like it and it likely has high margins and increases Apples ASP (average sale price). Something important to Apple.
that certainly isn't reflected in todays Mac Book Pro line up. The low end machines are even well configured and reasonable priced for what you get.
Today. But oddly I was talking about the future.
The problem I got is that the Mac hardware does compare well with equally positioned hardware from the PC manufactures. That is if you can even fing equivalent features on PC hardware.
I presume you mean doesn't compare. It does...if you compare SFF with SFF and AIOs with AIOs and Workstations to Workstations. If you compare a mid range tower to an AIO the AIO will suck.
But the AIO has a higher ASP and higher margins. Something important to Apple's business model.
I don't buy much of the above either.
You are free to refute it by posting the ASPs and margins for HP's tower desktops.
Apple isn't doing to bad with economies of scale.
Because everything they sell are notebooks. Have have 0% desktop processor sales (ignoring Apple TV for the moment).
I'm surprised at your focus on volume, I'm under the impression that Apple does realy well in this respect. Remember the PC manufactures have dozens of models to deal with and often models with unique parts. I don't think you will find huge differences in the cost to build items like mother boards for the laptops. From the internal pics of the latest laptops I'd say that they might even be cheaper than some PC laptops.
Apple sells about 1/3 or 1/4 of the top PC maker. But given that almost all of that is for notebook parts they are probably about par in terms of volume for the parts they buy.
This is how they do really well. Strip out the desktop sales to desktop chips and they lose parity in the notebook arena.
In anyevent I have a hard time accepting your arguement that Apples line up is based around margins and nothing else. Apple has demonstrated with it's laptops that the can produce agressive hardware that can command a premium when coupled with Mac OS/X.
Today. Because laptops are not the commodity market that desktop towers are. With netbooks they are going that route.
Why? Because a $400 12" netbook isn't really a new market segment but in actuality the commoditization of the current more profitable notebook market. This is why the artificial limitations of Atom and Windows in netbooks
"That means that for the most part, every Netbook sold is one less Dual Core that Intel can sell at a higher price and higher margin.
...
Intel also wants to keep Netbooks at 10 inches or less. Some PC companies we’ve spoken with say that Intel doesn’t want Atom chips in devices bigger than 10 inches, and puts incredible pressure on them to keep Netbooks at 10 inches or less."
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/01/06...appy-about-it/
"Intel announcing that it's even thinking about retiring the newer Atom N280 processor and GN40 chipset entirely, leaving the older and more common N270 with its 945GSE as the main choice until September, when the new Pineview Atom chips might finally hit production."
http://www.engadget.com/2009/05/12/i...st-of-the-yea/
Intel wants to use older chips for the 12-13" market and not Atom. Why? Because they have better margins and they make more money? Nah...that can't be the reason.
Everybody positions for margins. Apple's strategy is based on lower volumes with higher margins. Lower volumes with lower margins is obviously not so good.
Here's the current equation:
Windows will sell around 90% of the market until something REALLY upsets the apple cart. Just like IBM dominated until something really upset the apple cart.
When or what that will be, we don't know. But the high odds are it isn't some variety of unix (OSX or Linux). And it likely is a whole new form factor that obsoletes the PC anyway. Just like the PC era reduced the importance of heavy iron that allowed IBM to dominate computing.
So Apple will comfortably sell from 5-10% of the PC market. To be most successful as a 10% player with a different OS the winning play is to maximize margins.
And to use that money to try to find that apple cart upsetting paradigm change. You know, like maybe smartphones. Which, after years and years of fanciful (and mostly awkwardly broken) wearable computing prototypes and predictions is finally approaching useful reality.
I wear my iphone everywhere. Maybe not on my arm, but pretty danged close. I can't quite work on a keynote presentation or a word doc yet on my iphone but you know...maybe with this:
http://www.appletell.com/apple/comme...-manufacturer/
And a folding bt keyboard, mouse and flat white surface I will be able to.