Sorry to point out, but product pricing DOES have a psychological component; why price it at $1099? why not $1097.483? It's clear that prices are set to hit certain "thresholds" in the minds of consumers.
etc etc
Sorry to point out, but you really must be quite arrogant -- not to mention completely out to lunch -- if you think that Apple couldn't do or hasn't done an analysis of the trade-offs between price and quantity, controlling for phycological factors, for a product that they've been producing and selling apparently quite successfully for the past 16 years." src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
I'm sorry if this has been said previously (I skimmed the other comments), but if this was $999 that would make the MBA equivalent (256GB SSD, 8 GB Ram) $50 MORE expensive. I think this was a deciding factor in pricing. The iMac with a larger screen and peripherals should (err... this is where everyone will eat into this comment)... should be more expensive. And at this price point it is $50 more expensive.
Can you show me where I was assuming your needs? Or were you assuming that I was assuming? Does that mean the shoe is on the other foot? It seems you did notice that I tried to carefully word the post.
Yes, I assumed you were rebutting what I said because you quoted me. Had you not quoted me, I would assume it was simply your opinion, and not a rebuttal to my opinion. Otherwise, why quote me? I thought it was understood that when you quote someone, you are either agreeing and adding to the OP's opinion; or, you are disagreeing and offering a counterargument. Maybe the rules of forums have changed and I was unaware...
Irregardless, my quote wasn't anything that even needed rebutted, I was just responding to Rogifan explaining that I was someone who would buy one and then proceeded to give my reasons why.
read what you wrote. how could a general purpose computer be "crippled" by a HDD? it may be slower than a SSD, but for common, non-intensive tasks, it's surely not crippled.
I know very well what I wrote. With a 5400 rpm HDD AND 1.4 GHz CPU it is really crippled today. Apple could at least put in a slow 128 GB SSD, like they do even in the lowest end MBA. Even a 7200 rpm HDD would help. This iMac is literally the desktop version of the entry level MBA for 200 euros more. It is glaringly obvious that Apple targets some more than healthy margins here. If they succeed and people buy it, so be it. If not, they have nothing to lose.
Actually you can play Eve Online with those specs.
Interesting. That's pretty impressive for integrated graphics! I haven't had that much luck playing war thunder on my MBA except on absolute min though.
But you can't let your lack of basic reading comprehension and search skills to get in the way of a convenient straw man, can you?
My bad, I missed the "under 7200rpm" category. Still, those drives are by far in the minority compared to 7200rpm models (752 hits for 7200rpm, 42 hits for 5400rpm). Most other low-end desktops these days (see for example the lowest-end Lenovo ThinkCentres or the Celeron-equipped HP all-in-ones) seem to come with at least a 7200rpm drive.
I wonder how many ARE "happy to pay it" vs. how many are like me? I GRUDGINGLY pay Apple's prices because that's the only way to get the Apple OS experience, but I wince every time I do and it wouldn't take a ton of improvement in Windows to sway me back.
Price is also the single reason I've had zero success persuading family, friends and neighbours to buy Macs so we can share ecosystem benefits like FaceTime and Messages etc. They don't attach enough value to those activities to justify buying a Mercedes instead of a Honda.
Sorry to point out, but you really must be quite arrogant -- not to mention completely out to lunch -- if you think that Apple couldn't do or hasn't done an analysis of the trade-offs between price and quantity, controlling for phycological factors, for a product that they've been producing and selling apparently quite successfully for the past 16 years." src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
This is true, I have no access to Apple's supply lines or any ability to do a real analysis. However, by this logic, we should NEVER question ANY company's product moves, as we, as individuals, clearly have no ability to run an internal analysis for any company. And therefore, by extension, companies must NEVER make tactical missteps, being they have nearly infinite (compared to little-'ole-us) resources to plan their strategies.
$200 savings is $200 savings. Especially you don't need the power- like a simple workstation at an office. When our 2007 craps out in our Hawaii lab- I'll be getting this one. Only checks mail, numbers, and FileMaker. The power supply will die before the specs are obsolete for that use.
Rogi- that 2007 runs circles around our 2013 $500 Dell workstations (no monitor) regarding opening FileMaker, opening mail vs dell opening outlook, and opening numbers vs dell opening excel. Only reason our IT guy buys dell is I have to run sharp desk for printing our reports. Of course, I don't write reports so I have an imac
I have more faith than you that Macs are reliable, at least they used to be. My uncle still has a blueberry iMac from 1999 that fires up and connects to the internets just fine.
I have more faith than you that Macs are reliable, at least they used to be. My uncle still has a blueberry iMac from 1999 that fires up and connects to the internets just fine.
I'm still using a 2001 iMac every day. I've connected a 16TB RAID to it via FW400 (the RAID also supports USB 3.0 and eSATA) for my iTunes Server and my Time Machine backups. This works flawlessly from other Macs in the house and the Apple TV. I would like something a bit faster than FW400 and 100Mbps Ethernet to the AEBS which is why I'm holding out for the Mac Mini to be updated, although I may not buy the newest Mac Mini once it's updated but rather use that to get a better price on an older one.
I wonder how many consumer Win PCs from 2001 are still in use.
I'm not nuts about some of the hardware aspects, but I don't get the puzzlement either over who these could have possibly been aimed at. A lot of situations have tight budgets and don't need horsepower.
This is true, I have no access to Apple's supply lines or any ability to do a real analysis. However, by this logic, we should NEVER question ANY company's product moves, as we, as individuals, clearly have no ability to run an internal analysis for any company. And therefore, by extension, companies must NEVER make tactical missteps, being they have nearly infinite (compared to little-'ole-us) resources to plan their strategies.
Apple's goal is not to make money, but to make good products, said Jonathan Ive, senior vice president of industrial design at Apple, speaking at the British Embassy's Creative Summit.
"We are really pleased with our revenues but our goal isn't to make money. It sounds a little flippant, but it's the truth. Our goal and what makes us excited is to make great products. If we are successful people will like them and if we are operationally competent, we will make money," he said.
He explained how, in the 90s, Apple was very close to bankruptcy and that "you learn a lot about vital corporations through non-vital corporations". When Steve Jobs returned to the company in 1997, his focus was not on making money -- "His observation was that the products weren't good enough. His resolve was to make better products." This was a different approach from other attempts to turn the company around, which had focused first and foremost on cost savings and revenue generation.
I'm still using a 2001 iMac every day. I've connected a 16TB RAID to it via FW400 (the RAID also supports USB 3.0 and eSATA) for my iTunes Server and my Time Machine backups. This works flawlessly from other Macs in the house and the Apple TV. I would like something a bit faster than FW400 and 100Mbps Ethernet to the AEBS which is why I'm holding out for the Mac Mini to be updated, although I may not buy the newest Mac Mini once it's updated but rather use that to get a better price on an older one.
I wonder how many consumer Win PCs from 2001 are still in use.
I use my 2008 aluminum MacBook every day. I have it hooked up to a 27" Cinema Display, I run all the latest software. I can do video editing, photo editing, publishing, Netflix, HBO Go.. It may not be super fast at complex stuff, and I can't run the latest games (i'm not a big gamer though so bfd), but I have no reason to give it up. It still has a really good resale value, it's worth more than most of those new crap PC laptops or slaptops or netbooks on the market " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Comments
Sorry to point out, but product pricing DOES have a psychological component; why price it at $1099? why not $1097.483? It's clear that prices are set to hit certain "thresholds" in the minds of consumers.
etc etc
Sorry to point out, but you really must be quite arrogant -- not to mention completely out to lunch -- if you think that Apple couldn't do or hasn't done an analysis of the trade-offs between price and quantity, controlling for phycological factors, for a product that they've been producing and selling apparently quite successfully for the past 16 years.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
I'm sorry if this has been said previously (I skimmed the other comments), but if this was $999 that would make the MBA equivalent (256GB SSD, 8 GB Ram) $50 MORE expensive. I think this was a deciding factor in pricing. The iMac with a larger screen and peripherals should (err... this is where everyone will eat into this comment)... should be more expensive. And at this price point it is $50 more expensive.
Can you show me where I was assuming your needs? Or were you assuming that I was assuming? Does that mean the shoe is on the other foot? It seems you did notice that I tried to carefully word the post.
Yes, I assumed you were rebutting what I said because you quoted me. Had you not quoted me, I would assume it was simply your opinion, and not a rebuttal to my opinion. Otherwise, why quote me? I thought it was understood that when you quote someone, you are either agreeing and adding to the OP's opinion; or, you are disagreeing and offering a counterargument. Maybe the rules of forums have changed and I was unaware...
Irregardless, my quote wasn't anything that even needed rebutted, I was just responding to Rogifan explaining that I was someone who would buy one and then proceeded to give my reasons why.
Ah!!!!!!!!
You can't even get 5400 rpm drives on Newegg these days.
Sure you can.
But you can't let your lack of search skills get in the way of a convenient straw man, can you?
read what you wrote. how could a general purpose computer be "crippled" by a HDD? it may be slower than a SSD, but for common, non-intensive tasks, it's surely not crippled.
I know very well what I wrote. With a 5400 rpm HDD AND 1.4 GHz CPU it is really crippled today. Apple could at least put in a slow 128 GB SSD, like they do even in the lowest end MBA. Even a 7200 rpm HDD would help. This iMac is literally the desktop version of the entry level MBA for 200 euros more. It is glaringly obvious that Apple targets some more than healthy margins here. If they succeed and people buy it, so be it. If not, they have nothing to lose.
Sure you can.
But you can't let your lack of basic reading comprehension and search skills to get in the way of a convenient straw man, can you?
My bad, I missed the "under 7200rpm" category. Still, those drives are by far in the minority compared to 7200rpm models (752 hits for 7200rpm, 42 hits for 5400rpm). Most other low-end desktops these days (see for example the lowest-end Lenovo ThinkCentres or the Celeron-equipped HP all-in-ones) seem to come with at least a 7200rpm drive.
I wonder how many ARE "happy to pay it" vs. how many are like me? I GRUDGINGLY pay Apple's prices because that's the only way to get the Apple OS experience, but I wince every time I do and it wouldn't take a ton of improvement in Windows to sway me back.
Price is also the single reason I've had zero success persuading family, friends and neighbours to buy Macs so we can share ecosystem benefits like FaceTime and Messages etc. They don't attach enough value to those activities to justify buying a Mercedes instead of a Honda.
Sorry to point out, but you really must be quite arrogant -- not to mention completely out to lunch -- if you think that Apple couldn't do or hasn't done an analysis of the trade-offs between price and quantity, controlling for phycological factors, for a product that they've been producing and selling apparently quite successfully for the past 16 years.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
This is true, I have no access to Apple's supply lines or any ability to do a real analysis. However, by this logic, we should NEVER question ANY company's product moves, as we, as individuals, clearly have no ability to run an internal analysis for any company. And therefore, by extension, companies must NEVER make tactical missteps, being they have nearly infinite (compared to little-'ole-us) resources to plan their strategies.
“Only rich people can afford cheap windows.”
The coincidence is lovely, but the saying predates computers by quite some time.
Ah!!!!!!!!
My brain shut down- sorry.
Overgeneralizing to dodge burden of proof. Got it.
No response = proof. Got it.
Keep up those fallacies coming.
Just keep ignoring the other facts. Go ahead... fanboy!
Not in reality, in Europe we pay 1129 EURO = 1,535$
Difference = 436$ extra compared to the US price!
When is this ridiculous pricing (taxing) stuff going to end? with Iphone/Ipad the differences are even much higher!
So...be happy you US guys :-)
$200 savings is $200 savings. Especially you don't need the power- like a simple workstation at an office. When our 2007 craps out in our Hawaii lab- I'll be getting this one. Only checks mail, numbers, and FileMaker. The power supply will die before the specs are obsolete for that use.
Rogi- that 2007 runs circles around our 2013 $500 Dell workstations (no monitor) regarding opening FileMaker, opening mail vs dell opening outlook, and opening numbers vs dell opening excel. Only reason our IT guy buys dell is I have to run sharp desk for printing our reports. Of course, I don't write reports so I have an imac
I have more faith than you that Macs are reliable, at least they used to be. My uncle still has a blueberry iMac from 1999 that fires up and connects to the internets just fine.
I'm still using a 2001 iMac every day. I've connected a 16TB RAID to it via FW400 (the RAID also supports USB 3.0 and eSATA) for my iTunes Server and my Time Machine backups. This works flawlessly from other Macs in the house and the Apple TV. I would like something a bit faster than FW400 and 100Mbps Ethernet to the AEBS which is why I'm holding out for the Mac Mini to be updated, although I may not buy the newest Mac Mini once it's updated but rather use that to get a better price on an older one.
I wonder how many consumer Win PCs from 2001 are still in use.
Schools, students, offices.
I'm not nuts about some of the hardware aspects, but I don't get the puzzlement either over who these could have possibly been aimed at. A lot of situations have tight budgets and don't need horsepower.
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-07/30/jonathan-ive-revenue-good-design
I'm still using a 2001 iMac every day. I've connected a 16TB RAID to it via FW400 (the RAID also supports USB 3.0 and eSATA) for my iTunes Server and my Time Machine backups. This works flawlessly from other Macs in the house and the Apple TV. I would like something a bit faster than FW400 and 100Mbps Ethernet to the AEBS which is why I'm holding out for the Mac Mini to be updated, although I may not buy the newest Mac Mini once it's updated but rather use that to get a better price on an older one.
I wonder how many consumer Win PCs from 2001 are still in use.
I use my 2008 aluminum MacBook every day. I have it hooked up to a 27" Cinema Display, I run all the latest software. I can do video editing, photo editing, publishing, Netflix, HBO Go.. It may not be super fast at complex stuff, and I can't run the latest games (i'm not a big gamer though so bfd), but I have no reason to give it up. It still has a really good resale value, it's worth more than most of those new crap PC laptops or slaptops or netbooks on the market
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />