he's publicly stated he sees apple being a $8billion dollar company.
he said this in public. he's an officer of apple. so short of disaster, apple will become a $8billion dollar company.
the question is how and what apple will do with new products and price points to get to 8 billion.
does this mean we are looking at a new landscape for apple towers?
a retaining of g4 towers to fill a $999 to $1800 price range.and powerworkstation g5s taking over from there up to and including eating many of SGI's and Sun's lunches?
only time will tell. But fred is a _REALLY_ _REALLY_ smart guy and i have first hand knowledge that steve _LOVES_ fred. so this may have always been part of the plan but only when apple got this chip shît is order.
Fellas, don't be shocked when Apple charges a premium - like they always have. Here are the prices:
1.6 - $1599*
1.8 - $2599
2.0 Dual - $3499
* The 1.6 970 will have a Combo Drive,capacity for only 4GB of RAM, a lesser video card and no PCI-X.
Actually, this is dead-on with Apple's model for product differentiation. Also, Apple has a real gift for pricing products such that most people will wince, but after an hour of thinking about it still open their wallets.
The above prices are higher than what I think Apple should prices these at to expand share unless there is a new element to the matrix. The pricing arguments you usually see with Wintel people are frustrating because they start from different assumptions.
Mac people tend to argue from the perspective of price from a given feature base. Mac people tend to buy products that satisfy *specific* needs and work back to what they cost. PC people tend to argue from the persepctive of features from a given price point. PC people tend to just need a box, and work out from that.
In my office, I just need a box. I don't need burners, I don't need superdrives, I don't need dual CPUs or even 2 GHz 970s. I have cubes and I want more. 500MHz is fine for offices, I can swap out monitors, and paying extra for small, quiet machines is appropriate for an office. From the perspective of *most* computer users, a bare-bones machine might be most appropriate. That's why Apple is missing in the enterprise space.
The above specs and prices might be suitable to make inroads to the workstation market, but not enterprise. When Apple really goes after enterprise, we'll see the low-end, low-cost machines. Perhaps not yet. Matsu might have a little more dancing to do.
It'll be interesting to see how Apple addresses the enterprise needs. Either it'll be another product line - cheap headless box - or they'll tear the iMac in half to get the same effect. Don't expect Powermac to be that line - Powermac will move upward, not down.
You might say that the 970 is the missing cog in the wheel. Because of motorola's failures to provide the core technology, Apple has not been able to advance in a consistent manner. The 970 provides that core technology, allowing them get all the wheels (production, marketing, R&D, etc) all turning together.
The answer isn't that Apple "must" lower prices. The answer is that they must remain profitable. Fred and Steve know this. However within that window of profitability, they have a lot of options. Eventually one of those options will be a steady and consistent lowering of prices. Give it time.
Lundy, I agree, why can't they drop their margins 5 or 10% to increase market share? Well the answer to that is in their recent history. They already have!
When I bought my PowerMac (not all that long ago) it was the low-end model and cost $1699. The current low-end model is a good 25% overall faster and costs $1499. Do the math. I believe that works out more machine for less money. It also works out to approximately a 12% reduction in gross margins. And they have done this across all their lines. When you convert that over to "net" margins, you are probably seeing closer to a 50% or more. That means a 50% or more reduction in profit per unit. Whether some folks choose to accept it or not, Apple has been cutting their margins as tight as they dare, and this is reflected in their recent financials. There isn't much room left for further cuts without totalling eliminating profitability.
The PC market is no longer seeing substantial price cuts either. What they have been seeing is substantial performance increases at the same price, which have served to make them an "apparent" greater value to consumers (enterprise and private). Now that Apple has an opportunity to close the performance gap, they will eventually have new options. This may include a low cost -headless iMac with limited expansion capabilties that can compete with the low-cost PC's with Pentiums.
I can envision an eventual mini-tower with maybe 2 or 3 memory slots, upgradeable graphics and one or two PCI slots and running a low-power 970. We don't currently know enough about the 970 system architecture to know if upgradable CPU's are viable. It will be interesting to see. Give it some time. It can't and won't happen all at once. But the management team is in place that can make it happen. They have long had the vision, now they finally have the tools.
Well like i said before the price of the new powermacs is going to force apple to make everything else a heck of alot cheaper. Yet people will still complain and people are already complaining
Well like i said before the price of the new powermacs is going to force apple to make everything else a heck of alot cheaper. Yet people will still complain and people are already complaining
Some people will always complain. Some people will never be satisfied, and there are those few who think they deserve everything for nothing. Such is life.
There will always be those who won't be satisfied no matter what. I am sure that somewhere out there there is someone who thinks that Apple should pay them to use their computers, and if they were paid for it, would then demand a pay-raise.
Fortunately though, most people are a little more reasonable and practical. Unfortunately, the forums draw a very high percentage of the unreasonable.
As far as price, I have no doubt they will cut the current lines as low as they dare. After that the price goes up on the 970 PowerMacs to make up the difference. I also have no doubt that Apple will migrate their other lines to the new platform and/or to Gobi (if it exists), as soon as practical. However that won't be quick enough for a lot of folks who want it now.
Some people will always complain. Some people will never be satisfied, and there are those few who think they deserve everything for nothing. Such is life.
There will always be those who won't be satisfied no matter what. I am sure that somewhere out there there is someone who thinks that Apple should pay them to use their computers, and if they were paid for it, would then demand a pay-raise.
Fortunately though, most people are a little more reasonable and practical. Unfortunately, the forums draw a very high percentage of the unreasonable.
Only a DRAMATIC price decrease will alter the Powermac market share ratio.....so if we're talking $1399 or even $1299, the only thing that is being accomplished is costing Apple a couple hundred dollars in sales.
However, if Apple were to find a way to release a $999 Powermac, no one would ever buy an LCD iMac (unless of course the price on them went down on them to the point where they aren't sustainable) ever again.....
For better or worse, Apple is stuck where they are now, unless they give up their cherished iThings in favor of cheaper Powermacs.
IOW, I'm not optimistic that they will be an expandable inexpensive Mac any time soon.
Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is entirely up to you.....
Not exactly, care to explain why Apple has lowere prices on notebooks, and before that intored a new lower-end PB (the 12"). It just cost them money right, according to you. They did it because they wanted to remain competitive and you have to start somewhere.
Desktop mac prices are far too high, and they need to come down, at all price points, regardless of performance. 1299 is a nice break from 1499, and on the way to 999, where it needs to get to if Apple wants to make it in the desktop business.
Baby steps, a 1299 mac would pick up a lot of buyers. 1299, not some hermetically sealed, over-priced, AIO that cost as much as a laptop and goes just about as slow.
The market craves towers, and it will give a 1299 entry price a warm reception, trust me.
Expandability? The only people I've *EVER* seen add anything to their box are high-end folks who the PowerMac is geared directly at.
Consumer level box purchasers just... *don't*.
So... why towers? Why is it so $%#&*(!@ important to have *towers* at $999, when a $999 box in the Wintel world isn't going to get you pro level power either?
Expandability? The only people I've *EVER* seen add anything to their box are high-end folks who the PowerMac is geared directly at.
Consumer level box purchasers just... *don't*.
So... why towers? Why is it so $%#&*(!@ important to have *towers* at $999, when a $999 box in the Wintel world isn't going to get you pro level power either?
Expandability? The only people I've *EVER* seen add anything to their box are high-end folks who the PowerMac is geared directly at.
Consumer level box purchasers just... *don't*.
So... why towers? Why is it so $%#&*(!@ important to have *towers* at $999, when a $999 box in the Wintel world isn't going to get you pro level power either?
Yeah, I don't think towers are necessary, either. (In fact, I hate towers) However, selecting monitors is important, and some expansion is important.
I never bought a 15" flat screen iMac because the monitor was too small. I bought an eMac instead. The 17" iMac was overpriced due to the Superdrive, etc. The eMac was bare-bones. I bought cubes because they had the same balance - I could plug in whatever monitor size I needed.
Exansion is important only as a recovery means these days, IMO, so long as you are outside of scientific/creative markets. Every added consumer/enterprise device I can think to add goes out of either USB or Firewire now. I have a USB barcode reader. I'm looking at a USB smartcard reader, etc. However, if the ethernet on the motherboard went out (broken connector, etc.) then the presence of a PCI slot for a $9 10T NIC would be handy. How much would I pay for that? Nothing. It's never happened to me on a Mac, but it is something that people with large installations look for as a 'just in case' measure.
That doesn't mandate 4 bay, 3 slot towers, though. Again, I want to see cubes. $999 max price for a combo down to $699 or so for CD-only. Nothing special on specs, graphics, etc. Just a cheap, reasonable box. They'd move.
However, if Apple were to find a way to release a $999 Powermac, no one would ever buy an LCD iMac (unless of course the price on them went down on them to the point where they aren't sustainable) ever again.....
I disagree. I would never buy an LCD iMac in the first place. What we have here are two separate user groups. The ones that like the all-in-one vs the ones that don't.
I actually think Apple is LOSING sales by not offering a tower for $999.00.
People love to buy big beige boxes because they think they will swap out all that stuff, upgrade it, etc. Of course, they never do, but I think that, for one, Mac users in places like this are hyper-sensitive to that angle of attack, and also that people lke to think they have that flexibility.
As johnsonwax pointed out, the monitor is the main reason to really ask for a non-AIO design, looking at the size of the thing, not so much other factors (CRT vs. LCD, manufacturer, etc.). If Apple could supply an AIO design with a large range of minotrs, particularly large ones, people might be more inclined to go with them. However, I have a personal theory that many if not most of those who talk about wanting to choose a 20" monitor instead of taking the 17" one that comes with the iMac aren't willing to pay the price for a 20" monitor.
I also think that a lot of people find stuff to pick on because Apple does not, will not and should not try to cover all markets like this. Apple might lose sales because they don't sell a $300 plain box, but it's not necessarily in their interest to pick up those sales anyway. Apple shouldn't try to be all things to all people, and they certainly shouldn't put out any crap just because they're missing some small market. Those $300 boxes could erode the brand image for quality, and make support a nightmare. I don't think Apple is losing out on so many customers because they like AIOs for their consumer/cheaper lines. I don't think a "headless" iMac is a silver bullet to more marketshare.
1299 entry for a PM, or bring in a proper cube with video/cpu/and one PCI expansion slot.
desktops must be headless to make signifcant inroads. Why should i buy an iMac and be stuck with an overpriced display when I can buy plentiful 3rd party displays at great prices? CRt, LCD, whatever I want.
iMac, the AIO in genreal has peaked. Apple owns the market and defines just how big it is, NOT big enough, if they want to grow, they'll need a headless computer.
I don't see how selling a headless computer in the iMac's price range would hurt. It would carry inherently higher margins at the same or slightly lower prices because it does not need the same degree of customized assembly/miniturization/engineering nor does it require the expense of an integrated display.
With the right price it's a clear win-win situation.
I'm talking about the integrated display in an AIO, Apple charges too much for their AIO's and you can't do anything about the display you get. Their 20 and 23 are competitive.
I think quite a few people use the expansion/upgrade capability of their Powermacs. Take me for example, I'm not a power user, but I certainly use my Powermac:
AGP slot: ATI Radeon 32 MB
PCI slots: Soundblaster Live Audio card.
RAM slots: Filled, with 576 MB RAM
HD brackets: Filled, with two ATA 100 drives.
Optical drives: IF I had two bays, both would be full. Apple forced me to pay extra for a FireWire CD burner over an IDE CD Burner.
Planned:
Gigadesigns 1.5 GHz G4 upgrade card.
IDE CD burner, aka "Superdrive" after the cost comes down a bit more.
120 GB HD
I'd say that I'm putting my tower through it's paces. When I bought it I wouldn't even consider an AIO, because I can't upgrade it or expand it. Pluse, all of Apple's AIOs had tiny junk displays back then (15" CRT! LOL). I suppose the 17" iMac is nice, but if I wanted to add a better video card, or PCI card, or new CPU daughtercard upgrade, I'd be SOL.
I don't believe I'm all that atypical as a Powermac tower owner (maybe in other ways, but I'm talking about my expanding/upgrading behavior).
If Apple could supply an AIO design with a large range of minotrs, particularly large ones,
Or one with the same quality as the standalone displays. One of the maine reasons I dislikes the LCD iMac is the display quality sucks compared to the stand alone displays.
But yes, I like having the option to change displays when I need to. I've done that twice on my G4 Tower. I've also added a PCI card for an external CD burner to my tower as well as upgraded my Video Card and have installed a second Hard-Drive. Expandability is not an illusion has some have stated here.
JYD - Your point is taken, and I'm sure many agree with you. But let's still remember...the majority of people who read these forums at all are OUTSIDE the majority of customers Apple is trying to reach with the all-in-one machines.
We fanatics aren't who Apple designs the eMac and iMac for. (Though many of us have and love them...and most of us only think we need a PowerMac out of envy, not true necessity.) Apple designs AIO machines for people, companies, and schools who want the easiest possible setup with a reasonable set of specifications. I mean...even the eMac (supposedly the low rung on Apple's totem pole) is a superior machine to ANY single processor PowerMac built over a year ago...just without the slots.
For every one person who has a PowerMac tower and uses one of the 4 PCI slots inside, you'll find 20 who have one and have never opened the machine, barring a possible RAM upgrade. I know tons of people who bought the towers for the sake of expandibility they've never taken advantage of. Apple knows this..which is why the "pull it out of the box and plug it in" AIO concept was the rebirth of their entire company. For first time computer buyers in particular, nothing is more attractive.
I'd love to see Apple lower prices across the board on it's lineup...to gain market share and to give the PC whining "Macs cost too much" crowd a little less to moan about. But a $599 headless iMac with one PCI slot vs. a $799 eMac without the slot? I don't think the market share to gain from separating these two items would justify the expense for Apple.
And after tomorrow, "headless" will take on an entirely different meaning. It will be the PC world wandering around after their brains explode over the new king of the computing world.
Comments
he's publicly stated he sees apple being a $8billion dollar company.
he said this in public. he's an officer of apple. so short of disaster, apple will become a $8billion dollar company.
the question is how and what apple will do with new products and price points to get to 8 billion.
does this mean we are looking at a new landscape for apple towers?
a retaining of g4 towers to fill a $999 to $1800 price range.and powerworkstation g5s taking over from there up to and including eating many of SGI's and Sun's lunches?
only time will tell. But fred is a _REALLY_ _REALLY_ smart guy and i have first hand knowledge that steve _LOVES_ fred. so this may have always been part of the plan but only when apple got this chip shît is order.
come tommorrow it looks like they will.
Originally posted by NerV
Fellas, don't be shocked when Apple charges a premium - like they always have. Here are the prices:
1.6 - $1599*
1.8 - $2599
2.0 Dual - $3499
* The 1.6 970 will have a Combo Drive,capacity for only 4GB of RAM, a lesser video card and no PCI-X.
Actually, this is dead-on with Apple's model for product differentiation. Also, Apple has a real gift for pricing products such that most people will wince, but after an hour of thinking about it still open their wallets.
The above prices are higher than what I think Apple should prices these at to expand share unless there is a new element to the matrix. The pricing arguments you usually see with Wintel people are frustrating because they start from different assumptions.
Mac people tend to argue from the perspective of price from a given feature base. Mac people tend to buy products that satisfy *specific* needs and work back to what they cost. PC people tend to argue from the persepctive of features from a given price point. PC people tend to just need a box, and work out from that.
In my office, I just need a box. I don't need burners, I don't need superdrives, I don't need dual CPUs or even 2 GHz 970s. I have cubes and I want more. 500MHz is fine for offices, I can swap out monitors, and paying extra for small, quiet machines is appropriate for an office. From the perspective of *most* computer users, a bare-bones machine might be most appropriate. That's why Apple is missing in the enterprise space.
The above specs and prices might be suitable to make inroads to the workstation market, but not enterprise. When Apple really goes after enterprise, we'll see the low-end, low-cost machines. Perhaps not yet. Matsu might have a little more dancing to do.
It'll be interesting to see how Apple addresses the enterprise needs. Either it'll be another product line - cheap headless box - or they'll tear the iMac in half to get the same effect. Don't expect Powermac to be that line - Powermac will move upward, not down.
The answer isn't that Apple "must" lower prices. The answer is that they must remain profitable. Fred and Steve know this. However within that window of profitability, they have a lot of options. Eventually one of those options will be a steady and consistent lowering of prices. Give it time.
Lundy, I agree, why can't they drop their margins 5 or 10% to increase market share? Well the answer to that is in their recent history. They already have!
When I bought my PowerMac (not all that long ago) it was the low-end model and cost $1699. The current low-end model is a good 25% overall faster and costs $1499. Do the math. I believe that works out more machine for less money. It also works out to approximately a 12% reduction in gross margins. And they have done this across all their lines. When you convert that over to "net" margins, you are probably seeing closer to a 50% or more. That means a 50% or more reduction in profit per unit. Whether some folks choose to accept it or not, Apple has been cutting their margins as tight as they dare, and this is reflected in their recent financials. There isn't much room left for further cuts without totalling eliminating profitability.
The PC market is no longer seeing substantial price cuts either. What they have been seeing is substantial performance increases at the same price, which have served to make them an "apparent" greater value to consumers (enterprise and private). Now that Apple has an opportunity to close the performance gap, they will eventually have new options. This may include a low cost -headless iMac with limited expansion capabilties that can compete with the low-cost PC's with Pentiums.
I can envision an eventual mini-tower with maybe 2 or 3 memory slots, upgradeable graphics and one or two PCI slots and running a low-power 970. We don't currently know enough about the 970 system architecture to know if upgradable CPU's are viable. It will be interesting to see. Give it some time. It can't and won't happen all at once. But the management team is in place that can make it happen. They have long had the vision, now they finally have the tools.
Originally posted by O and A
Well like i said before the price of the new powermacs is going to force apple to make everything else a heck of alot cheaper. Yet people will still complain and people are already complaining
Some people will always complain. Some people will never be satisfied, and there are those few who think they deserve everything for nothing. Such is life.
There will always be those who won't be satisfied no matter what. I am sure that somewhere out there there is someone who thinks that Apple should pay them to use their computers, and if they were paid for it, would then demand a pay-raise.
Fortunately though, most people are a little more reasonable and practical. Unfortunately, the forums draw a very high percentage of the unreasonable.
As far as price, I have no doubt they will cut the current lines as low as they dare. After that the price goes up on the 970 PowerMacs to make up the difference. I also have no doubt that Apple will migrate their other lines to the new platform and/or to Gobi (if it exists), as soon as practical. However that won't be quick enough for a lot of folks who want it now.
Originally posted by Shaktai
Some people will always complain. Some people will never be satisfied, and there are those few who think they deserve everything for nothing. Such is life.
There will always be those who won't be satisfied no matter what. I am sure that somewhere out there there is someone who thinks that Apple should pay them to use their computers, and if they were paid for it, would then demand a pay-raise.
Fortunately though, most people are a little more reasonable and practical. Unfortunately, the forums draw a very high percentage of the unreasonable.
Well put and you have my total agreement.
Only a DRAMATIC price decrease will alter the Powermac market share ratio.....so if we're talking $1399 or even $1299, the only thing that is being accomplished is costing Apple a couple hundred dollars in sales.
However, if Apple were to find a way to release a $999 Powermac, no one would ever buy an LCD iMac (unless of course the price on them went down on them to the point where they aren't sustainable) ever again.....
For better or worse, Apple is stuck where they are now, unless they give up their cherished iThings in favor of cheaper Powermacs.
IOW, I'm not optimistic that they will be an expandable inexpensive Mac any time soon.
Whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is entirely up to you.....
Desktop mac prices are far too high, and they need to come down, at all price points, regardless of performance. 1299 is a nice break from 1499, and on the way to 999, where it needs to get to if Apple wants to make it in the desktop business.
Baby steps, a 1299 mac would pick up a lot of buyers. 1299, not some hermetically sealed, over-priced, AIO that cost as much as a laptop and goes just about as slow.
The market craves towers, and it will give a 1299 entry price a warm reception, trust me.
WHY does the market 'crave towers'?
Expandability? The only people I've *EVER* seen add anything to their box are high-end folks who the PowerMac is geared directly at.
Consumer level box purchasers just... *don't*.
So... why towers? Why is it so $%#&*(!@ important to have *towers* at $999, when a $999 box in the Wintel world isn't going to get you pro level power either?
Originally posted by Kickaha
Here's a question...
WHY does the market 'crave towers'?
Expandability? The only people I've *EVER* seen add anything to their box are high-end folks who the PowerMac is geared directly at.
Consumer level box purchasers just... *don't*.
So... why towers? Why is it so $%#&*(!@ important to have *towers* at $999, when a $999 box in the Wintel world isn't going to get you pro level power either?
Towers have more "horsepower" form the get go.
Originally posted by Kickaha
Here's a question...
WHY does the market 'crave towers'?
Expandability? The only people I've *EVER* seen add anything to their box are high-end folks who the PowerMac is geared directly at.
Consumer level box purchasers just... *don't*.
So... why towers? Why is it so $%#&*(!@ important to have *towers* at $999, when a $999 box in the Wintel world isn't going to get you pro level power either?
Yeah, I don't think towers are necessary, either. (In fact, I hate towers) However, selecting monitors is important, and some expansion is important.
I never bought a 15" flat screen iMac because the monitor was too small. I bought an eMac instead. The 17" iMac was overpriced due to the Superdrive, etc. The eMac was bare-bones. I bought cubes because they had the same balance - I could plug in whatever monitor size I needed.
Exansion is important only as a recovery means these days, IMO, so long as you are outside of scientific/creative markets. Every added consumer/enterprise device I can think to add goes out of either USB or Firewire now. I have a USB barcode reader. I'm looking at a USB smartcard reader, etc. However, if the ethernet on the motherboard went out (broken connector, etc.) then the presence of a PCI slot for a $9 10T NIC would be handy. How much would I pay for that? Nothing. It's never happened to me on a Mac, but it is something that people with large installations look for as a 'just in case' measure.
That doesn't mandate 4 bay, 3 slot towers, though. Again, I want to see cubes. $999 max price for a combo down to $699 or so for CD-only. Nothing special on specs, graphics, etc. Just a cheap, reasonable box. They'd move.
Originally posted by I, Fred
Here's another thing to consider:
However, if Apple were to find a way to release a $999 Powermac, no one would ever buy an LCD iMac (unless of course the price on them went down on them to the point where they aren't sustainable) ever again.....
I disagree. I would never buy an LCD iMac in the first place. What we have here are two separate user groups. The ones that like the all-in-one vs the ones that don't.
I actually think Apple is LOSING sales by not offering a tower for $999.00.
As johnsonwax pointed out, the monitor is the main reason to really ask for a non-AIO design, looking at the size of the thing, not so much other factors (CRT vs. LCD, manufacturer, etc.). If Apple could supply an AIO design with a large range of minotrs, particularly large ones, people might be more inclined to go with them. However, I have a personal theory that many if not most of those who talk about wanting to choose a 20" monitor instead of taking the 17" one that comes with the iMac aren't willing to pay the price for a 20" monitor.
I also think that a lot of people find stuff to pick on because Apple does not, will not and should not try to cover all markets like this. Apple might lose sales because they don't sell a $300 plain box, but it's not necessarily in their interest to pick up those sales anyway. Apple shouldn't try to be all things to all people, and they certainly shouldn't put out any crap just because they're missing some small market. Those $300 boxes could erode the brand image for quality, and make support a nightmare. I don't think Apple is losing out on so many customers because they like AIOs for their consumer/cheaper lines. I don't think a "headless" iMac is a silver bullet to more marketshare.
desktops must be headless to make signifcant inroads. Why should i buy an iMac and be stuck with an overpriced display when I can buy plentiful 3rd party displays at great prices? CRt, LCD, whatever I want.
iMac, the AIO in genreal has peaked. Apple owns the market and defines just how big it is, NOT big enough, if they want to grow, they'll need a headless computer.
I don't see how selling a headless computer in the iMac's price range would hurt. It would carry inherently higher margins at the same or slightly lower prices because it does not need the same degree of customized assembly/miniturization/engineering nor does it require the expense of an integrated display.
With the right price it's a clear win-win situation.
and be stuck with an overpriced display
I thought the 20" and 23" Cinemas were pretty price competitive?
AGP slot: ATI Radeon 32 MB
PCI slots: Soundblaster Live Audio card.
RAM slots: Filled, with 576 MB RAM
HD brackets: Filled, with two ATA 100 drives.
Optical drives: IF I had two bays, both would be full. Apple forced me to pay extra for a FireWire CD burner over an IDE CD Burner.
Planned:
Gigadesigns 1.5 GHz G4 upgrade card.
IDE CD burner, aka "Superdrive" after the cost comes down a bit more.
120 GB HD
I'd say that I'm putting my tower through it's paces. When I bought it I wouldn't even consider an AIO, because I can't upgrade it or expand it. Pluse, all of Apple's AIOs had tiny junk displays back then (15" CRT! LOL). I suppose the 17" iMac is nice, but if I wanted to add a better video card, or PCI card, or new CPU daughtercard upgrade, I'd be SOL.
I don't believe I'm all that atypical as a Powermac tower owner (maybe in other ways, but I'm talking about my expanding/upgrading behavior).
Originally posted by BuonRotto
If Apple could supply an AIO design with a large range of minotrs, particularly large ones,
Or one with the same quality as the standalone displays. One of the maine reasons I dislikes the LCD iMac is the display quality sucks compared to the stand alone displays.
But yes, I like having the option to change displays when I need to. I've done that twice on my G4 Tower. I've also added a PCI card for an external CD burner to my tower as well as upgraded my Video Card and have installed a second Hard-Drive. Expandability is not an illusion has some have stated here.
We fanatics aren't who Apple designs the eMac and iMac for. (Though many of us have and love them...and most of us only think we need a PowerMac out of envy, not true necessity.) Apple designs AIO machines for people, companies, and schools who want the easiest possible setup with a reasonable set of specifications. I mean...even the eMac (supposedly the low rung on Apple's totem pole) is a superior machine to ANY single processor PowerMac built over a year ago...just without the slots.
For every one person who has a PowerMac tower and uses one of the 4 PCI slots inside, you'll find 20 who have one and have never opened the machine, barring a possible RAM upgrade. I know tons of people who bought the towers for the sake of expandibility they've never taken advantage of. Apple knows this..which is why the "pull it out of the box and plug it in" AIO concept was the rebirth of their entire company. For first time computer buyers in particular, nothing is more attractive.
I'd love to see Apple lower prices across the board on it's lineup...to gain market share and to give the PC whining "Macs cost too much" crowd a little less to moan about. But a $599 headless iMac with one PCI slot vs. a $799 eMac without the slot? I don't think the market share to gain from separating these two items would justify the expense for Apple.
And after tomorrow, "headless" will take on an entirely different meaning. It will be the PC world wandering around after their brains explode over the new king of the computing world.
-- Ensoniq