I doubt that the 17" panel is too costly any more, or that it's aspect drives up the price. Square 17" panels can be had for as little as 600-650 Canadian, and the same 17" widescreen panel has recently popped up in a 1999 laptop (albeit a 10 pound one!). Just this afternoon, in my local Costco, I saw the same panel used in Widescreen flat panel TV/Monitor for 1000 Canadian. When you strip out the remote, speakers, RGB, Scart connectors from the TV component, the panels itself obviously isn't anything to much more costly than a 15"
It actually has less surface area than a square 17, and since panels are paid for by the square inch, I suspect it costs less than the better 5:4 17" displays.
A 17" digital LCD at various retailers is around $500 American. So yes, I can believe your argument that Apple could charge less for their screens. That was a Sony, but it's probably, spec-wise, close to what Apple's LCD are.
Apple needs to figure out a way to create a monitor like the iMac LCD screen - almost floatable with a solid base (but not the iMac as the base ). Just having the adjustable kickstand in back is not all that good when you sit and eye-level is 20" or so higher than the desk. Neck strain galore, from looking down at it all day long!
I wonder if a different version of the 17" display might be used that has deeper, richer color. Isn't it time for a GPU that goes a bit beyond the GeForce4 MX? I also wonder if there could be something other than a matte white base. If the iMac moves to the G5, a metalic base would be better, and with more or bigger holes.
A 1.2 GHz G5 is certainly possible in an iMac. The heat dissipation is 19W for the chip. That's very close to what the 7455 does at 1 GHz. Just use a 600 MHz bus and DDR300 memory. I don't know if there is such a thing but DDR266 can be upscaled a bit.
If there could be a G5 iMac this year, maybe it'll be announced in 2 weeks at MW and ship in August.
If there isn't going to be a G5 iMac this year, maybe the 7457 would have to be used at up to 1.3 GHz. These, then, would be the sort of boring, ho hum specs:
I wonder if a different version of the 17" display might be used that has deeper, richer color. Isn't it time for a GPU that goes a bit beyond the GeForce4 MX? I also wonder if there could be something other than a matte white base. If the iMac moves to the G5, a metalic base would be better, and with more or bigger holes.
A 1.2 GHz G5 is certainly possible in an iMac. The heat dissipation is 19W for the chip. That's very close to what the 7455 does at 1 GHz. Just use a 600 MHz bus and DDR300 memory. I don't know if there is such a thing but DDR266 can be upscaled a bit.
If there could be a G5 iMac this year, maybe it'll be announced in 2 weeks at MW and ship in August.
If there isn't going to be a G5 iMac this year, maybe the 7457 would have to be used at up to 1.3 GHz. These, then, would be the sort of boring, ho hum specs:
$1699
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.2GHz PowerPC G4
Radeon 9100 IGP
64MB DDR video memory
256MB DDR266 SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA hard drive
If a G5:
$1899
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.2GHz PowerPC G5
Radeon 9100 IGP
64MB DDR video memory
256MB DDR300 SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA hard drive
No way we'll see a G5 iMac to undercut Power Mac sales. That sucker is #1 in sales at the Apple online store for good reason. It has been 4 long years since Apple gave us something leading edge; they ain't gonna piss that away to iMac sales.
Hope so. I'm hoping my family will update from a B&W G3 300 and 1.6ghz Win2k PC. The price is more important than anything else like Matsu says. Look at the gigantic gaping gap of a gap between the G5 and everything else. The G5 must be more than 5x faster at most things than the iMac! Wow! There is going to be a tidal wave of updates coming this summer I believe. It will be awesome if Apple does it right and keeps prices going down. eMacs need to just get cheaper. iBooks need to get faster and/or cheaper. iMacs need to get MUCH cheaper and MUCH faster. 1.42ghz G4 should be the bare minimum but somehow I think Apple will be stupid and have 1ghz on the lowend. PowerBooks same thing, it would be nice to see 1.25 on lowend but I bet it'll be 1ghz on lowend.
No way we'll see a G5 iMac to undercut Power Mac sales. That sucker is #1 in sales at the Apple online store for good reason. It has been 4 long years since Apple gave us something leading edge; they ain't gonna piss that away to iMac sales.
Yeah but the #1 seller is the dual 2 gig. Power users are snapping them up. I don't think a 1.2 GHz G5 iMac is going to steal sales from that crowd.
OTOH, you're probably right. But then, what does Apple do about slumping iMac sales? Would it be enough to use the 7457 at, say, 1.2 GHz and lower the price to $1699? Maybe.
The iMac will definitely NOT go G5 before the "pro" line of Powerbooks. The iMac, eMac, and iBooks are low-end machines. The Powerbooks and Power Macs are the "pro" market. So if we see a G5 in another machine, it's going to be in the Powerbook...
I can't wait till Moto is out of the picture.... Looks like we're going to have to deal with them for a little while longer though...
The iMac will definitely NOT go G5 before the "pro" line of Powerbooks. The iMac, eMac, and iBooks are low-end machines. The Powerbooks and Power Macs are the "pro" market. So if we see a G5 in another machine, it's going to be in the Powerbook...
I can't wait till Moto is out of the picture.... Looks like we're going to have to deal with them for a little while longer though...
Damn, that sounds so reasonable, it must be true. If we're stuck with G4s, I hope we get a price break.
The iMac will definitely NOT go G5 before the "pro" line of Powerbooks. The iMac, eMac, and iBooks are low-end machines. The Powerbooks and Power Macs are the "pro" market. So if we see a G5 in another machine, it's going to be in the Powerbook...
I can't wait till Moto is out of the picture.... Looks like we're going to have to deal with them for a little while longer though...
First of all, you left out the Xserve... I'd say that that's first before the PowerBooks for the G5.
Also, I wouldn't call the iMac low-end. It definitely makes for a middle tier between the Power Macs and the eMacs.
Power consumption and heat are going to keep the G5 out of the PowerBooks for a while. Now, while G5 vs. G4 makes for a convenient way to distinguish pro vs. consumer, it's hardly the only way to make that distinction. If the G5 can be engineered into an iMac first for an afforable price, why hold back just to maintain some artificial pro vs. consumer distinction?
The PowerBooks have been good sellers for Apple. The iMac 2, after a brief initial surge, has not. Which of these products needs a sales boost more?
All this said, another G4 update of the iMac, especially a 7457, wouldn't surprise me. But I think a reasonable case can be made for G5s getting into iMacs sooner than PowerBooks. The situation is hardly as cut-and-dried as you'd like to make it out to be.
Upgrade issues aside, Apple would do well to reconsider what configurations they force buyers into. Most glaringly, Apple doesn't allow you to purchase a 17" iMac WITHOUT a SuperDrive. Just giving users that option would allow them to knock $200 off the price and make the iMac a much better value. While the SuperDive is a great thing to offer, many of us won't take advantage of it. As far an I'm concerned, it's $200 to no benefit of mine. Add a modest speed-bump and price reduction to a 17" Combo-Drive iMac, and I'd buy. But for now, Apple just isn't offering anything that I'd want to purchase.
First of all, you left out the Xserve... I'd say that that's first before the PowerBooks for the G5.
Also, I wouldn't call the iMac low-end. It definitely makes for a middle tier between the Power Macs and the eMacs.
Power consumption and heat are going to keep the G5 out of the PowerBooks for a while. Now, while G5 vs. G4 makes for a convenient way to distinguish pro vs. consumer, it's hardly the only way to make that distinction. If the G5 can be engineered into an iMac first for an afforable price, why hold back just to maintain some artificial pro vs. consumer distinction?
The PowerBooks have been good sellers for Apple. The iMac 2, after a brief initial surge, has not. Which of these products needs a sales boost more?
All this said, another G4 update of the iMac, especially a 7457, wouldn't surprise me. But I think a reasonable case can be made for G5s getting into iMacs sooner than PowerBooks. The situation is hardly as cut-and-dried as you'd like to make it out to be.
Really? Hasn't Apple followed this path for years now... It seems they bump the Powerbooks and then shortly after, they update the iMacs. I could be wrong, I'm just showing what Apple has done and predicting their next move. If the iMac gets the G5, you can guarantee the Powerbooks will get them as well. I'm still sticking with a G5 laptop before a G5 iMac.... makes sense.... "first 64-bit PowerMac" "first 64-bit laptop" Something for home, and something for on the go.... they don't need another G5 iMac to put that to good use
In early 2004 the iMac will go G5, somewhere in the 1.6GHz to 2.0GHz range, single processors of course.
By then Power Macs will be up to 2.5GHz with dual procs in the mid range model.
Single processor, non-expandable G5 iMacs will NOT cannabilize dual processor, very expandable G5 Power Macs. Maybe a few people would get a high end G5 iMac over a low end single processor G5 Power Mac, but Apple won't care as the low end Power Mac only exists to give you a reason to buy the better, more expensive Power Macs or a higher margin iMac.
Apple will NOT mix G4 and G5 processors in the iMac line.
In early 2004 the iMac will go G5, somewhere in the 1.6GHz to 2.0GHz range, single processors of course.
By then Power Macs will be up to 2.5GHz with dual procs in the mid range model.
Single processor, non-expandable G5 iMacs will NOT cannabilize dual processor, very expandable G5 Power Macs. Maybe a few people would get a high end G5 iMac over a low end single processor G5 Power Mac, but Apple won't care as the low end Power Mac only exists to give you a reason to buy the better, more expensive Power Macs or a higher margin iMac.
Apple will NOT mix G4 and G5 processors in the iMac line.
I agree, putting the G4 in the iMac has not affected PM sales, poor performance did that. Poor performance of the iMac will kill it too, so they will migrate to the G5 as soon as possible. I don't buy into the argument that Apple will sit back and watch iMac sales plument if it can stop it by including the G5, Apple wants to loos it's reputation for cool slow computers asap. It will have to deal with the PB problem as a seperate issue, the G5 as present is simply not suiatable for portable use so they will have to use the MPC7457 or Mojahv. However, I expect to see the 7457 and 200mhz bus speeds in both after MWNY in July. Mated with Panther both PB's and iMacs will gain a significent performance boost. Just improving the FSB has a disproportionate effect on preformance.
With the arrival of G5 in a month or two it clears the way for substantailly faster G4s in the iMac. A 1.4 Ghz with L3 cache substantially faster than a non L3 1.0 GHz G4.
When the second generation towers arrive early 2004 or so probably with dual CPUs it opens up for the G5 in the iMac
An alternative is to use the botton of the barrel IBM 970 CPUs says the 1.0 to 1.4 GHz ones. Quite useless for IBM as they compete against Intel Xeon and AMDs Opteron. But those 970 would still be a huge leap forward compared to the G4.
If Apple will go for a speedbump G4 and then G5 or go for low speed G5 right away depend on both supplies of chips and heat constrains and other issues with the iMac.
But the G4 to G5 transition is very different from the G3 to G4 as the G5 offer substantial performance gains from the start. Apple has the very best reason to make the transition they possibly can, namely profit
Really? Hasn't Apple followed this path for years now... It seems they bump the Powerbooks and then shortly after, they update the iMacs.
Apple's "path" has for the past few years been very constrained by Motorola. They now have more options.
I could be wrong, I'm just showing what Apple has done and predicting their next move.
There are new factors to consider besides past behavior.
If the iMac gets the G5, you can guarantee the Powerbooks will get them as well.
You say this as if the engineering issues mean absolutely nothing. The iMac's enclosure does limit its heat dissipation somewhat, but as a desktop unit it's going to be much more flexible about such things than a PowerBook.
I'm still sticking with a G5 laptop before a G5 iMac.... makes sense.... "first 64-bit PowerMac" "first 64-bit laptop" Something for home, and something for on the go.... they don't need another G5 iMac to put that to good use
Consider these premises, admittedly some just guesswork:
The iMac can handle currently available 1.2-1.4 GHz G5s, the PowerBook cannot.
iMac sales need much more help than PowerBook sales.
Using G5s at 1.2-1.4 GHz would improve the perceived value of the iMacs, without encroaching on Power Mac territory.
Apple?s engineering can quickly put together a viable iMac G5 mobo using currently-available G5s, well before doing so for the PowerBook, which is likely waiting on 90 nm versions of the 970.
Are you saying that even if all of the above were true, Apple would still let the iMac languish with the G4 for as much as a year or more, waiting for PowerBooks to catch up, just to follow a particular pattern, just to maintain some artificial ?G5 = pro? distinction, just to be able to use particular slogans at particular times?
Value/cost has been the number one indicator of sales success. iMacs cost too much, the G4 platform will still be cheaper than the G5 over the next 12-18 months.
Apple favors a CPU distinction between pro and consumer, and Apple has typically positioned the PB as a higher performance offering than the iMac.
You will not see G5 iMacs untill after 2004 is through.
Value/cost has been the number one indicator of sales success. iMacs cost too much, the G4 platform will still be cheaper than the G5 over the next 12-18 months.
Apple favors a CPU distinction between pro and consumer, and Apple has typically positioned the PB as a higher performance offering than the iMac.
You will not see G5 iMacs untill after 2004 is through.
G5 iMacs will be available by Summer 2004. Apple has said they will be at 3Ghz by then. That makes it easy for them to ship 1.6Ghz iMacs that won't come close to cannibalizing Powermac Sales(by then PM will be 2.4, 2.6 and 3Ghz)
Nah, Motorola is here to stay. Remember how long the original iMac held out, with a G3, and see how the iBook still makes use of it. By staying with a somewhat antiquated technology, Apple will be able to preserve margins which they love, yet add features and lower prices, which consumers love.
There will be a third desktop tier by the end of '04, you'll see. There is already one there, the leftover G4 tower, which is really more than a leftover, it is a purposeful continuation of the them with the aim to drive prices down, a cube, basically, but a better deal than the cube ever was.
Seriously, 1299 for a single 1.25Ghz G4 with 1MB of L3 is not a bad deal, not great, but better than the iMac, I could buy a 3rd party 17" display and still come out ahead with tons of expansion and a much faster CPU.
When the G5 platform comes down enough in price, it will go into this tier first -- headless (expandable) mac -- NOT the iMac. The eMac (which I lump together with the iMac, may not even exist by the end of 2004, depending on what Apple can do with iMac prices.
The line-up will look different (if Apple does it right)
G5 PowerMac 1999-2999.
G5 "Headless" 1299-1699
iMac G4 899-1299
eMac ? 699.
They've already inserted a tier between the iMac and PM, if anyone cares to notice, and they've commented on it, it's a long term intention of theirs to develop a product for that space. That product WILL cost more than an iMac and it will be FASTER, and it WILL (eventually) feature a G5.
This frees the iMac to be what it always had to be in order to have success, AN AFFORDABLE MACHINE. That's the whole point of an AIO, to get you everything in one package, you pay once and it's all there. LCD's were a tad too expensive for Apple when they launched the FP, but they're getting cheaper by the minute, and are quite cheap already.
Everything said about G5 iMacs in this thread ignores the reality of what Apple has done and what they are doing. IT IS NOT HAPPENING THIS YEAR OR NEXT, mebbe LATE '04, more likely Jan '05, NOT before.
And it makes sense to get the AIO's down in price as much as possible. Then, you will have CHOICE. Wanted it all integrated, buy the iMac. Want more power and flexibility, buy the "Headless" machine (mebbe it'll even be a cube) and get the "pro" CPU but you have to shell out for a seperate display. A comprimise middle tier.
I guarantee you, that the lineup will look like this
G5 machines:
PM
Xserve
Headless
PowerBook 15 and 17
mebbe 12 ???
G4 Machines
iMac
eMac
iBook
mebbe PB12 ???
That's the way it is, I'm right, there's no use crying about it
Assumptions, yes. Baseless? No... I think I've laid out my reasoning fairly well, and it's at least on par with much of the speculation done on AI. I think even better.
Value/cost has been the number one indicator of sales success. iMacs cost too much, the G4 platform will still be cheaper than the G5 over the next 12-18 months.
Sure, keeping the G4 and lowering the cost would increase value/cost. But so would keeping prices the same and adding the G5.
Apple favors a CPU distinction between pro and consumer, and Apple has typically positioned the PB as a higher performance offering than the iMac.
But Apple has add fewer choices, and not very good ones, when it came to CPUs up until now. I think it's just as "baseless" to insist that this CPU distinction must be carried forward under new conditions as if it were an inflexible policy carved in stone.
Besides, I don't think that history totally agrees with what you've said:
Sep. 1999: First Power Mac G4
Jul. 2000: 9 months later, the Cube is introduced with the G4. PowerBooks still have the G3. The Cube, although too pricey for many at first, was certainly more of a consumer model than a "pro" system.
Jan. 2001: 15 months after the first G4 Power Mac, 6 months after the G4 went into a consumer system, the PowerBook gets the G4. Why? Because the cooler-running, lower-power 7410 finally came along.
Apple waited to update PowerBooks for engineering reasons, and in the meantime, put their best CPU into a more consumer oriented product.
You will not see G5 iMacs untill after 2004 is through.
Perhaps this is true. Putting the 7457 G4 into the iMacs and lowering the price isn't an unreasonable course of action. All I'm pointing out is some good reasons for a G5 in iMacs sooner rather than later, and I think I've got my bases covered at least as well as you do.
Shetline. Good Rebuttal. Honestly both of your points are valid. Market conditions will dictate what Apple does. Right now they have options.
G5 computers seem to offer lots of performance. Consumers will tell themselves that they want a G5 at their price point. Apple may choose to push G4s but Mac users are Legendary in their ability two wait...wait....wait. Apple needs to retrain it's users to pull the trigger. Product cycles need to be updated no more than 8 months apart. That isolates Apple from anger from the consumer about missing out on a latest update. It's alot easier to swallow not having the fastest on the block of you can point to the poor bloke who puchased the model before yours just 8 months prior.
G4's will not be competitive with X86 next year. $1300 PC computers will have 800Mhz Busses and 3Ghz processors with Hyperthreading. If Apple continues to slack in the under $1500 market then they obviously don't believe in their Switch Campaign. I reiterate the G5 needs to be in an iMac by next summer. That gives Apple one more G4 refresh in the line.
Comments
Originally posted by Matsu
I doubt that the 17" panel is too costly any more, or that it's aspect drives up the price. Square 17" panels can be had for as little as 600-650 Canadian, and the same 17" widescreen panel has recently popped up in a 1999 laptop (albeit a 10 pound one!). Just this afternoon, in my local Costco, I saw the same panel used in Widescreen flat panel TV/Monitor for 1000 Canadian. When you strip out the remote, speakers, RGB, Scart connectors from the TV component, the panels itself obviously isn't anything to much more costly than a 15"
It actually has less surface area than a square 17, and since panels are paid for by the square inch, I suspect it costs less than the better 5:4 17" displays.
A 17" digital LCD at various retailers is around $500 American. So yes, I can believe your argument that Apple could charge less for their screens. That was a Sony, but it's probably, spec-wise, close to what Apple's LCD are.
Apple needs to figure out a way to create a monitor like the iMac LCD screen - almost floatable with a solid base (but not the iMac as the base
A 1.2 GHz G5 is certainly possible in an iMac. The heat dissipation is 19W for the chip. That's very close to what the 7455 does at 1 GHz. Just use a 600 MHz bus and DDR300 memory. I don't know if there is such a thing but DDR266 can be upscaled a bit.
If there could be a G5 iMac this year, maybe it'll be announced in 2 weeks at MW and ship in August.
If there isn't going to be a G5 iMac this year, maybe the 7457 would have to be used at up to 1.3 GHz. These, then, would be the sort of boring, ho hum specs:
$1699
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.2GHz PowerPC G4
Radeon 9100 IGP
64MB DDR video memory
256MB DDR266 SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA hard drive
If a G5:
$1899
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.2GHz PowerPC G5
Radeon 9100 IGP
64MB DDR video memory
256MB DDR300 SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA hard drive
Originally posted by Rolo
I wonder if a different version of the 17" display might be used that has deeper, richer color. Isn't it time for a GPU that goes a bit beyond the GeForce4 MX? I also wonder if there could be something other than a matte white base. If the iMac moves to the G5, a metalic base would be better, and with more or bigger holes.
A 1.2 GHz G5 is certainly possible in an iMac. The heat dissipation is 19W for the chip. That's very close to what the 7455 does at 1 GHz. Just use a 600 MHz bus and DDR300 memory. I don't know if there is such a thing but DDR266 can be upscaled a bit.
If there could be a G5 iMac this year, maybe it'll be announced in 2 weeks at MW and ship in August.
If there isn't going to be a G5 iMac this year, maybe the 7457 would have to be used at up to 1.3 GHz. These, then, would be the sort of boring, ho hum specs:
$1699
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.2GHz PowerPC G4
Radeon 9100 IGP
64MB DDR video memory
256MB DDR266 SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA hard drive
If a G5:
$1899
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.2GHz PowerPC G5
Radeon 9100 IGP
64MB DDR video memory
256MB DDR300 SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA hard drive
No way we'll see a G5 iMac to undercut Power Mac sales. That sucker is #1 in sales at the Apple online store for good reason. It has been 4 long years since Apple gave us something leading edge; they ain't gonna piss that away to iMac sales.
Originally posted by Rhumgod
No way we'll see a G5 iMac to undercut Power Mac sales. That sucker is #1 in sales at the Apple online store for good reason. It has been 4 long years since Apple gave us something leading edge; they ain't gonna piss that away to iMac sales.
Yeah but the #1 seller is the dual 2 gig. Power users are snapping them up. I don't think a 1.2 GHz G5 iMac is going to steal sales from that crowd.
OTOH, you're probably right.
I can't wait till Moto is out of the picture.... Looks like we're going to have to deal with them for a little while longer though...
Originally posted by Omek
The iMac will definitely NOT go G5 before the "pro" line of Powerbooks. The iMac, eMac, and iBooks are low-end machines. The Powerbooks and Power Macs are the "pro" market. So if we see a G5 in another machine, it's going to be in the Powerbook...
I can't wait till Moto is out of the picture.... Looks like we're going to have to deal with them for a little while longer though...
Damn, that sounds so reasonable, it must be true. If we're stuck with G4s, I hope we get a price break.
Originally posted by Omek
The iMac will definitely NOT go G5 before the "pro" line of Powerbooks. The iMac, eMac, and iBooks are low-end machines. The Powerbooks and Power Macs are the "pro" market. So if we see a G5 in another machine, it's going to be in the Powerbook...
I can't wait till Moto is out of the picture.... Looks like we're going to have to deal with them for a little while longer though...
First of all, you left out the Xserve... I'd say that that's first before the PowerBooks for the G5.
Also, I wouldn't call the iMac low-end. It definitely makes for a middle tier between the Power Macs and the eMacs.
Power consumption and heat are going to keep the G5 out of the PowerBooks for a while. Now, while G5 vs. G4 makes for a convenient way to distinguish pro vs. consumer, it's hardly the only way to make that distinction. If the G5 can be engineered into an iMac first for an afforable price, why hold back just to maintain some artificial pro vs. consumer distinction?
The PowerBooks have been good sellers for Apple. The iMac 2, after a brief initial surge, has not. Which of these products needs a sales boost more?
All this said, another G4 update of the iMac, especially a 7457, wouldn't surprise me. But I think a reasonable case can be made for G5s getting into iMacs sooner than PowerBooks. The situation is hardly as cut-and-dried as you'd like to make it out to be.
Originally posted by shetline
First of all, you left out the Xserve... I'd say that that's first before the PowerBooks for the G5.
Also, I wouldn't call the iMac low-end. It definitely makes for a middle tier between the Power Macs and the eMacs.
Power consumption and heat are going to keep the G5 out of the PowerBooks for a while. Now, while G5 vs. G4 makes for a convenient way to distinguish pro vs. consumer, it's hardly the only way to make that distinction. If the G5 can be engineered into an iMac first for an afforable price, why hold back just to maintain some artificial pro vs. consumer distinction?
The PowerBooks have been good sellers for Apple. The iMac 2, after a brief initial surge, has not. Which of these products needs a sales boost more?
All this said, another G4 update of the iMac, especially a 7457, wouldn't surprise me. But I think a reasonable case can be made for G5s getting into iMacs sooner than PowerBooks. The situation is hardly as cut-and-dried as you'd like to make it out to be.
Really? Hasn't Apple followed this path for years now... It seems they bump the Powerbooks and then shortly after, they update the iMacs. I could be wrong, I'm just showing what Apple has done and predicting their next move. If the iMac gets the G5, you can guarantee the Powerbooks will get them as well. I'm still sticking with a G5 laptop before a G5 iMac.... makes sense.... "first 64-bit PowerMac" "first 64-bit laptop" Something for home, and something for on the go.... they don't need another G5 iMac to put that to good use
There will not be a G5 iMac this year.
In early 2004 the iMac will go G5, somewhere in the 1.6GHz to 2.0GHz range, single processors of course.
By then Power Macs will be up to 2.5GHz with dual procs in the mid range model.
Single processor, non-expandable G5 iMacs will NOT cannabilize dual processor, very expandable G5 Power Macs. Maybe a few people would get a high end G5 iMac over a low end single processor G5 Power Mac, but Apple won't care as the low end Power Mac only exists to give you a reason to buy the better, more expensive Power Macs or a higher margin iMac.
Apple will NOT mix G4 and G5 processors in the iMac line.
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
Just my thoughts:
There will not be a G5 iMac this year.
In early 2004 the iMac will go G5, somewhere in the 1.6GHz to 2.0GHz range, single processors of course.
By then Power Macs will be up to 2.5GHz with dual procs in the mid range model.
Single processor, non-expandable G5 iMacs will NOT cannabilize dual processor, very expandable G5 Power Macs. Maybe a few people would get a high end G5 iMac over a low end single processor G5 Power Mac, but Apple won't care as the low end Power Mac only exists to give you a reason to buy the better, more expensive Power Macs or a higher margin iMac.
Apple will NOT mix G4 and G5 processors in the iMac line.
I agree, putting the G4 in the iMac has not affected PM sales, poor performance did that. Poor performance of the iMac will kill it too, so they will migrate to the G5 as soon as possible. I don't buy into the argument that Apple will sit back and watch iMac sales plument if it can stop it by including the G5, Apple wants to loos it's reputation for cool slow computers asap. It will have to deal with the PB problem as a seperate issue, the G5 as present is simply not suiatable for portable use so they will have to use the MPC7457 or Mojahv. However, I expect to see the 7457 and 200mhz bus speeds in both after MWNY in July. Mated with Panther both PB's and iMacs will gain a significent performance boost. Just improving the FSB has a disproportionate effect on preformance.
When the second generation towers arrive early 2004 or so probably with dual CPUs it opens up for the G5 in the iMac
An alternative is to use the botton of the barrel IBM 970 CPUs says the 1.0 to 1.4 GHz ones. Quite useless for IBM as they compete against Intel Xeon and AMDs Opteron. But those 970 would still be a huge leap forward compared to the G4.
If Apple will go for a speedbump G4 and then G5 or go for low speed G5 right away depend on both supplies of chips and heat constrains and other issues with the iMac.
But the G4 to G5 transition is very different from the G3 to G4 as the G5 offer substantial performance gains from the start. Apple has the very best reason to make the transition they possibly can, namely profit
Originally posted by Omek
Really? Hasn't Apple followed this path for years now... It seems they bump the Powerbooks and then shortly after, they update the iMacs.
Apple's "path" has for the past few years been very constrained by Motorola. They now have more options.
I could be wrong, I'm just showing what Apple has done and predicting their next move.
There are new factors to consider besides past behavior.
If the iMac gets the G5, you can guarantee the Powerbooks will get them as well.
You say this as if the engineering issues mean absolutely nothing. The iMac's enclosure does limit its heat dissipation somewhat, but as a desktop unit it's going to be much more flexible about such things than a PowerBook.
I'm still sticking with a G5 laptop before a G5 iMac.... makes sense.... "first 64-bit PowerMac" "first 64-bit laptop" Something for home, and something for on the go.... they don't need another G5 iMac to put that to good use
Consider these premises, admittedly some just guesswork:
- The iMac can handle currently available 1.2-1.4 GHz G5s, the PowerBook cannot.
- iMac sales need much more help than PowerBook sales.
- Using G5s at 1.2-1.4 GHz would improve the perceived value of the iMacs, without encroaching on Power Mac territory.
- Apple?s engineering can quickly put together a viable iMac G5 mobo using currently-available G5s, well before doing so for the PowerBook, which is likely waiting on 90 nm versions of the 970.
Are you saying that even if all of the above were true, Apple would still let the iMac languish with the G4 for as much as a year or more, waiting for PowerBooks to catch up, just to follow a particular pattern, just to maintain some artificial ?G5 = pro? distinction, just to be able to use particular slogans at particular times?Value/cost has been the number one indicator of sales success. iMacs cost too much, the G4 platform will still be cheaper than the G5 over the next 12-18 months.
Apple favors a CPU distinction between pro and consumer, and Apple has typically positioned the PB as a higher performance offering than the iMac.
You will not see G5 iMacs untill after 2004 is through.
Originally posted by Matsu
that's just as full of baseless assumptions.
Value/cost has been the number one indicator of sales success. iMacs cost too much, the G4 platform will still be cheaper than the G5 over the next 12-18 months.
Apple favors a CPU distinction between pro and consumer, and Apple has typically positioned the PB as a higher performance offering than the iMac.
You will not see G5 iMacs untill after 2004 is through.
G5 iMacs will be available by Summer 2004. Apple has said they will be at 3Ghz by then. That makes it easy for them to ship 1.6Ghz iMacs that won't come close to cannibalizing Powermac Sales(by then PM will be 2.4, 2.6 and 3Ghz)
There will be a third desktop tier by the end of '04, you'll see. There is already one there, the leftover G4 tower, which is really more than a leftover, it is a purposeful continuation of the them with the aim to drive prices down, a cube, basically, but a better deal than the cube ever was.
Seriously, 1299 for a single 1.25Ghz G4 with 1MB of L3 is not a bad deal, not great, but better than the iMac, I could buy a 3rd party 17" display and still come out ahead with tons of expansion and a much faster CPU.
When the G5 platform comes down enough in price, it will go into this tier first -- headless (expandable) mac -- NOT the iMac. The eMac (which I lump together with the iMac, may not even exist by the end of 2004, depending on what Apple can do with iMac prices.
The line-up will look different (if Apple does it right)
G5 PowerMac 1999-2999.
G5 "Headless" 1299-1699
iMac G4 899-1299
eMac ? 699.
They've already inserted a tier between the iMac and PM, if anyone cares to notice, and they've commented on it, it's a long term intention of theirs to develop a product for that space. That product WILL cost more than an iMac and it will be FASTER, and it WILL (eventually) feature a G5.
This frees the iMac to be what it always had to be in order to have success, AN AFFORDABLE MACHINE. That's the whole point of an AIO, to get you everything in one package, you pay once and it's all there. LCD's were a tad too expensive for Apple when they launched the FP, but they're getting cheaper by the minute, and are quite cheap already.
Everything said about G5 iMacs in this thread ignores the reality of what Apple has done and what they are doing. IT IS NOT HAPPENING THIS YEAR OR NEXT, mebbe LATE '04, more likely Jan '05, NOT before.
And it makes sense to get the AIO's down in price as much as possible. Then, you will have CHOICE. Wanted it all integrated, buy the iMac. Want more power and flexibility, buy the "Headless" machine (mebbe it'll even be a cube) and get the "pro" CPU but you have to shell out for a seperate display. A comprimise middle tier.
I guarantee you, that the lineup will look like this
G5 machines:
PM
Xserve
Headless
PowerBook 15 and 17
mebbe 12 ???
G4 Machines
iMac
eMac
iBook
mebbe PB12 ???
That's the way it is, I'm right, there's no use crying about it
Originally posted by Matsu
that's just as full of baseless assumptions.
Assumptions, yes. Baseless? No... I think I've laid out my reasoning fairly well, and it's at least on par with much of the speculation done on AI. I think even better.
Value/cost has been the number one indicator of sales success. iMacs cost too much, the G4 platform will still be cheaper than the G5 over the next 12-18 months.
Sure, keeping the G4 and lowering the cost would increase value/cost. But so would keeping prices the same and adding the G5.
Apple favors a CPU distinction between pro and consumer, and Apple has typically positioned the PB as a higher performance offering than the iMac.
But Apple has add fewer choices, and not very good ones, when it came to CPUs up until now. I think it's just as "baseless" to insist that this CPU distinction must be carried forward under new conditions as if it were an inflexible policy carved in stone.
Besides, I don't think that history totally agrees with what you've said:
Sep. 1999: First Power Mac G4
Jul. 2000: 9 months later, the Cube is introduced with the G4. PowerBooks still have the G3. The Cube, although too pricey for many at first, was certainly more of a consumer model than a "pro" system.
Jan. 2001: 15 months after the first G4 Power Mac, 6 months after the G4 went into a consumer system, the PowerBook gets the G4. Why? Because the cooler-running, lower-power 7410 finally came along.
Apple waited to update PowerBooks for engineering reasons, and in the meantime, put their best CPU into a more consumer oriented product.
You will not see G5 iMacs untill after 2004 is through.
Perhaps this is true. Putting the 7457 G4 into the iMacs and lowering the price isn't an unreasonable course of action. All I'm pointing out is some good reasons for a G5 in iMacs sooner rather than later, and I think I've got my bases covered at least as well as you do.
G5 computers seem to offer lots of performance. Consumers will tell themselves that they want a G5 at their price point. Apple may choose to push G4s but Mac users are Legendary in their ability two wait...wait....wait. Apple needs to retrain it's users to pull the trigger. Product cycles need to be updated no more than 8 months apart. That isolates Apple from anger from the consumer about missing out on a latest update. It's alot easier to swallow not having the fastest on the block of you can point to the poor bloke who puchased the model before yours just 8 months prior.
G4's will not be competitive with X86 next year. $1300 PC computers will have 800Mhz Busses and 3Ghz processors with Hyperthreading. If Apple continues to slack in the under $1500 market then they obviously don't believe in their Switch Campaign. I reiterate the G5 needs to be in an iMac by next summer. That gives Apple one more G4 refresh in the line.