Is the iMac doomed?
Reading the financial reports of today, revenues from iMacs are down 25% compared to one year ago while Powerbooks are up.
Somehow, I got the impression that the form factor of the iMacs with their flatpanel display is not focused enough:
- if you want a desktop, you are going to buy a tower
- if you want an AIO, you are going to buy an eMac
- if you want a sleek, space-saving computer, you are going to buy a 'book.
There just seems a shrinking nieche for an AIO that wants to be as flexible as a notebook yet as powerful as a tower - especially since the price/performance rating is just soso compared to the eMac or iBook.
Is the iMac just a cube reloaded, overdesigned and overpriced for its target audience?
Somehow, I got the impression that the form factor of the iMacs with their flatpanel display is not focused enough:
- if you want a desktop, you are going to buy a tower
- if you want an AIO, you are going to buy an eMac
- if you want a sleek, space-saving computer, you are going to buy a 'book.
There just seems a shrinking nieche for an AIO that wants to be as flexible as a notebook yet as powerful as a tower - especially since the price/performance rating is just soso compared to the eMac or iBook.
Is the iMac just a cube reloaded, overdesigned and overpriced for its target audience?
Comments
Originally posted by applenut
Yes, it is doomed.
No, it is not doomed. Lot's of people like flat panel desktop, but don't need to or want to move all the way to a tower.
For the current price/performance ratio, I agree, however, that the eMac is a better deal.
I think that the iMac is a good design, but it needs an upgrade and a bit of a price drop. Apple needs the iMac, so I hope that this happens.
That would Allow Apple to move to Duals only in the future Powermac lineup and push clockspeed while the xMac could be the solid midrange machine Apple needs.
I don't think they are doomed, though with the 17" screens, I don't really see any reason for the 15" model. Knock the price down $200 and it will fly.
What the new G5 towers lack compared to the El Capitan towers (with or without chrome) is "fuzziness". They are industrial chic machines, I fear. And that will not appeal overlly to the home user or light industry i.e. office) environment. The speed and power of the processors and the memory and storage with sound video etc are all more than adequate and indeed challenging enough to keep most users fully occupied buying peripherals for several years to come. Keep tweeking Apple.
I saw a wonderful product at the NYC Creative Pro expo called iGo from Rains Designs, which doesn't go anywhere, but is instead, a modular desk/stand for iMac that did pretty well at MacWorld SF. It is very boutique and gallery oriented, but can that possibly be a bad thing for iMacs?
iGo4mac Link
There is a sit-down desk version on the right is even better. I'm not pushing the produce, and have nothing to do with it, but I think those who underestimate the critical importance of design stylei n Mac's sales appeal are missing something big. Oh, of course, I do own several Cubes, so what do I know>
I think that is why PowerBook sales have been up, up. I've got the desktop covered, but now I want power on the fly; darn hard to give up those big screens though.\
One of my friends who his an urologist said he is very happy with it. He use it for his job, on his desk. He write infos on it : the medical folder, and when he want so show some video to explain a procedure, he just turn the screen. You should notice that a mirroring screen do not do the same, because you don't want to show everything you wrote in your medical folder.
If the iMac2 had been aggressively ramped down in price like the original had then it would have built upon its momentum at launch. No fruity flavours for the iMac2 over a whopping 13 month stagnation.
Apple's laptop percentage looks so good because the desktops have been so lame despite the 'portable trend' in increased sales.
The general desktop range needs a damn good sorting. The POWERMac G5 heralds a comeback trail. 04 and 0.09 970s can't come quick enough for the entire desktop range. By then, POWERMac G5 will need a refresh and consumer desktops will be draining their stagnant waters.
I think Apple needs a fundamentally different product from the eMac and iMac2. Replacing them? Not necessarily. A cheap consumer product...without the awkwardness of non-upgradable screens...non-industry standard sizes. A cheap headless Mac...white plastic box with an Apple chrome logo on it. No frills.
Rip the screen off an ibook and sell it as an iSlab that you can plug into your own monitor for £495. A 'mini-desktop'. A thin client on its side? Very space saving for edu'.
There's many ways Apple could go cheap and headless and beat the eMac on price and spec.
Lemon Bon Bon
Apple does need to draw more distinct lines between consumers, prosumers, and professionals. consumer products should have low-end G4's (eMac), prosumer products should have high-end G4's (iBook, iMac, remaining G4 towers), and pros of course have the glory of the G5's (PowerBook, PowerMacs). the prices would also be separated more clearly since they reflect the power of each system. the confusion of the eMac and iMac comes from their close price and power.
lastly, the only way a headless mac will become popular is if Apple comes up with a cheap display. i could not see myself buying a display that costs as much or even more than the actual computer. it would be better to just buy an AIO like an eMac (crt display + computer) or an iMac (flat panel display + computer).
edited, thanks CubeDude.
Now we are torn because of the G5. We really like the all in one design of the iMac (can't stand the eMac) and don't want to have to spend the money on a screen and a tower.
It doesn't appear feasible that the iMac will use a G5 for quite awhile. Since we buy a new desktop about every 3 to 4 years, it is really hard seeing a G5 and buying a G4.
Apple has really put the iMac in an awkward position in my opinion. The sooner they get a G5 in this thing, the better.
Originally posted by soberbrain
Apple does need to draw more distinct lines between consumers, prosumers, and professionals. consumer products should have low-end G4's (eMac), prosumer products should have high-end G4's (iBook, iMac, remaining G4 towers), and prosumers of course have the glory of the G5's (PowerBook, PowerMacs). the prices would also be separated more clearly since they reflect the power of each system. the confusion of the eMac and iMac comes from their close price and power.
I think you mean "pro's of course have the glory of the G5's."
Then I re-read the thread title...
When the iMac was released it matched the low end professional machine's specs nearly exact and ssold with a suitable screen and other consumer features for a set low price.
233 Mhz
512K/cache
32 MB RAM
6 GB HD
ATI Rage IIC
56K Modem
10/100 Ethernet
24X CD-ROM
15 inch Display
$1299
it sold because for that one price it was a great all around consumer machine with a consumer focus and a great consumer software package. It also sold because of design and later because of personal preference in design. Apple now, doesn't seem to use these beliefs/guidelines in the iMac.
The iMac i think could be a great seller again, but Apple has to refocus it on its target market. They can't try to cover both the lowend consumer and the prosumer with it.
My preferred specs for the next revision would be this:
1.6Ghz G5
800 Mhz Bus
256 MB RAM
80GB HD
DVD-RW
Geforce FX 5200 64 MB
Gigabit Ethernet
56K Modem
Better supplied speaker system, perhaps even include the iSub
17 inch LCD
$1299
Package it with a new and refocused software package consisting of a new Apple Productivity Suite.... AppleWorks 7?..... Print Shop..... The Sims.... Quicken......the iSuite..... WorldBook......another fun family friendly game or two (Backyard Baseball?).....some other home related apps (Williams Sonoma, etc.)
I understand based on the current 1999 introductory G5 price these specs, which virtually mirror the G5 tower, at this price seem far fetched but.... G5 prices should eventually come down a bit..... despite that I still realize that Apple's G5 pricing leaves little support that they could do an imac this cheap..... so, perhaps Apple could ship a 1.42 Ghz G4 in it instead although doing so wouldn't be too cool IMHO.
I would buy that right now at the current $1799 price. (Superdrive)
So why doesnt it sell like hot cakes? I dont think its just the lack of upgraded chips from Motorola...
Its the screen!
An all-in-one CRT is fine cause the monitor development is mature. CRTs arent getting better and cheaper every 3-6 months. LCDS are. The iMac is kinda pricey for a consumer who is accustomed to $800 Celeron based machines. Yet for "prosumers" the idea of getting married to that good-but-not-great screen for 3 years is too heavy a commitment.
Even me, a consumer, wants a 20" LCD. I was thrilled with my 17" ASD for almost a year but now after seeing larger, better LCDs at the same price, Im glad my monitor isnt attached to my computer.
Hey, how about a headless iMac?! Has there EVER been a thread on that topic?
But sincerely, all you young pro-sumers out there, aren't you a little reluctant to commit to your girlfriends and to the iMacs screen?