As has been said here, I think the best solution is to offer a modular machine that can have the capability of being set up as an AIO or as two separate pieces.
This would mean Apple displays would have to function in just one enclosure instead of several. Granted, the enclosure would vary in size depending on screen size, but Apple would not need different enclosures for the Cinema displays and the iMac.
I also think a small, flexible enclosure should cost less than what the current iMac enclosure does and could still be of good quality and have innovative design.
Could you explain how this would work a little bit more clearly...I just dont see how the enclosure idea would work? I'm not picturing something right maybe? A drawing would help...
What exactly is meant by a "modular machine?" Does that mean it basically has the ability to transform from AIO to a 2 piece and vice versa? Or does it mean it is highly expandable, maybe both of those things?
Thanks, good post too...I cant tell if your agreeing or disagreeing with mine tho, haha...I'm just blonde today.
If I understand Mr. MacPhisto correctly, it would be somewhat like the current iMac, only the display could be removed to place in an inexpensive base unit and be used as a separate display. Each base and each iMac unit would be able to use different sized removable display panels. Am I close? I think it's a good idea anyway. That way if you sell your older computer, you could keep the display panel, stick it in a base unit or put it on a new computer. A drawing would help. Scates?
Or, maybe that's not what he was talking about at all.
buy using BT, wireless keyboard and mouse the design options expand, this way apple could allow you to upgrade your display or fix it at 17 or 20 inches
have the guts, processor optical drive and ports on a pod attaching to the back, out of site and upgradable displays, the present imac doen't allow screen upgrades.
Cool designs guys. I'm not a talented artist, so I decided to stay away from it. I especially like the aluminum dome. I'd probably make it a little larger and not have a half-ring on the from of the display. I'd stick the USB and FW on the front of the base with audio coming out the back (and a passthrough on the monitor base so it is still accessible). There can be an ADC and VGA plug on the back so the display with the display able to lock-in and attach to the ADC flush (giving the user two power buttons to utilize as well - parity can be a good thing).
The nice thing about an aluminum dome is that it should be cheaper to manufacture than the current iMac dome. It also would allow a back panel and the top of the dome to come off for easy access.
In that back slot you could upgrade memory. It also would be good to be able to upgrade video via some small slot. Upgrades could be licensed out to a few companies (like PowerLogix and the sort) with Apple creating video and processor slots that would allow the upgrade. All offered upgrades would have to be authorized by Apple before offered. The benefits? Apple would continue to provide a warranty on the machine if any time remains (AppleCare). Motherboard upgrades may be too much to hope for and would be as expensive as buying a new machine.
Great thing is that the machine would have a smalll footprint, would look sleek, and would give the user more options.
Also, if I were Apple, I'd discount Apple displays when bought with the machines. Get $200 off the total cost in store when you buy a 17" display (greater for the 20") and an iMac. That way you can entice some customers to buy a new display that will work effectively with their base. Once again, the customer is not getting a display shoved down their throat - they're given options, with the a discount offered when they buy the machine (and maybe extended beyond initial purchase with a dated receipt).
The only problem with the small footprint is the lack of PCI expansion, but FW and USB help to eliminate that. You can add editing capability and drives via either, so allowing for video upgrades, processor upgrades, and RAM upgrades solves most problems. The more sophisticated user is better with the PowerMac anyways.
Of course, you could always just have an iBook and go back to the Duo Dock concept. The dock could add a second processor, card expandability, more HDD space, etc.
This thread is turning into a hellish circle of ideas and concepts, spritzed with similar opinions. I cant seem to figure it out yet, poor Apple probably has similar issues trying to nail down the strategy.
BUT...I also get tired of the argument that the iMac - in it's current form - "sucks". It's a bit overpriced and "boutique-y" and out of the reach of most. But, on its own, it doesn't "suck" and it's a beautiful piece of machinery.
But, bottom line: does Apple throw all their eggs into the "dazzle 'em with design and price it out of reach" approach (they're on strike two, counting the G4 Cube) OR go more for "plain Jane box" to get those fence-sitters curious about the Mac and OS X a wonderful incentive to make the leap.
Full disclosure: I workin a big box computer retailer that sells Apple computers.
This sums up the everage opinion on the iMac 2:
1. Hey that is really cool...and it has a DVD burner. $18000??????? That's a little out of my budget...and they leave with an HP with DVD Burner, 17" LCD and printer for about $1500 before the inevitable $200-$400 in rebates.
2. Those Apple computers look cool...but they aren't for me..I have been using PCs for 10 years.
3. The whole thing is the computer? And if the screen breaks do I need to replace the whole thing?????
4. Apple makes computers for rich people and graphic designers.
5. This computer looks like something Muffy and Todd use: "Oh look at my new computer...but it isn't really that functional"
So based on my observations....the imac misses the sweet spot by a mile...for $500 cheap you can get a PC with more RAM, more Video memory, more hard drive space, and will feel faster in many applications, pick up some iLife like software...and still come out saving $200-300. How is that incentive for switching.
AIO are great for SOME customers, but the entire consumer line should not be limited to an AIO. Even PC makers like Sony and Gateway are honest about the AIO #s. Sony releases their computer only for the holidays..and even businesses rarely buyt the all in one computers...although it is perfectly logical. Does Dell lose education customer by not having an AIO machine...I don't think so...it more closely relates to price, and performance, convinience. Education customers don't need emacs...they need reasonably priced computers.
PS I love the first concept, and the last concept!
Yes already, the iMac is the personal computer for rich people.
As long as there are customers who'll drop $1600 CAN on two portable music players for their kids, Apple will not be terribly concerned with providing a bargain machine.
As long as somebody cares about coolness, and style over sheer pragmatism, Apple can make premium products for a certain priveleged demographic.
Somebody criticized the iMac for being 'too boutiquey'... yeah, you missed the point.
I didn't miss "any point". I'm talking, relaying, as above, all the things I hear and read on a fairly routine basis.
In ANY case...you can't dodge facts, can you? They're not exactly flying off the shelves and how many people would enjoy having a Mac, but aren't quite sure they could swing the money OR like the idea of a display tethered to their machine.
Again, I love the iMac and AIO. Always have. But I'm just one guy. I quite sure I don't represent all those thousands (or millions) of others out there who don't.
Many people DO see the iMac 2 as an out-of-reach boutique item, right or wrong.
I saw it has a cool, great-looking computer that would handle any task I threw at it (because I'm not a S.W.), so that's why I bought one.
Yes already, the iMac is the personal computer for rich people.
As long as there are customers who'll drop $1600 CAN on two portable music players for their kids, Apple will not be terribly concerned with providing a bargain machine.
As long as somebody cares about coolness, and style over sheer pragmatism, Apple can make premium products for a certain priveleged demographic.
Somebody criticized the iMac for being 'too boutiquey'... yeah, you missed the point.
So based on my observations....the imac misses the sweet spot by a mile...for $500 cheap you can get a PC with more RAM, more Video memory, more hard drive space, and will feel faster in many applications, pick up some iLife like software...and still come out saving $200-300. How is that incentive for switching.
Ouch.
Credit to PSCates for offering a fair opinion on this debate. He loves the iMac 2 but recognises that he's one of an increasingly few amount of people prepared to buy the iMac 2. And is willing to accept the fact that they are people out there who want different things.
I'm dying to see what Apple has in store. 2 months into 2004 and we still haven't seen new Mac hardware...
Because it's not an issue of design, it's an issue of sourcing. If they bought someone else's standard case, bought someone else's motherboard - both of which sell into the much larger PC market - then because of economies of scale they could sell cheaper.
If they designed a case and a board in an ATX format they'd be right back where they started, because their problem at the low end is that they can't take advantage of the commodity market for cases and boards. As long as they make their own stuff in the quantities their market supports, they're going to be more expensive at the low end.
All else being equal (that means ignoring the cost of things like the iMac 2's elaborate arm) a two piece will be more expensive to make, stock and sell than an AIO. On the PC side, all else is not equal because the commodity market is built around a two piece architecture.
The number of people who shop around for a separate monitor at the time of purchase is low enough to be irrelevant in terms of pricing the whole system - and Apple will discourage it anyway, because it will make it that much harder (and therefor more expensive) to figure out how many monitors to make. To cut cost, reduce the number of variables in play. You want to increase the number of variables in play.
Is this hard to understand?
I see downthread that you actually praise someone for saying the iMac 2 misses the mark. News flash: Nobody here - including me - is saying otherwise. It is a given that the iMac 2 is broken. It is a given that it needs fixing. The question is how, and that's far more interesting than further obsession over the iMac 2's sales numbers.
You are all hoping for too much, too soon. I'm in the Apple store near me every other day and people are STILL surprised when the sales person shows them how the LCD can be adjusted on the arm. It may seem old to us Mac faithful who obscess every other minute on what the next cool new Mac device might be, but to the general public the iMacs are still new and fresh.
Look for feature enhancements and little boosts and upgrades, but nothing very dramatic.
Of course by saying this, tomorrow Apple will reveal the G5, Aluminium iMac Sphere!
I agree. The other day I emailed a friend a picture of the iMac and she called and just gushed over how "pretty" it looked. She's been a Windows user for about 10 years. We do forget how unique the style of the machine is.
I claim to know nothing about marketing and running a billion dollar company. But I'll offer some advice and other things as I see fit.
With the G5 Apple finally has room to grow and expand. It's time to bring back the prestige and recognizability that the "Power" lineup used to envoke back in the 90's when people talked about Mac's.
Apple should have two goals when it comes to CPU sales. One short term one and one long term one.
*short term goal should be to sell 500,000 CPU units of the "Power" line combined. Simply put. Get as many G5's out there as you can. Expanding the PowerBook lineup to three configuration showed that Apple could sell boatloads of notebooks. By expanding the G5 desktops to 4 models and lowering the entery price to 1,499 (single G5), I think they could easily get past 225,000 Tower units a quarter....possibly 250,000. I'm not to worried about the Powerbooks. I have a feeling that once they get a G5....they will sell like nothing since the first iMac. I wouldn't be surprised if PowerBook G5 sales come close to the 250,000 mark that first quarter.
A strong "Power" lineup is the first key to market share and increased mindshare.
*Long term goal should be to get back above the 1,000,000 CPU mark per quarter.
This one is a little more difficult because it will require a complete revamp of the consumer Desktop lineup. (the iBooks are fine...leave them alone for the time being). But as people have been complaining in here about....the iMac/eMac situation needs desperate attention. Personally, I would like to see the eMac move back to eduction only. A completely new iMac would then cover the consumer lineup. Whatever it is, it needs to cover the 799 to 1,299 lineup. And if that's a new Cube....then so be it. A "consumer" PC should cost no more than 1,299 with moniter included. If you need that much power...then that's exactly where the 1,499 G5 comes in. (and at a higher gross margin for Apple).
Just for sh!ts and Giggles...it should look something like this:
Consumer Cube: All CPU's are fixed, RAM is upgradable, Videocard is upgradable, all come with new 2 year limited AppleCare Warranty.
Base Cube w/ no moniter: $699.00 (the true headless mac for those that have their own moniter. BTO any Optical drive
Entry Cube: 899.00
w/ 15" Apple LCD
Combo Drive
Cube Special Edition: 1,299
w/ 17" LCD
Superdrive
Soundsticks
I don't know.....I think that if people saw this sort of line-up (consumer and pro) they would take a little bit harder look at getting a Mac. I know i would be looking at the 699 or 899 option myself.
I don't know...I'm just dreaming though. But SOMETHING needs to happen! I think it's a slap in the face to make people pay 799+ tax and only get a 1GHz CPU and a lame, heavy 17" CRT beast that looks like it needs to go on the Atkins diet...
...and the iMac's price/performance ratio is so out of wack it isn't even funny.
Well I'm in the same boat with repsect to marketing, I cetainly don't have any special knowledge in that area. But here is how I would run things:
Keep the PowerMac as pro equipment. That means very fast systems with atleast two real processors. The Power Mac should lead the Pac so to speak.
I do believe that Apple needs a low cost machine that can effectively be marketed around $500. That would be for a base machine with atleast 512MB of RAM. The only key element for the low cost machine is that it needs to be able to support graphics card upgrades, with via AGP port or its follow on. This could be a cube or a pizza box format like the old LC machines. The issue is, And I do hope that Apple and Steve hear this, that they not screw up with respect to performance. To that end the machine should hit at least 2GHz with a 970 class processor. Actually a little faster wouldn't hurt.
The All in ones need a upgrade that is obvious. Keeping them around in one form or the other would be ideal. While not my cup of tea they do fill a spot in the market place in a unique manner. They woud today if it wasn't for the fact that they have the performance of a three year old machine.
Thanks
Dave
Quote:
Originally posted by PowerPC
I claim to know nothing about marketing and running a billion dollar company. But I'll offer some advice and other things as I see fit.
With the G5 Apple finally has room to grow and expand. It's time to bring back the prestige and recognizability that the "Power" lineup used to envoke back in the 90's when people talked about Mac's.
Apple should have two goals when it comes to CPU sales. One short term one and one long term one.
*short term goal should be to sell 500,000 CPU units of the "Power" line combined. Simply put. Get as many G5's out there as you can. Expanding the PowerBook lineup to three configuration showed that Apple could sell boatloads of notebooks. By expanding the G5 desktops to 4 models and lowering the entery price to 1,499 (single G5), I think they could easily get past 225,000 Tower units a quarter....possibly 250,000. I'm not to worried about the Powerbooks. I have a feeling that once they get a G5....they will sell like nothing since the first iMac. I wouldn't be surprised if PowerBook G5 sales come close to the 250,000 mark that first quarter.
A strong "Power" lineup is the first key to market share and increased mindshare.
*Long term goal should be to get back above the 1,000,000 CPU mark per quarter.
This one is a little more difficult because it will require a complete revamp of the consumer Desktop lineup. (the iBooks are fine...leave them alone for the time being). But as people have been complaining in here about....the iMac/eMac situation needs desperate attention. Personally, I would like to see the eMac move back to eduction only. A completely new iMac would then cover the consumer lineup. Whatever it is, it needs to cover the 799 to 1,299 lineup. And if that's a new Cube....then so be it. A "consumer" PC should cost no more than 1,299 with moniter included. If you need that much power...then that's exactly where the 1,499 G5 comes in. (and at a higher gross margin for Apple).
Just for sh!ts and Giggles...it should look something like this:
Consumer Cube: All CPU's are fixed, RAM is upgradable, Videocard is upgradable, all come with new 2 year limited AppleCare Warranty.
Base Cube w/ no moniter: $699.00 (the true headless mac for those that have their own moniter. BTO any Optical drive
Entry Cube: 899.00
w/ 15" Apple LCD
Combo Drive
Cube Special Edition: 1,299
w/ 17" LCD
Superdrive
Soundsticks
I don't know.....I think that if people saw this sort of line-up (consumer and pro) they would take a little bit harder look at getting a Mac. I know i would be looking at the 699 or 899 option myself.
I don't know...I'm just dreaming though. But SOMETHING needs to happen! I think it's a slap in the face to make people pay 799+ tax and only get a 1GHz CPU and a lame, heavy 17" CRT beast that looks like it needs to go on the Atkins diet...
...and the iMac's price/performance ratio is so out of wack it isn't even funny.
Or have all-in-one-box that includes the $299 monitor for $999 - $1499.
Sell more monitors separately to other people. Let other people use other mointors that they may already have. I really don't get how someone will switch from PC if they HAVE to buy a new monitor.
Let them get that headless cube for cheap. Somewhere down the line, they will break down and get the matching LCD. Maybe even getting a larger display for more money.
2 display lines:
iDisplay - $299 - $799
15" - $299
17" Widescreen $499
18" or 19" 4:3 $799
ProDisplay
20" Widescreen - $899
23" Widescreen - $1499
30" Widescreen - $1999
I'd rather someone take these and come up with a good model pricing scheme. I don't like the 4:3's in there, but couldn't come up with something at the high end that wouldn't take away from the low end ProDisplays
I just wish they'd release something...so these threads won't hurt my head so much and keep me up nights.
I'm truly stumped. I have no earthly idea what they're going to do. I only know one thing for sure: half the people here (probably including myself) will think it's the coolest, sexiest thing ever created and will slap their heads and go "of COURSE!!! Why didn't I think of that?!?! OMG! Ive ROCKS!!!".
Comments
Originally posted by Mr. MacPhisto
As has been said here, I think the best solution is to offer a modular machine that can have the capability of being set up as an AIO or as two separate pieces.
This would mean Apple displays would have to function in just one enclosure instead of several. Granted, the enclosure would vary in size depending on screen size, but Apple would not need different enclosures for the Cinema displays and the iMac.
I also think a small, flexible enclosure should cost less than what the current iMac enclosure does and could still be of good quality and have innovative design.
Could you explain how this would work a little bit more clearly...I just dont see how the enclosure idea would work? I'm not picturing something right maybe? A drawing would help...
What exactly is meant by a "modular machine?" Does that mean it basically has the ability to transform from AIO to a 2 piece and vice versa? Or does it mean it is highly expandable, maybe both of those things?
Thanks, good post too...I cant tell if your agreeing or disagreeing with mine tho, haha...I'm just blonde today.
Or, maybe that's not what he was talking about at all.
Just working on my dreaming.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/12/te...ts/12inte.html
if that doesn't work try this and go to the new york tiimes link "intel blurs lines"
http://news.google.com/news/en/us/technology.html
buy using BT, wireless keyboard and mouse the design options expand, this way apple could allow you to upgrade your display or fix it at 17 or 20 inches
have the guts, processor optical drive and ports on a pod attaching to the back, out of site and upgradable displays, the present imac doen't allow screen upgrades.
http://www.theapplecollection.com/de...]Headless iMac
[edit by Amorph: No inlined images over 800x600.]
Originally posted by Messiahtosh
Some cool concept images...
Headless iMac
Those are cool...I'll take one of the first.
[edit by Amorph: Don't inline images over 800x600.]
The nice thing about an aluminum dome is that it should be cheaper to manufacture than the current iMac dome. It also would allow a back panel and the top of the dome to come off for easy access.
In that back slot you could upgrade memory. It also would be good to be able to upgrade video via some small slot. Upgrades could be licensed out to a few companies (like PowerLogix and the sort) with Apple creating video and processor slots that would allow the upgrade. All offered upgrades would have to be authorized by Apple before offered. The benefits? Apple would continue to provide a warranty on the machine if any time remains (AppleCare). Motherboard upgrades may be too much to hope for and would be as expensive as buying a new machine.
Great thing is that the machine would have a smalll footprint, would look sleek, and would give the user more options.
Also, if I were Apple, I'd discount Apple displays when bought with the machines. Get $200 off the total cost in store when you buy a 17" display (greater for the 20") and an iMac. That way you can entice some customers to buy a new display that will work effectively with their base. Once again, the customer is not getting a display shoved down their throat - they're given options, with the a discount offered when they buy the machine (and maybe extended beyond initial purchase with a dated receipt).
The only problem with the small footprint is the lack of PCI expansion, but FW and USB help to eliminate that. You can add editing capability and drives via either, so allowing for video upgrades, processor upgrades, and RAM upgrades solves most problems. The more sophisticated user is better with the PowerMac anyways.
Of course, you could always just have an iBook and go back to the Duo Dock concept. The dock could add a second processor, card expandability, more HDD space, etc.
Originally posted by pscates
BUT...I also get tired of the argument that the iMac - in it's current form - "sucks". It's a bit overpriced and "boutique-y" and out of the reach of most. But, on its own, it doesn't "suck" and it's a beautiful piece of machinery.
But, bottom line: does Apple throw all their eggs into the "dazzle 'em with design and price it out of reach" approach (they're on strike two, counting the G4 Cube) OR go more for "plain Jane box" to get those fence-sitters curious about the Mac and OS X a wonderful incentive to make the leap.
Full disclosure: I workin a big box computer retailer that sells Apple computers.
This sums up the everage opinion on the iMac 2:
1. Hey that is really cool...and it has a DVD burner. $18000??????? That's a little out of my budget...and they leave with an HP with DVD Burner, 17" LCD and printer for about $1500 before the inevitable $200-$400 in rebates.
2. Those Apple computers look cool...but they aren't for me..I have been using PCs for 10 years.
3. The whole thing is the computer? And if the screen breaks do I need to replace the whole thing?????
4. Apple makes computers for rich people and graphic designers.
5. This computer looks like something Muffy and Todd use: "Oh look at my new computer...but it isn't really that functional"
So based on my observations....the imac misses the sweet spot by a mile...for $500 cheap you can get a PC with more RAM, more Video memory, more hard drive space, and will feel faster in many applications, pick up some iLife like software...and still come out saving $200-300. How is that incentive for switching.
AIO are great for SOME customers, but the entire consumer line should not be limited to an AIO. Even PC makers like Sony and Gateway are honest about the AIO #s. Sony releases their computer only for the holidays..and even businesses rarely buyt the all in one computers...although it is perfectly logical. Does Dell lose education customer by not having an AIO machine...I don't think so...it more closely relates to price, and performance, convinience. Education customers don't need emacs...they need reasonably priced computers.
PS I love the first concept, and the last concept!
As long as there are customers who'll drop $1600 CAN on two portable music players for their kids, Apple will not be terribly concerned with providing a bargain machine.
As long as somebody cares about coolness, and style over sheer pragmatism, Apple can make premium products for a certain priveleged demographic.
Somebody criticized the iMac for being 'too boutiquey'... yeah, you missed the point.
In ANY case...you can't dodge facts, can you? They're not exactly flying off the shelves and how many people would enjoy having a Mac, but aren't quite sure they could swing the money OR like the idea of a display tethered to their machine.
Again, I love the iMac and AIO. Always have. But I'm just one guy. I quite sure I don't represent all those thousands (or millions) of others out there who don't.
Many people DO see the iMac 2 as an out-of-reach boutique item, right or wrong.
I saw it has a cool, great-looking computer that would handle any task I threw at it (because I'm not a S.W.), so that's why I bought one.
Others? Apparently not the case.
Originally posted by sorhed
Yes already, the iMac is the personal computer for rich people.
As long as there are customers who'll drop $1600 CAN on two portable music players for their kids, Apple will not be terribly concerned with providing a bargain machine.
As long as somebody cares about coolness, and style over sheer pragmatism, Apple can make premium products for a certain priveleged demographic.
Somebody criticized the iMac for being 'too boutiquey'... yeah, you missed the point.
Class warfare! I love it! 8)
So based on my observations....the imac misses the sweet spot by a mile...for $500 cheap you can get a PC with more RAM, more Video memory, more hard drive space, and will feel faster in many applications, pick up some iLife like software...and still come out saving $200-300. How is that incentive for switching.
Ouch.
Credit to PSCates for offering a fair opinion on this debate. He loves the iMac 2 but recognises that he's one of an increasingly few amount of people prepared to buy the iMac 2. And is willing to accept the fact that they are people out there who want different things.
I'm dying to see what Apple has in store. 2 months into 2004 and we still haven't seen new Mac hardware...
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Lemon Bon Bon
Yes they can. How do you know they can't?
Because it's not an issue of design, it's an issue of sourcing. If they bought someone else's standard case, bought someone else's motherboard - both of which sell into the much larger PC market - then because of economies of scale they could sell cheaper.
If they designed a case and a board in an ATX format they'd be right back where they started, because their problem at the low end is that they can't take advantage of the commodity market for cases and boards. As long as they make their own stuff in the quantities their market supports, they're going to be more expensive at the low end.
All else being equal (that means ignoring the cost of things like the iMac 2's elaborate arm) a two piece will be more expensive to make, stock and sell than an AIO. On the PC side, all else is not equal because the commodity market is built around a two piece architecture.
The number of people who shop around for a separate monitor at the time of purchase is low enough to be irrelevant in terms of pricing the whole system - and Apple will discourage it anyway, because it will make it that much harder (and therefor more expensive) to figure out how many monitors to make. To cut cost, reduce the number of variables in play. You want to increase the number of variables in play.
Is this hard to understand?
I see downthread that you actually praise someone for saying the iMac 2 misses the mark. News flash: Nobody here - including me - is saying otherwise. It is a given that the iMac 2 is broken. It is a given that it needs fixing. The question is how, and that's far more interesting than further obsession over the iMac 2's sales numbers.
Originally posted by clonenode
You are all hoping for too much, too soon. I'm in the Apple store near me every other day and people are STILL surprised when the sales person shows them how the LCD can be adjusted on the arm. It may seem old to us Mac faithful who obscess every other minute on what the next cool new Mac device might be, but to the general public the iMacs are still new and fresh.
Look for feature enhancements and little boosts and upgrades, but nothing very dramatic.
Of course by saying this, tomorrow Apple will reveal the G5, Aluminium iMac Sphere!
I agree. The other day I emailed a friend a picture of the iMac and she called and just gushed over how "pretty" it looked. She's been a Windows user for about 10 years. We do forget how unique the style of the machine is.
With the G5 Apple finally has room to grow and expand. It's time to bring back the prestige and recognizability that the "Power" lineup used to envoke back in the 90's when people talked about Mac's.
Apple should have two goals when it comes to CPU sales. One short term one and one long term one.
*short term goal should be to sell 500,000 CPU units of the "Power" line combined. Simply put. Get as many G5's out there as you can. Expanding the PowerBook lineup to three configuration showed that Apple could sell boatloads of notebooks. By expanding the G5 desktops to 4 models and lowering the entery price to 1,499 (single G5), I think they could easily get past 225,000 Tower units a quarter....possibly 250,000. I'm not to worried about the Powerbooks. I have a feeling that once they get a G5....they will sell like nothing since the first iMac. I wouldn't be surprised if PowerBook G5 sales come close to the 250,000 mark that first quarter.
A strong "Power" lineup is the first key to market share and increased mindshare.
*Long term goal should be to get back above the 1,000,000 CPU mark per quarter.
This one is a little more difficult because it will require a complete revamp of the consumer Desktop lineup. (the iBooks are fine...leave them alone for the time being). But as people have been complaining in here about....the iMac/eMac situation needs desperate attention. Personally, I would like to see the eMac move back to eduction only. A completely new iMac would then cover the consumer lineup. Whatever it is, it needs to cover the 799 to 1,299 lineup. And if that's a new Cube....then so be it. A "consumer" PC should cost no more than 1,299 with moniter included. If you need that much power...then that's exactly where the 1,499 G5 comes in. (and at a higher gross margin for Apple).
Just for sh!ts and Giggles...it should look something like this:
Consumer Cube: All CPU's are fixed, RAM is upgradable, Videocard is upgradable, all come with new 2 year limited AppleCare Warranty.
Base Cube w/ no moniter: $699.00 (the true headless mac for those that have their own moniter. BTO any Optical drive
Entry Cube: 899.00
w/ 15" Apple LCD
Combo Drive
Cube Special Edition: 1,299
w/ 17" LCD
Superdrive
Soundsticks
I don't know.....I think that if people saw this sort of line-up (consumer and pro) they would take a little bit harder look at getting a Mac. I know i would be looking at the 699 or 899 option myself.
I don't know...I'm just dreaming though. But SOMETHING needs to happen! I think it's a slap in the face to make people pay 799+ tax and only get a 1GHz CPU and a lame, heavy 17" CRT beast that looks like it needs to go on the Atkins diet...
...and the iMac's price/performance ratio is so out of wack it isn't even funny.
But what do I know....I'm just a talking goat...
Keep the PowerMac as pro equipment. That means very fast systems with atleast two real processors. The Power Mac should lead the Pac so to speak.
I do believe that Apple needs a low cost machine that can effectively be marketed around $500. That would be for a base machine with atleast 512MB of RAM. The only key element for the low cost machine is that it needs to be able to support graphics card upgrades, with via AGP port or its follow on. This could be a cube or a pizza box format like the old LC machines. The issue is, And I do hope that Apple and Steve hear this, that they not screw up with respect to performance. To that end the machine should hit at least 2GHz with a 970 class processor. Actually a little faster wouldn't hurt.
The All in ones need a upgrade that is obvious. Keeping them around in one form or the other would be ideal. While not my cup of tea they do fill a spot in the market place in a unique manner. They woud today if it wasn't for the fact that they have the performance of a three year old machine.
Thanks
Dave
Originally posted by PowerPC
I claim to know nothing about marketing and running a billion dollar company. But I'll offer some advice and other things as I see fit.
With the G5 Apple finally has room to grow and expand. It's time to bring back the prestige and recognizability that the "Power" lineup used to envoke back in the 90's when people talked about Mac's.
Apple should have two goals when it comes to CPU sales. One short term one and one long term one.
*short term goal should be to sell 500,000 CPU units of the "Power" line combined. Simply put. Get as many G5's out there as you can. Expanding the PowerBook lineup to three configuration showed that Apple could sell boatloads of notebooks. By expanding the G5 desktops to 4 models and lowering the entery price to 1,499 (single G5), I think they could easily get past 225,000 Tower units a quarter....possibly 250,000. I'm not to worried about the Powerbooks. I have a feeling that once they get a G5....they will sell like nothing since the first iMac. I wouldn't be surprised if PowerBook G5 sales come close to the 250,000 mark that first quarter.
A strong "Power" lineup is the first key to market share and increased mindshare.
*Long term goal should be to get back above the 1,000,000 CPU mark per quarter.
This one is a little more difficult because it will require a complete revamp of the consumer Desktop lineup. (the iBooks are fine...leave them alone for the time being). But as people have been complaining in here about....the iMac/eMac situation needs desperate attention. Personally, I would like to see the eMac move back to eduction only. A completely new iMac would then cover the consumer lineup. Whatever it is, it needs to cover the 799 to 1,299 lineup. And if that's a new Cube....then so be it. A "consumer" PC should cost no more than 1,299 with moniter included. If you need that much power...then that's exactly where the 1,499 G5 comes in. (and at a higher gross margin for Apple).
Just for sh!ts and Giggles...it should look something like this:
Consumer Cube: All CPU's are fixed, RAM is upgradable, Videocard is upgradable, all come with new 2 year limited AppleCare Warranty.
Base Cube w/ no moniter: $699.00 (the true headless mac for those that have their own moniter. BTO any Optical drive
Entry Cube: 899.00
w/ 15" Apple LCD
Combo Drive
Cube Special Edition: 1,299
w/ 17" LCD
Superdrive
Soundsticks
I don't know.....I think that if people saw this sort of line-up (consumer and pro) they would take a little bit harder look at getting a Mac. I know i would be looking at the 699 or 899 option myself.
I don't know...I'm just dreaming though. But SOMETHING needs to happen! I think it's a slap in the face to make people pay 799+ tax and only get a 1GHz CPU and a lame, heavy 17" CRT beast that looks like it needs to go on the Atkins diet...
...and the iMac's price/performance ratio is so out of wack it isn't even funny.
But what do I know....I'm just a talking goat...
Cube $799-$1299
Monitors sold separately, with the low end $299
So you go to basically to $1099 to $1599
Or have all-in-one-box that includes the $299 monitor for $999 - $1499.
Sell more monitors separately to other people. Let other people use other mointors that they may already have. I really don't get how someone will switch from PC if they HAVE to buy a new monitor.
Let them get that headless cube for cheap. Somewhere down the line, they will break down and get the matching LCD. Maybe even getting a larger display for more money.
2 display lines:
iDisplay - $299 - $799
15" - $299
17" Widescreen $499
18" or 19" 4:3 $799
ProDisplay
20" Widescreen - $899
23" Widescreen - $1499
30" Widescreen - $1999
I'd rather someone take these and come up with a good model pricing scheme. I don't like the 4:3's in there, but couldn't come up with something at the high end that wouldn't take away from the low end ProDisplays
Originally posted by tak1108
I don't think the above prices are viable.
Cube $799-$1299
Monitors sold separately, with the low end $299
So you go to basically to $1099 to $1599
Or have all-in-one-box that includes the $299 monitor for $999 - $1499.
2 display lines:
iDisplay - $299 - $799
15" - $299
17" Widescreen $499
18" or 19" 4:3 $799
ProDisplay
20" Widescreen - $899
23" Widescreen - $1499
30" Widescreen - $1999
There is not going to be a $299 display this year. No way. LCD prices have climbed somewhat, and $499 for a 17". Keep that crack pipe to your self.
I'm truly stumped. I have no earthly idea what they're going to do. I only know one thing for sure: half the people here (probably including myself) will think it's the coolest, sexiest thing ever created and will slap their heads and go "of COURSE!!! Why didn't I think of that?!?! OMG! Ive ROCKS!!!".
The other half will bitch and moan as usual.
THAT is 100% guaranteed.