Yep. But at least the Cube had an upgradable video card.
I'm glad I got my 1.6 tower, even though it's as big as a small refrigerator. I've already upgraded the video.
That's why you spend the extra money. There is no free lunch you $cratch the vendors back with some moolah they provide you better hardware. Circle of business...mutual beneficiaries.
Quote:
Anyway. It's the bleeding price folks! 1299, and no superdrive, which should be standard at that price, and only 256MB of RAM, a figure which every single manufacturer doubles when we're talking about systems over 1K.
Not the point of view. Rather than take a holistic approach to viewing the situation the closet Mac Hater takes a passive agressive stance by failing to acknowledge the unique design of Apple products as a potential positive thus, they wish to strengthen their negativity via lies of ommission.
Seeing only have the story means you are blind to the other %50. How many here want to give up one of their eyes. Not too fun is it?
Sure, you can get an AGP card (sometimes) and go into driver update hell
Are you implying that you get driver update hell automagically for a GFX card upgrade?
I have to be honest, it's the first time I've ever heard of such a thing. And me and my friend do change the GFX card of our computers, though not very often. And this is one thing that has never given us trouble, be it on a OEM computer or a "homebuilt" one.
Quote:
Originally posted by Amorph
If a significant percentage of PC buyers bought aftermarket cards, the industry would be wildly more profitable than it is. As it is, ATI and NVIDIA both still make most of their money from OEM sales, so most people must not upgrade the card that ships in their machine
Does this OEM sales figure include buissnes sales? Or is it just sales to "regular consumers"? </curious>
Does this OEM sales figure include buissnes sales? Or is it just sales to "regular consumers"? </curious>
He's talking about winning contracts for their products to ship in computers from the
Dells
IBMs
Apples
Compaqs
HPs
That's where the money is. 3dfx died because they had cool stuff that gamers loved but gamers aren't enough to keep your coffers ringing with money. You need your graphics shipping in every product you can. Concrete deliverables.
Gamers are best suited to buying configurable computers. If that isn't Apple then that's the way it is because Apple doesn't promote gaming that much. A SFF PC with a nice card would be a nice little gaming box to go along with a Mac or a console computer.
The 5200 fx doesn't knock your socks off but in the scheme of what Appe wants to do with Tiger and other apps it works.
Who's the closet mac hater? Hugs 12" powerbook, thumbs 30Gb iPod, and heads out of the office. I've always said Apple makes some good stuff, unfortunately it's been a long time since they made any of it for the consumer desktop -- at least not at a reasonable price.
Not the point of view. Rather than take a holitic approach to viewing the situation the closet Mac Hater takes a passive agressive stance by failing to acknowledge the unique design of Apple products as a potential positive thus, they wish to strengthen their negativity via lies of ommission.
Wow. I've owned half a dozen Macs, recommend them every chance I get, and because I observe that a non-upgradable 5200FX is a joke in a machine at the iMac's price, I'm a "closet Mac hater"? Yes, design is an important advantage of Apple's products. But we've seen what a unique design combined with lousy price/performance results in, with both the cube and iMac2.
I love the angst in this thread! Any excuse to get one's knickers in a twist!
Hey! Whatever happened to bus speed? A few months ago, all I read about here was that Wintel PCs had bus speeds that kicked Apple's butt, and that a faster bus was the main thing holding back Macs. Now that iMacs are possibly on the verge of 800/900 MHz buses, where are the yawns of relief?
When people claim that current iMacs are dogs at playing games, is it entirely the fault of the video card? Is the bus saturated? Is the CPU pegged? Is the software port just poorly coded? Some or all of the above?
All the concern about the video card reminds me of the comments when the original iMac Rev. A was introduced: "What are they thinking? How much could it have cost to put in a #@$& floppy drive?" "USB? There aren't even any USB peripherals out there!" "What? A 15-inch display? That's so bogus: they easily could have fit a 17-incher in there!" "No one will ever buy a computer with a round mouse," "Blue? Yeah, like I'm gonna use a toy-colored computer!" "Where's my paper clip? [OS 8 joke]"
Interesting, all this discussion of the new iMac's price/value ratio...
Yet not one word devoted to ergonomics or form factor?
Speed is increasinly trivial to many consumers. While I agree that the iMac2 and possibly the iMac3 are overpriced, it seems that the problem is overstated. People purchasing botique machines (like the iMac2 and iMac3) are likely more impressed by design than teraflop mongering.
Discussion of the iMac's price/value is useless unless the form factor is factored in.
agreed, the imac is a botique computer, nothing more, thus leaving a huge market unserved, the non-pro who wants a desktop, not an inverted cerial bowl with a display on top.
I have given up on the dream of a $999 headless mac but they sure could revive the single cpu PM and toss in a combo drive, an agp, and one pci slot and a 5200 for like 1599$ and fill the niche quite well.
That's where the money is. 3dfx died because they had cool stuff that gamers loved but gamers aren't enough to keep your coffers ringing with money.
Now from what I've read the so called "enthusiasts" market has seen an exponential growth over the last few years. So then question that then would arise [if my source is correct] is how much money is in this market segment, and if it's growing exponetially, how much will there be in it in a few years?
And for that matter didn't DELL start a "gaming line" or some such of there computers?
Not that I want the iMac to become a 1337 gaming rig though, it's a small formfactor computer, and thus it's limited in it's choice of both GPU and CPU, even if I feel that they could have found a better GPU then the 5200. (you don't see Mini-ITX boards with nVidia 6800 Ultra GPUs )
But a choice in this regard would be nice never the less, like a single CPU Power Mac perhap?
and because I observe that a non-upgradable 5200FX is a joke in a machine at the iMac's price, I'm a "closet Mac hater"?
Sorry sometimes I just get swept in the drama. I'm just making hyperbolic statements for fun really. We've all been posting on these boards long enough to get a feel for each other and dammit I look forward to "ribbing" Matsu every now and then
hehehe let's be honest it was getting quite boring around here. Trust, if I've actually offended anyone when in Seattle look me up and I'll buy you a quality beer.
Quote:
I have given up on the dream of a $999 headless mac but they sure could revive the single cpu PM and toss in a combo drive, an agp, and one pci slot and a 5200 for like 1599$ and fill the niche quite well.
No you musn't give up on this dream. You just have to realize what must happen to this to come to fruition. The reason why HP, Dell and other can sell lowcost computers is because they are looking to sell the whole widget. HP and Dell don't derive their profit from selling $499 computers. Those are loss leaders. HP and Dell want to sell you an infrastructure. Both companies have Server lines and Switches and Printers. They want to own the whole shebang.
If Dell pitched their lineup at you(the business or school) and you said "Nahhhh I think I'll pass on the Poweredge Server and Switches but we'll keep the $599 client boxes"
Dell would say
"Nice try sparky, the deal is for the whole enchilada"
What does this mean for you and your headless Mac? It means we're not going to see one until Apple can offer a much better "full meal deal" which includes Xserves, Office Suites , switches etc. Yes Apple will likely need to buy into a networking(someone like Asante) and rebrand to Apple. Then Apple could use a loss leader headless Mac to get more Xserves and Switches into the biz and edu.
Apples reluctance to embrace gaming on Macintosh is legendary. That and their refusal to license the OS have to be some of the biggest blunders Apple has created.
I sold Macs for a while and I lost far more Mac sales to people over gaming versus say price. I saw kids give their parents the iciest looks because they wanted a PC for the gaming. Many parents cave and go buy the PC.
Gaming also ensures that you have an OS tuned for multimedia. Apple's ill fated Quickdraw 3D had to be the dumbest thing. They develop a 3D API yet Apple doesn't support it with games based on the technology or apps. So it dies a neglected death as Directx and OpenGL become the tech used. Apple wasted all that time and resources.
Bungie was loved by Mac users. Why did Microsoft see the potential that Apple didn't? Probably because Microsoft see's many things that Apple doesn't hence they have %97 share and Apple has less than %3.
I think Steve Jobs will be able to take Apple up to a point but I think he has a ceiling and beyond that point you need vision coming from a different point of view. If Steve can hang on for say 7 more years and turn Apple into a 20 billion a year company then it would be ready for someone that can tone down the glitz a bit but increase the power.
Are you implying that you get driver update hell automagically for a GFX card upgrade?
Where did "automagically" come from? You certainly can end up on a driver update treadmill, dealing with conflicts, etc.
Quote:
I have to be honest, it's the first time I've ever heard of such a thing. And me and my friend do change the GFX card of our computers, though not very often. And this is one thing that has never given us trouble, be it on a OEM computer or a "homebuilt" one.
Consider yourself lucky. I know people who switched to Macs and stayed there in no small part to get some respite from video driver hell. It's what happens when you have third-party drivers for third-party hardware that the original manufacturer didn't and couldn't test being pushed out at a tremendous clip to compete in the high-end gaming market. If you've managed to avoid it, great.
I think it's less of a problem on home-built PCs, just because those tend to have much less unnecessary gunk in software and higher quality hardware components overall. But that's mostly a hunch.
Anyway. It's the bleeding price folks! 1299, and no superdrive, which should be standard at that price, and only 256MB of RAM, a figure which every single manufacturer doubles when we're talking about systems over 1K.
A combodrive 17" model has no business costing more than 999. That ain't no loss leader either. G5's are at least as cheap as G4's, and 17" panels barely cost more than 15"ers.
It really depends on what kind of LCD monitor. If it is an analog 17" LCD, the price should be in the $1000 to $1200 range. If it is a digital 17" LCD, than I don't see Apple, or any big manufacturer, selling it for less that $1300. If Apple is able to sell a digital 17" iMac for $1300, it'll be very impressive.
It really just comes down to price and the inflexibility of Apple's consumer systems. If the iMac starts at $1300, it won't be a big seller, and many people will have to settle with an eMac, with some chagrin probably. The other problem is inflexibility. People with less than $2000 to spend on a computer, virtually everybody, don't really have any options in the CPU, display, and graphics they can have. If Apple offered CPU and graphics options in the iMac, many of the complaints go away.
For instance, I'd like a large monitor, with a middle-of-road GPU and lower end processor. If Apple offered a 20" iMac with optional 1.6 GHz G5 and 64 MB GPU, instead of the standard 1.8 GHz G5 and 128 MB, with appropriate price reductions, the iMac could be a more attractive buy to me. Though I imagine a 17" one with faster CPU and GPU options would be more popular.
A consumer computer purchase is driven by want, not need. It's not like they are going to use it for work or anything.
If a consumer wants something, they will buy it; even if they will never use it. I'm sure you all have friends that bought a Superdrive and never used it after the first month. I have friends who spent extra money for a PowerMac just because it has PCI slots although they never used any of it. The FW 800 and Airport Extreme were deciding factors when I got my PowerMac G4, but I have yet to use it.
If Apple had a AGP slot, it will increase sales. Never mind how many people will actually take advantage of it. The comfort of knowing that you can upgrade will make people feel at ease with the purchase.
At the very least, even without the AGP slot, Apple needs upgrade the graphics for the top-of-the-line iMac to something better. It a non-issue if it's needed. It's the perceived need thats important.
BTW, why are people being satisfied by the fact that the iMac is fairly competitive with the PC side. I thought Apple wanted to increase marketshare. They need to be better than the PC counterparts.
Ever notice that Mike Matas doesn't hang around anymore " "jacking jaws" about specs and all. Maybe it's because he
has a freakin JOB!
and actually does something with his computer rather than sit around counting framerates and envying PCs. No he's creating something. Mac users used to create stuff...now they sit around and bitch and moan because PCs have 64 more megabytes on their graphics card.
There's nothing in the iMac preventing you damn disgruntled people from running your own frickin' company with an iMac. Don't like it don't buy it. Let the next Mike Matas come in and actually do something with the iMac more useful than fragging some virtual character.
Macs and their software are a testament to those who want a better computing experience in hardware and software. Decide what side you want to be on folks. Quality always cost more.
You people need to shut up about the gpu. The 5200 is a cheap $30 gpu and the imac is a prosumer machince. Make it worth the money by adding a pro card. The 5200 will not do the job as a consumer gpu.
A consumer computer purchase is driven by want, not need. It's not like they are going to use it for work or anything.
If a consumer wants something, they will buy it; even if they will never use it. I'm sure you all have friends that bought a Superdrive and never used it after the first month. I have friends who spent extra money for a PowerMac just because it has PCI slots although they never used any of it. The FW 800 and Airport Extreme were deciding factors when I got my PowerMac G4, but I have yet to use it.
If Apple had a AGP slot, it will increase sales. Never mind how many people will actually take advantage of it. The comfort of knowing that you can upgrade will make people feel at ease with the purchase.
At the very least, even without the AGP slot, Apple needs upgrade the graphics for the top-of-the-line iMac to something better. It a non-issue if it's needed. It's the perceived need thats important.
BTW, why are people being satisfied by the fact that the iMac is fairly competitive with the PC side. I thought Apple wanted to increase marketshare. They need to be better than the PC counterparts.
nice post and gets right to the heart, no agp slot and the cheapest chip from nvidea. not middle or high but the lowest form of video chip except for onboard memory garbage. Apple is about class. fx5200 is not.like using a 4 cylinder in a cadillac. enough said.
Most people don't Zap. Apple sells almost a million computers a qtr so imagine how many PCs are sold per qtr but not even half of these people upgrade their cards. Macintosh is admittedly not a platform for games so the whole "rush" to get the latest graphics card isn't really prevalent.
But you do admit that a huge lot of people actually do upgrade their cards? I'm willing to bet that there's ten times more PC buyers upgrading their graphics card than there are mac buyers. Why ignore all these people? (People, as in people who prefer a fast(er) graphics card)
Quote:
Again you're revising reality to meet your needs. My links previous showed adequately that both Dell and Gateway heavily utilize the 5200fx. Are PC user not as ambitious for gaming. Id guess many are MORE apt to play game yet they will find a 5200fx in computers up to $1800. Hence Apple is "skimping" no more than the worlds largest computer manufacturer(Dell).
Yes, I can see that Dell and Gateway utilize the 5200, but does it make the chip any better? Remember that the user is stuck with this chip until the machine is sold/dies.
Quote:
Apple never said they were going to take over the world. They simply make cool products and make a profit doing so. They must be suceeding as they turned a nice 60 million profit last qtr. They have money in the bank. You know what. For the first time I think I realize that it is some fans that have the Reality Distortion Field.
You shouldn't take the "take over the world" phrase literally, it was another way of saying "appeal to the big masses", since Apple obviously aren't getting to be the next Microsoft, market share wise, in any foreseeable future. They are succeeding in making money, still, but it's not because of the iMac. Apple is in dire need of recapturing market share, they need a good weapon to do this.
Quote:
The RDF on this board is amazing. I mean i'm being told that 98% of PC users want fast graphics yet most have the same damn card. Where's the "scratching my head" emoticon for these moments.
Eh, what? I never said that 98% of PC users want fast graphics, I seriously hope you didn't imply that there.
And thanks so much for being stroked with the RDF brush.
Comments
Originally posted by cubist
Yep. But at least the Cube had an upgradable video card.
I'm glad I got my 1.6 tower, even though it's as big as a small refrigerator. I've already upgraded the video.
That's why you spend the extra money. There is no free lunch you $cratch the vendors back with some moolah they provide you better hardware. Circle of business...mutual beneficiaries.
Anyway. It's the bleeding price folks! 1299, and no superdrive, which should be standard at that price, and only 256MB of RAM, a figure which every single manufacturer doubles when we're talking about systems over 1K.
Not the point of view. Rather than take a holistic approach to viewing the situation the closet Mac Hater takes a passive agressive stance by failing to acknowledge the unique design of Apple products as a potential positive thus, they wish to strengthen their negativity via lies of ommission.
Seeing only have the story means you are blind to the other %50. How many here want to give up one of their eyes. Not too fun is it?
Originally posted by Amorph
Sure, you can get an AGP card (sometimes) and go into driver update hell
Are you implying that you get driver update hell automagically for a GFX card upgrade?
I have to be honest, it's the first time I've ever heard of such a thing. And me and my friend do change the GFX card of our computers, though not very often. And this is one thing that has never given us trouble, be it on a OEM computer or a "homebuilt" one.
Originally posted by Amorph
If a significant percentage of PC buyers bought aftermarket cards, the industry would be wildly more profitable than it is. As it is, ATI and NVIDIA both still make most of their money from OEM sales, so most people must not upgrade the card that ships in their machine
Does this OEM sales figure include buissnes sales? Or is it just sales to "regular consumers"? </curious>
Does this OEM sales figure include buissnes sales? Or is it just sales to "regular consumers"? </curious>
He's talking about winning contracts for their products to ship in computers from the
Dells
IBMs
Apples
Compaqs
HPs
That's where the money is. 3dfx died because they had cool stuff that gamers loved but gamers aren't enough to keep your coffers ringing with money. You need your graphics shipping in every product you can. Concrete deliverables.
Gamers are best suited to buying configurable computers. If that isn't Apple then that's the way it is because Apple doesn't promote gaming that much. A SFF PC with a nice card would be a nice little gaming box to go along with a Mac or a console computer.
The 5200 fx doesn't knock your socks off but in the scheme of what Appe wants to do with Tiger and other apps it works.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Not the point of view. Rather than take a holitic approach to viewing the situation the closet Mac Hater takes a passive agressive stance by failing to acknowledge the unique design of Apple products as a potential positive thus, they wish to strengthen their negativity via lies of ommission.
Wow. I've owned half a dozen Macs, recommend them every chance I get, and because I observe that a non-upgradable 5200FX is a joke in a machine at the iMac's price, I'm a "closet Mac hater"? Yes, design is an important advantage of Apple's products. But we've seen what a unique design combined with lousy price/performance results in, with both the cube and iMac2.
Hey! Whatever happened to bus speed? A few months ago, all I read about here was that Wintel PCs had bus speeds that kicked Apple's butt, and that a faster bus was the main thing holding back Macs. Now that iMacs are possibly on the verge of 800/900 MHz buses, where are the yawns of relief?
When people claim that current iMacs are dogs at playing games, is it entirely the fault of the video card? Is the bus saturated? Is the CPU pegged? Is the software port just poorly coded? Some or all of the above?
All the concern about the video card reminds me of the comments when the original iMac Rev. A was introduced: "What are they thinking? How much could it have cost to put in a #@$& floppy drive?" "USB? There aren't even any USB peripherals out there!" "What? A 15-inch display? That's so bogus: they easily could have fit a 17-incher in there!" "No one will ever buy a computer with a round mouse," "Blue? Yeah, like I'm gonna use a toy-colored computer!" "Where's my paper clip? [OS 8 joke]"
Let's see: 278,000 sold in 6 weeks....
Originally posted by dfiler
Interesting, all this discussion of the new iMac's price/value ratio...
Yet not one word devoted to ergonomics or form factor?
Speed is increasinly trivial to many consumers. While I agree that the iMac2 and possibly the iMac3 are overpriced, it seems that the problem is overstated. People purchasing botique machines (like the iMac2 and iMac3) are likely more impressed by design than teraflop mongering.
Discussion of the iMac's price/value is useless unless the form factor is factored in.
agreed, the imac is a botique computer, nothing more, thus leaving a huge market unserved, the non-pro who wants a desktop, not an inverted cerial bowl with a display on top.
I have given up on the dream of a $999 headless mac but they sure could revive the single cpu PM and toss in a combo drive, an agp, and one pci slot and a 5200 for like 1599$ and fill the niche quite well.
Originally posted by hmurchison
That's where the money is. 3dfx died because they had cool stuff that gamers loved but gamers aren't enough to keep your coffers ringing with money.
Now from what I've read the so called "enthusiasts" market has seen an exponential growth over the last few years. So then question that then would arise [if my source is correct] is how much money is in this market segment, and if it's growing exponetially, how much will there be in it in a few years?
And for that matter didn't DELL start a "gaming line" or some such of there computers?
Not that I want the iMac to become a 1337 gaming rig though, it's a small formfactor computer, and thus it's limited in it's choice of both GPU and CPU, even if I feel that they could have found a better GPU then the 5200. (you don't see Mini-ITX boards with nVidia 6800 Ultra GPUs
But a choice in this regard would be nice never the less, like a single CPU Power Mac perhap?
and because I observe that a non-upgradable 5200FX is a joke in a machine at the iMac's price, I'm a "closet Mac hater"?
Sorry sometimes I just get swept in the drama.
hehehe let's be honest it was getting quite boring around here. Trust, if I've actually offended anyone when in Seattle look me up and I'll buy you a quality beer.
I have given up on the dream of a $999 headless mac but they sure could revive the single cpu PM and toss in a combo drive, an agp, and one pci slot and a 5200 for like 1599$ and fill the niche quite well.
No you musn't give up on this dream. You just have to realize what must happen to this to come to fruition. The reason why HP, Dell and other can sell lowcost computers is because they are looking to sell the whole widget. HP and Dell don't derive their profit from selling $499 computers. Those are loss leaders. HP and Dell want to sell you an infrastructure. Both companies have Server lines and Switches and Printers. They want to own the whole shebang.
If Dell pitched their lineup at you(the business or school) and you said "Nahhhh I think I'll pass on the Poweredge Server and Switches but we'll keep the $599 client boxes"
Dell would say
"Nice try sparky, the deal is for the whole enchilada"
What does this mean for you and your headless Mac? It means we're not going to see one until Apple can offer a much better "full meal deal" which includes Xserves, Office Suites , switches etc. Yes Apple will likely need to buy into a networking(someone like Asante) and rebrand to Apple. Then Apple could use a loss leader headless Mac to get more Xserves and Switches into the biz and edu.
Apples reluctance to embrace gaming on Macintosh is legendary. That and their refusal to license the OS have to be some of the biggest blunders Apple has created.
I sold Macs for a while and I lost far more Mac sales to people over gaming versus say price. I saw kids give their parents the iciest looks because they wanted a PC for the gaming. Many parents cave and go buy the PC.
Gaming also ensures that you have an OS tuned for multimedia. Apple's ill fated Quickdraw 3D had to be the dumbest thing. They develop a 3D API yet Apple doesn't support it with games based on the technology or apps. So it dies a neglected death as Directx and OpenGL become the tech used. Apple wasted all that time and resources.
Bungie was loved by Mac users. Why did Microsoft see the potential that Apple didn't? Probably because Microsoft see's many things that Apple doesn't hence they have %97 share and Apple has less than %3.
I think Steve Jobs will be able to take Apple up to a point but I think he has a ceiling and beyond that point you need vision coming from a different point of view. If Steve can hang on for say 7 more years and turn Apple into a 20 billion a year company then it would be ready for someone that can tone down the glitz a bit but increase the power.
Originally posted by Eric_Z
Are you implying that you get driver update hell automagically for a GFX card upgrade?
Where did "automagically" come from? You certainly can end up on a driver update treadmill, dealing with conflicts, etc.
I have to be honest, it's the first time I've ever heard of such a thing. And me and my friend do change the GFX card of our computers, though not very often. And this is one thing that has never given us trouble, be it on a OEM computer or a "homebuilt" one.
Consider yourself lucky. I know people who switched to Macs and stayed there in no small part to get some respite from video driver hell. It's what happens when you have third-party drivers for third-party hardware that the original manufacturer didn't and couldn't test being pushed out at a tremendous clip to compete in the high-end gaming market. If you've managed to avoid it, great.
I think it's less of a problem on home-built PCs, just because those tend to have much less unnecessary gunk in software and higher quality hardware components overall. But that's mostly a hunch.
Originally posted by Amorph
Consider yourself lucky.
I would think that "lucky" is a tad on the strong side, unless you are talking about finding Linux drivers for newer GFX cards
Originally posted by Matsu
Anyway. It's the bleeding price folks! 1299, and no superdrive, which should be standard at that price, and only 256MB of RAM, a figure which every single manufacturer doubles when we're talking about systems over 1K.
A combodrive 17" model has no business costing more than 999. That ain't no loss leader either. G5's are at least as cheap as G4's, and 17" panels barely cost more than 15"ers.
It really depends on what kind of LCD monitor. If it is an analog 17" LCD, the price should be in the $1000 to $1200 range. If it is a digital 17" LCD, than I don't see Apple, or any big manufacturer, selling it for less that $1300. If Apple is able to sell a digital 17" iMac for $1300, it'll be very impressive.
It really just comes down to price and the inflexibility of Apple's consumer systems. If the iMac starts at $1300, it won't be a big seller, and many people will have to settle with an eMac, with some chagrin probably. The other problem is inflexibility. People with less than $2000 to spend on a computer, virtually everybody, don't really have any options in the CPU, display, and graphics they can have. If Apple offered CPU and graphics options in the iMac, many of the complaints go away.
For instance, I'd like a large monitor, with a middle-of-road GPU and lower end processor. If Apple offered a 20" iMac with optional 1.6 GHz G5 and 64 MB GPU, instead of the standard 1.8 GHz G5 and 128 MB, with appropriate price reductions, the iMac could be a more attractive buy to me. Though I imagine a 17" one with faster CPU and GPU options would be more popular.
"these are not the droids you're looking for... move along."
na
If a consumer wants something, they will buy it; even if they will never use it. I'm sure you all have friends that bought a Superdrive and never used it after the first month. I have friends who spent extra money for a PowerMac just because it has PCI slots although they never used any of it. The FW 800 and Airport Extreme were deciding factors when I got my PowerMac G4, but I have yet to use it.
If Apple had a AGP slot, it will increase sales. Never mind how many people will actually take advantage of it. The comfort of knowing that you can upgrade will make people feel at ease with the purchase.
At the very least, even without the AGP slot, Apple needs upgrade the graphics for the top-of-the-line iMac to something better. It a non-issue if it's needed. It's the perceived need thats important.
BTW, why are people being satisfied by the fact that the iMac is fairly competitive with the PC side. I thought Apple wanted to increase marketshare. They need to be better than the PC counterparts.
Originally posted by BeigeUser
They need to be better than the PC counterparts.
They are. It's called MacOS X.
Unfortunately, the spec whores will ignore that.
They need to be better than the PC counterparts.
Ever notice that Mike Matas doesn't hang around anymore " "jacking jaws" about specs and all. Maybe it's because he
has a freakin JOB!
and actually does something with his computer rather than sit around counting framerates and envying PCs. No he's creating something. Mac users used to create stuff...now they sit around and bitch and moan because PCs have 64 more megabytes on their graphics card.
There's nothing in the iMac preventing you damn disgruntled people from running your own frickin' company with an iMac. Don't like it don't buy it. Let the next Mike Matas come in and actually do something with the iMac more useful than fragging some virtual character.
Macs and their software are a testament to those who want a better computing experience in hardware and software. Decide what side you want to be on folks. Quality always cost more.
Originally posted by quagmire
You people need to shut up about the gpu. The 5200 is a cheap $30 gpu and the imac is a prosumer machince. Make it worth the money by adding a pro card. The 5200 will not do the job as a consumer gpu.
Fixed! You're welcome!
Originally posted by BeigeUser
A consumer computer purchase is driven by want, not need. It's not like they are going to use it for work or anything.
If a consumer wants something, they will buy it; even if they will never use it. I'm sure you all have friends that bought a Superdrive and never used it after the first month. I have friends who spent extra money for a PowerMac just because it has PCI slots although they never used any of it. The FW 800 and Airport Extreme were deciding factors when I got my PowerMac G4, but I have yet to use it.
If Apple had a AGP slot, it will increase sales. Never mind how many people will actually take advantage of it. The comfort of knowing that you can upgrade will make people feel at ease with the purchase.
At the very least, even without the AGP slot, Apple needs upgrade the graphics for the top-of-the-line iMac to something better. It a non-issue if it's needed. It's the perceived need thats important.
BTW, why are people being satisfied by the fact that the iMac is fairly competitive with the PC side. I thought Apple wanted to increase marketshare. They need to be better than the PC counterparts.
nice post and gets right to the heart, no agp slot and the cheapest chip from nvidea. not middle or high but the lowest form of video chip except for onboard memory garbage. Apple is about class. fx5200 is not.like using a 4 cylinder in a cadillac. enough said.
Originally posted by hmurchison
Most people don't Zap. Apple sells almost a million computers a qtr so imagine how many PCs are sold per qtr but not even half of these people upgrade their cards. Macintosh is admittedly not a platform for games so the whole "rush" to get the latest graphics card isn't really prevalent.
But you do admit that a huge lot of people actually do upgrade their cards? I'm willing to bet that there's ten times more PC buyers upgrading their graphics card than there are mac buyers. Why ignore all these people? (People, as in people who prefer a fast(er) graphics card)
Again you're revising reality to meet your needs. My links previous showed adequately that both Dell and Gateway heavily utilize the 5200fx. Are PC user not as ambitious for gaming. Id guess many are MORE apt to play game yet they will find a 5200fx in computers up to $1800. Hence Apple is "skimping" no more than the worlds largest computer manufacturer(Dell).
Yes, I can see that Dell and Gateway utilize the 5200, but does it make the chip any better? Remember that the user is stuck with this chip until the machine is sold/dies.
Apple never said they were going to take over the world. They simply make cool products and make a profit doing so. They must be suceeding as they turned a nice 60 million profit last qtr. They have money in the bank. You know what. For the first time I think I realize that it is some fans that have the Reality Distortion Field.
You shouldn't take the "take over the world" phrase literally, it was another way of saying "appeal to the big masses", since Apple obviously aren't getting to be the next Microsoft, market share wise, in any foreseeable future. They are succeeding in making money, still, but it's not because of the iMac. Apple is in dire need of recapturing market share, they need a good weapon to do this.
The RDF on this board is amazing. I mean i'm being told that 98% of PC users want fast graphics yet most have the same damn card. Where's the "scratching my head" emoticon for these moments.
Eh, what? I never said that 98% of PC users want fast graphics, I seriously hope you didn't imply that there.
And thanks so much for being stroked with the RDF brush.
I don't think we'll ever agree on this.