Well, I guess I can't argue with a bunch of geeks who pretend to be pilots...
...and anyway, the Alienware is definitely not the fastest. Voodoo has an exceedingly fast, excessively (yet safely) overclocked GPU and CPU that blew the Aurora away in most benchmarks.
I don't think Mr Ives'll have much input in to areas like whether the display is removable. I should imagine that those decisions will be made by the senior marketing people WAY in advance.
Somebody'll brief Mr Ives stipulating that the product has to do A, B & C. Mr Ives' job is to bring the bigwigs ideas to life, and to do so in such a way that it appeals to the target market.
It's one thing to be given a blank canvas, but it's another thing entirely to have to design these things with so many existing constraints and still deliver the goods time after time.
Don't blame Mr Ives for the iMac's lack of second processor or non-updateable graphics card.
I agree the iMac wil always be and AIO design - that's the big thing about the iMac.
If the average consumer bought a computer that didn't at least come with a monitor, they'd be so ticked off. (I think that's the reason for the cube's demise).
besides, if they offered it to the mac faithful without a monitor they'd lose out on an important revenue stream. the faithful will buy anything with an apple logo on it.
Thats why iam getting an Aurora, because Mac ownership when you like to game is iffy at best. Thats why the wife gets the Quicksilver 1.4 and me the new Aurora. no more will i be able to run it crap anymore. Apple has a sweet OS but its choices for hardware are not sweet. Apple has by sticking with all in ones killed off its consumer lines,its consumer base and more. They didnt get to 3% of new sales because iMac was suited for everyone. they got it because it suited so few. Lets just hope the new model isnt more of the same. Customer is King not Apple, remember that. Build for the customer and they will reward you,build for yourself and the rest is history.
You sound like the type that has a coffee can sized tail pipe and clear tail lights on their civic.
I far prefer an iMac 2 over an gamer box like those from Alienware. Apple purposely makes machines aimed at a different market than the uber gamer geek. Alienware purposely makes machines not aimed at the ergonomics mongering uber interface geek.
Maturity helps people realize that not everyone is like one?s self.
Please pass the perspective; I've had enough of these insular proclamations from armchair board members.
Most people that get Macs that are upgradeable - don't. We can assume a similar percentage of PC users that give a rats ass about upgradability. Sure, it might be a buzzword on their checklist at purchase time but it isn't an actual issue.
The perceived/real lack of upgradability is an issue to Apple's sales, yes. Just as people "thought" the iMac "needed" a floppy drive. The idea is enough to keep people away, right or wrong.
I just meant that upgradability is rarely an actual issue with consumers post-sale.
Serious gamers? Sure, they need it. But the vast majority of users rarely get beyond Excel and Solitaire. Expandability is the 4 Wheel Drive of computers. People want it and seldom utilize it.
I disagree, they got there by not offering what the consumer wanted,sure there are people that are clueless but there are plenty of folks who do a little research before making a big purchase such as a computer. Imac was a 1 size fits all approach and it just doesnt work anymore with people doing so many different things with their machines. I actually love Mac but when i see Apple making such bad choices it just kills me as a long time user. If Jobs has to have a all in one fine but they need a consumer tower. PowerMac isnt a consumer tower.
I don't think Aurora is a troll. Lots of folks love the OS and don't like the "proprietary" aspect of Apple. The fact that MS is just as if not more proprietary rarely hits the average consumer and gamer where they notice it. The iPod is making this more obvious as Appleware gets to the majority of consumers.
I think that there is no problem with AIO's, I like the idea...it was the idea behind the 1st Mac and it still is a great idea, if done well. I would just like to see Apple do the same thing to its AIO's that it did to the iPod. Make it a standard for others to EASILY make accessories for.
If they could hit the sweetspot of $999 (while the eMac) works toward $499) BUT made upgrades as easy as docking an iPod or PDA, then they might get plenty of upgrades/cycle vs. the slower new computer/cycle. What I mean is that I would love the iMac to have a similar ability as the Cube for push out the old, push in the new upgradeablity....without haveing to turn the thing upside-down. A healthy variety of cpu and gpu and laptop-like (though bigger and cheaper) drive "modules" that are as complicated as changing Atari cartridges is the way to go.
Simple, reasonably priced upgrade modules is a very "consumer" thing to do. Maybe there are fewer folks who buy a new iMac every 2 years, but they will pay for new cpus, gpus, etc. every year. Less money but spread over a more consistent period of time. This gives Apple stores a more legitimater reason for being close by since it would be so easy to stop in more often. "Hey, maybe I'll get a new gpu module while I get that Belkin FM tuner for my iPod." It isn't making the iMac "cheaper" just making it a safer purchase for those worried about upgrades or being "stuck" with something beautiful, but slow after 3 months.
The digital hub needs to be an EASY decision for the mass market. Apple could do it if the business model allows for it. As Apple becomes more Sony-like via the iPod, then it may need to shift its business model with computers that direction too.
It was an amazing design when it came out and still is. The primary problems with is was that Moto did not keep up with their road map on speed increases, leading Apple wo work with IBM for TWO YEARS to bring the G5 to the PM last year. That G5 chip was a 130nm chip and IBM's road map was to move to the 90nm processor last December, which would have made the G5 iMac available around last April. If you want to raise hell about the performance of the iMac aim it at Moto - the ball was in their court.
AIO a problem? Look at all the notebook sales - all of them are AIOs and have the same limited upgrading as the iMac. Since I have had no problems with the two PBs I have owned - both "lowly" G4s - I have no problem with the limited upgradability of an G5 iMac. TOMORROW I will simply get on the Apple Store and spec a BTO order, maximizing everything buy memory (third party there) and treat it like a notebook that stays on the desk. I definitely WANT an AIO for home as I am bloody tired of all the boxes and wires associated with the old Dull tower that has handled internet/email duties for the last few years.
G5 iMac a single G5 only? Yup. THe PM has moved to the dual processor platform and the iMac will be the single G5 processor format. If you want dual G5s you need to use the PM as it has the space for memory upgrades, which has to be 2 chips for each increment. No was is Apple going to include that much memory expansion capacity into the iMac.
PM mini? Might be possible when there is an abundance of G5 chips to put into it. There is simply not enough chips coming out of IBM's plant to add this at the current time and the iMac line is more important for them at this time.
Games more important to you? Then buy something that is specifically designed/optimized for games. That is a stand alone market, is well served and is designed for people who don't really care about anything else. If you want a stable, well balanced platform then the OS X/Unix approach is a very wise approach to take.
Worried about Apple's lowly 3% market share? Don't. Apple could have major increases in computer sales and still stay at that level, or drop. The problem is that there are too many options for consumers that don't understand. Exceptionally cheap boxes from Wal-Mart to Dull on-line to a commission salesman that tells an uninformed customer not to buy a Mac because they are too expensive and there is no software for it. The issue that counts is that Apple is profitable and is continually increasing the number of computers sold when compared to the dark years of Moto.
The new G5 iMac design. This is the best kept secret Apple has been able to pull off for a long time. I'll keep checking all day for a picture on the boards, but I think Apple might actually be able to keep it under raps until the Keynote. My only problem is deciding if I'm going to stay awake to catch it the minute it is on Apple's web site, of just get up early. That much secrecy indicates, to me, that the new design is going to be a mind blower.
"One more thing." I would love to see a new iBook range with DVI and a wide screen. Been waiting on that for a notebook for my wife. If it isn't announced then she is going to have to settle for the 12",
Today is the last day for fun guessing. The boards are really going to change tomorrow!
AIO a problem? Look at all the notebook sales - all of them are AIOs and have the same limited upgrading as the iMac. Since I have had no problems with the two PBs I have owned - both "lowly" G4s - I have no problem with the limited upgradability of an G5 iMac.
AIO is a problem when it is tied to your desk. Laptops are uniquely suited to the AIO arena in that they are PORTABLE which the iMac is NOT. Make the iMac portable or give it some other wow factor and it'll sell, otherwise it is simply a non-upgradeable tower w/ an expensive LCD glued to it.
I would love to be able to upgrade my imac2, even if it meant having to take it to an authorized apple tech to do it. Do I need a faster machine? Not really. So I prolly wont get a new iMac unless its really great. Would I upgrade my current iMac even though its not really needed? Yes, yes I would. I like new bells and whistles as much as the next guy, plus I can sneak an upgrade by my wife pretty easy but if she sits down to use it and its a new machine I'll prolly spend a week or 2 on the couch or worse :P
I think that even a semi upgradeable iMac would help people like me convince our wives it was worth the $1800 (or more) price tag.
Worried about Apple's lowly 3% market share? Don't. Apple could have major increases in computer sales and still stay at that level, or drop. The problem is that there are too many options for consumers that don't understand. Exceptionally cheap boxes from Wal-Mart to Dull on-line to a commission salesman that tells an uninformed customer not to buy a Mac because they are too expensive and there is no software for it. The issue that counts is that Apple is profitable and is continually increasing the number of computers sold when compared to the dark years of Moto.
-snip-
I used to have that attitude, until Adobe canceled FrameMaker for the Mac due to Apple's small market share. FrameMaker is mission critical for me, and is the only reason I still have classic on my Mac. Running an old version of FrameMaker in classic is not going to be viable forever. And, since I cannot find an alternative program, I am stuck in a situation where it looks like I am going to be forced to switch over to PC's for work (I might build them for gaming, but I never wanted to have to work on a PC again).
So Apple's small market share is something to worry about. I've been wondering what would happen to Apple if Adobe dropped support for all Mac products and offered a dirt cheap side-grade to the PC versions of their software (say $25 -$50). It sounds crazy at first, but they would save a lot of money by laying off all of the Mac support staff and programers, and they might not lose many sales (most of the pros I know would follow photoshop over to the PC if they had to).
It probably won't happen, but it is a scary thought. I would be a lot happier if Apple would reverse the downward spiral and start increasing market share every year. To do that Apple is going to have to come out with much better consumer offerings. The minimum processor and graphics card in the upcoming iMac should be the 2GHz G5 and a Radeon 9600XT. The Top of the line should have a 2.5GHz G5 and a Radeon 9800XT (or the Nvidia equivalents).
The iMac doesn't need expandability, it just needs to start with a better processor and graphics card.
You sound like the type that has a coffee can sized tail pipe and clear tail lights on their civic.
I far prefer an iMac 2 over an gamer box like those from Alienware. Apple purposely makes machines aimed at a different market than the uber gamer geek. Alienware purposely makes machines not aimed at the ergonomics mongering uber interface geek.
Maturity helps people realize that not everyone is like one?s self.
Please pass the perspective; I've had enough of these insular proclamations from armchair board members.
Actually i drive a MGB but you might not be old enough to know what that is. Imac's are fine for a lot of folks but suck for the younger crowd who like to game but then again you might be to old to remember games....without a video upgrade path it just doesnt cut it.
First post here, love the forum and hope to contibute in the future.
I recently switched from PC's and absolutely fell in luv with the AIO iMac.. Breaks my heart to see that so many think it's a not a powerful machine. I, on the other hand, liked mine so much I decided to go get me the 12" PB 133 to roam around with.
I had read all the comments about speed issues but would have to disagree with your assessmant. This 1.25 20" iMac does everything I need it to do and I don't notice any real difference from my old 2.4 ghz pc box. Too many of us here are try to forget that we not the "average" computer user/purchaser. Also, the vast majority of don't have the power need for Video or memory/processor intensive games. Hell, Solitaire is the most popular game for the over 30 set.. haha
Anyway, despite marketshare, I'm certain a whole lotta pc makers would love to trade places with Apple and all the cash sticking out of it's pockets.
Just curious what you guys think will happen to the old iMacs when the new one is debuted. Some of our local CompUSA's have some floating around. What does Apple typically do with these?
Just curious what you guys think will happen to the old iMacs when the new one is debuted. Some of our local CompUSA's have some floating around. What does Apple typically do with these?
There are hardly any left to even worry about. They will be sold for pennies.
First post here, love the forum and hope to contibute in the future.
I recently switched from PC's and absolutely fell in luv with the AIO iMac.. Breaks my heart to see that so many think it's a not a powerful machine. I, on the other hand, liked mine so much I decided to go get me the 12" PB 133 to roam around with.
I had read all the comments about speed issues but would have to disagree with your assessmant. This 1.25 20" iMac does everything I need it to do and I don't notice any real difference from my old 2.4 ghz pc box. Too many of us here are try to forget that we not the "average" computer user/purchaser. Also, the vast majority of don't have the power need for Video or memory/processor intensive games. Hell, Solitaire is the most popular game for the over 30 set.. haha
Anyway, despite marketshare, I'm certain a whole lotta pc makers would love to trade places with Apple and all the cash sticking out of it's pockets.
Comments
But the step up to a G5 tower is too much - those things are massive.
What I want is a mini G5!
Originally posted by Aurora
Flight simulator .com said its the best.
Well, I guess I can't argue with a bunch of geeks who pretend to be pilots...
...and anyway, the Alienware is definitely not the fastest. Voodoo has an exceedingly fast, excessively (yet safely) overclocked GPU and CPU that blew the Aurora away in most benchmarks.
Somebody'll brief Mr Ives stipulating that the product has to do A, B & C. Mr Ives' job is to bring the bigwigs ideas to life, and to do so in such a way that it appeals to the target market.
It's one thing to be given a blank canvas, but it's another thing entirely to have to design these things with so many existing constraints and still deliver the goods time after time.
Don't blame Mr Ives for the iMac's lack of second processor or non-updateable graphics card.
Originally posted by philbot
I agree the iMac wil always be and AIO design - that's the big thing about the iMac.
If the average consumer bought a computer that didn't at least come with a monitor, they'd be so ticked off. (I think that's the reason for the cube's demise).
besides, if they offered it to the mac faithful without a monitor they'd lose out on an important revenue stream. the faithful will buy anything with an apple logo on it.
Originally posted by Aurora
Thats why iam getting an Aurora, because Mac ownership when you like to game is iffy at best. Thats why the wife gets the Quicksilver 1.4 and me the new Aurora.
You sound like the type that has a coffee can sized tail pipe and clear tail lights on their civic.
I far prefer an iMac 2 over an gamer box like those from Alienware. Apple purposely makes machines aimed at a different market than the uber gamer geek. Alienware purposely makes machines not aimed at the ergonomics mongering uber interface geek.
Maturity helps people realize that not everyone is like one?s self.
Please pass the perspective; I've had enough of these insular proclamations from armchair board members.
Originally posted by johnq
Most people that get Macs that are upgradeable - don't. We can assume a similar percentage of PC users that give a rats ass about upgradability. Sure, it might be a buzzword on their checklist at purchase time but it isn't an actual issue.
that sounds exactly like an "issue" to me.
Originally posted by applenut
that sounds exactly like an "issue" to me.
The perceived/real lack of upgradability is an issue to Apple's sales, yes. Just as people "thought" the iMac "needed" a floppy drive. The idea is enough to keep people away, right or wrong.
I just meant that upgradability is rarely an actual issue with consumers post-sale.
Serious gamers? Sure, they need it. But the vast majority of users rarely get beyond Excel and Solitaire. Expandability is the 4 Wheel Drive of computers. People want it and seldom utilize it.
Originally posted by Aurora
I disagree, they got there by not offering what the consumer wanted,sure there are people that are clueless but there are plenty of folks who do a little research before making a big purchase such as a computer. Imac was a 1 size fits all approach and it just doesnt work anymore with people doing so many different things with their machines. I actually love Mac but when i see Apple making such bad choices it just kills me as a long time user. If Jobs has to have a all in one fine but they need a consumer tower. PowerMac isnt a consumer tower.
I don't think Aurora is a troll. Lots of folks love the OS and don't like the "proprietary" aspect of Apple. The fact that MS is just as if not more proprietary rarely hits the average consumer and gamer where they notice it. The iPod is making this more obvious as Appleware gets to the majority of consumers.
I think that there is no problem with AIO's, I like the idea...it was the idea behind the 1st Mac and it still is a great idea, if done well. I would just like to see Apple do the same thing to its AIO's that it did to the iPod. Make it a standard for others to EASILY make accessories for.
If they could hit the sweetspot of $999 (while the eMac) works toward $499) BUT made upgrades as easy as docking an iPod or PDA, then they might get plenty of upgrades/cycle vs. the slower new computer/cycle. What I mean is that I would love the iMac to have a similar ability as the Cube for push out the old, push in the new upgradeablity....without haveing to turn the thing upside-down. A healthy variety of cpu and gpu and laptop-like (though bigger and cheaper) drive "modules" that are as complicated as changing Atari cartridges is the way to go.
Simple, reasonably priced upgrade modules is a very "consumer" thing to do. Maybe there are fewer folks who buy a new iMac every 2 years, but they will pay for new cpus, gpus, etc. every year. Less money but spread over a more consistent period of time. This gives Apple stores a more legitimater reason for being close by since it would be so easy to stop in more often. "Hey, maybe I'll get a new gpu module while I get that Belkin FM tuner for my iPod." It isn't making the iMac "cheaper" just making it a safer purchase for those worried about upgrades or being "stuck" with something beautiful, but slow after 3 months.
The digital hub needs to be an EASY decision for the mass market. Apple could do it if the business model allows for it. As Apple becomes more Sony-like via the iPod, then it may need to shift its business model with computers that direction too.
It was an amazing design when it came out and still is. The primary problems with is was that Moto did not keep up with their road map on speed increases, leading Apple wo work with IBM for TWO YEARS to bring the G5 to the PM last year. That G5 chip was a 130nm chip and IBM's road map was to move to the 90nm processor last December, which would have made the G5 iMac available around last April. If you want to raise hell about the performance of the iMac aim it at Moto - the ball was in their court.
AIO a problem? Look at all the notebook sales - all of them are AIOs and have the same limited upgrading as the iMac. Since I have had no problems with the two PBs I have owned - both "lowly" G4s - I have no problem with the limited upgradability of an G5 iMac. TOMORROW I will simply get on the Apple Store and spec a BTO order, maximizing everything buy memory (third party there) and treat it like a notebook that stays on the desk. I definitely WANT an AIO for home as I am bloody tired of all the boxes and wires associated with the old Dull tower that has handled internet/email duties for the last few years.
G5 iMac a single G5 only? Yup. THe PM has moved to the dual processor platform and the iMac will be the single G5 processor format. If you want dual G5s you need to use the PM as it has the space for memory upgrades, which has to be 2 chips for each increment. No was is Apple going to include that much memory expansion capacity into the iMac.
PM mini? Might be possible when there is an abundance of G5 chips to put into it. There is simply not enough chips coming out of IBM's plant to add this at the current time and the iMac line is more important for them at this time.
Games more important to you? Then buy something that is specifically designed/optimized for games. That is a stand alone market, is well served and is designed for people who don't really care about anything else. If you want a stable, well balanced platform then the OS X/Unix approach is a very wise approach to take.
Worried about Apple's lowly 3% market share? Don't. Apple could have major increases in computer sales and still stay at that level, or drop. The problem is that there are too many options for consumers that don't understand. Exceptionally cheap boxes from Wal-Mart to Dull on-line to a commission salesman that tells an uninformed customer not to buy a Mac because they are too expensive and there is no software for it. The issue that counts is that Apple is profitable and is continually increasing the number of computers sold when compared to the dark years of Moto.
The new G5 iMac design. This is the best kept secret Apple has been able to pull off for a long time. I'll keep checking all day for a picture on the boards, but I think Apple might actually be able to keep it under raps until the Keynote. My only problem is deciding if I'm going to stay awake to catch it the minute it is on Apple's web site, of just get up early. That much secrecy indicates, to me, that the new design is going to be a mind blower.
"One more thing." I would love to see a new iBook range with DVI and a wide screen. Been waiting on that for a notebook for my wife. If it isn't announced then she is going to have to settle for the 12",
Today is the last day for fun guessing. The boards are really going to change tomorrow!
Originally posted by kenaustus
AIO a problem? Look at all the notebook sales - all of them are AIOs and have the same limited upgrading as the iMac. Since I have had no problems with the two PBs I have owned - both "lowly" G4s - I have no problem with the limited upgradability of an G5 iMac.
AIO is a problem when it is tied to your desk. Laptops are uniquely suited to the AIO arena in that they are PORTABLE which the iMac is NOT. Make the iMac portable or give it some other wow factor and it'll sell, otherwise it is simply a non-upgradeable tower w/ an expensive LCD glued to it.
I think that even a semi upgradeable iMac would help people like me convince our wives it was worth the $1800 (or more) price tag.
Originally posted by kenaustus
A few points on the FP iMac.
-Snip-
Worried about Apple's lowly 3% market share? Don't. Apple could have major increases in computer sales and still stay at that level, or drop. The problem is that there are too many options for consumers that don't understand. Exceptionally cheap boxes from Wal-Mart to Dull on-line to a commission salesman that tells an uninformed customer not to buy a Mac because they are too expensive and there is no software for it. The issue that counts is that Apple is profitable and is continually increasing the number of computers sold when compared to the dark years of Moto.
-snip-
I used to have that attitude, until Adobe canceled FrameMaker for the Mac due to Apple's small market share. FrameMaker is mission critical for me, and is the only reason I still have classic on my Mac. Running an old version of FrameMaker in classic is not going to be viable forever. And, since I cannot find an alternative program, I am stuck in a situation where it looks like I am going to be forced to switch over to PC's for work (I might build them for gaming, but I never wanted to have to work on a PC again).
So Apple's small market share is something to worry about. I've been wondering what would happen to Apple if Adobe dropped support for all Mac products and offered a dirt cheap side-grade to the PC versions of their software (say $25 -$50). It sounds crazy at first, but they would save a lot of money by laying off all of the Mac support staff and programers, and they might not lose many sales (most of the pros I know would follow photoshop over to the PC if they had to).
It probably won't happen, but it is a scary thought. I would be a lot happier if Apple would reverse the downward spiral and start increasing market share every year. To do that Apple is going to have to come out with much better consumer offerings. The minimum processor and graphics card in the upcoming iMac should be the 2GHz G5 and a Radeon 9600XT. The Top of the line should have a 2.5GHz G5 and a Radeon 9800XT (or the Nvidia equivalents).
The iMac doesn't need expandability, it just needs to start with a better processor and graphics card.
Originally posted by dfiler
You sound like the type that has a coffee can sized tail pipe and clear tail lights on their civic.
I far prefer an iMac 2 over an gamer box like those from Alienware. Apple purposely makes machines aimed at a different market than the uber gamer geek. Alienware purposely makes machines not aimed at the ergonomics mongering uber interface geek.
Maturity helps people realize that not everyone is like one?s self.
Please pass the perspective; I've had enough of these insular proclamations from armchair board members.
Actually i drive a MGB but you might not be old enough to know what that is. Imac's are fine for a lot of folks but suck for the younger crowd who like to game but then again you might be to old to remember games....without a video upgrade path it just doesnt cut it.
Originally posted by Res
I used to have that attitude, until Adobe canceled FrameMaker for the Mac due to Apple's small market share.
Adobe canceling any Mac product doesn't have much if anything to do about market share.
First post here, love the forum and hope to contibute in the future.
I recently switched from PC's and absolutely fell in luv with the AIO iMac.. Breaks my heart to see that so many think it's a not a powerful machine. I, on the other hand, liked mine so much I decided to go get me the 12" PB 133 to roam around with.
I had read all the comments about speed issues but would have to disagree with your assessmant. This 1.25 20" iMac does everything I need it to do and I don't notice any real difference from my old 2.4 ghz pc box. Too many of us here are try to forget that we not the "average" computer user/purchaser. Also, the vast majority of don't have the power need for Video or memory/processor intensive games. Hell, Solitaire is the most popular game for the over 30 set.. haha
Anyway, despite marketshare, I'm certain a whole lotta pc makers would love to trade places with Apple and all the cash sticking out of it's pockets.
Originally posted by mivaldes
Just curious what you guys think will happen to the old iMacs when the new one is debuted. Some of our local CompUSA's have some floating around. What does Apple typically do with these?
There are hardly any left to even worry about. They will be sold for pennies.
Originally posted by WishBone
Hi Peeps,
First post here, love the forum and hope to contibute in the future.
I recently switched from PC's and absolutely fell in luv with the AIO iMac.. Breaks my heart to see that so many think it's a not a powerful machine. I, on the other hand, liked mine so much I decided to go get me the 12" PB 133 to roam around with.
I had read all the comments about speed issues but would have to disagree with your assessmant. This 1.25 20" iMac does everything I need it to do and I don't notice any real difference from my old 2.4 ghz pc box. Too many of us here are try to forget that we not the "average" computer user/purchaser. Also, the vast majority of don't have the power need for Video or memory/processor intensive games. Hell, Solitaire is the most popular game for the over 30 set.. haha
Anyway, despite marketshare, I'm certain a whole lotta pc makers would love to trade places with Apple and all the cash sticking out of it's pockets.
Great post sir, you speak wisely.