[quote] The iMac is pretty good bang for the buck.
<hr></blockquote>
Guess it is if money is no object and you don't look beyond an Apple sales leaflet.
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. The entry level Mac stinks after 13 months. It should be cheaper at least.
Anyhow, given that Apple just upgraded virtually everything in the last month or so...perhaps the fall arrival of the 970(?) will shake things up value wise.
[[[I think a lot of them have some resentment that their investments become so worthless so quickly.]]]
What does this mean? I have 5 people that are still using the iMac Special Editions, several people on 400MHz. G4's a buddy with a B&W G3 and a 500MHz G4.. the lis goes on... Hell, I'm using a lowly iBook SE/DVD-466 and it's just fine! Everyone that I know that owns a PC of some sort say that the system is good enough for their needs (i.e., most people) the only difference is the people with the Wintel systems are calling me up all the time to help them fix whatever went wrong with their systems. Oh, and the PC people complain a lot more about their systems too..
Again, I think you're confusing what *most* people are using their computer for with what *you* and I need a system for..
[[[before you try to be a smart ass it would help if you actually backed yourself up.]]]
Smart ass? *you* were the one who made the sweeping generality, you dolt. Here, let me quote you again...
[[[1.) All "consumer" PCs have an AGP slot]]]
Yep, I thought that's what you said. Now you are trying to cherry-pick. Typical.
[[[only their absolute CHEAPEST systems (300 series) dont have AGP slots but have integrated graphics these are sub 1000 dollar machines 449 and 549 with CRT and 849 and 1049 with 15 inch LCD]]]
OK, so, you've proved your initial statement wrong a bunch of times. I suppose that we are in agreement that NOT ALL CONSUMER PCs have upgradable graphics.
Here, let's look at those Gateway configs a little closer shall we?
[[[$1299 Gateway 700S WITH AGP (15 inch LCD included)
$1499 Gateway 500X WITH AGP (17 inch LCD included)]]]
$1299 for the 700s? I got a base price of:
As for the monitors... I'm betting that this is the monitor that the 700s comes with:
Don't even know if a 15" or 17" digital option is available... If it is then it would be more money. There is an 18" option available.. you gotta add $100 more bucks.
Oh, but wait, there's one other thing.. It's likely that you'll need support on the graphics card for digital. If the base system doesn't come with a digital out then what good is having a digital monitor? Again.. add more $$$. About 100 bucks.
Sub Totalt$2,097.99\ty Hot Keys\t
Coupon Savingst$0.00\t\t
(optional) Enter to Est. Tax¹tTBD\t\t
Est.Shipping & Handling² : \t$104.00\t\t\ty Hot Keys\t
Totalt$2,201.99\t
And that's not even including tax... Add about $160 on average for that.. could be much more depending on where you live.
Still the first price you listed is a far cry from $1499.00. Roughly $700 minimum difference.
The 700s is likely to follow the same course.
To top it off, you are not comparing an AIO system. Don't you think that the Profile would be a better comparison?
It's an old comparison, but I'd say that the *new* iMacs would still come out ahead in the end.
You're the one who is falling for the BS they're feeding you, not me.
And they aren't selling either, which was my point. Glad you used Gateway in your example; after all, they are doing so well and their configs are simply *flying off the shelves*...
--
Ed M.
[edit by Amorph: shortened links to restore board formatting.]
[[[Desktops for the consumer MUST be affordable and upgradable/expandable, that is what defines them.]]]
Would you say the same for Refrigerators, Microwaves, TVs, Stereo equipment... the list goes on...
Let me give you a hint, and think about it really hard... Most people aren't interested in what a few or even all of the people on this board want. Most of the people that go buy a PC simply want it to work and do what it is they need them to do. Period. They only start to *want* more when the sales people start spewing technobabble at them convincing them that they *need* something extra that they really don't. To top that off those machines run Windows, so forget it.
<strong>[[[Desktops for the consumer MUST be affordable and upgradable/expandable, that is what defines them.]]]
Would you say the same for Refrigerators, Microwaves, TVs, Stereo equipment... the list goes on...
Let me give you a hint, and think about it really hard... Most people aren't interested in what a few or even all of the people on this board want. Most of the people that go buy a PC simply want it to work and do what it is they need them to do. Period. They only start to *want* more when the sales people start spewing technobabble at them convincing them that they *need* something extra that they really don't. To top that off those machines run Windows, so forget it.
--
Ed M.</strong><hr></blockquote>
if the imac is so perfect for its intended market then how come apple isn't gaining market share by the truckload from people who see the imac as the computer that suits their needs? what is it about the imac that prevents it from being an automatic choice?
along the same lines, if the emac is the product of talking to educators and producing a machine based on the features they wanted then how come apple's education market share isn't soaring?
if people are not buying them in sufficient droves then there has to be some issue with them
[quote] if the imac is so perfect for its intended market then how come apple isn't gaining market share by the truckload from people who see the imac as the computer that suits their needs? what is it about the imac that prevents it from being an automatic choice?
along the same lines, if the emac is the product of talking to educators and producing a machine based on the features they wanted then how come apple's education market share isn't soaring?
if people are not buying them in sufficient droves then there has to be some issue with them
<strong>if people are not buying them in sufficient droves then there has to be some issue with them</strong><hr></blockquote>
the issue is that they are not wintel.
most of the people who buy a computer will ask a relative what he or she should buy. since there are a lot more windows users that's why windows market share is still growing.
because apple users are higher educated, there for do more in their lives then reproduce to fill their boring lives with the surogate joy and pleasure of having children, there for they have less relatives with stupid questions about computers.
so apple gains marketshare because we don't have sex to reproduce but for the joy of it.
My toaster won't be asked to run new software or speak to new devices next year or in twenty years, neither will my fridge, stove, even TV/Radio signals were relatively standard for about 50 years. When I buy new toast, frozen beans, or VHS tapes, none of them are incompatible with my hardware. In fact, my hardware runs those new applications just as well as it did 10 months ago or ten years ago. When I find a new application, like pop-tarts or frozen waffles, my hardware deals with them just fine. What happens when new software makes an appearance? What's supported, what's left behind?
My computer will likely be put to that task within months. A computer is NOT an appliance. To be an appliance it would have to be either VERY CHEAP, as in basically disposable, or have an extremely long useable life for a given function, measured closer to decades than years.
VCR/TV/Stereo have all given 10+ years of service with only minor additions.
Stove, washer, dryer, fridge, deep freezer, dishwasher, microwave -- have all given well over 10 years of service in my house, most of them closer to 20 a few over 25. Ain't no thousand dollars you spend on a computer going to be still in use in 20 years. A few corded phones in the basement, garage, etc etc are also probably twenty years old and they still work like a charm, even my stupid blender is about 20 years old, and it still works perfectly despite having been seriously abused.
The only things that fail from time to time these days are cordless phones and the toaster, but these things are cheap cheap cheap.
A computer IS NOT like any appliance until it delivers the (supported) service life of those machines, or reaches a disposable price point like the less reliable of homme appliances/doo-dads.
Let me remind you that less than 1% of all computers sold happens to be an iMac. Over 70% of systems sold are affordable towers? You think those windows box makers might be on to something? Some estimates put white box mom and pop builders at up to 30% of the desktop market, I know from experience that these people see a good chunk of their business from gamers. Frivolous use perhaps, but far from insignificant. Expansion/upgradeability and affordability DEFINE the home desktop market. Apple might try to redefine it, but so far people aren't buying, nor should they. What Apple does borders on contempt for the customer, and so long as they keep at it, the more their market-share will continue to shrink.
You have the option of giving people what they want or going home. Can't do it because of cost, canibalization (a myth BTW), a weak market, corporate idiology... whatever, these are just excuses that make no difference to the growing percentage of people buuying the other guy's computer.
I see this thread has gotten hijacked by the "way over-priced" and "cheap windoze imitation" group. <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[oyvey]" /> This thread is about "add excitement design wise". Tell me how exciting design wise it would be to have 2Ghz cpus or AGP/PCI slot for expansion?
I'd like to see no wires - keyboard, mouse, speakers, cables. Somehow have integrated speakers that sound awesome. A longer arm - really be able to push the base aside, but still have a floating monitor. I like to be able to write and read without the monitor and keyboard being in the way.
BTW - A heated debate does not need to use "wise ass" and "naive". Just use the Smilies to get your point across.
Yeeesh... Upgrading. Not many people are doing it anymore. It simply isn't worth the time, the trouble or expense for MOST people. Let's look at it again.
1. PCs continue to get cheaper (Mac or Wintel, makes no difference)
2. Memory increases. (Again, makes no difference Mac or PC)
3. For *MOST* people, the performance or ANY of the current PCs is good enough for a much longer period of time than it used to be. In short, people are upgrading LESS, whether it's to a completely new system or whether it's upgrading the guts.
We can upgrade the memory, that seems to be the biggest/easiest thing that provides noticeable results. The point is, after the memory upgrades, a person is more likely to buy a completely new computer before they consider tampering with the guts of the system. The point is that not many people other than *geeks* (PC enthusiasts/hobbiests or business) even bother with opening the case. MOST people could care less about the internals. Therefore, we should stop looking at it from a *geek* point of view or a salesperson's point of view. Look at it from someone's point of view that knows absolutely nothing about the hardware and simply wants a machine that performs their desired tasks. That said, it appears to come down to memory and maybe some additional peripherals that will be added later.
I don't know anyone who bothers to upgrade to a different monitor on a system that they bought in the last 2 years; as I stated before, I must be occupying the wrong circles. MOST people will upgrade their monitor when they get a new system even if they do, it will surely carry over to their next system. That doesn't leave us with much other than this "sketchy perception" that *upgradability* is important to future-proof a machine. If you think really hard, the costs of anything else that you might want to *uprgade* simply will NOT JUSTIFY the added costs. In other words, you keep pumping money into a system over time -- trying to stay *current* (again a preoccupation to keep up with the Jones's) and end up spending way too much in the long run.
I have firsthand experience with this. A cousin of mine did me one better. He saved EVERY receipt to EVERY component upgrade and peripheral upgrade he's ever did since the Intel 286. He has easily 11 husks of machines sitting in his basement. he finally came to the conclusion that the only way to go is with an OEM and stick with it for as long as you can and then upgrade to a completely new machine when the time comes. It would be interesting to see what those receipts totaled up to. The point was that he admitted that it simply wasn't worth it. This is a Wintel PC guy mind you... He is in the design field and mostly works in a CAD environment -- you would think he'd be clamoring for an ultra-fast machine. The one he has now doesn't make him any more productive than his last HP Kayak system at 800 MHz.
OK, so you upgrade the machine ... the next question is how much time will that buy you -- I mean*really* buy you? Probably not much more time; especially if you are a person that's hell-bent on "one-upping" the next guy for what ever reason. The simple fact is that for MOST people, the performance is well beyond the needs of everyday tasks, and 5 years out of a system should not be unheard of. In fact, we can see proof of this already -- the global PC slump... Ironically, Apple seems to be in a better position simply because there seems to be a pent-up demand for faster Macs... I could be wrong though. On the other hand, I'm not sure this demand exists in the Wintel space, so all these "Wintel is cheaper here for this: and "Wintel is cheaper there for that" will all be moot if 64-bit takes off in the desktop space anytime soon. There goes those forced upgrades again. I suspect we'll see it offered to Apple mainstream/home customers before Wintel customers... Just think, all those people who bought those 32-bit Wintel systems that year ;-) Time to upgrade! (again). The only rule you should follow is to purchase a system based on your current needs then perhaps go for the next model up.
The problem is a little more harsh in the Wintel world since Microsoft insist on forcing people to buy new equipment more often. What they normally do is stop supporting your current version of the OS so developers are forced to stop supporting it as well (Apple did this with OS X). The difference is that Microsoft does it more often. This is/was all based on the promise that the new one will be superior in the way of security, stability and performance blah blah blah , which as many people are finding out, isn't always the case. XP was supposed to be impenetrable. Hackers are having a field day with it -- it's vulnerable. The answer? Palladium/Longhorn.. That requires new hardware to accompany the OS -- new apps too. So much for truly future-proffing the Wintel PC, eh? More copies, more often, whether you need them or not.
The difference is that 1000 Canadian, about 650USD buys you a very capable wintel box complete with 17" CRT. 650 USD buys you exactly nothing from the good folks at Apple.
Expansion is VERY COST EFFECTIVE.
See price of firewire HDD, easily 100USD more than an ATA drive. Any cheap PC tower will easily take 3-4 internal HDD's. Same thing with internal opticals which are often less than half the ocst of external firewire verisons. Drives alone. Not mention what you do with an AIO when the display goes on the fritz. I have a 6 year old PC here that's still in use because I could change the display when the first one went bad. Yet another benefit of upgradability, and again EXTREMELY COST EFFECTIVE. very good 17" CRT's are VERY VERY CHEAP. It's worth it for drives and displays alone.
Once more, with feeling: Towers define the consumer market because tower cases are cheap and ubiquitous, the layouts are governed by standards (ATX, mini-ATX, etc.) and the slots and bays make BTO configurations easy for the manufacturer. That's it.
End-user expandability is hardly ever a consideration. The multimedia PCs Sony was trundling out for a while to compete with the iMac had every single PCI slot stuffed with something (Ethernet, sound, etc.) right out of the box. Do you think they'd have used a form that required the end user to remove functionality to gain expansion if they'd meant the expansion for the end user? To the contrary, most cheap PCs aren't even fully tested for compatibility with the cards that they can be BTO'd with, because that would be overhead, and you can't have overhead in a price-driven commodity market.
"Consumer" PCs are basically just corporate destops with a little more cutesy software destabilizing the system. To the extent that any thought has been given to the industrial design, it's been for the convenience of IT staff, who like being able to swap things in and out as much as possible - but even then, they never thought to make cases easy to open until Apple started doing it. Industrial design is simply not a consideration in the PC world, as a rule. I would not be surprised to find out that the eMac and the iMac were the only consumer machines on the market where the end user was the primary consideration during design.
As for the software argument: It's true that software obsoletes hardware at a far greater rate than, say, baked beans obsolete ovens. It's also true that despite that, consumers use computers as appliances: They might do one round of shopping for software, but after that they'll use what came with the machine. When that's not enough anymore, they'll replace the whole thing. Unless there's a tech-savvy person to intercept them, they might start out with the intention of merely upgrading, until they realize that for not really that much more money they could upgrade everything. (Even then, speaking as one of the people who get tapped for advice, interception is rarely enough to head off this behavior. People like new things.)
Meanwhile, thanks to my early adoption of OS X, my Cube has gotten faster and more capable every year that I've owned it. My oven has not. For that matter, I've barely noticed the jump from an 800Mhz PIII running NT 4 to a 1.9GHz P4 running Windows 2K Pro (except that 2K is even flakier) because of the continually worsening performance of Windows, and the stagnation of the software on the platform.
Name one Wintel AIO that's sold well? They all suck, yes, I must admit, but people buy towers/desktops for a reason --price/expansion/upgradability is it. That may not be why towers get built, but that's why they get bought!
You yourself bought a cube, not an iMac. In a year or two, when fast G4 upgrades are less than 300USD you'll get a nice little boost for that machine without breaking the bank. In internal HDD upgrade is a simple matter and it won't void your warrantee either. If anything goes wrong with your display, a solution is as easy as a trip to the local Electromics r'us'oMart. How often have you pined for a pizza box? You know it's a better solution and that it's a better solution for more people than the AIO.
Granted, most I/O is built into the Mobo these days (at least on a mac) but having the ability to drop in a connector for faster USB/firewire isn't some exotic expansion demand, it's pretty basic. And again the cards to do it are dirt cheap. USB2.0 and soon firewire800 are 50 bucks away if you own a PM or a PC. Not so easy to fix that problem if you have one of Apple's hermetically sealed units.
Even a cardbus slot would do just to keep a little I/O insurance, but Apple likes to remove those wherever possible too!
Let's try to get this thread back to it's original premise of the next design direction you'd like to see for the iMac. Can we agree that the iMac is an AIO. Always has been and always will be. That's part of what makes it an iMac. This talk of adding expandability and tower design, bumping specs and dropping price have been debated ad nauseum.
As far as the next design direction for the iMacs I agree with previous posts to add ports to the front. Preferably behind a door of some kind to maintain the uncluttered look. I also like the idea of a screen that can rotate from horizontal aspect to vertical. Very cool idea. Other than that the iMac is near perfect as a design. As far as colors go, I wonder if Apple will incorporate their newly acquired patent for changing colors in a device into future iMacs. Imagine the white base changing to pulsing colors when you play something from your iTunes library. Or pulsing a cool blue while sleeping. Hmmm...
I kinda think the Powerbook 17 incher is the next evolution of the imac2.
But I'd rather it was the Cube.
Lemon Bon Bon
Hey, 'elo'. 'You shine a little love on my life...' or if we're talking iMac 2 specs 'Horace Wimp'. 'Make a stand and be a man.' Fat chance consumer desktop Apple, eh?
The design talk is Boring, and it doesn't sell machines either. There is no need for front facing ports, the iMac is already small enough, perhaps side facing, but not front, it looks wrong on the front. The tray loader stays as it's a better solution. Larger screens basically mean that you don't need a pivoting screen anymore, especially when the imac gets a 20" screen. Speakers should move to the display, by using FP speakers on either side, thereby making the display seem even wider.
The base should grow a touch, if Apple makes a 20" version. The guts need to be rearranged so that all available RAM slots are user accessible and the airport card is added in the same way as the eMac. Internally the board should be reworked to accomodate a PPC daughtercard and a cube-size AGP card. Outwardly a MINIMUM of two independent FW800 ports to replace PCI. NO funky doors!
What could be done is to place one FW800 port internally so that it connects through the base. Optionally, Apple could sell an A/V base that screws onto the bottom of the machine providing A/V in-out, a digital decoder, optical outs, spdiff and the like, space for an additional 3.5" HDD, and a digital TV tuner to create a PVR section. Using iCal, you load/share different regional cable listings. YOu watch TV on your iMac, record your favorite shows and burn a DVD later.
[[[See price of firewire HDD, easily 100USD more than an ATA drive. Any cheap PC tower will easily take 3-4 internal HDD's. Same thing with internal opticals which are often less than half the ocst of external firewire verisons. ]]]
What part didn't you understand, Matsu. MOST people aren't opening the innards of their systems not to mention upgrading these things anyway. Even if they were, options are available. They'll likely opts for external alternatives first, if at all. And the selling points are better for external FireWire.. easier portability from machine to machine (or where ever), easier connectivity (almost no configuration), hot-swappable... It's about tradeoffs. Cant do that with internal units... and that's still not the point. Only geeks and enthusiasts are delving into the guts or paying someone to do so.
[[[Not mention what you do with an AIO when the display goes on the fritz. I have a 6 year old PC here that's still in use because I could change the display when the first one went bad. Yet another benefit of upgradability, and again EXTREMELY COST EFFECTIVE.]]]
You can't add an external monitor to the iMac? You better look again.
[[[It's worth it for drives and displays alone.]]]
No it isn't. That's from *your* perspective, not mine and not most people's. I upgrade people's PCs on the side... I can't even take their money because I feel bad. MY Mac people know what their options are and they are completely satisfied. A for chancing the drives in an iMac... I'll make you a bet that it's easier on the older iMac Graphite Special Editions then it is on my cousins shiny new Compaq.
I've never worked on a CRT iMac before, the whole job was done in roughly 39 minutes... That's including OS 9. wapped in a nice 7200 rpm 80 Gig Seagate. It was cake! I can do it again in under half an hour with OS install. That's opening the case removing the drive placing in the new drive and closing it up.
The point is, Apple made the drives EXTREMELY easy to get at on the CRT iMac Special Editions. Same goes for the CMOS battery (which can be unplugged; unlike the Compaq which is soldered on to the mobo) as well as the optical drive. Furthermore, I'm betting that the drives are just as easy to get at on the new iMacs. Of course if you've never worked on one, you wouldn't know this. So, you can erase *drives* from your argument. It doesn't hold whether they are external or internal, they can be upgraded *if* you want to. Period. Monitors.. well if your main one goes, you can always use the VGA out, no?
[[[I would not be surprised to find out that the eMac and the iMac were the only consumer machines on the market where the end user was the primary consideration during design. ]]]
Contrary to popular belief, the CRT iMacs (the Special Editions anyway) were absolute CAKE to work on to install a hard drive. I'm not kidding, but why bother unless the main one smokes. Most people would like to perform the upgrade themselves, which is hardly the case in the Wintel world. I know because I do it for people because they have no desire to delve into the box. It's much easire to add an external FW or USB component. Anyway, *you* seem to get it. Other's on this board do not. And unless they've actually worked on the iMacs then they really have no room talking.
[[[As for the software argument: It's true that software obsoletes hardware at a far greater rate than, say, baked beans obsolete ovens. It's also true that despite that, consumers use computers as appliances: They might do one round of shopping for software, but after that they'll use what came with the machine. When that's not enough anymore, they'll replace the whole thing.]]]
VGA-out with a perfectly non-functional display just sitting there taking up space, that's really elegant!
No you cannot erase drives from the equation, why do you insist on citing the worst PC examples. All the cases I've seen are extremely easy to get at. People buy dirt cheap ATA drives and drop 'em in, nothing could be simpler.
I think it's you who doesn't understand. less than 1% of all computers sold are an iMac, obviously more people follow a trend not represented by your arguments. You're just wrong, it's that simple, the market has voted against you, has been doing so for quite some time in fact.
Comments
But what's the point?
He said it all in a nutshell. Particularly about the Cube.
Are you LISTENING Apple!?
Lemon Bon Bon :cool:
I think I may paste the Cube comment into the feedback at Apple...maybe they can use it to buy themselves a clue for their desktop strategy.
<hr></blockquote>
Guess it is if money is no object and you don't look beyond an Apple sales leaflet.
Lemon Bon Bon
PS. The entry level Mac stinks after 13 months. It should be cheaper at least.
Anyhow, given that Apple just upgraded virtually everything in the last month or so...perhaps the fall arrival of the 970(?) will shake things up value wise.
$1799. 1GHz iMac
17" LCD (included)
$500. MBox (USB)
------
$2300.
$1499. 1GHz PowerMac
$699. 17" LCD
$500. MBox (USB)
------
$2700.
$1499. 1GHz PowerMac
$699. 17" LCD
$800. Digi 001 (PCI card)
------
$3000.
What does this mean? I have 5 people that are still using the iMac Special Editions, several people on 400MHz. G4's a buddy with a B&W G3 and a 500MHz G4.. the lis goes on... Hell, I'm using a lowly iBook SE/DVD-466 and it's just fine! Everyone that I know that owns a PC of some sort say that the system is good enough for their needs (i.e., most people) the only difference is the people with the Wintel systems are calling me up all the time to help them fix whatever went wrong with their systems. Oh, and the PC people complain a lot more about their systems too..
Again, I think you're confusing what *most* people are using their computer for with what *you* and I need a system for..
[[[before you try to be a smart ass it would help if you actually backed yourself up.]]]
Smart ass? *you* were the one who made the sweeping generality, you dolt. Here, let me quote you again...
[[[1.) All "consumer" PCs have an AGP slot]]]
Yep, I thought that's what you said. Now you are trying to cherry-pick. Typical.
[[[only their absolute CHEAPEST systems (300 series) dont have AGP slots but have integrated graphics these are sub 1000 dollar machines 449 and 549 with CRT and 849 and 1049 with 15 inch LCD]]]
OK, so, you've proved your initial statement wrong a bunch of times. I suppose that we are in agreement that NOT ALL CONSUMER PCs have upgradable graphics.
Here, let's look at those Gateway configs a little closer shall we?
[[[$1299 Gateway 700S WITH AGP (15 inch LCD included)
$1499 Gateway 500X WITH AGP (17 inch LCD included)]]]
$1299 for the 700s? I got a base price of:
As for the monitors... I'm betting that this is the monitor that the 700s comes with:
<a href="http://accessories.gateway.com/AccessoryStore/Hardware_316441/Monitors+_A1_+Video_316684/Monitors_316687/LCD+Monitors_316694/1528108_ProdDetail.htm"; target="_blank">Gatelway LCD</a>
Oh, and it's ANALOG.
As for the 500x system...
No superdrive with that config... Add $270 bucks to that price.
Here is the 17" monitor...
<a href="http://accessories.gateway.com/AccessoryStore/Hardware_316441/Monitors+_A1_+Video_316684/Monitors_316687/LCD+Monitors_316694/1528109_ProdDetail.htm"; target="_blank">Another Gateway LCD</a>
Again.. ANALOG.
Don't even know if a 15" or 17" digital option is available... If it is then it would be more money. There is an 18" option available.. you gotta add $100 more bucks.
Oh, but wait, there's one other thing.. It's likely that you'll need support on the graphics card for digital. If the base system doesn't come with a digital out then what good is having a digital monitor? Again.. add more $$$. About 100 bucks.
Sub Total
Coupon Savings
(optional) Enter to Est. Tax¹
Est.Shipping & Handling² : \t$104.00\t\t\ty Hot Keys\t
Total
And that's not even including tax... Add about $160 on average for that.. could be much more depending on where you live.
Still the first price you listed is a far cry from $1499.00. Roughly $700 minimum difference.
The 700s is likely to follow the same course.
To top it off, you are not comparing an AIO system. Don't you think that the Profile would be a better comparison?
It's an old comparison, but I'd say that the *new* iMacs would still come out ahead in the end.
<a href="http://www.macobserver.com/shootouts/special_shootouts/2002/imac_vs_gateway.html"; target="_blank">iMac vs. Gateway on MacObserver.com</a>
[[[dont be naive ]]]
You're the one who is falling for the BS they're feeding you, not me.
And they aren't selling either, which was my point. Glad you used Gateway in your example; after all, they are doing so well and their configs are simply *flying off the shelves*...
--
Ed M.
[edit by Amorph: shortened links to restore board formatting.]
[ 02-09-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
Would you say the same for Refrigerators, Microwaves, TVs, Stereo equipment... the list goes on...
Let me give you a hint, and think about it really hard... Most people aren't interested in what a few or even all of the people on this board want. Most of the people that go buy a PC simply want it to work and do what it is they need them to do. Period. They only start to *want* more when the sales people start spewing technobabble at them convincing them that they *need* something extra that they really don't. To top that off those machines run Windows, so forget it.
--
Ed M.
<strong>[[[Desktops for the consumer MUST be affordable and upgradable/expandable, that is what defines them.]]]
Would you say the same for Refrigerators, Microwaves, TVs, Stereo equipment... the list goes on...
Let me give you a hint, and think about it really hard... Most people aren't interested in what a few or even all of the people on this board want. Most of the people that go buy a PC simply want it to work and do what it is they need them to do. Period. They only start to *want* more when the sales people start spewing technobabble at them convincing them that they *need* something extra that they really don't. To top that off those machines run Windows, so forget it.
--
Ed M.</strong><hr></blockquote>
if the imac is so perfect for its intended market then how come apple isn't gaining market share by the truckload from people who see the imac as the computer that suits their needs? what is it about the imac that prevents it from being an automatic choice?
along the same lines, if the emac is the product of talking to educators and producing a machine based on the features they wanted then how come apple's education market share isn't soaring?
if people are not buying them in sufficient droves then there has to be some issue with them
along the same lines, if the emac is the product of talking to educators and producing a machine based on the features they wanted then how come apple's education market share isn't soaring?
if people are not buying them in sufficient droves then there has to be some issue with them
<hr></blockquote>
Gee, maybe you've hit onto something there.
That's a whole can of worms, eh?
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>if people are not buying them in sufficient droves then there has to be some issue with them</strong><hr></blockquote>
the issue is that they are not wintel.
most of the people who buy a computer will ask a relative what he or she should buy. since there are a lot more windows users that's why windows market share is still growing.
because apple users are higher educated, there for do more in their lives then reproduce to fill their boring lives with the surogate joy and pleasure of having children, there for they have less relatives with stupid questions about computers.
so apple gains marketshare because we don't have sex to reproduce but for the joy of it.
My toaster won't be asked to run new software or speak to new devices next year or in twenty years, neither will my fridge, stove, even TV/Radio signals were relatively standard for about 50 years. When I buy new toast, frozen beans, or VHS tapes, none of them are incompatible with my hardware. In fact, my hardware runs those new applications just as well as it did 10 months ago or ten years ago. When I find a new application, like pop-tarts or frozen waffles, my hardware deals with them just fine. What happens when new software makes an appearance? What's supported, what's left behind?
My computer will likely be put to that task within months. A computer is NOT an appliance. To be an appliance it would have to be either VERY CHEAP, as in basically disposable, or have an extremely long useable life for a given function, measured closer to decades than years.
VCR/TV/Stereo have all given 10+ years of service with only minor additions.
Stove, washer, dryer, fridge, deep freezer, dishwasher, microwave -- have all given well over 10 years of service in my house, most of them closer to 20 a few over 25. Ain't no thousand dollars you spend on a computer going to be still in use in 20 years. A few corded phones in the basement, garage, etc etc are also probably twenty years old and they still work like a charm, even my stupid blender is about 20 years old, and it still works perfectly despite having been seriously abused.
The only things that fail from time to time these days are cordless phones and the toaster, but these things are cheap cheap cheap.
A computer IS NOT like any appliance until it delivers the (supported) service life of those machines, or reaches a disposable price point like the less reliable of homme appliances/doo-dads.
Let me remind you that less than 1% of all computers sold happens to be an iMac. Over 70% of systems sold are affordable towers? You think those windows box makers might be on to something? Some estimates put white box mom and pop builders at up to 30% of the desktop market, I know from experience that these people see a good chunk of their business from gamers. Frivolous use perhaps, but far from insignificant. Expansion/upgradeability and affordability DEFINE the home desktop market. Apple might try to redefine it, but so far people aren't buying, nor should they. What Apple does borders on contempt for the customer, and so long as they keep at it, the more their market-share will continue to shrink.
You have the option of giving people what they want or going home. Can't do it because of cost, canibalization (a myth BTW), a weak market, corporate idiology... whatever, these are just excuses that make no difference to the growing percentage of people buuying the other guy's computer.
I'd like to see no wires - keyboard, mouse, speakers, cables. Somehow have integrated speakers that sound awesome. A longer arm - really be able to push the base aside, but still have a floating monitor. I like to be able to write and read without the monitor and keyboard being in the way.
BTW - A heated debate does not need to use "wise ass" and "naive". Just use the Smilies to get your point across.
1. PCs continue to get cheaper (Mac or Wintel, makes no difference)
2. Memory increases. (Again, makes no difference Mac or PC)
3. For *MOST* people, the performance or ANY of the current PCs is good enough for a much longer period of time than it used to be. In short, people are upgrading LESS, whether it's to a completely new system or whether it's upgrading the guts.
We can upgrade the memory, that seems to be the biggest/easiest thing that provides noticeable results. The point is, after the memory upgrades, a person is more likely to buy a completely new computer before they consider tampering with the guts of the system. The point is that not many people other than *geeks* (PC enthusiasts/hobbiests or business) even bother with opening the case. MOST people could care less about the internals. Therefore, we should stop looking at it from a *geek* point of view or a salesperson's point of view. Look at it from someone's point of view that knows absolutely nothing about the hardware and simply wants a machine that performs their desired tasks. That said, it appears to come down to memory and maybe some additional peripherals that will be added later.
I don't know anyone who bothers to upgrade to a different monitor on a system that they bought in the last 2 years; as I stated before, I must be occupying the wrong circles. MOST people will upgrade their monitor when they get a new system even if they do, it will surely carry over to their next system. That doesn't leave us with much other than this "sketchy perception" that *upgradability* is important to future-proof a machine. If you think really hard, the costs of anything else that you might want to *uprgade* simply will NOT JUSTIFY the added costs. In other words, you keep pumping money into a system over time -- trying to stay *current* (again a preoccupation to keep up with the Jones's) and end up spending way too much in the long run.
I have firsthand experience with this. A cousin of mine did me one better. He saved EVERY receipt to EVERY component upgrade and peripheral upgrade he's ever did since the Intel 286. He has easily 11 husks of machines sitting in his basement. he finally came to the conclusion that the only way to go is with an OEM and stick with it for as long as you can and then upgrade to a completely new machine when the time comes. It would be interesting to see what those receipts totaled up to. The point was that he admitted that it simply wasn't worth it. This is a Wintel PC guy mind you... He is in the design field and mostly works in a CAD environment -- you would think he'd be clamoring for an ultra-fast machine. The one he has now doesn't make him any more productive than his last HP Kayak system at 800 MHz.
OK, so you upgrade the machine ... the next question is how much time will that buy you -- I mean*really* buy you? Probably not much more time; especially if you are a person that's hell-bent on "one-upping" the next guy for what ever reason. The simple fact is that for MOST people, the performance is well beyond the needs of everyday tasks, and 5 years out of a system should not be unheard of. In fact, we can see proof of this already -- the global PC slump... Ironically, Apple seems to be in a better position simply because there seems to be a pent-up demand for faster Macs... I could be wrong though. On the other hand, I'm not sure this demand exists in the Wintel space, so all these "Wintel is cheaper here for this: and "Wintel is cheaper there for that" will all be moot if 64-bit takes off in the desktop space anytime soon. There goes those forced upgrades again. I suspect we'll see it offered to Apple mainstream/home customers before Wintel customers... Just think, all those people who bought those 32-bit Wintel systems that year ;-) Time to upgrade! (again). The only rule you should follow is to purchase a system based on your current needs then perhaps go for the next model up.
The problem is a little more harsh in the Wintel world since Microsoft insist on forcing people to buy new equipment more often. What they normally do is stop supporting your current version of the OS so developers are forced to stop supporting it as well (Apple did this with OS X). The difference is that Microsoft does it more often. This is/was all based on the promise that the new one will be superior in the way of security, stability and performance blah blah blah , which as many people are finding out, isn't always the case. XP was supposed to be impenetrable. Hackers are having a field day with it -- it's vulnerable. The answer? Palladium/Longhorn.. That requires new hardware to accompany the OS -- new apps too. So much for truly future-proffing the Wintel PC, eh? More copies, more often, whether you need them or not.
--
Ed M.
Expansion is VERY COST EFFECTIVE.
See price of firewire HDD, easily 100USD more than an ATA drive. Any cheap PC tower will easily take 3-4 internal HDD's. Same thing with internal opticals which are often less than half the ocst of external firewire verisons. Drives alone. Not mention what you do with an AIO when the display goes on the fritz. I have a 6 year old PC here that's still in use because I could change the display when the first one went bad. Yet another benefit of upgradability, and again EXTREMELY COST EFFECTIVE. very good 17" CRT's are VERY VERY CHEAP. It's worth it for drives and displays alone.
End-user expandability is hardly ever a consideration. The multimedia PCs Sony was trundling out for a while to compete with the iMac had every single PCI slot stuffed with something (Ethernet, sound, etc.) right out of the box. Do you think they'd have used a form that required the end user to remove functionality to gain expansion if they'd meant the expansion for the end user? To the contrary, most cheap PCs aren't even fully tested for compatibility with the cards that they can be BTO'd with, because that would be overhead, and you can't have overhead in a price-driven commodity market.
"Consumer" PCs are basically just corporate destops with a little more cutesy software destabilizing the system. To the extent that any thought has been given to the industrial design, it's been for the convenience of IT staff, who like being able to swap things in and out as much as possible - but even then, they never thought to make cases easy to open until Apple started doing it. Industrial design is simply not a consideration in the PC world, as a rule. I would not be surprised to find out that the eMac and the iMac were the only consumer machines on the market where the end user was the primary consideration during design.
As for the software argument: It's true that software obsoletes hardware at a far greater rate than, say, baked beans obsolete ovens. It's also true that despite that, consumers use computers as appliances: They might do one round of shopping for software, but after that they'll use what came with the machine. When that's not enough anymore, they'll replace the whole thing. Unless there's a tech-savvy person to intercept them, they might start out with the intention of merely upgrading, until they realize that for not really that much more money they could upgrade everything. (Even then, speaking as one of the people who get tapped for advice, interception is rarely enough to head off this behavior. People like new things.)
Meanwhile, thanks to my early adoption of OS X, my Cube has gotten faster and more capable every year that I've owned it. My oven has not. For that matter, I've barely noticed the jump from an 800Mhz PIII running NT 4 to a 1.9GHz P4 running Windows 2K Pro (except that 2K is even flakier) because of the continually worsening performance of Windows, and the stagnation of the software on the platform.
[ 02-09-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
You yourself bought a cube, not an iMac. In a year or two, when fast G4 upgrades are less than 300USD you'll get a nice little boost for that machine without breaking the bank. In internal HDD upgrade is a simple matter and it won't void your warrantee either. If anything goes wrong with your display, a solution is as easy as a trip to the local Electromics r'us'oMart. How often have you pined for a pizza box? You know it's a better solution and that it's a better solution for more people than the AIO.
Granted, most I/O is built into the Mobo these days (at least on a mac) but having the ability to drop in a connector for faster USB/firewire isn't some exotic expansion demand, it's pretty basic. And again the cards to do it are dirt cheap. USB2.0 and soon firewire800 are 50 bucks away if you own a PM or a PC. Not so easy to fix that problem if you have one of Apple's hermetically sealed units.
Even a cardbus slot would do just to keep a little I/O insurance, but Apple likes to remove those wherever possible too!
As far as the next design direction for the iMacs I agree with previous posts to add ports to the front. Preferably behind a door of some kind to maintain the uncluttered look. I also like the idea of a screen that can rotate from horizontal aspect to vertical. Very cool idea. Other than that the iMac is near perfect as a design. As far as colors go, I wonder if Apple will incorporate their newly acquired patent for changing colors in a device into future iMacs. Imagine the white base changing to pulsing colors when you play something from your iTunes library. Or pulsing a cool blue while sleeping. Hmmm...
But I'd rather it was the Cube.
Lemon Bon Bon
Hey, 'elo'. 'You shine a little love on my life...' or if we're talking iMac 2 specs 'Horace Wimp'. 'Make a stand and be a man.' Fat chance consumer desktop Apple, eh?
I like my Dad's music!
The base should grow a touch, if Apple makes a 20" version. The guts need to be rearranged so that all available RAM slots are user accessible and the airport card is added in the same way as the eMac. Internally the board should be reworked to accomodate a PPC daughtercard and a cube-size AGP card. Outwardly a MINIMUM of two independent FW800 ports to replace PCI. NO funky doors!
What could be done is to place one FW800 port internally so that it connects through the base. Optionally, Apple could sell an A/V base that screws onto the bottom of the machine providing A/V in-out, a digital decoder, optical outs, spdiff and the like, space for an additional 3.5" HDD, and a digital TV tuner to create a PVR section. Using iCal, you load/share different regional cable listings. YOu watch TV on your iMac, record your favorite shows and burn a DVD later.
What part didn't you understand, Matsu. MOST people aren't opening the innards of their systems not to mention upgrading these things anyway. Even if they were, options are available. They'll likely opts for external alternatives first, if at all. And the selling points are better for external FireWire.. easier portability from machine to machine (or where ever), easier connectivity (almost no configuration), hot-swappable... It's about tradeoffs. Cant do that with internal units... and that's still not the point. Only geeks and enthusiasts are delving into the guts or paying someone to do so.
[[[Not mention what you do with an AIO when the display goes on the fritz. I have a 6 year old PC here that's still in use because I could change the display when the first one went bad. Yet another benefit of upgradability, and again EXTREMELY COST EFFECTIVE.]]]
You can't add an external monitor to the iMac? You better look again.
[[[It's worth it for drives and displays alone.]]]
No it isn't. That's from *your* perspective, not mine and not most people's. I upgrade people's PCs on the side... I can't even take their money because I feel bad. MY Mac people know what their options are and they are completely satisfied. A for chancing the drives in an iMac... I'll make you a bet that it's easier on the older iMac Graphite Special Editions then it is on my cousins shiny new Compaq.
I've never worked on a CRT iMac before, the whole job was done in roughly 39 minutes... That's including OS 9. wapped in a nice 7200 rpm 80 Gig Seagate. It was cake! I can do it again in under half an hour with OS install. That's opening the case removing the drive placing in the new drive and closing it up.
The point is, Apple made the drives EXTREMELY easy to get at on the CRT iMac Special Editions. Same goes for the CMOS battery (which can be unplugged; unlike the Compaq which is soldered on to the mobo) as well as the optical drive. Furthermore, I'm betting that the drives are just as easy to get at on the new iMacs. Of course if you've never worked on one, you wouldn't know this. So, you can erase *drives* from your argument. It doesn't hold whether they are external or internal, they can be upgraded *if* you want to. Period. Monitors.. well if your main one goes, you can always use the VGA out, no?
--
Ed M.
Contrary to popular belief, the CRT iMacs (the Special Editions anyway) were absolute CAKE to work on to install a hard drive. I'm not kidding, but why bother unless the main one smokes. Most people would like to perform the upgrade themselves, which is hardly the case in the Wintel world. I know because I do it for people because they have no desire to delve into the box. It's much easire to add an external FW or USB component. Anyway, *you* seem to get it. Other's on this board do not. And unless they've actually worked on the iMacs then they really have no room talking.
[[[As for the software argument: It's true that software obsoletes hardware at a far greater rate than, say, baked beans obsolete ovens. It's also true that despite that, consumers use computers as appliances: They might do one round of shopping for software, but after that they'll use what came with the machine. When that's not enough anymore, they'll replace the whole thing.]]]
Agreed!
\t
The rest of your post is spot-on Amorph.
--
Ed M.
No you cannot erase drives from the equation, why do you insist on citing the worst PC examples. All the cases I've seen are extremely easy to get at. People buy dirt cheap ATA drives and drop 'em in, nothing could be simpler.
I think it's you who doesn't understand. less than 1% of all computers sold are an iMac, obviously more people follow a trend not represented by your arguments. You're just wrong, it's that simple, the market has voted against you, has been doing so for quite some time in fact.