Indigo iMac About To Be Dropped?

in Current Mac Hardware edited January 2014
With all of the talk about big things happening at MWNY, and the eMac being made available for everyone, it occurred to me, maybe this is a good time for the G3 iMac to be dropped.

It now has a replacement (of sorts) in the form of the eMac, so if the eMac was to be slowly upgrade or dropped in price, there would be no need for the iMac anymore. The other benefit to Apple would be that it would mean less G3 processors in models. The only G3 model would be an iBook, and it can't be long until that is droppped too. It looks better for Apple if they don't still have G3s when the G5s come out in a few months, as that is just too big a difference, having three generations of processors at once. So is the iMacs days numbered? Discuss


  • Reply 1 of 31
    bartobarto Posts: 2,246member
    The iMac fits as the budget option for business and schools in the line-up. If Apple comes up with an eMac (G4+GF2+17") for less than $800 it won't be relevent, but until that day...

  • Reply 2 of 31
    ibrowseibrowse Posts: 1,749member
    I have heard quite a bit of people talking about whether or not Apple was going to drop the old iMacs to replace them with the eMacs, and I agree that they might as well. As far as the iBook jumping to G4, they should, it would be cool, but I don't know about this one. The iBook has a lot of work to be done before it could make the switch to G4.
  • Reply 3 of 31
    They should keep the old snow iMac's real purty, and fits in with the other stuff.

    Give it a fast cheap G4 and cheap it down to $699 or so.....just to have something in there at the ultrabudget box.

    There is no Jet Powers

    [ 06-13-2002: Message edited by: There is no g5 ]</p>
  • Reply 4 of 31
    [quote] They should keep the old snow iMac's real purty, and fits in with the other stuff.

    Give it a fast cheap G4 and cheap it down to $699 or so.....just to have something in there at the ultrabudget box. <hr></blockquote>

    Apple already does one of these snow iMac things though - it is called the eMac.

    Seriously, would what you are talking about not be the same as a cheaper eMac? Just drop the iMac and drop the price of an eMac I say - makes sense to me!
  • Reply 5 of 31
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    It will be a sad day when the last of the 'original iMacs' rolls off of the line. The machines saved Apple and here you are, trying to get rid of them.

    What I'd like Apple to do is keep one around and make it DIRT CHEAP. Make it like $500 or so. Apple needs a machine for that range of people to get them started with Macs. Not everyone needs a G4. For a lot of people, give them a machine with Mac OS X, mail, a web browser, a word processor, and the occasional game or two and they'll be fine.

    I think that a 600 MHz G3, 128 MB RAM, 32 MB graphics card, and keyboard and mouse is very good for $500.
  • Reply 6 of 31
    [quote] I think that a 600 MHz G3, 128 MB RAM, 32 MB graphics card, and keyboard and mouse is very good for $500. <hr></blockquote>

    Sure it would be sad to see the iMac go, but a machine like the one you describe would be out of date before it is even released. if you suggst that this machine would still be on sale in 6 months time or whatever, it would be an embarassment by then - it would barely be able to run many software titles, even when brand new. What Apple needs is an iMac replacement - something in the same spirit, and in the eMac I think we have found this.
  • Reply 7 of 31
    wolfeye155wolfeye155 Posts: 425member
    I agree with Fran. I have a 933 G4 and I really want to introduce my little sister (she's 8) to Macs ( get to them when they're young ). However, I don't have TONS of money to spend on another computer for her and she would only be using the computer to go online and play simple games like The Sims (she LOVES The Sims!). A G3 iMac for $500 would be absolutely great for her. I can't believe that Apple is selling 500Mhz G3 iMac's at $800. I'm going to try grabbing one at some retail store that is trying to get rid of them.

    P.S.-I find it very annoying that the old iMac's are $999 (retail) when I can get an eMac for that same price (education discount). <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

    [ 06-13-2002: Message edited by: wolfeye155 ]</p>
  • Reply 8 of 31
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Yeah, I think Apple should keep around speedy G3 Snow iMacs, and try to sell then for as close to $500 as humanly possible.

    Face it, guys: not everyone using a Mac is a graphics type, and wouldn't know (or care) if it had a G3, G4, Gwhiz, etc.

    As long as it was cheap, well-made, let them surf, check e-mail, run Microsoft Office, iTunes, a few games, etc.

    How awesome would it be to have a Snow iMac that cost $499:

    - 600-800MHz G3 (increasing incrementally as time went on)

    - 30GB hard drive

    - 256MB RAM (enough for OS X, and then a bit having to buy RAM as soon as you take it out of the box)

    - 16MB VRAM

    - USB, FireWire, Ethernet, modem (USB is a given, but definitely FireWire so no one misses out on the digital camcorder/iPod thing. Ethernet and modem are no-brainers)

    - Snow color only (pares the line down to one simple color, which just happens to tie in with the iBook, eMac, iMac and iPod.

    White, the new consumer color!
  • Reply 9 of 31
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    To all the people suggesting $500US iMacG3's...

    YES, Yes, yes! Finally a majority of people talking sense about macs, pricing, market-share, and the entry level. Gongrats, there's hope for us yet.

    Apple must realize that a $500US price tag now describes the entry level, and not 1000. Hell, there are laptops knocking down that door already. While I have my doubts about sub $1000 laptops, I have total confidence in 500US (750 Can) PC desktops that aren't trying to promise the moon. Less RAM, stable if not stellar graphics, and smaller HDDs, maybe a slow CDrw, maybe just read only, 15" screen/budget 17" (you choose).

    The only strategy I would choose (for a prolonged Snow iMac life span) would be to incorporate a better 15" tube -- slightly flatter, with better refresh and focus at XGA res, maybe pushing the VIS to 14.1". I think there are some trintron tubes out there that would do nicely.

    For the rest of it, stay with smaller HDD's, slower opticals and less standard RAM. As long as two firewire ports and two USB ports are present, people can add faster burners/bigger HDD's. RAM installation is a snap, and there's no need to get your RAM from Apple. G3's are fine. Handing down previous gen GPU's from the pricier models is fine too.

    The point is that it be cheap, run office, iApps, and browsing apps well. Get people a taste for a price they can afford. It be a great little machine for a kids room, with airport you could even afford to scatter them about the house for internet access wherever you have a power outlet. A secondary/back-up machine, even a main machine. Sure, the spec sheet is a little anemic, but at least the price would match it. So, if your needs are modest, you now have all the excuse you need to get a mac instead of a budget PC.

    A $500 iMacG3 is a great idea. It is also the ONLY proven ground for actually winning some of the other 95%.

    I think Apple will just kill it. That, or put a stupid price tag on it. Even the CDrw iMacG3 isn't worth more than 599. We'll see what happens, but at least everyone here is thiinking straight for a change.
  • Reply 10 of 31
    [quote]How awesome would it be to have a Snow iMac that cost $499<hr></blockquote>

    I totally agree. There are a lot of people out there who do nothing with their computers except surf the web, send e-mail and balance their checkbooks. A G3 iMac is perfectly sufficient for that.
  • Reply 11 of 31
    fran441fran441 Posts: 3,715member
    Hehe. I take full credit for this idea.
  • Reply 12 of 31
    andymacandymac Posts: 11member
    How well do you think these systems could run OS X?
  • Reply 13 of 31
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Well enough for the things listed above! Listen, I had a 400MHz iMac DV with 384MB RAM, and ran OS X on it, starting PRE v10.1.

    Of course, after 10.1, it got A LOT nicer and more usable. A friend of mine has it now, and I end up seeing it every few weeks and it runs awesome. I just put 10.1.5 on there for her and she uses iTunes, Explorer, Quicken and Office v.X EVERY SINGLE DAY with no complaints whatsoever.

    I would imagine a 600MHz (or higher) G3 would be that much nicer, smoother and faster.
  • Reply 14 of 31
    gumby5647gumby5647 Posts: 241member
    I think Apple should keep the Classic iMac around. One model, one color.

    700Mhz Sahara or Sidewinder G3

    128MB Ram

    20GB HD


    Snow only

  • Reply 15 of 31
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    For performance, look at the iBooks and find out.

    600-800Mhz of G3 can't cost very much, and Sahara variations would live a quite tranquil life in the fanless iMac.

    This is what I said about migrating acceptable components down to the iMacG3. Saharas and Radeons, when cost permits and not before. For now 16MB of Rage will do, though I suspect that at this point a Rage isn't much cheaper than a radeon (7000 or equivalent) embedded part.

    One other way to approach this is to take an iBookG3 MoBo and loose the extra expense of a 2.5" HDD, the LCD, So-Dimms, Battery, and portable optical. Put a tray load back in the iMac with a smaller face plate than that used on the eMac (same shape as on the towers, and for that matter put that shape on the eMac as well). Use virtually the same classic iMac plastics. The only thing you really need to add to an iBook Mobo to make the iMac run is an analogue board.

    Now you don't have to do too much work to support the iMac Classic, you basically take an iBook and strip-out/replace the expensive bits.

    For that matter I'd change the name to iMac "Classic". Some people probably don't like that name around here, but I like it, no biggie though. Offer it in snow, and various patterns/colors throughout the year. Have a color for a limited run, then retire it. Kinda like beanie babies.

    But it has to be cheaper than 699. That's too much for a pure entry level machine. They could offer two machines. The real cheapy with read-only optical, less RAM and smaller HDD for 500USD and a higher model with an 8X CDrw, more standard RAM and a 50% bigger HDD for 699.
  • Reply 16 of 31
    andymacandymac Posts: 11member
    I agree wholeheartedly with everything stated here. I've only been a mac user for a year now and often try to talk my parents, friends into switching. I think I'd really have a shot if there was something available in this price range. They always ask why should I spend the money on a mac when they can get a entry level pc for so much less.
  • Reply 17 of 31
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    [quote]Originally posted by Matsu:

    <strong> incorporate a better 15" tube -- slightly flatter, with better refresh and focus at XGA res, maybe pushing the VIS to 14.1". I think there are some trintron tubes out there that would do nicely.


    A better tube yes, but I'm not sure a Trinitron tube would help in getting to that $500 price point.

    I'd snap one up for $500 (but I'd hope it would be at least a 700mhz G3).

    Consider the many uses and target groups who would snap this up:

    -Families taking it up to the cottage for their kids on a long weekend.

    -Perfect for receptionists for businesses

    -2nd computer for the kids

    -2nd computer for the attic, bedroom or kitchen

    -great starter for senior citizens at old age homes

    -writers who don't need processing power

    you get the idea.
  • Reply 18 of 31
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Those markets all make good sense to me.
  • Reply 19 of 31
    Wouldn't it be nice if, after MacWorld Expo:

    iMac Classic: G4 700, $600

    eMac: G4 800, $900 - $1100

    iMac: G4 900/1000, $1200-1600

    Powermac: G4 1133/1266/2x1266, $ 1600-3000

    iBook: G4 700, $1100-1600

    Powerbook: G4 800/1000, $2200-$3000

    Ah, I'm dreaming.

  • Reply 20 of 31
    gumby5647gumby5647 Posts: 241member
    i disagree with the 500.00 price point.

    Selling a Mac at that price makes it seem like you are trying to compete with E-Machines....

    ....and that is something i don't want Apple doing.

    Im 100% positive that Apple could ship a decently spec'd machine for 699.00 and not make it seem like its trying to go up against the E-Machine's of the world....

    [ 06-13-2002: Message edited by: gumby5647 ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.