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.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Of course I don't want Apple to compete with E-Machines either, but would it really hurt? I mean, if people are looking for computers and don't know much they're likely to go with the cheaper one. Apple COULD definately have a pretty good $500 computer.
This is where I hope Apple's consumer lines will be after MWNY:
CRT iMac
700MHz PowerPC G3
128MB SDRAM
20GB Ultra ATA drive
CD-ROM drive
RAGE 128 Ultra w/16MB
$599
eMac
700MHz PowerPC G4-------800MHz PowerPC G4
256MB SDRAM-------------256MB SDRAM
20GB Ultra ATA drive----40GB Ultra ATA drive
CD-RW drive-------------CD-RW drive
Geforce 2MX w/32MB------Radeon 7500 w/32MB
$799--------------------$1099
LCD iMac
933MHz PowerPC G4-------933MHz PowerPC G4
256MB SDRAM-------------256MB SDRAM
40GB Ultra ATA drive----60GB Ultra ATA drive
CD-RW drive-------------Combo drive
Geforce 4MX w/64MB------Geforce 4MX w/64MB
$1399-------------------$1599
1GHz PowerPC G4
512MB SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA drive
SuperDrive
Geforce 4MX w/64MB
$1899
These specs at these price points would Apple's consumer lineup very competitive compared to what other PC makers offer. The only weakness here would be MHz, but Apple can't do anything about that.
Why is everyone so hung up on the Snow iMac? I have always thought that it was the ugliest thing ever. The first thought I had when I saw it was that it looked like the tip of a used condom.
1. OS X will run fine when 10.2 is introduced. 10.2 is going to be the biggest obsticle to upgrades for Apple.
2. Apple just can't sell iMacs for $599, it simply doesn't have the volume demand. If it were only making $75 per machine instead of say $275 it couldn't exist, because it's sales are so small it need the higher magins to keep it's head above water. The fact is that most PC makers are loosing money, and wouldn't want Apple to follow that model.
[quote]2. Apple just can't sell iMacs for $599, it simply doesn't have the volume demand. If it were only making $75 per machine instead of say $275 it couldn't exist, because it's sales are so small it need the higher magins to keep it's head above water. The fact is that most PC makers are loosing money, and wouldn't want Apple to follow that model. <hr></blockquote>
Not true. When Apple lowered the price of the low end iMac to $799, the retailers were making nothing off of them. If Apple was to enter the market with a lower cost computer, I think you'd see many people buy them up just to run Mac OS X. I hear from people all of the time that they would love to try Mac OS X but they don't want to make a $1000 investment on one. Now $499, on the other hand, is a different story. If Apple was to do nothing other than the following machine at that price, they would sell a boatload.
600MHz PowerPC G3
128MB SDRAM
20GB Ultra ATA drive
DVD-ROM Drive
RAGE 128 Ultra w/16MB
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
56K fax modem
15-inch display
2 USB & 2 FireWire ports
AirPort Ready
Are you telling me that Apple doesn't get the G3 cheap? What about memory? 128 MB is still relatively cheap when bought in bulk. 20 GB HDs aren't that bad and neither are DVD ROMs. Apple has to use the RAGE cards up any way, and the ethernet and 56k doesn't really add to the cost of the machine either.
I think that realistically, there is no reason why Apple can't sell this machine for between $500 and $650. $649 is the highest end that Apple could 'get away with' charging, IMO. Now, they sell these iMacs for $999! Way too expensive! If they could make a low cost machine, you'd see market share increase by quite a bit.
Comments
<strong>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.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Of course I don't want Apple to compete with E-Machines either, but would it really hurt? I mean, if people are looking for computers and don't know much they're likely to go with the cheaper one. Apple COULD definately have a pretty good $500 computer.
\t700Mhz Sahara
\t256mb RAM
\tRadeon(32mb)
\tUSB, Firewire, Ethernet, Modem
\tDVD-ROM
\tSnow
would satisfy him(and a lot of other people).
One color to make inventory management easier.
Sahara G3 to keep performance good and price low, hopefully in the 700-800mhz range.
20GB hard drive. a casual user will not fill that for a while.
cheap video (rage128, radeon, gf2mx) with 16-32 MB memory.
128-256 MB RAM
ethernet, modem, usb, firewire, airport. $499 - $599
That would have a market.
<strong>Well, it's not $499, but you can get an Indigo iMac for a cool <a href="http://www.dealsontheweb.com/deal-click.php?id=2271"; target="_blank">$599</a>, if you like . . .</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, but Apple should be offering an iMac at this price.
CRT iMac
700MHz PowerPC G3
128MB SDRAM
20GB Ultra ATA drive
CD-ROM drive
RAGE 128 Ultra w/16MB
$599
eMac
700MHz PowerPC G4-------800MHz PowerPC G4
256MB SDRAM-------------256MB SDRAM
20GB Ultra ATA drive----40GB Ultra ATA drive
CD-RW drive-------------CD-RW drive
Geforce 2MX w/32MB------Radeon 7500 w/32MB
$799--------------------$1099
LCD iMac
933MHz PowerPC G4-------933MHz PowerPC G4
256MB SDRAM-------------256MB SDRAM
40GB Ultra ATA drive----60GB Ultra ATA drive
CD-RW drive-------------Combo drive
Geforce 4MX w/64MB------Geforce 4MX w/64MB
$1399-------------------$1599
1GHz PowerPC G4
512MB SDRAM
80GB Ultra ATA drive
SuperDrive
Geforce 4MX w/64MB
$1899
These specs at these price points would Apple's consumer lineup very competitive compared to what other PC makers offer. The only weakness here would be MHz, but Apple can't do anything about that.
[ 06-14-2002: Message edited by: Keeksy ]</p>
The graphite and the sage, on the otherhand...
...but until Apple can bring the eMac down to <$1000, the old iMacs will stay.
2. Apple just can't sell iMacs for $599, it simply doesn't have the volume demand. If it were only making $75 per machine instead of say $275 it couldn't exist, because it's sales are so small it need the higher magins to keep it's head above water. The fact is that most PC makers are loosing money, and wouldn't want Apple to follow that model.
Not true. When Apple lowered the price of the low end iMac to $799, the retailers were making nothing off of them. If Apple was to enter the market with a lower cost computer, I think you'd see many people buy them up just to run Mac OS X. I hear from people all of the time that they would love to try Mac OS X but they don't want to make a $1000 investment on one. Now $499, on the other hand, is a different story. If Apple was to do nothing other than the following machine at that price, they would sell a boatload.
600MHz PowerPC G3
128MB SDRAM
20GB Ultra ATA drive
DVD-ROM Drive
RAGE 128 Ultra w/16MB
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
56K fax modem
15-inch display
2 USB & 2 FireWire ports
AirPort Ready
Are you telling me that Apple doesn't get the G3 cheap? What about memory? 128 MB is still relatively cheap when bought in bulk. 20 GB HDs aren't that bad and neither are DVD ROMs. Apple has to use the RAGE cards up any way, and the ethernet and 56k doesn't really add to the cost of the machine either.
I think that realistically, there is no reason why Apple can't sell this machine for between $500 and $650. $649 is the highest end that Apple could 'get away with' charging, IMO. Now, they sell these iMacs for $999! Way too expensive! If they could make a low cost machine, you'd see market share increase by quite a bit.