PDA

View Full Version : New All-in-One Mac for Education?


MacRumors
May 27, 2006, 12:02 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)

AppleInsider reports (http://appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1775) that Apple is working on a new all-in-one Mac for education, to replace the phased-out eMac, and that Apple is targeting release in the "September timeframe" 2006. If so, Apple would catch only the tail end of the purchase cycle for the school year beginning this Fall, since many educational institutions, faculty, and students are already planning their next purchases.

The upcoming model is said to have a design similar to the current iMac, with a single enclosure, LCD screen, and Intel processor. It is not clear whether it will simply be a lower-end iMac or be a distinct model line. Apple's challenge will be to keep the price down, despite the switch to LCD displays, because of the competitive pressures in the education market.

The CRT-based eMac has had its share of ups and downs over the years. Introduced (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/04/20020429065943.shtml) in April 2002, the eMac was first sold only to education customers, but Apple soon added the eMac to its consumer line (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/06/20020604091820.shtml) by popular demand. In efforts to keep the eMac up to date, Apple gave the eMac occasional price drops (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/04/20030408224648.shtml) and speed bumps (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2003/05/20030506101713.shtml) as demand waned, and rumors of the eMac's demise (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2004/03/20040319052859.shtml) have circulated since as long ago as March 2004. The eMac line received a quiet update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/05/20050503090326.shtml) in May 2005. In October 2005, Apple dropped the eMac (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/10/20051012153043.shtml) from its retail line and let inventory run down in the education channel.

Atlasland
May 27, 2006, 12:04 PM
This has to have been expected for a while.

There has been a gap in the product lineup for a little while.

Here's to 15"/17" Edu-only iMacs being released along with the Mac Pros.

4God
May 27, 2006, 12:05 PM
I'll bet it's a core solo 17" iMac.

steve_hill4
May 27, 2006, 12:09 PM
I'll bet it's a core solo 17" iMac.
My thoughts exactly, but with stripped down HDD, combo drive, maybe lower graphics.

I hope they also release this onto the consumer market again. That way it could replace the Mini for low end switchers and the Mini could evolve into a true range of Media Hubs.

Doctor Q
May 27, 2006, 12:09 PM
I'm already helping a school plan their next computer purchases, to replace the Macs in our computer lab, and the PC-vs.-Mac and price/performance debates are back in our planning committee for their annual visits.

Knowing that Apple will introduce new up-to-date Macs, if this rumor is true, will make a positive difference in promoting the Mac option. It would help if we knew the price too.

narco
May 27, 2006, 12:09 PM
Probably a 15" or even a 17" iMac core solo. Or maybe a mac mini on a iMac/display stand with a 6" LCD mounted on top.

Fishes,
narco.

ero87
May 27, 2006, 12:09 PM
Maybe they'll bring back the form factor of the iMac G4, sticking an intel chip inside? That was a sweet design.

celebrian23
May 27, 2006, 12:09 PM
I think it's an excellent idea. I think apple needs a mac in the mac mini price range that is a full-blown mac.

yankeefan24
May 27, 2006, 12:15 PM
I think it will be a 17" iMac, Core Solo, Integrated graphics, 80 or 100 GB HDD. It should be released soon for this years educational market though. Very soon.

Maybe they'll bring back the form factor of the iMac G4, sticking an intel chip inside? That was a sweet design.

I always loved that design, but it won't happen.

Foxglove9
May 27, 2006, 12:18 PM
That's exactly what my guess would be too. Though the idea of the G4 imac being resurrected is nice, it will never happen.

I think it will be a 17" iMac, Core Solo, Integrated graphics, 80 or 100 GB HDD. It should be released soon for this years educational market though. Very soon.



I always loved that design, but it won't happen.

Mord
May 27, 2006, 12:21 PM
no core solo, by that time conroe/woodcrest/merom will be out and it'll be a core2duo of the conroe kind.

4God
May 27, 2006, 12:25 PM
no core solo, by that time conroe/woodcrest/merom will be out and it'll be a core2duo of the conroe kind.


Which is why the core solo would be perfect for educational pricing. What I mean is that with the new processors out, it would make the core solo iMac very attractive to the educational sector.

Mord
May 27, 2006, 12:32 PM
no, the core solo will not be produced then, atm all intel macs are useing expensive mobile processors, once the next gen comes out apple can start using considerably cheaper desktop cpu's in the desktop and that means a core2duo.

LimeiBook86
May 27, 2006, 12:37 PM
I wonder if they'll keep the eMac name...:confused: I'm sure this system won't be too far off from the 17" intel iMac. Maybe integrated graphics and a slower CPU. I wonder how cheap they'll try and make it. If I remember correctly the eMacs started at $799 or so...it would be nice if they had a sort of Intel Mac Mini system with a built-in display. :)

saulbug
May 27, 2006, 12:43 PM
Knowing that Apple will introduce new up-to-date Macs, if this rumor is true, will make a positive difference in promoting the Mac option. It would help if we knew the price too.

Considering your comment, and considering how many situations like yours likely exist, and considering how relatively late in the educational buying season the release of this machine would be... it would seem to greatly behoove Apple to make an official pre-release announcement regarding this machine as soon as possible (if it is indeed coming).

Didn’t they do this with the iMac G5 (although for somewhat different reasons)?

In this case, it seems that the usual upside to "the element of surprise" would be overpowered by the upside to "planning ahead". No?

Eidorian
May 27, 2006, 01:01 PM
I've been waiting for this announcement all year. I'd like to get all-in-ones w/keyboard instead of our Dell LCD plus Mini.

macgeek2005
May 27, 2006, 01:04 PM
Please let it be a $799 starting point!!!

Apple needs that. They desperatly need a desktop computer that costs $799 or less.

And I'm also hoping for the iMac G4 Design.

bigandy
May 27, 2006, 01:06 PM
my thoughts are it's not going to be a "stripped down iMac" - for the plain and simple reason that they released one of them in the G5 guise - and it didn't sell well, here in the UK anyway.

people thought "why get a worse processor and no optical drive when you can get that stuff for a few quid more?"

i think a completely different system, based around a 15" TFT (1280x1024 or, hopefully, a little more), would be good. 1.83 Core Duos, or their replacement by then, would be pretty sweet. chuck in GMA950's, 512mb RAM, and a SuperDrive, and that's perfect.

all this crap about education markets needing less spec is exactly that - i've been in contact with a good few here in britain that have shown the eMac (much as i love that indestructable hunk of plastic), and the Edu iMac G5, the door, because of their "too low" spec. - Core Duo, in some form, would be a must. GMA950s are fine in the Edu model, because they're not aimed at gaming or apple's Motion.

:rolleyes:

daneoni
May 27, 2006, 01:14 PM
it'll definately be a 1.66 Core Duo (Yonah) (since prices of the chips would have further decreased on the release of merom) with integrated graphics,60GB HDD and combo drive on a 15" model whilst the 17" model will have a low end discrete ATI/Nvidia Card, 1.83 Ghz chip, superdrive and an 80GB HDD. It will be close to the mini in specs "for a while" till the mini (if not already upgraded) gets upgraded to a merom 1.66GHz Core 2 Duo chip

Also it'll be called an eMac because it has mac in it.

These are my theories

iWaugh
May 27, 2006, 01:15 PM
Maybe they should sell it to whoever wants it !! Why should such goodies be limited to education.

I think it will be a 15" (and if it is like iMac G4 - I will grab it on day one.)

ryannel2003
May 27, 2006, 01:18 PM
Well I was planning on getting something new towards the end of the year (Core Solo Mac mini most likely), but if the new eMac replacement comes out I'll get that. I'm still suprised Apple is selling the eMac though the education site; who would want to buy a G4 eMac for the same price as a Core Duo Mac mini :confused:

Paulius
May 27, 2006, 01:20 PM
Why can't Apple give us a low-cost MacTower? The Intel MacPros are not out yet. The current PowerMac G5 prices are ridiculous. I don't want to get an iMac because I already have a big LCD screen. I don't want a MacMini because I need better storage, expandability and graphics!

Arrrgh! Apple! Think of the average geek.

Josias
May 27, 2006, 01:28 PM
I guess it would be like this:
One eMac model:
1.83 GHz Core 2 Duo
512 MB 667 MHz PC2-5300 DDR2 RAM (if not better, upgradeable to 1/2 GB)
120 GB 3.5" HDD at 7.200 rpm. (upgradeable to 160/200 GB)
Intel GMA/950 128 MB DDR2
15" LCD widescreen display at 1280x800
Buil-in iSight, microphone and stereo-speakers
8x DVD+/-RW/DL SuperDrive
Internal powersupply
(actually same case and connectors as iMac, just thinner)
Ships with ? keyboard and Mighty Mouse
FrontRow
Since it will be a too big compeditor for the Mini, I think it will be around 900-1000 bucks.:(

Mord
May 27, 2006, 01:35 PM
I guess it would be like this:
One eMac model:
1.83 GHz Core 2 Duo
512 MB 667 MHz PC2-5300 DDR2 RAM (if not better, upgradeable to 1/2 GB)
120 GB 3.5" HDD at 7.200 rpm. (upgradeable to 160/200 GB)
Intel GMA/950 128 MB DDR2
15" LCD widescreen display at 1280x800
Buil-in iSight, microphone and stereo-speakers
8x DVD+/-RW/DL SuperDrive
Internal powersupply
(actually same case and connectors as iMac, just thinner)
Ships with ? keyboard and Mighty Mouse
FrontRow
Since it will be a too big compeditor for the Mini, I think it will be around 900-1000 bucks.:(

it'll more likely use a 17" 1280x1024 glossy protected screen, GMA 965 and probably sans frontrow and isight, to save costs, and the case would be bigger and thicker than the imac more sturdy with more space for cooling ect.

dontmatter
May 27, 2006, 01:36 PM
What about the emac made it fail? What about this computer will be different in that respect?

Legacy
May 27, 2006, 01:40 PM
It will be called the eMac no doubt. No need for name change.

Standard specs:

15" TFT wide/Airport/Gigabit Ethernet/Firewire 400/4xUSB

I think we'll see two models:

$799: Core Duo 1.66/512RAM/60GB/GMA950/Combo
$999: Core Duo 1.83/512RAM/80GB/GMA950/Super

NB MacMini will be the same as the above, only headless for $599/$799 using laptop parts however.

iMac will get bumped up to:

$1299: 17"/Core2Duo 2.0/512RAM/160GB/X1600 128MB/Super
$1699: 20"/Core2Duo 2.16/512RAM/250GB/X1600 256MB standard/Super

4God
May 27, 2006, 01:50 PM
It will be called the eMac no doubt. No need for name change.

Standard specs:

15" TFT wide/Airport/Gigabit Ethernet/Firewire 400/4xUSB

I think we'll see two models:

$799: Core Duo 1.66/512RAM/60GB/GMA950/Combo
$999: Core Duo 1.83/512RAM/80GB/GMA950/Super

NB MacMini will be the same as the above, only headless for $599/$799 using laptop parts however.

iMac will get bumped up to:

$1299: 17"/Core2Duo 2.0/512RAM/160GB/X1600 128MB/Super
$1699: 20"/Core2Duo 2.16/512RAM/250GB/X1600 256MB standard/Super


Not bad. I sure hope the iMacs get a better bump than that though.
I personally would like to see a 23" iMac with a 2.33 Core2Duo for $2099. :D

~Shard~
May 27, 2006, 01:50 PM
With Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest coming out, it would make sense for Apple to use a Core Duo in this machine, as the price of the Core Duos will decrease significantly once Intel's new Core 2 Duo offerings are out. The eMac has to be a very cost-conscious offering, so Apple would not stick a brand new Core 2 Duo proc in them, especially when most of their other products at that time would still be using Core Duos. Can't have the eMac out-spec the rest of the Mac line-up after all! ;)

But yeah, to keep costs down and make the machine more attractive to the educational institutions I'd expect Apple to put in a Core Duo, and have it built similar to the Mac mini and MacBook - perhaps even with a glossy screen! :eek: ;) And don't forget integrated graphics as well... :o :cool:

mccldwll
May 27, 2006, 01:52 PM
My prediction/guess has been/is a detuned 17" imac core duo, smaller hd, combo (superdrive also available for video lab work), no isight (trouble in a school setting) which could be available almost immediately for fall semester purchasing. My prediction/hope is that the new imac will be a larger form mini which will dock to a cinema display w/ isight (and available only as a unit), but which can be removed and carried to tv room (who wants the distraction/style of the present imac by tv). May be possible to also buy isight enabled cinema displays separately to which minis can dock.

CrackedButter
May 27, 2006, 01:54 PM
I wonder if they'll keep the eMac name...:confused: I'm sure this system won't be too far off from the 17" intel iMac. Maybe integrated graphics and a slower CPU. I wonder how cheap they'll try and make it. If I remember correctly the eMacs started at $799 or so...it would be nice if they had a sort of Intel Mac Mini system with a built-in display. :)

Steve Jobs said he wanted to have "Mac" in the product's name now so rather than call the eMac an "eMac" I think they will re-christen the eMac to the "eMac".

I'm going out on a limb here btw, don't blame me if I get it wrong but give me the credit if its right because you heard it here first.

Doctor Q
May 27, 2006, 02:09 PM
Students don't necessarily have less demanding requirements than other buyers these days, as students do video editing and other demanding tasks on their computers at schools. But starting prices have to remain low due to competition and (at least here in California) always-tight budgets. And low prices means something's gotta give - screen size, performance, or other shortcuts.

Apple would be wise to bundle plenty of software into these models (iLife and iWork at a minimum), since they can do that without adding to manufacturing costs and it'll help them in head-to-head competition with PCs.

w_parietti22
May 27, 2006, 02:33 PM
I was thinking something along these lines:

eMacs:

Good:
15" Widescreen 1280 x 800 - Glossy
1.5ghz Core Solo
Combo Drive
60gb HD
Intergrated Graphics
512mb of RAM

Price: $699

Better:
15" Widescreen 1280x800 -Glossy
1.66 Core Duo
Combo Drive
80gb HD
Integrated Graphics
512mb of RAM
Price: $749

Best:

17" Widescreen 1440x900 -Glossy
1.83ghz Core Duo
4x SL SuperDrive
100gb HD
ATI Radeon X1300 graphics with 64MB
1gb of RAM

$999


iMacs:

Good:
17-inch widescreen 1440x900 -Glossy or Matte Optional
2.0 GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
8x DL SuperDrive
ATI Radeon X1600 graphics with 128MB
Price: $1,299

Better:
20-inch widescreen 1680x1050 Glossy or Matte Optional
2.16 GHz Intel Core Duo
1gb (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
250GB Serial ATA hard drive
8x DL SuperDrive
ATI Radeon X1800 graphics with 256MB

Price: $1,499

Best:
23-inch widescreen 1920 x 1200 Glossy or Matte Optional
2.16 GHz Intel Core Duo
1gb (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
250GB Serial ATA hard drive
8x DL SuperDrive
ATI Radeon X1800 graphics with 256MB

Price: $1,699

There could be a possibility of taking out the 17" iMac all together and the Mac Mini would require a price reduce.

dops7107
May 27, 2006, 02:45 PM
Why can't Apple give us a low-cost MacTower? The Intel MacPros are not out yet. The current PowerMac G5 prices are ridiculous. I don't want to get an iMac because I already have a big LCD screen. I don't want a MacMini because I need better storage, expandability and graphics!

Arrrgh! Apple! Think of the average geek.

Gotta agree with you there - I've been wondering about this for a long time. It's an obvious gap in their line-up which every other computer manufacturer seems to cover. Having siad that, there aren't any other manufacturers that really can rival Apple for all-in-ones :rolleyes:

shadowmoses
May 27, 2006, 02:46 PM
I think the specs will be:

$599 or £399

-17" Standard screen not wide (its an edu model, no need for widescreen)
-512mb RAM upgradeable to 2gb
-GMA950 64mb Intergrated graphics possibly 128mb
-3.5" HD (Probably 120-300gb)
-Normal processor not mobile maybe the new Celeron D or something like that
-Slot Loading Combo or Superdrive (possibly standard tray loading depending on design route)
-AE built in, and bluetooth

All in a enclosure simular to the iMac G3's but smaller and more compact but not as compact as the Intel iMac's. It will be very tough and industrially designed...

I don't see why Apple would use portable components like core processor's when a Celeron D or something like that is a very efficient processor and would do the job fine, allowing Apple to produce these usints at a very affordable price.....

Also why should they use 2.5" Hard drives they arent pushed for space and they cost more so there is no need....

ShadoW

BlizzardBomb
May 27, 2006, 03:44 PM
it'll more likely use a 17" 1280x1024 glossy protected screen.

Apple uses 16:10 and always will.

I was thinking something along these lines:

eMacs
Good - $699
Better - $749
Best - $999

iMacs
Good - $1,299
Better - $1,499
Best - $1,699

There could be a possibility of taking out the 17" iMac all together and the Mac Mini would require a price reduce.

You're specs aren't far off :) My only problem is that it's far too many models. Apple have already simplified the laptops (MacBook Family vs. 2 iBooks sizes and 3 PB sizes) so why complicate the desktops? Personally, I hope the just keep the iMac design and just change what's inside it. Here's what I think would happen:

17" iMac (1440x900) - $999/£749
Core 2 Duo, either Conroe E6300 (1.86GHz) or Merom T7200 (2GHz)
512MB RAM, 160GB HD, SuperDrive
X1600 128MB

20" iMac (1680x1050) - $1,499/£1,149
Core 2 Duo, either Conroe E6400 (2.13GHz) or Merom T7400 (2.16GHz)
1GB RAM, 250GB HD, SuperDrive
X1600 Pro 128MB -> 256MB as an upgrade

23" iMac (1920x1200) - $1,999/£1,549 (Come on Apple, you know you want to :D)
Core 2 Duo, either Conroe E6600 (2.4GHz) or Merom T7600 (2.33Ghz)
1GB RAM, 250GB HD, SuperDrive
X1600 XT 256MB -> 512MB as an upgrade

I've put Conroe/Merom because even though Conroe is cheaper than Merom at the equivalent clock speed it all comes down to heat. I really think putting Conroe in it shouldn't be a problem though if the iMac could handle G5s.

The price can't be too low, or else it will choke Mac Mini sales (like what Mac Mini vs. eMac did). No integrated graphics on the iMac, but the Mac Mini should keep it for the next revision and have a G965 instead which will perform a lot better.

Apple have been selling displays at the same price for a while now and the cost to Apple must of dropped a fair bit so it's time for them to pass the savings on to us ;)

sam10685
May 27, 2006, 03:49 PM
hope the price is affordable... and a boost in the imac specs would be nice too.

Lollypop
May 27, 2006, 03:49 PM
I think the specs will be:

$599 or £399

-17" Standard screen not wide (its an edu model, no need for widescreen)
-512mb RAM upgradeable to 2gb
-GMA950 64mb Intergrated graphics possibly 128mb
-3.5" HD (Probably 120-300gb)
-Normal processor not mobile maybe the new Celeron D or something like that
-Slot Loading Combo or Superdrive (possibly standard tray loading depending on design route)
-AE built in, and bluetooth

All in a enclosure simular to the iMac G3's but smaller and more compact but not as compact as the Intel iMac's. It will be very tough and industrially designed...

I don't see why Apple would use portable components like core processor's when a Celeron D or something like that is a very efficient processor and would do the job fine, allowing Apple to produce these usints at a very affordable price.....

Also why should they use 2.5" Hard drives they arent pushed for space and they cost more so there is no need....

ShadoW

That sounds ight to me. But have the components easily upgradable like the macbook. The edu market wants something cheap over the long run as well, having the ability to upgrade things without external help will be cool. Dont think apple will go over 64megs for integrated graphics soon, there is no reason, the more they "add" the less memory there is for the OS.

matticus008
May 27, 2006, 03:56 PM
23" iMac (1920x1200) - $1,999/£1,549 (Come on Apple, you know you want to :D)
Core 2 Duo, either Conroe E6600 (2.4GHz) or Merom T7400 (2.33Ghz)
1GB RAM, 250GB HD, SuperDrive
X1600 XT 256MB -> 512MB as an upgrade

[...]
The price can't be too low, or else it will choke Mac Mini sales (like what Mac Mini vs. eMac did). No integrated graphics on the iMac, but the Mac Mini should keep it for the next revision and have a G965 instead which will perform a lot better.

The prices are way too low, but the specs are reasonable, except that I doubt there will be a 23" all in one at all. Just looking at the 23" you can tell that Apple wouldn't even sell a PowerMac (without the 23" display) for that price--even $2799 would be an optimistic price for something like that right at introduction.

Di9it8
May 27, 2006, 03:59 PM
My prediction/guess has been/is a detuned 17" imac core duo, ... no isight

Taking out isight allows them to minimise costs and address the privacy issues.
This is also the time to update Apple Works as a package, to compete with MS Office.

But the absolutely critical issue is that education purchasing takes 3-9months lead in, so therefore the education purchasers need to now what is available for January next year.

The cheapest thing for Apple to do is just to rebadge one of their existing iMacs, whilst the rest of the range is speed bumped etc.

BlizzardBomb
May 27, 2006, 04:00 PM
The prices are way too low, but the specs are reasonable, except that I doubt there will be a 23" all in one at all. Just looking at the 23" you can tell that Apple wouldn't even sell a PowerMac (without the 23" display) for that price--even $2799 would be an optimistic price for something like that right at introduction.

Cost to Apple (estimates apart from Conroe):

23" display - $1,000
Conroe E6600 - $315 (would be a lot less with bulk pricing)
X1600 XT - $100
RAM, HD, Optical Drive - $250

Total - $1,665

Reasonable isn't it?

mklos
May 27, 2006, 04:04 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if Apple used the 15.4" Glossy Widescreen from the MacBook Pro, with an option to get the 17" Glossy Widescreen from the MacBook Pro. Throw in a 1.66 Core Duo, 512MB DDR2 SODIMM, 60 GB notebook HD, Integrated Intel GMA950 graphics, AirPort/Bluetooth Wireless, with optional CDRW or SuperDrive (no optical standard). Selling for around $799 with the 17" w/SuperDrive and 80 GB notebook HD going for $999.

Glossy screens would be great in a school atmosphere with kids ALWAYS putting their fingers on the display. A glossy display would be easy to clean and more durable.

Schools don't need optical drives in every computer. Its plain not necessary and a lot of them prefer if they weren't in there. Then you don't have to worry about students/teachers bringing in burned CDs, installing applications from CDs, etc... You can use Apple Remote Desktop to do nearly anything that would require a CD. Schools can always buy a couple external CDRW and/or DVDRW Drives for use around the school. This would save Apple some money. If Apple wants to sell a Mac that will compete with Dell, its gotta be around the $799 mark or lower if possible. With a flat screen display, they gotta strip out everything from the iMac that isn't necessary like the iSight Cam, Remote/FrontRow, ATI Graphics, large displays, and optical drives.

w_parietti22
May 27, 2006, 04:08 PM
Apple uses 16:10 and always will.



You're specs aren't far off :) My only problem is that it's far too many models. Apple have already simplified the laptops (MacBook Family vs. 2 iBooks sizes and 3 PB sizes) so why complicate the desktops? Personally, I hope the just keep the iMac design and just change what's inside it. Here's what I think would happen:

17" iMac (1440x900) - $999/£749
Core 2 Duo, either Conroe E6300 (1.86GHz) or Merom T7200 (2GHz)
512MB RAM, 160GB HD, SuperDrive
X1600 128MB

20" iMac (1680x1050) - $1,499/£1,149
Core 2 Duo, either Conroe E6400 (2.13GHz) or Merom T7400 (2.16GHz)
1GB RAM, 250GB HD, SuperDrive
X1600 Pro 128MB -> 256MB as an upgrade

23" iMac (1920x1200) - $1,999/£1,549 (Come on Apple, you know you want to :D)
Core 2 Duo, either Conroe E6600 (2.4GHz) or Merom T7600 (2.33Ghz)
1GB RAM, 250GB HD, SuperDrive
X1600 XT 256MB -> 512MB as an upgrade

I've put Conroe/Merom because even though Conroe is cheaper than Merom at the equivalent clock speed it all comes down to heat. I really think putting Conroe in it shouldn't be a problem though if the iMac could handle G5s.

The price can't be too low, or else it will choke Mac Mini sales (like what Mac Mini vs. eMac did). No integrated graphics on the iMac, but the Mac Mini should keep it for the next revision and have a G965 instead which will perform a lot better.

Apple have been selling displays at the same price for a while now and the cost to Apple must of dropped a fair bit so it's time for them to pass the savings on to us ;)

How about something like this:

Mac Minis:

Good:
1.66GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB memory
60GB Serial ATA hard drive
Combo drive (DVD-ROM/CD-RW)
Intergrated Graphics
Optional TV-Tuner

Price: $499

Best:
1.83GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB memory
80GB Serial ATA hard drive
4x SL SuperDrive
Intergrated Graphics
Built-In TV tuner

Price: $599

eMacs:

Good:
15" Widescreen 1280 x 800 - Glossy
1.66ghz Core Duo
Combo Drive
60gb HD
Intergrated Graphics
512mb of RAM

Price: $699

Best:
15" Widescreen 1280x800 -Glossy
1.83ghz Core Duo
4x SL SuperDrive
80gb HD
Integrated Graphics
512mb of RAM
Price: $799

iMacs:

Good:
17-inch widescreen 1440x900 -Glossy or Matte Optional
2.0 GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
8x DL SuperDrive
ATI Radeon X1600 graphics with 128MB
Price: $1099

Better:
20-inch widescreen 1680x1050 Glossy or Matte Optional
2.16 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1gb (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
250GB Serial ATA hard drive
8x DL SuperDrive
ATI Radeon X1800 graphics with 256MB

Price: $1,499

Best:
23-inch widescreen 1920 x 1200 Glossy or Matte Optional
2.33 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1gb (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
300GB Serial ATA hard drive
8x DL SuperDrive
ATI Radeon X1800 graphics with 256MB

Price: $1,799

mklos
May 27, 2006, 04:18 PM
I think the specs will be:

$599 or £399

-17" Standard screen not wide (its an edu model, no need for widescreen)
-512mb RAM upgradeable to 2gb
-GMA950 64mb Intergrated graphics possibly 128mb
-3.5" HD (Probably 120-300gb)
-Normal processor not mobile maybe the new Celeron D or something like that
-Slot Loading Combo or Superdrive (possibly standard tray loading depending on design route)
-AE built in, and bluetooth

All in a enclosure simular to the iMac G3's but smaller and more compact but not as compact as the Intel iMac's. It will be very tough and industrially designed...

I don't see why Apple would use portable components like core processor's when a Celeron D or something like that is a very efficient processor and would do the job fine, allowing Apple to produce these usints at a very affordable price.....

Also why should they use 2.5" Hard drives they arent pushed for space and they cost more so there is no need....

ShadoW

I don't see Apple using a 17" regular display. It would actually cost Apple just as a widescreen in the long run much because that would be the only model to use a regular 17" LCD display. Also no way in hell is Apple going to sell a Mac with a 17" screen for $599. IMO, its just not possible. I doubt they'll be able to sell a 15 or 15.4" widescreen for $599.

I doubt you'll see Apple use the Celeron in any Mac. Its old technology and Apple won't use old technology. The CoreDuo is going to go down in price so I don't think pricing on the CPU will be an issue. Using a CoreSolo isn't really saving Apple any money either since its just a CoreDuo with one of the core disabled and is just a few bucks less in bulk.

If you have a 15" LCD AIO, then you're really pressed for space so a notebook HD is a must unless you want a 3" thick computer? You're possibly thinking this will have a CRT display in it? It most certainly won't and wouldn't be a good move if they did.

Optical drives aren't necessary for all educational computers. Like I posted previously its like having floppy drives in every computer. You have to keep an eye on students/teachers bringing in CDs from home, installing programs, etc... Its just a mess with some school districts. Make it an option for either a CDRW/DVD Combo Drive, or SuperDrive.

Wireless is a must for a lot of school districts and can be very handy if implemented correctly. It will allow for easy moving of the computers, less cables, and no problems with bad cables, or students pulling the ethernet cable out of the computer. It also enables things like wireless printing using either bluetooth or AirPort, cleaner work area, etc... Just enable MAC Address Filtering and don't broadcast the signal and any district would be pretty damn secure.

matticus008
May 27, 2006, 04:20 PM
Best:
15" Widescreen 1280x800 -Glossy
1.83ghz Core Duo
4x SL SuperDrive
80gb HD
Integrated Graphics
512mb of RAM
Price: $799

iMacs:

Good:
17-inch widescreen 1440x900 -Glossy or Matte Optional
2.0 GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB (single SO-DIMM) 667MHz DDR2 SDRAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
8x DL SuperDrive
ATI Radeon X1600 graphics with 128MB
Price: $1099
You've bested the current MacBook by $400+. From there, your prices get progressively worse, all the way to downright ludicrous for your 23" iMac, which you're selling for $500 more (less than the price of a base model mini) than just the (non-Apple competing) displays sell for. The Apple display is just $400 less--even if they drop the price to below that of competitors (to 999), you're talking about selling a $1400+ computer for just $600.

4God
May 27, 2006, 04:22 PM
The prices are way too low, but the specs are reasonable, except that I doubt there will be a 23" all in one at all. Just looking at the 23" you can tell that Apple wouldn't even sell a PowerMac (without the 23" display) for that price--even $2799 would be an optimistic price for something like that right at introduction.


Well, as I mentioned in an earlier post, $2099 would probably be more feasable.
Let's take away the price of a 20" display - $799 from the current 20" iMac.
Now you have iMac guts for around $899. Then add the price of a 23" display - $1199.
Where does that leave us? Just about $2099. Hmmmm....close, not factoring in the
extra acrylic and so on. Not exactly perfect, but reasonably close IMO. :D

matticus008
May 27, 2006, 04:38 PM
Cost to Apple (estimates apart from Conroe):

23" display - $1,000
Conroe E6600 - $315 (would be a lot less with bulk pricing)
X1600 XT - $100
RAM, HD, Optical Drive - $250

Total - $1,665

Reasonable isn't it?
No. Let's say $900 for the display, $300 for the CPU, $350 for the other parts you've mentioned. You're still leaving out the logic board (~$50), wireless components ($25), keyboard/mouse/remote/iSight/accessories/AC adapter ($150), case/cooling/power supply ($85), and the minimum ~20% markup (for labor, shipping, packaging, R&D, inventory tracking, marketing, capital cost recovery, and profit).

All together: $2349, bare minimum, and I didn't even mention software R&D or planned support costs, and I've even undercut your price proposals in a few areas.

IndyGopher
May 27, 2006, 04:39 PM
Apple uses 16:10 and always will.

Considering all the fairly radical changes Apple has rolled out in the last couple of years, that statement is basically asinine.

BlizzardBomb
May 27, 2006, 04:50 PM
Considering all the fairly radical changes Apple has rolled out in the last couple of years, that statement is basically asinine.

Ok, Apple uses 16:10 and will for a while ;)


No.

Let's say $900 for the display, $300 for the CPU, $350 for the other parts you've mentioned. You're still leaving out the logic board (~$50), wireless components ($25), keyboard/mouse/remote/iSight/accessories/AC adapter ($150), case/cooling/power supply ($85), and the minimum ~20% markup (for labor, shipping, packaging, R&D, inventory tracking, marketing, capital cost recovery, and profit).

All together: $2349, bare minimum, and I didn't even mention software R&D or planned support costs, and I've even undercut your price proposals in a few areas.

I'm almost certain that it is possible at $2,000. If Apple can sell a 20" at $1,699, a 23" at $1,999 with similar specs should be easily possible. Remember that the aluminium case of the ACDs probably costs more than the plastic of iMacs, so I'm now guessing that the display itself would cost Apple $800 possibly less.

Spectrum
May 27, 2006, 04:59 PM
Ok, Apple uses 16:10 and will for a while ;)


Apart from the origianal iMac G4, the old cinema display 17", and the retired PB15" (15:10)

And what is the obsession people are having with putting glossy screens on the thing????? That would be sh**e.

~Shard~
May 27, 2006, 05:01 PM
And what is the obsession people are having with putting glossy screens on the thing????? That would be sh**e.


Just look at the MacBooks - it's the style of the times! :D ;)

mklos
May 27, 2006, 05:20 PM
Apart from the origianal iMac G4, the old cinema display 17", and the retired PB15" (15:10)

And what is the obsession people are having with putting glossy screens on the thing????? That would be sh**e.

It would be a good idea only because it protects the display and is easier to clean. If you have kids at home you know that they absolutely cannot keep the damn fingers off the display. So having a glossy display would help with this.

bloodycape
May 27, 2006, 05:21 PM
Cost to Apple (estimates apart from Conroe):

23" display - $1,000
Conroe E6600 - $315 (would be a lot less with bulk pricing)
X1600 XT - $100
RAM, HD, Optical Drive - $250

Total - $1,665

Reasonable isn't it?
No way would the X1600 be that cheap, even for bulk. If anything it will be $200 and the RAM, HD and Optical drive also seem a little optimistic for a dual layer combo I would think it be more like at $300.

aswitcher
May 27, 2006, 05:22 PM
I can see a lot of people getting one of these machines for word processing and internet instead of the gruntier iMacs.

edinz
May 27, 2006, 05:23 PM
CRTs have deservedly passed on, like the carburettor and the wooden ox cart before it. Nostalgia has a place, like in a museum. Perhaps a budget flat panel display for the MacMini or drop the 17" iMac specification and pricing to meet the education market's expectations, but let's never mention the CRT again in the same sentence as Apple, please!

Spectrum
May 27, 2006, 05:26 PM
Just look at the MacBooks - it's the style of the times! :D ;)
:eek:

I was doing some typing on my Powerbook today with my back to a large sunny window today. There was appreciable glare, but at no point/position did it affect my ability to see what I was doing.

Just for fun, I got out the god-awful 15" Glossy Gateway BrickTM that my gf's work bought her, and put it alongside the PB. Yes! I could see myself in it, the window in it, and the people in the apartment across the street.

Shift it to one side: no window anymore, but I can still see the reflection of the walls in the room, and a dark outline of myself of course.

At a distance, and from an angle, the glare is less obvious, but the image on the PB just looks SO much better. It looks like it is painted on the screen. The colours on the Gateway just look garish.

This, just my outspoken opinion about the stupidity of glossy screens. :D

matticus008
May 27, 2006, 05:27 PM
I'm almost certain that it is possible at $2,000. If Apple can sell a 20" at $1,699, a 23" at $1,999 with similar specs should be easily possible. Remember that the aluminium case of the ACDs probably costs more than the plastic of iMacs, so I'm now guessing that the display itself would cost Apple $800 possibly less.
There's a $500 difference between the display prices, and I've already discounted the 23" one 35% off the retail price (where the key expense is the panel and supporting hardware, not the case--there might be a $30 difference there). LCDs aren't priced evenly (the difference between a 17" and 20" is far less than between a 20" and a 23", for example). Even a $300 generic parts increase means something closer to $400 at the retail end. But the specific nature of the LCD in particular would result in a higher return rate because of pixel problems, which means that per-unit support costs would also increase, along with shipping costs due to increased size and weight, and higher power consumption because of the larger panel, and more heat, and you can see how what seems to be a simple change snowballs into something much bigger.

You can look at Dell for a rough example. Their 17" monitors are $250 or so (widescreen would be priced higher if they sold them), and their 20 is roughly $400. Their 24" is $950. Even without the computer, the price differential is massive, and Apple will never be able to buy or sell for as cheaply as Dell. So $400 might buy you a faster CPU and a bigger iMac now, but it doesn't mean the next bigger one can be done in the same price constraints.

rockthecasbah
May 27, 2006, 05:29 PM
What about the emac made it fail? What about this computer will be different in that respect?
it's hideous :p My guess is that with the Mac Mini's more stylish enclosure and cheaper price (since many already have mice, screens, or keyboards) it was a better buy, so sales of the eMac slumped. Also iMac prices may have been more appealing with the G5 redesign and those who would have purchased an eMac spent a little more to get the new iMac.

GilGrissom
May 27, 2006, 05:30 PM
Personally I really hope this is true. I don't really mind whether it is a CRT or LCD. As long as it is cheap and durable (hard thick plastic) so they last in schools. CRT would make sure it can't be stolen easily due to size and weight, a problem a lot of schools I know suffer from. We have huge 17" CRTs for our machines that power Interactive Whiteboards in one of the schools I work for, for the primary reason they are extremely hard (and cheaper than LCD!) to pick up and cart out the window with! (at least slows them down enough for Police etc to get there!)

My friend made his switch to Apple with an eMac when they were open to the general public, proof they should be still made so, granted maybe not advertised like the iMac, but still available if someone looks and finds it and wants it.

I really hope this is true. A nice cheap Apple Mac for education again, the eMac was so perfect in so many ways, and ofcourse had it's downfalls. I hope any reincarnation rolls out the bad bits and keeps the good bits.

If it's true I could be looking to buy some of these for my schools.

081440
May 27, 2006, 07:10 PM
I've been asking about this for ages... Nice to finally have an answer of sorts.

If they go with an LCD they will need to put alot of protection on it. Schools are not freindly places for computers. Plus how are they going to weight the iMac down. It's almost small enough to slide into a large backpack, something that the eMac could not do.

I see there being two models:

lesser - (for most workstations, and classroom/teacher machines)
1.83 ghz Core Duo (sooo much cheaper once Core 2 Duo is out)
Integrated graphics
40 GB HD (Most schools have main servers for all acounts and where all data is saved so only software would be on the machine)
Combo Drive
front side USB ports - (most students now use there iPods or flashdrives for data transfer)
Easy open case for upgrades / in-house maintance


better - (for things like CAD, Light video work, and more intense tasks)
2.0 ghz Core Duo
ATI Graphics (of some sort)
120+ GB HD (for video work this is nessasary)
Super Drive
front side USB ports - (most students now use there iPods or flashdrives for data transfer)
Easy open case for upgrades / in-house maintance


With both machines being boxier and heavier than any iMac

Doctor Q
May 27, 2006, 07:22 PM
I don't expect Apple do make any changes for classroom security reasons, even as school Macs become lighter. With a standard security slot, buyers can insert a standard lock and cable the eMac (or iMac, or whatever its called) to the table.

praterkeith
May 27, 2006, 07:32 PM
This actually really isnt all THAT bad...if they give a 17" screen option it would be worth it if indeed the HD and the RAM could be upgraded to what you listed. I'm not sure about the $1000 price tag though. I'm sure it will stay around $800ish. But very nice. I actually had an eMac and they only problem I had with it was the CRT gave off a quiet sqeeling noise that was rediculously annoying when used in my dorm room. So I got a mini.



I guess it would be like this:
One eMac model:
1.83 GHz Core 2 Duo
512 MB 667 MHz PC2-5300 DDR2 RAM (if not better, upgradeable to 1/2 GB)
120 GB 3.5" HDD at 7.200 rpm. (upgradeable to 160/200 GB)
Intel GMA/950 128 MB DDR2
15" LCD widescreen display at 1280x800
Buil-in iSight, microphone and stereo-speakers
8x DVD+/-RW/DL SuperDrive
Internal powersupply
(actually same case and connectors as iMac, just thinner)
Ships with ? keyboard and Mighty Mouse
FrontRow
Since it will be a too big compeditor for the Mini, I think it will be around 900-1000 bucks.:(

macffooky
May 27, 2006, 07:39 PM
it's hideous

Don't badmouth my baby, eye of the beholder etc., etc.

celebrian23
May 27, 2006, 07:42 PM
I'm pretty sure the emac's ugliness is part of the reason why its sales started to slide, especially compared to the elegance of the other apple machines.

Abstract
May 27, 2006, 08:09 PM
I think the specs will be:

$599 or £399

-17" Standard screen not wide (its an edu model, no need for widescreen)



Yeah, except it would cost Apple a lot to offer that, since they currently don't buy any screen of such description, nor do they offer any internal configurations that would allow for such a strangely shaped casing.


I don't see Apple using a 17" regular display. It would actually cost Apple just as a widescreen in the long run much because that would be the only model to use a regular 17" LCD display. Also no way in hell is Apple going to sell a Mac with a 17" screen for $599. IMO, its just not possible. I doubt they'll be able to sell a 15 or 15.4" widescreen for $599.


........Optical drives aren't necessary for all educational computers. Like I posted previously its like having floppy drives in every computer. You have to keep an eye on students/teachers bringing in CDs from home, installing programs, etc... Its just a mess with some school districts. Make it an option for either a CDRW/DVD Combo Drive, or SuperDrive.



I think Apple will use 17" displays so that they don't have to reenginneer their case designs too much. Right now, everything inside the iMac fits just perfectly. If they went for a smaller case for a 15" iMac, they'd have to make the case smaller, but then they'd need to make the case much thicker to compensate for using a smaller screen. I mean, the fact that the inside was originally too small is why there's that bit of extra white space (where the Apple logo is on the iMac) below the screen..........to have more internal space (to fit everything in, and for heat reasons). I'm sure that white space wasn't their first choice, but it offered the engineers more internal space.

I don't really expect a 15" iMac, nor do I expect a 2.5" laptop harddrive because of their cost, nor do I expect iSight or a graphics card. But if they do decide to use a 15.4" widescreen LCD, then expect a different case design to anything we have now ---- or at least a thicker iMac.

MB Buyer?
May 27, 2006, 08:20 PM
the new emac should be a 17" iMac with GMA950 and choice of combo/super drive, keeping it at 17" will mean no new enclosure costs, and allow enough price difference to seperate it from the mini

the imacs should be upgraded to 20" and 23" - i mean who doesnt want a 23" imac? :)

andrewag
May 27, 2006, 08:37 PM
Like everyone has said, a cut down imac only for education makes the most sense. Integrated graphics, a smaller HD and maybe no optical drive? Core solo most likely. Going to a 15" display is a silly idea considering other manufactures bundle 17" displays.

The education system i work for have an agreement with Apple to buy the 1.83Ghz iMacs at AU$1400 (they sell for $1800 to education) which is a pretty sweet deal. They come with four years onsite warranty as well.

Heb1228
May 27, 2006, 08:57 PM
This, just my outspoken opinion about the stupidity of glossy screens. :D
I agree. Stay away from glossy screens! I've got a mirror in my room if I need one.

rockthecasbah
May 27, 2006, 09:30 PM
Don't badmouth my baby, eye of the beholder etc., etc.
i agree beauty is in the eye of the beholder, as well as that beauty is not merely an external measurement, but i would have to say that they are not much to look at. Beautiful at heart but...oy ;)

Plymouthbreezer
May 27, 2006, 09:53 PM
Wy do people think the would re use the iMac G4 design? Companies don't phase out designs and re introducethem years later with newer technology... :rolleyes:

Ok, maybe some do.

But, Apple wouldn't reuse an old design.

FF_productions
May 27, 2006, 10:04 PM
Wy do people think the would re use the iMac G4 design? Companies don't phase out designs and re introducethem years later with newer technology... :rolleyes:

Ok, maybe some do.

But, Apple wouldn't reuse an old design.

It was a good design in my opinion.

I wonder how creative Apple is going to be with this new Intel "eMac". I was kinda down when they dumped the eMac from the Apple Store because it really was a good machine at a good price. I definetely want to see some specs!

sam10685
May 27, 2006, 10:13 PM
This, just my outspoken opinion about the stupidity of glossy screens. :D

i agree... lame idea... but apparently it's catching on. :confused:

rockthecasbah
May 27, 2006, 10:16 PM
what would prevent Apple from taking what would essentially be a Mac Mini, slap that onto the back of an LCD screen, enclose that in a curving white plastic, and make spaces for an optical drive and ports? Sounds pretty simple, no need to redesign anything. It could even be the same specs as the Mini if they wanted. No need to extra expenses, but is still all-in-one, stylish, and new.

zap2
May 27, 2006, 10:24 PM
But, Apple wouldn't reuse an old design.


Yup if you forget these

eMac is an new iMac G3

And the intel switch(not time between but still same idea)
iMac CD-iMac G5
PowerBook-MacBook Pro
Mac Mini G4-Mac Mini intel

Also Steve has been know to do crazy things, who replaces the top selling music player, Steve does:cool:

My idea for an intel eMac
15'' iLamp design
$899
1.5Ghz intel Core Dou
80Gb Harddrive
512Mbs
Combo Drive
No iSight
FrontRow
IGG

or 1099
15'''
1.66GHz Core Duo
120Gb Harddrive
512mb RAM
Super Drive
No iSight
FrontRow
IIG

Doctor Q
May 27, 2006, 10:27 PM
A Mac that's really all-in-one would be a large MacBook, not a small iMac. Why? Because the iMac, like the eMac, uses a separate keyboard and mouse, making two more items that schools might have to secure from theft.

So, odd as it seems, the MacBook form factor, if prevented from being portable, may best suit a classsroom. Of course, it doesn't have to be thin with a flip-up lid, so imagine a fat permanently-open MacBook - that's what could replace the eMac. Who's going to mock one up?

futurepastnow
May 27, 2006, 10:27 PM
This could be the answer to a question I've had since January. The iMac uses Intel's 945GM chipset (http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/945gm/index.htm), which has integrated video, even though the iMac doesn't use it.

If Apple took the iMac motherboard and left the GPU socket unpopulated (no x1600 chip), the GMA950 would take over video output. Give it a 1.5Ghz Core Solo, a crappy optical drive, and the cheapest SATA drive available, and Apple could shave $400-$500 of the cost of the machine.

That's my prediction, take it or leave it.

MattyMac
May 27, 2006, 10:57 PM
This would definitely be a good thing. I for one would most likely go for it! A mac mini gets a bit too expensive after having to buy a display, keyboard, mouse, etc.
So...I can't wait to see what they come out with next!

sushi
May 27, 2006, 11:08 PM
Here's to 15"/17" Edu-only iMacs being released along with the Mac Pros.
Would love to see it.

Apple tends to give full featured computers.

For example, the current 17 inch iMac specs:
- 512MB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 1x512
- 160GB Serial ATA drive
- ATI Radeon X1600/128MB VRAM
- SuperDrive 8x (DVD+R DL/DVD+RW/CD-RW)
- 17-inch widescreen LCD
- 1.83GHz Intel Core Duo
- AirPort Extreme
- Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR

This at $1,299 retail or $1,199 educational discount.

Why not have a low end iMac offering. Something like this:
- 512MB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 1x512
- 40GB Serial ATA drive
- Onboard Intel Graphics
- Combo drive
- 15-inch widescreen LCD
- Somthing less than a 1.83GHz Intel Core Duo. Maybe a Core Solo or slower Core Duo.
- AirPort Extreme
- Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR

Would be fantastic for office type environments which traditionally run MSFT Office and for classrooms that need basic functionality.

Price around $700-800.

Having an all in one design for the traditional office would be great. Don't need a large HD. 40GB is more than plenty. Intel Graphics is more than sufficient for Microsoft Office, email, browsing and such. Having an all in one design saves set up time and parts tracking.

I think for many classroom situations, this would be sufficient as well.

Multimedia
May 27, 2006, 11:14 PM
I've seen Tuscon mandate iBooks for all students (http://futuremediatv.blogspot.com/2005/09/empire-ibook-high-tucson-arizona_24.html). Man these MacBooks would be killer for the next generation of Mac lovers - esp because they also run Windows. :) What a huge amount of power in the hands of kids.

Maybe a 1.66 Core 2 Duo MacBook for schools @ $899 would work?

Les Kern
May 27, 2006, 11:28 PM
I'm already helping a school plan their next computer purchases, to replace the Macs in our computer lab, and the PC-vs.-Mac and price/performance debates are back in our planning committee for their annual visits.
Knowing that Apple will introduce new up-to-date Macs, if this rumor is true, will make a positive difference in promoting the Mac option. It would help if we knew the price too.

I am doing the same. This fall I begin planning a lease of about 1 million bucks for the school year one year after that, alternating every two years for both high school campuses with a 4-year life expectancy.
While the eMac was low priced and has served us VERY well in some of the "we don't need a top model" applications, by the time I actually order, the dust would have settled and I can look forward to a mature edu product line.
At last the stars are aligning, and I couldn't be happier.
As for the price... they HAVE to keep it in line with the eMac, and as LCD prices drop, they will. My guess is they will bottom out at about 700 bucks.

what would prevent Apple from taking what would essentially be a Mac Mini, slap that onto the back of an LCD screen, enclose that in a curving white plastic, and make spaces for an optical drive and ports? Sounds pretty simple, no need to redesign anything. It could even be the same specs as the Mini if they wanted. No need to extra expenses, but is still all-in-one, stylish, and new.

Because I think folks will know that, and it wouldn't look good for a company known for it's killer design team to retro anything.
If Dell did that we'd be trashing them big-time... wouldn't we?
That being said, it WOULD be cheaper!

jamesi
May 27, 2006, 11:43 PM
i cant imagine this working very well at all to be honest b/c the mac mini fits the needs of a school perfectly. if anything i would just lower the price of the mini to a base price of $499. there isnt much chance that apple would be nice enough to price the emac less than the mini considering the companies history of pricey goods.

my other thought is that if apple only lets the new emac be sold to schools, then would they be offered at a cheap bulk price? not really sure

sushi
May 27, 2006, 11:47 PM
Because the iMac, like the eMac, uses a separate keyboard and mouse, making two more items that schools might have to secure from theft.
Valid point.

One reason why the iMac form factor is so nice compared to the typical PC setup. Fewer wires & parts (speakers, mic, camera).

Generally, I think that keyboards and mice are fairly safe from theft. However, I am sure it depends on the school system/grade.

Multimedia
May 28, 2006, 12:14 AM
Would love to see it.

Apple tends to give full featured computers.

For example, the current 17 inch iMac specs:
- 512MB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 1x512
- 160GB Serial ATA drive
- ATI Radeon X1600/128MB VRAM
- SuperDrive 8x (DVD+R DL/DVD+RW/CD-RW)
- 17-inch widescreen LCD
- 1.83GHz Intel Core Duo
- AirPort Extreme
- Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR

This at $1,299 retail or $1,199 educational discount.Don't even need dedicated graphics for Final Cut Studio. Today's integrated graphics are more powerful than yesterday's dedicated and support both Quartz Extreme and Core Image. Unnecessary expense. Bluetooth for school? Perhaps if it doesn't cost Apple more but I can't imagine why.Why not have a low end iMac offering. Something like this:
- 512MB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 1x512
- 40GB Serial ATA drive
- Onboard Intel Graphics
- Combo drive
- 15-inch widescreen LCD
- Somthing less than a 1.83GHz Intel Core Duo. Maybe a Core Solo or slower Core Duo.
- AirPort Extreme
- Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR

Would be fantastic for office type environments which traditionally run MSFT Office and for classrooms that need basic functionality.

Price around $700-800.

Having an all in one design for the traditional office would be great. Don't need a large HD. 40GB is more than plenty. Intel Graphics is more than sufficient for Microsoft Office, email, browsing and such. Having an all in one design saves set up time and parts tracking.

I think for many classroom situations, this would be sufficient as well.Core Solo? God I hope not. Price of 1.66GHz Core 2 Duo Merom is pretty much the bottom of the processors by September. That would make for a great new 64-bit Leopard ready eMac's foundation.

alec
May 28, 2006, 12:31 AM
It'll just be nice to have an all-in-one sub-$1000 Mac back on the market. I know it doesn't appeal to a lot of the Mac Rumors crowd, but a compatible price tag can really help attract users that don't need a full featured computer.

IamtheGTIguy
May 28, 2006, 12:47 AM
Sorry to say this guys, but some of you are such lame mac geeks that you've never built a computer yourself and have no concept of component costs, etc...

As much as I like Macs and Mac OS, the one thing you miss out on (for better or worse) is the first-hand knowledge of hardware you get when you build a performance PC.

The new eMac will likely be around $899, possibly $999.

There is no reason not to offer wides screen - and 15.4" widescreen really isn't big enough for a desktop. Moreover, the marginal cost of a 17" screen is virtually zilch. Combine this with the fact that Apple alreadh has engineered a 17" body for the iMac, and its obvious that the eMac will be a 17" widescreen likely with 1440 x 900 resolution.

It likely will still have iSight, but not bluetooth or wireless. Most school networks are still hard-wired. ISight, however, is virtually free and already engineered into the frames of the iMacs.
It likely will not have a core solo, but rather leftover core-duos, probably T2300 1.66 GHZ Yonahs. THey cost marginally more than core-solos and are great for multitasking - soemthing school computers get used for all the time.

Finally, the harddrive is a 3.5" drive. THis is where most people on here don't seem to know anything about hardware costs. The reasons laptop harddrives go in increments of 60/80/100/120 GB is because they are 2.5" drives and far more expensive for larger capacities.

3.5" drives, however, now start at 80GB. The next step is 120GB, which is virtually the same price as 160GB.


It is assanine to think that the eMac will have a 40GB harddrive - again - it's a 3.5" drive. Most companies stopped making 3.5" drives that small years ago.

So here are my predicted specs:

-iSight
-No wireless, no bluetooth
-17" 1440x900
-1.66 GHZ Core Duo Yonah
-512 MB ram (2 x 256 due to the neceissity of running dual-channel for integrated graphics)
-Intel integrated 950 GMA
-80GB Harddrive
-Combo Drive (No need for superdrive)
-Special hard plastic casing around computer

-$899 available only to schools and through the education store.

p0intblank
May 28, 2006, 12:54 AM
I would love to see a new version of the eMac. The more Macs, the better! :D

~Shard~
May 28, 2006, 01:14 AM
I would love to see a new version of the eMac. The more Macs, the better! :D

Maybe along with these new eMacs then we'll see a Conroe mini tower to complement the new Mac Pros at WWDC in August. :eek: ;) :cool:

Multimedia
May 28, 2006, 01:16 AM
Sorry to say this guys, but some of you are such lame mac geeks that you've never built a computer yourself and have no concept of component costs, etc...

As much as I like Macs and Mac OS, the one thing you miss out on (for better or worse) is the first-hand knowledge of hardware you get when you build a performance PC.

The new eMac will likely be around $899, possibly $999.

There is no reason not to offer wides screen - and 15.4" widescreen really isn't big enough for a desktop. Moreover, the marginal cost of a 17" screen is virtually zilch. Combine this with the fact that Apple alreadh has engineered a 17" body for the iMac, and its obvious that the eMac will be a 17" widescreen likely with 1440 x 900 resolution.

It likely will still have iSight, but not bluetooth or wireless. Most school networks are still hard-wired. ISight, however, is virtually free and already engineered into the frames of the iMacs.
It likely will not have a core solo, but rather leftover core-duos, probably T2300 1.66 GHZ Yonahs. THey cost marginally more than core-solos and are great for multitasking - soemthing school computers get used for all the time.

Finally, the harddrive is a 3.5" drive. THis is where most people on here don't seem to know anything about hardware costs. The reasons laptop harddrives go in increments of 60/80/100/120 GB is because they are 2.5" drives and far more expensive for larger capacities.

3.5" drives, however, now start at 80GB. The next step is 120GB, which is virtually the same price as 160GB.


It is assanine to think that the eMac will have a 40GB harddrive - again - it's a 3.5" drive. Most companies stopped making 3.5" drives that small years ago.

So here are my predicted specs:

-iSight
-No wireless, no bluetooth
-17" 1440x900
-1.66 GHZ Core Duo Yonah
-512 MB ram (2 x 256 due to the neceissity of running dual-channel for integrated graphics)
-Intel integrated 950 GMA
-80GB Harddrive
-Combo Drive (No need for superdrive)
-Special hard plastic casing around computer

-$899 available only to schools and through the education store.Makes sense. But I Thought 1.66GHz Meroms Will Be Priced Same As 1.66GHz Yonahs By September. No? In the quantity Apple will need to make them why wouldn't they be all Merom from the start - especially with Leopard coming soon?

Multimedia
May 28, 2006, 01:28 AM
Maybe along with these new eMacs then we'll see a Conroe mini tower to complement the new Mac Pros at WWDC in August. :eek: ;) :cool:~Shard~ and Alden Shaw back on the mini tower watch 'til August. I hope you guys are right. But I'm mainly interested in the Woodcrest Quad. :)

GilGrissom
May 28, 2006, 01:44 AM
So here are my predicted specs:

-iSight
-No wireless, no bluetooth
-17" 1440x900
-1.66 GHZ Core Duo Yonah
-512 MB ram (2 x 256 due to the neceissity of running dual-channel for integrated graphics)
-Intel integrated 950 GMA
-80GB Harddrive
-Combo Drive (No need for superdrive)
-Special hard plastic casing around computer

-$899 available only to schools and through the education store.
While I agree with most of what you say, the old eMac had SuperDrive, Bluetooth & Wireless options, I don't see Apple taking them out (granted they may be only on the top model, or built to order only, but all Macs for at least the past year or two have all had wireless & bluetooth as standard, it's one of those things which defines a Mac in its spec, despite costs. True most schools are still wired networks, but you'd be surprised how many schools now dabble in wireless (at least over here) and how many would like to. All notebooks that I buy for my schools are all Centrino, still cheap, but the wireless is always there. Every school I know will more than likely get a Centrino notebook (half the time as it is the only one offered to them, but the fact of wireless being there still remains...it's too common and big these days to miss out). Schools would also expect (and maybe demand) to have wireless in an Apple Mac to help justify getting one over a normal PC. Remember component cost is one thing, but still making it a "Mac" and making it be chosen over a cheap RM or Stone (UK) based PC is still needed and not that easy.

Apple don't want to dilute what a "Mac" is too much for schools, there will still be the business thinking hope the teachers and pupils will then go home and want that new MacBook or iMac themselves.

Your price looks reasonable, giving the past price of the eMac and the possible LCD screen, but I hope it is hard surfaced (plastic/glass cover). Naturally I hope its lower! But as you say components are tricky and do cost money still!

~Shard~
May 28, 2006, 01:45 AM
~Shard~ and Alden Shaw back on the mini tower watch 'til August. I hope you guys are right. But I'm mainly interested in the Woodcrest Quad. :)

Hey, a man can always dream.... ;) I'm not holding my breath on it either, as I honestly think that we will probably just see Mac Pros for now, but it sure would be nice to see nonetheless. :)

Tab
May 28, 2006, 02:53 AM
OH **** new eMacs next Tuesday!!

matticus008
May 28, 2006, 02:55 AM
OH **** new eMacs next Tuesday!!
Not just eMacs, G5 eMacs!

sushi
May 28, 2006, 03:22 AM
Finally, the harddrive is a 3.5" drive. THis is where most people on here don't seem to know anything about hardware costs. The reasons laptop harddrives go in increments of 60/80/100/120 GB is because they are 2.5" drives and far more expensive for larger capacities.

3.5" drives, however, now start at 80GB. The next step is 120GB, which is virtually the same price as 160GB.

It is assanine to think that the eMac will have a 40GB harddrive - again - it's a 3.5" drive. Most companies stopped making 3.5" drives that small years ago.
I beg to differ...

Today, there are many 40GB Hard Drives for sale.

Prices for new 40GB are about $10-$20 cheaper than 80GB models. That is a significant savings on an OEM product.

I don't know the current standard mark up for OEM price costing, but let's say it's only 4 times. So a $10 OEM wholesale price difference would be equal to a $40 retail price difference. Of course the greater the difference in OEM price the greater the difference in retail pricing.

Now whether or not Apple decided to go with a 40GB vice 80GB is another issue. Everything must be taken into account when designing the package. In Apple's case, offering an 80GB may be a better marketing choice.

gekko513
May 28, 2006, 05:35 AM
What about the emac made it fail? What about this computer will be different in that respect?
I don't think the eMac failed at all. It just became too old.

elisha cuthbert
May 28, 2006, 05:49 AM
why do apple need to bother making an all-in-one they already have the imac and of they want to market it to an education market just drop the price, and maybe even make a special program to record all homework given to a student

GilGrissom
May 28, 2006, 06:02 AM
why do apple need to bother making an all-in-one they already have the imac and of they want to market it to an education market just drop the price, and maybe even make a special program to record all homework given to a student
Because of the market the iMac is already aimed at and the technology already in the iMac.

Granted I'd love to have the iMac technology in an eMac priced product! But (from Apple especially!) I doubt it will happen.

Despite its all-in-one design of the iMac I still see other potential for a seperate education all-in-one. Maybe it will be exactly the same as the iMac, but with just cheaper bits inside and labelled the eMac again (or EduMac?! lol!). Or Apple might be adding new thinking to the education machine, being as the eMac has gone and they might be bringing it back. "If you're gonna do it, do it properly" kinda thinking perhaps. Then again just a simple rejig of an iMacs insides are just as likely I guess.

sushi
May 28, 2006, 06:58 AM
why do apple need to bother making an all-in-one they already have the imac and of they want to market it to an education market just drop the price, and maybe even make a special program to record all homework given to a student
There's a thing called profit! ;)

Apple must make a profit, so if they use the current iMac, they would need to remove/change some items such as:

- Use a 15 inch vice 17 inch display

- Video card and use the Intel Graphics chip that is already on the MoBo

- Smaller Hard Drive

- Combo vice SuperDrive

- Remove the WiFi and Bluetooth

- Use a slower processor

- Remove the iSight camera

The current iMac education price is $1,199 vice the retail price of $1,299. If they did all the above, the price could be reduced considerably. I would imagine that the price could drop by $400-500 bucks resulting in a $700-800 iMac for education.

Pancake
May 28, 2006, 07:12 AM
A Mac that's really all-in-one would be a large MacBook, not a small iMac. Why? Because the iMac, like the eMac, uses a separate keyboard and mouse, making two more items that schools might have to secure from theft.

So, odd as it seems, the MacBook form factor, if prevented from being portable, may best suit a classsroom. Of course, it doesn't have to be thin with a flip-up lid, so imagine a fat permanently-open MacBook - that's what could replace the eMac. Who's going to mock one up?

Here is my mock-up. I think it's getting close to what you were suggesting.
It looks sort of like a MacBook, but it certainly isn't portable.

http://i4.tinypic.com/10ye96p.gif

Plymouthbreezer
May 28, 2006, 07:21 AM
It was a good design in my opinion.I think so too. In fact, I own one.

Yup if you forget these...

I added this "Ok, maybe some do."

But even then with what you mention, none of those designs were phased out for years and THEN reintroduced with the same form factor.

7on
May 28, 2006, 07:24 AM
Apple could easily make a case design and put a piece of glass between the viewer and the LCD to make the screen more durable. If I recall, many salesmen for the eMac would drop it from 5 feet to the ground while it was still plugged in and it would continue to work. That is what Apple would need for the educational sector. It'd only be a machine for Writing papers and web browsing so power would be non issue (Multimedia classes could just get iMacs, the emac was something you'd see in elementary schools and gen purpose labs for higher education). Probably no Optical drive, no iSight or Front Row. Not that these are predictions - just things I'd do. Of course if this is for educators I'm sure Apple would just listen to what they need and build a machine to their speck.

Though I'd like the mini to drop to around $400 or $500. Then an eMac could come out at around $600 and only be available in the educational store.

mccldwll
May 28, 2006, 07:25 AM
It likely will still have iSight, but not bluetooth or wireless. Most school networks are still hard-wired. ISight, however, is virtually free and already engineered into the frames of the iMacs.


Respectfully disagree on above points. Even if schools wired, still want flexibility of wireless (but not sure if need/want bluetooth). Seriously doubt isight would be included. Too much mischief and distraction (anything you can imagine will happen). Make kids lust for isight on their home systems. Proposed emac w/ minimal footprint perfect computer for office keyboarding. Also, can't help but think new emac in some small way related to apple's upcoming program for free recycling.

sushi
May 28, 2006, 07:42 AM
Here is my mock-up. I think it's getting close to what you were suggesting.
It looks sort of like a MacBook, but it certainly isn't portable.

http://i4.tinypic.com/10ye96p.gif
I remember when these came out. Almost purchased one. They were very good at the time.

Over here in Japan, they have models that may be what Dr. Q is suggesting.

For example:

http://www.vaio.sony.co.jp/Products/L1/

Personally, I prefer a separate keyboard so that I can position it where I want.

alec
May 28, 2006, 09:15 AM
Exactly, if anything, I'd expect the opposite -- wireless and the possibility of iSight. But no bluetooth.

Respectfully disagree on above points. Even if schools wired, still want flexibility of wireless (but not sure if need/want bluetooth). Seriously doubt isight would be included. Too much mischief and distraction (anything you can imagine will happen). Make kids lust for isight on their home systems. Proposed emac w/ minimal footprint perfect computer for office keyboarding. Also, can't help but think new emac in some small way related to apple's upcoming program for free recycling.

gregorsamsa
May 28, 2006, 09:17 AM
Wouldn't it be far easier just to release a stripped down iMac (have combo drive, no iSight, no BT, etc.) & call it the ... iMac-E! This could sell for much less than the current 17" iMac & would be ideal for the educational market.

FF_productions
May 28, 2006, 09:18 AM
Wouldn't it be far easier just to release a stripped down iMac (have combo drive, no iSight, no BT, etc.) & call it the ... iMac-E! This could sell for much less than the current 17" iMac & would be ideal for the educational market.

iMac-E? Your joking...right? How about we stick with eMac?

zac4mac
May 28, 2006, 09:19 AM
How about this Outbound Kangaroo I found in a dumpster a few years ago.:)
Keyboard has infra-red link.

http://homepage.mac.com/zac4mac/.Public/CIMG0075.JPG

gregorsamsa
May 28, 2006, 09:22 AM
iMac-E? Your joking...right? How about we stick with eMac?

I was being serious!! Apple ought to employ guys like me in their marketing depts!

zap2
May 28, 2006, 09:28 AM
Sorry to say this guys, but some of you are such lame mac geeks that you've never built a computer yourself and have no concept of component costs, etc...

As much as I like Macs and Mac OS, the one thing you miss out on (for better or worse) is the first-hand knowledge of hardware you get when you build a performance PC.

The new eMac will likely be around $899, possibly $999.

There is no reason not to offer wides screen - and 15.4" widescreen really isn't big enough for a desktop. Moreover, the marginal cost of a 17" screen is virtually zilch. Combine this with the fact that Apple alreadh has engineered a 17" body for the iMac, and its obvious that the eMac will be a 17" widescreen likely with 1440 x 900 resolution.

It likely will still have iSight, but not bluetooth or wireless. Most school networks are still hard-wired. ISight, however, is virtually free and already engineered into the frames of the iMacs.
It likely will not have a core solo, but rather leftover core-duos, probably T2300 1.66 GHZ Yonahs. THey cost marginally more than core-solos and are great for multitasking - soemthing school computers get used for all the time.

Finally, the harddrive is a 3.5" drive. THis is where most people on here don't seem to know anything about hardware costs. The reasons laptop harddrives go in increments of 60/80/100/120 GB is because they are 2.5" drives and far more expensive for larger capacities.

3.5" drives, however, now start at 80GB. The next step is 120GB, which is virtually the same price as 160GB.


It is assanine to think that the eMac will have a 40GB harddrive - again - it's a 3.5" drive. Most companies stopped making 3.5" drives that small years ago.

So here are my predicted specs:

-iSight
-No wireless, no bluetooth
-17" 1440x900
-1.66 GHZ Core Duo Yonah
-512 MB ram (2 x 256 due to the neceissity of running dual-channel for integrated graphics)
-Intel integrated 950 GMA
-80GB Harddrive
-Combo Drive (No need for superdrive)
-Special hard plastic casing around computer

-$899 available only to schools and through the education store.


You seem to be miss know-how of how Apple works. Apple had a superdrive on the ls eMac(on the high end). I'll likly have a model with AirPort.

Also you reason for it being a 17'' Widescreen is flawed as Apple will likely change the over all look of the eMac, especial if they switch to an LCD based eMac

peharri
May 28, 2006, 09:32 AM
...and to make the machine relatively useless to steal: remove the hard drive. Don't even give it the ability to boot from a hard drive.

Give it a decent amount of RAM (so swap is rarely necessary), and gigabit networking, and offer the classroom administrator a decent Mac OS X Server machine that can provide storage and network booting via BOOTP/et al.

There's no reason a device that isn't meant to be portable, and will always be part of a network, couldn't operate like this. A device that's essentially a Mac mini with a keyboard, mouse, and 12-14" screen (whatever Apple can get cheaply) shouldn't cost more than $800, especially with hard drive removed, no interface to it, and USB/Firewire booting locked (requiring some kind of machine specific dongle that can locked away) From the point of view of the teacher who's lumbered with the system administrator job, their job becomes easier, there's just one central server to admin, one set of applications, no cause for any user account to be given "Admin" privs. No single machine will suddenly become tempramental due to a wierd config.

hsds04a
May 28, 2006, 09:39 AM
I beg to differ...

Today, there are many 40GB Hard Drives for sale.

Prices for new 40GB are about $10-$20 cheaper than 80GB models. That is a significant savings on an OEM product.

I don't know the current standard mark up for OEM price costing, but let's say it's only 4 times. So a $10 OEM wholesale price difference would be equal to a $40 retail price difference. Of course the greater the difference in OEM price the greater the difference in retail pricing.

Now whether or not Apple decided to go with a 40GB vice 80GB is another issue. Everything must be taken into account when designing the package. In Apple's case, offering an 80GB may be a better marketing choice.

I don't think you're correct about the price premium of 40GB vs. 80GB hard drives. Presently, the lowest prices for various types of 3.5" hard drives on newegg.com are as follows:

40GB PATA: $41.99 (Western Digital Caviar WD400BB)
80GB PATA: $44.49 (Western Digital Caviar WD800BB)
40GB SATA: $45.99 (SAMSUNG SpinPoint P80SD HD040GJ)
80GB SATA: $45.99 (Western Digital Caviar SE WD800JD)

Obviously, Apple would probably pay lower prices that would not correlate precisely with these, but they are nevertheless a useful guide to current hard drive pricing.

These prices show a $2.50 price premium for 80GB PATA drives and no premium at all for 80GB SATA drives (and Apple will probably be using SATA drives in any new models they introduce). All the 40GB and 80GB drives on Newegg are priced quite similarly, between $41.99 and $50.99. So it seems unlikely that Apple would pay $10 more for 80GB versus 40GB drives; indeed, there may be no premium at all.

Also, most hard drive manufacturers do not list 40GB models in their most recently released families of drives. Samsung, Seagate, Hitachi, and Maxtor seem to offer 40GB models only from older product lines. The only manufacturer that may be offering latest-generation 40GB drives is Western Digital. They don't clearly differentiate families of drives, but they do offer several 40GB models and have obviously updated them somewhat recently, since they are available with 300 MB/s SATA. This picture suggests that as older hard drive lines are discontinued and supplies dry up, the availability of 40GB drives may become quite limited fairly soon, with perhaps only one manufacturer continuing to produce them.

We can get some idea of Apple's retail "markups" on hard drive prices relative to Newegg by looking at what Apple charges for hard drive upgrades in build-to-order configurations. The low-end iMac and Power Mac G5 both start with 160GB SATA drives. They can be upgraded to 250GB for $75, or to 500GB for $375. These compare to the following prices for the cheapest SATA drives of various capacities at Newegg:

120GB: $68.99 (Western Digital Caviar SE WD1200JS)
160GB: $64.99 (HITACHI Deskstar T7K250 HDT722516DLA380 (0A31637))
200GB: $76.99 (Western Digital Caviar SE WD2000JS)
250GB: $74.99 (Maxtor DiamondMax 10 6L250S0)
300GB: $94.99 (Seagate Barracuda 7200.9 ST3300822AS)
320GB: $108.99 (Western Digital Caviar SE WD3200JD)
400GB: $177.99 (Western Digital Caviar RE2 WD4000YR)
500GB: $249.99 (Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD5000KS)

So at Newegg, a 250GB drive costs $10 more than a 160GB drive, and a 500GB drive costs $185 more than a 160GB drive. The figure for the 250GB drive suggests an Apple "markup" relative to Newegg of 7.5x, but this figure is of questionable reliability because the variation in prices among different 160GB and 250GB drives is on the same order as the $10 price difference between the cheapest ones, so slight changes is drive pricing could change it quite a bit. The figure for the 500GB drive gives an Apple markup of about 2x, which is a more reliable figure, although it might not accurately reflect the markup for smaller-capacity drives.

Even taking the questionable 7.5x markup and the $2.50 price difference between 40GB and 80GB PATA drives at Newegg, we get a retail price difference of only $18.75, and I think the real figure would probably be lower. Considering this small price difference, coupled with the questionable future availability of 40GB 3.5" drives, I am quite sure Apple will not elect to use 40GB 3.5" drives in any future computer models.

On the other hand, there is a $19 price difference at Newegg between an 80GB SATA drive and the next larger model, which is large enough that Apple might well use 80GB drives in low-end desktop systems. It is also interesting to observe that in relatively low-capacity drives, there seems to be a pattern of two capacities having very similar prices, followed by a noticeably higher price for the next capacity up. As long as this trend holds, Apple is probably unlikely to offer 120GB and 200GB hard drives for much the same reason that they won't offer 40GB drives.

sushi
May 28, 2006, 09:42 AM
...and to make the machine relatively useless to steal: remove the hard drive. Don't even give it the ability to boot from a hard drive.

<snip>
Interesting idea.

And if they have a Gbit Ethernet, then you would not need WiFi. Plus you could dump BT.

They could use the same screen as the MBP 15. Already in the system. Greater numbers would drive the costs down.

BTW, I've seen this concept used on the Windows side quite a bit. Works well for most common office tasks.

mccldwll
May 28, 2006, 09:59 AM
Stripped emac colored imac for $699, with either 1) several performance ugrades OR 2) black color, for $849. :D (couldn't resist)

Doctor Q
May 28, 2006, 10:05 AM
...and to make the machine relatively useless to steal: remove the hard drive. Don't even give it the ability to boot from a hard drive.

Give it a decent amount of RAM (so swap is rarely necessary), and gigabit networking, and offer the classroom administrator a decent Mac OS X Server machine that can provide storage and network booting via BOOTP/et al.Ah, thin clients. That would suit us quite well, since we already netboot the student Macs off the server. Would it actually still work if the hard disks we have now in each Mac were physically removed? Are they still used, for swap space?

Of course, a thief might not realize that the Mac is missing its hard drive unless we put signs on each one saying "Attention thieves - This Mac is not worth stealing!"

X5-452
May 28, 2006, 10:24 AM
I can see the eMac becoming 15" LCD based w/ 80GB HDD, 512MB RAM, IIG 64MB, no iSight or FrontRow, Combo Drive and 1.66Ghz Core Duo for $799. Then the $999 model can be either 15" or 17" LCD (not too sure what they'll decide), 160GB HDD, 512MB RAM, IIG 64MB, SuperDrive, iSight (maybe FrontRow) and 1.83Ghz Core Duo. They would keep WiFi in them, just because a lot of schools are becoming wireless hotspots so that'll help if the eMac's are pre-configured for it, but I can't see them keeping BlueTooth.

The only problem is that they'll have to finally bump up the Mac mini specs.

schatten
May 28, 2006, 10:30 AM
Man, those eMacs were a nightmare to fix. Seriously, you get a bad mainboard in one of those, that took about 2-3 hours to swap out (& alot of heavy lifting) I HATED repairing those things! That coulpled witha known defect with the CRTs made for all sorts of fun.

~Shard~
May 28, 2006, 10:40 AM
I don't think the eMac failed at all. It just became too old.

I agree, I don't think it's a matter of failing, I think it has just slipped "behind the times' so to speak. This rumored refresh to the line will be just what the doctor ordered* and will bring the eMac back as an excellent alternative for educational institutions. :cool:



*Disclaimer: I in no way have any knowledge as to whether or not Doctor Q will be ordering a new eMac.

Plymouthbreezer
May 28, 2006, 10:58 AM
Ughhh... Not newtetwork booting! Our school system has this, and it really blows. Granted we had crappy no name machines ranging from 266MHz models to new 2.8GHz's, it proves a terrible system.

Doctor Q
May 28, 2006, 11:04 AM
*Disclaimer: I in no way have any knowledge as to whether or not Doctor Q will be ordering a new eMac.Me either. This is only a rumor.

sushi
May 28, 2006, 11:17 AM
I agree, I don't think it's a matter of failing, I think it has just slipped "behind the times' so to speak.
And the change to an LCD supports SJ's comment some time ago about having all LCD displays.

Doctor Q
May 28, 2006, 11:22 AM
And the change to an LCD supports SJ's comment some time ago about having all LCD displays.Just as with floppy drives, Apple's decision to drop CRTs was on the leading edge of a trend that some found surprising at first, but everyone now recognizes.

sushi
May 28, 2006, 11:46 AM
Just as with floppy drives, Apple's decision to drop CRTs was on the leading edge of a trend that some found surprising at first, but everyone now recognizes.
Yep, Apple tends to set trends don't they! :D

Caitlyn
May 28, 2006, 11:57 AM
In a thread somewhere else on the forum, someone said they saw a 17" iMac Core Solo at their local Apple Store. If this is true, maybe that will be our new "Education Mac".

JGowan
May 28, 2006, 12:00 PM
Wouldn't it be far easier just to release a stripped down iMac (have combo drive, no iSight, no BT, etc.) & call it the ... iMac-E! This could sell for much less than the current 17" iMac & would be ideal for the educational market.First, let Steve name it, please. Second, Apple doesn't do what is easy. It does what's right. And a stripped down iMac doesn't sound like a good business model. It would cannibalize their iMac sales + there just wouldn't be the right distinction between the two. Everything needs to look completely different and yet, look like they are all part of the same family.

Mindfield
May 28, 2006, 01:16 PM
What I've been wondering is would Apple jump that fast to using Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest whatever in iMacs, because I think it'd piss owners of Core Duo iMac having an inferior processor maybe less than a year from buying a new computer. Sure Apple could use rapid speed bumps and better processors, but maybe they've shed some thought how they'd react.

thejadedmonkey
May 28, 2006, 01:18 PM
So, odd as it seems, the MacBook form factor, if prevented from being portable, may best suit a classsroom. Of course, it doesn't have to be thin with a flip-up lid, so imagine a fat permanently-open MacBook - that's what could replace the eMac. Who's going to mock one up?
One problem...mice and keyboards are prone to failing...getting spilled on...etc.. No perminantly attached keyboards.

What we'll see from Apple is a whole new re-design. Using a current design for a low end model would give people the impression that the iMac model is a low end/slow model. bad PR.

No retro G4. Using an old model would possibly have people buying them for their looks instead of a mini. Nix that idea too...

What we'll get is an 80 gig hard drive, IIG, Wireless and BT, but no iSight. Frontrow would work for presentations maybe? Core Duo, and a new, easy to service form factor with a 15" or 17" screen.

If you're looking for a design, look at your CRT monitors guys (I know you still use them) but a full size optical drive and some USB ports on the bottom, and that's what the front will look like. The back will be...different.

At least, that's what I think.

nsjoker
May 28, 2006, 02:46 PM
my god, no core solo. it's a crippled chip. knowing that it has the potential to run at 2 cores but only runs at one is really disheartening. besides, the low end core duo i believe is getting a pretty nice price slash soon.

~Shard~
May 28, 2006, 02:52 PM
my god, no core solo. it's a crippled chip. knowing that it has the potential to run at 2 cores but only runs at one is really disheartening. besides, the low end core duo i believe is getting a pretty nice price slash soon.

Exactly - with the Core 2 Duo line coming out in the very near future, all the Macs will transition to these new lines (Merom, Conroe) so it will make perfect sense to put a nice cheap Core Duo in the new eMac. This will help keep costs down on these machines, which is an important factor in the educational market.

Doctor Q
May 28, 2006, 03:03 PM
If Apple decides to distinguish regular classroom use from use by "power users" in schools (prostudents?), the shape of the display is a factor to be considered along with the processing power.

Commonl classroom use, such as word processing, presentation, web surfing, and perhaps drawing, would be fine with a standard aspect ratio display, whereas a widescreen format better suits video editing, which more and more students are getting to try their hand at.

Apple has led consumers toward widescreen and I expect it to do the same for schools, but is that what most schools would prefer?

zap2
May 28, 2006, 03:12 PM
What I've been wondering is would Apple jump that fast to using Merom/Conroe/Woodcrest whatever in iMacs, because I think it'd piss owners of Core Duo iMac having an inferior processor maybe less than a year from buying a new computer. Sure Apple could use rapid speed bumps and better processors, but maybe they've shed some thought how they'd react.


Yes, Apple is not going to make a worse computer to make people happy, that would be stupid! Also All other PC makers with Core Duo are in the same boat, and they plan to move up. TO cripple you computers to make people happy is the stupidest bussiness move.

Windowlicker
May 28, 2006, 03:33 PM
Or maybe a mac mini on a iMac/display stand with a 6" LCD mounted on top.

That must be the stupidest idea ever! Hope you didn't actually think it would be a real possibility..

Multimedia
May 28, 2006, 03:49 PM
Wouldn't it be far easier just to release a stripped down iMac (have combo drive, no iSight, no BT, etc.) & call it the ... iMac-E! This could sell for much less than the current 17" iMac & would be ideal for the educational market.I agree. Just roll with 1.66GHz Core 2 Duo with optional 2GHz BTO, Combo with Super BYO, 80 GB SATA HD with 120,160,300 and 500 BTO, Wi-Fi BTO, and what greg wrote. Problem solved.:)

081440
May 28, 2006, 03:52 PM
There is no way on Earth Apple will put in anything smaller than a 17 inch LCD in a new eMac.

No one wants to look at a tiny little 15" or worse yet 12" as some of you suggested, and to the poster that said a 6" I hope it was a typo.

My school bought 15" CRTs four years ago and they are begining to seem too small. The CAD room and teachers desks all are getting newer 17 inch CRTs. (I don't know why they just don't buy LCDs (the tech guys and main office all have 19 inch LCDs :mad: )

There is also no way the eMacs will be anything other than a fully functioning independant machine (not a client), plus they will definetly have gigabit ethernet - it's a standard now and most schools have a central server were all the data goes, so there will definitely be a fast hard wire system.

And as for keyboard and mouse theft - Almost nonexistant, no one wants a keyboard or mouse any more, there common items, most thefts of computer hardware is of hard drives, optical drives, and RAM. (at least at this school)

The eMacs will have to be heavy and bulky, you cannot lock up all the Macs cause that would become unbelievably expensive.

Multimedia
May 28, 2006, 03:56 PM
Exactly - with the Core 2 Duo line coming out in the very near future, all the Macs will transition to these new lines (Merom, Conroe) so it will make perfect sense to put a nice cheap Core Duo in the new eMac. This will help keep costs down on these machines, which is an important factor in the educational market.You mean nice cheap Core 2 Duo right ~Shard~? I don't see Apple using Yonah in the next eMac. Intel is not going to keep making Yonahs for any significant amount of time. It would be pretty dumb to ship a new eMac with Yonah inside a month before Intel ships Meroms don't you think? Plus any heat issues with Yonah is something Apple will not want to have to deal with at the educational institutional level is it? Using slow 1.66 GHz Meroms from the get go will be heat free insurance, plus 64-bit hardware for the next generation of code warriors. ;)

Windowlicker
May 28, 2006, 04:00 PM
I don't see Apple using a 17" regular display... Optical drives aren't necessary for all educational computers. Like I posted previously its like having floppy drives in every computer. You have to keep an eye on students/teachers bringing in CDs from home, installing programs, etc... Its just a mess with some school districts. Make it an option for either a CDRW/DVD Combo Drive, or SuperDrive... Wireless is a must for a lot of school districts and can be very handy if implemented correctly...

Finally some sense to this thread. This was about an edu computer and most of the writers just began writing the specs of their personal dream cheap computers.

I don't think even bluetooth would be needed here, but airport is good to have. I'm pretty sure making a 17" lcd for imac is cheaper or the same price than making a 15" with the same resolution.. am I wrong here?

Still, ethernet would be good because in many cases it's smarter to have most of the files stored on a server. So with gigabit ethernet the computers wouldn't need so big HDs. It has to be cheap, so there can't be expensive stuff on it.

Apple isn't making the edu computers because they want schools to have them. They make them because they want money.

matticus008
May 28, 2006, 04:25 PM
There is no way on Earth Apple will put in anything smaller than a 17 inch LCD in a new eMac.
15 inch LCD = 17 inch CRT. It's perfectly adequate for the educational market. The low end eMac is not a video editing workstation or a CAD machine, and no one should expect it to be. Schools with enough money to have the software for these applications also have a lab of decent computers capable of running them.

The eMac is not a super do-everything machine. It's a basic computer that fulfills the needs of running office applications, Internet applications, and educational software. It should be reliable, inexpensive, and easy to support.

They also don't have to be 50-pound monsters or bulletproof. They're not operating in war zones. There should probably be a tough coating on the LCD to make it more durable, but I've seen LCDs in many public schools--by and large intact. Any computer roughly the size of an iMac is too large to sneak out of a computer lab, and zip-tying the cord to the power strip is an inexpensive security measure that's rather effective. If students have access to an unsupervised and unlocked computer lab, that's the school's own fault.

It definitely doesn't need dedicated graphics, Bluetooth, or even a DVD writer. Some would argue it doesn't need an optical drive or Airport, either. No Front Row, no remote, no widescreen display (unless they just re-use the MBP one). It just has to be a basic, networkable all-in-one absolutely no better than a Mac mini for about $800.

mozmac
May 28, 2006, 04:35 PM
Apple finally has an OS that, for the masses, can completely replace Windows. And, with Boot Camp and virtualization, schools COULD run Windows if they wanted. Apple is in a position to provide schools with EVERYTHING they need in one computer. Why buy a Dell when you could buy a Mac that does everything a Dell does AS WELL AS a Mac. Educators have to like that option.

rockthecasbah
May 28, 2006, 04:47 PM
Because I think folks will know that, and it wouldn't look good for a company known for it's killer design team to retro anything.
If Dell did that we'd be trashing them big-time... wouldn't we?
That being said, it WOULD be cheaper!
Well Apple wouldn't HAVE to make it an EXACT replica of a Mini, it could have different specs if they wanted to separate them. I was concerning more not the specs but just compact design in general. They have the basis already, just switching up ports and the optical drive with the enclosure design would make it a "new" eMac. I dunno i think it's a good idea. Better than a dumbed down iMac if you ask me.

codo
May 28, 2006, 04:51 PM
Why buy a Dell when you could buy a Mac that does everything a Dell does AS WELL AS a Mac.

Because a school couldnít care less what OS a computer runs.

This myth that educational machines have to be less powerful is ludicrous. My college needed to refurb its video editing suits last summer (We have three - each with 10/15 machines with all the stand capturing equipment etc) - and there is no way they could afford the Mac equivalents to what they could get from Dell, Pinnacle and Adobe Premier/Photoshop educational licensing. They had a grant and wanted as much bang for their buck as possible, and Dell gave them that - They donít care if it runs Windows or OS X.

I have spoken to several staff members in this area, and they all dismissed the Mac's as overpriced for what you actually get. Now obviously, I feel differently as I prefer Final Cut Ex to Premier, but unless Apple pulls something cool out of the bag that provides enough power at a reasonable price, that attitude wont change.

Computer workstations in schools probably do a hell of a lot more processing on a variety of tasks than many computers in (non creative) businesses. This idea that the eMac has to be sub-average just so Apple's other products donít look "good" is crazy. To a school - There is also no benefit of OS X; itís just an operating system. To be quite honest, its probably a down side - Few people in the UK actually know what the hell Mac OS X is or how it differs from Windows, let alone actually using it Ė I can only see schools here buying Macs in mass if their was a clear price advantage.

Schools donít care if the computer looks like a pile of crap - As long as it does what they want and doesnít cost them the earth. They donít need Bluetooth, wireless, iSight, FrontRow, iThisAndThat"Great"Feature - Just a good enough computer to teach with.

If Apple wants the education market, itís essential that they pack as much punch into these machines for as smaller a price with as few unnecessary gadgets as possible. Donít want it to outshine the iMac? Donít sell it to average Joe in the normal stores.

I realise some of you might agree with what I have said and that's entirely your right - But I'm afraid the points I have raised are important to Educational Institutions. We're not talking about a luxury personal computer for individual home use (i.e... Any Mac!); we are talking about a computer that works hard in a school... There is a huge difference.

amac4me
May 28, 2006, 04:56 PM
Given Apple's recent market share gains and overall momentum, it's logical that Apple would continue its presence in the education market.

A revision to the eMac would be logical as many students will get their first exposure to a Mac in school as opposed to home as many homes have PC's.

matticus008
May 28, 2006, 04:58 PM
And, with Boot Camp and virtualization, schools COULD run Windows if they wanted. Apple is in a position to provide schools with EVERYTHING they need in one computer. Why buy a Dell when you could buy a Mac that does everything a Dell does AS WELL AS a Mac. Educators have to like that option.
That's true of any Intel Mac. The eMac is an entry-level machine. It's the Mac mini with a display, at best. Educators already have the option for a do-everything multimedia machine. It's called an iMac. What they don't have is a cheap, basic Mac box that students can't hide in their backpacks. That's the option these fanciful boxes don't provide. If a school can get a $500 Dell that does everything they need, why should they buy an iMac-level machine with features they don't want? A $700 basic eMac might get their business, if the support and reliability are what they need, but anything more expensive or more full-featured is missing the core market.

A $1000 "education" iMac, even if it has triple the features of the $500 Dell (more bang per buck), is still going to cost them double. Schools are pragmatic. They buy a small number of expensive machines to do the fancy things, and then they buy affordable boxes everywhere else. 100 computers that do everything you need is more appealing than 50 that do far more than you need. That's the option that's missing, in my opinion.

codo
May 28, 2006, 05:07 PM
A $1000 "education" iMac, even if it has triple the features of the $500 Dell (more bang per buck), is still going to cost them double..

I'm afraid that is simply not true. The features you don’t mention in the iMac, but presumably mean iSight, Bluetooth etc... Schools just don’t need that stuff - If you're talking about software, there is a vast amount of quality freeware for Windows that schools utilize and much bespoke education software (Some of which local education authorities actually purchase for their schools) So it isn’t a case of how many features it has, like you said, it’s about the final cost.

A computer quick enough to run a vast library of applications for different subject areas at a good price is all that’s needed. There is NO Mac that suffices this requirement right now (The Mini is not acceptable and wouldn’t get used in schools simply because it comes with no screen or input devices) - This rumoured eMac may change this - if it meets the criteria aforementioned.

zap2
May 28, 2006, 05:17 PM
but unless Apple pulls something cool out of the bag that provides enough power at a reasonable price, that attitude wont change.



They already dom the MacBook is a hell of a deal, for the power and price, its not dirt cheap but for the value of speed its a very good deal(even when looking at PC laptops)

GilGrissom
May 28, 2006, 05:27 PM
I'm afraid that is simply not true. The features you don’t mention in the iMac, but presumably mean iSight, Bluetooth etc... Schools just don’t need that stuff -
9 times out of 10 no they don't...but it should always be an option!
...and much bespoke education software (Some of which local education authorities actually purchase for their schools) So it isn’t a case of how many features it has, like you said, it’s about the final cost.
Indeed they do, but we're not always happy about it! Sometimes schools have less choice and are restricted, or at least feel restricted.
A computer quick enough to run a vast library of applications for different subject areas at a good price is all that’s needed. There is NO Mac that suffices this requirement right now (The Mini is not acceptable and wouldn’t get used in schools simply because it comes with no screen or input devices) - This rumoured eMac may change this - if it meets the criteria aforementioned.
An eMac could change this, like it (in my opinion) was already doing to some degree.

Cost is always a big issue with schools, but so is lifespan. The government look to have a 3 year life-span in most schools for computers before they should look to upgrade. If a machine is going to last that long well then they won't need to spend that money. Most machines a school has if they are used heavily are so in dire need of replacement before 3 years but the money isn't there...neither is it to keep doing this every few years.
One thing Macs are good at is lifespan, they last, they don't usually crumble away like most PCs as quick...this is in my working opinion also a big selling point. Even if the price was a touch higher than cheap PCs schools often get, if it were to last longer (and still do everything the cheap PC can do...software etc) then a lot of schools would strongly consider it, especially higher up, or more heavily funded schools. Schools which are able to take the risk and get something new and a touch more expensive from the usual RM grey boxes schools get.

(Bare in mind this is in the UK, I have no experience of anywhere else in the world).

codo
May 28, 2006, 05:32 PM
They already dom the MacBook is a hell of a deal, for the power and price, its not dirt cheap but for the value of speed its a very good deal(even when looking at PC laptops)

Absolutely! My post was more aimed at the desktop market (which makes up a larger proportion of Edu Instu. computer use). However I totally agree, the MacBook is a pretty good deal for schools - However I still think many would opt for a Dell without the camera etc for a lower price because returning to my original point... They donít want or need those "features".

My point still remains; there is a difference between a home computer and educational one. You have to understand how competitive and how tight the educational market is in terms of A) How much schools have to spend (which is not a hell of a lot) and B) The many companies wanting this prime market share. Check out http://www.rm.com/. Most primary and secondary schools in the UK buy their machines from these guys - Cheap and do the job. However, look like crap - Do they care? No... Itís an educational computer, not a home device. The last majority chunk goes to Dell.

I have never been to or known anybody to have attended a British state primary or secondary school that had more than one or two Macs (That generally go unused because they are so old and no one really understands them) Ė Sure, their might be some who experience quite the opposite, but the figure sure isnít going to be large.

GilGrissom
May 28, 2006, 05:38 PM
My point still remains; there is a difference between a home computer and educational one. You have to understand how competitive and how tight the educational market is in terms of A) How much schools have to spend (which is not a hell of a lot) and B) The many companies wanting this prime market share.
Absolutely.
Check out http://www.rm.com/. Most primary and secondary schools in the UK buy their machines from these guys - Cheap and do the job. However, look like crap - Do they care? No... Itís an educational computer, not a home device. The last majority chunk goes to Dell.
And Stone. Even though they had their prime a while back, they're coming back (with RM intergration!...so in the end..still RM networks!)

One problems schools have (or more the LEAs) is the relationship with manufacturers. Sometimes the manufacturers will not see and treat the LEAs and schools as what they are...educational institutions, as you say it's a whole different ball game. LEAs have problems in getting them to fully acknowledge them for who they are to ensure fast and efficient communication, support, repairs and everything else that should go with a service or a contract. For this reason they are often forced to go with other small players or someone else and end up worse in other ways. (This has happened in my LEA with school admin machines).
I have never been to or known anybody to have attended a British state primary or secondary school that had more than one or two Macs (That generally go unused because they are so old and no one really understands them) Ė Sure, their might be some who experience quite the opposite, but the figure sure isnít going to be large.
Unfortunately yes. My old college had an iMac G4 in the VIth Form DT Studio, old software with not much on it, wasn't networked or anything. But those who knew how to use it used it! Plus is was always a conversation piece of a focal point to inspire you!

codo
May 28, 2006, 05:50 PM
Gil, I can see 100% where you are coming from.

I'd love to see Apple provide machines and service at a competitive price in the UK for the Education market, because at the end of the day, they are great computers.

I only left high school a few years ago, and I can remember them having all their new Dells fitted and all the networking problems, file servers, printers and general ease of use being dreadful for the staff.

Macs can change this; Apple has to convince the sector with competitive pricing and suitable machines, however.

ingenious
May 28, 2006, 06:06 PM
it'll more likely use a 17" 1280x1024 glossy protected screen, GMA 965 and probably sans frontrow and isight, to save costs, and the case would be bigger and thicker than the imac more sturdy with more space for cooling ect.


I doubt they'll leave out Front Row/iSight. They're pushing Front Row on the Edu site and iSight is good for (obviously :rolleyes: ) video conferencing, something that my school is really excited about with the new MacBooks.

edit: emoticon fix

gregorsamsa
May 28, 2006, 06:07 PM
First, let Steve name it, please. Second, Apple doesn't do what is easy. It does what's right. And a stripped down iMac doesn't sound like a good business model. It would cannibalize their iMac sales + there just wouldn't be the right distinction between the two. Everything needs to look completely different and yet, look like they are all part of the same family.

A stripped down iMac for new eMac shell could work. After all, the current eMac is not dissimilar to the original iMac G3. Then when the iMac G4 came out people said: "Brilliant! Design-wise it can't get much better." People seem to be assuming the same thing about the current iMac.

I think the new eMac will be quite similar to the iMac in appearance. Long-term this won't affect iMac sales too much. Apple will surprise us yet again with a newly-designed Intel iMac within ... 2 years.

081440
May 28, 2006, 06:20 PM
(Bare in mind this is in the UK, I have no experience of anywhere else in the world).


I think it's the same anywhere you go

matticus008
May 28, 2006, 06:31 PM
I'm afraid that is simply not true. The features you don’t mention in the iMac, but presumably mean iSight, Bluetooth etc... Schools just don’t need that stuff - If you're talking about software, there is a vast amount of quality freeware for Windows that schools utilize and much bespoke education software (Some of which local education authorities actually purchase for their schools) So it isn’t a case of how many features it has, like you said, it’s about the final cost.
Right. You might have missed my post prior to that one which was more directly involved with this particular point of yours.

A computer quick enough to run a vast library of applications for different subject areas at a good price is all that’s needed. There is NO Mac that suffices this requirement right now
Exactly right. We're saying the same thing :).

9 times out of 10 no they don't...but it should always be an option!
And it is! It's an iMac. Schools should also have the option NOT to have those features or be required to pay for them. Right now the 9 out of 10 don't have that choice.

081440
May 28, 2006, 06:32 PM
What about the emac made it fail? What about this computer will be different in that respect?

Nothing made it fail, it's just outdated. Apple still even has it on the webpage:

http://www.apple.com/education/emac/

It still looks great though, for a machine that has had a design virtually untouched since 1998!

Atlasland
May 28, 2006, 06:33 PM
Here's my prediction:

17" iMac becomes the eMac. We get a new iMac redesign. Solves all your problems.

matticus008
May 28, 2006, 06:35 PM
Here's my prediction:

17" iMac becomes the eMac. We get a new iMac redesign. Solves all your problems.
Except price. Unless they can take a $500-600 (~40-46%!) hit on the current iMac's price, it's not a good option.

081440
May 28, 2006, 06:38 PM
Apple's also going to have to add some more RAM than they are currently putting in. 256 MB is not enough for the eMac to run alot of educational software.

See site:

http://www.apple.com/education/promos/emac/

codo
May 28, 2006, 06:40 PM
Except price. Unless they can take a $500-600 (~40-46%!) hit on the current iMac's price, it's not a good option.

Totally. iMac for MacBook money minus iSight, Bluetooth etc would provide a serious competitor to the sort of offers Dell and other Edu. dealers offer.

sushi
May 28, 2006, 06:42 PM
My point still remains; there is a difference between a home computer and educational one.
Agreed.

You have to understand how competitive and how tight the educational market is in terms of A) How much schools have to spend (which is not a hell of a lot) and B) The many companies wanting this prime market share. Check out http://www.rm.com/. Most primary and secondary schools in the UK buy their machines from these guys - Cheap and do the job.
Just checked out their site.

Their RM One (All in One) starts with a Celeron, 256MB RAM, 40GB HD, 15 inch LCD (17 inch option) and no optical drive.

Their RM Ascend PC starts with a Celeron, 256MB RAM, 40GB HD, 17 inch CRT and no optical drive.

Most interesting.

gregorsamsa
May 28, 2006, 06:43 PM
Here's my prediction:

17" iMac becomes the eMac. We get a new iMac redesign. Solves all your problems.

Exactly what I posted 1/2 hour ago, in greater detail!

codo
May 28, 2006, 06:54 PM
Just checked out their site.

Their RM One (All in One) starts with a Celeron, 256MB RAM, 40GB HD, 15 inch LCD (17 inch option) and no optical drive.

Their RM Ascend PC starts with a Celeron, 256MB RAM, 40GB HD, 17 inch CRT and no optical drive.

Most interesting.

Absolutely, they are very poor computers. The school I used to attend purchased their laptops and had Dell desktops and those RM things would literally take about 5 minuets to boot brand new. But the budgets are just so small, this is all they can afford in combination with the support services they would have to purchase additionally as well as servers etc. I’m not talking about a poor state school either. A medium sized thousand or so pupils average high school with good results and receiving a steady stream of money.

Predictably, schools have two tier computers.

The "labs" that provide internet access and word processing for general ICT lessons - This market I feel will remain PC based in the UK for some time (i.e. Dell and RM). Schools don’t have the budget for anything else.

You then have the slightly more powerful computers used in Media/Arts/Design & Technology/Engineering. Now when I say powerful, I don’t mean by many of our standards, I’m talking school budget powerful. I could see Macs filling this role perfectly with the eMac if it was priced right with enough punch for encoding and design software.

macgeek2005
May 28, 2006, 07:14 PM
PLEASE let the iMac be redesigned. It's design now BLOWS.

codo
May 28, 2006, 07:18 PM
PLEASE let the iMac be redesigned. It's design now BLOWS.

Do you think? I'm not so sure - I mean it is quite elegant. If they could get rid of that thick bit below the screen, it would look even more amazing I think.

sushi
May 28, 2006, 07:48 PM
Do you think? I'm not so sure - I mean it is quite elegant. If they could get rid of that thick bit below the screen, it would look even more amazing I think.
I always wondered why they never put the speakers on the sides facing the user. I think that it would look better and would be easier to hear sounds.

gregorsamsa
May 28, 2006, 07:56 PM
Do you think? I'm not so sure - I mean it is quite elegant. If they could get rid of that thick bit below the screen, it would look even more amazing I think.

I think it'll happen! They said the same thing about the very elegant iMac G4 ("can't be bettered" etc. See my post 148).

Apple will continue to evolve & alter the design of all their computers, partly because they know we can't resist them. But it would also be going against the spirit & reputation of Apple not to do so.

Some people still prefer the design of the iMac G4 over the current one, but that hasn't stopped the G5/Intel model being a roaring success. That's Apple! Great company, great products &, the only thing for sure is, nothing stays the same for too long! Expect a new iMac anytime within the next 2 years.

SmileyDude
May 28, 2006, 08:01 PM
Honestly, instead of the all-in-one models, I wish Apple would make a nice display that a mini could dock into and then upgrade the specs on the mini to make allow it to replace the iMac's price point. The low end would be the eMac replacement, and you would still have the option of BYOKMD like the current minis.

I think this would be good because it would 1) simplify the lineup while at the same time increasing the options 2) it would lead to more sales of displays from Apple instead of Dell and other vendors.

I'm positive that Apple could design a really nice solution to dock the mini into a display that didn't look like ass (i.e, something from dell).

Anyone else want to see something like this?

gregorsamsa
May 28, 2006, 08:09 PM
Honestly, instead of the all-in-one models, I wish Apple would make a nice display that a mini could dock into and then upgrade the specs on the mini to make allow it to replace the iMac's price point. The low end would be the eMac replacement, and you would still have the option of BYOKMD like the current minis.

I think this would be good because it would 1) simplify the lineup while at the same time increasing the options 2) it would lead to more sales of displays from Apple instead of Dell and other vendors.

I'm positive that Apple could design a really nice solution to dock the mini into a display that didn't look like ass (i.e, something from dell).

Anyone else want to see something like this?

Nice idea, but don't see it happening. The mini's appeal is strongly marketed at potential switchers from PCs, people who already have monitors, keyboards, etc.

Apple designing a mini-specific monitor would adversely affect that potential market.

CompUser
May 28, 2006, 08:20 PM
For apple to really compete with the PC edu market, they will have to create a $500-$600 computer.

Very few schools will shell out $1000 per computer when they can go off and buy 2 PC's for the same price. Thats exactly what my school did.

SmileyDude
May 28, 2006, 08:33 PM
Nice idea, but don't see it happening. The mini's appeal is strongly marketed at potential switchers from PCs, people who already have monitors, keyboards, etc.

Apple designing a mini-specific monitor would adversely affect that potential market.

Yes, currently the mini is strongly marketed at switchers. But, that is strictly a marketing decision. Not one that is locked in due to technical constraints.

Also, I don't think the monitor has to be mini-specific. I'm sure apple could design a general purpose monitor that could accommodate a mini dock of sorts. Dell does it with some of their monitors for their small PCs (I saw a few used at one of the local furniture stores) -- it was the same monitor that we have at work that came with a mid-size Dell tower. But, as usual, Dell didn't do a great job integrating it, IMO. Apple could do much better.

I find the mini very frustrating, myself -- it has the perfect form factor, IMO. But, Apple gives it the low end of the CPU and hard drive offerings. I'm not even going to bring up video here, but why isn't Apple offering a 7200RPM HD version with a Dual Core 2.0Ghz CPU? Are they afraid of eating into the iMac sales?

If that's the case, then why not split the iMac into monitor and machine, and simply use the mini form factor with a nice display? They can even sell the combo together as the iMac. It instantly allows them to offer a low end iMac (15" display, Core Solo, 5400RPM drive, Combo Drive) and a high end (20" display, 2.0Ghz Core Duo, 7200RPM, DL Superdrive, iSight) and everything in between. You can even have high end guts with a 15" display, or vice versa. And, when the inevitable happens, you can swap the guts with the latest Mac mini and not get rid of that nice monitor you bought.

Honestly, I don't expect it to happen either, but if any company could pull it off, it's Apple.

AidenShaw
May 28, 2006, 08:33 PM
Intel is not going to keep making Yonahs for any significant amount of time.
You're probably wrong here.

I just bought a brand new Pentium III system. Intel's still selling PIII's to the people who want them.

Much of Intel's OEM business demands multi-year availability of product - some companies won't even consider a chip without a guarantee of being able to buy it for 3 years.

If all you need is a 32-bit low power dual-core chip, Merom has no added value. You'll want to lock-in a multi-year Yonah contract.

...but why isn't Apple offering a 7200RPM HD version with a Dual Core 2.0Ghz CPU?
Ego.

68134
May 28, 2006, 08:53 PM
_

JGowan
May 28, 2006, 09:08 PM
I have always thought that the eMac was what the 2nd generation iMac was going to be. Jobs told a story of Ives coming to him with the NEW iMAC and said "No, it's not unique enough. Go back and come up with something else." He even talked about his thought that it should look more a sunflower. Not long after the 2nd gen iMacs came out, they came out with the eMac and I thought "A-ha! It was not good for the iMac, but it was too good to scrap altogether!" Of course, it doesn't matter it I was right or wrong but it was a good solid computer for the time it lasted which was quite some time.

mccldwll
May 28, 2006, 10:12 PM
Honestly, instead of the all-in-one models, I wish Apple would make a nice display that a mini could dock into and then upgrade the specs on the mini to make allow it to replace the iMac's price point. The low end would be the eMac replacement, and you would still have the option of BYOKMD like the current minis.

I think this would be good because it would 1) simplify the lineup while at the same time increasing the options 2) it would lead to more sales of displays from Apple instead of Dell and other vendors.

I'm positive that Apple could design a really nice solution to dock the mini into a display that didn't look like ass (i.e, something from dell).

Anyone else want to see something like this?

My post #29:
My prediction/guess has been/is a detuned 17" imac core duo, smaller hd, combo (superdrive also available for video lab work), no isight (trouble in a school setting) which could be available almost immediately for fall semester purchasing. My prediction/hope is that the new imac will be a larger form mini which will dock to a cinema display w/ isight (and available only as a unit), but which can be removed and carried to tv room (who wants the distraction/style of the present imac by tv). May be possible to also buy isight enabled cinema displays separately to which minis can dock.

Multimedia
May 28, 2006, 10:19 PM
Intel is not going to keep making Yonahs for any significant amount of time.You're probably wrong here.

I just bought a brand new Pentium III system. Intel's still selling PIII's to the people who want them.

Much of Intel's OEM business demands multi-year availability of product - some companies won't even consider a chip without a guarantee of being able to buy it for 3 years.

If all you need is a 32-bit low power dual-core chip, Merom has no added value. You'll want to lock-in a multi-year Yonah contract.So Aiden, You Think MacBook Will Remain Yonah Into 2007? :(

Nate4747
May 28, 2006, 10:34 PM
This could be cool, it might prompt more institutions to get Macs. Especially with the capability for Windows too, that could be a major selling point.

~Shard~
May 28, 2006, 10:39 PM
You mean nice cheap Core 2 Duo right ~Shard~? I don't see Apple using Yonah in the next eMac. Intel is not going to keep making Yonahs for any significant amount of time.

Actually no, I was referring to the existing Core Duos which will be even cheaper once the Core 2 Duos are released. Apple can't/won't stick Core 2 Duos in everything right off the bat, so I think Yonah will be around for a little while yet, at least into early 2007 before Apple transitions them fully out of their product line.

Mind you, Apple has been good at keeping on the ball with frequent updates so far (better than their usual 6 month update cycle ;) ) so I suppose anything is possible. That being said, my guess (and of course I could be wrong :) ) is that to keep costs as low as possible for these new eMacs, Apple will stick Core Duos in them and slowly migrate their other products to the Core 2 Duos.

We'll see... :cool:

AidenShaw
May 28, 2006, 11:51 PM
So Aiden, You Think MacBook Will Remain Yonah Into 2007? :(
First and foremost, I think that "Intel isn't making Yonahs anymore" won't be a factor.

Second, I've said repeatedly that Apple should kill Yonah as soon as possible and go to an all 64-bit lineup.

Third, in the end it will be marketing and market segmentation - Apple might decide to cripple the low end with 32-bit CPUs long after the mainstream goes 64-bit.

You can't apply logic to marketing decisions....

btfgus
May 29, 2006, 12:42 AM
This is great news. A purpose built Mac for education purposes and budgets. What I wouldn't have given to be educated on a mac instead of wasting years & $$$$ on a PC.

macgeek2005
May 29, 2006, 12:46 AM
First and foremost, I think that "Intel isn't making Yonahs anymore" won't be a factor.

Second, I've said repeatedly that Apple should kill Yonah as soon as possible and go to an all 64-bit lineup.

Third, in the end it will be marketing and market segmentation - Apple might decide to cripple the low end with 32-bit CPUs long after the mainstream goes 64-bit.

You can't apply logic to marketing decisions....

Now I understand why apple hasn't made Mac Pro's yet. They need to wait for 64 Bit, since the G5 was 64 bit, they can't go backwards, and they were originally planning to switch to intel just in time for that, and they started too early, and had to put up with Yonah.

sushi
May 29, 2006, 01:54 AM
Third, in the end it will be marketing and market segmentation - Apple might decide to cripple the low end with 32-bit CPUs long after the mainstream goes 64-bit.
I beg to differ.

A 32 bit CPU will still work fine for most applications.

While I understand your point, I wouldn't call it crippled -- PC or Mac.

darrens
May 29, 2006, 03:42 AM
Here's my prediction:

17" iMac becomes the eMac. We get a new iMac redesign. Solves all your problems.

I'm with the others - the iMac is a miniturised computer that has a lot of expensive componentry. It's not likely to become the next eMac without some serious cost reduction.

Look at the original eMac - it uses components that are all at least a generation old, with no attempt to miniturise. It was basically an original form factor iMac with a bigger screen and no pretty case colours!

I'd expect to see a really basic 4x3 LCD on a machine that isn't as thin as the iMac.

AidenShaw
May 29, 2006, 08:16 AM
I beg to differ.

A 32 bit CPU will still work fine for most applications.

While I understand your point, I wouldn't call it crippled -- PC or Mac.
It will be fine until Apple releases OSx64 - the true 64-bit version of OSX.

After that release, however, there will be software that won't run as well on Yonah, or won't run at all.

Technically, a Performa with a 601 isn't crippled either....

BenRoethig
May 29, 2006, 09:08 AM
Personally, I would have just released two low end iMacs with the same specs as the Mac Mini.

GilGrissom
May 29, 2006, 09:11 AM
Just checked out their site.

Their RM One (All in One) starts with a Celeron, 256MB RAM, 40GB HD, 15 inch LCD (17 inch option) and no optical drive.

Their RM Ascend PC starts with a Celeron, 256MB RAM, 40GB HD, 17 inch CRT and no optical drive.

Most interesting.
It is. Not including optical drives was something I've always wanted Apple to do as an option on their education machines. A lot of schools would prefer plenty of front USB ports, headphone sockets and other front controls/sockets like that. When you look at the design of the RM One, to be honest it has had thought put into it and apart from their early fan trouble they are good education machines. Sometimes the screen seems a little high, especially for little kids, but its a good designed machine in my opinion. My old college I used to work for brought several labs full of them.

I doubt they'll leave out Front Row/iSight. They're pushing Front Row on the Edu site and iSight is good for (obviously :rolleyes: ) video conferencing, something that my school is really excited about with the new MacBooks.
I see your point. Video conferencing has been pushed in my LEA for the past year or two, with the rollout of broadband across schools it seems to have gone hand in hand. That doesn't mean it's caught on yet, but its still being pushed definately.

matticus008 raised a good point on this though...a machine with iSight/FrontRow etc could be just the iMac.
And it is! It's an iMac. Schools should also have the option NOT to have those features or be required to pay for them. Right now the 9 out of 10 don't have that choice.

Yes, but in my experience there is a lot of schools which have it more the other way round still. Sometimes they want things and cannot get them without having something else (i.e.: iMac just to get the iSight etc). Maybe the iMac is still too much of a jump upwards just to get an iSight in a cheap eMac. Maybe having the iSight as an option on an eMac is even more expensive (case design?...covering the hole left?) but then again there are lots of PCs out there which have "holes" or sockets for certain items which are only there on the top of the range models, in the lower models the sockets are noticable, but the plastic just hasn't been punched out, or a little stopper has been put in it's place. Acer are big at doing this on their TravelMate laptops used in schools. S-Video, FireWire, sometimes PC Card slots are all blocked in, but still there and noticable...so maybe Apple making the iSight and Front Row an option isn't too hard and expensive after all and well worth it.

It's tricky. If Apple are going to redo an eMac then obviously the marketing will be mainly that product at the market. The iMac may not be marketed as much to the market once the eMac comes out, then again it might be. But something tells me Apple will keep it simple with one main product at a time in a marketing scheme, so the eMac has to be seen to be offering everything (or as much as they think they need) a school needs otherwise it might get too complicated or the eMac appeal may get diluted. I dunno...just a worry I have in the back of my mind, knowing how a lot of machines are advertised to schools and how schools interpret them. It's not always logical how schools think and see things, and it depends on how prepared the school themselves are willing to do things on their own and get a product that their LEA may not fully recommend or support (a big part).

Apple have to get all aspects sorted on this product. Get to the schools, get to the LEA offices, tackle it from all aspects, sell it how it needs to be sold to the different areas that are involved in educational institutions these days. I know my LEA has problems a lot of the time in finding that balance between acting like a business to the outside world and being taken seriously and then switching back to providing good education products and services to its schools in that unique and hard to do manner at times.

Anyhoo...'ll leave it to Apple to stand back from the situation and come up with a good product like they always do. :)

sushi
May 29, 2006, 10:59 AM
I have a Logitec (not Logitech) 15 inch LCD monitor.

I always thought that it's form factor would be a great eMac replacement.

It's sort of like the iMac, but all plastic. It has a more normal looking stand vice the metal one for the iMac. And the stand is detachable which makes for a small package for shipping.

For the eMac, I would have USB, FW, and audio in/out ports at the front of the stand. Also, I really like the forward facing speakers as well. Simple solid design. Would be great for the classroom.

I would equip it with:
40GB HD
512MB RAM
On board Intel Graphics chip set
No optical drive
USB/FW ports
No iSight

Cost could easily be in the $600-700 range.

sushi
May 29, 2006, 11:05 AM
It will be fine until Apple releases OSx64 - the true 64-bit version of OSX.

After that release, however, there will be software that won't run as well on Yonah, or won't run at all.

Technically, a Performa with a 601 isn't crippled either....
Fair enough.

BTW, nothing against 64 bit chips. But right now 32 ones seem to work just fine. Plus they are a whole lot cheaper! :D

sam10685
May 29, 2006, 11:11 AM
Maybe they'll bring back the form factor of the iMac G4, sticking an intel chip inside? That was a sweet design.

dad's getting an iMac G4... i'm jealous.

I have a Logitec (not Logitech) 15 inch LCD monitor.

I always thought that it's form factor would be a great eMac replacement.

It's sort of like the iMac, but all plastic. It has a more normal looking stand vice the metal one for the iMac. And the stand is detachable which makes for a small package for shipping.

For the eMac, I would have USB, FW, and audio in/out ports at the front of the stand. Also, I really like the forward facing speakers as well. Simple solid design. Would be great for the classroom.

I would equip it with:
40GB HD
512MB RAM
On board Intel Graphics chip set
No optical drive
USB/FW ports
No iSight

Cost could easily be in the $600-700 range.

i like the like the little blue light disk thing from the Nintendo Wii.

sam10685
May 29, 2006, 11:25 AM
Except price. Unless they can take a $500-600 (~40-46%!) hit on the current iMac's price, it's not a good option.

i can easily see them taking that much off the price of a 17" imac. the current specs on the 17'' one are getting out dated. (they might shirk the HDD capacity though.)

Caitlyn
May 29, 2006, 12:12 PM
Surprisingly, I'm actually liking www.engadget.com's mockup.

http://www.engadget.com/media/2006/05/new_emac.jpg

I think those would sell pretty nicely given that the specs were fair.

iowamensan
May 29, 2006, 12:24 PM
Sadly, the release date is too late. I am the tech coordinator for a k-12 school, and am getting ready to order for next year. By the estimated Sept. release date, school will have already started. I am about to place my order for about 80 eMacs in about a week. and the $799 price point others have mentioned had also better have the 8-pack option they have now. 8 for 5,000 comes to $625 each. A very nice price.

AidenShaw
May 29, 2006, 12:40 PM
But right now 32[-bit] ones seem to work just fine. Plus they are a whole lot cheaper [than 64-bit chips]! :D
The prices are pretty constant - note that 64-bit Merom is coming in at the same price points that Yonah was introduced at - even though Merom is higher frequency and much faster.

Even Celerons can be 64-bit today.

Older and slower chips can be cheaper - even when they're 64-bit. So, although you're right that Yonah will be cheaper - it's really just age and speed that causes the Yonah discounts. Any implication that "64-bit is expensive" isn't justified (whether such an implication was intended or not).

lazyrighteye
May 29, 2006, 01:36 PM
I'm already helping a school plan their next computer purchases, to replace the Macs in our computer lab, and the PC-vs.-Mac and price/performance debates are back in our planning committee for their annual visits.

Knowing that Apple will introduce new up-to-date Macs, if this rumor is true, will make a positive difference in promoting the Mac option. It would help if we knew the price too.


And don't forget the "Macs can/will now boot Windows" angle. ;)
That, in my mind, totally destroys any "pro PC" side to the now moot PC/Mac debate.

Doctor Q
May 29, 2006, 01:46 PM
And don't forget the "Macs can/will now boot Windows" angle. ;)
That, in my mind, totally destroys any "pro PC" side to the now moot PC/Mac debate.Students in our classrooms aren't going to restart the computer each time they want to switch applications. We don't have some classes that would use Windows and some that would use Mac OS X. We don't have lessons where some students would use Mac OS X and some Windows. These options would just make more work for the teachers.

So if we're going to use Windows apps, we don't need Macs at all. Perhaps buying Macs for Windows-based lessons in case we later decide to switch to a Mac OS X-based curriculum would be an advantage, but that isn't a very impressive argument.

I can sometimes sell them on Macs and Mac apps, but some teachers insist on using Windows because that's all they know. I'll bring up the Windows-on-Mac point now and then, but so far it's been moot. I'm only speaking for our school.

matticus008
May 29, 2006, 01:52 PM
Yes, but in my experience there is a lot of schools which have it more the other way round still. Sometimes they want things and cannot get them without having something else (i.e.: iMac just to get the iSight etc). Maybe the iMac is still too much of a jump upwards just to get an iSight in a cheap eMac.
Very true, and interesting that a school would be interested in an iSight camera. I hadn't considered that schools might have found a practical use for one-on-one videoconferencing for students--classroom to classroom distance learning seems to be en vogue for several of my teacher friends, but that requires an actual camera so that it can be positioned and adjusted properly. I would have thought that an iSight for kids to take MySpace pictures would be one "home PC" feature schools would want to leave out. Maybe offering it as an option wouldn't be unreasonable, then.

mklos
May 29, 2006, 02:00 PM
Finally some sense to this thread. This was about an edu computer and most of the writers just began writing the specs of their personal dream cheap computers.

I don't think even bluetooth would be needed here, but airport is good to have. I'm pretty sure making a 17" lcd for imac is cheaper or the same price than making a 15" with the same resolution.. am I wrong here?

Still, ethernet would be good because in many cases it's smarter to have most of the files stored on a server. So with gigabit ethernet the computers wouldn't need so big HDs. It has to be cheap, so there can't be expensive stuff on it.

Apple isn't making the edu computers because they want schools to have them. They make them because they want money.

Exactly! I think too many people are thinking about their dream cheap Mac instead of what the needs of school districts are.

1. Schools don't need huge displays, 15.4" widescreen is a nice display for educational use. A 20" or even 17 widescreen display is unnecessary. I think that people who own the new 15.4" MacBook Pro would agree that the display is large enough for normal use.

2. Wireless is a must! Just because schools are mostly wired, doesn't mean they can't switch to wireless. This is actually quite doable in nearly any school district. I've already explained the benefits of going wireless. Not every district will do it, but I think it would give an advantage over the competition as most don't offer wireless standard.

3. Apple needs to get the costs down as much as possible and keeping the large display is a waste of money. Remember, Apple is competing against the $399-$599 Dell/HP here so it has to get close with the numbers and specs or else school districts will go elsewhere, even the dedicated Mac only districts.

4. iSight just plain isn't needed. It would cause more of a problem with students doing inappropriate things with it than anything and would add more unnecessary costs to the model. I think people just want this in their dream cheap AIO Mac.

5. The foot print needs to be as small as possible so having a smaller display would keep shipping costs down (remember these ship from China). Sure it would be in a smaller enclosure, but with the use of notebook parts, it would keep it as thin as possible without overheating. Apple can take a lot of technology from the MacMini and MacBook here.

6. CoreSolo just isn't worth it. Its just a disabled CoreDuo and Apple would only be saving a few bucks. I'd rather see them use the CoreDuo so that schools can keep up with technology 3 years down the road and not feel the need to upgrade their Macs every 2 years.

Again, remember this is going to be a Mac that meets the needs of educational institutions, not house holds and businesses. So it needs to be cheap, well made, and expandable for year of usage. These are needs that are slightly different from normal Macs. Some people just don't understand the needs of educators.

gekko513
May 29, 2006, 02:30 PM
Surprisingly, I'm actually liking www.engadget.com's mockup.

<picture>

I think those would sell pretty nicely given that the specs were fair.
Yeah, me too. It would have to be very bottom heavy, though, or the kids would topple it.

AidenShaw
May 29, 2006, 02:31 PM
6. CoreSolo just isn't worth it. Its just a disabled CoreDuo and Apple would only be saving a few bucks.
It's a Core Duo that mostly works, not a fully functional Core Duo that's been intentionally crippled.



I'd rather see them use the CoreDuo so that schools can keep up with technology 3 years down the road and not feel the need to upgrade their Macs every 2 years.
In three months Apple could be 64-bit up-and-down the line. In two or three years, if not sooner, a Core will be completely inadequate.

Or, did you mean a Core 2 Duo, perhaps?

thejadedmonkey
May 29, 2006, 02:54 PM
In three months Apple could be 64-bit up-and-down the line. In two or three years, if not sooner, a Core will be completely inadequate.

Or, did you mean a Core 2 Duo, perhaps?
My (almost) 3 year old XP notebook is still adequate for what I use it for..it's a Pentium M single core. Using that as a benchmark, I think a Core Duo would be fine for a few years, but a Core 2 Duo would of course be better.

mklos
May 29, 2006, 03:27 PM
It's a Core Duo that mostly works, not a fully functional Core Duo that's been intentionally crippled.




In three months Apple could be 64-bit up-and-down the line. In two or three years, if not sooner, a Core will be completely inadequate.

Or, did you mean a Core 2 Duo, perhaps?

Going 64-bit won't really make a difference. The performance increases are marginal and in a lot of apps, its actually slower because the CPU has to crunch more data to do the same amount of work.

I don't foresee a cheap education ONLY Mac doing 64-bit. It would be useless for them. Remember that Apple needs to keep costs down as much as possible as well. If it sells for $999, then IMO Apple just wasted their time and money because schools will just look to Dell and HP and get their $400 computers.

A CoreDuo will last a Mac for years. Apple doesn't make bloatware like M$ does. Schools don't need cutting edge technology every school year. The school I graduated from in 2001 used PowerMac 5200's and they were still working just as good as the day they were first taken out of the box. Sure they were only 75 MHz, but they did exactly what they were supposed to. CoreDuo Macs will serve the same purpose for years. I know I'm beating this to death, but remember that this is a computer for educational use, not personal, business, or gaming use.

Most of the use will be word processing, web browsing, and educational software. Most if not all educational software for the Mac will be able to run on these CoreDuo Macs for years to come. There may be a few apps out there that require some power, but thats why you buy faster Macs if you absolutely have to have that particular piece of software. Its not uncommon for schools to buy different models for different needs in a particular classroom. For example, the computer labs may have the new Intel eMac, while the digital photography/computer graphics classroom may have PowerMacs, or high end iMacs.

itguy06
May 29, 2006, 04:33 PM
Going 64-bit won't really make a difference. The performance increases are marginal and in a lot of apps, its actually slower because the CPU has to crunch more data to do the same amount of work.

Guess that's how an AMD x64 can smoke even the new Core Duos when running 32-bit software? It gets even worse with 64-bit software. The Core's come close, but are still generally second fiddle. It's been that way since the Athlon came out (And AMD has always been faster on non-FPU intensive apps).

Apple should have went AMD - the fastest chips now (and in the past), no production problems anymore, and 64-bits today. AMD also makes the whole widget - chipsets, chips, and can even reference you a motherboard just like Intel does.

Let's just hope Intel doesn't paper launch the rest of their roadmap like they have done so much in the past.....

mklos
May 29, 2006, 04:45 PM
I disagree...I think Intel was the correct choice for Apple. AMD is really good at one thing, gaming! Intel is a great CPU for general use and especially in the creative market. Many creative apps (Avid for example) won't even run on an AMD because nothing is fully optimized or not optimized for AMD processors, but rather Intel processors.

I have Mac friends who have had both AMD and Intel computers and the Intel computer smokes the AMD in nearly any creative thing they do.

Again, schools don't need the top of the line CPUs and never will....

FragTek
May 29, 2006, 05:10 PM
Guess that's how an AMD x64 can smoke even the new Core Duos when running 32-bit software? It gets even worse with 64-bit software. The Core's come close, but are still generally second fiddle. It's been that way since the Athlon came out (And AMD has always been faster on non-FPU intensive apps).

Apple should have went AMD - the fastest chips now (and in the past), no production problems anymore, and 64-bits today. AMD also makes the whole widget - chipsets, chips, and can even reference you a motherboard just like Intel does.

Let's just hope Intel doesn't paper launch the rest of their roadmap like they have done so much in the past.....
Ummmm... I hope this whole post is a hoax.

Don't get me wrong, I'm an AMD fanboy at heart but you obviously missed the train when the Core Duo's came out. All Core Duo processors, no matter which core (Yonah, Conroe, Merom, etc) all outperform any available AMD processor for s939 or AM2. The only thing that AMD has going for them with AM2 is incredible memory bandwidth which the new Intels cant even compete with, but it doesn't do much for AMD because they are still using the A64 architecture whereas Intel revamped the entire architecture for its Core lineup. In fact the new Intels are one of the largest jumps in technology we've seen in quite some time on the grounds of pure speed and performance.

I'm a very avid poster at XtremeSystems and Overclock3D and trust me when I tell ya... No AMD processor can run a 10 second SP1MB :p Let alone anything in the low 'teens. Yonah's are running ~23 second 1mb spi runs at completely stock speeds. An equivalent AMD rig requires a massive overclock only obtainable by a nice custom built single stage or cascade to reach the same speed that the Yonahs are hitting at stock speeds on air.

Do a wee bit more research before you go posting bogus crap... Kthx.

jcabs
May 29, 2006, 05:35 PM
I work in a K-12 environment with over 200 macs. The eMac is definitely needed. And, if Apple does not get a product out before mid-June they will have lost much of this buying season, or stuck a lot of schools like ours with buying eMac G4s which are three year-old technology. That is just poor. Apple has made similar mistakes and lost a signifiant number of schools in the process.

I would love to see specs in clue entry Core Duo, 512 MB Ram (minimum), 17" LCD - if it is an all-in-one product it will not have a CRT as Apple's company "green" policy states that Apple will not be selling any more CRT models, integrated graphics, and it can leave out all of teh iSight, wireless, and BT stuff. Sure they would be nice, but not necessary. I'd rather buy a couple simple webcams than buy one for every computer.

Wireless is definitely not needed in a school desktop environment. Apple has worked hard to provide some excellent network tools that in most cases will have schools using roaming profiles/preferences when they log in to a network server. This is just slow when doing it over wireless and especially slow when a lot of computers are trying to do it over wireless. Remote Desktop struggles over wireless. Mac OS X is finicky about network connections that get dropped in a managed environment. I have never even bothered trying to image machines over wireless. The cost of buying a small 5/8/12/24 port 10/100 switch to expand a network is soo small there is no good reason that anyone should resort to wireless in a desktop setting.

There is real value to Boot Camp. For about $70 a school can buy a Win XP Pro license and now have a lab that is very flexible in terms of software. This may only be a bonus in lab settings, but this is certainly a bonus. I have a lab that I would love to be able to replace with Apples running Boot Camp. The computers run a bunch of Windows only science software for some classes, but for other classes i wish I could use some of the Apple iApps. The machines coul deasily be rebooted in between class periods.

Let's hope Apple has something very soon for all of the Mac school out there.


Exactly! I think too many people are thinking about their dream cheap Mac instead of what the needs of school districts are.

1. Schools don't need huge displays, 15.4" widescreen is a nice display for educational use. A 20" or even 17 widescreen display is unnecessary. I think that people who own the new 15.4" MacBook Pro would agree that the display is large enough for normal use.

2. Wireless is a must! Just because schools are mostly wired, doesn't mean they can't switch to wireless. This is actually quite doable in nearly any school district. I've already explained the benefits of going wireless. Not every district will do it, but I think it would give an advantage over the competition as most don't offer wireless standard.

3. Apple needs to get the costs down as much as possible and keeping the large display is a waste of money. Remember, Apple is competing against the $399-$599 Dell/HP here so it has to get close with the numbers and specs or else school districts will go elsewhere, even the dedicated Mac only districts.

4. iSight just plain isn't needed. It would cause more of a problem with students doing inappropriate things with it than anything and would add more unnecessary costs to the model. I think people just want this in their dream cheap AIO Mac.

5. The foot print needs to be as small as possible so having a smaller display would keep shipping costs down (remember these ship from China). Sure it would be in a smaller enclosure, but with the use of notebook parts, it would keep it as thin as possible without overheating. Apple can take a lot of technology from the MacMini and MacBook here.

6. CoreSolo just isn't worth it. Its just a disabled CoreDuo and Apple would only be saving a few bucks. I'd rather see them use the CoreDuo so that schools can keep up with technology 3 years down the road and not feel the need to upgrade their Macs every 2 years.

Again, remember this is going to be a Mac that meets the needs of educational institutions, not house holds and businesses. So it needs to be cheap, well made, and expandable for year of usage. These are needs that are slightly different from normal Macs. Some people just don't understand the needs of educators.

celebrian23
May 29, 2006, 05:51 PM
I think a big point is the need for a computer that can stand the test of time. We don't use apple at my school, but the computers we use usually have to go 4-5 years before they'll be ugraded. I understand why apple is more expensive, but a school district a lot of times needs the best cheapest solution- apple has to be able to compete in the education arena.

GilGrissom
May 29, 2006, 06:18 PM
I think a big point is the need for a computer that can stand the test of time. We don't use apple at my school, but the computers we use usually have to go 4-5 years before they'll be ugraded.
Indeed they do. As I said earlier the UK Government gives an aim of 3 years to most schools, it's almost never done, even if they really could do with being replaced. Macs usually last longer...any slight increase in price against their usual cheap PCs could still be better money spent if the machines effectively last longer.

BobtheTomato
May 29, 2006, 06:42 PM
I just hope they put the display behind plexiglass or otherwise kid-proof it and make it heavy enough to stay put. Love the flat panel iMacs but they're a bit delicate for the real world of education.

BobtheTomato
May 29, 2006, 06:54 PM
There is real value to Boot Camp. For about $70 a school can buy a Win XP Pro license and now have a lab that is very flexible in terms of software. This may only be a bonus in lab settings, but this is certainly a bonus. I have a lab that I would love to be able to replace with Apples running Boot Camp. The computers run a bunch of Windows only science software for some classes, but for other classes i wish I could use some of the Apple iApps. The machines coul deasily be rebooted in between class periods.

Be nice if the teacher could reboot all the machines to WinXP (and vice versa) from their desktop (preferably with a "roster" on screen where each machine checks in once successfully rebooted so you can glance and know that all are ready for the class)

itguy06
May 29, 2006, 06:58 PM
Many creative apps (Avid for example) won't even run on an AMD because nothing is fully optimized or not optimized for AMD processors, but rather Intel processors.

Don't know much about Avid - apparently they have a very narrow computer specifications they will work with - their site mentions models and not general specs.

I've never had issues with AMD CPU's - they run everything I throw at them and do it speedily and reliably. And for video encoding and such they smoke most Intels. This is the reason many CGI shops moved to AMD Opterons and Linux for the render farms because they smoke the Xeon...

Don't get me wrong, I'm an AMD fanboy at heart but you obviously missed the train when the Core Duo's came out. All Core Duo processors, no matter which core (Yonah, Conroe, Merom, etc) all outperform any available AMD processor for s939 or AM2.

So, you're basing this on unreleased processors, which the only speed benches we have are 1 future Intel system vs the current AMD system where both were supplied by Intel? Sounds like a fair test to me. Please.

Of course the preproduction runs are going to be faster. Of course Intel's going to "rig" it in favor of them (even though no hints could be found) by only allowing certain benchies to be run.

Truth be told, we have no idea what the future will be like for both camps. When the P4 came out, it was supposed to be smoking fast. It was getitng it's butt handed to it by Athlons and even lower clocked P3's.

In fact the new Intels are one of the largest jumps in technology we've seen in quite some time on the grounds of pure speed and performance.

They are still catching up to AMD on many benchies. And I'd put transparent 64-bits and dual core 64-bit up there as well. As well as AMD having the power/performance lead in server CPU's right now.

From:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2648&p=14

"We continue to see that the Core Duo can offer, clock for clock, overall performance identical to that of AMD's Athlon 64 X2 - without the use of an on-die memory controlle"

Then there's:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2627&p=10

"As a desktop contender, Yonah is a bit of a mixed bag. While its performance in content creation applications has definitely improved over the single core Dothan, it still falls behind the Athlon 64 X2 in a handful of areas. Intel still needs to improve their video encoding and gaming performance, but it looks like we may have to wait for Conroe and Merom for that."

So they are just catching up to an "older" CPU and still can't make the grade in the Desktop area. Yeah, a huge jump...
:confused:

Do a wee bit more research before you go posting bogus crap... Kthx.
I do, thanks. Came from the PC world. Fortunately, I don't beleive the Gospel of Jobs and Intel. Intel has a history of promising and not delivering - they are the king of the paper launch, you know. Intel's road map may promise you the starts, but from past experience it will be rewritten to barely get you to the next town over.

I'll wait to see what Cornhole and Merummm ship to see what they do. Right now I'm unimpressed and underwhelmed by Intel.

mklos
May 29, 2006, 07:04 PM
Well that would be great if every classroom had enough computers for everyone, but in this world...its just not possible.

FragTek
May 29, 2006, 07:11 PM
The problem here is that you are taking a stance with old old information... It's been a looong time since the intel supplied system shootout. Yonah processors are now available on retail shelves along with i975x mobos.

Since the release of Yonah my friends have been testing new Conroe ES's and Core 2 Extreme ES's hot off of the production line. I stay current with the situation, VERY current.

No current AMD processor can hold a candle to the power of any processor from the Core Duo lineup.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=101190

Have a few looks at the responses and results in that thread. Every world record for every available benchmark has been broken by a Conroe ES. Now, imagine once Intel has finished fine tuning them and put them on the shelf, they'll be even better. People are eating this stuff up. The new Intel lineup is completely amazing and will leave you speachless.

Futuremark just recently (2 days ago iirc) removed all 3dmark results posted by users on Conroe rigs because they dubbed it "unfair" due to lack of availability to the masses. Once they re-allow those results, you can expect every record to be documented and broken by a Core Duo based rig.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=101321

AMD can't keep up, period. AMD has announced that in Q1 '07 they plan to release a new processor running a completely revamped architecture for AM2 to compete with Intel. But hell, that's a ways off. Viva la Intel!

mklos
May 29, 2006, 07:34 PM
Don't know much about Avid - apparently they have a very narrow computer specifications they will work with - their site mentions models and not general specs.

I've never had issues with AMD CPU's - they run everything I throw at them and do it speedily and reliably. And for video encoding and such they smoke most Intels. This is the reason many CGI shops moved to AMD Opterons and Linux for the render farms because they smoke the Xeon...



So, you're basing this on unreleased processors, which the only speed benches we have are 1 future Intel system vs the current AMD system where both were supplied by Intel? Sounds like a fair test to me. Please.

Of course the preproduction runs are going to be faster. Of course Intel's going to "rig" it in favor of them (even though no hints could be found) by only allowing certain benchies to be run.

Truth be told, we have no idea what the future will be like for both camps. When the P4 came out, it was supposed to be smoking fast. It was getitng it's butt handed to it by Athlons and even lower clocked P3's.



They are still catching up to AMD on many benchies. And I'd put transparent 64-bits and dual core 64-bit up there as well. As well as AMD having the power/performance lead in server CPU's right now.

From:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2648&p=14

"We continue to see that the Core Duo can offer, clock for clock, overall performance identical to that of AMD's Athlon 64 X2 - without the use of an on-die memory controlle"

Then there's:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2627&p=10

"As a desktop contender, Yonah is a bit of a mixed bag. While its performance in content creation applications has definitely improved over the single core Dothan, it still falls behind the Athlon 64 X2 in a handful of areas. Intel still needs to improve their video encoding and gaming performance, but it looks like we may have to wait for Conroe and Merom for that."

So they are just catching up to an "older" CPU and still can't make the grade in the Desktop area. Yeah, a huge jump...
:confused:


I do, thanks. Came from the PC world. Fortunately, I don't beleive the Gospel of Jobs and Intel. Intel has a history of promising and not delivering - they are the king of the paper launch, you know. Intel's road map may promise you the starts, but from past experience it will be rewritten to barely get you to the next town over.

I'll wait to see what Cornhole and Merummm ship to see what they do. Right now I'm unimpressed and underwhelmed by Intel.

Just because you found one website, doesn't make the AMD any better. I don't really care what websites report. I know they all say this is as independent as they get, but they can make a tweak here, tweak there to make it sway one way or the other. So I don't care what websites say.

You just sound like a die hard AMD fans who think their (AMD's) crap doesn't stink. Like I said..AMD's are good for one thing and one thing only, Gaming.

Apple always has the option of going AMD in the future and may. Who knows! Nobody knows is AMD will deliver in the future either. Every chip maker has its ups and downs. They can be on top today/tomorrow, and in the crapper 1 year later. Every chip maker will eventually hit a wall and then they gotta do something else to catch up to the competition.

codo
May 29, 2006, 07:58 PM
I like AMD - I think itís just the whole under dog mentality, love it! :confused:
(In a way, thatís one of the attractions of Macs - They are different, i.e. not Windows. I like being different.)

Donít you love opinions based upon fact?

Btw - We've run Avid Liquid on AMD CPUís; donít know where this is all coming from. I've never come across any application that wonít run on my AMD windows machine. When sys. requirements say Intel; they generally mean any Windows compatible processor.

FragTek
May 29, 2006, 08:14 PM
One of my forum members just posted up some Pi results with his newly acquired Merom T7200... Talk about fast on icewater!

http://forum.overclock3d.net/showthread.php?t=4570

Iverieli
May 29, 2006, 08:31 PM
Has this forum any administrator or moderator?? I read many posts and why those AMD craps posting everywhere and saying AMD is better?

Does anyone much better and well educated then Apple engeneers in cupertino? I don't think so and Apple never goes wrong and lost they name or many. Please calm and give us some space to talk about macs not AMD vs Intel ****!!!

sam10685
May 29, 2006, 09:20 PM
Yeah, me too. It would have to be very bottom heavy, though, or the kids would topple it.

it should have osmium in the bottom.

kresh
May 29, 2006, 11:29 PM
You just sound like a die hard AMD fans who think their (AMD's) crap doesn't stink. Like I said..AMD's are good for one thing and one thing only, Gaming.



Yep. That's the reason Dell recently announced, for the first time ever, they were going to start selling end end servers with AMD chips. Thus ending their exclusive relationship with Intel.

It's the games of course.

mattcube64
May 29, 2006, 11:38 PM
Hey guys, just thought I'd share my two cents.

This year I'll be a senior in highschool, and editor-in-chief of the school paper. We currently use a three G5 iMacs (20" as a HDD host, and two 17"s for InDesign and Photoshop), and two eMacs (mainly for TextEdit). It's not enough for all the reporters in the class. Now, unlike the school computers, my peers and I have complete admin rights to each of the computers. Right now, the eMacs are fine for story writing, but they just aren't up to snuff for InDesign and Photoshop, meaning we have to resort to several of us cramming around three computers to get design done.

I've been pushing the school/school district to purchase new Powermacs for the class or more G5 iMacs (neither of our needed programs are universal, yet). They take the requests seriously, as we're an awarded and recognized publication, but they refuse due to price constraints.

If Apple were to make a 15-17", 512MB Ram, no optical, 40GB HDD, Core Duo 1.83Ghz in the sub $700 for education, I'm certain we could get two or three in our class. Man, would I love that.:p

rasterbator
May 30, 2006, 02:03 AM
This new education mac is expected. If it is fashioned after an iMac, they could call it iMac mini. It woll most likely have the intel Core Duo and the 950 processor. It would make sense to use these since APple will be moving up to the newer intel processors as they arrive.

Also to be expected: two flavors of Mac Pro. One possibly called Mac Pro tower and another called Mac Pro mini. The Mac Pro mini would look something like this:
http://66.134.41.67/~ron/apple/index2.html

This would make sense because then each line would have a mini and a pro option, and then the options within each option when you custom build.

It would also be nice to see an XServe mini, which could be targeted at schools, small businesses, and home media centers:
http://66.134.41.67/~ron/apple/index4.html

Looking forward to more Apple success.

kildraik
May 30, 2006, 02:26 AM
Mac Pro Mini? Any guess on what it's price would be?

LACOSTE
May 30, 2006, 06:04 AM
Maybe they'll bring back the form factor of the iMac G4, sticking an intel chip inside? That was a sweet design.

Yup i agree, an eMac Flatpanel design would look great, but it might be more costly to make. :(

Maybe apple would design this new eMac using the "ipod-in-a-dock" design...

Or maybe something completely different: Can the eMac turn out to be the long-awaited tablet mac? At least one that you can dock?

This would be useful in higher education: specially for genomics, architecture and the like.

As for schools, the touchscreen interactive feature would be a big bonus.

ghetto
May 30, 2006, 11:11 AM
This isn't real scientific proof, but our Apple rep always sends out an email with blowout prices for things just before they announce a new product. Right now they are getting $625 for a CD eMac.

Our school is looking to upgrade (we are still using 5500's :eek: in some instances) and we will wait. There is nothing like being on the trail end with your "new" computers.

One of the things I am going to push is the fact that an iMac can run windoze. For some, this is a good thing. Here's to the new eMac running windoze as well.

mklos
May 30, 2006, 12:14 PM
Yep. That's the reason Dell recently announced, for the first time ever, they were going to start selling end end servers with AMD chips. Thus ending their exclusive relationship with Intel.

It's the games of course.

Just another reason why Dell sucks!

iMeowbot
May 31, 2006, 06:42 AM
What about the emac made it fail? What about this computer will be different in that respect?
It's got to be an RoHS nightmare, and the deadline is July. Notice what model is conspicuously absent here (http://www.apple.com/environment/resources/specs.html).