New Hardware in April/March?

[MacRumors]

Appleinsider posts (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=376) some updates regarding the 10.3.3 seed. In addition, according to the site, 10.3.3 is incorporating support for new product offerings that are expected to debut between March and April.

[TRiPod]

sounds good to me!

[virividox]

well obviously the likely hood of it happening in feb is low now that theres only a littel over a week left.

so this is the next logical step.

i wonder if they make an announcement april 1 then repeal it just for kicks

[Steven1621]

this doesn't seem like a PB or PM update, but rather something brand new. maybe this is that apple table-top device that has been rumored recently?

[wrldwzrd89]

This doesn't surprise me at all. Previous rumors have hinted at Mac OS 10.3.3 being required for new hardware (specifically the Rev. B PowerMac G5s), but there is always the possibility of Apple releasing something entirely new and Mac OS X-powered.

[QCassidy352]

it's about freakin' time!

[Grimace]

Apple users get so uptight about hardware revisions! ;) Do PC people follow the releases of Dell, Sony, HP, and Gateway with such interest???

[arn]

Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
This doesn't surprise me at all. Previous rumors have hinted at Mac OS 10.3.3 being required for new hardware (specifically the Rev. B PowerMac G5s)

I think is faulty logic.

Hardware isn't delayed by OS releases.

When a new Mac is released, it always has a newer version of Mac OS installed on it -- this extra code provides support for the new machine.

In other words, even if Mac OS X 10.3.3 came out a week before the new PowerMacs were released, I'd wager the new PowerMacs have a different version of Mac OS X 10.3.3.

arn

[sparks9]

lol another useless prediction. It's like saying, "no updates in feb".

[machan]

all i really care about is an updated emac (i know, crazy right?). the reason is that my parents and a coworker are both waiting for the updated versions before they buy....and they've been waiting a couple months now since i told them to hold off a bit. what's a couple more months when you've waited 4 years at this point, that's what i told them but they are getting antsy. hurry up apple!

[montecristo]

They should stop these rumors, because people are holding back their purchases, and then Apple and other resellers get stuck with old inventories and then they delay the release of new stuff thinking that they need to move the old stuff and then more rumors persist, and so on and so on and then we mac fans just get disgruntled. But we keep on saying, "Thank you sir can I please have another!" as we get rumor-whipped.:mad:

[Ambrose Chapel]

as the apple turns has made a few crytpic references to "something huge in april." they speculated it may be a G5 iMac.

In fact, we're getting increasingly excited about the possibility that the "something huge" coming in April which we mentioned a week or two back might in fact turn out to be the G5ing of the iMac line

[a17inchFuture]

Would they really put a G5 into an imac before a powerbook? I mean powerbooks are considered their top of the line books, whereas imacs are considered their economic line. Does this makes sense?

Also, i doesn't mean they are introducing anything new (as someone suggesed that it was reaily something compeltely new, like a tablet). "New hardware" could simply mean new powerbooks, as a synonym for hardware can be many things such as powerbook, powermac, imac, etc.

So no, I am sorry, but it certainly doesn't mean there will be something completely new. I think the new revision should be from PB's. They have gone longer without updates than the pm, and they certainly need a g5 more than imacs.

Pray for Apple Powerbook G5's by April!

[Ambrose Chapel]

Originally posted by a17inchFuture
Would they really put a G5 into an imac before a powerbook? I mean powerbooks are considered their top of the line books, whereas imacs are considered their economic line. Does this makes sense?

well, powerbooks are selling, iMacs are not. they need to do something to revive interest and sales in their consumer desktops.

[CmdrLaForge]

Everyone could make up that rumor and will be proofed to be right !

I mean Feb is over. And that "something" should come in the next two month is quite obvious.

Cheers

[johnnyjibbs]

As Arn said, I think the release of 10.3.3 has little to do with new hardware. Unless there are new Bluetooth Apple devices or similar such things. New radical displays perhaps? 3D screens?

I think we're more on the assumption that it's inevitable that there will be hardware released of some kind in March or April. That has 1 week away to 10 weeks away covered. I still think Power Macs will be first, and this ties in nicely with the 2.5GHz G5 chips that IBM has been demoing. PowerBooks will probably follow a few weeks later (still G4 I reckon). I think we may see an iMac price drop or update too. G5? I'd like it to be, but I have a feeling Apple will decline this time.

All purely speculative, mind, just like most of the rumours of late.

[a17inchFuture]

Originally posted by Ambrose Chapel
well, powerbooks are selling, iMacs are not. they need to do something to revive interest and sales in their consumer desktops.

Well I hope you are wrong, as the present design for imacs is very cool, and is somewhat newish if I remember correctly(or have at least had the G4 for little time). Anyways, I just think that the iMacs are selling poorly because people want powerful machines these days, and are simply going for the beautfiul G5 PM's. But I think this desire for technology and the future is veering a little away from iMacs, and more toward the portability and all encompassing abilities of the powerbooks and G5 Pm's. Therefore, I believe they should try to stay on top of the powerbook game as well.

Back five years ago, iMacs were what was needed to get people back into mac, and to get apple out of the woods. At the same time, computer sales were growing faster than ever before with ethernet and internet in general really becoming household things. I think now people are so onboard with the "computer lifestyle", especially for the mac users, that now they just want to get the best of the best when they buy, and that that is why the PMs are doing better lately, and the iMacs not.

Plus, iMacs kinda get people into the "Apple style", which is a refined taste, like escargot (sp?). And once you are into that style, the PB's and G5 PM's are just the pinnacle of that taste.

Okay, so some of that might have been a little out on a limb . . . .

[Ambrose Chapel]

i agree, i think the iMac is a beautiful machine, and i've recommended it to friends (one did buy a 17" and loves it). it was debuted in Jan 2002. i also personally would like to see G5 PBs before G5 iMacs. BUT, iMacs are selling poorly, they do poorly on price/performance relative to wintels (even if it's arguably all the power a consumer desktop needs), and a G5 would certainly boost sales. there have been a few articles from tech consultants or whoever speculating on this as well...

[a17inchFuture]

Well if Apple always did what tech consultants said we'd have a very boring company in them.

or in other words- BOO-HISS!!!.... nothing until new G5 powerbooks!

[wdlove]

Originally posted by Macrumors
Appleinsider posts (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=376) some updates regarding the 10.3.3 seed. In addition, according to the site, 10.3.3 is incorporating support for new product offerings that are expected to debut between March and April.

This sounds awesome. A new 3D Display would also be great. Mr. Anderson was the first to mention the possibility that the 10.3.3 would indicate new hardware. If indeed there are new hardware on the way, it's great news. That means they might actually be available by my birthday.

[JasonElise1983]

G5 iMac...i don't think so. It would be so silly of Apple to even attempt a G5 iMac. Lets look at the facts. The PowerMac just got a G5 in June. The PowerBook doesn't even have one yet. And the iMac just got a 20" screen. Apple would never put a G5 in the current case, and since they just developed something new for it, i would say that it will be a G4 for a while. As i recall, IBM is also develping a 7??? processor which was called a G3 +altivec. I think apple will switch to this sometime soon, and call it a G4 or maybe even a G4-II. The PowerBook will get a G5 soon, 970fx looks too easy for it not too. This is how i think the line up should look.

PowerMac G5
2.0Ghz
Dual 2.2Ghz
Dual 2.4 Ghz

PowerBook G5
12" 1.6Ghz
15" 1.6 Ghz
15" 1.8 Ghz
17" 1.8Ghz

iMac
15" 1.2Ghz G4-II
17" 1.4Ghz G4-II
20" 1.6Ghz G4-II

eMac
1.2Ghz G4-II

iBook
12" 1Ghz G4-II
14" 1.2Ghz G4-II

That would be a reasonable, ass kicking line of computers. It would kill the world of PC's and start the trend of total mac domination.

[Dont Hurt Me]

A sure way to kill off sales is to leave Imac G4.
Point #1 the consumer line should be selling 10 times the amount of the pro line due to consumers outnumber the pro's 100 to 1. they are not and in fact are selling in about the same quantity. and this is Emac & Imac sales combined. Very sad if you are going for those pod carrying folks also known as consumers.
Point#2 where is is written that powerbook needs G5 before Imac? this is a total different market. one is portable one is not.
Point#3 G4 is good for a laptop due to its low power consumption
Point#4 Imac has been priced for prosumer market but its G4(insert laugh) is nowhere close to prosumer Pc's. even if they gave it 2 G4s its still not close. G4 doesnt belong there.
Point #5 Consumers are gamers and the top consumer machine is a very poor gamer machine. at over 2 thousand dollars it should be able to play Halo,Ut2004 and Doom3. It cant.
Point # 6 This means a consumer has to buy a Powermac 1.6 G5 to get (only) decent performance. not stellar performance and add the cost of a monitor and you are now at $2500. this is way outside what consumers want to spend for a good computer in fact about $1000 over where it should be thereby locking the consumer out of Apple as a alternative to a Pc which will have more performance,less cost and the consumer can get just what they want without having to buy all the extras Apple forces on you.
Last Point. Imac is hurting more then any other product and should be a clear sales leader for Apple. It isnt. Imac Crt was the leader that brought millions into Apples world and they need another machine that can do that again. It will take power(G5) it will take style and it will take color. If Apple ignores these 3 points it is going to be more of the same for its sales numbers. Rant over.

[aswitcher]

I also think the iMac needs to try and compete, and the only way it will be able to do that for Games, Digital Video, Digital Stills etc, is for it to have a decent processor, graphic card options and max RAM - both of which the iMacs are seemingly years behind equivelent PCs.

Also Mac users I know who are home users or semi pro, don't want a lame G4 chip when they know what the G5 (no matter the speed) will likely be doing in the next year or so as software is recompilled to use 64 bit.

When it comes out it should have a new form factor to allow for a single G5 with 2 but preferable 4 slots of ram to take maximuim advantage of the G5.


I also agree that its sales are very poor and that as soon as its ready ir should be out. Indeed it clearly the line that needs most attention and should have priority unless Apple are moving away from a consumer focus, like BMW building cars for only the upper middle class and the rich...

[JasonElise1983]

G5 iMac...i don't think so. It would be so silly of Apple to even attempt a G5 iMac. Lets look at the facts. The PowerMac just got a G5 in June. The PowerBook doesn't even have one yet. And the iMac just got a 20" screen. Apple would never put a G5 in the current case, and since they just developed something new for it, i would say that it will be a G4 for a while. As i recall, IBM is also develping a 7??? processor which was called a G3 +altivec. I think apple will switch to this sometime soon, and call it a G4 or maybe even a G4-II. The PowerBook will get a G5 soon, 970fx looks too easy for it not too. This is how i think the line up should look.

PowerMac G5
2.0Ghz
Dual 2.2Ghz
Dual 2.4 Ghz

PowerBook G5
12" 1.6Ghz
15" 1.6 Ghz
15" 1.8 Ghz
17" 1.8Ghz

iMac
15" 1.2Ghz G4-II
17" 1.4Ghz G4-II
20" 1.6Ghz G4-II

eMac
1.2Ghz G4-II

iBook
12" 1Ghz G4-II
14" 1.2Ghz G4-II

That would be a reasonable, ass kicking line of computers. It would kill the world of PC's and start the trend of total mac domination.

[stingerman]

The PB 17" has a dual 1.8 in it, doesn't it? ;) Oh and I predict we will see hardware updated between March and December...

[Puppies]

Lets face it, Apple's hardware is massively overpriced. The PowerMac is the only line that's more or less in the same league performance-wise as current x86 hardware, but it costs at least double the price.

The iMac and PowerBook are both overpriced and underpowered. Considering the 970 is actually CHEAPER than a G4, and can run cooler (especially on the new process) there's no excuse not to switch to it across the line. I was shocked the PowerBook didn't switch last September and these claims of it drawing too much power are bogus. Even on a .13 process it drew a reasonable amount at full speed-underclocked it was comparable to a G4. Geez, some official Intel mobile chips draw 70 watts.

And the iMac comes with at BEST a non-upgradeable Geforce 5200? What the hey! In the Windows world you can get something easily twice as powerful (a Geforce 4) for $60-70. Consumers want to play games, and the iMac should cost about $300 if it wanted to compete price/performance against x86 hardware.

EDIT: (Okay, I was basing $300 on what you can get for $1000 with x86-technically the iMac would compare really nicely against cheap x86 hardware if it were priced <$800).

(Of course, if Apple is still using tech support based in the US, that's worth a premium right there-most x86 vendors are based out of India now).

[Dont Hurt Me]

jasonelise1983 whats with the posting of the same post twice? once is enough thankyou. Puppies you make some nice points, i was looking at some more Pcs and it amazing for under $1500 they will give you a 9800 pro, in our stale Macworld they will give you a stale fx5200 even in the dual 1.8 G5. $2500 simply sorry. Mac Hardware is way overpriced and we all know it. Its been this way for years. all i can say is vote with your wallet.

[Wonder Boy]

Originally posted by stingerman
I predict we will see hardware updated between March and December...

whoa. your way off. lets be reasonable here ;)

[JasonElise1983]

i didn't mean to post it twice, i actually don't know how that happened. i just refreshed my browser and there it was again. But i do disagree with Apple Hardware being over priced. Have you looked at decent PC's in the market lately? No, you probably haven't. HP, Dell, Gateway are all ****. If you want a real PC, you get an alienware, falcon northwest, voodoo, or build it yourself. An alienware running intels top processor will easily cost as much as a PowerMac G5 and doesn't perform as well. Yes graphic cards, are a little more expensive on the mac side, but that is because you are actually buying an ATI and not some saphire ****. you pay for what you get. HP, Dell, Compaq, and Gateway are paper weights compared to a mac. I would buy a 700mhz eMac for $1000 before i bought a gateway with a 3ghz P4 for the same price. Its the way its built. I trust apple hardware, i don't trust gateway. Hell, i don't trust microsoft or intel. I do have a lot of respect for AMD, and i hope the Athlon64 kills intel and stomps them into the ground. I'm not a Mac head, i work cross platform. At home on my desk i have a P4 PC and a G4iMac sitting side by side. I use both of them, but the iMac just performs better. Its just a better machine. I see the benefits of PCs and i think they have a good market(cheap asses and gamers) I don't think apple needs that market, apple wants the consumers that are willing to pay for a quality machine. Maybe that is why they have such a low marketshare, but i like it. I'd drive a honda over a cadillac anyday. Hondas are just made better, and are worth the money.

[woolfgang]

Hey Puppies, this has been addressed many times before: You get what you pay for. I just left an office that was being run on a 12 year old mac server, I see 4 and 5 year old PC's on the street every day. Anyway, I don't think the G5 upgrade thingy is all that black and white. I wouldn't be surprised if Steve didn't have something up his sleeve and introduce G5's in imacs and Powerbooks within a short time of each other. I'm frustrated too, wanting a G5 Powerbook. I've never bought Rev. A, but would if I could get one. What about the push at the Apple store online. There definitely trying to sell those G5's.

[Puppies]

JasonElise1983: But i do disagree with Apple Hardware being over priced. Have you looked at decent PC's in the market lately? No, you probably haven't. HP, Dell, Gateway are all ****. If you want a real PC, you get an alienware, falcon northwest, voodoo, or build it yourself. An alienware running intels top processor will easily cost as much as a PowerMac G5 and doesn't perform as well.[quote]

Falcon, Alienware, etc. are horribly overpriced too. There’s nothing wrong with Dell, and with Dell or building it yourself you’re getting easily double the bang for the buck versus Apple. (Probably more.)

[quote]Yes graphic cards, are a little more expensive on the mac side

A LITTLE more expensive? A Radeon 9800 Pro goes for $400 for the Mac, versus about $215 for Windows right now (or $350 to upgrade from a Geforce 5200 on a new Mac). I don’t think I’d describe that difference as “little”. Plus there’s very little to choose from compared with the gazillions of different varieties of Radeons and Geforces available for x86 (which brings with it really good pricing).

but that is because you are actually buying an ATI and not some saphire ****.

What’s wrong with Saphire? It’s possible the Radeon in the PowerMac is made by Saphire, as they make a lot of the ‘ATi’ hardware apparently. I haven’t used anything by Saphire yet, but I haven’t heard of anything negative against them.

you pay for what you get. HP, Dell, Compaq, and Gateway are paper weights compared to a mac. I would buy a 700mhz eMac for $1000 before i bought a gateway with a 3ghz P4 for the same price. Its the way its built. I trust apple hardware, i don't trust gateway. Hell, i don't trust microsoft or intel. I do have a lot of respect for AMD, and i hope the Athlon64 kills intel and stomps them into the ground. I'm not a Mac head, i work cross platform. At home on my desk i have a P4 PC and a G4iMac sitting side by side. I use both of them, but the iMac just performs better. Its just a better machine. I see the benefits of PCs and i think they have a good market(cheap asses and gamers) I don't think apple needs that market, apple wants the consumers that are willing to pay for a quality machine. Maybe that is why they have such a low marketshare, but i like it. I'd drive a honda over a cadillac anyday. Hondas are just made better, and are worth the money.

That whole ‘quality’ argument works to a point. Macs do tend to be well built and they certainly look nice. But the nice looking bit runs out of steam (most people aren’t going to pay two or three times more just for something that looks a little nicer) and Apple doesn’t give you the option of buying something more “normal” looking for more “normal” prices. A lot more people would be willing to get away from Microsoft if they could buy an Apple system for a reasonable price/performance level. And as for the quality-yeah, store bought Windows PCs are basically pieces of junk, but Dell and some other vendors aren’t, and I’d trust an x86 system with hand picked components for reliability and speed any day over a Mac.

There’s no way around it. Apple hardware costs too much for its performance. I’d have to spend $3000 to get an Apple system that performs similarly to a $1000 x86 system I threw together myself or got from Dell (and that’s WITH an educational discount). It’s really hard to justify, and I think there’s probably more of an untapped market for reasonably priced Apple hardware than ever, because of people who want to switch to OS X but can’t justify the cost.

[173080]

Originally posted by Puppies

Apple doesn’t give you the option of buying something more “normal” looking for more “normal” prices.


And Mercedes-Benz and BMW do?

[ionas]

its up to apple.
if they dont release anything but 3ghz i will go for 3ghz directly.

i dont need to buy
i want to buy
if there is nothing to buy
i dont buy

if apple doesnt bring anything but 3ghz and brings 3ghz after 2004 i wont even consider to buy.

then i ll stick with some other ppc and MoL (mac on linux) and still have a PPC, Mac OS X and all the fun.

so its not up to me - its up to apple.

[woolfgang]

Thou doth protest too much. If you want PC, what are you doing in here. What's the problem? I wonder how many PC forums have Mac people in them complaining.

[phillymjs]

Consarnit, Apple! Announce the damned speed-bumped G5s already! I don't care if they won't be shipping for a few weeks because the OS isn't ready! I've got a ~$6K check coming next week from a junk fax lawsuit, and I want to blow it on a shiny new top-of-the-line Power Mac.

I swear, I can't win. When I'm broke, you can't announce nifty new machines fast enough, but now...

~Philly

[Puppies]

And Mercedes-Benz and BMW do?

That's really not a valid comparison. BMWs don't need special BMW gas or BMW roads.

Can't believe anyone would actually try to argue that Apple isn't overpriced...

Anyway, I'm still hoping for quick PowerBook updates.

[invaLPsion]

I've been waiting for powermac updates for two months and it's TIME for Apple to release them. Idon't care how fast they are. Whatever it is, I will buy it!

[reorx]

Originally posted by Puppies
That's really not a valid comparison. BMWs don't need special BMW gas or BMW roads.

Can't believe anyone would actually try to argue that Apple isn't overpriced...

Anyway, I'm still hoping for quick PowerBook updates.

Its a perfectly valid comparison. If you're comparing vehicle to vehicle, your observation about needing special gas is way off (unless you assume premium fuel is somehow "special").

Mac's don't require special "electricity" nor do they need special "internet connectivity".

What they give end-users is far more than can be measured in MHz and FPS.

Are you saying that the user experience of a Pontiac GTO is the same as a BMW 3 series given that they're roughly the same size and have similar 0-60 times?

If so, you're absolutely missing the point.

[aswitcher]

Originally posted by reorx
Its a perfectly valid comparison. If you're comparing vehicle to vehicle, your observation about needing special gas is way off (unless you assume premium fuel is somehow "special").

Mac's don't require special "electricity" nor do they need special "internet connectivity".

What they give end-users is far more than can be measured in MHz and FPS.

Are you saying that the user experience of a Pontiac GTO is the same as a BMW 3 series given that they're roughly the same size and have similar 0-60 times?

If so, you're absolutely missing the point.

I agree.

The real issue for me here is that Apple set out to build a machine for the masses, 20 odd years ago, and also suceeded with a pretty good mom and pop machine with the first iMac. But now they dont compete or even really attempt to seriously compete on performance at the low end of the computing market - and their sales reflect that.

[takao]

Originally posted by Huezo
And Mercedes-Benz and BMW do?


please no more car comparisations...

yes bmw/mercedes are offering normal looking cars for normal prices...in europe...and guess what ? they have more than 20% marketshare combined...and guess how many mustang,camaros,skylines i have seen _ever_ : zero, nada, null,...

there is _no_ market niche for them here they have to compete with m3s,s3s,golf gtis etc.at much lower price ...and because of that they don't sell them here... you can't sell american cars here they just use to much fuel... would you buy a car which uses 20 liters per 100 km and you have to pay more than 1 dollar per liter ?

if you use car manufactures..use porsche,aston martin etc. they are comparable to apple

PS: even driving schools are using BMW 3,or Audi A4 here

[rdowns]

Originally posted by a17inchFuture
whereas imacs are considered their economic line. than the pm, and they certainly need a g5 more than imacs.


Economical line? Surely, you jest.

[reorx]

Originally posted by takao
if you use car manufactures..use porsche,aston martin etc. they are comparable to apple

Ah, a valid point if you live on the continent, but not here in the USA. :D

We get the expensive vehicles from all the world's manufacturers. You can't even get a Toyota Land Cruiser over here with a manual transmission or a diesel. They are only $60K plus vehicles here. Such a shame, as I'd love to have an all-manual(tranny tcase) turbodiesel FZJ100 here in the states. :D

[rdowns]

Originally posted by JasonElise1983
G5 iMac...i don't think so. It would be so silly of Apple to even attempt a G5 iMac. Lets look at the facts. The PowerMac just got a G5 in June. The PowerBook doesn't even have one yet. And the iMac just got a 20" screen. Apple would never put a G5 in the current case, and since they just developed something new for it, i would say that it will be a G4 for a while. As i recall, IBM is also develping a 7??? processor which was called a G3 +altivec. I think apple will switch to this sometime soon, and call it a G4 or maybe even a G4-II. The PowerBook will get a G5 soon, 970fx looks too easy for it not too. This is how i think the line up should look.

PowerMac G5
2.0Ghz
Dual 2.2Ghz
Dual 2.4 Ghz

PowerBook G5
12" 1.6Ghz
15" 1.6 Ghz
15" 1.8 Ghz
17" 1.8Ghz

iMac
15" 1.2Ghz G4-II
17" 1.4Ghz G4-II
20" 1.6Ghz G4-II

eMac
1.2Ghz G4-II

iBook
12" 1Ghz G4-II
14" 1.2Ghz G4-II

That would be a reasonable, ass kicking line of computers. It would kill the world of PC's and start the trend of total mac domination.

G3 with Altivec is non-existant.

The 20" display was slapped onto an existing line, no development there.

1.6 GHz G4's. Pass the bong this way.

Apple needs a G5 in its consumer line to jump start sales. I am so desperate for a new Mac but don't want the beast that it the PM. That is a very prevalent thought on MR, although probably not representative of the buying public.

I'd sooner buy a Windows box after using Macs for over 15 years than buy a three year old G4 CPU running on a bus that my grandmother can run faster than.

[cheekyspanky]

I'm just wondering if the BMW 3-series is still considered luxury in the states? Here in the UK they're so common that the luxury aspect has disappeared for a lot of people.

And Mercedes and BMW do offer cheaper alternatives, the Mercedes A-Class and also the Smart (www.smart.com) which is a brand of Daimler-Chrysler. BMW are bringing out the 1-Series in a little while IIRC and they offer the MINI (www.mini.com) as well.

Maybe Apple should offer a cheaper branch as well to get the customers in who'd then upgrade to a proper Apple when they next upgrade?

edit - I've never seen driving school Audi's or BMWs, the MINI yes but none of the others! Although even the police here in Portsmouth drive BMW 3 Series and X5's!

[clr900]

Originally posted by takao
please no more car comparisations...

yes bmw/mercedes are offering normal looking cars for normal prices...in europe...and guess what ? they have more than 20% marketshare combined...and guess how many mustang,camaros,skylines i have seen _ever_ : zero, nada, null,...

there is _no_ market niche for them here they have to compete with m3s,s3s,golf gtis etc.at much lower price ...and because of that they don't sell them here... you can't sell american cars here they just use to much fuel... would you buy a car which uses 20 liters per 100 km and you have to pay more than 1 dollar per liter ?

if you use car manufactures..use porsche,aston martin etc. they are comparable to apple

PS: even driving schools are using BMW 3,or Audi A4 here Wow I wish it was like that here in America...

[rdowns]

Originally posted by Huezo
And Mercedes-Benz and BMW do?

Yes.

Mercedes C class starting at under $30,000.

BMW 325i at $28,000.

Both starting at prices unheard of for MB and BMW only 2 years ago.

[takao]

Originally posted by reorx
We get the expensive vehicles from all the world's manufacturers. You can't even get a Toyota Land Cruiser over here with a manual transmission or a diesel. They are only $60K plus vehicles here. Such a shame, as I'd love to have an all-manual(tranny tcase) turbodiesel FZJ100 here in the states. :D


i always wondered why automatic transmissions are so popular in the US ? for me personnaly shifting is the most interresting aspect of driving a car ..i would miss it ..
can somebody please give me some numbers on this prices for gasoline/diesel in america ? i know they are very low but how low exactly ?
and how much is a gallon ?... (all those american things: yard,inch,fahrenheit etc. are very confusing )perhaps sombody knows a good site where you can calculate them to something different ?

back on topic
if there are any new hardware during april/march i doubt it would be something brand new like imac g5 or new formfactors
better speed/specs. perhaps but nothing ground breaking

[clr900]

I have been waiting for two months for new PMs so I really hope they release them in March, I really wouldn't want to wait another month. I think that PMs are competitively priced with other Windows based machines considering that they are of such high quality and are aesthetically pleasing. Hopefully after the revision, the dual 2ghz will drop in price and then will be in direct competition with other PCs in the consumer market that is looking for a high end machine for gaming or what not. I think that the iMac is amazing and really cool but is supposed to be an average consumer computer and therefore is highly overpriced. But what makes it so overpriced is the LCD screen. I think that Apple should create a tower iMac which has no screen and unlike the current iMac it would offer expandability and reasonable speeds that could compete with the crappy computers dell and other companies offer for so cheap. It would not be as big as the current PowerMac G5 and obviously would have to be really cool and good looking. This would allow the average consumer to have a tower like the crappy computers they already have and could hook it up to a monitor they already have and then they would be able to see the amazing quality and greatness of Apple but not have to feel like they are spending a fortune or buying something that can't be upgraded. It could have single G5 processors with varying speeds so that it would not compete with the PowerMac line, but it would not be so far behind like it is now. Apple could bundle it in a package with their 17in lcd screens which would obviously be much more expensive than just the iMac tower but you could buy just the iMac too. If Apple could come out with this and price it around 1000 dollars, I think that the average consumer would seriously consider it, without the display it is much cheaper and would allow consumers to use displays they already owned.

[ZildjianKX]

Originally posted by takao
i always wondered why automatic transmissions are so popular in the US ? for me personnaly shifting is the most interresting aspect of driving a car ..i would miss it ..
can somebody please give me some numbers on this prices for gasoline/diesel in america ? i know they are very low but how low exactly ?
and how much is a gallon ?... (all those american things: yard,inch,fahrenheit etc. are very confusing )perhaps sombody knows a good site where you can calculate them to something different ?

back on topic
if there are any new hardware during april/march i doubt it would be something brand new like imac g5 or new formfactors
better speed/specs. perhaps but nothing ground breaking

It depends on where you live. In California, which normally has the most expensive gas, its about $1.85/gallon, and diesel is probably a little lower than that.

[reorx]

I prefer a manual, too... I guess the majority of folks here are either too lazy or just not skilled enough to shift while on the phone... :D

Just a comparison (its gonna make you sick):

In San Antonio:

diesel = $1.58/gal
93 octane = $1.68/gal

Its 3.7854 liters / gallon... :cool:

On topic: I'm just hoping the new hardware pushes down the pricing on the G5 towers... I'd love to have a dual 2.0 GHz this spring at dual 1.8 prices... :D

[cheekyspanky]

That works out at being about 24 pence per litre then, but we get charged more like 80p

so with the current exchange rate it works out to be the equivalent of $5.60 a gallon here!

[rdowns]

Originally posted by takao
i always wondered why automatic transmissions are so popular in the US ? for me personnaly shifting is the most interresting aspect of driving a car ..i would miss it ..
can somebody please give me some numbers on this prices for gasoline/diesel in america ? i know they are very low but how low exactly ?
and how much is a gallon ?... (all those american things: yard,inch,fahrenheit etc. are very confusing )perhaps sombody knows a good site where you can calculate them to something different ?

back on topic
if there are any new hardware during april/march i doubt it would be something brand new like imac g5 or new formfactors
better speed/specs. perhaps but nothing ground breaking

_
1 US gallons = 3.7854118 liters. Just types gallons to liters in gogle and got that, plenty of conversion tools online. Try this:

http://directory.google.com/Top/Science/Reference/Units_of_Measurement/Online_Calculators/?tc=1


Gas averages $1.65 per gallon as reported on the news yesterday. I live in NYC and pay closer to $2.00 per gallon. Living here is like owning a Mac, more expensive but worth it.

Automatic transmissions because of so much traffic. Takes all the fun out of driving a stick.

[takao]

thx for those numbers....

and yeah those numbers make me feel bad
...at current exchange rate i have to pay 4.84$ per gallon ... i guess i have to pay 'SGI-Prices' here for fuel...but i think those free hospital-service/school system is worth enough to pay so much tax ...

[jwhitnah]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
A sure way to kill off sales is to leave Imac G4.
Point #1 the consumer line should be selling 10 times the amount of the pro line due to consumers outnumber the pro's 100 to 1. they are not and in fact are selling in about the same quantity. and this is Emac & Imac sales combined. Very sad if you are going for those pod carrying folks also known as consumers.
Point#2 where is is written that powerbook needs G5 before Imac? this is a total different market. one is portable one is not.
Point#3 G4 is good for a laptop due to its low power consumption
Point#4 Imac has been priced for prosumer market but its G4(insert laugh) is nowhere close to prosumer Pc's. even if they gave it 2 G4s its still not close. G4 doesnt belong there.
Point #5 Consumers are gamers and the top consumer machine is a very poor gamer machine. at over 2 thousand dollars it should be able to play Halo,Ut2004 and Doom3. It cant.
Point # 6 This means a consumer has to buy a Powermac 1.6 G5 to get (only) decent performance. not stellar performance and add the cost of a monitor and you are now at $2500. this is way outside what consumers want to spend for a good computer in fact about $1000 over where it should be thereby locking the consumer out of Apple as a alternative to a Pc which will have more performance,less cost and the consumer can get just what they want without having to buy all the extras Apple forces on you.
Last Point. Imac is hurting more then any other product and should be a clear sales leader for Apple. It isnt. Imac Crt was the leader that brought millions into Apples world and they need another machine that can do that again. It will take power(G5) it will take style and it will take color. If Apple ignores these 3 points it is going to be more of the same for its sales numbers. Rant over.

The G4 is quite outdated. It barely belongs in an eMac, let alone an iMac. In my dreams: The powermac jumps to a G6 based on the 980, and every thing below jumps to a G5 the eMac and iBook would bring up the rear with improved G4s or slow G5s. oh yeah, somehow apple needs to make a cheaper iMac and eMac. Im not holding my breath.:rolleyes:

[Nermal]

Originally posted by carletonmusic
Apple users get so uptight about hardware revisions! ;) Do PC people follow the releases of Dell, Sony, HP, and Gateway with such interest???

Judge for yourself (http://www.joyoftech.com/joyoftech/joyimages/385.gif) :)

[hulugu]

Originally posted by takao
i always wondered why automatic transmissions are so popular in the US ? for me personnaly shifting is the most interresting aspect of driving a car ..i would miss it ..
can somebody please give me some numbers on this prices for gasoline/diesel in america ? i know they are very low but how low exactly ?
and how much is a gallon ?... (all those american things: yard,inch,fahrenheit etc. are very confusing )perhaps sombody knows a good site where you can calculate them to something different ?

Automatic transmissions have their use in long commutes in traffic, holding down a clutch pedal for an hour starts to suck. I have an automatic Ford Focus and a manual Jeep CJ-7 and I can see the advantages for both.
Where I live gas is about $1.60 per gallon, and a gallon is equal to about 3.8 Liters. I still don't understand why we can't just use the metric system. Try www.mathconnect.com/Conversion.htm.

[hulugu]

Originally posted by takao
thx for those numbers....

and yeah those numbers make me feel bad
...at current exchange rate i have to pay 4.84$ per gallon ... i guess i have to pay 'SGI-Prices' here for fuel...but i think those free hospital-service/school system is worth enough to pay so much tax ...

It must cost a fortune to drive out to somewhere like Alice Springs.
Is there that much tax added to fuel? And is is really paying for so many things like health-care and schools. Do you have property taxes? If yes, approximately how much?
Off-topic, so I'll weigh in on this little rumor now:

Apple should hold with its product line unless it plans to release a 'headless' mac, lots of people seems to want them and frankly Apple needs to start competing below the $2000 line for consumers. While Apple's products are exceedingly better for quality, ROI, TCO, etc. it becomes hard to keep a consumer focused on such a machine when most Dells fall below that line. And while a G5 can stay above this line because it offers such things as 64-bit chip, fibre-channel, etc. the iMac/eMac/Powerbook do not. The iBook can remain G4 because it is truly a student machine, and a low-end consumer machine and it fits very well within that particular line, but as you move into the iMac range, Apple compares less and less favorably. Although if I could I would certainly buy a 20" iMac just for the screen real-estate, I can see why many people would buy something else. The eMac I think offers the best value, but still it seems expensive when you add the Superdrive, and memory (I know Apple's memory is expensive, but this isn't true with Dell or Gateway and adding 512k to a machine should not add $200.00 when these companies are adding it in for free).
I love Apple, they've taken such good care of me, and my Powerbook has been such a great machine for 2 years, but Apple compete damnit! Like the iPod be your trojan horse, but at some point people still view Apple as overpriced, and at the mid-range, they are.

[aswitcher]

Yep, return of the cube - a little bigger and with fans

Originally posted by clr900
SNIP
I think that Apple should create a tower iMac which has no screen and unlike the current iMac it would offer expandability and reasonable speeds that could compete with the crappy computers dell and other companies offer for so cheap. It would not be as big as the current PowerMac G5 and obviously would have to be really cool and good looking. This would allow the average consumer to have a tower like the crappy computers they already have and could hook it up to a monitor they already have and then they would be able to see the amazing quality and greatness of Apple but not have to feel like they are spending a fortune or buying something that can't be upgraded. It could have single G5 processors with varying speeds so that it would not compete with the PowerMac line, but it would not be so far behind like it is now. Apple could bundle it in a package with their 17in lcd screens which would obviously be much more expensive than just the iMac tower but you could buy just the iMac too. If Apple could come out with this and price it around 1000 dollars, I think that the average consumer would seriously consider it, without the display it is much cheaper and would allow consumers to use displays they already owned.

[Skiniftz]

Originally posted by carletonmusic
Apple users get so uptight about hardware revisions! ;) Do PC people follow the releases of Dell, Sony, HP, and Gateway with such interest???
They don't have to - it's like working in a sweet shop - there is that much variety and new things out ALL the time, that the concept is irrelevant.

[lind0834]

Working in a 'Sweet Shop'.. mmmmm. Chocolate.

Anyway.. Apple is still shipping Bluetooth keyboards and mice BTO. Maybe 10.3.3 includes them so the PM can boot first time without cords.

[GregA]

Originally posted by JasonElise1983
G5 iMac...i don't think so. It would be so silly of Apple to even attempt a G5 iMac. Lets look at the facts. The PowerMac just got a G5 in June. The PowerBook doesn't even have one yet. And the iMac just got a 20" screen. Apple would never put a G5 in the current case, and since they just developed something new for it, i would say that it will be a G4 for a while. Maybe I'm reading you wrong - but it sounds like you're saying even if Apple could do an iMac G5, they'd sit back and say "well, we've got this new chip. We have some designs which'd work for an iMac G5, but hey - we haven't got a PowerBook G5 yet so lets forget making the iMacs a good machine for now. Besides, we only just increased the iMac screen size - lets let it run slow for a while until we sell enough to make back our investment (if it sells really slowly we'll just wait longer, or increase the price)."

I have to admit a part of me gets a chill worrying that Apple sometimes thinks this way... but business wise it makes sense to bring the specs up on their machines as fast as they can, whether the iMac or PowerBook come out first.

On a related note - Apple would avoid people waiting around for new hardware by dropping the price on a machine as it ages... then when the new release comes out its price is back at the original (and any old ones sitting in the sales channel get sold at the reduced price)

Originally posted by takao
...at current exchange rate i have to pay 4.84$ per gallon ... Originally posted by hulugu
It must cost a fortune to drive out to somewhere like Alice Springs.Takao is from Austria, not Australia!

We pay about US$2.40/gallon in Australia (done in my head... feel free to correct me anyone).

But we don't really drive to Alice Springs (well, the east coast people don't). Do you drive from Arizona to Washington much?

[wrldwzrd89]

Originally posted by arn
I think is faulty logic.

Hardware isn't delayed by OS releases.

When a new Mac is released, it always has a newer version of Mac OS installed on it -- this extra code provides support for the new machine.

In other words, even if Mac OS X 10.3.3 came out a week before the new PowerMacs were released, I'd wager the new PowerMacs have a different version of Mac OS X 10.3.3.

arn

Even if the PowerMac G5 version of Mac OS 10.3.3 is a different, but related, branch of the Mac OS X Panther development tree, it still has to go through the same testing process that the main 10.3.3 branch does. So it is still conceivable in my mind that Mac OS 10.3.3 could be holding up the Rev. B G5s.

[takao]

Originally posted by GregA
Takao is from Austria, not Australia!

i was wondering by myself: 'Alice Springs ? Where is that ?' Sorry no kangoroos here :D
for long distances we're using train very often .. sometimes cheaper than flying and more comfortable/cheaper than driving with your own car

back on topic:
i think if they _can_ release a G5 iMac they are releasing them ..i doubt that apple is going to hold one back because of the slower "pro" laptops ... in(PC)history laptops _never_ had the same speed as a decent consumer machine ... even now with 3.0ghz laptops on the PC side they aren't as fast as 3.0 ghz desktops ...desktops are going for 10.000 rpm drives, faster busses/RAM, better graphic cards,etc. .. it's illusion that a laptop can be at the same speed without sacrificing battery life

G5 imac will be released when it's done.
G5 PowerBook will be released when it's done.
Holding one of them back because of the other one will not happen.
One is portable, and one is not. They are not in the same market. If somebody wants a laptop and sees that there is a consumer desktop available which is faster does the person buy the desktop instead ? I don't think so.

[Rocketman]

Originally posted by carletonmusic
Apple users get so uptight about hardware revisions! ;) Do PC people follow the releases of Dell, Sony, HP, and Gateway with such interest???

Yes. They are just a lot less public about their zealotry.

Rocketry

[Wonder Boy]

Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
Even if the PowerMac G5 version of Mac OS 10.3.3 is a different, but related, branch of the Mac OS X Panther development tree, it still has to go through the same testing process that the main 10.3.3 branch does. So it is still conceivable in my mind that Mac OS 10.3.3 could be holding up the Rev. B G5s.

i agree.

[Rocketman]

From the general tone of the posts here it would seem that what people are clamoring for is a G5 version of an "LC" that can plug right into PC style peripherals and run PC games (under VPC or whatever) but still have full mac functionality. All for some low price point.

Apple knows people have wanted this for a decade or more but have not released it.

They must feel such a device would cannnaibalize Mac sales and not simply take away premium PC sales. And possibly be a service nightmare.

Rocketman

[wdlove]

Originally posted by jwhitnah
The G4 is quite outdated. It barely belongs in an eMac, let alone an iMac. In my dreams: The powermac jumps to a G6 based on the 980, and every thing below jumps to a G5 the eMac and iBook would bring up the rear with improved G4s or slow G5s. oh yeah, somehow apple needs to make a cheaper iMac and eMac. Im not holding my breath.:rolleyes:

I would find this to be an awesome development. It has been already posted the IBM is already working the the next generation chips. Steve did say that there are much more to come this year. The Mac OS 10.5 or 10.6 just might be that radical new software need for the G6. That is if they do indeed skip the 10.4. It could be that the 3D look would to the screen would need a new chip. Anything is possible, this is the 20th Anniversary year of the Mac. Why not make a big splash, by also moving the iMac, PB, & eMac up to G5 status.

[JFreak]

apple hardware is not too expensive, you only need to make fair comparison. take a powerbook for example, it is just ridiculous to compare it to some dell model - it should be compared to top-of-line ibm laptops. and guess what? ibm is far more expensive. and apple cinema displays for example, well, there just is nothing to compare against, which is a merit for apple. (that said, i think they should just drop the regular 17" model or replace it with a widescreen model. if colour accuracy is not worth anything, one could say that is an overpriced luxury item.)

oh yes, i'm waiting for the G5PB. but i know i will be waiting for the rev.b because for some reason i suspect the first revision will be less than "rock solid".

[CmdrLaForge]

Hi folks,

what do you expect will come in March or April ? Well I guess everyone is waiting for new PB and PM as well as iMac and eMac. From my perspective the whole offering (except the iBook) is due for an update. I think that we see a PM with speeds up to 2.6 GHz, PB with still G4s and minor speedbumps. For the iMac and think its time for the G5 and the eMac, well some speedbumps as well and I hope for a better monitor. Thats it. What do you think ?

Cheers

[johnnyjibbs]

I don't see why there is a problem with the iMac going G5 before the PowerBook. They are different markets. As long as the PowerBook is more powerful or refined than the iBook, that's all that matters. People who need real power will have a PowerMac as their main machine, with portability coming in the form of a PowerBook if needed. Desktops are always more powerful than notebooks because of the size and heat constraints.

I wouldn't be surprised to see the PowerBook G5 looking very similar to the G4 (just with a logo change). The iMac may go metal, but it will most likely be a similar design.

[invaLPsion]

I'm guessing we will see updates around early-mid March. Powermacs up to 2.6GHz and powerbooks up to 1.53 GHz G4.

Here's hoping I'm wrong about the powerbooks. Because I think Apple would be fools not to put in a G5 970FX up to 1.8GHz in them.

[EK03]

a new powerbook is long overdue, and i really want to purchase one. Do you guys still think the powerbook G5 will be released at the end of the year/ early summer?

[j_maddison]

I think that one of the biggest problems Apple has is that its marketing is internally focussed. Their are very inovative when it comes to product design, but their marketing sucks big time.

All to often I see people (i guess prosumers) talking about how consumer machines are fine and how us non pro users dont want anything too powrful, well heres two fingers to you. I'm not a designer, i have no interest in photoshop or any form of editing. I love my mac because it works, it has a killer os and its aesthetic. I dont worry about viruses or crashes wiping out half of my hard drive.

The reality is does anyone honestly think that if the imac was G5 that people would sop bying a powermac. dont be so stupid, and besides if they did, then who cares. It means more imac sales, but cummon seriously. what powermac users look for is slightly different to consumers, but to assume that consumers dont want power is farsical.

I think what would really give apple a boost woudl be somethign like this

PowerMac G5
Drop the single processor G5 and let people buy an imac instead.
Dual 2.4Ghz
Dual 2.6 Ghz

The prossumer rance will be diferentiated by expandibility, higher Ram capacity and duals.

PowerBook G5
12" 2.0Ghz
15" 2.0 (apple should stop trying to differentiate with two different fifteen inch powerbooks. Give them all super drives and let the consumer ibook range have the option of a superdirve or a cd burner/dvd rom combo)
15" 2.0 Ghz
17" 2.0 Ghz

I think people buy a 12" because they want a 12", and a 15" because they want a 15" and 17" because they want a 17". I dont think the processor comes into it. so give them all the same processor.

iMac
no more 15" get rid of it, buy an e mac instead.
17" 2.0 single G5 yes G5
20" 2.0 single G5.
In all honesty unless they do something with the price i think the iMac is the next cube and will just dissapear. I really like the iMac, but i dont think that artificially keeping the eMac under powered does anyone any good. i'm sure the iMac has a market, but i just wonder if it will be canabalised by the eMac

eMac - bring back the colour. Give us the same flavours the imac used to have. I really think that this would make hte eMac take right off. Consumers really loved the colours of the iMac. hell its why i switched.
2.0 G5

iBook
12" 1.6 G5
14" 1.6 G5

The reason I'm saying go G5 across the range is so that OS x can trully become a 64bit os. apple make your marketing focus on what consumers want, not on internal standards. also the entire apple range would really have a boost from the G5 brand strength. The average consumer will see G5 and see that at its very simplest intention it will be a numbercial increse over the P4 brand.

I know im going to get flamed, but I just see that there is more to be gained from shifting to a more marketing focused strategy, and not an internal one.

I just think that apple needs to shift tin, and it doesnt matter what type of tin it is as long as they are shifting it.

see i know the prosumers will not like what ive said, becuase they want their line to be head and shoulders above anything else. But the reality is what kills apple is the fact that people see macs as being great for designers and not so godo for anything else. I've even heard apple users say it, and it make me want to strangel them. I think a mac is a wonderful machine for anyonefrom abusiness users to students, and not just designers.

jason

[aswitcher]

Originally posted by EK03
a new powerbook is long overdue, and i really want to purchase one. Do you guys still think the powerbook G5 will be released at the end of the year/ early summer?

There are a signficant number of us hoping that the PB G5 will appear anytime now, and summer NH at the latest. But we don't have any real hard evidence to suggest that it will, although lots of reasons to speculate why it might.

[cubist]

Originally posted by j_maddison
... The reality is does anyone honestly think that if the imac was G5 that people would sop bying a powermac. dont be so stupid, and besides if they did, then who cares. ...

Hear hear! When Steve Jobs first brought out the G3 iMac, did it cut into Beige G3 tower sales? Of course it did! Did they worry about it? Maybe -- but it saved the company, you know!

Steve Jobs knows that the consumer line is hurting. Fred Anderson even said it. Steve's not going to sit in his easy chair and twiddle his thumbs. The G5 iMac is coming, you can believe it.

[hulugu]

Originally posted by GregA
Takao is from Austria, not Australia!

We pay about US$2.40/gallon in Australia (done in my head... feel free to correct me anyone).

But we don't really drive to Alice Springs (well, the east coast people don't). Do you drive from Arizona to Washington much?

First, D'oh! —(there's no emoticon for someone slapping themselves silly for not reading clearly is there?).

And second that was just my point, although it makes much less sense now. If you had to drive 1,000 miles or so at $4.00 per gallon, that would be hideously expensive, and the 10 mile per day average here in the U.S. would become a major expense.
My American education reveals itself.;)

[takao]

Originally posted by hulugu
First, D'oh! —(there's no emoticon for someone slapping themselves silly for not reading clearly is there?).

And second that was just my point, although it makes much less sense now. If you had to drive 1,000 miles or so at $4.00 per gallon, that would be hideously expensive, and the 10 mile per day average here in the U.S. would become a major expense.
My American education reveals itself.;)

off topic:

i would have to drive a few circles if i want to drive 1000 miles in my own country ;-) with maximum 500 miles from one side to the opposite side ...perhaps even less.... our giant 'Airforce'( they had 24 draken.... only 4 left because the machines are so old and they can't get any spare parts) have problems to patrol the austrian airspace ...2 miles in the wrong direction and some other nation has to send up their own jets...they have in some places not enough space to maneuver and we have some treaties with switzerland etc. to use their airspace for turnarounds (and vice versa) ...from one airport they can reach every place in the country in 20 minutes (for a small region a little more like 25 minutes)

but even those crappy machines are good if you combine it with one of the biggest/strongest/newest radar dishes of europe ;-) the pictures of those 2 F-117 which were flying illegal through austrian airspace during the afghanistan thing (they wanted to save fuel because they would have to fly around austria normally :rolleyes: ) their stealth-ability wasn't good enough to slip through...i wonder what happed to the responsible persons because the pictures were sent directly to washington
</off topic>

[Evan_11]

I think we'll definately see a powerbook G5 first but isn't this kind of release "oh and one last thing" MacWorld material? They could however slip a G5 into the iMac without much bruhaha.

I think Apple needs to focus on the prosumer. They've lost the battle in the under 1K field. They just cannot compete with a Dell built machine for $399. The current iMac would be a wonderful if it only allowed for cube like expansion.

[aswitcher]

Originally posted by Evan_11
I think we'll definately see a powerbook G5 first but isn't this kind of release "oh and one last thing" MacWorld material? They could however slip a G5 into the iMac without much bruhaha.

I think Apple needs to focus on the prosumer. They've lost the battle in the under 1K field. They just cannot compete with a Dell built machine for $399. The current iMac would be a wonderful if it only allowed for cube like expansion.

Go G5 Cube! :D (and new metal form factor screens - 30" please :p )

[CmdrLaForge]

Originally posted by j_maddison


I think what would really give apple a boost woudl be somethign like this

PowerMac G5
Drop the single processor G5 and let people buy an imac instead.
Dual 2.4Ghz
Dual 2.6 Ghz

The prossumer rance will be diferentiated by expandibility, higher Ram capacity and duals.

PowerBook G5
12" 2.0Ghz
15" 2.0 (apple should stop trying to differentiate with two different fifteen inch powerbooks. Give them all super drives and let the consumer ibook range have the option of a superdirve or a cd burner/dvd rom combo)
15" 2.0 Ghz
17" 2.0 Ghz

I think people buy a 12" because they want a 12", and a 15" because they want a 15" and 17" because they want a 17". I dont think the processor comes into it. so give them all the same processor.

iMac
no more 15" get rid of it, buy an e mac instead.
17" 2.0 single G5 yes G5
20" 2.0 single G5.
In all honesty unless they do something with the price i think the iMac is the next cube and will just dissapear. I really like the iMac, but i dont think that artificially keeping the eMac under powered does anyone any good. i'm sure the iMac has a market, but i just wonder if it will be canabalised by the eMac

eMac - bring back the colour. Give us the same flavours the imac used to have. I really think that this would make hte eMac take right off. Consumers really loved the colours of the iMac. hell its why i switched.
2.0 G5

iBook
12" 1.6 G5
14" 1.6 G5

The reason I'm saying go G5 across the range is so that OS x can trully become a 64bit os. apple make your marketing focus on what consumers want, not on internal standards. also the entire apple range would really have a boost from the G5 brand strength. The average consumer will see G5 and see that at its very simplest intention it will be a numbercial increse over the P4 brand.

jason

Hi Jason,

first thanks for staying on topic.

I really agree with you that what you are proposing would be just a great lineup. But I don't think its going to happen in the next 6 month. I guess it takes another year before the line is completly G5.

And for the colors - hope for it. I mean the iPods are colored again, why not the emacs.

Cheers

[Dreadnought]

The new hardware they are talking about must be the updated G5's, new displays and the tvbox rumored for several months now! Ofcourse new Imacs, Powerbooks are also possible, but I think they wait with that for another couple of months, although there is really a need for updated and therefore faster Imacs!

[iriejedi]

Originally posted by stingerman
The PB 17" has a dual 1.8 in it, doesn't it? ;) Oh and I predict we will see hardware updated between March and December...
..in a year that has this format "2XXX"

[Kurt]

Originally posted by j_maddison


The reason I'm saying go G5 across the range is so that OS x can trully become a 64bit os. apple make your marketing focus on what consumers want, not on internal standards. also the entire apple range would really have a boost from the G5 brand strength. The average consumer will see G5 and see that at its very simplest intention it will be a numbercial increse over the P4 brand.


jason

I think it would be great to go G5 across the entire line but it will take awhile. I remember other people making the same arguments about the G4 and look how long it took for the iBook to finally get a G4. About 4 years? Although, I think the transition to the G5 will be a little faster than that.

[johnnyjibbs]

Yes, in 4 years we'll have 20GHz processors so there will be no room for 1.42GHz G4 machines. That said, people like me will still be running our G4 PowerBooks and machines so support for the G4 will have to continue for a good while yet.

[j_maddison]

Sadly I dont think the line will go G5 either. Unfortunately apple always look internally, I think the first time they actually looked at what the market wanted was with the colour imacs.

I think the colour mini ipods will be a smash as soon as they lower the prices.

I genuinly belive that Apple themselves are Apples' biggest problem.

Personally I either want a G5 emac in blue, no i've changed my mind i want a red one, nope a green one, no no no i want a black one, oh i remember i can only have boring white :(

Bring on the 12" G5 powerbook to replace my existing 12" G4 one.

Jason

[cubist]

Originally posted by johnnyjibbs
Yes, in 4 years we'll have 20GHz processors ...

At the rate we're going, in 4 years PowerMacs will have 4.4GHz processors; the iBooks will still be G4 at about 1.6GHz; eMacs and iMacs combined will sell about 20,000 units a year; Dell will be selling PCs at about $199.

I don't think Apple should try to compete with low-end PCs. Microsoft is the only company making any real profit off of them. Apple should keep the iMac price where it is -- and make it worth the money.

[johnnyjibbs]

That's exactly right. The iMacs is expensive because it is of a great build quality and is very stylish. But it would sell far more if it packed more power and maybe had a little bit more upgradeability (better RAM expansion and changeable graphics card).

[Evan_11]

If they go all dual in the powermac lineup which I think they will, it will open up the doors for putting a G5 in the iMac. Not before the powerbook though...

A G5 cube would be insanely great because it would offer upgradeability that prosumers need but without the 2 processors. The current powermac looks kind of stupid with just one processor anyway.

However a G5 Cube priced right would kill off a lot of iMac sales.

I think we'll see another overhaul of the iMac design. Now that Apple has infiltrated the PC market with the iPod its time to fully convert them. This is really the whole point of the iMac anyway. A detachable touch screen, built in Airport and a ipod like interface. Even have a dock like the iPods where you would plug in your printer, keyboard and mouse. Center the software around the iApps. You might even see a less powerful processor like IBM's altivec enabled G3 to keep the heat and power consumption down.

[johnnyjibbs]

But the iMac is Apple's flagship machine. Part of its problem is they changed market slightly when changing from the old bulbous iMac to the new trendy, stylish but with a price tag one. Consumers aren't stupid and it's about time Apple realised this. Give them a functional but upgradeable (if you so desire) iMac that retains style and elegance but that has more power. The G5 fits that bill. Single 2.0 GHz processor please.

[takao]

Originally posted by johnnyjibbs
.. the iMac is Apple's flagship machine. ...

that sums it up pretty good ...there lies the whole problem at the moment
if you you say 'mac' to people on the x86 side they have the original iMac with colors or the TFT-imac in mind (and now perhaps ipods)...nobody thinks about ibooks,powerbooks,powermacs etc..

[Dont Hurt Me]

Evan11 makes a very good point, a single cpu in the new towers is not only silly but a big waste of space. whats the point of even having such a large container if its half empty? might as well have 2 cpu's or another drive or something in there. Poor execution in my book. We have said many times but all towers should be duals and put single G5s in Imac/cube/Performa whatever. I mean what was Apple thinking in coming out with 2 single cpu machines and then only 1 dual in the original pro towers??? seems they always find a way to screw up the product lines.

[johnnyjibbs]

They may have had chip shortages at the beginning, or they may just have misjudged the market. Currently I think the 1.6 G5 is designed for those who want a cheap G5 but can't afford a more expensive dual. Once the iMac goes G5, I could see them making the towers all duals.

[gate]

"They should stop these rumors, because people are holding back their purchases"

It's even worse when they announce something and release it only 4 months later like what they did the G5.

[Evan_11]

I agree that most people still see polka dots when you mention iMac. Hell most people think the eMac is the iMac without the spots (which in reality it is). The current model has a severe identity crises. I think they are heading in the right direction by putting a 20" screen on it but for god sakes it needs a G5 and easier expandibility. For $2200 you should be getting a true prosumer machine not a consumer machine on steroids.

[wdlove]

Originally posted by gate
"They should stop these rumors, because people are holding back their purchases"

It's even worse when they announce something and release it only 4 months later like what they did the G5.

I agree, there are a lot waiting for the Rev. B Power Mac to make their next purchase. There is certainly a lot of pent up demand. Hopefully there won't be a long wait again from announcement to delivery. With the delay, it would certainly seem that it won't be the case again.

It would be nice if all the G5's come out as dual, The space is certainly there.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Face it Apple screwed up by not making Emac the Imac and then removing colors, its amazing how this company keeps going when you look at the history of screw up after screw up. Current Imac and Emac are another example. Didnt Steve say crts are dead? wasnt Emac only for education? and so is the G5 fiasco about power supplies and ibook motherboards. I swear i still think they have a bunch of clowns running this company and then picking straws at what they will do next:confused:

[clr900]

Emac-should go color and have same stats as it does now except a g5

iMac-cut off its head, make it into a really cool looking tower but remain much smaller than the powermac. Make sure its expandable and very aesthetically pleasing. Give it a single G5 at around 2ghz and drop the price significantly.

PowerMac-all models Dual G5s. Dual 3ghz, dual 2.5 ghz and dual 2.0 ghz, higher speeds get better stuff but all are fully upgradeable.

Powerbook-get the speeds up to a 1.6-1.8 g5. Don't change the speeds between sizes but give more RAM and bigger hd etc for bigger sizes.

iBook-eventually get a G5 but keep stats has now

[gate]

"there are a lot waiting for the Rev. B Power Mac to make their next purchase"

I'm one of them but I was interested to buy in January or early February. Now I may wait 'til September to get a dual 3 Ghz with DDR II and probably a few other features that won't be on the Rev. B.

[invaLPsion]

I will buy the very day the Rev. B powermacs come out. That's what I've been waiting for and that's what I'm gonna get. And I will be happy!:D

[maclamb]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
Face it Apple screwed up by not making Emac the Imac and then removing colors, its amazing how this company keeps going when you look at the history of screw up after screw up. Current Imac and Emac are another example. Didnt Steve say crts are dead? wasnt Emac only for education? and so is the G5 fiasco about power supplies and ibook motherboards. I swear i still think they have a bunch of clowns running this company and then picking straws at what they will do next:confused:
Be careful and honest with yourself here.
THEY don't keep the company going . YOU DO. And all who buy from "Clowns".

[bensisko]

First of all, let's try not to use an "Apple would never...". I think we all know how unpredictable Apple can be. No matter what Apple releases next, somebody, somewhere on these boards, predicted it. Apple could release the Mac OS X powered VW Beetle with a built-in, OS-X run computer that monitors your car, and runs all it's systems, has built-in wifi, bluetooth, and a touch-screen interface suitable for driving, and somebody would say "I totally saw that coming!" and provide a link to the appropriate forum.

Second of all, I was very unpopular when I booed the eMac when it first came out. I said it would kill iMac sales, and it did. It IS good to have an eMac type computer on the low end, but when a person can buy an eMac for $500 less than a comparable iMac, then "style" isn't that important. If the difference were $200, iMacs would sell better, but a person can eather have an eMac and a 20 gig iPod (or about a year's worth of .Mac, iLife and OS X updates), or just an iMac, the choice is simple (for most). There just isn't a market for the iMac (or, more accurately, the iMacs market is being taken by the eMac). Especially people coming from the generally "design clueless" world of wintel, style and cool is just not worth $500.

Third, we can sit around all day and theorize about why Apple isn't selling the numbers other companies are, but the fact isn't nessessarily the hardware, it's the software. People use Windows at work and something new frightens them. I think that a smart move would be to make a deal with Microsoft that would have the option to include Virtual PC with a new Mac (offer it pre-installed). Consumers would see that they can use Windows if they get "scared" and go back to Mac when they're feeling "brave". Sometimes it's better to "ease" somebody onto something rather than forcing a sudden change. Even the military realizes this (they encourage people to socialize and work out with other applicants for months before they goto boot camp). Plus, the addition of being able to use their old apps would be appealing. Apple would be happy because it would sell them more machines (they are still a hardware business, right? =P), Microsoft would be happy because they would have this whole "new" market. This wouldn't cut OS X out entirely, but rather provide a crutch for new users to stand on.

Fourth, simply lowering the price wouldn't do anything for Apple. Apple could lower the price of a duel G5 to $1499, but people still wouldn't buy. Lowering the price is like trying to pump blood into a patient who still has a bleeding wound. This is basically the same as what the US politicans are doing, trying to encourage Job growth without finding out what the root problem is and fixing it. Eventually it will become a diminishing return and Apple would go out of business because they are selling things cheaper than what they cost.

Sorry for the long squeege of a post. I hope this all still makes sense when I re-read it tommorrow morning!
Anyway... here's hoping for the ability to connect an iSight camera up to an iPod to record movies! =)

BTW - Letting iSight users record with iMoive was a smart move, but still locking out non-Apple superdrives from iDVD was not.

[hulugu]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
Face it Apple screwed up by not making Emac the Imac and then removing colors, its amazing how this company keeps going when you look at the history of screw up after screw up. Current Imac and Emac are another example. Didnt Steve say crts are dead? wasnt Emac only for education? and so is the G5 fiasco about power supplies and ibook motherboards. I swear i still think they have a bunch of clowns running this company and then picking straws at what they will do next:confused:

My you're feeling a little vitriolic today. I actually think selling to eMac to the consumer market was a smart move considering people were asking for it. The eMac is a great consumer machine for the low end, and while I agree that it confuses the market a little between iMac and eMac it works. And yes Jobs did say that the 'CRT was dead' but I'm glad he was able to eat those words.
Apple needs to improve its quality that's true, but the iBook problem and the G5 PSU affect how many people, around 1%. I've seen two DOA Dells last week, so I'm really not impressed on that front either.
Apple needs to do better, yes, but I think they're doing a generally good job. Hopefully those 'clowns' are really working on shoving the G5 into everything they can so they can go 64-bit fully before MS and simplify their OS development. If the new IBM chips are as efficient as reported even a sloughed down version could work in the iBook (at 1.0Ghz maybe). Now that would kick ass.

[ffakr]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
Face it Apple screwed up by not making Emac the Imac and then removing colors, its amazing how this company keeps going when you look at the history of screw up after screw up. Current Imac and Emac are another example. Didnt Steve say crts are dead? wasnt Emac only for education? and so is the G5 fiasco about power supplies and ibook motherboards. I swear i still think they have a bunch of clowns running this company and then picking straws at what they will do next:confused:
That's an interesting revisionist view of the history.
Apple released the iMac LCD before the eMac. The eMac was released after the 15" LCD iMac. It was initially only for the edu market as a low cost replacement for the 15 CRT iMac.
LCD iMac january 2002
eMac for EDU April 2002
eMac for everyone July 2002

SJ did say the CRT was dead, but prices haven't dropped as fast as hoped. I think Apple over-estimated the ability and willingness of all its customers to pay 'Lexus' prices for the coolest tech. Some people still want Macs even though they don't have lots of $$$. CRTs will be essentially dead, the transition just isn't complete yet. BTW.. Apple makes one machine with a CRT vs. 3 models of LCD monitors the iMac and the portables. They are, in fact, pretty much close to killing off the CRT.

It's also interesting that you blame the the "bunch of clowns" who make strategic business decisions for things like manufacturing problems with the iBook and that "G5 fiasco about power supplies". Now I'm not saying these problems don't exist, but I manage a support desk for a division with about 800 Macs in it and I've yet to see a truely faulty G5 powersupply.. and I think I've run across 1 bad ibook motherboard, which was repaired in a few days under warranty. Now, didn't that "G5 fiasco" really boil down to some chirping related to some powersupplies? Would Dell offer to replace custom Power Supplies if they ocassionally chirped?

Apple's problems, IMHO, are that they aren't keeping a close enough eye on the people who actually construct their components. This doesn't mean that Steve Jobs should be in TaiPai (or where ever) looking over the production lines, but Apple management needs to implement the changes that will ensure tighter quality control if they want to keep their reputation as the Mercedes of the personal computer market.

There are two things that really amuse me about back seat Apple Execs...
First: Everything is in the Execs control. Apple is in control of component pricing, production runs of components in other countries, processor speed and availability... It's Apple's fault that they didn't have 500,000 .09 micron G5s in stock in December so they could move the entire line the G5 processor (aka. PPC 970) already.
Second: Apple's management is retarded because they aren't doing exactly what I want. This can also be described as 'I want a blue eMac so Apple should ignore the enormous issues it had managing stock of multiple color iMacs and they should jump back into multiple colored eMacs.'

There are a lot of things that I'd like to see happen. I wouldn't even mind a few eMac colors, but I realize that there are reasons why this may not be the best solution for Apple. Don't think that Apple doesn't regularly weigh the benefits of shaking up the eMac line with the problems of managing the stock of resellers if they go back to multiple colors.

[Evan_11]

I think colors should only be made availabe via the Apple store as special order. Mac users like to think that they're different and that would be extra money in Apple's pocket over its resellers. I think also that the iPod mini will be limited to 2 colors real soon, silver and whatever the popular color of the moment is (it seems pink is the rage). Apple won't want to discount the bronze and green ones just because they aren't selling.

As I stated, Apple must focus on the prosumer and up. The weekend warrior types can't always afford a 3k computer. Either make the iMac expandable or cut its head off and make it cheaper...

Another solution is to re-introduce the cube but advertise it as clusterable. You might only have the finances to afford one at the moment but next year when you want to upgrade you could just buy another cube (buying from the Apple store you could substract the components you don't need such as a 2nd graphics card and save a few bucks), daisy chain the two and have essentially a dual processor mac.

[SiliconAddict]

Originally posted by JasonElise1983


That would be a reasonable, ass kicking line of computers. It would kill the world of PC's and start the trend of total mac domination.

And then you suddenly wake up. Reality check time: 97+/-% of the market is owned by Microsoft. That will NOT change anytime soon. Users aren't going to throw out perfectly good hardware to get a Mac. They may consider going Linux before they go Mac. So at the end of the day, and when Linux gets their GUI in a state that isn't a mess, Linux may save the world from MS. As for Apple,
They will never overtake wintel unless Gates and Ballmer gets drunk over at Jobs's house and sells Microsoft to Jobs for 10 bucks.

My guess? PowerMac speedbumps. That's it. WWDC is fast approaching. Any major new hardware is going to be held back for that. Speed bumps are one thing, but major new releases? Jobs ego won't allow anything other then a major event where HE is the center of attention. Where he can debut his new hardware.

[Ravenflight]

I bought my iMac a little over a year ago and I love it. After using it I just cannot see myself ever buying another standard boring box like the Powermac- even if they did upgrade it slightly to a shiny silver with a handle and a half dozen leafblowers inside. However I just can't see myself upgrading till they at least come out with a G5 version iMac if not a total new look (G5 Cube anyone?). I would think adding the G5 to the iMac would be a piece of cake compared to getting it into a Powerbook- no worries about power consumption or cooling. Also with more of a performance gap between the iMac and the eMac it would really add an incentive to get the iMac.

I really do need a laptop next though so I hope they figure out how to shoehorn a G5 into a Powerbook sometime this year

[aswitcher]

Originally posted by Evan_11
I agree that most people still see polka dots when you mention iMac. Hell most people think the eMac is the iMac without the spots (which in reality it is). The current model has a severe identity crises. I think they are heading in the right direction by putting a 20" screen on it but for god sakes it needs a G5 and easier expandibility. For $2200 you should be getting a true prosumer machine not a consumer machine on steroids.

That's it in a nut shell... hopefully we will be suprised this year with a new incarnation

[rdowns]

Originally posted by Evan_11
I think colors should only be made availabe via the Apple store as special order. Mac users like to think that they're different and that would be extra money in Apple's pocket over its resellers. I think also that the iPod mini will be limited to 2 colors real soon, silver and whatever the popular color of the moment is (it seems pink is the rage). Apple won't want to discount the bronze and green ones just because they aren't selling.

As I stated, Apple must focus on the prosumer and up. The weekend warrior types can't always afford a 3k computer. Either make the iMac expandable or cut its head off and make it cheaper...

Another solution is to re-introduce the cube but advertise it as clusterable. You might only have the finances to afford one at the moment but next year when you want to upgrade you could just buy another cube (buying from the Apple store you could substract the components you don't need such as a 2nd graphics card and save a few bucks), daisy chain the two and have essentially a dual processor mac.

Sorry, I can;t get behind any of these ideas.

Apple has long pissed off its reseller channel. Selling colored units only at their store would further piss off their anemic base of resellers.

A device on sale for about 48 hours and you already have the color choice reduced by 3. Reports here state silver is the worst seller so far. Could be because they shipped more silver than any other color.

Clusterable? Do you really think this would be a mass market idea? Many people have trouble installing a simple home network, let alone a cluster of computers. I just don't see this as ever happening.

[bensisko]

Originally posted by rdowns
\Clusterable? Do you really think this would be a mass market idea? Many people have trouble installing a simple home network, let alone a cluster of computers. I just don't see this as ever happening.

Why not?
Two things:
One: "Many" does not exemplify 90% of the Mac market. I think there would be a great deal of Mac users interested in this sort of thing.
Two: Apple would never release something like this without making it "plug-and-play". There would be some easy, one-step way to get this done if it were to be released.

I think it's a cool idea, but the cost of making such a machine would be very high (basically making external versions of all the components).

[BenRoethig]

Originally posted by cheekyspanky
Maybe Apple should offer a cheaper branch as well to get the customers in who'd then upgrade to a proper Apple when they next upgrade?

Or partner with someone for consumer macs.

[Little Endian]

I need a G5 Power Mac!! I have owned three imacs over the past 3-4 years from G3500Mhz-G41.25 Ghz and enough is enough. Always just enough power for today but never enough for the very near tommorow. No upgradability. I have been stuck in a loop of buying a new imac every 15-18 months or so because they cannot keep up with my needs and desires.

The imac is simply a poor value take this example in point: I have a friend who has a three year old G4 466 that he purchased new for $1499. That three year old G4 is much faster than my newest and fastest 1.25Ghz imac. That three year old G4 has a Dual 1.33Ghz G4 upgrade that cost about $1000 so my friend spent about $2499 over the past three years and thruought that entire period has had a faster computer than any of the three imac's I have owned. Over the past 3-4 years I have spent some $3000+ on three imacs and that is calculating the money I got from selling older ones . imac is a very very poor value regardless of ones needs!!

With that said.....

I would not buy another imac even if Apple came out with a G5 imac. When Apple does come out with a G5 imac rest assured that it will still feauture a barely acceptable NON upgradeble Graphics card, No PCI slots, limited RAM expansion and a hobbled version of the G5 chip and architecture. Hobbled how? who know's but Apple will find a way just like they did with the G3 & G4 imacs of the past in relation to the Power Mac line.

[Savage Henry]

Originally posted by Little Endian


I would not buy another imac even if Apple came out with a G5 imac. When Apple does come out with a G5 imac rest assured that it will still feauture a barely acceptable NON upgradeble Graphics card, No PCI slots, limited RAM expansion and a hobbled version of the G5 chip and architecture.

Agree with you sir on that point. As much as I am gagging to up my iMac to one running on G5-juice, I am going to need more convincing on the whole components caboodle before I take anothe chunk out of my credit card limit.

However I do think that Apple needs to be ahead of the 64-bit game. So why not top range the iMacs with a G5, whilst simultaneously losing bottom end Power Mac and upgrading the top end to a nice 2.6. Then six months down the line G5 the PB and re-stretch the Power Mac line by introducing the 3.0 beast.

Price drops are for wimps.;)

[wdlove]

Originally posted by SiliconAddict
My guess? PowerMac speedbumps. That's it. WWDC is fast approaching. Any major new hardware is going to be held back for that. Speed bumps are one thing, but major new releases? Jobs ego won't allow anything other then a major event where HE is the center of attention. Where he can debut his new hardware.

I agree with your logic SiliconAddict. We are now approximately three months away from WWDC on June 28th. The announcement of the Rev. B Power Mac will be a major upgrade. So I don't blame Steve Jobs at all for wanting to make the announcement personally. He would not be in that position is he didn't have an ego, that is what drives his innovative spirit.

[-hh]

Originally posted by rdowns
Clusterable? Do you really think this would be a mass market idea? Many people have trouble installing a simple home network, let alone a cluster of computers. I just don't see this as ever happening.

I think it would work - - but then again, I made the same suggestion probably 12-24 months ago. :D The reason why it would work is twofold:

- Apple's reputation for easy interfacing (TRUE plug-n-play) will make it marketplace-friendly. The appeal is that you can grow your system over time, plus that any computer on the network has the power of all.

- The consumer appeal for "Never" needs replacing, which manages total lifecycle costs (which is already an Apple strength, although a poorly marketed one).

- Just what do you think the VA Tech Cluster was? Off-the-shelf G5's. The Apple hardware upgrade was a 2GB Fibre Channel hardware upgrade (to double the Std GigaBit Ethernet used for node innerconnectivity); the rest was system cooling and software.


For example, we know that Apple could take 'System Update' and incude an automatic (background) feature that monitors the cluster performance, and when that old 2GH G5 that you bought back in 2004 isn't only adding +2% to your cluster performance, it can migrate all of its data off its physical hard drives and instruct you to unplug it.

And FYI, if you wanted to make the system extra-friendly and appear even more brilliant, it does the entire file migration during overnight downtime after it makes up its mind -- and before it even tells the User that "Its time to retire Component X".


In any event, I see that this thread isn't going anywhere particularly profound...

Yes, there are issues with iMacs ... but as much as we might say that we want a "headless iMac", the history is that we didn't buy it when it was offered to us -- the Cube. Granted, part of it was probably the price point, but we shouldn't forget that the iMac's design makes us captive LCD buyers for Apple, and that helps keep their sales volume up, which helps improve economy of scale costs for all LCD-using Apple products (such as iBooks & PB's).

Second, on performance:

a) in general, anyone who's bothered to read the Journals knows that the PC industry is in a bit of a slump right now because *Business* has found that they no longer need the absolute latest hardware for general office automation. The reality is that there are a few specialty applications that need the iron, but the emerging buyer for top-end PC's is no longer business, but the personal gamer

b) YMMV on the arguements of if this customer would be better served by a game console...I don't personally know the answer, because the "Rest of Us" reality is that we don't need a high-end system for generic Internet, Productivity, etc, applications.

Third, productivity:

Productivity is NOT Speed, at least as measured by frames/sec in Quake, or a CPU's MHz/GHz. What matters is how quickly you get your tasks done, and the workflow process includes a lot of factors, not the least of which is how quickly and efficiently the User navigates through the OS's GUI.

It would be an interesting Grad Student research topic to find how how many hours of lost productivity have been caused by Microsoft's "CLIPPY" assistant - - I swear, every time the dang thing pops up is a royal waste of my time and that makes me so ticked that I go take a coffee break.

Because overall productivity also includes time spent not working, a "rabbit" design that forces you to take frequent breaks is often slower than an enjoyable "turtle".


Fourth, on the 'Experience' (eg, BMW & Mercedes analogies):

First, gasoline in Europe often runs more than $4/gallon and yes, a lot of that is taxes ... that's why they have comparatively excellent mass transit systems.

Insofar as what car is analogous to Apple, BMW is a frequent example, but it doesn't really matter: the real point to all of this is out there in our own driveway right now: very few of us own the automotive equivalent to a $300 PC. Instead, we buy nice SUV's, or GTO's or whatever because it is what we want.

It doesn't matter if we've bought into luxury, handling, "rugged individualist", or whatever: 95% of us right now own significantly more vehicle than what is required to satisfy the requirement of "Basic Transportation".

If we can 'Enjoy the Ride' in our car but then cannot conceive of people choosing to do the same for their PC choice, we are either closed-minded, or we're deceived ourselves into believing that luxury goods are an absolute life necessity.

Finally, on "Cost", two things:

a) You get what you pay for. My last Mac was retired after 7 years of service - - and my 1705 Apple Monitor is still going strong, so its what my G5 is now using. In contrast, my PC at work is 4 years old and its ready for the trashcan, having spontaneous power loss problems (build quality), and the no-name cheapie monitor has aggrivating horizontal line streaking that also means its heading for the trashbin...it simply isn't cost-effective for me to invoke our Repair Service.

b) Recent reports state that the average household consumer debt of those that are carrying a balance is now over $13,000. Some reports now state the value at $19,000. At typical credit-card interest rates (~20%), the amount of money paid just in debt service is well over $2500. But why am I telling you this? Because it means that every household could theoretically afford to buy a new PowerMac _every_ year if they had good control over their finances and avoided credit card debt. If you can't afford a little more for a Mac, my personal recommendation is to stop complaining and to go look at your financial situation: the best financial investment you can make today is to get rid of credit card debt. IMO for most people, the cost differential for a Mac will disappear as a 'barrier' if they fix this very basic item.


-hh

[macnews]

Originally posted by Little Endian
I need a G5 Power Mac!! I have owned three imacs over the past 3-4 years from G3500Mhz-G41.25 Ghz and enough is enough. Always just enough power for today but never enough for the very near tommorow. No upgradability. I have been stuck in a loop of buying a new imac every 15-18 months or so because they cannot keep up with my needs and desires. ....imac is a very very poor value regardless of ones needs!!....When Apple does come out with a G5 imac rest assured that it will still feauture a barely acceptable NON upgradeble Graphics card, No PCI slots, limited RAM expansion and a hobbled version of the G5 chip and architecture...

Ok trying to follow forum rules here and not tear you down for poor purchasing decisions. While the imac is not right for you, to say "imac is a very very poor value regardless of ones needs" is way wrong. I happen to have an imac and love it. But rather than get in to the intangible "I love it, you hate routine", I want to rebut you on some of your later points.

Regarding upgrading - I have owned three PC's, only thing I have ever upgraded was the ram and video card. I manage a 20 computer lab of macs (imacs, powermacs, powerbooks). Over the past 6 years I have never upgraded anything aside from RAM. Why? Just didn't make sense from a money stand point. I knew from the outset I would buy a new machine (either personal or for the lab) every 4 years or so. I bought the machine to do what I needed it do and then some in the near future. In other words, I didn't go the cheap route. I bought a slightly better graphics card, extra ram (if price was cheap), hard drive, processor, etc. etc. etc. Sure, paid a little more but after four years, didn't have to waste my time, efforts and new cash to hold up an old machine.

Hey, if upgrading is for you fine. I personally don't like to spend a lot of time always "upgrading" my computer. I like it to just work, allowing me to do what I do and get the job done. Maybe that means I don't buy the latest version of photoshop (I still know some who use photoshop 5). If I can get what I like to do done fast, then who needs the few extra seconds (which 10 is about the most you might get with some upgrades in terms of regular task savings) then why waste my time putting something in, updating everything, buying the new software - no thanks.

If you don't like the imac fine. But just because you made some poor buying choices does not mean it is a bad machine.

[johnnyjibbs]

Originally posted by -hh
Recent reports state that the average household consumer debt of those that are carrying a balance is now over $13,000. Some reports now state the value at $19,000. At typical credit-card interest rates (~20%), the amount of money paid just in debt service is well over $2500. But why am I telling you this? Because it means that every household could theoretically afford to buy a new PowerMac _every_ year if they had good control over their finances and avoided credit card debt. If you can't afford a little more for a Mac, my personal recommendation is to stop complaining and to go look at your financial situation: the best financial investment you can make today is to get rid of credit card debt. IMO for most people, the cost differential for a Mac will disappear as a 'barrier' if they fix this very basic item.
Problem is, for many, the credit card debt is due to buying a new dual 2GHz G5 when they don't have the money, hence the debt ;) :D

[invaLPsion]

Originally posted by wdlove
I agree with your logic SiliconAddict. We are now approximately three months away from WWDC on June 28th. The announcement of the Rev. B Power Mac will be a major upgrade. So I don't blame Steve Jobs at all for wanting to make the announcement personally. He would not be in that position is he didn't have an ego, that is what drives his innovative spirit.

I disagree. The announcement of speed bumped powermacs is minor. Those will be out in March. What is major is the G5 powerbooks and iMacs. That is my guess at what was originally meant by the poster and what will happen in the next few months.

[Darkhorse]

Here's a wildly stupid idea... since there was no Superbowl ad... mayyybe there'll be a commercial for new crap during the Oscars...

or maybe not.

[windowsblowsass]

Originally posted by arn
I think is faulty logic.

Hardware isn't delayed by OS releases.

When a new Mac is released, it always has a newer version of Mac OS installed on it -- this extra code provides support for the new machine.

In other words, even if Mac OS X 10.3.3 came out a week before the new PowerMacs were released, I'd wager the new PowerMacs have a different version of Mac OS X 10.3.3.

arn
exactly when g5s where released panther wasnt out yet but apple installed an revamped version of jaguar with 64bit suport codenamed smeagle

[invaLPsion]

Originally posted by Darkhorse
Here's a wildly stupid idea... since there was no Superbowl ad... mayyybe there'll be a commercial for new crap during the Oscars...

or maybe not.

I just thought the same thing when I saw an ad for the Oscars a minute ago.:p

[Darkhorse]

wouldn't be the first rumour of an oscar ad:

http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2002/03/20020307161851.shtml

hmm... tomorrow's a tuesday and it's the 24th... which is also steve's birthday... OMG FORGET THE OSCARS NEW CRAP TOMMORROW FOR TRUE!!111

sorry.


*cough*

[aswitcher]

I think iTunes and iPods have a few more weeks to run...

Maybe we will see some of the stars sporting GOLD Mini iPods :p

[Darkhorse]

Originally posted by aswitcher
I think iTunes and iPods have a few more weeks to run...

Maybe we will see some of the stars sporting GOLD Mini iPods :p

bling bling

[173080]

I came across this (http://news.com.com/2100-1044-5163527.html?tag=nefd_hed). I wonder if it means anything? :cool:

[numediaman]

Patience! Apple seems to be working through its issues one at a time -- I'm incredibly encouraged.

Sorry Arn, I disagree -- I think the 10.3.3 seeding and other software updates are very important. Apple wouldn't, or shouldn't, release a rev b G5 with all these issue still sitting out there. They seem to be addressing OS issues, now the Power Supply. There were Graphic Card issues that seem to have disappeared, as well. That leaves three issues left (maybe more I'm not aware of): getting a good supply of chips from IBM (no problem), re-releasing QuickTime 6.5 for the G5, and updating iLife (extremely important for those wanting to use iDVD). The only other things that could hold this up would be design issues -- there have been rumors of dual opticals, etc. Another rumor concerned changes in RAM -- that could seriously hold things up as they wait for new RAM to filter through the supply chain.

I've predicted March -- but I'm not so sure now that Apple will actually be able to deliver product this soon -- maybe an announcement in March with delivery within 4 weeks? The developers conference is still four months away -- they wouldn't wait that long, would they?

Anybody want to predict "today"?

[billy]

an example of what they're reffering to is YAMAHA'S new product...01x. a full blown digital mixing board that works as a 24 bit digital I/O and remote control.

www.yamahasynth.com

Yamaha has developed a new networking system for music called mLAN (where m is for music) that they're incorporating into all they're new products. it's a high end networking protocol that allows audio AND MIDI data to be sent down one firewire cable. and also allows compatible instruments to be "daisy chained" into a network.

the reason it's connected with Apple's 10.3.3 release is because the mLAN protocol is being programmed DIRECTLY into 10.3.3. so that there's no need for a a drvier.

100% total integration via the OS!

you can peep the hype here: www.01xray.com
have a nice day

[Fiveos22]

Originally posted by rdowns
G3 with Altivec is non-existant.



Isn't that the Power PC 750FX? The same one used in the new G4 ibooks, yes?

It isn't too far fetched that they might move some more of the consumer line over to the IBM processor to further free themselves of Motorola. The only thing I'd imagine that they'd have to keep with the 7XXX Moto processors are the power line of notebooks which have/need L3 cache.

PB G5s are a ways off, but they're going to be amazing when they are debuted.

[john123]

Originally posted by Fiveos22
Isn't that the Power PC 750FX? The same one used in the new G4 ibooks, yes?
.

It's similar but not identical. Altivec is a Motorola-specific technology, but the principles employed in the IBM chips are roughly similar.

[rog]

It looks like sometime after March 27th there will be new iMacs and towers. Apple just announced a RAM upgrade special on those machines which runs until then. They rarely introduce machines while there is some ongoing promotion of current models.

[tunanut]

oh no, march 27? i know something's about to happen b/c i'm about to buy a tower and invariably the very least that happens immediately after is a price reduction.

[mrsebastian]

march, april, may... nobody knows and that's why we have this recurring rumor every 2 weeks :p that said, i'd wish apple would hurry up and give us an updated g5 tower.

[Borg3of5]

I'm still on an 800 mHz G3 iBook! I'd stop short of killing a baby for a PM G5 and a 20" Cinema Display. Looks like I am going to have to get a part time job, just for this whim.

[ionas]

Originally posted by rog
It looks like sometime after March 27th there will be new iMacs and towers. Apple just announced a RAM upgrade special on those machines which runs until then. They rarely introduce machines while there is some ongoing promotion of current models.

and when is it going to start?
if it just started today it could also be 30th march and not 27th cause 30th is a tuesday and 27th a sunday...

what do you say?

[Little Endian]

quote:
Originally posted by rog
It looks like sometime after March 27th there will be new iMacs and towers. Apple just announced a RAM upgrade special on those machines which runs until then. They rarely introduce machines while there is some ongoing promotion of current models.

quote:
and when is it going to start?
if it just started today it could also be 30th march and not 27th cause 30th is a tuesday and 27th a sunday...

what do you say?

The Ram Promotion starts immediately and is available at the Apple Store website for viewing. The Epson rebate promo also lasts through March 27th so March 30th Tuesday does seem the most likely date for updates and it is only one month away. This is rather late though as Apple has stated that they would hit 3Ghz within a year since the June 2003 annoucement of the Power Mac G5. Unless this new Power Mac revision has only a 3-4 month run or it tops out at 3Ghz apple will fail to reach it's target. However if we look at the time since the original Power Mac G5's started shipping which is September then a March 30th release would be a 5 month run (still rather short) until the 3Ghz G5's are available or announced. My opinion is that Apple will not announce or start shipping a 3Ghz Power Mac until sometime in November O4. Even if we don't hit 3Ghz till the ending of the year that will still be fine as the fastest shipping processors from Intel will probably only be at 4Ghz and we will still overtake AMD in raw clockspeed who will probably only be at a 2.6Ghz for it's best processors at the end of the year.

[invaLPsion]

March 30th seems unfortunately to be the day of the updates. God I am tired of waiting!:mad:

[john123]

As they say, good things come to those who wait.

Personally, March was my prediction for PowerBook updates all along. It coincides with the end of the pilot tradeup program for people who own the original and Gigabit Ethernet models of PowerBook G4s.

[invaLPsion]

Originally posted by john123
As they say, good things come to those who wait.

Personally, March was my prediction for PowerBook updates all along. It coincides with the end of the pilot tradeup program for people who own the original and Gigabit Ethernet models of PowerBook G4s.

Hey, I'm hoping for powermacs. Maybe they'll be up to 3GHz since it will be so close to WWDC? Then we'll see the G6 at MWSF! But there's no way I'm waiting that long...:p

[numediaman]

Originally posted by invaLPsion
Hey, I'm hoping for powermacs. Maybe they'll be up to 3GHz since it will be so close to WWDC? Then we'll see the G6 at MWSF! But there's no way I'm waiting that long...:p

invaLPsion, you are the eternal optimist -- I'll give you credit for that.

I've said March is the month (as invaLPsion knows) -- but I doubt it could happen before March 30th -- but we'll see. The good news for those of us who have waited is that we are closer than we were Jan. 1, right?

But Powerbooks? The best bet for G5 PBs is probably by year's end. Unfortunately, I think they are locked in with Motorola until then. Again, we will see.

[john123]

Originally posted by numediaman
invaLPsion, you are the eternal optimist -- I'll give you credit for that.

I've said March is the month (as invaLPsion knows) -- but I doubt it could happen before March 30th -- but we'll see. The good news for those of us who have waited is that we are closer than we were Jan. 1, right?

But Powerbooks? The best bet for G5 PBs is probably by year's end. Unfortunately, I think they are locked in with Motorola until then. Again, we will see.

I am betting they'll use those 1.5Ghz G4s in the next round of PowerBooks.

And I'm waiting on Power Macs, too...my parents need a new computer and that's what I'd give them. I've introduced them to my Dell computers, but they don't seem to care for them too much. They've been using OS 9 on a 266Mhz machine so far, and they'll have a bit of trouble adjusting to OS X, but they'll live.

[invaLPsion]

Originally posted by numediaman
invaLPsion, you are the eternal optimist -- I'll give you credit for that.

I've said March is the month (as invaLPsion knows) -- but I doubt it could happen before March 30th -- but we'll see. The good news for those of us who have waited is that we are closer than we were Jan. 1, right?

But Powerbooks? The best bet for G5 PBs is probably by year's end. Unfortunately, I think they are locked in with Motorola until then. Again, we will see.

I have to stay optimistic, or else I'll go insane!:D :p

We are a lot closer, I'll give you that. But you have to remember, back then we thought we were closer, and thinking is what counts in this waiting game, thinking that it's always gonna be soon, or the next Tuesday in this case.:p

[aswitcher]

Originally posted by john123
I am betting they'll use those 1.5Ghz G4s in the next round of PowerBooks.


If so, just as long as they upgrade everything else to make it more than a minor speed hike, I guess I could live with that...

[john123]

Originally posted by aswitcher
If so, just as long as they upgrade everything else to make it more than a minor speed hike, I guess I could live with that...

I could live with it too...but I wouldn't buy it.

[klezmer41]

Power Mac G5 1.8GHz/512MB/160G/SuperDrive/PCI/GeFr5200

$1899 for a brand new machine

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?family=SpecialDeals&siteID=Es5Ekr9eEBk-IlbBSs8a16%2FEU5EkAzGpcA

[john123]

Originally posted by klezmer41
Power Mac G5 1.8GHz/512MB/160G/SuperDrive/PCI/GeFr5200

$1899 for a brand new machine

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore?family=SpecialDeals&siteID=Es5Ekr9eEBk-IlbBSs8a16%2FEU5EkAzGpcA

Some resellers have been offering that machine at $1749 -- below the price of the 1.6Ghz...

[Little Endian]

Applestore also offers the Refurb G5 1.8 Ghz for $1699 and I also beleive the refurb model probably includes a Radeon 9600 as that is what they were originally equipped with.

When they are also available you can get a Dual 1.8Ghz Refurb for $1999 or a Dual 2.0 for $2399 from Applestore online and online retailers like Smalldog.com and PowerMax.com though none are currently available.

I personally get the Developer Discount which is the best bargain available as all systems are new and you also get a discount on all upgrades to the machine as well as discounted Apple LCDs.

http://store.apple.com/AppleStore/WebObjects/ADC.woa/72305/wo/Ex4K4NsGVOpA2sxUSDE1YZ8WXjG/0.0.7.1.0.5.21.1.3.1.2.0.0.1.0

[ionas]

Originally posted by Little Endian
...

I personally get the Developer Discount which is the best bargain available as all systems are new and you also get a discount on all upgrades to the machine as well as discounted Apple LCDs.

http://store.apple.com/AppleStore/WebObjects/ADC.woa/72305/wo/Ex4K4NsGVOpA2sxUSDE1YZ8WXjG/0.0.7.1.0.5.21.1.3.1.2.0.0.1.0

how do i become an official apple developer, where can i become that and how much does it cost?

i am a student btw.

pls someone reply to my answer! :->

[ffakr]

Originally posted by ionas
how do i become an official apple developer, where can i become that and how much does it cost?

i am a student btw.

pls someone reply to my answer! :->

You have to pay to get a developer discount.
I'm not sure what it normally costs, but I get my developer account by paying $400 more for my WWDC ticket. That is the base level developer.. it gets you one hardware discount per year. If you get the Premier, it runs $3500 [by its self] and you get (I think) 3 hardware discounts.
You also get access to Apple's labs, beta seeds, docs... all kinds of goodies.. in varying degrees based on which type of developer you happen to be.

[ionas]

no chance to get it cheaper than 400?
i dont need a ticket, i am an euro guy...
further i am a student, any chance i may get a developer account for - lets say - 200 USD (175 Eur)?

hope i get discounts on euro products the same amount then (600$ on top notch model g5 is a lot!)

[bastardx]

A student can get an ADC account and hardware discount for $100 US, just get an account at the developer site, and enter your school and give them a student ID #, or proof or enrollment.

[Damek]

That's all I want, an iBook update in early April (or late March would be even better).

Nothing big, I just want to be able to get a 1GHz G4 in a 12" iBook. That's what I'm waiting for, to switch from my aging PC.

[klezmer41]

when you register as a student developer, it doesn't say on your benefits page that you are eligible for a hardware discount, but you are. there's some documentation somewhere that says that it's once per lifetime sort of discount. you would order normally through the ADC discount page.

scott

[dudewheresmymac]

Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
This doesn't surprise me at all. Previous rumors have hinted at Mac OS 10.3.3 being required for new hardware (specifically the Rev. B PowerMac G5s), but there is always the possibility of Apple releasing something entirely new and Mac OS X-powered.


perhaps powertune

[invaLPsion]

Well we don't have long to find out. 10.3.3 is due out very soon. Maybe that's why the xServes have been delayed so long? Apple has had the chips, they just needed the software.

Apple Insider and MacOSRumors have been saying that the powermacs will require with 10.3.3...

[Hattig]

The product lineup is well overdue for an upgrade ... especially the iMac which is laughable in terms of hardware. The PowerMac has fallen behind as well since its introduction.

What I'd hope to see is:

PowerMac: Dual Processors across the line, 2.4, 2.2, 2.0GHz options.

iMac: Single Processors across the line. 1.6, 1.8, 2GHz. Decent graphics card option for people who want to play games.

PowerBook: 1.6GHz G5

I expect that the iMac will not be fast or suitable for many typical consumer activities like gaming however. The PowerBook will remain with the G4 with a small speed bump.

Most people probably want something between an iMac and a PowerMac though. Reasonable expandability at a reasonable price point in a normal form factor. A single G5 in a cost reduced PowerMac style case with room for extra hard drives, reasonable memory expansion, the possibility to add a couple of PCI cards (better audio, etc), upgradable graphics (AGP 8x slot, or maybe even a PCI Express x16 slot given that is the major new thing this year). Nothing fancy, just a good solid reliable system that can compete with PCs in terms of features at hopefully not too much a price premium.

[a17inchFuture]

For those who believe the 1.5 ghz g4 will be in the next pbook lineup, the original article said the chips wouldnt be available for 3-6 months, so I doubt they will update the g4 with chips that arent available until june to maybe september.

G5's coming in june, with ibook's getting that 1.5 g4 in the highest configuration. It will be a newly designed ibook, whihc, if i remember correctly, is in need of a makeover.

Speculation obviously, but it makes the most sense out of all the arguments out there.

[mklos]

The product lineup is well overdue for an upgrade ... especially the iMac which is laughable in terms of hardware. The PowerMac has fallen behind as well since its introduction.

What I'd hope to see is:

PowerMac: Dual Processors across the line, 2.4, 2.2, 2.0GHz options.

iMac: Single Processors across the line. 1.6, 1.8, 2GHz. Decent graphics card option for people who want to play games.

PowerBook: 1.6GHz G5

I expect that the iMac will not be fast or suitable for many typical consumer activities like gaming however. The PowerBook will remain with the G4 with a small speed bump.

Most people probably want something between an iMac and a PowerMac though. Reasonable expandability at a reasonable price point in a normal form factor. A single G5 in a cost reduced PowerMac style case with room for extra hard drives, reasonable memory expansion, the possibility to add a couple of PCI cards (better audio, etc), upgradable graphics (AGP 8x slot, or maybe even a PCI Express x16 slot given that is the major new thing this year). Nothing fancy, just a good solid reliable system that can compete with PCs in terms of features at hopefully not too much a price premium.

I've said this in other forums but I think the next iMac should be headless. This opens up everything. The new iMac should include a G5 running up to 1.6 GHz. It should be like a scaled down version of the PowerMac G5. People want expandability, or at least they think they do. Especially Windoze users. This would also allow for people to buy the display they want and actually get to keep their display when they want to upgrade. They could just buy the new tower instead of giving up this beautiful 17" widescreen display every time. Why should I have to pay for a display everytime? Doesn't make sense to me.

Here are the specs I think the new "headless" iMac should have:

1.4/1.6 GHz G5
700/800 MHz FSB
80/100 GB SATA drive
4x AGP
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra Graphics Card (DVI/ADC connectors)
256 MB PC2700 DDR RAM (exp. to 4 GB)
32x Combo Drive/4x SuperDrive
(2)FireWire 400 Ports
(5) USB 2.0 Ports
10/100 Ethernet
56k Modem
AirPort Extreme Ready
Bluetooth Ready
Same Aluminum enclosure, only a smaller tower

They should sell this for something that enables someone to buy the computer and display for under $1700 at the high end. They are basically doing the same thing with the current iMac so I don't see why they can't do this with a newly designed iMac.

It only makes sense to me that they make the iMac headless. Keep the eMac for the AIO machines that people will still want, including schools, businesses, etc... Apple would sell more displays, and therefore could make them cheaper, they would be buying more G5's which makes the cost of it go down, buy for NVIDIA graphics cards which in turn makes them go down. You get my drift here...

[Ultimatetone]

Wasn't there some talk (earlier in this thread)
about Apple purchasing some 'ad time' during tonight's Oscar's?

Has anyone seen the ad?


Ultimatetone.com

[aswitcher]

I've said this in other forums but I think the next iMac should be headless. SNIP

Here are the specs I think the new "headless" iMac should have:

1.4/1.6 GHz G5
700/800 MHz FSB
80/100 GB SATA drive
4x AGP
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra Graphics Card (DVI/ADC connectors)
256 MB PC2700 DDR RAM (exp. to 4 GB)
32x Combo Drive/4x SuperDrive
(2)FireWire 400 Ports
(5) USB 2.0 Ports
10/100 Ethernet
56k Modem
AirPort Extreme Ready
Bluetooth Ready
Same Aluminum enclosure, only a smaller tower

SNIP

160GB drive as standard. Its not that much extra.
I think it needs a better graphics card. Part of the problems with iMacs is lack of decent graphics support for game players.. a substantial part of the market...
Bluetooth should be standard.
Extreme might also need to be standard with a nice Aerial form factor as part of the design outside the faraday cage enclosure...
2 PCI slots...

my thoughts

[Duff-Man]

Wasn't there some talk (earlier in this thread)
about Apple purchasing some 'ad time' during tonight's Oscar's?

Has anyone seen the ad?Duff-Man says...that was just someone's speculation - there was never any concrete info that Apple was buying ad time during the Oscars....oh yeah!

[Borg3of5]

:rolleyes: I'm hoping that when the new systems (rev.B) are released the price on the current models will come down some. I'm currently on a 12" 800 mHz iBook G3. I've been SO drooling for a G5, y'all just can't believe how bad I want one.

Then I can splurge on a 20" Cinema Display, and get the 1.6 gHz G5.

Hey: after being on a G3 for more than 1 year, the G5 will seem like going from the Wright Brothers to a Borg Cube.

[Opteron]

PCI-Express is the Key.
and that's April/May.

[CalfCanuck]

G5's coming in june, with ibook's getting that 1.5 g4 in the highest configuration. It will be a newly designed ibook, whihc, if i remember correctly, is in need of a makeover.
I hope you're wrong, as iBooks G4s are the most recently updated part of Apple's product line. They introduced new models in Oct. 2003, and the specs are such that they already cannibalize some of the PB line.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Apple's whole Hardware line is such a joke, other then the dual G5s everything else is very old slow and outdated. this Qtrs numbers are going to be very poor for Apple but i have a idea, since they allready count Emac as Imac sales why dont they just count all ipods& mini ipods as just consumer sales and add them to Emac/Imac and then they can say how Great Imacs are selling. :D they are spinning Imac numbers so they might as well spin them a little faster. 10 years later and its still the same story Mac Hardware sucks and they charge you twice what its worth. How many more years will it be before Apple has decent Hardware across the board. I say it will be at least 2 more motorola dragging years. Single G5s are still not that impressive and it takes 2 g5s to equal 1 Intel. :mad: same old Apple story. by the time Imac gets a G5 I will be wanting a G6.

[Opteron]

they are spinning Imac numbers so they might as well spin them a little faster. 10 years later and its still the same story Mac Hardware sucks and they charge you twice what its worth. How many more years will it be before Apple has decent Hardware across the board. I say it will be at least 2 more motorola dragging years. Single G5s are still not that impressive and it takes 2 g5s to equal 1 Intel. :mad: same old Apple story. by the time Imac gets a G5 I will be wanting a G6.

Agreed, Apple need to swallow some pride and release a healess, bare bone box for the wider consumer. Imaging the sales of the PM if all you got was:
a case
powersupply
Motherboard
and bought the cpu's you wanted.

[hulugu]

Agreed, Apple need to swallow some pride and release a healess, bare bone box for the wider consumer. Imaging the sales of the PM if all you got was:
a case
powersupply
Motherboard
and bought the cpu's you wanted.

Apple does need to swallow some pride and some profit and try to release a headless box for consumer usage, however you are missing the point of Apple: vertical integration. A case, powersupply, mobo and cpus only would suck. I want USB, Firewire, DVI, Airport, etc. in a box, I don't want to add in all the extra stuff just so I can have the same experience I do with a beige box. Apple's stuff works, at least in part, because they can create such specifically tweaked machines. Your suggestion adds in some many extra variables that they must as well license clones, which by the way sucked!
Apple has been behind the curve on the processor side (megahertz myth or not a 3.0Ghz PIV is faster than a 1.0Ghz G4) and they have been slow to bring in the best video cards (or they cost more) and memory. However, and this goes to Don't Hurt Me too, Apple makes a very nice machine. It's not the fastest, but they are clearly very stable and reliable. You will of course mention the iBooks, white-spots on the 15'' AlBooks, dead iPod batteries, noisy MDD G4s, figety G5 video, etc. and yet Apple still manages to do well in Consumer Reports and other reviews and continues to produce excellent computers. Do they ****** up? Definitely, but Apple does not produce crap, you make this wide knee-jerk reaction and yet ignore the whole thing that makes Apple IMHO better than the commodity PC makers they compete against.

[aswitcher]

Apple does need to swallow some pride and some profit and try to release a headless box for consumer usage, however you are missing the point of Apple: vertical integration. A case, powersupply, mobo and cpus only would suck. I want USB, Firewire, DVI, Airport, etc. in a box, I don't want to add in all the extra stuff just so I can have the same experience I do with a beige box. Apple's stuff works, at least in part, because they can create such specifically tweaked machines. Your suggestion adds in some many extra variables that they must as well license clones, which by the way sucked!
Apple has been behind the curve on the processor side (megahertz myth or not a 3.0Ghz PIV is faster than a 1.0Ghz G4) and they have been slow to bring in the best video cards (or they cost more) and memory. However, and this goes to Don't Hurt Me too, Apple makes a very nice machine. It's not the fastest, but they are clearly very stable and reliable. You will of course mention the iBooks, white-spots on the 15'' AlBooks, dead iPod batteries, noisy MDD G4s, figety G5 video, etc. and yet Apple still manages to do well in Consumer Reports and other reviews and continues to produce excellent computers. Do they ****** up? Definitely, but Apple does not produce crap, you make this wide knee-jerk reaction and yet ignore the whole thing that makes Apple IMHO better than the commodity PC makers they compete against.

I would want those extra features on a cut down mac as well. Its just the head removal and a decent chip/bus etc I want to see.

[CmdrLaForge]

Apple does need to swallow some pride and some profit and try to release a headless box for consumer usage, however you are missing the point of Apple: vertical integration....that makes Apple IMHO better than the commodity PC makers they compete against.

Hi,

I guess some of you just miss the point. I have to agree with DHM. The point is that Apples marketshare dropped below 2%. And thats the point. They need more marketshare ! We currently have around 7 Mio active Mac users (even if Jobs tells that there are 25Mio) in comparison to 400 Mio PC users. Apple spended 1 billion dollars in developing OS X If they earn if they sell it for $120 and with a COS of $70 they only earn $50 they need 20E6 to buy it ! Or make the money with sales of hardware. With that low marketshare they have to charge more per unit. But how can you get more people to switch with outdated and overpriced hardware ? Apples marketshare dropped from 10% 15 years ago to 1.x% now and is still declining !!!! If this goes on we won't celebrate another 20 years. Period. The prices are so far away from the PC world right now !!!

In other words: they should release the iCube with G5 for $999-$1399 depending on speed and drives etc. and the price for the 17" screen should drop to $400.

[ffakr]

this Qtrs numbers are going to be very poor for Apple...

Just so you know, Calendar Quarter 1 is always the slowest in the computer industry. It is always Apple's slowest period.

[primalman]

I agree mostly with the opinions of people wanting a headless iMac or something, and that lowering prices would allow for some more marketshare penetration at work and in the home. At the risk of getting flamed/pounded/ridiculed/laughed at, here goes. Apple's line within the year [ie by Jan 05], IMHO, should be:

PowerMac G5
All dual, also, get some uber-high-end vido card options for 3-D.
2.6Ghz, $1,499
3.0Ghz, $1,899
3.4Ghz, $2,299.

Displays
All widescreen
17" $449
20" $899
23" $1,499.

PowerBook G5
All have superdrive standard, combo as option. Same form factors as now.
12" 2.0Ghz, $1,499
15" 2.4Ghz, $1,999
17" 2.4Ghz, $2,399

iMac G5
Headless/No screens attached, use the displays from pro line, or get your own. DVI/ADC midline video card. Up to 2GB RAM, one PCI slot, one hard drive slot, full complement of ports. I dare say it may be time for the pizza box again, or something like it, small-form-factor. Add a superdrive for $100.
2.0Ghz, $899
2.4Ghz, $1,299

iBook G4
Yes, keep it G4, but pray all day that speed can be ramped up. It may be time to for Apple to pay for a liscence for IBM to manufacture and enhance the desktop G4. Same form factor as now. No superdrive option, all combo.
12" 2.0Ghz [or as close as possible], $899
14" 2.0Ghz [or as close as possible], $1,299

eMac G4
Same deal as iBook with the G4. Same as now, yes a superdrive option.
2.0Ghz [or as close as possible], combo drive $699
2.0Ghz [or as close as possible], superdrive $799

The key here is dropping priced to make the business buyers, lab managers and prosumers get interested in the headless iMac, cheapos in the eMac and iBook, and your real pros into more towers and PowerBooks.

We'll see huh?
;)

[wdlove]

So it sounds as though the headless iMac would essentially be the return of Cube redesigned. Your prices are awesome primalman. Now if Steve would just fulfill your prognostication. I can see myself in that dual 3.0 or 3.4 with a 23" Cinema Display this Fall.

[hulugu]

Hi,
I guess some of you just miss the point. I have to agree with DHM. The point is that Apples marketshare dropped below 2%. And thats the point. They need more marketshare ! We currently have around 7 Mio active Mac users (even if Jobs tells that there are 25Mio) in comparison to 400 Mio PC users. Apple spended 1 billion dollars in developing OS X If they earn if they sell it for $120 and with a COS of $70 they only earn $50 they need 20E6 to buy it ! Or make the money with sales of hardware. With that low marketshare they have to charge more per unit. But how can you get more people to switch with outdated and overpriced hardware ? Apples marketshare dropped from 10% 15 years ago to 1.x% now and is still declining !!!! If this goes on we won't celebrate another 20 years. Period. The prices are so far away from the PC world right now !!!

First, were do you get your numbers? Second, are you using pure marketshare data and are you comparing that against installed base? Marketshare is important, especially for the perception of consumers(I want what others have) and developers (I need a large base to sell to). However, we must be careful with this number because Apple does not sell to the entire computer industry, ie. cubicle farms for telemarketers, etc. This market is cut-rate, low-quality with a high-turnover, exactly the kind of market that Apple cannot compete in. Furthermore, and I know we go over this everytime some wag mentions market-share: if Apple sold 10,000 computers in 1984 (out of 1 million) and now sells 100,000 (out of 20 Million) you could say their market-share dropped from 10% to 5%, and yet they are selling 10x as many units. This isn't the whole story, but neither is market-share.
In my mind, Apple needs to do 3 things:
Headless iMac: Keep the iMac as a flagship product, but give people a renewed Cube (or another form figure, surprise me Apple!) with the fastest G5 possible. In fact, shove a G5 in everything you can and don't change the prices or if possible lower them. But Apple must be willing, this bears repeating, to lose some profitibility on its consumer machines. The G5 Powermac should be a money-maker, but the iBook and the eMac should be an easier entry into the Macintosh world. I've noticed once people buy a Mac they want to do it again.
Advertise: Get Chiat Day off their asses and start producing iLife commercials again. (Remember the iMovie/iDVD commercials?) And show OSX as well, advertise No virii, security, etc. You guys had the balls to proclaim you had the 'World Most Powerful Computer' so step up.
Innovate, innovate, innovate! Apple must be the bleeding edge for the computer industry, think about the iPad (a tablet that actually works for people) the video-iPod (I've been thinking about this one, not really a iPod for movies, but rather for photographers, be able to plug in your DV camera and dump the whole thing to your 40Gig drive and keep shooting, or for photographers. Maybe a smart-card port, and the ability to see pictures and organize them using gasp! iPhoto once it's plugged into a Mac.
I lied, I though of another: Be willing to deal with Windows. I know that battle has been lost in many respects, but a Mac should be able to coexist with Wintel. Keep working on the network connections, also port iChat AV to Windows, you'll sell more iSights that way. However, do NOT port the rest of iLife or anything else. Show someone iTunes/iChat AV and then tell them there's more on the other pasture. Do it in a commercial, in magazines, etc. And yeah, and mention it works with Linux. Push that, a Mac UNIX your grandmother could use, iLife MS Office for the rest of your life, the great negotiator works with Windows and Linux. But cooler.

Lastly, Apple's hardware, good stuff. Overpriced. Maybe. Outdated. I doubt it. But OSX. Priceless.

[Opteron]

Apple does need to swallow some pride and some profit and try to release a headless box for consumer usage, however you are missing the point of Apple: vertical integration. A case, powersupply, mobo and cpus only would suck. I want USB, Firewire, DVI, Airport, etc. in a box, I don't want to add in all the extra stuff just so I can have the same experience I do with a beige box. Apple's stuff works, at least in part, because they can create such specifically tweaked machines. Your suggestion adds in some many extra variables that they must as well license clones, which by the way sucked!

Firstly if I could buy a bearbone PM, have you looked at th back pannel of the mother board, notice all the ports that come standard. Firewire800, USB2, ....

Secondly whether or not your computer has DVI is dependent on the graphics card you use.

Hence I'm not saying Apple should drop their complete box/all in one idea, but just give the consumer another option.

[aswitcher]

Firstly if I could buy a bearbone PM, have you looked at th back pannel of the mother board, notice all the ports that come standard. Firewire800, USB2, ....

Secondly whether or not your computer has DVI is dependent on the graphics card you use.

Hence I'm not saying Apple should drop their complete box/all in one idea, but just give the consumer another option.


Yep. I think this has found some concensus over the last 3-4 months.

This machine needs to be headless but performance wise should have a few models so that you can get a cheapy but also get something that is effectively a single G5 processor cut down PowerMac without the room to expand a real G5 has presently.

So a G5 Cube would be similiar as the G5 iMac described a few posts back, although I think room for 4 RAM slots for the single processor is a must so that we can get 2 gig from much cheaper 512 Ram sticks or 4Gig for those who so desire.

Also speed could go from 1.6Ghz up to almost the max - whatever that is next.

Access to a decent graphics card is a must to attract the gamer switchers who can't afford a full PowerMac but can afford the new MiniPowerMac (comes in 5 colours :p )

I actually think the form factor of a cube or even a current G5 sliced horizontally to be a log or stand up as a post could be workable.

[numediaman]

I agree that Apple needs a consumer Mac that can increase overall marketshare, and leads to more people using the Mac OS. The problem I have with a "headless" computer is that it forces people to buy a non-Apple display. Why spend $500 to $1000 on a Mac, then have to spend almost as much on an Apple display? So a solution needs to be introduced.

Lower prices on the G5s? Forget -- won't happen. I bought an 8600 Power Mac seven years ago at the same price point as the dual 1.8 ghz G5. Apple will keep their price points right where they are -- give or take $100.

Right now, I think Apple is going to have to bust their tail in order to be able to introduce a G5 rev b by the end of March. There is some question whether Apple has really solved the power supply issue on the G5. If they haven't, they have got to find an all new power supply, yet again. (It's ironic that everyone here is screaming for G5s, and users of the G5 are screaming at Apple because of all the problems.)

[CmdrLaForge]

First, were do you get your numbers? Second, are you using pure marketshare data and are you comparing that against installed base? Marketshare is important, especially for the perception of consumers(I want what others have) and developers (I need a large base to sell to). However, we must be careful with this number because Apple does not sell to the entire computer industry, ie. cubicle farms for telemarketers, etc. This market is cut-rate, low-quality with a high-turnover, exactly the kind of market that Apple cannot compete in. Furthermore, and I know we go over this everytime some wag mentions market-share: if Apple sold 10,000 computers in 1984 (out of 1 million) and now sells 100,000 (out of 20 Million) you could say their market-share dropped from 10% to 5%, and yet they are selling 10x as many units. This isn't the whole story, but neither is market-share.


Good question: look here : http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=3143 and here http://www.pegasus3d.com/total_share.html

Another interesting sidenote http://www.thinksecret.com/news/tsnotes10.html

Unit sells are up as well as investing costs ! Its very difficult to get the complete picture. Hopefully for software companys ROIC (return on invested capital) for Mac Apps is still good enough.

In my mind, Apple needs to do 3 things:
Headless iMac: Keep the iMac as a flagship product, but give people a renewed Cube (or another form figure, surprise me Apple!) with the fastest G5 possible. In fact, shove a G5 in everything you can and don't change the prices or if possible lower them. But Apple must be willing, this bears repeating, to lose some profitibility on its consumer machines. The G5 Powermac should be a money-maker, but the iBook and the eMac should be an easier entry into the Macintosh world. I've noticed once people buy a Mac they want to do it again.
Advertise: Get Chiat Day off their asses and start producing iLife commercials again. (Remember the iMovie/iDVD commercials?) And show OSX as well, advertise No virii, security, etc. You guys had the balls to proclaim you had the 'World Most Powerful Computer' so step up.
Innovate, innovate, innovate! Apple must be the bleeding edge for the computer industry, think about the iPad (a tablet that actually works for people) the video-iPod (I've been thinking about this one, not really a iPod for movies, but rather for photographers, be able to plug in your DV camera and dump the whole thing to your 40Gig drive and keep shooting, or for photographers. Maybe a smart-card port, and the ability to see pictures and organize them using gasp! iPhoto once it's plugged into a Mac.
I lied, I though of another: Be willing to deal with Windows. I know that battle has been lost in many respects, but a Mac should be able to coexist with Wintel. Keep working on the network connections, also port iChat AV to Windows, you'll sell more iSights that way. However, do NOT port the rest of iLife or anything else. Show someone iTunes/iChat AV and then tell them there's more on the other pasture. Do it in a commercial, in magazines, etc. And yeah, and mention it works with Linux. Push that, a Mac UNIX your grandmother could use, iLife MS Office for the rest of your life, the great negotiator works with Windows and Linux. But cooler.

Lastly, Apple's hardware, good stuff. Overpriced. Maybe. Outdated. I doubt it. But OSX. Priceless.


I agree to most of your points. IMHO one is missing and that GAMES ! Quite important market, because a lot of people are not heavily gaming, just sometimes, but if they buy a computer for $2000 they want to be able to play the latest games.

But Outdated : YES ! The G4 machines at 1 (+ a little bit) are outdated.
iBook, eMac and G5 are great.

[aswitcher]

I agree that Apple needs a consumer Mac that can increase overall marketshare, and leads to more people using the Mac OS. The problem I have with a "headless" computer is that it forces people to buy a non-Apple display. Why spend $500 to $1000 on a Mac, then have to spend almost as much on an Apple display? So a solution needs to be introduced.

SNIP

Actually the headless Mac is not designed necessarily to support non-Apple displays but to overcome the problem that iMacs have where 2-3 years down the track you have a lovely 20" display on a seriously outdated computer. If the display were seperate you could just switch the box. Personally this is one of the main reasons I won't buy an iMac.

[Prom1]

bling bling on the Gold Mini iPods, LOL. I can see Snoop & his Pimp friend wearing htose on a gold chain in a retro era/scene Hip-Hop video, for real my snizell.

I think that the delay for possible G5 PowerBooks may not only be related to OS integration of power-stepping the G5 a-la XServes, but probably because they may be THE first laptops to incorporate High-resolution 32-bit OLED screens, large sizes 12/15/17 inches!!

If Apple, Sony or Sharp, IBM, and whom ever manufacturer's their mobos can pull that off - in high-quality numbers, then it'll be the first time that an inanimate object gets me hard!
;) :p :D :cool:

[aswitcher]

SNIP
I think that the delay for possible G5 PowerBooks may not only be related to OS integration of power-stepping the G5 a-la XServes, but probably because they may be THE first laptops to incorporate High-resolution 32-bit OLED screens, large sizes 12/15/17 inches!!

If Apple, Sony or Sharp, IBM, and whom ever manufacturer's their mobos can pull that off - in high-quality numbers, then it'll be the first time that an inanimate object gets me hard!
;) :p :D :cool:

Mmm. They had so many problems with quality control on screens last year that a shift to new tech might have occured, but would they really have had enough time to properly test entirely new technology so as not to repeat similiar problems before 2005 rolls around?

Must say that it would be worth the wait if they did.

[Prom1]

Mmm. They had so many problems with quality control on screens last year that a shift to new tech might have occured, but would they really have had enough time to properly test entirely new technology so as not to repeat similiar problems before 2005 rolls around?

Must say that it would be worth the wait if they did.

Indeed it would be worth the wait, hence the hope I have for it. This will allow a significant reduction in power consumption, which could be offset for a powerful gpu for graphics. Kodak is also one of the forerunners of this OLED technolgy. I read a pres release on Brighthand.com that Sony has announced an OLED solution into a summer release (Japan, most likely) of a PDA. Where already seeing signs of success of OLED on a miniscal scale. regarding testing, I think that Sharp, Sony, Kodak, Philips will be doing that because a company like Apple would give them free advertising and the quality associated with their products would be a testament to future sales to other corporations (Dell, Gateway, Panasonic, IBM, etc). One thing I hope Apple does if they are considering OLED into Laptops is how it affects/lack of strain on the Human eye on usuage of 1- 3- 5-10hours of use.

Then again if Apple could release PowerBooks utilizing OLED on 17" screens then its a safe guess that their Displays would also incorporate this as well.

I think this will be a good year. Keeping fingers crossed.

[PRØBE]

Actually the headless Mac is not designed necessarily to support non-Apple displays but to overcome the problem that iMacs have where 2-3 years down the track you have a lovely 20" display on a seriously outdated computer. If the display were seperate you could just switch the box. Personally this is one of the main reasons I won't buy an iMac.





IMO the ideal solution would be to maintain the current or similar form factor imac, but redesign the way the screen is attatched in order to allow it to be removed. The imacs could then be sold either with or without display and users could just sell the base when they want to upgrade and hang on to the screen. I'm sure Apple could handle the engineering side of this and it would allow consumers more flexibility and choice.

People could also just choose to upgrade the display and keep the same base.
Any thoughts on this?

[FatSweatyChimp]

The imacs could then be sold either with or without display and users could just sell the base when they want to upgrade and hang on to the screen.

---

People could also just choose to upgrade the display and keep the same base.
Any thoughts on this?

That would be great :)

Imagine after a couple of years you could just unscrew the base and fit a new one on, and it all works perfectly. Easiest upgrade ever!

[aswitcher]

IMO the ideal solution would be to maintain the current or similar form factor imac, but redesign the way the screen is attatched in order to allow it to be removed. The imacs could then be sold either with or without display and users could just sell the base when they want to upgrade and hang on to the screen. I'm sure Apple could handle the engineering side of this and it would allow consumers more flexibility and choice.

People could also just choose to upgrade the display and keep the same base.
Any thoughts on this?

Well that's deifnetly been suggested as an option by some. I wonder though if more flexibility would come from a entirely seperate monitor and base arrangement, allowing G5PM to use monitors (dual) on "stalks", and allowing the cpu to be moved where the user thinks is most convienient.

[PRØBE]

Well that's deifnetly been suggested as an option by some. I wonder though if more flexibility would come from a entirely seperate monitor and base arrangement, allowing G5PM to use monitors (dual) on "stalks", and allowing the cpu to be moved where the user thinks is most convienient.






The detatchable imac displays could be designed to clip into an "istand" so they could be used separately from the imac base station.

[takao]

The detatchable imac displays could be designed to clip into an "istand" so they could be used separately from the imac base station.

hey i like that idea !! thought about it before
that would be awesome thats exactly what i would want for the next imac

and those base station would have the additional usb ports etc. i guess it wouldn't be too difficult to realize because apple is already using power/monitor signal in one connector

[acerbas]

Actually the headless Mac is not designed necessarily to support non-Apple displays but to overcome the problem that iMacs have where 2-3 years down the track you have a lovely 20" display on a seriously outdated computer. If the display were seperate you could just switch the box. Personally this is one of the main reasons I won't buy an iMac.
Interesting point. I have read this thread with interest since I am in the market for a new Mac (I think?) but Apple doesn't market anything right now that floats my boat. I am struggling along with a 5 year old G3 266 D.T. and I would like to upgrade to a computer on which I can run O.S. X but I am disenchanted with the selection. My son just bought a G5 but he is a professional videographer and needs the power. I don't, but since he lives in Hawaii I'd like a machine that supports iSight. I went to Comp U.S.A. and looked at Macs, but the G5 is huge, expensive, and you need an expensive separate display and external speakers. I loath the industrial design of the tutti-frutti iLamp. Supposedly it is compact, but when you factor in the goofy little external speakers it takes up plenty of real estate, too, and as depicted above you have to toss an expensive, beautiful monitor when the box has outlived its utility. I would migrate to Wintel before I would buy an iMac. I like the design of the eMac (I bought my wife one last year and she loves it), especially with the built in speakers, but the CRT is hard on my ageing eyes, and it lacks support for Bluetooth and USB 2.0, and it is pretty darned slow by contemporary standards. It had not occured to me before but a headless iMac might be what the doctor ordered. Say a G5 chip with 64 bit processing running at 2.5 ghz with a superdrive, second optical drive slot, second drive bay, and a couple of PCI slots (hey, I'm talking about a G5, except about a third the size), but I'm not holding my breath. I guess the best I might hope for is a rev. 2 eMac with a G5 chip and Bluetooth and USB 2. An LCD display would be icing, but not likely. I wonder if Apple ever reads these posts, or do they just sit around in their ivory tower and feed us what they think we want?

[aswitcher]

SNIP
It had not occured to me before but a headless iMac might be what the doctor ordered. Say a G5 chip with 64 bit processing running at 2.5 ghz with a superdrive, second optical drive slot, second drive bay, and a couple of PCI slots (hey, I'm talking about a G5, except about a third the size), but I'm not holding my breath. I guess the best I might hope for is a rev. 2 eMac with a G5 chip and Bluetooth and USB 2. An LCD display would be icing, but not likely. I wonder if Apple ever reads these posts, or do they just sit around in their ivory tower and feed us what they think we want?

Well a return to the cube then...hey tomorrows Tuesday, so here's hoping :p

As for Apple listening, I get the impression its not Apple but Steve Jobs who has to think an idea has merit, else it don't happen.

[johnnyjibbs]

Interesting point. I have read this thread with interest since I am in the market for a new Mac (I think?) but Apple doesn't market anything right now that floats my boat. I am struggling along with a 5 year old G3 266 D.T. and I would like to upgrade to a computer on which I can run O.S. X but I am disenchanted with the selection. My son just bought a G5 but he is a professional videographer and needs the power. I don't, but since he lives in Hawaii I'd like a machine that supports iSight. I went to Comp U.S.A. and looked at Macs, but the G5 is huge, expensive, and you need an expensive separate display and external speakers. I loath the industrial design of the tutti-frutti iLamp. Supposedly it is compact, but when you factor in the goofy little external speakers it takes up plenty of real estate, too, and as depicted above you have to toss an expensive, beautiful monitor when the box has outlived its utility. I would migrate to Wintel before I would buy an iMac. I like the design of the eMac (I bought my wife one last year and she loves it), especially with the built in speakers, but the CRT is hard on my ageing eyes, and it lacks support for Bluetooth and USB 2.0, and it is pretty darned slow by contemporary standards. It had not occured to me before but a headless iMac might be what the doctor ordered. Say a G5 chip with 64 bit processing running at 2.5 ghz with a superdrive, second optical drive slot, second drive bay, and a couple of PCI slots (hey, I'm talking about a G5, except about a third the size), but I'm not holding my breath. I guess the best I might hope for is a rev. 2 eMac with a G5 chip and Bluetooth and USB 2. An LCD display would be icing, but not likely. I wonder if Apple ever reads these posts, or do they just sit around in their ivory tower and feed us what they think we want?
I'd start praying hard if you want a 2.5GHz iMac. When it moves to G5, I'd expect it to be 1.6-2.0 GHz, single processor. The eMac will always have a CRT - otherwise it would be an iMac. It is designed primarily as a cheap machine for the education market (hence "e"). CRTs will always be cheaper and more sturdy than LCDs. Sounds like you need to buy a G5 tower and put it under your desk.

[PRØBE]

I'd start praying hard if you want a 2.5GHz iMac. When it moves to G5, I'd expect it to be 1.6-2.0 GHz, single processor. The eMac will always have a CRT - otherwise it would be an iMac. It is designed primarily as a cheap machine for the education market (hence "e"). CRTs will always be cheaper and more sturdy than LCDs. Sounds like you need to buy a G5 tower and put it under your desk.




If you are going to hide your mac under a desk, then you might as well buy a decent PC for 1/3 the price. I do however think the G5 towers are ungainly and that Ives allowed the practical problems of the chips heat dissapation overly dictate the case design. Apple has gone from the smooth elegant design to clunky over-sized industrial. If next generation water cooled G5s would emit steam and hiss, the image would be complete.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Apples whole desk top line needs work, The Cheese Grater really turned me off and was ready to buy but the size and styling does nothing for me, Imac I like but its so throw away and with such a dated cpu/graphics its a poor investment, Emac is very practical but it hampered with poor video like Imac and again very dated Cpu. The whole line of desk tops sucks and they need to redo all of them. Not one of these machines have had sales like Imac Crt, Apple is missing the boat and then crippling all its consumer stuff so its no surprise sales have sucked. Every Model has bad flaws except the Dual G5s. Single G5s are in way to big of case, other stuff is almost obsolete. The Hardware needs Help Big time. How many more months will it take Apple? oh yeah they want to sell pods and forgotten computers?

[wdlove]

If you are going to hide your mac under a desk, then you might as well buy a decent PC for 1/3 the price. I do however think the G5 towers are ungainly and that Ives allowed the practical problems of the chips heat dissipation overly dictate the case design. Apple has gone from the smooth elegant design to clunky over-sized industrial. If next generation water cooled G5s would emit steam and hiss, the image would be complete.

I would like to politely disagree. After initial shock of the new G5 tower design was over, many have become fans. I'm one that really likes the design. It has a very strong presence to go with a powerful machine inside.

We just need to be patient. WWDC will be here in 120 days. Apple and Steve want to put out an awesome machine. They do monitor forums, they want to listen to their customers suggestions to fix problems.

[PRØBE]

I would like to politely disagree. After initial shock of the new G5 tower design was over, many have become fans. I'm one that really likes the design. It has a very strong presence to go with a powerful machine inside.

We just need to be patient. WWDC will be here in 120 days. Apple and Steve want to put out an awesome machine. They do monitor forums, they want to listen to their customers suggestions to fix problems.

My views of the "unAppleyness" of the G5 towers was confirmed when they failed to pass the ultimate of tests....The Girlfriend. When faced with a row of 15 PCs and (as usual) just 1 Mac (a PPC G5) I asked my GF to pick out which one she thought was a mac. It took her 3 guesses, followed by a "That thing! It's huge!" She was only impressed when I showed her the "interior design" of the tower which I also think is way more attractive than the outside.

I blame Motorola for the crippling of all the consumer line. Not Apple

[clr900]

Personally I love the look of the G5 Towers both inside and out. It should never be hidden under a desk. I think it has a commanding presence and should be proudly displayed, the huge Apple logo just emphasizes its dominance and style. I can't wait to buy one when the Rev B is released.

[aswitcher]

SNIP

We just need to be patient. WWDC will be here in 120 days. Apple and Steve want to put out an awesome machine. They do monitor forums, they want to listen to their customers suggestions to fix problems.

I hope your right.

[spinko]

...We just need to be patient. WWDC will be here in 120 days. Apple and Steve want to put out an awesome machine.....

add another 120 days for the actual shipments to occur .. :D

[invaLPsion]

I hope your right.

I hope he's wrong. If I have to wait until WWDC I might as well purchase a new 3.4 GHz P4...

[a17inchFuture]

add another 120 days for the actual shipments to occur .. :D

Yeah, so if pbooks rea among the new lineup, it will onyl have been a year since they updated it! Gret business! Especially for a line that is already WAY behind! Much further behind than that crappy moto g4 1.5 processor will mend. They need to get the friggin g5 in the books already. Screw the Xserves, pbooks will outsell them in a heartbeat, and you won't be the laughing stock of your own consumers!

[Dont Hurt Me]

Yeah, so if pbooks rea among the new lineup, it will onyl have been a year since they updated it! Gret business! Especially for a line that is already WAY behind! Much further behind than that crappy moto g4 1.5 processor will mend. They need to get the friggin g5 in the books already. Screw the Xserves, pbooks will outsell them in a heartbeat, and you won't be the laughing stock of your own consumers!Its to late they all ready are getting laughs or rather snores. I love what Probe said about all they need is some steam coming out of the Space Heaters. very funny indeed. I wonder what ever happened to neatgekko, jan,feb,now march? Apple better do some very very big things soon with a lot of products otherwise they will no longer be known as a computer company but simply a sony walkman mp3 maker. Very Hard to recommend any of their hardware except the walkmans. :rolleyes:

[aswitcher]

SNIP
Apple better do some very very big things soon with a lot of products otherwise they will no longer be known as a computer company but simply a sony walkman mp3 maker. Very Hard to recommend any of their hardware except the walkmans. :rolleyes:

They have a couple of nice phones, pdas and cameras...

[Opteron]

We just need to be patient. WWDC will be here in 120 days. Apple and Steve want to put out an awesome machine. They do monitor forums, they want to listen to their customers suggestions to fix problems.

Here's a suggestion, release a new computer. It's been nearly a year and no new releases or major updates.

[Michael Vance]

What I hate is the circus involved in trying to buy an Apple computer. Make a mistake there and you can literally spend twice as much as you would if you had waited another couple of weeks, or get a computer that has only three fourths the power of one that comes out the next week. On top of that every month there is a new rumor about new hardware coming out next month, regardless of all facts. So there's always this rumor floating around about next month, so you wait because you don't want to make a stupid mistake and then when the rumor is proved false, it auto updates to be whatever month follows next. Get caught waiting a couple of months and then when nothing materializes, you start to think that if you buy now, having already waited fruitlessly for a few months, that it will all the more painful if you buy now and then there really is new hardware next month. So you end of waiting a few more months and then nothing still comes so you wait some more and then nothing comes and then you realize that Apple is slow as crap about updating their line of machines and their main market has shifted to focus on selling portable music machines, so you say wtf and just buy the computer you need and then next week the new computers are announced.

With Apple you just can't win. If I didn't need a Mac to run Final Cut Pro I wouldn't think of buying one as they are so underpowered and overpriced.

[aswitcher]

Here's a suggestion, release a new computer. It's been nearly a year and no new releases or major updates.

I think what you meant to say was "release a new computer + for each line, being PMs, PBs, iMs and iBs :D

[spinko]

Michael Vance....


I can identify with that ... I've been on the marktet for a new PB since Apple brought out the last G4 revision. I have even seriously considered buying a Vaio or something similar but so far have resisted. How much longer ? Yet another G4 revision would not (sorry) be an option. In the mean time I'm getting more and more frustrated. I can't understand why Apple forces a frustrated/satisfied/frustrated/satisfied/.. cycle on it's (longstanding) customers.

I wish Steve J. would just stop hyping everybody up before he is absolutely sure that processor X or graphic card Y is deliverable in a reasonable time frame and that _ALL_ potential problems are sorted out. All this from a end-user perspective. Imagine what it's like to be dependant on Apple as a reseller ?

[CalfCanuck]

All this from a end-user perspective. Imagine what it's like to be dependant on Apple as a reseller ?
The frustrations and difficulties of running a high quality Apple dealership may be one reason few of these exist any longer, and Apple chose the path of the "Apple Store.

It's pretty hard to complain about amateurish sales and support among resellers when your only source for hardware is sometimes just as amateurish. Any the lingering rumors of Apples's death during the lean years surely didn't help these independent maintain their professionalism.

While many here maintain that Mac's are just fine with the G4's and that others are just whiners, the huge hole in their product line beween the eMac and the G5 towers is glaring.

And for those who've talked earlier in this thread about making iMacs with a "detachable" LCD, this already exists and doesn't need to be invented anew by Apple. It's called an external monitor! :rolleyes:

[dbauer]

I was just over on the Apple Store website specials page and tried to order a refurb dual 1.8 G5 when I noticed the est. ship time was 30+ business days!
This lends to my theory that if updates are coming on the 23rd and the line up is what the french site dictated that the new processors are all going to be the same 970FX G5's that are in the XServs. This makes sense to me because the faster models with the new 970FX would run cooler than the current ones and the cases wouldn't have to be redesigned for better airflow.

If the specs on the French site are correct, I think the pricing will go as follows:

1.8 dual = $1999
2.2 dual = $2499
2.4 dual = $2999

Although I think that the 1.8 will be a single priced at $1799 just like the 1.6 is now.

-db

Oh and in my previous post in this thread I misspelled "idoit" on purpose, I can't believe you guys misread my intentions on this one.

[FatSweatyChimp]

Oh and in my previous post in this thread I misspelled "idoit" on purpose, I can't believe you guys misread my intentions on this one.


Right....

[spinko]

it makes no sense to complain about fast updates.

Updates should happen whenever there is something worthwhile to update. Even if it is just a new graphics chip or +33MHz bump to processor, if it can be put in without big redesign, it should go in. Likewise, the prices should be more flexible, in computer business it's just insane to hold on to one pricing for six months. Not to mention the fluctuation of the currency market...

This is maybe the biggest thing where Apple's hardware dept. should look at the rest of the PC market and get a clue. What they accomplish with slow updates is that people will not buy till the next revision comes out. Then they get a massive influx of buyers, which swamps the distribution and production, and that means 1) people don't get their hardware when they want it, 2) the distribution and production lines stand idle toward the end of the update cycle. If there was continuous update policy, people could buy what they need at any time and have confidence they're getting a deal that is pretty much as good as the one they will get in a week.

I just had to post this here.. it's from http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=38976

[Namacste]

Maybe just wishful thinking since I need one so badly.

But seriously think of it: a new flat panel display with HDTV capabilities maybe?

It has been a long, long while since Apple updated these mothers.

[PRØBE]

And for those who've talked earlier in this thread about making iMacs with a "detachable" LCD, this already exists and doesn't need to be invented anew by Apple. It's called an external monitor! :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]







This isn't the same thing at all. An LCD display that detatched from the imac base (and could possible be used seperately with PPC and power supply etc) would take up far less desk space than an external monitor, have less cables and maintain all the adjustability that the current imac displays enjoy. Plus the option of buying a headless imac would add more choice to those of limited budget who already owned a monitor. (rolls eyes)

It's not gonna happen anyway.

[GregA]

Updates should happen whenever there is something worthwhile to update. Even if it is just a new graphics chip or +33MHz bump to processor, if it can be put in without big redesign, it should go in. Likewise, the prices should be more flexible, in computer business it's just insane to hold on to one pricing for six months. Not to mention the fluctuation of the currency market...I agree totally.

If a new graphics chip comes out it should be used... Naturally, if your iMacs (for example) get bumped up, they need to still sell their existing (older) iMacs. If Apple was to slowly reduce the price on machines as they aged, then you wouldn't have the problems of no-one buying 6 month old stuff.

In my mind, right now the PowerMac G5s SHOULD be cheaper than they were on release (technology gets cheaper over time). IF apple planned to make it's Dual-2Ghz the low end in April, then the current Dual-2Ghz should be dropping towards the price of the upcoming dual-2Ghz. It'd make life a lot easier, and people wouldn't feel the need to hangout that extra time before purchasing.

[173080]

Argh, any news on when the PowerBooks might be updated?
What do you guys think? One week? Two weeks? A Month? :mad:

[Borg3of5]

Although this may not be a SURE indicator of imminent updates, I will let you all decide reference the following:

I finally decided to put in my order for a Dual 1.8 gHz G5, and when I called the Apple Store, the rep advised me that he would be giving me a $250 discount on my G5. The rep offered this discount without me asking, or me inquiring about any imminent updates on the G5 product-line.

I have never called in an order to Apple, but it would seem to me that an update to the current product-scheme MIGHT be imminent, given the rep's offer to give me a discount on my G5 order.

Quite strange, isn't it? Anyone else get this recently from a phone call to Apple?

[aswitcher]

Although this may not be a SURE indicator of imminent updates, I will let you all decide reference the following:

I finally decided to put in my order for a Dual 1.8 gHz G5, and when I called the Apple Store, the rep advised me that he would be giving me a $250 discount on my G5. The rep offered this discount without me asking, or me inquiring about any imminent updates on the G5 product-line.

I have never called in an order to Apple, but it would seem to me that an update to the current product-scheme MIGHT be imminent, given the rep's offer to give me a discount on my G5 order.

Quite strange, isn't it? Anyone else get this recently from a phone call to Apple?

This looks promising. Could it be the RAM deal? Shame it wasn't on a PB...

[Kimmer]

I'm just curious, being a bit of a newbie to the forum though a long time comuter user of both x86 and RISC platforms, if when references are being made here to computing power, such as in Puppies' post stating:

Lets face it, Apple's hardware is massively overpriced. The PowerMac is the only line that's more or less in the same league performance-wise as current x86 hardware, but it costs at least double the price.

and

EDIT: (Okay, I was basing $300 on what you can get for $1000 with x86-technically the iMac would compare really nicely against cheap x86 hardware if it were priced <$800).

if the consideration regarding the differences in instructions per CPU cycle and therefore efficiency are really being taken into consideration. (Sorry Puppies, yours was the one that stood out the most for the sake of comparisson, esp since you do make some good points. Nothing personal, really!)

Part of my job at work is to compare Mac and PC hardware daily based upon user needs, and while the PCs are winning out on games, and the argument of the graphics card upgradability being limited on iMacs is sad but true, there's a lot more in the stew than that. The two main types of customers I see are "email/web users" and "powerusers". Email/web users tend to be the sort who just want to surf the internet, though powerusers tend to vary from database/homegrown app users to people who want to do high end 3D graphics and video editing. When presented with x86 options for both, I do have to agree that the variety of options are wider on the Windows platform. After all, why spend 1299 for a machine that will just be used for email? Why spend more for a power machine with many great options but perhaps not certain specifics when one can build one that has parts of my picking and chosing? Valid question.

In general:

Comparing x86 and RISC is kinda an awkward thing to do, because when it comes to the two types of processors, we start to get into meeting specific needs. x86 being less expensive for a less powerful chip of a similar spec rating, while RISC costing a bit more for a processor that is capable of so much more. It becomes more of an issue of technology longevity and specific needs. Technology longevity is a big one, though, since someone today could buy a Mac that will outlast a few generations of x86 for most basic computer users in terms of being able to do the same thing that newer chips on the x86 market can do without having to upgrade as many times to stay "current" (which is another relative term). When it comes to power users, the differences grow by leaps and bounds. (I'll not get into hyper detail here since this post is already running long, but do the research, you'll see what I mean.)

iMac:

Other than the ease of use and stability issues of an iMac, many users who just want a basic machine may as well get a Dell or Gateway for some $400. Granted, they're buying a disposable machine, but that's their choice. When you look at the basic features in an iMac ( not to mention the resale/trade-in value of an inexpensive machine as well), the iMac is going to come out the winner here. Someone who invests the extra money in an iMac will have more options when they want to (should they want to) do more with their machine since the iMac is a platform that many people can grow with rather than have to buy a bunch of extra parts for or completely scrap their old machine and get a new one to do. A basic user can take their iMac from simple email to making home movies with no upgrades (other than perhaps RAM) in a heartbeat wheras an x86 machine would require a graphics card upgrade, a video capture card/firewire bus, and much much more RAM to do the same thing when their iMac has all that functionality built in.

And we're not even talking resale value here. What do x86 users do when their machine is out of date? If they're smart, they try to sell it on ebay, though the resale value will be pretty low... so most people tend to sell them for scrap or just junk the machine. With an iMac, you can still get back around 75% of the purchase price if you sell it on ebay, and heck that's an awesome down payment on a new computer if you need to upgrade. Even in the lower product lines such as iBooks and iMacs.

PowerMac:

This is where the larger differences begin to stand out. More instructions per CPU cycle and a more robust FPU for higher end applications like video and 3D will tend to outperform an x86 machine of a higher frequency. To compete with a PowerMac in this arena, one would indeed need to purchase a custom built machine from someone like Alienware. Granted there are more customization options with an Alienware machine than your basic PowerMac, but you're also running an operating system that can't fully take advantage of the hardware, nevermind manages your resources more poorly than OS X's unix core. So when it comes down to it, you're not really comparing oranges and oranges.

Resale value in this product line is even more dramatic when compared to an x86 machine of similar build. Its a commonly stated rule of thumb that x86 hardware drops 1/2 in value the moment it leaves the seller, and for the most part (though not always), this tends to prove itself true. PowerMacs do tend to hold their resale value for much longer (years, in fact) and will go for more in a few years than an x86 machine bought at the same time.

Overall:

So yes, Macs are more expensive sometimes a bit too much so, but there's more to consider than just price when buying a Mac. Moreso, Apple has never claimed to really want to compete with people like Dell or Gateway; they've focused on technology longevity, long term benefits, ease of use, and stability more than a cheap machine for a simple job that will be outdated rather quickly. Building houses out of bricks rather than of sticks, to put it one way. And no, I'll not compare this sort of thing to cars; enough people already have done that. ^^

[Naimfan]

Kimmer--

I thought that was very well said and explained. You did a terrific job of avoiding the more extreme positions on either side--reality usually is, as you point out, somewhere in the middle.....

Best,

Bob

[clr900]

I just wanted to say great post Kimmer, good points and great comparisons.

[Michael Vance]

I'm just curious, being a bit of a newbie to the forum though a long time comuter user of both x86 and RISC platforms, if when references are being made here to computing power, such as in Puppies' post stating:



and



if the consideration regarding the differences in instructions per CPU cycle and therefore efficiency are really being taken into consideration. (Sorry Puppies, yours was the one that stood out the most for the sake of comparisson, esp since you do make some good points. Nothing personal, really!)

Part of my job at work is to compare Mac and PC hardware daily based upon user needs, and while the PCs are winning out on games, and the argument of the graphics card upgradability being limited on iMacs is sad but true, there's a lot more in the stew than that. The two main types of customers I see are "email/web users" and "powerusers". Email/web users tend to be the sort who just want to surf the internet, though powerusers tend to vary from database/homegrown app users to people who want to do high end 3D graphics and video editing. When presented with x86 options for both, I do have to agree that the variety of options are wider on the Windows platform. After all, why spend 1299 for a machine that will just be used for email? Why spend more for a power machine with many great options but perhaps not certain specifics when one can build one that has parts of my picking and chosing? Valid question.

In general:

Comparing x86 and RISC is kinda an awkward thing to do, because when it comes to the two types of processors, we start to get into meeting specific needs. x86 being less expensive for a less powerful chip of a similar spec rating, while RISC costing a bit more for a processor that is capable of so much more. It becomes more of an issue of technology longevity and specific needs. Technology longevity is a big one, though, since someone today could buy a Mac that will outlast a few generations of x86 for most basic computer users in terms of being able to do the same thing that newer chips on the x86 market can do without having to upgrade as many times to stay "current" (which is another relative term). When it comes to power users, the differences grow by leaps and bounds. (I'll not get into hyper detail here since this post is already running long, but do the research, you'll see what I mean.)

iMac:

Other than the ease of use and stability issues of an iMac, many users who just want a basic machine may as well get a Dell or Gateway for some $400. Granted, they're buying a disposable machine, but that's their choice. When you look at the basic features in an iMac ( not to mention the resale/trade-in value of an inexpensive machine as well), the iMac is going to come out the winner here. Someone who invests the extra money in an iMac will have more options when they want to (should they want to) do more with their machine since the iMac is a platform that many people can grow with rather than have to buy a bunch of extra parts for or completely scrap their old machine and get a new one to do. A basic user can take their iMac from simple email to making home movies with no upgrades (other than perhaps RAM) in a heartbeat wheras an x86 machine would require a graphics card upgrade, a video capture card/firewire bus, and much much more RAM to do the same thing when their iMac has all that functionality built in.

And we're not even talking resale value here. What do x86 users do when their machine is out of date? If they're smart, they try to sell it on ebay, though the resale value will be pretty low... so most people tend to sell them for scrap or just junk the machine. With an iMac, you can still get back around 75% of the purchase price if you sell it on ebay, and heck that's an awesome down payment on a new computer if you need to upgrade. Even in the lower product lines such as iBooks and iMacs.

PowerMac:

This is where the larger differences begin to stand out. More instructions per CPU cycle and a more robust FPU for higher end applications like video and 3D will tend to outperform an x86 machine of a higher frequency. To compete with a PowerMac in this arena, one would indeed need to purchase a custom built machine from someone like Alienware. Granted there are more customization options with an Alienware machine than your basic PowerMac, but you're also running an operating system that can't fully take advantage of the hardware, nevermind manages your resources more poorly than OS X's unix core. So when it comes down to it, you're not really comparing oranges and oranges.

Resale value in this product line is even more dramatic when compared to an x86 machine of similar build. Its a commonly stated rule of thumb that x86 hardware drops 1/2 in value the moment it leaves the seller, and for the most part (though not always), this tends to prove itself true. PowerMacs do tend to hold their resale value for much longer (years, in fact) and will go for more in a few years than an x86 machine bought at the same time.

Overall:

So yes, Macs are more expensive sometimes a bit too much so, but there's more to consider than just price when buying a Mac. Moreso, Apple has never claimed to really want to compete with people like Dell or Gateway; they've focused on technology longevity, long term benefits, ease of use, and stability more than a cheap machine for a simple job that will be outdated rather quickly. Building houses out of bricks rather than of sticks, to put it one way. And no, I'll not compare this sort of thing to cars; enough people already have done that. ^^

This is what Mac users always want you to believe but it couldn't be further from the truth. I do motion graphics, 3D, and video for a living and have been doing this extremely processor intensive work for ten years. For the last three or four it's really been no contest about which is the superior machine for these power uses. PC's win hands down for speed, reliability, stability, dependability, networking, and just about everything. Mac's are slower, more crash prone, expecially under heavy loads, require more time troubleshooting, and force you to spend more time in the OS. You'll find yourself getting to know you Mac's inner workings much better than the PC, because guess what, you'll need to. I recently bought my wife a 20" iMac for it's sweet monitor, small footprint, and good looks which go very well in our small apartment. But in terms of processor it's of no use to me at all. Though I have need to do network rendering of long animations using otherwise idle machines, there is absolutely no point whatsoever of even hooking it up for that. I would be pointless the processor is so slow. Aside from that it doesn't network with the other machines PC and older Macs at home using Appletalk, always losing it's connection and requiring a restart.

I'll be getting a G5 to edit with only because Final Cut Pro runs exclusively on Macs, and I am getting the machine for that. In terms of power it's barely as fast as my now more than two year old PC. In terms of stability I've seen the G5's in action and work and know from experience that they are as unstable and crash prone as Macs have always been. They also are very slow to respond to new instructions, sometimes just throwing the spinning ball at you for no apparent reason. Window resizing is again dog slow compared to PC's, and again, the networking sucks.

To say that these machines are for power users is simply not true, and hasn't been true for years. It's just a slow to die myth.

[mahermusic]

This is what Mac users always want you to believe but it couldn't be further from the truth. I do motion graphics, 3D, and video for a living and have been doing this extremely processor intensive work for ten years. For the last three or four it's really been no contest about which is the superior machine for these power uses. PC's win hands down for speed, reliability, stability, dependability, networking, and just about everything. Mac's are slower, more crash prone, expecially under heavy loads, require more time troubleshooting, and force you to spend more time in the OS. You'll find yourself getting to know you Mac's inner workings much better than the PC, because guess what, you'll need to. I recently bought my wife a 20" iMac for it's sweet monitor, small footprint, and good looks which go very well in our small apartment. But in terms of processor it's of no use to me at all. Though I have need to do network rendering of long animations using otherwise idle machines, there is absolutely no point whatsoever of even hooking it up for that. I would be pointless the processor is so slow. Aside from that it doesn't network with the other machines PC and older Macs at home using Appletalk, always losing it's connection and requiring a restart.

I'll be getting a G5 to edit with only because Final Cut Pro runs exclusively on Macs, and I am getting the machine for that. In terms of power it's barely as fast as my now more than two year old PC. In terms of stability I've seen the G5's in action and work and know from experience that they are as unstable and crash prone as Macs have always been. They also are very slow to respond to new instructions, sometimes just throwing the spinning ball at you for no apparent reason. Window resizing is again dog slow compared to PC's, and again, the networking sucks.

To say that these machines are for power users is simply not true, and hasn't been true for years. It's just a slow to die myth.

Your entire post makes absolute sense... if you change "Mac" to "Windows", and "Windows" to "Mac".

(I would've posted earlier, but my OS X crashed once again... Darn It..., I WISH I could do my work on a FAST, SECURE and STABLE set up, such as windows XP, and a windows machine...) AA meetings are Tuesday nights, by the way.

[Michael Vance]

Your entire post makes absolute sense... if you change "Mac" to "Windows", and "Windows" to "Mac".

(I would've posted earlier, but my OS X crashed once again... Darn It..., I WISH I could do my work on a FAST, SECURE and STABLE set up, such as windows XP, and a windows machine...) AA meetings are Tuesday nights, by the way.

I know, it's hard to accept when you don't have any real world experience with the two and have been brainwashed with the Mac propoganda.

[Kimmer]

In response to:

I know, it's hard to accept when you don't have any real world experience with the two and have been brainwashed with the Mac propoganda.

I have to wonder what qualifies as real world experience when one knows nothing of the other person's experiences. Granted, all experiences are unique, as are people, but here is my real world experience so that the forum members in general can learn more about me (being new to these forums). ^^

Many of us have grown up with different computers, and I myself started with Apple Computers and a Colecovision Adam computer. Not that I knew very much about computers in those days, but they were both fun. I did always wonder what I would have to do to get my computer to do the things that my dad's business partner's mac could do, though, but didn't think about it too much until I got into computers later in life.

One of my first jobs was at an electronics store in California where I got to gather lots of feedback from both Mac and Windows machines and eventually opted to go with Linux as an alternative since I couldn't afford a Mac and my Windows machines always had crashes and driver issues.

That's not to say that I didn't hear my share of stories regarding Mac OS problems, but when I did some research and learned more about what RISC and x86 were really about, I determined that until some OS issues were resolved on either platform, I'd go with an OS that worked for me. Ideally, I would have run mklinux, but again I couldn't afford the hardware.

I ended up having to use Windows eventually because of the fact that I could build the machine for myself and learn an OS that would make me marketable in the IT industry at the time. So I ended up on Windows NT for my home machine and ended up learning Desktop Publishing on my friend's Mac. After all, gotta be marketable in the industry.

I found myself in a group of silicon valley computer industry geeks, which led me to learn more about the benefits of each platform and operating system, and ended up determined to end up on a Mac one day. Once they're hardware became standards-based, and their OS went through a little more development.

I puttered through the world of Windows and learned how to 'tweak' it to make it do what I wanted it to do, and got quite good at it, and eventually got a job working at an SGI reseller where I was responsible for integrating Windows and IRIX (SGI's flavour of Unix) together.

I'd read about SGI, and the work they'd been doing in the motion picture industry, as well as high end product design. The more research I did, I found that SGI had been working in the 3D effects realm for a long time, and that we were soon to be entering the broadcast and 3D field ourselves. The customers we encountered were mostly Mac users who wanted to go farther with their film and animation projects, from the home users to the local television stations and sporting events broadcasters. Many of them had said they regretted giving up their Macs, but they needed the stability of Unix and a platform on which higher end apps like Alias|Wavefront's Power Modeler/Animator and Discreet Logic's Flint/Flame could run, as well as supporting things like RAID arrays by Megadrive to replace their AVID systems.

I regretted it too, but I really liked SGIs, save for the security holes in IRIX. But wow, look at the platform otherwise! Awesome graphics, awesome hardware and processing power...isn't this what Macs were supposed to be? Ah well, I found a platform that runs some seriously powerful applications, why not learn it? I'd been experimenting with Lightwave and 3D Studio Max and Photoshop on Windows, why not make the leap to the professional apps? Still have to use Windows for games and for MS Office, but wow, if I can get this sort of a machine for all of these things, why not?

My company ended up working on various digital films, as well as selling to people in that industry, and indeed ended up working with a lot of Mac users using Strata Pro and AVIDs as well as Media 100 NLEs. We went with Megadrive and Discreet Logic for that solution, ourselves, and were really pleased with that partnership. Hence I gained quite a lot of experience in Digital Video Editing, 3D animation and modeling, and even was able to get education on Lightwave, SoftImage, and the Alias|Wavefront suite of applications, including Maya. In fact, we were a part of the launch of Maya when SGI/A|W released Maya 1.0. Let me just say that Siggraph and the Digital Video Expo that year were a blast. Now if only I could get my hands on some of this hardware...

Well sadly it didn't work out that way. SGIs are expensive machines, and in the end they ended up declining in many ways they could have improved. How sad... So I went back to Windows. At least Maya was out on the PC, and I could use Premiere and After Effects to do my video editing, and I could use MS Office when I needed it.

Over the following years, I continued to talk with my friends about wanting to move to Mac if only A) I could afford it and B) if I could run all my apps on it. A common complaint, to be sure, since a lot of people were in that boat. So I bided my time, making the most of Windows and learning how to get it to perform how I wanted to, which ended up meaning working only on an NT level OS from NT 4.0 through Windows 2000 and now XP.

One thing I did learn, however, was to make multiple platforms work together, and eventually I was given a bunch of old Macs to play with from a friend who had gotten them from a former job as a tax write-off. So what did I do? Found versions of apps I wanted to run on them and got them to talk to my Windows machine and my FreeBSD box. So I had a fully functioning heterogeneous network of Macs, Windows PCs, and Unix machines. Not bad, but not an SGI, and certainly not Macs capable of doing what I wanted to given their age.

Soooooo.... I kept my eye on Mac, and then they made an awesome change: the release of a Unix based operating system. Now glorious as this may seem, I wasn't ready to switch until I watched the technology for a little while to see where it ended up. During this time, I ended up working for an advertising agency doing web design, video editing, and tech support all at the same time. And what did I find? A whole slew of Macs, and I ended up working on some current hardware. Very nice indeed... so I got to watch Macs under some stressful work conditions such as making TV commercials and Branding Videos, as well as Publishing catalogs and print ads and other press/pre-press work. Boy did the OS stand up and deliver (something I directly attribute to being based on Unix).

It wasn't until I moved to the midwest that I was able to afford a Mac of my own, so got myself an iBook to learn the platform in depth. I've not turned back since, and now own a G4 (which I payed for with the sale of my iBook which went for almost its retail purchase price) and am saving for a G5. I still have a Windows machine, and I use it for games and extra storage. I do all my video editing, design, and productivity-based work on my Mac, however, and am pleased to say that over the three years I've been Mac primary, it has only crashed three times, whereas my Windows PC has crashed and been reinstalled many times in that time period.

Don't get me wrong; I like Windows XP, and believe that it and Windows 2000 are the best things to happen to the PC in a very long time. I use both machines, I have them networked together and share files between the applications thereon without any problem. In fact, as far as networking is concerned, when we hooked up the Macs and Windows PCs at work for a huge network gaming party, they were the first machines seen by the server and to be setup for all of our games. The PCs were installing service packs and updates and runtime environment APIs for a while as we sat and waited.

So how do I define real world experience with Mac and in the computer industry in general? Working in high-end industries where your hardware and OS will be seriously stress tested and seeing who comes out on top. So far its been SGI and Macs running OS X. Windows came in a close third, though, and I do have to admit that there are a lot of great things that can be done with them. But to configure a Windows PC to do what my Mac can do out of the box costs more than what I paid for my Mac in the first place. A comparison that grows with the introduction of the G5. But that's another issue.

My real world experience in the film, video, broadcast, and SFX industry has shown that RISC technology running a Unix based operating system tends to perform the best, and that recently, Apple has picked up where SGI fell behind and eventually left off. Maya, Final Cut Pro, DVD Studio Pro, and Shake are all industry standards nowadays, and to be honest, FCP and Shake can be likened to the Discreet Logic and Chyron Products I was initially trained on, and feel very familiar. Very professional, very robust, and running on a workstation that doesn't cost near as much as an SGI or Sun, bringing high end tools to end users who can become professionals for half the cost of what it used to be. And the Apple Macintosh PowerMac delivers that. The iMac delivers all that power in a smaller package geared towards home users who need a simple and stable machine, but who may someday venture more into a digital lifestyle whether it be digital photos and home videos, or getting more into the Pro level applications.

Anyway, that's me and my experience, how about y'all and some of yours? ^_^

[spinko]

I've just installed Flash MX 2004 Pro on an old 466 Mhz PC running XP and it feels just as snappy as on a G4 2x1.25 Mhz machine ... that's reality for me although I acknowledge that Macromedia products suck performance wise on Macs....

[mahermusic]

I know, it's hard to accept when you don't have any real world experience with the two and have been brainwashed with the Mac propoganda.

I wish there WAS real world experience with windows... when they build a operating system that doesn't crash, I'll try it. They took out all of the win XP's to replace them with OS X in our District. Performance issues... of course. You shouldn't be suprised... I sure am not.

[Dont Hurt Me]

There is nothing new here, its been this way since the get go, Macs have the best software and the otherside gets the best hardware. We pay a premium for the software and get old limited hardware. Whats changed in 20 years? nothing.

[wdlove]

There is nothing new here, its been this way since the get go, Macs have the best software and the otherside gets the best hardware. We pay a premium for the software and get old limited hardware. Whats changed in 20 years? nothing.

What is old about the Power Mac G5? :confused: We may pay a premium, but it is for newest and most innovative.

[aswitcher]

There is nothing new here, its been this way since the get go, Macs have the best software and the otherside gets the best hardware. We pay a premium for the software and get old limited hardware. Whats changed in 20 years? nothing.

I think that's not entirely true. I think that Macs occasionally cycle to the front of the pack for a while. The G5PM for example is making waves. The form factor of the iMac on two occassions has been attractive, not sure I could say that about the machiens guts. The Powerbook is also nice for the weight and design when it first came out, but now its performance is clearly well behind. It comes and goes.

[Dont Hurt Me]

yeah occasional surge but look at the G5. single cpu's Pcs are beating 2 cpu G5 machines. take your pick of Intel or Amd. so its not like the G5 is whipping the otherside and the truth is only the dual G5s are in the same league. the singles are getting spanked. so here we go again hardware that doesnt match or exceed the otherside. where is that photoshop bench they use to use to show off all that power??? Apple spins as much as a greasy politician. counting Emac and Imac sales as Imac sales is another example of the spin. saying the dual G5 was the fastest PC was more spin and England made them take off those commercials because they were lies. dont even see them here in the U.S now. Macworld just admitted they arent the fastest from what i understand. Lies spin and distortion( reminds me of George Bush ) meanwhile they are still pushing G4s in almost every model??? when is enough enough? G5 was 2 years late to the party and so its back to comparing 2 CPU's to 1 CPU the other guys use. am i missing something? oh yeah our Macs our Great.

[Mav451]

Dont Hurt Me: Haha why are you always so down on Macs? I'm of course presuming you are using a Mac, but i have noticed you still are extremely unhappy with the hardware situation in most of your posts this month :(

Performance matters in areas like games/specific apps/OS. If your bug is in the games arena, the obvious fix is build a gaming PC. OS and specific apps on the other hand are so variable, so i'm not entirely sure where you are getting at.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Dont Hurt Me: Haha why are you always so down on Macs? I'm of course presuming you are using a Mac, but i have noticed you still are extremely unhappy with the hardware situation in most of your posts this month :(

Performance matters in areas like games/specific apps/OS. If your bug is in the games arena, the obvious fix is build a gaming PC. OS and specific apps on the other hand are so variable, so i'm not entirely sure where you are getting at.I have used Macs for years and for years its allways the same crap, poor hardware good software. I have been waiting for a decent Mac for the past year. currently I use a 1.47 G4 geforce3 1 gig mem. sure its fine for web,mail photo's but try playing a new game on it and barely ok. Start comparing benches on the otherside and you soon notice our Hardware sucks. even top of the line $3000 Duals G5s get beat by single CPU machines from AMD and Intel. not only in gaming but in video and other stuff. now when i want something for my Mac I have to search and search and wait and wait. the otherside? hell i walk into Wally world and there is that program or peripheral sitting on the shelf! so here we wait and wait. well one day the Mac version is released and guess what it costs $100 bucks more! on top of that the otherside has by now a newer and improved version. this has been going on for years. in software and new hardware. i think Apple should just sell a PC version of the OS and shutdown the poor hardware division. there i said it.

[173080]

i think Apple should just sell a PC version of the OS and shutdown the poor hardware division. there i said it.

Poor Hardware? Can you tell me the name of ONE Notebook of the same build quality as a PowerBook?

[clr900]

I agree that Apple's hardware is often underpowered but what sets them apart in my opinion is the amazing quality and design. What other company makes such slick looking, aesthetically pleasing computers? Not to mention how well they are engineered, look inside of a PowerMac G5. Amazing.

[aswitcher]

I agree that Apple's hardware is often underpowered but what sets them apart in my opinion is the amazing quality and design. What other company makes such slick looking, aesthetically pleasing computers? Not to mention how well they are engineered, look inside of a PowerMac G5. Amazing.

I am impressed with Apple's power line designs...but yeah, they tend to lag somewhat in terms of performance and features...

[Dont Hurt Me]

I agree that Apple's hardware is often underpowered but what sets them apart in my opinion is the amazing quality and design. What other company makes such slick looking, aesthetically pleasing computers? Not to mention how well they are engineered, look inside of a PowerMac G5. Amazing.It is laid out nice no doubt. time for some real horsepower. a 64 bit OS and the 90 nm process should do it. keep on waiting is all i can say. I wonder how Xserves 90nm are doing at virginia tech and how they compare to the 130 nm powermacs. this should tell us if our waiting is in vane or not.

[volfreak]

Going to the Apple store this AM and trying to access the Powerbook and iMac sections times out. iBook, eMac, Displays and PMac G5 pages load appropriately.

Could there be updates of some type coming? Seems odd just the PB and iMac details won't load. The top image loads but the actual system spec details don't. And the summary on the PB page doesn't include specs on processor, HD, bus or anything. iMac page still does but the PB page lists only general things.

Or is it just me?

Hmmmmm...

[CalfCanuck]

Dont Hurt Me: Haha why are you always so down on Macs? I'm of course presuming you are using a Mac, but i have noticed you still are extremely unhappy with the hardware situation in most of your posts this month
He's got good reason to complain. Apple has some good points, but they also have some significant bad ones as well. One of the things that I also find so frustrating is that even when they come up with a universally recognized bad idea, they won't change it.

Anyone remember the "round mouse" nonsense? The mouse is based around an x / y coordinate system, so it must be used in the proper orientation. But a round mouse gave no user feedback on what that proper orientation would be. Once they came out, the problem became immediately apparent.

Yet Apple shipped CPUs with these crappy mice for years. Why, because they "looked nice"? But form MUST follow function, and this failed the test.

So forcing most users to go out and buy a third party mouse the minute they opened their new computers box is systematic of the weakness of Apple's hardware division.

We see this repeated time and time again - minimal hard drives, too little RAM for the appropriate system, charging as extras things should be included in the base system (Apple charged $100 for a keyboard for years), etc.

Now Apple is finally starting to include some decent software in base models, and that is becoming a strong selling point. DHM acknowledges this. But while their hardware might have improved from the low point in the mid 1990's, it still has a lot of room for improvement, particularly in the heavy lifting category.

[invaLPsion]

Going to the Apple store this AM and trying to access the Powerbook and iMac sections times out. iBook, eMac, Displays and PMac G5 pages load appropriately.

Could there be updates of some type coming? Seems odd just the PB and iMac details won't load. The top image loads but the actual system spec details don't. And the summary on the PB page doesn't include specs on processor, HD, bus or anything. iMac page still does but the PB page lists only general things.

Or is it just me?

Hmmmmm...

This is very strange, with the site going down yesterday and this occuring.

Updates Tuesday?

[Dont Hurt Me]

I just checked here at US site and everything seems ok and i didnt notice nothing new. maybe some routine maintence.

[volfreak]

I just checked here at US site and everything seems ok and i didnt notice nothing new. maybe some routine maintence.

... seems it's back with no changes. oh well.

[paulsecic]

Well I hope you are wrong, as the present design for imacs is very cool, and is somewhat newish if I remember correctly(or have at least had the G4 for little time). Anyways, I just think that the iMacs are selling poorly because people want powerful machines these days, and are simply going for the beautfiul G5 PM's. But I think this desire for technology and the future is veering a little away from iMacs, and more toward the portability and all encompassing abilities of the powerbooks and G5 Pm's. Therefore, I believe they should try to stay on top of the powerbook game as well.

Back five years ago, iMacs were what was needed to get people back into mac, and to get apple out of the woods. At the same time, computer sales were growing faster than ever before with ethernet and internet in general really becoming household things. I think now people are so onboard with the "computer lifestyle", especially for the mac users, that now they just want to get the best of the best when they buy, and that that is why the PMs are doing better lately, and the iMacs not.

Plus, iMacs kinda get people into the "Apple style", which is a refined taste, like escargot (sp?). And once you are into that style, the PB's and G5 PM's are just the pinnacle of that taste.

Okay, so some of that might have been a little out on a limb . . . .

I'm just waiting until they update G5 or a faster Imac. I have Windows 98 on an E-machine and its awfuk, & I know XP ia a shell.

[paulsecic]

My you're feeling a little vitriolic today. I actually think selling to eMac to the consumer market was a smart move considering people were asking for it. The eMac is a great consumer machine for the low end, and while I agree that it confuses the market a little between iMac and eMac it works. And yes Jobs did say that the 'CRT was dead' but I'm glad he was able to eat those words.
Apple needs to improve its quality that's true, but the iBook problem and the G5 PSU affect how many people, around 1%. I've seen two DOA Dells last week, so I'm really not impressed on that front either.
Apple needs to do better, yes, but I think they're doing a generally good job. Hopefully those 'clowns' are really working on shoving the G5 into everything they can so they can go 64-bit fully before MS and simplify their OS development. If the new IBM chips are as efficient as reported even a sloughed down version could work in the iBook (at 1.0Ghz maybe). Now that would kick ass.
MS won't have 64 bit computing until late 2005 - 06. They're rewiting the file system from scracth. They're true boobs!

[Mav451]

Well in the same way, when will OSX go 64-bit? (not talking about memory addressing, but actual software, drivers, etc.)

The G5, Athlon64 series and the FX have made 64-bit cpus mainstream now. If anyone is a historian, how long was the transition from 16 to 32-bit software?

[dudewheresmymac]

Hear hear! When Steve Jobs first brought out the G3 iMac, did it cut into Beige G3 tower sales? Of course it did! Did they worry about it? Maybe -- but it saved the company, you know!

Steve Jobs knows that the consumer line is hurting. Fred Anderson even said it. Steve's not going to sit in his easy chair and twiddle his thumbs. The G5 iMac is coming, you can believe it.


i agree completely imac definately needs a G5.... it is just too underpowered.... also the price needs to be lowered somehow.....

[Game_Hunter]

It seems to me the problem for Apple since the early to mid-nineties as far as their strength in the PC market has been mindshare. Now with the success of iPod and the iTunes Music Store as well as high profile stories about the good in their new OS and the bad in their competition's they are positioned well for a new assault on the market. Problem: they are underpowered. Now don't go throwing a fit. They ARE underpowered and NOT price competitive.

I can go buy a pretty solid Dell right now for 500 USD that will outperform on many tasks the cheapest Mac (eMac) at 300 USD more. That does not look good to a consumer, mindshare be damned. To add insult to injury there is the software availability problem and the generally poor performance of anything other than a Power Mac for heavy gaming. Software availability follows marketshare so in addressing marketshare you are addressing software selection and availability, but games need horsepower and there are no two ways around that.

In my opinion the recapture of market share requires a lot of things to change and to facilitate that change Apple needs to push their hardware into the modern era so that it combined with their ahead of it's time OS can truly make the competition look as shoddy as it is. My revised line-up within six months would look like this.

Entry Level Desktops = Colorful eMacs starting at 599 (Revive the colors fun and match them to the iPod Mini colors)

These should have two RAM slots accepting up to 2 GB of DDR RAM running at 333 Mhz and start at a default 256 MB of RAM or they will seem sluggish. The FSB needs to be upped to 533 Mhz. If they want to jump up more slowly they can do 266 RAM/400 Mhz FSB but they need to up this. Consumers are not as computer dumb as they used to be and they look at these as standard specs along with processor type and speed which brings up the next thing. They should up the G4s in these to at least 1.25 Mhz and within another 6 months 1.42 Mhz. No excuse for a slow system. All of these major performance ups could be achieved at a new price with only a modest margin hit I'm sure. Other things like being Airport ready and the video/sound cards/hard drives require no change. I'd keep the two models idea running. Basically one cheap starter system (599) and the more professional but still reasonable upgraded system with DVD burning and maybe slightly higher default RAM (maybe 899). To meet these prices they could maybe drop the cheaper eMac to a 15" CRT but this is dangerous as many consumers have now become accustomed to 17" monitors which are competitive with 15" monitors in pricing.

Entry Level Laptop = iBook

I think these are fine and color matching should be considered. I'd up the processors to 1 Ghz in the 12" model and 1.25 in the 14's because a sub-Hz computer speed looks slow to consumers used to 2 Ghz and up. They will accept slower speeds in laptops because they're used to it but sub 1 Ghz looks bad. Only other things would be the building in of 256 MB instead of 128, and allowing for larger 1GB RAM modules in the single upgrade slot instead of 512 MB modules. This would make their RAM max 1.256 GB instead of 640 MB making them solid performers and a very good option for laptop customers. The prices should remain the same but the 12 inch model should be dropped to 999 for prestige sake.

Prosumer Desktop = iMac?

While I know there are people who like these I would personally drop them all together in favor of a line of single processor G5s at similar price points. The cost of them doesn't jive with people's ideas about the cost/performance ratio and their design makes upgrading or customizing not possible. For an entry level computer this is fine but for a Prosumer machine it isn't acceptable. There are no PCI slots and these max at 1GB of RAM. You also can't change out the video card. Nasty. These are overpriced eMacs with flat panels and nobody is buying them.

If you want to keep them drop the 15" model and lower the prices on the 17" and 20" by about 300, make Bluetooth default and then make the max RAM 2GB. This wouldn't drive their sales much but it would make them more attractive.

If it were me I would create a new two system line of Macs based on the single processor G5 tower designs using perhaps what was the bottom rung 1.6 Hz G5 as the starter system and then a revived single processor 1.8 G5 as the upper end unit. These are upgradable and seductive to consumers. At the old iMac price points including a 17" Apple flat panel these would be DAMN sexy purchases. (G5 1.6 Ghz + 17" monitor = 1699. Oooo...Aaaaa). My only other suggestion would be to change the name and tower look to distance it from the POWER Macs. You don't want any mistake about where the POWER lies in the line-up and this could have that effect if Apple wasn't careful. Save the Power Mac name for the true power systems. I'd also speed bump them to 1.8 and 2.0 in October or so to get in on those folks who buy a new computer for Christmas as a tax write off before they have to give the money to the government in the next year.

Perhaps the iMac's design could be revived in a few years as a replacement to the eMacs when no one want's to see a CRT or traditional BIG monitor anymore and the manufacturing cost of the flat panels comes down low enough to make sub 1000 USD iMacs realistic. Apple was a little too early on this move and the demand for consumer sales of the eMac have shown this.

Power User Desktop = Power Mac G5

I don't think they still make G4 Power Macs but they should certainly stop. The G5 is the only processor that should exist in anything currently called a Power Mac, period. I'll go one step further and say that they should do away with the single processor systems in the Power Mac line as well and save those for the Prosumer line I mentioned above. They'll need only two models. One which is cheaper and acts as the entry level system and one that is about all out balls to the wall performance bar none (prestige!!!!! It equals mindshare which affects marketshare). I'm talking about a dual 2 Ghz as the entry level and a dual 2.4 Ghz as the pillaging plundering conquerer of 2004. And these should be speed bumped in November to get in on those end of the year shoppers I mentioned above. Push the damn things to the limit. Dual 2.4GHz machines replace the Dual 2s and Dual 3s step it to take over the crown. Only other thing is to not go over 3000 on the default configuration of any of these making them not only unbelievable, but unbelievably priced (prestige!!!!!!!!).

Power User Laptop = PowerBook G4

I know I'm going to take heat for this one but the fact is that these with a few speed bumps are still totally awesome machines. There is no need to move them to G5s this year and doing so could hurt their battery life and prestige. I would wait for revisions to the G5 that improve power consumption and upgrade the processors to G5 next year. For this year just keep uping their speed across the line and maybe improve their video cards a bit.

On more thing and it's not about hardware but about software. Games are a major force in driving consumers to an OS/computer and the Mac is hurting for games by comparison to PC. I think Apple should buy Bungie or a similar quality developer and/or create there own in-house game development team which makes modern cutting edge Mac exclusive games and then perhaps ports them slowly or late or incomplete to Windows PCs. Turn the tables a bit. Give gamers a reason to look at Macs first. This is a standard technique in console wars and should be considered as a valid one in PC marketshare battles. With iLife, Mac exclusive or first games, and a more solid pricing/performance comparison to PC Apple's Macs could really truly make a huge move in the next 5-10 years instead of the slow painful creep that they've been fighting for during the past 5.


Final thing. I think Apple should consider entering the camcorder market with a digital camcorder based on mini-hard drive technology. Apple's already on the cutting edge of the computer side of home movie making for consumers. They should levy that and their iPod prestige to branch into this consumer market as well. Apple has made their computer the best "digital hub" money can buy and branched out of that limited position with the iPod by reaching into the digital music market. Now I think they should reach into the digital video market as well. The iCam could effectively work with Windows easily without giving away iMovie to the Windows crowd but really shine when plugged into the Firewire on a Mac. This is an opportunity Apple should NOT miss out on.

There. I've said my piece. Now when Apple calls I'll gratiously accept their job offer. :rolleyes:

[aswitcher]

Final thing. I think Apple should consider entering the camcorder market with a digital camcorder based on mini-hard drive technology. Apple's already on the cutting edge of the computer side of home movie making for consumers. They should levy that and their iPod prestige to branch into this consumer market as well. Apple has made their computer the best "digital hub" money can buy and branched out of that limited position with the iPod by reaching into the digital music market. Now I think they should reach into the digital video market as well. The iCam could effectively work with Windows easily without giving away iMovie to the Windows crowd but really shine when plugged into the Firewire on a Mac. This is an opportunity Apple should NOT miss out on.

There. I've said my piece. Now when Apple calls I'll gratiously accept their job offer. :rolleyes:

Much of what you have raised has been bought up previously, so you are amoungst other similiar thinkers. I definitely like the Bungie idea, that would be cool.

As for the video camera, I think Apple should stay with what it does well, and would be better off cutting a deal than expanding into a highly competitatve market they have no experience at. Sure, if they buy someone out that would be cool, but they don't have the money for Sony, Canon, Minolta, etc, so maybe a nice deal would work best. Harddisks are a cool idea assuming transfer rates and issues with wanting to replace "tapes"...tapes are cheap and spare hard disks are not.

[Game_Hunter]

As for the video camera, I think Apple should stay with what it does well, and would be better off cutting a deal than expanding into a highly competitatve market they have no experience at. Sure, if they buy someone out that would be cool, but they don't have the money for Sony, Canon, Minolta, etc, so maybe a nice deal would work best. Harddisks are a cool idea assuming transfer rates and issues with wanting to replace "tapes"...tapes are cheap and spare hard disks are not.

I only think it would be good for them because they need to diversify their presense and use consumer products like these as gateways to switching. If I love my iCam and iPod and they work so well I couldn't think of replacing them, the next time I march into CompUSA for a new computer won't I think about Apple? They've done right by me and I know they make computers too. This has worked for Sony. All it takes is a few minutes using one with a positive frame of mind to have them make the switch and most I've met switch to Mac and never go back.

The reasons I particularly like the iCam idea is that they have all the technology to do it with iSight and iPods plus Firewire and their iLife suite (in particular iMovie and iDVD). They could integrate it into a consumer line by making next gen iPods and iCams share interchangable rechargable batteries and/or hard drives. You could open the ass of your iCam and switch out the HD when it's full or keep one extra battery in your bag that would work with either your iCam or your iPod.

It also occurred to me that they could create an iPod+ in 2005 or 2006 at 499 USD which recreates the iPod as a PDA with a Touch Wheel screen saver. Could make for a nice replacement to the Palm line which is losing Mac OS X compatibility soon. Mac Users are going to be left out. The only alternative solution I can think of is an alliance with Nokia or a high end cell phone manufacturer to assure Mac OS X compatibility with the high end Symbian OS/PDA phones as a replacement to the PDAs that many now use.

[aswitcher]

I only think it would be good for them because they need to diversify their presense and use consumer products like these as gateways to switching. If I love my iCam and iPod and they work so well I couldn't think of replacing them, the next time I march into CompUSA for a new computer won't I think about Apple? They've done right by me and I know they make computers too. This has worked for Sony. All it takes is a few minutes using one with a positive frame of mind to have them make the switch and most I've met switch to Mac and never go back.

I see where your coming from but I can't say a video camera is the first new thing Apple should be trying to put out given it would be expensive and be going into a market that has some very large and old manufacturers with excellent cheap products. I doubt Apple could pull off a new spin on things to make its mark.

The reasons I particularly like the iCam idea is that they have all the technology to do it with iSight and iPods plus Firewire and their iLife suite (in particular iMovie and iDVD). They could integrate it into a consumer line by making next gen iPods and iCams share interchangable rechargable batteries and/or hard drives. You could open the ass of your iCam and switch out the HD when it's full or keep one extra battery in your bag that would work with either your iCam or your iPod.

An iSight, no matter how good, doesn't make them ready to take on the big boys with complex megapixel ccds, patented optics, sophisticated sensors etc. Sure, a cable and software patch to use a new geenration iPod with a video screen as a basic recorder for the iSight could be an interesting simple solution video camera, but I remain unconvinced there is a much of a market, especially with the features, memory capacity ect that is available now. Plus you have that market still getting cheaper. An iPod (40Gig) + iSight is already at a price point equal or higher than entry level DV cameras, + you still need to an A/V iPod to make this work if that's what your proposing.

It also occurred to me that they could create an iPod+ in 2005 or 2006 at 499 USD which recreates the iPod as a PDA with a Touch Wheel screen saver. Could make for a nice replacement to the Palm line which is losing Mac OS X compatibility soon. Mac Users are going to be left out. The only alternative solution I can think of is an alliance with Nokia or a high end cell phone manufacturer to assure Mac OS X compatibility with the high end Symbian OS/PDA phones as a replacement to the PDAs that many now use.

Sure, that's been a subject of some considerable debate in the forums. It all came up again when Palm pulled out of supporting Mac (do a search and fine the references). An alliance is a possiblity of course, and I am sure there would be many keen buyers but again is a competative market.

[Game_Hunter]

An iSight, no matter how good, doesn't make them ready to take on the big boys with complex megapixel ccds, patented optics, sophisticated sensors etc. Sure, a cable and software patch to use a new geenration iPod with a video screen as a basic recorder for the iSight could be an interesting simple solution video camera, but I remain unconvinced there is a much of a market, especially with the features, memory capacity ect that is available now. Plus you have that market still getting cheaper. An iPod (40Gig) + iSight is already at a price point equal or higher than entry level DV cameras, + you still need to an A/V iPod to make this work if that's what your proposing.

I subscribe to the opinion that marketing aside much like with a superior species on a closed environment a superior product in a closed market will likely succeed. There are a huge number of factors involved in brining a product like the to market and it wouldn't be easy (perhaps 2005-2006 sometime) but I think it could be a huge success for Apple in the way the iPod has been because the market is in a transitional phase. It's looking for a new medium and a new type of player. Sony is trying t obe there with there little DV camcorders and several are approaching pure digital camcorders but no one has done it exactly right. The first company to do it exactly right is going to hit a goldmine and with Apple's respected name they'd have a solid shot a serious attention without the need for serious marketing muscle. Add that muscle in and they could manage a head start exactly as they did with the iPod. The MP3 market was crowded and contained some big names but no one did it right until the iPod and now it's the player to beat. An iCam could easy march to the head of the class and become the camcorder to beat. If they built it and next gen iPods to use the same removable battery they would be both addressing a majoy complaint against their dominant music player and savings costs on the development on the iCam. Further it would be an accessory to sell for one or the other that could likley bring in constant high margin sales. It could be the item that could put Apple's name back in electronics superstores like Best Buy for good. If you factor in the iPod presence at such stores it might be enough Apple interest to justify floor space for a few Macs. If it was to be done it would have to be done as part of a larger strategy to grow Apple as a company with massive mindshare and cross product marketshare.
I don't think they should loose their focus at all. Computers are their main stay and if that tanks they die, but gradual branching out and attempts at new markets wouldn't hurt them at all. It's done wonders for Gateway despite how poorly they handled it and can help make a tech company more resiliant in rough times.

Sure, that's been a subject of some considerable debate in the forums. It all came up again when Palm pulled out of supporting Mac (do a search and fine the references). An alliance is a possiblity of course, and I am sure there would be many keen buyers but again is a competative market.

This was just an idea. Personally I would go for the mentioned alliances on these because of the amount of time and resources that would have to be devoted to this to do it properly. A half assed attmept would only hurt them financially and publicity-wise. It's also not a good idea to mess with your cash cow unless you are improving it. Changing what it is might alienate your customer base.

[rdowns]

It seems to me the problem for Apple since the early to mid-nineties as far as their strength in the PC market has been mindshare. Now with the success of iPod and the iTunes Music Store as well as high profile stories about the good in their new OS and the bad in their competition's they are positioned well for a new assault on the market. Problem: they are underpowered. Now don't go throwing a fit. They ARE underpowered and NOT price competitive.

No fits here. With the success of the iPod and marketing deals with HP, Pepsi and AOL, Apple is in its best positions ever to win new customers. Sadly, their lineup is ill equipped to exploit it.


Entry Level Desktops = Colorful eMacs starting at 599 (Revive the colors fun and match them to the iPod Mini colors)

These should have two RAM slots accepting up to 2 GB of DDR RAM running at 333 Mhz and start at a default 256 MB of RAM or they will seem sluggish. The FSB needs to be upped to 533 Mhz. If they want to jump up more slowly they can do 266 RAM/400 Mhz FSB but they need to up this. Consumers are not as computer dumb as they used to be and they look at these as standard specs along with processor type and speed which brings up the next thing. They should up the G4s in these to at least 1.25 Mhz and within another 6 months 1.42 Mhz. No excuse for a slow system. All of these major performance ups could be achieved at a new price with only a modest margin hit I'm sure. Other things like being Airport ready and the video/sound cards/hard drives require no change. I'd keep the two models idea running. Basically one cheap starter system (599) and the more professional but still reasonable upgraded system with DVD burning and maybe slightly higher default RAM (maybe 899). To meet these prices they could maybe drop the cheaper eMac to a 15" CRT but this is dangerous as many consumers have now become accustomed to 17" monitors which are competitive with 15" monitors in pricing.

Am I undertanding you correctly here? G4s still in the eMac? If so, no FSB faster than 167 MHz. Motorola has been stalled there for years. If we're lucky, the new 1.5 GHz g$ they recently announced will have a faster FSB, maybe 200 MHz.

I like the idea of colors but 5 is too many. As I recall, that hurt them bad with the original iMac. Check that, their inane requirement to have to buy them in sets killed them. Typical Apple. 2 or 3 colors would be good, just make them in the top 2 or 3 colors of the iPod mini.

Prosumer Desktop = iMac?

While I know there are people who like these I would personally drop them all together in favor of a line of single processor G5s at similar price points. The cost of them doesn't jive with people's ideas about the cost/performance ratio and their design makes upgrading or customizing not possible. For an entry level computer this is fine but for a Prosumer machine it isn't acceptable. There are no PCI slots and these max at 1GB of RAM. You also can't change out the video card. Nasty. These are overpriced eMacs with flat panels and nobody is buying them.

If you want to keep them drop the 15" model and lower the prices on the 17" and 20" by about 300, make Bluetooth default and then make the max RAM 2GB. This wouldn't drive their sales much but it would make them more attractive.

If it were me I would create a new two system line of Macs based on the single processor G5 tower designs using perhaps what was the bottom rung 1.6 Hz G5 as the starter system and then a revived single processor 1.8 G5 as the upper end unit. These are upgradable and seductive to consumers. At the old iMac price points including a 17" Apple flat panel these would be DAMN sexy purchases. (G5 1.6 Ghz + 17" monitor = 1699. Oooo...Aaaaa). My only other suggestion would be to change the name and tower look to distance it from the POWER Macs. You don't want any mistake about where the POWER lies in the line-up and this could have that effect if Apple wasn't careful. Save the Power Mac name for the true power systems. I'd also speed bump them to 1.8 and 2.0 in October or so to get in on those folks who buy a new computer for Christmas as a tax write off before they have to give the money to the government in the next year.

Perhaps the iMac's design could be revived in a few years as a replacement to the eMacs when no one want's to see a CRT or traditional BIG monitor anymore and the manufacturing cost of the flat panels comes down low enough to make sub 1000 USD iMacs realistic. Apple was a little too early on this move and the demand for consumer sales of the eMac have shown this.

No doubt, G5s are needed here yesterday. Dual processors in the PM and single in the iMac. I love the current iMac form factor but maybe it is just too costly for Apple to sell them competitively. I would love a small tower (no more than half the current PM size, smaller if possible) that I could upgrade the video card and maybe even a PCI slot. Ship the damn thing with 512MB and leave me 2 slots open (need RAM in pairs for a G5).

Does Apple really want to attract switchers? I think many people consider Macs but then they think about transferiing all their files, will peripherals work etc. Put a program in place to help these people. Offer it through Apple Stores, CompUSA and use it to attract new resellers. For a small fee ($100?), bring in your old PC and you'll be shown how to move files, obtain drivers for your existing peripherals (if needed), basic OS training and select software. The fee would boost margins for resellers and give them the opportunity to sell additional hardware and software. Would probably be a bitch to run, but would probably move people to switch.

All those nice QuickTime training movies Apple has for Panther, iPhoto, iMovie etc. on .Mac, put them on the damn hard drives of all new Macs. Market them as free training and shout from the rooftops how great the iApps are. These apps solve problems people buy computers for.

Here's an example, my niece was in a play last week and about 11 family members attended. Most had a digital cameras and took pictures. I took 29 pictures. Within 90 minutes of returning home, I had them edited and posted online at my .Mac site. Sent out an email and the replies flooded in. How did you do that so fast? How do I do that with my PC? Put that in a TV ad, that would sell Macs.


Final thing. I think Apple should consider entering the camcorder market with a digital camcorder based on mini-hard drive technology. Apple's already on the cutting edge of the computer side of home movie making for consumers. They should levy that and their iPod prestige to branch into this consumer market as well. Apple has made their computer the best "digital hub" money can buy and branched out of that limited position with the iPod by reaching into the digital music market. Now I think they should reach into the digital video market as well. The iCam could effectively work with Windows easily without giving away iMovie to the Windows crowd but really shine when plugged into the Firewire on a Mac. This is an opportunity Apple should NOT miss out on.

There. I've said my piece. Now when Apple calls I'll gratiously accept their job offer. :rolleyes:

I disagree. Unless Apple can add something that current camcorder vendors don't do, then it makes little sense. It is far from Apple's core competency and would likely fail. They don't have the technology and would have to license it which would lead to an overpriced offering. Partner with Sony or one of the other players to make a more Mac friendly camera. Sell it with special pricing or rebates.

Don't hold your breath waiting for Apple's call. They are interested in head up your ass marketers, those who create inane schemes to sell older technolgy and protect their higher end units. Apparently, they would rather sell small amounts of high end, high margin units than move millions at lower margins.

[Dont Hurt Me]

How you doing Rdowns? thanks again for that article hope to see it soon, I agree with almost everything you said about Apple not being able to exploit its music success even more. Emac is still being held back( crippled with a 133 bus) since Imac was getting beat by Emac when both were at 133 apple gave it a .25 more cpu with the 33mhz more bus. still didnt do much from benches i have seen. we know people are running Emacs at 1.33 ghz with the stock cpu so it is just more of the crippling by Apple.
Having colors for Imac crt was good for consumers but forcing a retailer to buy the machine in bundled colors was more of Apple trying to figure out how to screw up a good thing. They should have just let market decide on the colors and produce them in larger qtys. Allways seem to manage 2 steps forward and 1 step back in some fashion.
This is one of the longest slumps I can remember from Apple. Emac,Imac,Powerbook and Powermac every machine needing updates and overdue.
Very good idea on making it easy to switch Pc users to mac by showing how to transfer all that stuff. Still have to have hardware to get people to switch. people arent going to switch to a new mac that is as fast as a 2+ year old PC. at least not many. Apple just has to stop the crippling game. Emac is a Great example of what it could be and how its held back for Imac.

[rdowns]

How you doing Rdowns? thanks again for that article hope to see it soon, I agree with almost everything you said about Apple not being able to exploit its music success even more. Emac is still being held back( crippled with a 133 bus) since Imac was getting beat by Emac when both were at 133 apple gave it a .25 more cpu with the 33mhz more bus. still didnt do much from benches i have seen. we know people are running Emacs at 1.33 ghz with the stock cpu so it is just more of the crippling by Apple.
Having colors for Imac crt was good for consumers but forcing a retailer to buy the machine in bundled colors was more of Apple trying to figure out how to screw up a good thing. They should have just let market decide on the colors and produce them in larger qtys. Allways seem to manage 2 steps forward and 1 step back in some fashion.
This is one of the longest slumps I can remember from Apple. Emac,Imac,Powerbook and Powermac every machine needing updates and overdue.
Very good idea on making it easy to switch Pc users to mac by showing how to transfer all that stuff. Still have to have hardware to get people to switch. people arent going to switch to a new mac that is as fast as a 2+ year old PC. at least not many. Apple just has to stop the crippling game. Emac is a Great example of what it could be and how its held back for Imac.

The more I think about offering a switch service (iSwitch?), the more I like it.

Apple has got to stop crippling lines to protect others. You can't force buyers to buy the next line up in the matrix by crippling the one they really want to buy. This notion of pro machines and not having the same or similar technology in other lines is just stupid. Let the market decide.

I mailed the article on Friday.

[Dont Hurt Me]

Cool Rdowns. Did you read that article? Did alienware give the Mac a whooping? I think Apple is so worried of one product taking away from another that they all end up as less then they can be therefore hurting all sales. Anywhere else the market decides winners and loosers but apple wants all products to be winners but with the philisophy they cant be. How many times do people wrestle with Imac vs Emac or Imac vs Powermac or Powerbook vs ibook. the better Pc makers let you get just what you want and hence they own 95% of the market.

[aswitcher]

I subscribe to the opinion that marketing aside much like with a superior species on a closed environment a superior product in a closed market will likely succeed. There are a huge number of factors involved in brining a product like the to market and it wouldn't be easy (perhaps 2005-2006 sometime) but I think it could be a huge success for Apple in the way the iPod has been because the market is in a transitional phase. It's looking for a new medium and a new type of player. Sony is trying t obe there with there little DV camcorders and several are approaching pure digital camcorders but no one has done it exactly right. The first company to do it exactly right is going to hit a goldmine and with Apple's respected name they'd have a solid shot a serious attention without the need for serious marketing muscle.

That's probably ture. A little DV camera with a decent harddrive (60/80gig?) using mpeg4, with at least a 3x optical zoom, sterio audio (with mic option), 1-3 megapixel still capacity (whilst recording video), stablised optics (becoming standard), light mount for indoor shooting (a significant problem), firewire port, decent battery life, nice little high pixel screen, maybe a CF1 card slot...

Add that muscle in and they could manage a head start exactly as they did with the iPod. The MP3 market was crowded and contained some big names but no one did it right until the iPod and now it's the player to beat. An iCam could easy march to the head of the class and become the camcorder to beat. If they built it and next gen iPods to use the same removable battery they would be both addressing a majoy complaint against their dominant music player and savings costs on the development on the iCam. Further it would be an accessory to sell for one or the other that could likley bring in constant high margin sales. It could be the item that could put Apple's name back in electronics superstores like Best Buy for good. If you factor in the iPod presence at such stores it might be enough Apple interest to justify floor space for a few Macs. If it was to be done it would have to be done as part of a larger strategy to grow Apple as a company with massive mindshare and cross product marketshare.

SNIP


But Apple doesn't do much of that stuff except the harddrive now, the iSight not really being more than it is, a simple fixed lense. The iPod is soemthign that just required them to build a different sort of simple computer ands work hard on the software and Hollywood to make it work. A digital video camera is an entirely new market which is already highly competative, requiring several signifcant areas of expertise specifically optics and CCD sensors. If they got it just right, and the PC/Mac compatability, price point etc were on the mark, then they might get a profitable product but it would not be done cheaply and would require signficant resources to bring out a new camera every 6-12 months to stay