20 inch iMac Released

[Ja Di ksw]

As other people have pointed out, it doesn't matter if Apple puts in some great video card or whatever for gamers, because the games are not there. Games are very rarely made just for the mac. Games are fairly rarely made for mac and windows at the same time. Games are usually made for windows, and then converted over to macs later. No hardcore gamer, which is the person who is going to care about the top-end hardware, is going to get a computer that has to wait months and months to MAYBE get a game their friend has had for a long time on their windows machine.

Ok, maybe not all hardcore gamers, but the number is certainly small enough that Apple shouldn't go into this, for financial reasons.

 

[~Shard~]

Originally posted by pgwalsh
~Shard~ < No need to get personal about grammar errors.. Typo's an spelling mistakes happen in forums...

Fair enough, I apologize - was just letting off some steam there... I feel much better now!

 

[vrapan]

As I said before I do not believe it is a matter of Apple devoting resources to create a gamers machine. A 1.6GHz G5 with a better graphics card and some extra RAM will be just fine as a gaming machine. Why should a gamer though devote a big sum of money on a platform with at best uncertain commitment from major game developing houses. As far as I know only Blizzard develops games simultaneously for both platforms. The rest develope them much later, do not develope them at all and rarely announce their intentions.

So the Mac is not a gamer's platform not so much because Apple does not have the hardware (although not having the hardware might be one of the reasons many developers abandoned the platform) but because of uncertainty from developers.

The problem I see with the consumer line of Apple is that it makes no effort to ensure playability of the current games. iMac is not and should not be geared towards gamers. What it should be though is a machine that can play most of the games that have been released prior to it. A better graphics card and a bit more memory in the basic configuration should see to that. And given that the technology is there it means that Apple has nothing more to do other than using a better GPU. No special attention to the gamer just a more capable machine especially at the 2200+tax price point...

 

[eyrii69]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
well i got a powermac! anyways apple just needs to give the people what they want? did i want a powermac ? no. why did i buy one? they cripple the imac so bad in performance & expansion. powermac is way more then i needed but what are you going to do? the imac is fantastic but they make sure they have one of its arms tied behind its back if you know what i mean, lackluster video or no l3 or whatever! stop crippling the dam thing apple! why not a full version of something in the imac?? how about a real video card? give the people what they want and stop acting like big brother from your 1984 add Apple!

Let us hope Apple makes an iGame machine for you gamers, with 4x3GHz G5s, fluidchilled, decent graphics and a VGA port to the display so you can use your existing one. Oh, and of course a couple of PCI-X slots, and USB2, Firewire800, espresso-output,

And maybe it will be possible to read email on it, browse the web here on MacRumors or do wordprocessing.

 

[pgwalsh]

Ok... my apologies to all you iMac fans... Clearly I'm misguided in thinking you would want more performance in an iMac... My bad...

As it is a consumer targeted machine I thought for the price it could contain some better components. However, for the suggested use in these forums I guess it would compare to a Dell at $500 to $799 Dell. Of course it looks way better and has OS X.

See y'all avoided the Radeon 9600 and G5 question... As you all secretly don't want it in an iMac.. or do you? That would be killer wouldn't it... oh wait no.. it wouldn't... Blah!

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

if imac was a real consumer machine it would have those things consumers want and be able to do those things consumers like to do such as gaming. it doesnt have a pci slot, it forces a monitor on you, no video card only chip, not good for gaming, who the heck is it for ? oh yeah the artsy types that want to browse the iphoto collection? meanwhile how many millions of pc's are sold? i have said it before they cripple the heck out of imac, and want you to buy a 3 thousand dollar pro machine. and so 90% of the market runs out and buys a pc. Apple scratches it head and says we are happy we have gone from3.5 to 4% marketshare.

 

[the_mole1314]

By all means, the iMac isn't what switchers buy, they either buy a G5, iBook, or eMac.

 

[DGFan]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
if imac was a real consumer machine it would have those things consumers want and be able to do those things consumers like to do such as gaming. it doesnt have a pci slot, it forces a monitor on you, no video card only chip, not good for gaming, who the heck is it for ? oh yeah the artsy types that want to browse the iphoto collection? meanwhile how many millions of pc's are sold? i have said it before they cripple the heck out of imac, and want you to buy a 3 thousand dollar pro machine. and so 90% of the market runs out and buys a pc. Apple scratches it head and says we are happy we have gone from3.5 to 4% marketshare.

Most consumers don't play games though. Less than 10% of the people I know who own computers play games on them.

They DO surf the web, read email, type up documents, store digital photos, etc....

(directed to the board in general and not just you)
I just don't understand why so many people do not know what the real world is like. Do you all get outside? Do you have real friends? Real friends who aren't "gamers"? Do you have a girlfriend?

 

[kangaroo]

What's all the heat about?

The iMac is an expensive consumer machine designed to <capably> cover the basics (email, surfing, word processing, digitial media, etc) AND appeal to people's sense of luxury. Obviously, there's a market for it and according to Apple's latest financial report, a bigger market than (most people here would have thought) and Apple's other computer offerings. Just because YOU (put the shoe on if it fits) wouldn't buy it or no one in your orbit would buy it doesn't mean there isn't a market for it. A person or family with disposable income, who could care less about a video card specification, or build-to-order options or modularity, who wants a simple, single component computing solution is going to be interested in a 'headed' iMac. It's a no brainer--and that's the point.

 

[jxyama]

i thought i wouldn't come back, but it's kind of tempting.

pgwalsh and DHM:

do you have any experience in business? marketing?

it's not as easy as "ok, here's g5 and the best videocard, we'll just charge the same price as before because we know that's what consumers want."

apple is a business, it's not a charity. they cannot just put in what "consumers want" (your claim, i don't believe it) and charge less for them. can they afford to put them in and charge less? probably, because apple has pretty a healthy margin. BUT WHY? to make gamers happy? to feel "good"? geez, if i were a shareholder in apple, i'd be mad at anyone who made that kind of a dumb headed decision BLINDLY.

if you eat into margins, you have to make it up elsewhere. unless you have solid analysis claiming that the decreased margins can be made up by increases in sales (from gamers, if what you say is right), then such a decision would be considered. otherwise, no. i'm sure apple considered it and decided against it.

you guys aren't really suggesting/asking for a better iMac. to me, it just sounds like you guys are complaining endlessly how useless it is and how expensive it is. it's not a very constructive argument to say, make it cheaper and make it better. OF COURSE it would be better if everything was better and cheaper. there's a reason it isn't.

tell me how iMacs can be made better (for gamers) without:
* eating into other Mac sales
* significantly decreasing the margins

then we'll talk. until then, all you are suggesting is apple blindly lower prices and raise specs.

Don't Hurt Me: "if imac was a real consumer machine it would have those things consumers want and be able to do those things consumers like to do such as gaming."

- you don't represent the consumers

and

-average consumer will not be obsessed about gaming performance to the same degree you are

by the way, those $500 to $800 dells you are talking about will have shared RAM, CD-ROM, CRT and/or celeron. those compare better with eMacs, not iMacs.

 

[1macker1]

If you cant afford it, then it's not for you.

 

[Ensoniq]

I'm sure it's all been said before, but Apple f'd up on the pricing. The specs, understandable when they have PowerBooks and G5s to sell. Pricing...way off.

Should have been:

15" - $999
17" - $1499
20" - $1999 (w/120 GB HD/512 MB RAM)

The 15" at $999 would have given potential eMac buyers an option for more class for a slightly higher price and slightly smaller screen. Good trade-off for some.

The 17" at $1499 would have only been $200 more than they are selling the 15" for right now. Excellent buy and price/performance combo.

The 20" at $1999 with more HD, more RAM, AND the awesome screen for only $200 more than the previous 17" sold for would have flown off the shelves, no questions asked.

I have no doubt that Apple will sell plenty of the 20" iMac as is. But if they had reworked the entire lineup as above, they could have seen their best holiday iMac sales ever.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

im sorry i just keep forgetting you are not supposed to game on the mac, that consumers are not gamers, and if you want to game you should be on a pc. thats it my UT2K3, RTCW, Nascar,Medal of Honor and all those others are going out the window! and Halo coming out for mac next month! forget it! and doom3 next year no way! this is a mac after all i shouldnt be having fun on my computer let alone a consumer machine. i should take what apple feeds me and be happy

 

[Nicky G]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
im sorry but if you expect me to think you are running your games at 1440 x 900 and they are even remotely smooth on a 4mx then you must think iam a newbie.

No... People think you're a newbie because you come off like a 16-year-old pimply-faced geek who does not understand marketing, business, margins, niches, or the tech industry as a whole. Remember that Apple is one of the 2 big PC makers actually MAKING money these days. Sheesh. As someone said... Kids!

 

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by jxyama
i thought i wouldn't come back, but it's kind of tempting.

pgwalsh and DHM:

do you have any experience in business? marketing?

No marketing experience, but plenty of business experience... Interesting way to start your post, but irrelevant...

You didn't answer my question because you know I'm right... You want a G5 and a radeon 9600 in your iMac... you know you do... Everyone does.. If they don't they're FOS. Apple will do it eventually..
I'd just like to see it sooner than later. I do recall in many forums that the G5 is cheaper to produce then the G4.. However, I'm sure there's other hurdles to get that into the iMac... heat etc.

 

[hughdogg]

Originally posted by Lancetx
IMO, the eMac is the real switcher machine, not the iMac, at least as it stands right now and the eMac is certainly a much better value.

That's the machine I'm trying to convince my mother-in-law to switch to...she is the classic consumer who wants e-mail, web, budget software on her computer, doesn't own a digital camera, yet, but is starting to think about it..and dosen't want to spend more the $700-800 dollars - hence the eMac..and she is the prototypical consumer that Apple should be targeting. Get them in with the eMac, get them used to the ease of use, the "I don't have to think about how I'm going to make it work, it just does" of the Mac ownership experience, and then sell them services, like .Mac, photo developing, and ITMS, etc. Itis a very real, very underserved market by the PC makers, and it could be a real cash cow that could help support all of the wonderful R&D that benefits the rest of us.

Cheers,
hughdogg

 

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by Nicky G
No... People think you're a newbie because you come off like a 16-year-old pimply-faced geek

WTF that's inappropriate.. You don't have anything better to say so you make a personal attack..

If he and I are pressing your buttons laught it off, but the personal attacks are dumb.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

Originally posted by pgwalsh
No marketing experience, but plenty of business experience... Interesting way to start your post, but irrelevant...

You didn't answer my question because you know I'm right... You want a G5 and a radeon 9600 in your iMac... you know you do... Everyone does.. If they don't they're FOS. Apple will do it eventually..
I'd just like to see it sooner than later. I do recall in many forums that the G5 is cheaper to produce then the G4.. However, I'm sure there's other hurdles to get that into the iMac... heat etc.

nice post and when they do ill get rid of this old powermac

 

[1macker1]

I dont want a G5 or a 9600 pro card (unless it's in a powerbook), it's sorta like overkill for some people. But i could use the 20" screen.

 

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by 1macker1
I dont want a G5 or a 9600 pro card (unless it's in a powerbook), it's sorta like overkill for some people. But i could use the 20" screen.

Coming from the man/woman that just said "if you can't afford it then it's not for you". ha ha ha

We both know your FOS

 

[jxyama]

Originally posted by pgwalsh
You didn't answer my question because you know I'm right... You want a G5 and a radeon 9600 in your iMac... you know you do... Everyone does.. If they don't they're FOS. Apple will do it eventually..
I'd just like to see it sooner than later. I do recall in many forums that the G5 is cheaper to produce then the G4.. However, I'm sure there's other hurdles to get that into the iMac... heat etc.

apple will put g5 and 9600 when PM is sufficiently advanced beyond those. of course it will happen eventually. g5 being cheaper to produce is completely irrelevant. if you priced g5 lower than g4, then who would buy the g4? if you put in PM capabilities into iMac, who would buy the PM?

did i answer your questions? it's called product differentiation.

apple's marketing/business strategy, coupled with the technologies available, is at a point where if you want g5 and 9600, you buy a PM. done, simple.

DHM: grow up, please. i never said consumers aren't supposed to play games. i said they don't care about gaming specs to the degree you do.

 

[jettredmont]

Originally posted by pgwalsh
See y'all avoided the Radeon 9600 and G5 question... As you all secretly don't want it in an iMac.. or do you? That would be killer wouldn't it... oh wait no.. it wouldn't... Blah!

Didn't avoid the question, just have a life and can't spend every minute monitorring these boards!

I'd love, absolutely love, a G5 in an iMac. I'd also love a Radeon 9800 in there, just so that when OS X 10.5-Snow Leopard changes the Finder to a first-person shooter with your files as the evil henchmen I'll be ready. I certainly wouldn't not buy an iMac with either of these features.

However, all wish-upon-a-star aside, reality is that those components cost money and generate heat, which costs even more money to design around/evacuate from the iMac housing. So, the question is not, "Do you want X and Y in your iMac?" but "Would you pay $Z*100 more to get X and Y in your iMac?"

Personally, as I'm a developer and need the PowerMac form factor for day-to-day work, I've got all that on my G5 and so, no, I wouldn't pay extra for it in an iMac. Moreover, I don't have more than an hour or so a month to spend on any computer games, so the high-end graphics chips are generally a waste (until a *lot* more is done with QE).

For my parents, my wife's parents, and my sister (all future iMac owners, if I have my way with them ...), the answer is mixed. My sister and parents would pay a few hundred more for a G5, but only if there was a noticable performance gain (32 vs 64 bits just doesn't come into play for them and likely won't be a factor in the memory capacity of iMacs for a year or two). My mother in law would be ecstatic with a 20" iMac as it stands today. My sister doesn't play games either, and wouldn't know what to do with a higher-end video card (her PC today has an old TNT card which she had bought second hand when the one before that fizzled on her I believe). My parents would definitely go for the perceived power of the G5, but would also not pay any extra for a higher-end video card.

So, for me and those I know, I think that the video card premium (chip + design issues) would have to be well under $100 and the G5 premium probably under around $200 for them to go for it.

 

[TorbX]

Originally posted by Dont Hurt Me
im sorry i just keep forgetting you are not supposed to game on the mac, that consumers are not gamers, and if you want to game you should be on a pc. thats it my UT2K3, RTCW, Nascar,Medal of Honor and all those others are going out the window! and Halo coming out for mac next month! forget it! and doom3 next year no way! this is a mac after all i shouldnt be having fun on my computer let alone a consumer machine. i should take what apple feeds me and be happy

At some degree I agree with this guy. To some degree, it'd me nice to be ABLE to run a game, you know...

 

[pgwalsh]

Originally posted by jxyama
apple will put g5 and 9600 when PM is sufficiently advanced beyond those. of course it will happen eventually. g5 being cheaper to produce is completely irrelevant. if you priced g5 lower than g4, then who would buy the g4? if you put in PM capabilities into iMac, who would buy the PM?

did i answer your questions? it's called product differentiation.

No you did not... however, you'd make a great politician.

The G5 being cheaper to produce is not irrelevant when you're concerned about the bottom line.. It's also not irrelevant when you take into consider marketing and consumer satisfaction...

 

[aethier]

Originally posted by biscuit
It is a shame they didn't put a faster proc in there, since that would protect one's investment for longer. biscuit

the thing you are all forgetting (well maybe someone wrote a comment about this before me, after reading this post i didn;t bother reading the rest before posting) that they cannot have the imac faster then the powerbook, given that the powerbook is part of the pro line up. the 17, and 20 inch imacs already match the clock speed of the 15 inch powerbooks.

aethier