Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
$499 Headless iMac?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not a loss leader at all
I think Apple can make some decent money off this box.
Consider:
1. Logic board:
Variant of the current iBook board, less the circuits needed to drive the LCD but with DVI/VGA outputs (probably just DVI with an adapter)
Very similar architecture to the iBook board, but more room for layout, so "development" consisted of figuring out how to produce it at the cheapest possible price.
Cost: $150?
2. Hard drive: Does Apple even pay $40 for 80GB drives?
3. Optical: same combo drive as the iMac G5. Cost: $40?
4. RAM: Cheapest 256MB DDR RAM (same specs as the current eMac), $30?
(one open slot)
5. Case plastics, power supply, keyboard/mouse, packaging. $80?
Total cost to Apple: $350?
Nice margin for a "low-end" box.
I think Apple can make some decent money off this box.
Consider:
1. Logic board:
Variant of the current iBook board, less the circuits needed to drive the LCD but with DVI/VGA outputs (probably just DVI with an adapter)
Very similar architecture to the iBook board, but more room for layout, so "development" consisted of figuring out how to produce it at the cheapest possible price.
Cost: $150?
2. Hard drive: Does Apple even pay $40 for 80GB drives?
3. Optical: same combo drive as the iMac G5. Cost: $40?
4. RAM: Cheapest 256MB DDR RAM (same specs as the current eMac), $30?
(one open slot)
5. Case plastics, power supply, keyboard/mouse, packaging. $80?
Total cost to Apple: $350?
Nice margin for a "low-end" box.
The idea of a $499 iMac is good, and I bet it will offer memory upgrades. Here is what I'd like to see in the future:
1) SVideo/Optical In/Out jacks. OR a FireWire external adapter with these to work with...
2) Apple Tivo-Like software. This software should be DirecTV, DishNetwork, Digital Cable friendly. It would be great to take this new headless iMac, and use with a basic DirecTV receiver, and have all of the benefits of TiVo, but Apple style... Less the $5.00 monthly fee.
3) Apple Remote Control (optional accessory). Would be a great compliment to AirTunes. Control tunes from your TV regardless of where music is hosted.
Personally, I think a so-called "Media Center Mac" is pointless. I don't think that the masses want to surf the net from their couch. It's just not the same. However, TiVo functionality, iTunes and iMovie integration seems natural.
I doubt Apple would release a $499 computer without considering offering a low-cost monitor.
1) SVideo/Optical In/Out jacks. OR a FireWire external adapter with these to work with...
2) Apple Tivo-Like software. This software should be DirecTV, DishNetwork, Digital Cable friendly. It would be great to take this new headless iMac, and use with a basic DirecTV receiver, and have all of the benefits of TiVo, but Apple style... Less the $5.00 monthly fee.
3) Apple Remote Control (optional accessory). Would be a great compliment to AirTunes. Control tunes from your TV regardless of where music is hosted.
Personally, I think a so-called "Media Center Mac" is pointless. I don't think that the masses want to surf the net from their couch. It's just not the same. However, TiVo functionality, iTunes and iMovie integration seems natural.
I doubt Apple would release a $499 computer without considering offering a low-cost monitor.
I think if they want this to fly, they need to tie it into the iPods with all the advertising. Show it as a desktop solution that goes hand in hand for ripping, and syncing to the iPod. Then show that you can use Office on it and they'll sell quite a few.
If they try and sell them just as a cheap machine as an alternative to Windows, then people will start asking if its fast, will it beat out the inexpensive 3Ghz AMDs, what kind of 3D video, will it blow away everyone with awesome games, etc etc ..
If they try and sell them just as a cheap machine as an alternative to Windows, then people will start asking if its fast, will it beat out the inexpensive 3Ghz AMDs, what kind of 3D video, will it blow away everyone with awesome games, etc etc ..
Dont Hurt Me said:
Ummm... try Photoshop (yes that includes Elements)? Try it runs OS X faster? Try... it'll be significantly zippier in any app you throw at it than a 733 G4? Try... it's more of a value for $499 than buying a 733 machine for $500+ and throwing another $400+ at it to make it comparable or exceed it in speed. If it wasn't worthwhile... why did you upgrade your 733 to a 1.4? Try for $900, I'm not too far away from a new G5 iMac that the QuickSilver machine can't touch (unless it's dual processor) without a video card upgrade (also another expense)?
Continue adding it all up... why not just buy a $1,499 single processor 1.8Ghz G5 with upgradable 8x AGP video? The 1.2 Ghz. G4's that aren't G5 upgradable are selling for $1,000 and can't match a 1.8 Ghz. G5 machine! LoL There's no value there. That's why this machine's launch might spell the dawn of value for used hardware... when used hardware finally depreciates to what it truly is worth. Until then... $499 for 1.4 Ghz. and similar video to a $500-600 733 Mhz. G4 Quicksilver that costs $400+ to get up to terms in processor speed? It makes no valuable sense unless you need significantly more RAM slots than this machine may hold, and unless you need to have PCI/AGP upgrades. At which point... this machine might not have been for you anyhow. ::gasp::
LoL
There's very little value in used hardware... and there won't be until things depreciate. Bottomline... this machine could help Apple in more ways than one.
It's Mine! Bwahahahaaaa!
I'll be hetting one ASAP
I have a trusty G3/500 kandy koloured (well, indigo) iMac. It's great for my 'digital lifestyle' (eww, hate that phrase) stuff -- photos, music, addy book, iSyncing to my bluetooth phone, etc. stuff. And I adore how OS X works. But it's just a little too slow for day-to-day web stuff. All my hard-core browsing and gaming takes place on my stupendously quick, but Windows-constrained PC.
I don't want yet another complete computer in the house. I have far too many already. However, I've got a gap under my PC's monitor shelf that'd be perfect for how this headless Mac sounds. Slide it in, hook up a KVM switch to my existing PC peripherals, and I'm sorted.
Not overly concerned about RAM, SuperDrive, etc. Just run a FireWire cable between my PC and iMac Mini, and use the PC's DVD-RW drive. Instant high-speed data transfer! I could then use the PC for what it's good for... err, games, really. And use the Mac for my day-to-day stuff.
All the important bits will be upgradeable anyway. If you can crack the case, you can upgrade RAM and hard disk with a bit of work, Best of all, I'll get to use OS X to the full. My little ol' iMac gets to keep its usefullness too. It's great for the rest of the family, and due to the Rendezvous (or whatever it's meant to be called these days) sharing, my existing libraries of media on the iMac will be instantly available.
Fingers crossed this is true. Think Secret seem to be pretty good historically...
I'll be hetting one ASAP
I have a trusty G3/500 kandy koloured (well, indigo) iMac. It's great for my 'digital lifestyle' (eww, hate that phrase) stuff -- photos, music, addy book, iSyncing to my bluetooth phone, etc. stuff. And I adore how OS X works. But it's just a little too slow for day-to-day web stuff. All my hard-core browsing and gaming takes place on my stupendously quick, but Windows-constrained PC.
I don't want yet another complete computer in the house. I have far too many already. However, I've got a gap under my PC's monitor shelf that'd be perfect for how this headless Mac sounds. Slide it in, hook up a KVM switch to my existing PC peripherals, and I'm sorted.
Not overly concerned about RAM, SuperDrive, etc. Just run a FireWire cable between my PC and iMac Mini, and use the PC's DVD-RW drive. Instant high-speed data transfer! I could then use the PC for what it's good for... err, games, really. And use the Mac for my day-to-day stuff.
All the important bits will be upgradeable anyway. If you can crack the case, you can upgrade RAM and hard disk with a bit of work, Best of all, I'll get to use OS X to the full. My little ol' iMac gets to keep its usefullness too. It's great for the rest of the family, and due to the Rendezvous (or whatever it's meant to be called these days) sharing, my existing libraries of media on the iMac will be instantly available.
Fingers crossed this is true. Think Secret seem to be pretty good historically...
Apple has not had an "average consumer-" based Mac since the colored iMacs, which drew many people from the Windows world to switch.
They have been needing this, and I'd buy one for my partner in a heartbeat at that price.
They have been needing this, and I'd buy one for my partner in a heartbeat at that price.
AdamZ said:
IMHO I'm doubting it. Could be wrong but... First off the TV market is still in flux. In the next 4-5 years you are going to see a total transition over to HDTV. At this point its still in the movement stages. Apple almost never moves into a market before its ready. Do you really think Apple would pounce on the set top market before the infrastructure is in place? HDTVs are finally starting to come down in price and are finally starting to really make inroads in replacing those outdated TVs sitting in people's homes. But there is still another couple of years before it hits critical mass.
Secondly in regards to DVR there is no set standard for how a show is recorded, how its played back, how and if it can be exported, etc. Consequently you have content providers getting their panties in a bunch over things like commercial skipping. Exporting of movies in HDTV format. With potential solutions from the US government in the next 5 years. (e.g. flags being embedded into programs that says what content can be recorded, what content can't, and what content has a time delay feature where after X time it can no longer be played.)
Again all of this is in flux. Apple may very well start the set top revolution like they did with the iPod however they aren't going to do it before all the pieces on the board are positioned just right.
A few posts suggest that buying a used PowerMac with a viable upgrade path is a better deal than this proposed headless iMac, and they are correct. That being said, we need to remember that the target market for a device such as this is NOT the individual who would seriously pursue the idea of a used computer.
There are tons and tons of folks out there who never post on forums or care about opening up the case on their computer to look at it (much less add RAM or upgrade the GPU). They want to pull it off the shelf, take it home, plug in a monitor, power cord, and a modem. Use it. They will learn to enjoy a computing experience devoid of virii and spyware.
We can discuss the shortcomings of the specific spec's all we want. The fact remains, this is a good move by Apple, designed to get the iPod buyer to think about a Mac. We all know that, once introduced to the OS, people love the computer experience, and the vast majority will become Mac users for life. A low margin $500 Mac today equates to someone potentially buying a new Mac every 3-5 years for life? What's that worth to Apple?
For those who still prefer the used Mac market, thank Apple, because the introduction of this Mac will drive your prices down for you.
It's ALL good.
There are tons and tons of folks out there who never post on forums or care about opening up the case on their computer to look at it (much less add RAM or upgrade the GPU). They want to pull it off the shelf, take it home, plug in a monitor, power cord, and a modem. Use it. They will learn to enjoy a computing experience devoid of virii and spyware.
We can discuss the shortcomings of the specific spec's all we want. The fact remains, this is a good move by Apple, designed to get the iPod buyer to think about a Mac. We all know that, once introduced to the OS, people love the computer experience, and the vast majority will become Mac users for life. A low margin $500 Mac today equates to someone potentially buying a new Mac every 3-5 years for life? What's that worth to Apple?
For those who still prefer the used Mac market, thank Apple, because the introduction of this Mac will drive your prices down for you.
It's ALL good.
Dont Hurt Me said:
Agreed... but you know what the upgrade path of this machine is? Look at the pricetag man... $499. Can you not spring for another $499 machine in another year? LoL The costs of a decent speed bump in a G4 from a 733 to a 1.4 is $400+?!? LoL Basically Apple is finding another way to bring the cash back home rather than let other's eat their lunch and prevent them from selling new hardware en masse to the masses.
It'll work out for processor upgrade vendors if the older hardware depreciates as some will be able to snag older G4's for half the price they're at now reeeeeeeealllll soon assuming the market drops out from under the older hardware like it should. There's no value in spending 2x's the cost in upgrades when you can buy a throwaway with similar performance for 1/2 the cost.
The cube had no market. It was too costly to manufacture, it had less upgradability than it's comparably spec'ed desktop hardware (of which it was almost identical to) and cost as much or more. It was a pretty fetish item that cost too much and had too little value and it sold accordingly. That is why it is no longer with us. Bang and Oluffsen-style design works for products that have a nice lonnnnnnnnnnng shelf life; like TV's and CD players that can hit the market and be comparable for 20 years. When it comes to computers that have a practical purpose and that outdate over a relatively short period, the only way to make it work is if you're selling for a fraction of the cost of your top of the line units. It's hard to upgrade a cube, and you can't upgrade one to near the level of the G4 desktops of the era, nor for as cheap. It looked pretty, but it had no value.
In contrast... this new machine will (assuming the rumor to be correct) be a cheap piece of hardware that costs less than an upgrade on an older machine to a similar level. It has much more value than spending $500+ for a 733 Quicksilver and $400+ for a processor upgrade. It costs about 1/3-1/2 of what it costs to buy a used 1.25 Ghz. G4 desktop and serves the needs of 90% of the people that want a machine like this in the first place who don't care about frame rates in games. Something that's got a decent amount of speed for surfing the web, running applications like Photoshop, Photoshop Elements, iTunes, Toast, iPhoto, etc. etc. It's not a gamers box, but it'll run some casual games "adequately". I'm not a gamer... so I don't care.
It'll cut the value of older hardware so that the pricepoints drop so that more older hardware will flood the market, excluding those with machines that are comparable in speed, have dual processors, or can be taken further via video upgrades and aren't hamstrung by bottlenecks on their logic board. At which point... you have to weigh the costs of upgrades vs. a brand new machine in terms of value. Buying two new $400+ 1.2 Ghz. G4's for a dual 800 G4 ($800+) at this juncture is looking to cost you more than if you save your cash and buy a new G5 with faster AGP graphics than you can obtain in your G4, SATA drives, no RAM bottleneck from the G4's memory controller, etc. etc. For a little bit more than the 1.8 single G5, you can have a dual processor G5 that'll smoke the aforementioned dual processor G4 easily.
Let's stay on topic people, DROP the media center banter! That has nothing to do with this rumor.This rumor is simply about Apple repacking the iBook to be a desktop ipod companion. FOR UNDER $500!!!!!
About the whole monitor thing, the reason Apple won't sell a cheapy monitor for $400 or so is that if people want a complete solution, they can get it with the iMac:
iMac Mini G4 1.25 ghz PLUS 'cheap' Apple monitor: ~$900
iMac G5 1.6 ghz with 17" LCD, speakers, etc: $1300
Ok, so it's $400 more but you get LOT more computer. Also, there's the eMac for those looking for a really cheap complete solution.
Look people, this new Mac is all about getting people hooked on OS X and iLife. The idea is that once these people get used to using iLife and Panther/Tiger, they'll want to upgrade to faster (and more expensive) Macs to run higher-end apps like Final Cut and iDVD. A 1.25 ghz G4 is more than adequate to get people introduced to OS X (kmy 800 mhz iBook runs Panther quite well).
This will sell well. The iPod is already having HUGE coat-tail effects on the iMac G5. I imagine Apple will market this new Mac even tighter with the iPod. "The iPod for the Home. Introducing the iMac Mini. Starting at $499."
Name possibilities:
iMac Mini (I like it a lot but this won't be the AIO solution that the iMac embodies.)
iLifeStation
iPod Mac
iPod Center
PodMate
PodStation
MiniMac
hPod ('h' for home, but maybe too close to hp iPod)
iPod Home
About the whole monitor thing, the reason Apple won't sell a cheapy monitor for $400 or so is that if people want a complete solution, they can get it with the iMac:
iMac Mini G4 1.25 ghz PLUS 'cheap' Apple monitor: ~$900
iMac G5 1.6 ghz with 17" LCD, speakers, etc: $1300
Ok, so it's $400 more but you get LOT more computer. Also, there's the eMac for those looking for a really cheap complete solution.
Look people, this new Mac is all about getting people hooked on OS X and iLife. The idea is that once these people get used to using iLife and Panther/Tiger, they'll want to upgrade to faster (and more expensive) Macs to run higher-end apps like Final Cut and iDVD. A 1.25 ghz G4 is more than adequate to get people introduced to OS X (kmy 800 mhz iBook runs Panther quite well).
This will sell well. The iPod is already having HUGE coat-tail effects on the iMac G5. I imagine Apple will market this new Mac even tighter with the iPod. "The iPod for the Home. Introducing the iMac Mini. Starting at $499."
Name possibilities:
iMac Mini (I like it a lot but this won't be the AIO solution that the iMac embodies.)
iLifeStation
iPod Mac
iPod Center
PodMate
PodStation
MiniMac
hPod ('h' for home, but maybe too close to hp iPod)
iPod Home
SiliconAddict said:Umm question...What has Think Secret's rep been lately in regards to rumor accuracy?
Thinksecret seems to be one of the more reliable rumor sources, but they're not infallible - didn't they predict aluminum and colored enclosures for the full-sized ipod last summer? I admit, not a major error - but more disconcerting, I seem to remember them - and everyone - coming in low on the ipod mini price points, which left many of us disappointed (*ahem*) when it was officially announced. So... are we as excited about this headless imac if it comes in at, say, $599?
ncbill said:
Even if your figure is spot on, and if this device really does come to fruition. At the end of the day this thing isnt designed to make Apple a ton of cash. It is designed to reel in Windows users at a low price point. This system is low enough and cheap enough that its, yes I know its a sin to say this, a throw away system. My PDA costs more then the price point suggested. Again the idea is to get switchers; something Apple is sorely in need of right now. What is cool is that since the bar has been drastically lowered new users WILL bite and those users in turn will, in all likelihood, get something more powerful in the long term. (e.g. Get em hooked with the cheap stuff and reel em in with the iMac or PowerMac.) Honestly if this rumor is real its probably the smartest move Apple has made in the last 5 years.
With all the mainstream media news about vulnerabilities of of Windows and the increased usage of firefox maybe Steve-o sees some serious cracks developing in in the Ms monolith. I have talked to several peole recently who are VERY leery of buying a computer because of the perils of the internet i.e id theft, spam, spyware, virii etc. I tell them about my Mac, its runtime, no spyware, virii etc. and they are ver impressed. Touting the securty of a Mac vs. Windows may be a huge selling point. Imagine a commercial where they show in print: Viruses made for Windows: 500+ Viruses made for the Mac: ??
Touting other reseach indicating that hooking a windows machine to the internet for the first time can result in an attack in less than 4 minutes. The possiblities are really endless and all can prey upon people's fear of Windows.
This could be good if it pans out. I have my doubts though.
Touting other reseach indicating that hooking a windows machine to the internet for the first time can result in an attack in less than 4 minutes. The possiblities are really endless and all can prey upon people's fear of Windows.
This could be good if it pans out. I have my doubts though.
Oh, in case any Apple marketing folks are reading, here is a reminder:
Code:
From WordNet (r) 2.0 :
advertise
v 1: call attention to; "Please don't advertise the fact that he
has AIDS" [syn: publicize, advertize, publicise]
2: make publicity for; try to sell (a product); "The salesman
is aggressively pushing the new computer model"; "The
company is heavily advertizing their new laptops" [syn: advertize,
promote, push]
dongmin said:
And if Apple is smart they will bundle in the DVI to VGA adapter for those that already have monitors from their PC systems.
My sister ought to like the sound of this. She's been wanting to get a cheap new computer and has been very interested in the eMacs. If this is true then it would be great.
dongmin said:
Not entirely true. This unit could in theory end up being a media center. I doubt it, because I feel if Apple went this direction they'd not do it with a monster Macintoh PC unit with an OS that would take your non-computer literate types a ton of effort to learn and use... but a more purposeful unit like the iPod that uses an OS tailored to the particular experience (and likely have a low-latency system that could run on a cheap and efficient processor... like a StrongARM or embedded PowerPC). I see Apple going that direction rather than a "Jack of all trades, master of none" approach like the Media Center PC craze is having many believe as the "next generation". Yet who really knows? We could all be wrong, there might be an OS X Media Center edition brewing... I doubt it, but stranger things have happened.
Almost... too late for me, and I need Quicken!
Well hell, they'll almost have my money. I'm a long-time Windows user, tried out Linux for about a year in 2002, then bought my first mac, an iBook, this past May 2004. I gave away the main PC I had, but lately have been wishing I had a cheap, low-power central server for my laptop & my wife's laptop to use.
I just bought one, at just under $500. It's working out great.
Assuming it's true, if I'd known about this just a month or two sooner, I'd probably have waited and bought a headless Mac. I've been hoping for something like this ever since I got my iBook. Unfortunately, since I just bought this little PC server, a headless Mac will have to wait.
The other sticking point is that I'm connecting to the little PC server remotely to run Quicken (previously my wife and I shared a copy on her laptop). Now we both use shared files on the server. Because Windows Quicken is good (even the old 2002 version we have), and everywhere I go I read that Mac Quicken sucks.
Also, even if this isn't true (somebody please tell me if Mac Quicken is actually good now, or if there is some other wonderful Mac finance software package??) ... even if we could do finances on a Mac instead of relying on Windows, her laptop is new enough that she doesn't want to replace it for at least 2 more years - so we couldn't just share the files, she'd have to do what I'm doing now - connect to the headless mac in a VNC/"Remote Desktop" way and run the app on the server. Which would probably mean we'd have to buy Apple Remote Desktop, unless they wisely included it with their headless macs...
Overall, I find this news positive, but sadly, too little, too late for me.
Hopefully one of those "codenamed" Apple Keynote projects is a full-featured replacement for Quicken on the Mac... (not holding my breath! )
Well hell, they'll almost have my money. I'm a long-time Windows user, tried out Linux for about a year in 2002, then bought my first mac, an iBook, this past May 2004. I gave away the main PC I had, but lately have been wishing I had a cheap, low-power central server for my laptop & my wife's laptop to use.
I just bought one, at just under $500. It's working out great.
Assuming it's true, if I'd known about this just a month or two sooner, I'd probably have waited and bought a headless Mac. I've been hoping for something like this ever since I got my iBook. Unfortunately, since I just bought this little PC server, a headless Mac will have to wait.
The other sticking point is that I'm connecting to the little PC server remotely to run Quicken (previously my wife and I shared a copy on her laptop). Now we both use shared files on the server. Because Windows Quicken is good (even the old 2002 version we have), and everywhere I go I read that Mac Quicken sucks.
Also, even if this isn't true (somebody please tell me if Mac Quicken is actually good now, or if there is some other wonderful Mac finance software package??) ... even if we could do finances on a Mac instead of relying on Windows, her laptop is new enough that she doesn't want to replace it for at least 2 more years - so we couldn't just share the files, she'd have to do what I'm doing now - connect to the headless mac in a VNC/"Remote Desktop" way and run the app on the server. Which would probably mean we'd have to buy Apple Remote Desktop, unless they wisely included it with their headless macs...
Overall, I find this news positive, but sadly, too little, too late for me.
Hopefully one of those "codenamed" Apple Keynote projects is a full-featured replacement for Quicken on the Mac... (not holding my breath!
)
IVIIVI4ck3y27 said:
Well, as long as some folks think the media center idea is too hoaky to talk about on a rumor site, I guess I'll point out that you could run the Newton OS on the processor you mentioned above. So how about a media center running the Newton OS?
[ducks and runs]
Got to agree...I can't see the logic behind this one
I think you're right.
The reason apple's stayed away from this sort of thing in the past is that it would be more geared towards current apple users than switchers effectively turning a bunch of $1200 purchases into as many $600 purchases.
Also, I don't think apple wants to release a new 32-bit product that they'll have to support for however many years.
if this happens, which i hope it will, it will have to have a low-power G5 or some sort of fancy 64-bit motorolla chip. I don't know how they'll keep the imac market buying the imac, though.
(Disclaimer: I, like everybody else on this list, don't know what I'm talking about)
budugu said:This is going to keep us busy for a while
leaving all the 64 bitness (unless G4 is going 64 too), what i donot get is that the demographic apple is targeting is hardly changing. most of the people buying into apple are for asthetic beauty (i donot want to start a flame war here i could be wrong!), and the point is lost once you have any 'outside' component that will not blend in. If you are talking of people wo are moving to macs because they cannot bear the malware on windows then it is the imac crowd. The botom line is that people will have to spend close to atleast 850 (computer+a decent monitor) bucks and get an half baked solution (with a very uncertain future) and would rather spend couple of hundred more and get a imac if they want a mac!
nevertheless apple slashing prices is good! After all this i might order it the day it appears!!
I think you're right.
The reason apple's stayed away from this sort of thing in the past is that it would be more geared towards current apple users than switchers effectively turning a bunch of $1200 purchases into as many $600 purchases.
Also, I don't think apple wants to release a new 32-bit product that they'll have to support for however many years.
if this happens, which i hope it will, it will have to have a low-power G5 or some sort of fancy 64-bit motorolla chip. I don't know how they'll keep the imac market buying the imac, though.
(Disclaimer: I, like everybody else on this list, don't know what I'm talking about)