$499 Headless iMac?

[pkscout]

True - I'm just spoiled by Microsoft's easy Remote Desktop stuff. That's really the least of my concerns. The fact that I just spent $500 this month on a similar solution, and finding a replacement for Quicken - those are the biggies. Once I get past those, finding a VNC solution is just a speed bump.

Just as an FYI, Microsoft has a remote desktop client for OSX. So if Quicken on the Mac isn't at parity with the PC version (I have no idea if it is or not), you could keep that PC server running and use the remote desktop client to connect to your Windows box to run Quicken.

 

[thequicksilver]

www.powerlogix.com
www.sonnettech.com
www.gigadesigns.com
www.fastmac.com

upgrades up to dual 1.73GHz

Thanks for the links, but these things are up to $499 for a single 1.73GHz chip. That's not cost effective in my eyes when a brand new iMac with a 17" widescreen display is $1299.

 

[Calihafan]

Seems unlikely, would be great if it's true...

I've only skimmed the other posts (a lot) and I don't know if this has been mentioned, but Apple has never released a cheap computer. Ever. If they did, it would draw many Windows users, as the other posts said blah blah blah...

But when you look at the market share, at least from the number of Apple computers sold each month, Apple has a small amount in that category. This is because Macs last longer than PCs and so fewer people are buying them. Because fewer people need to.

The typical $500-$600 PC is a crappy plastic Dell that breaks down after four years (or, as my friends and I so constantly repeat, "dies"). That may be due to the OS, in which case this whole entry was a joke, but also the quality of the product physically is compromised. Even the eMac, which looks like a Dell compared to the iMac (which looks like a Dell compared to the PowerMac), is not a total piece of crap. I mean, I hope that the reduced cost doesn't take away the aesthetic qualities that we so readily associate with Apple.

Now, the target audience wouldn't care, because they're used to using these crappy PCs (which aren't built well anyway), but any Mac user who wants a new Mac cheap won't want to compromise design. I'm sure that PC users will flock to it in droves, but veteran Macheads? They might be a little wary, depending on the design.

If Apple did release this, then they would make a profit from PC users. I just hope they don't sacrifice the coolness of the Mac for lower prices.

 

[agentmouthwash]

this is actually great news for businesses. We have 7 aging 350mhz G3 imacs that need to be replaces. Because we have space issues, the eMacs were always just too big for us and the G5 iMacs are too much money. Now we can buy this new $499 mac along with a bunch of cheap 15" LCD monitors and it will run MSOffice and Filemaker just fine!

 

[TranceClubMusic]

Lets Compare to Dell...

Lets face it, Dell is the # 1 seller of PeeCee's - PERIOD. Everyone I talk to at work would LOVE to have a MAC. #1 complaint = TOO EXPENSIVE. Why? Cause I always hear - and I quote: "I can get a Dell for $499."

Guess what folks? Thats what MOST people buy! When I came back to work after the XMAS break - All I would hear is..."I ordered a Dell for $499"

So lets compare with what Apple (may offer as a rumor) compared to the cheapest cheap PeeCee from the All Mighty Mr. Dell.

________________________________________

As of today December 29th, 2004:

Dell Dimension Model 3000

Processor/Display
Intel® Celeron® D Processor 320 (2.40GHz, 533 FSB)

Operating System
Microsoft® Windows® XP Home Edition

Video Card
Integrated Intel® Extreme Graphics 2


Memory
256MB DDR SDRAM at 400MHz


Hard Drive
40GB Ultra ATA/100 7200RPM Hard Drive


Monitors
17 in (16 in viewable,.27dp) E773c CRT Monitor


CD or DVD Drive
Dual Drives: 48x CD-ROM Drive+ FREE UPGRADE! 48x CD-RW Drive

Productivity Software
WordPerfect®, Powerful Word Processing


Limited Warranty, Services and Support Options

90 Day Warranty

$499

________________________________________________

Something too take notice: This Price INCLUDES a 17" CRT Monitor.
My Opinion is that Apple is headed in the right direction BUT needs to price the current eMac @ $499.

 

[TheMasin9]

Beauty, elegance and Mac superiority in a tiny little box

Wow, wouldnt this be a great addition to the mac lineup and what a good thing to do with all of the remaining ppc g4s. $499 would be an excellent price to sell for, i mean, your baseline dell (that looks like a big black turd and is about as operational as one) costs this much. Another possible design idea would be the hemisphere base that the imac g4 had and just the base (headless). Just a thot tho. i may have to get one of these for the rents, but first i gotta get some apple stock, cuz i have a feeling 2005 is gonna be the year that mac rises. headless imac....ilife 05....flash ipods....powerbook g5s....emac g5s....Tiger...its gonna be GRRRREAT.

 

[anonymous161]

I think an iMac mini in one of 5 colors would be a great (not to stereotype, but I know a couple of teenage girls that would flip for a Pink mini computer to go with their coveted pink mini iPods). Quite a few people would be willing to drop $500 on a computer for their kids alone. I think some people feel the current look of the Mac is very sterile and bringing some color back into the mix would be good. Each of the colors currently used on the mini would go good with a low end white display (well maybe not the gold, but does anyone buy gold?) and would further tie the iPod and the Mac in the public eye. Drop an iBook logic board in a small rectangle and call it a day (but please don't show people dancing with them). Plastic or aluminum is fine with me.

 

[Jovian9]

This could turn out to be a bird with two heads, or
should I say, two sets of wings, after all - both a
headless iMac and/or an entertainment hub for
TV, DVD, MP3, TiVO, etc. Surely looks promising...

That's kind of what I was thinking.....the iBox. You can use this as your desktop computer or you can put this with your television/stereo/home entertainment area and use it as a media center. Perhaps you can even use Airport technology to wirelessly stream info from your main Mac to this.

 

[IVIIVI4ck3y27]

Something too take notice: This Price INCLUDES a 17" CRT Monitor.
My Opinion is that Apple is headed in the right direction BUT needs to price the current eMac @ $499.

Nah... who cares if they undercut us in price. To quote Butthead... "You con't polish a turd..."

I want my $499 Mac without monitor. Thankee very much. I'll buy a better one later.

 

[SiliconAddict]

I just told people in my office about this and they're like:

"I can still build one for 300.00"

"But then you have to buy software for it"

Windows users are programmed zombies.

Yah I just turned around and asked my coworker the same question: Would he consider a low end Mac that came in at $499? For all intents and purposes he said maybe but since none of his software would work on it he would have to start from scratch.

Like it or not this IS a legit issue for switchers. We’ve poured a ton of cash into software for this platform and you are now asking us to go out and purchase new software? Kinda a steep request don’t you think? This is the main reason I need a laptop that can run VPC at a decent clip before I purchase a Mac as my primary system (Sorry but the G4 in the PowerBook doesn’t cut it.) but again at $499? It’s a toy at that point. Cheap enough that I can still have this as my secondary system.

 

[Damek]

Just as an FYI, Microsoft has a remote desktop client for OSX. So if Quicken on the Mac isn't at parity with the PC version (I have no idea if it is or not), you could keep that PC server running and use the remote desktop client to connect to your Windows box to run Quicken.

Thanks, I know - I'm using it now, which is why I mentioned it in conjunction with Quicken. I connect from my iBook to the PC server and run Quicken there. My wife runs Quicken on her laptop but it opens the files on the server.

The change if I got a cheap headless Mac would have to be the software - run the Mac version of Quicken, for example, and switch which one of us is connecting remotely and which one is just using the remote files. So she would need a Windows client to VNC in to the headless Mac.

Such a thing exists, I know, I'd just have to do the research again when the time came. The hard part is going to be figuring out how to export to QIF and import the QIF files in Mac Quicken...

 

[IVIIVI4ck3y27]

Oh I don't remember who said it but I wanted to clarify something, without having to sift back through 200+ replies (many my own). To say that Apple has "NEVER" done the low cost computer route is to be wrong. Apple at one point released the Mac LC (LC... Low Cost... get it?), which prior to the candy-colored iMac was the most popular Macintosh in Apple history. It also was... headless. At the time it was a relative bargain of a computer, at least comparable to it's relative competition.

(Note) One could even argue that the Apple ][ was a relatively low cost computer compared to the competition. It also at one point held much of the market prior to the Mac and then DOS-based PC's.

TO say it's never been done by Apple... is to not know the full story, or to be stuck in the modern era, Post-Amelio. Look at your Mac history peeps!

 

[iggyb]

Yah I just turned around and asked my coworker the same question: Would he consider a low end Mac that came in at $499? For all intents and purposes he said maybe but since none of his software would work on it he would have to start from scratch.

Like it or not this IS a legit issue for switchers. We’ve poured a ton of cash into software for this platform and you are now asking us to go out and purchase new software? Kinda a steep request don’t you think? This is the main reason I need a laptop that can run VPC at a decent clip before I purchase a Mac as my primary system (Sorry but the G4 in the PowerBook doesn’t cut it.) but again at $499? It’s a toy at that point. Cheap enough that I can still have this as my secondary system.

Good point, SiliconAddict...

Remember, folks. Even if this rumor turns out to be true, there won't be a huge exodus of Windows users to Macs. Now, for those who use their computer for basic use (surfing the internet, digital photos, writing letters, etc), this would not be a huge change in software. For those who use their machine as a business, then software costs are a huge factor.

That said, this will create more switchers, and this can turn into a steady growth in marketshare for Mac users. A good thing indeed.

As for the people you talk to that rebut with "I can still build a cheaper PC", don't even worry about them. They're still waiting for the 99 cent value menu at the 4 star restaurant in their town.

 

[Jovian9]

My grandmother and my father-in-law would pick these up almost instantly if this is true. But my father-in-law is looking at dull right now d/t him not wanting to spend more than $500.

 

[macFanDave]

I've got the name...

Here's the current matrix...

Pro Consumer
Portable PowerBook iBook
Desktop PowerMac iMac

This new thing seems to be a consumer version of Xserve, so call it the

iServe

And the exterior should be optic yellow tennis ball felt.

While the idea is intriguing, I'll bet it is not true.

 

[SiliconAddict]

Lets face it, Dell is the # 1 seller of PeeCee's - PERIOD. Everyone I talk to at work would LOVE to have a MAC. #1 complaint = TOO EXPENSIVE. Why? Cause I always hear - and I quote: "I can get a Dell for $499."

Here's the rub of your argument. It’s about price vs. features right? For those on discussion boards they are power users so people complaining aren't typical users. What this device is targeting is Ma and Pa bumpkin who isn't interested in FSB speed. Isn't interested in ripping a DVD. Isn't interested in playing Unreal. This system is targeting the baseline user who is simply looking for a cheap computer to browse the net, get e-mail, listen to music, burn a CD, etc. The basics. Here is where it gets interesting.
You may very well get more bang for your buck hardware wise with Dell but at a price point of $499 users aren't going to be nitpicking over the specifics. No one is going into a $500 purchase expect some cutting edge box at that point. At that price point function does follow form. (e.g. clunky dell vs. small elegant iMac that does the same basic thing a the Dell.) You don't need a 500Mhz FSB with a 2.5Ghz chip. No. Overkill for the basics. For the average user the suggested system in this thread is more then adequate. (With the exception of RAM.) Then add the whole security aspect of OS X to the system and you get a pretty compelling device. I really believe this device could successfully take on the bottom of the barrel PC systems and cream them. The only question is can Apple meet demand. If this thing is as successfully as I think it might be Apple could be inundated with requests. Somehow Apple HAS to meet demand. None of this iPod backorder type crap. Apple needs to find a manufacturer/s that can meet the potential demand.

 

[ccuilla]

Good point, SiliconAddict...

Remember, folks. Even if this rumor turns out to be true, there won't be a huge exodus of Windows users to Macs. Now, for those who use their computer for basic use (surfing the internet, digital photos, writing letters, etc), this would not be a huge change in software. For those who use their machine as a business, then software costs are a huge factor.

This is certainly true. Obviously this new Mac would come with the basics most consumers need/want to use their computer for (web, email, word processing, spreadsheet, digital lifestyle).

Fot the majority of business users the next step up isn't really that much...what MS Office? That is the most used piece of software on the planet...and of that primarily Word and Excel. So, while I agree the switching in this category won't happen in droves...it still makes it easier.

 

[BillHarrison]

A couple answers to items posed in the thread:

Will this rob sales of higher end apple systems?

No, I don't see why it would. Someone in the market for a powermac G5 knows the difference between that and this. Big difference.

Someone in the market for an Imac is also looking higher than this. I doubt the sales cannibilization would outweigh the NEW customers this generates. And, supposing not a dime is made profit wise on these machines (which is doubtful, they stand to make a profit at this price) the amount of increased market share could be almost priceless to the future of apple.

Secondly, will this be a "Media Center" mac? Not out of the box, no way. Could you make it into one? Perhaps, but not using Apple made items, all aftermarket. Would it be doable, or worth doing? Perhaps, if a 1.25ghz G4 could handle the video playback (and I see no reason it couldnt) then this would go quite nicely on my component rack. But, thats not what apple is after here. They need a blood infusion, and this is the ticket.

Stalwart mac buyers will always be, as long as apple exists. I would dare say FEW switchers jump into dual processor Powermacs. SOME may jump to Imacs, but many probably hold off due to Price and the fact that they have a monitor etc sitting at home.

The answer is here all in one svelte box!

Bill

 

[TheMasin9]

Apple likes to make "sealed boxes"...devices where they could stamp out a million that are identical (this was the original vision for the Macintosh). This new iMac sounds like more of the same.

I agree with the likeliness that it is the iBook G4 motherboard. Drop the display, keyboard and battery. Shove the power supply inside...and you have a TINY computer.

I think this is all around a great idea. I hope it is true.

This is true, apple does like to make a bunch of computers with limited bto options, makes sense, its alot easier on them. but i think this computer is going to have to be a little bit more customizable than previous imacs/emacs to get windoze converts. interesting concept of taking the ibook and cramming it into a desktop. I cant wait to see one.

 

[wrldwzrd89]

Here's the current matrix...

Pro Consumer
Portable PowerBook iBook
Desktop PowerMac iMac

This new thing seems to be a consumer version of Xserve, so call it the

iServe

And the exterior should be optic yellow tennis ball felt.

While the idea is intriguing, I'll bet it is not true.

That isn't what it was intended for, but it sure seems like it could be used that way for simple server tasks.

 

[dicklacara]

Take it to the bank: this will only ship with 10.4 -- they will ship the same day, March 24.

My thoughts: The speed benefit from 10.4 will be necessary for this box not to seem ridiculously slow, even if marketed to those who just need the "basics". Plus, Apple's been waiting for a truly stable, polished version of OS X before launching an all-out effort to convert Windows users.

10.3 is stable but still has networking issues and a barn full of bugs. Their "switch" campaign was just a tester. With 10.4 everything is in place: huge brand recognition with iPod making Apple synonymous with hip, quality, and style; years of real-world beta testing of OS X; and mountainous dissatisfaction with Microsoft. And now finally, a reasonable price-point for the zillions of consumers who are buy-curious, but can't imagine spending a grand on an e-mail box.

Yeah! This has a lot of things going for it!

I think the digital media center is one use -- a major use. Note that Tiger Spotlight can automatically catalog & search everything that comes in contact with-- like music, pictures, videos.

So, If nothing else the box would be an automatic organizer & searcher for all your digital stuff!

But it can be a digital copier and player too!

As to the monitor -- most pc users arready have one or more.

As for the non-computer people, they have a monitor in their TV. What would make using a TV great, is if Apple found some magical way of displaying in higher resolution on a standard TV (of today's capability) -- Not so far-fetched, there were 3rd-party add-ons to the original Macs (in the 80's) that could display a very good representation of the Mac screen on a TV--- The power of Macs and TVs has changed a lot in 20 years. mmm.... I Just tried cranking down the 20" iMac G5 from 1680x1050 to 640x480-- quite acceptable -- maybe they already have a solution for TV use.

I could see one of these with with every TV in the house.

Then, for the enterprises & schools, use the same box(es) for network Spotlight Server(s). These could exist on any network (wired or wireless). So a classroom (or sales department) computer could offload Spotlight searches to a headless box in the Library (or shipping department), etc.

Mmmmm.....

 

[Mr_Ed]

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

It's more fun to name it than to argue about it . . .

My suggestion:
iDeal

 

[swissmann]

I won't buy one because I love the G5 chip too much and cannot live without a Superdrive. A lot of consumers are asking "Does it burn DVDs?" Not that a lot of them will ever really use it but for some reason they need to have that comfort or they associate that simple term with a good computer. Burn DVD must equal high tech good computer right? What I am saying is it all looks great and I think a great move for Apple but they really should offer an upgrade option with a Superdrive.

 

[morkintosh]

Oh god, a new G4 desktop. Why not give it at least a 1.5GHz G4? The benefit of getting this system should be that it is absolutely tiny. Otherwise, they basically just made a headless eMac. YAY!!

that is exactly what they did ... it's not supposed to be some super fast box, it's what you buy grandma to let her view the holiday pics you put on your .mac account.

 

[IVIIVI4ck3y27]

Good point, SiliconAddict...

Remember, folks. Even if this rumor turns out to be true, there won't be a huge exodus of Windows users to Macs.

I don't think anyone expected that... but for the costs, it's more reachable than ever before if it does hold true. Some might even buy one just to play around with as a secondary computer for the hell of it, or use as a more secure internet box for getting their email and web surfing, keeping their dedicated PC's offline to keep away from virus concerns. A transition plan can be put into place for those that don't have specialized software that is Windows-only with no compatible alternative on Mac.

Now, for those who use their computer for basic use (surfing the internet, digital photos, writing letters, etc), this would not be a huge change in software. For those who use their machine as a business, then software costs are a huge factor.

Very good point. This could end up being a computer purchased for kids of the family. This could be as I said, an internet computer so as to keep their PC offline and away from spyware, viruses, and adware. Use it as a basic email and internet box of sorts, one that can open some Word documents with Appleworks. It can play MP3's, open .WMV's and .MOV's and Real's format of video. It can serve another role in the household and be an alternative or something merely to play around on. At very worse, if Apple puts it out with a 15" or 17" widescreen LCD as a monitor... it could very well be an expensive multifunction DVD player.

That said, this will create more switchers, and this can turn into a steady growth in marketshare for Mac users. A good thing indeed.

Agreed.

As for the people you talk to that rebut with "I can still build a cheaper PC", don't even worry about them. They're still waiting for the 99 cent value menu at the 4 star restaurant in their town.

You mean they don't have it yet. LoL

The way to look at is this... yes I can even build a cheaper PC than this Mac myself, $85 for a motherboard/processor, $80 for a hard drive, $40 for a decent clone-brand AGP video card (if the motherboard I buy doesn't come with crappy integrated video), $29 for a CD burner or $69 for a dual layer DVD burner, and then for enough RAM to make it worth running... probably $60-100 for 512mb.

Yet... said cheaper PC will not have the security, won't be as efficient, and it won't be as stable after 3 months on the net as said Mac. To run said PC, I also need to purchase a $199 version of XP Pro (Home sucks) SP 2 to be remotely secure from an OS perspective and not be annoyed with the OS trying to do everything for me with no manual override. Plus you need to likely add $65 in Norton Antivirus, Systemworks, and Firewall software to really have a good semblance of protection. It's $149 for a copy of Mac OS X but ::gasp:: it comes with the above-rumored machine for free.

You'll also have peace of mind in knowing that in a few months Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger will be out (perhaps even with a free upgrade?) and that it'll have many of the features promised in Windows Longhorn that's scheduled for 2006. Some of said features have been axed for the 2006 release, and by the time more features are brought to light... Apple might beat them to the punch even there. Firefox is already ahead of IE, in another year it might make IE look ridiculous. Safari is hot on Firefox's heels.

It might not turn the tables overnight... and to go from 2-5% marketshare to 90% isn't even a realistic dream. It can however slowly make inroads if done right. Here's the start... it's just up to Apple to deliver, and to continue on delivering.