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
Still too much $$
Here is what you get from Dell for $550.00:
- Intel® Celeron® D Processor 320 (2.40GHz, 533 FSB)
- 512MB Dual Channel DDR SDRAM at 400MHz
- 80GB Ultra ATA/100 7200RPM Hard Drive
- FREE Dell Color Inkjet Printer 720
Here is what you get from Apple for $500.00
1.25GHz
256MB of RAM
40GB to 80GB hard drive
Not to impressive, but this is typical of Apple.
Here is what you get from Dell for $550.00:
- Intel® Celeron® D Processor 320 (2.40GHz, 533 FSB)
- 512MB Dual Channel DDR SDRAM at 400MHz
- 80GB Ultra ATA/100 7200RPM Hard Drive
- FREE Dell Color Inkjet Printer 720
Here is what you get from Apple for $500.00
1.25GHz
256MB of RAM
40GB to 80GB hard drive
Not to impressive, but this is typical of Apple.
B_Gates said:
Here's what else you get from Dell:
- Viruses
- Adware
- Spyware
- Windows
- Ginormous, ugly case
Here's what else you get from Apple:
- Mac OS X
- Piece of mind
- Security
- Sleek, sexy small case
- iLife
All of the sudden it doesn't look so bad. I totally agree that there should be at least 512MB of RAM and an 80GB HD, but the processor comparission is pretty silly -- we all know that the two are much closer than the numbers make it seem. A printer is a nice freebie, but people don't need one, and if the idea is to get switchers, they probably already have one, anyway.
B_Gates said:
How typical. Haven't we already gone over this? The chip architecture differences alone make it pointless to compare GHz to GHz of the two systems. I have a 1.25GHz G4 iMac at home that runs circles around my 2.0 GHz Dell machine at work.
jcroft said:
- For viruses, Adware & Spyware you get McAfee works great I have had no issues.
- Windows XP: Works fine for me.
- Ginormous, ugly case: Its not that ugly, you set it on the ground & forget about it.
It still looks bad to me, if you threw in the G5 parts, I would agree with you that it would be a winner.
B_Gates said:
Some people buy a Chevy Cavalier (Dell) and maybe it'll make it to 100,000 miles, if they're lucky, it will have a long history of issues, recalls, creaks, body roll, not to mention all that cheap cheap plastic and sub-par parts. Some people buy a Honda Civic and it'll probably make it to 250,000+ miles, not uncommon, average users usually need not have any issues until a wearable like brakes needs replacing, fit and finish of course are great, okay plastics and parts that aren't made to wear out. Sure there are people out there who are cheap, care less about quality and asthetics and buy a Chevy (Dell) but smart consumers who understand the value of a dollar and would rather have quality will go with the Honda.
Adware and Spyware are, in our experience around here, starting to come with the Dell OOBE.jcroft said:
The killer app, for Apple's low-end market, is iLife. No other suite offers the integration and ease-of-use that iLife offers. I can rip a CD with iTunes, transfer pictures from my camera with iPhoto, use iMovie to create a slideshow for my grandmother, and burn it with iDVD. It all works, and it all works together. This is *huge* for the technophobes out there.
The Windows-based platforms offer an amalgamation of applications (similar, I suppose, to Frankenstein's monster, and just as graceful) that halfway do the job and are barely integrated with each other, if at all.
B_Gates said:
I shouldn't even dignify this trolling with a response. But I'm bored at work, so it's your lucky day.
1. Users shouldn't HAVE to run ad-aware and McAfee, etc. That's a hassle, and while it might work great for you and me (Yes, I own three PCs, as well as my Macs), my Grandma calls me EVERY time she has to do it. She's can't manage it herself. It's a pain in the ass, plain and simple.
2. Windows XP: works better than any previous Windows, I'll give you that. And I'm sure it works fine for you. but again, you're a savvy users. It doesn't work fine for my Grandma. Her PC is virus-ridden, slow as hell (despite fast hardware), and a royal PITA. Why? Because maintaining a healthy Windows installation takes work. She doesn't put the work in. Is that her fault? I think not. She doesn't have to put time and effort into maintaining her microwave or TV -- why should her computer be any different?
3. You want to put a big black Dell box in the floor in front of your TV and forget about it? Go ahead. Many of us have wives and girlfriends that won't allow it, though.
4. Sure, a G5 would be great. But it's overkill. The G4 is faster than the Celeron, which is what is in most budget PCs. For this market, the G4 is perfectly fine.
What do you think?
Will this thing use a 3,5" hard drive, regular size CD ROM drive and 168pin SDRAM? This will be the cheap solution for Apple, but OTOH it if it's true that it's going to be based on the iBook board, it maybe quite a redesign.
Also, if it's going to use the iBook power brick, 45W may not be enough to power these regular (not intended for low power consumption) components.
Maybe it will use notbook components? 2,5" HD, slim CD ROM drive, and SO DIMM. Power won't be a problem with a 45W adapter, but it's more expensive.
Every iMac uses SODIMM's too, but the eMac doesn't. But if I'm right, the eMac doesn't come standard with a memory slot filled. That means that except for the socket (which doesn't cost much), Apple wouldn't have had any economical reason -for themselves- to use regular SDRAM in the eMac.
I think most of us favor regular components, for the sake of cheap upgrades.
Will this thing use a 3,5" hard drive, regular size CD ROM drive and 168pin SDRAM? This will be the cheap solution for Apple, but OTOH it if it's true that it's going to be based on the iBook board, it maybe quite a redesign.
Also, if it's going to use the iBook power brick, 45W may not be enough to power these regular (not intended for low power consumption) components.
Maybe it will use notbook components? 2,5" HD, slim CD ROM drive, and SO DIMM. Power won't be a problem with a 45W adapter, but it's more expensive.
Every iMac uses SODIMM's too, but the eMac doesn't. But if I'm right, the eMac doesn't come standard with a memory slot filled. That means that except for the socket (which doesn't cost much), Apple wouldn't have had any economical reason -for themselves- to use regular SDRAM in the eMac.
I think most of us favor regular components, for the sake of cheap upgrades.
B_Gates said:
"It's not THAT ugly." - Interpreted version: It's ugly.
"For viruses, Adware & Spyware you get McAfee works great I have had no issues." - Interpreted version = add $50.00
"Windows XP: Works fine for me." - Interpreted version = I've never used OSX
10.0.27.18 -- Bring it on.Photorun said:
My point is that it's not an "OS X vs Windows" debate when it comes to security. No matter how stable or secure the OS is -- there's always the human factor, which is the weakest link.
Apple just makes it a lot easier to be more secure. It tends to be secure out of the box, but Windows can, if properly fortified, be just as secure.
Of course -- if you give them all non-routable IP addresses, a lot of the world's problems are already solved.
stealthboy said:
And for web browsing my 1.3 ghz Pentium M Dell laptop is faster and smoother than my Dual 2Ghz G5, and tremendously faster for MS Office, while the G5 is clearly faster for media and anything *nix. It all depends on the application and environment - Most Windows PCs are slow because people don't take care of them and keep the crap off. Most Office PCs are even slower because of network based applications and Novell (gag) or Active Directory services.
In the end it's more about the environment you prefer than raw speed as long as it gets the job done. I think this is long overdue and definitely a great step in the right direction for Apple. The current iMac is a bad option for many current Windows users not only by price, but lack of expandibility and the integrated monitor isn't appealing to everyone (obviously, just look at the response to this story
)I too have a friend that is already excited about replacing his aging athlon with one of these.
It's not that bad...
I'd consider myself a power user, despite the fact that my PC is old and needs to be replaced soon. I have a 1.4 GHz Athlon with 512 MB of RAM. The machine is about 3.5 years old, I've upgraded the RAM, HD, sound and video cards since I initially purchased it. I am just now starting to notice some sluggish behavior, but that is more because I have more processes running in the background these days. I'm using it as a webserver run out of my home that I keep up 24/7, I'm also running the GIMPS software to crunch data for finding new big primes since I'm a bit of a math geek. I can run Far Cry at the medium video settings (ATI 9600 SE). I can also run VMWare sessions on it for when I'm testing/debugging for work at home, I'm a C++ Windows programmer.
Even with the services I have running in the background, I can still check email, surf the web, run iTunes and Trillian and few other programs without any hassle. I would not consider myself a "casual PC user" and if I can get by with my old machine, I think the average computer user will be able to have all their needs met by the proposed specs of this new headless Mac. The only thing that should really be done is to bump the memory to 512 at least, you really need that if you run many apps at one time, which I think most users do.
Although, I'll be building a Athlon 64 machine this year to replace my current PC, for $500 I'd love to have a Mac with OS X as a second machine. I've always wanted a Mac, but I cannot live without my PC and the prices of Macs keep me away because I don't want to spend much on a second machine. I've considered the eMac, but I already have a nice CRT. This headless Mac would be perfect for me to hook up with my existing machine using a KVM. Then I can get more out of my iPod using iSync and iCal, etc and I can run iLife and play around with OS X. I know there is iPod agent and stuff you can use to sync but none of the Windows apps work with Mozilla Thunderbird/Sunbird yet. I would write an extension for it if I had the time these days.
At any rate, I think adding type of a machine to their desktop line would really help Apple with marketshare, I don't think they will take the market like some optimistic posters have said in this thread, but having a low cost Mac will be a big benefit for them as they can compete in the eMachine arena, which is a big segement of the market. If this is true and Apple plays their cards right perhaps they can get up to about 10% of the market in a couple of years.
spinko said:
I'd consider myself a power user, despite the fact that my PC is old and needs to be replaced soon. I have a 1.4 GHz Athlon with 512 MB of RAM. The machine is about 3.5 years old, I've upgraded the RAM, HD, sound and video cards since I initially purchased it. I am just now starting to notice some sluggish behavior, but that is more because I have more processes running in the background these days. I'm using it as a webserver run out of my home that I keep up 24/7, I'm also running the GIMPS software to crunch data for finding new big primes since I'm a bit of a math geek. I can run Far Cry at the medium video settings (ATI 9600 SE). I can also run VMWare sessions on it for when I'm testing/debugging for work at home, I'm a C++ Windows programmer.
Even with the services I have running in the background, I can still check email, surf the web, run iTunes and Trillian and few other programs without any hassle. I would not consider myself a "casual PC user" and if I can get by with my old machine, I think the average computer user will be able to have all their needs met by the proposed specs of this new headless Mac. The only thing that should really be done is to bump the memory to 512 at least, you really need that if you run many apps at one time, which I think most users do.
Although, I'll be building a Athlon 64 machine this year to replace my current PC, for $500 I'd love to have a Mac with OS X as a second machine. I've always wanted a Mac, but I cannot live without my PC and the prices of Macs keep me away because I don't want to spend much on a second machine. I've considered the eMac, but I already have a nice CRT. This headless Mac would be perfect for me to hook up with my existing machine using a KVM. Then I can get more out of my iPod using iSync and iCal, etc and I can run iLife and play around with OS X. I know there is iPod agent and stuff you can use to sync but none of the Windows apps work with Mozilla Thunderbird/Sunbird yet. I would write an extension for it if I had the time these days.
At any rate, I think adding type of a machine to their desktop line would really help Apple with marketshare, I don't think they will take the market like some optimistic posters have said in this thread, but having a low cost Mac will be a big benefit for them as they can compete in the eMachine arena, which is a big segement of the market. If this is true and Apple plays their cards right perhaps they can get up to about 10% of the market in a couple of years.