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
Sweet
This is really cool, I cant wait. One thing though is I hope is has an agp slot and some pci slots for upgradable graphics. I wonder what it will be called?
This is really cool, I cant wait. One thing though is I hope is has an agp slot and some pci slots for upgradable graphics. I wonder what it will be called?
What one more thing should be....
Great board so far..read every post.
Being a teacher in a high school..here is what I would like to see Apple come up with.
$599 headless G5. Same basic specs as what rumored here. $100 more because it is a G5. $699 with Super Drive.
$899 G5 Emac
the $1099 G5 Emac with Superdrive.
The all in one design is great for schools and the weight of the emac is a theft deterrent.
Basically if you want the all in one it costs the same as the headless mac, sans monitor.
Apple should leave the G4 to the portables and move to dual core soon.
why the G5 thing wont happen...Imac prices would have to drop a bit, and the supply from IBM is still not up to snuff from what Ive read.
The Set top device from apple is a few years away...I agree with Jonathan on this...the timing and technology are not right yet for most people.
If a G4 sub $500 imac mini is the one more thing at the keynote...Steve is going to have to triple the RDF rays...this just isnt news. Cutting the screen off an Ibook isnt any great feat nor worth the end of a keynote. G5 PBs is worth one more thing
My bet..Think Secret is right...and there is no one more thing at the keynote. I hope Im wrong since I will be there.
Im hoping Ilife 05 under the seats by the way!!!
Great board so far..read every post.
Being a teacher in a high school..here is what I would like to see Apple come up with.
$599 headless G5. Same basic specs as what rumored here. $100 more because it is a G5. $699 with Super Drive.
$899 G5 Emac
the $1099 G5 Emac with Superdrive.
The all in one design is great for schools and the weight of the emac is a theft deterrent.
Basically if you want the all in one it costs the same as the headless mac, sans monitor.
Apple should leave the G4 to the portables and move to dual core soon.
why the G5 thing wont happen...Imac prices would have to drop a bit, and the supply from IBM is still not up to snuff from what Ive read.
The Set top device from apple is a few years away...I agree with Jonathan on this...the timing and technology are not right yet for most people.
If a G4 sub $500 imac mini is the one more thing at the keynote...Steve is going to have to triple the RDF rays...this just isnt news. Cutting the screen off an Ibook isnt any great feat nor worth the end of a keynote. G5 PBs is worth one more thing
My bet..Think Secret is right...and there is no one more thing at the keynote. I hope Im wrong since I will be there.
Im hoping Ilife 05 under the seats by the way!!!
golfstud said:Great board so far..read every post.
Being a teacher in a high school..here is what I would like to see Apple come up with.
$599 headless G5. Same basic specs as what rumored here. $100 more because it is a G5. $699 with Super Drive.
$899 G5 Emac
the $1099 G5 Emac with Superdrive.
The all in one design is great for schools and the weight of the emac is a theft deterrent.
Basically if you want the all in one it costs the same as the headless mac, sans monitor.
Apple should leave the G4 to the portables and move to dual core soon.
why the G5 thing wont happen...Imac prices would have to drop a bit, and the supply from IBM is still not up to snuff from what Ive read.
The Set top device from apple is a few years away...I agree with Jonathan on this...the timing and technology are not right yet for most people.
If a G4 sub $500 imac mini is the one more thing at the keynote...Steve is going to have to triple the RDF rays...this just isnt news. Cutting the screen off an Ibook isnt any great feat nor worth the end of a keynote. G5 PBs is worth one more thing
My bet..Think Secret is right...and there is no one more thing at the keynote. I hope Im wrong since I will be there.
Im hoping Ilife 05 under the seats by the way!!!
Great I would much rather like a G5 headless
for a couple of 100's more than a G4sorry
Hate to say it, but those "advertisements" are jokes. Every month iCreate has a different "What if Apple made...". There was one with an iPhone, this one with a g5mini. But they are just jokes.
That said, I think this would be one of the best ideas to come out of Cupertino in quite some time... it would be perfect for people like my parents: just need email, internet, digital photos and can't figure out what virus is infecting their stupid PC.
Here's hoping and waiting for the keynote.
kaneda said:
Hate to say it, but those "advertisements" are jokes. Every month iCreate has a different "What if Apple made...". There was one with an iPhone, this one with a g5mini. But they are just jokes.
That said, I think this would be one of the best ideas to come out of Cupertino in quite some time... it would be perfect for people like my parents: just need email, internet, digital photos and can't figure out what virus is infecting their stupid PC.
Here's hoping and waiting for the keynote.
I would bet that if released, it will be a $599 MiniMac. When has Apple came out with something at a price point that everyone thought was cheap?
Everyone thought the iPod mini would come out at $199.00. We all know that it came priced at $249.00 and sold like crazy.
$599 is my guess. (I also think they will sell like crazy).
To put things in perspective a MiniMac would be the same price as an iPod Photo 60 gig.
Everyone thought the iPod mini would come out at $199.00. We all know that it came priced at $249.00 and sold like crazy.
$599 is my guess. (I also think they will sell like crazy).
To put things in perspective a MiniMac would be the same price as an iPod Photo 60 gig.
I like this, BUT:
- It's still incredibly overpriced for what it offers, like all desktop Macs (as are the laptops but the laptops are actually less overpriced than an equivalent Windows desktop which is why I bought my iBook and fell in love with the Mac - though I HATE Steve Jobs' dishonest and anticompetitive business practices (intentionally disabling spanning, constant lawsuits, not licensing the OS to other hardware vendors, one-button built-in trackpad, and other things that if he'd stop would skyrocket Apple to #1)
- I'd be reluctant to buy a G4 now (I bought my iBook in the spring after the update). I just can't see software in a couple years running on the old 32 bit architecture.
Still, the basic idea is a step in the right direction.
- It's still incredibly overpriced for what it offers, like all desktop Macs (as are the laptops but the laptops are actually less overpriced than an equivalent Windows desktop which is why I bought my iBook and fell in love with the Mac - though I HATE Steve Jobs' dishonest and anticompetitive business practices (intentionally disabling spanning, constant lawsuits, not licensing the OS to other hardware vendors, one-button built-in trackpad, and other things that if he'd stop would skyrocket Apple to #1)
- I'd be reluctant to buy a G4 now (I bought my iBook in the spring after the update). I just can't see software in a couple years running on the old 32 bit architecture.
Still, the basic idea is a step in the right direction.
golfstud said:Great board so far..read every post.
My bet..Think Secret is right...and there is no one more thing at the keynote. I hope Im wrong since I will be there.
I really don't think this system will be announced, the one more thing will more than likely be a flash iPod! But if they do its smart because they can sell the Tiger upgrade to the people that can't wait off the bat. UNNNLEESS they ship the same time Tiger comes out and that my friend would be sweet! God Apple is on some roll!
"apple plus a beatiful white apple will look horrible with some cheazy windows monitor"
LOL, not all Windows hardware looks poor. My LG 1520B is beautifully designed and looks fantastic. No DVI though (the 17" model does) but I just wanted a cheap and good image quality monitor for my non-DVI iBook. It looks fantastic, both the image quality and the design. I mean, Dell is ugly but there's beautiful hardware. Besides there's no such thing as a Windows monitor. There's RGBHV and DVI. Oh, and not all x86 users are Windows users!!! Linux my friend (and FreeBSD and other x86 OSes).
"I don't believe Apple could make even a 15" monitor for the price of 500 dollars"
OF COURSE THEY COULD. Apple doesn't want to make affordable products, they're the Ferrari of the computer world. Artificially overpriced, but definitely high quality products. Not to say that's wrong, but I hate hearing the Mac fans say "Apple can't make affordable products". They just choose not to. This is a step in the right direction.
LOL, not all Windows hardware looks poor. My LG 1520B is beautifully designed and looks fantastic. No DVI though (the 17" model does) but I just wanted a cheap and good image quality monitor for my non-DVI iBook. It looks fantastic, both the image quality and the design. I mean, Dell is ugly but there's beautiful hardware. Besides there's no such thing as a Windows monitor. There's RGBHV and DVI. Oh, and not all x86 users are Windows users!!! Linux my friend (and FreeBSD and other x86 OSes).
"I don't believe Apple could make even a 15" monitor for the price of 500 dollars"
OF COURSE THEY COULD. Apple doesn't want to make affordable products, they're the Ferrari of the computer world. Artificially overpriced, but definitely high quality products. Not to say that's wrong, but I hate hearing the Mac fans say "Apple can't make affordable products". They just choose not to. This is a step in the right direction.
okay, since it seems everyone else who is registered on macrumors had soemthing to say, I'll say my bit on this model.
1. I like it.
2. At 1.25 GHZ it's faster than my mac and will prob have a better graphics card (this card in my imac is killing me on so many levels)
Anyways, I compared it to Dell's $499 bottom model here's the differences.
Dell:
free 17" CRT
Only reads CDs (maybe writes too, not sure)
Winblows XP home
Apple:
Provide your own monitor
Combo Drive
Mac OS X
those are the differences between the 2 computers. that's enough i feel to give Dell a run for their money. Oh yeah I'm pretty sure Dell's doesn't have a Firewire 400 either. Not sure on the USB 2.0 count.
1. I like it.
2. At 1.25 GHZ it's faster than my mac and will prob have a better graphics card (this card in my imac is killing me on so many levels)
Anyways, I compared it to Dell's $499 bottom model here's the differences.
Dell:
free 17" CRT
Only reads CDs (maybe writes too, not sure)
Winblows XP home
Apple:
Provide your own monitor
Combo Drive
Mac OS X
those are the differences between the 2 computers. that's enough i feel to give Dell a run for their money. Oh yeah I'm pretty sure Dell's doesn't have a Firewire 400 either. Not sure on the USB 2.0 count.
Misc ramblin's
and it does more for me with less hassle than I could possibly have gotten for that money with Windows or Linux.
This new machine won't scrape the bottom either--it won't be the cheapest computer in history, it won't look, feel, and break down like something cheap, and it won't lack some "frills" (in the low-end Windows world) like Firewire, built-in antennas, and a real dedicated GPU with VRAM.
But it will strike a new balance that is needed. And it will be plenty of power: if an iBook G4 is sufficient for many people (and it is) then a desktop of similar specs would be too.
True--but BTO a PowerMac and you'll get non-Apple displays offered right there on the page. Apple has always been willing to let that happen.
Yes, it's by choice that they don't enter the very bottom of the market. But you CAN'T go to the very bottom in pricing without sacrificing quality--that's not artificial. Apple's hardware--laptops AND desktops alike--have the lowest failure rate in the industry (see Consumer Reports stats), plus features and components lacking in bargain-basement PCs. So the question has to be, how do you define "affordable?" I afforded an eMac just finemarkie said:
and it does more for me with less hassle than I could possibly have gotten for that money with Windows or Linux.This new machine won't scrape the bottom either--it won't be the cheapest computer in history, it won't look, feel, and break down like something cheap, and it won't lack some "frills" (in the low-end Windows world) like Firewire, built-in antennas, and a real dedicated GPU with VRAM.
But it will strike a new balance that is needed. And it will be plenty of power: if an iBook G4 is sufficient for many people (and it is) then a desktop of similar specs would be too.
Again and again
And this tends to be the #1 complaint among the magazine reviewers with Apple's computers. There is never enough RAM. In 2010, there still won't be enough RAM, even though base configurations will probably start out at 1 GB of RAM. Sick, eh?
Apple is somewhat odd in its hardware. At times, it will innovate and promote new and/or developing technologies. Sometimes, many years ahead of its time (Newton, floppy-less computers, DVD-writers etc.). Other times, they lag behind for what is probably a little more ideal in specs (more RAM, better video cards, faster CPUs, etc.)
However, today, the idea dawned on me, how perfect an inexpensive headless Mac would be for me at work. I currently use my own iBook for some graphics work, web design, etc. Since that laptop only has Mac OS 10.1, I'd like another system with 10.3, so I can use more modern applications (BB Edit 8, OmniWeb 5, Safari). I already have a monitor at work with a switch, so I can easily switch between a PC and a Mac with the monitor. A low price for such a computer, would be about perfect for my work, either to convince the office to buy it for me, or for me to finance it myself.
The interesting idea behind an inexpensive Mac would be to see if such a Mac only eats into the other Macs sales, and it never really caters to a new, outside wealth of users, OR if this could garner some new interest for those who want yet another machine, or want to try out a Mac without spending a small mint.
And all things considered, when the first Mac came out, it came in at nearly $2500, and that was almost 21 years ago. Amazing to see that computers have been one of the few things to have gone down in price, so much, that computers have become quite an expendable commodity.
zach said:
And this tends to be the #1 complaint among the magazine reviewers with Apple's computers. There is never enough RAM. In 2010, there still won't be enough RAM, even though base configurations will probably start out at 1 GB of RAM. Sick, eh?
Apple is somewhat odd in its hardware. At times, it will innovate and promote new and/or developing technologies. Sometimes, many years ahead of its time (Newton, floppy-less computers, DVD-writers etc.). Other times, they lag behind for what is probably a little more ideal in specs (more RAM, better video cards, faster CPUs, etc.)
However, today, the idea dawned on me, how perfect an inexpensive headless Mac would be for me at work. I currently use my own iBook for some graphics work, web design, etc. Since that laptop only has Mac OS 10.1, I'd like another system with 10.3, so I can use more modern applications (BB Edit 8, OmniWeb 5, Safari). I already have a monitor at work with a switch, so I can easily switch between a PC and a Mac with the monitor. A low price for such a computer, would be about perfect for my work, either to convince the office to buy it for me, or for me to finance it myself.
The interesting idea behind an inexpensive Mac would be to see if such a Mac only eats into the other Macs sales, and it never really caters to a new, outside wealth of users, OR if this could garner some new interest for those who want yet another machine, or want to try out a Mac without spending a small mint.
And all things considered, when the first Mac came out, it came in at nearly $2500, and that was almost 21 years ago. Amazing to see that computers have been one of the few things to have gone down in price, so much, that computers have become quite an expendable commodity.
Knowing Apple, I'm still a bit skeptical. Somehow, it's too good to be true, even if it was priced at $599. I sure hope Apple will announce that system at MWSF but wouldn't be the least surprise if the keynote ended without the big bang most of us are waiting and hoping for.
edenwaith said:
I remember working at a graphic design firm. We were putting together an ad for the latest eMachines, this was about 4 years ago. The machine called for 128MB RAM. My co-worker at the time was shaking his head saying, who needs 128MB RAM, like it was a bad thing.
What's really funny is that 4 years later, Apple has only doubled the amount of RAM in their base configuration. Apple really needs to raise the minimum to 512MB RAM. 256 is way too little. (The price sweet spot is 512MB anyway, even if it means they have to charge an extra $10. DO IT!
does he intentialnally hurt apple?
Do you think steve does these things to hurt apple? One button = ease of use. no licensing the OS is simple apple got killed by it in the 90s. the constant lawsuits are a fact of the us economic system, every company has lawsuits. you are a fool if you think Steve is doing things because he is stuborn and not becasue he thinks it benifits apple in the long run. You think steve wanted to make that deal with microsoft in the mid 90s? no but for the future of apple it had to be made, I dont' really care to give other examples or explain more, unless you still don't get it.
Oh also Steve is a massive apple share holder so it's in his interest for the company to do well. now stop being dense
markie said:
Do you think steve does these things to hurt apple? One button = ease of use. no licensing the OS is simple apple got killed by it in the 90s. the constant lawsuits are a fact of the us economic system, every company has lawsuits. you are a fool if you think Steve is doing things because he is stuborn and not becasue he thinks it benifits apple in the long run. You think steve wanted to make that deal with microsoft in the mid 90s? no but for the future of apple it had to be made, I dont' really care to give other examples or explain more, unless you still don't get it.
Oh also Steve is a massive apple share holder so it's in his interest for the company to do well. now stop being dense
In two more years, it would almost be a decade that Steve has been back at Apple. Time flew by so fast while he was back. But I think the fruits of his labor are finally being realized now. Good thing also Steve didnt sell NeXtSTEP to IBM, that would have spelled the end to Apple. and Microsoft.
I think the last hurdle Apple faces is the need to get rid of the one-button mouse. It is the last thing standing that prevents it from being accepted by 95% of the computing world.
I think the last hurdle Apple faces is the need to get rid of the one-button mouse. It is the last thing standing that prevents it from being accepted by 95% of the computing world.
Man you guys are hard on me, I love my iBook and would never go back to Windows as my main OS BUT:
"Do you think steve does these things to hurt apple? One button = ease of use"
LOL, seriously, you must be one die-hard Steve fan. That's completely illogical because it's STILL A TWO BUTTON USER INTERFACE! You just ctrl-click. It's a PITA and Steve needs to wake up and smell the three button mice. It's the number one complaint I hear from friends about macs is how awful the darn mice are and half of them aren't smart enough to realize it's USB and you just plug in a real mice and toss the toy in the trash with a desktop mac. I'd love the second button (and a scroll section to the touchpad) on my iBook. Though I hate touchpads anyway and so always carry a cordless mouse...
"Yes, it's by choice that they don't enter the very bottom of the market. But you CAN'T go to the very bottom in pricing without sacrificing quality--that's not artificial."
To some extent, but Apple's profit margins are surely way higher than say eMachines or MPC (to name a couple good PC vendors - eMachines is actually really good since they're under new ownership and changed manufacturing partners)
"Apple's hardware--laptops AND desktops alike--have the lowest failure rate in the industry (see Consumer Reports stats)"
They're reliable, but ignore CR - they're idiots. But seriously, much of the stuff that breaks often (the LCD panels, hard drives, optical drives) are the same items used in better x86 PCs... Apple's good reputation is due far more to the excellent support in my opinion than the lack of probles.
"plus features and components lacking in bargain-basement PCs. So the question has to be, how do you define "affordable?" I afforded an eMac just fine and it does more for me with less hassle than I could possibly have gotten for that money with Windows or Linux."
Affordable to me is sub $400 for the box. And I'm sure I could put together a technically better system than this new Mac for under $400 - yes with real video and FireWire Buy - maybe about the same. That's why it's nice to see Apple finally waking up a little.
"if an iBook G4 is sufficient for many people (and it is) then a desktop of similar specs would be too."
The iBook G4 (at least for me) is sufficient BECAUSE IT'S A LAPTOP. If it was a desktop I'd laugh at it. That's the thing there.
"Do you think steve does these things to hurt apple? One button = ease of use"
LOL, seriously, you must be one die-hard Steve fan. That's completely illogical because it's STILL A TWO BUTTON USER INTERFACE! You just ctrl-click. It's a PITA and Steve needs to wake up and smell the three button mice. It's the number one complaint I hear from friends about macs is how awful the darn mice are and half of them aren't smart enough to realize it's USB and you just plug in a real mice and toss the toy in the trash with a desktop mac. I'd love the second button (and a scroll section to the touchpad) on my iBook. Though I hate touchpads anyway and so always carry a cordless mouse...
"Yes, it's by choice that they don't enter the very bottom of the market. But you CAN'T go to the very bottom in pricing without sacrificing quality--that's not artificial."
To some extent, but Apple's profit margins are surely way higher than say eMachines or MPC (to name a couple good PC vendors - eMachines is actually really good since they're under new ownership and changed manufacturing partners)
"Apple's hardware--laptops AND desktops alike--have the lowest failure rate in the industry (see Consumer Reports stats)"
They're reliable, but ignore CR - they're idiots. But seriously, much of the stuff that breaks often (the LCD panels, hard drives, optical drives) are the same items used in better x86 PCs... Apple's good reputation is due far more to the excellent support in my opinion than the lack of probles.
"plus features and components lacking in bargain-basement PCs. So the question has to be, how do you define "affordable?" I afforded an eMac just fine and it does more for me with less hassle than I could possibly have gotten for that money with Windows or Linux."
Affordable to me is sub $400 for the box. And I'm sure I could put together a technically better system than this new Mac for under $400 - yes with real video and FireWire
Buy - maybe about the same. That's why it's nice to see Apple finally waking up a little."if an iBook G4 is sufficient for many people (and it is) then a desktop of similar specs would be too."
The iBook G4 (at least for me) is sufficient BECAUSE IT'S A LAPTOP. If it was a desktop I'd laugh at it. That's the thing there.
mclosers said:
dude, you make some salient points there. but i would have to ask, how do you explain the RAM issue being discussed here, in terms of it lagging behind the winBlows world...
although ask most people that the imac mini is targeted towards, those with an iBook g4 and 256mb ram... 256 cruises fine...
Ack!
After reading all the off topic posts, I did some research on my own yesterday. I made a "Rather" unscientific poll of fellow employees and a few family members. Here are the results:
# People = 17
# Macs = 0
# Pc's = 12
# Pc's OVER 3 ghz = 2
# Pc's UNDER 1ghz = 7
All the machines under 1ghz are running 98 or ME
Now, tell me there is no market for this machine. Has anyone here complaining about the speed of a 1.25ghz Mac actually USED? one. A claim of 5 minutes to start iDVD? Come on man, give me a break. And u timed this using a sundial?
My only REAL mac experience came from running OS X on a Beige g3 W/ a 600mhz G4 card, and 512mb ram. This machine did EVERYTHING I wanted to do on it with ease. Finder, web, mail, etc. NOTE, my home PC is a DUAL Athlon XP 3200+, so I think I would notice a lack of speed. Yes, a 600mhz G4 was quick enough for me, and my family to use with no problems. Come to think of it, the Athlon only got turned on for "Heavy" usage, which obviously a 600mhz G4 could not handle, IE movie encoding, etc.
Now, here is a machine with a much faster (and quartz Extreme capable) video card, 2x the processor speed, 4x the FSB, and everyone is saying "it will be too slow!"
Yes, there are much faster machines. But after my rather unscientific poll, I realized that this would be a BIG UPGRADE to the average consumer, atleast in my neck of the world. Perhaps everyone in your town is running 3+ Ghz P4 Computers, but around here, most people are just happy to get email, etc. I was at a friends house just last month, they asked me to look at the pc in the den. Took 8 minutes to boot to a moving cursor running windows me. Asked what could be done to help it. Not alot I told them, it really needs replaced. Some ram, etc, might bump it, but here is what I could recommend, and no probs!
I dare say anyone that claims a 1.25ghz G4 is unusable for the consumer has:
A. Never truly used one
is
B. Comparing it to something that is NOT in its category
and
C. Has no idea who or what the AVERAGE consumer really is
The average consumer is that guy working in dairymart. The average consumer doesnt know a P4 from an XP from a G4 from a G5. They know they might like the way something looks. They definitely know how much something costs, and that is where this hits the spot!
After reading all the off topic posts, I did some research on my own yesterday. I made a "Rather" unscientific poll of fellow employees and a few family members. Here are the results:
# People = 17
# Macs = 0
# Pc's = 12
# Pc's OVER 3 ghz = 2
# Pc's UNDER 1ghz = 7
All the machines under 1ghz are running 98 or ME
Now, tell me there is no market for this machine. Has anyone here complaining about the speed of a 1.25ghz Mac actually USED? one. A claim of 5 minutes to start iDVD? Come on man, give me a break. And u timed this using a sundial?
My only REAL mac experience came from running OS X on a Beige g3 W/ a 600mhz G4 card, and 512mb ram. This machine did EVERYTHING I wanted to do on it with ease. Finder, web, mail, etc. NOTE, my home PC is a DUAL Athlon XP 3200+, so I think I would notice a lack of speed. Yes, a 600mhz G4 was quick enough for me, and my family to use with no problems. Come to think of it, the Athlon only got turned on for "Heavy" usage, which obviously a 600mhz G4 could not handle, IE movie encoding, etc.
Now, here is a machine with a much faster (and quartz Extreme capable) video card, 2x the processor speed, 4x the FSB, and everyone is saying "it will be too slow!"
Yes, there are much faster machines. But after my rather unscientific poll, I realized that this would be a BIG UPGRADE to the average consumer, atleast in my neck of the world. Perhaps everyone in your town is running 3+ Ghz P4 Computers, but around here, most people are just happy to get email, etc. I was at a friends house just last month, they asked me to look at the pc in the den. Took 8 minutes to boot to a moving cursor running windows me. Asked what could be done to help it. Not alot I told them, it really needs replaced. Some ram, etc, might bump it, but here is what I could recommend, and no probs!
I dare say anyone that claims a 1.25ghz G4 is unusable for the consumer has:
A. Never truly used one
is
B. Comparing it to something that is NOT in its category
and
C. Has no idea who or what the AVERAGE consumer really is
The average consumer is that guy working in dairymart. The average consumer doesnt know a P4 from an XP from a G4 from a G5. They know they might like the way something looks. They definitely know how much something costs, and that is where this hits the spot!
Hmmm just a few thoughts about price... (assuming that this rumor is true)
The CPU costs about $200 if you buy it from Arrows (small batch), so I'm guessing that Apple gets it for about $150.
The GPU + mem (64 or so) is iirc about $20.
The northbride is propably an older design, so say about $10. (after looking at other nb prices this looks reasonable)
Making the board with all of the other components $10. (Based on a conversation with a guy I know that makes embedded boards)
The mem can propably be had for about $30. (based on newegg browsing)
Combo drive + HD (80GB) is propably about $100. (based on newegg browsing)
The case + PSU is (say) $50. (based on newegg browsing)
Software + aditional costs (shipping, keyboard etc..) another $100.
That ends up being about $470 ie a profit of $29US, not huge but there are margins. Not to mention that I wouldn't be suprised if Apple can use their buying powe to shave off another $50US of that. So that the margins end up being $79, or about 16% (15.8...%) of the retail price of $499.
The CPU costs about $200 if you buy it from Arrows (small batch), so I'm guessing that Apple gets it for about $150.
The GPU + mem (64 or so) is iirc about $20.
The northbride is propably an older design, so say about $10. (after looking at other nb prices this looks reasonable)
Making the board with all of the other components $10. (Based on a conversation with a guy I know that makes embedded boards)
The mem can propably be had for about $30. (based on newegg browsing)
Combo drive + HD (80GB) is propably about $100. (based on newegg browsing)
The case + PSU is (say) $50. (based on newegg browsing)
Software + aditional costs (shipping, keyboard etc..) another $100.
That ends up being about $470 ie a profit of $29US, not huge but there are margins. Not to mention that I wouldn't be suprised if Apple can use their buying powe to shave off another $50US of that. So that the margins end up being $79, or about 16% (15.8...%) of the retail price of $499.
Headless iMac and iPod evolution
A few weeks ago my mind was wandering and a vision hit me. A headless iMac with a neat built in iPod dock. Why? not just to synch but also to drive the headless iMac. The iPod would in effect be the main Hard Drive or your User Account with all applications and documents.
So you carry your iPod - you visit a friend or an iMac cafe - you just insert your iPod and "it's you" - your apps, your photolibrary, your iTunes library, your work.
Is this practical? I think it would work - just think of thousands of headless iMacs dotted around the world - they are just dumb until an iPod is attached. Also the headless could still have it's own HD if necessary - plugging in your iPod would just logout and allow you to login and drive the headless from "your" iPod.
Just a thought, I'm sure others have thought the same. Feedback please....
Thanks,
A few weeks ago my mind was wandering and a vision hit me. A headless iMac with a neat built in iPod dock. Why? not just to synch but also to drive the headless iMac. The iPod would in effect be the main Hard Drive or your User Account with all applications and documents.
So you carry your iPod - you visit a friend or an iMac cafe - you just insert your iPod and "it's you" - your apps, your photolibrary, your iTunes library, your work.
Is this practical? I think it would work - just think of thousands of headless iMacs dotted around the world - they are just dumb until an iPod is attached. Also the headless could still have it's own HD if necessary - plugging in your iPod would just logout and allow you to login and drive the headless from "your" iPod.
Just a thought, I'm sure others have thought the same. Feedback please....
Thanks,
i think i would definitely buy one of these.
i mean, if someone was selling a G4 Powermac with 1.25ghz, 256mb, 40gb, combo drive on this forums Classifieds page for $499 - i'd buy that too!!
i sold my Powerbook some time ago and have been happily using an HP AMD64 laptop since (for 3x better performance with some audio plugins, couldnt afford a G5, plus i wanted to stick with a laptop), but i really DO miss OSX for all operations non-audio. I've got an old Compaq PC that i use at home for little internet stuff and as a server, i'd love to replace it with a sub-$500 G4 such as the one being discussed. Let's hope this becomes more than just a rumor.
i mean, if someone was selling a G4 Powermac with 1.25ghz, 256mb, 40gb, combo drive on this forums Classifieds page for $499 - i'd buy that too!!
i sold my Powerbook some time ago and have been happily using an HP AMD64 laptop since (for 3x better performance with some audio plugins, couldnt afford a G5, plus i wanted to stick with a laptop), but i really DO miss OSX for all operations non-audio. I've got an old Compaq PC that i use at home for little internet stuff and as a server, i'd love to replace it with a sub-$500 G4 such as the one being discussed. Let's hope this becomes more than just a rumor.