Eric_Z said:
Good point, that's why I think the "sub-600" price tag as mentioned by AI seems more plausible than the $499. I guess if this headless mac was to become real, it would be priced at $599, with $549 being a possibility, too.
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
Good point, that's why I think the "sub-600" price tag as mentioned by AI seems more plausible than the $499. I guess if this headless mac was to become real, it would be priced at $599, with $549 being a possibility, too.
budugu said:This is going to keep us busy for a while... after the enthusiasm and the blood rush settled down a bit... it is hard to think how this will pursuade people? ofcourse the there will be an initial knee jerk reaction, but more i think of it it will be the people who already have a mac (like us) that are going to buy it. The base model starting it at 500, any reasonable (minimum to run panther/tiger) would end up atleast at 600 (with out a monitor). There is no entry level monitor from apple anyway. I tried to hook up my powerbook with a cheap 200$ monitor, result was just hopeless graphics (worse than windows). With no way to upgrade, you are pretty much going to eat into imac and emac sales than get more people. no matter what ever 'wizardary' apple marketing can show, G4 is not a match for the P4. At 600 people get highend desktops (if you are lucky add a free flat panel), not an entry level computer.
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!!
It could be possible that this machine will be setup for using any moniter? Or, whjat would pribably happem is apple will offer as a option, an inexpensive 15" lcd like all the pc manufacturers.
Also, I run a old Cube, while I have upgrades ram to the max, harddrive and video, the cpu is still the old 450 that came with it, I would love one of these new machines! I have a 20" apple lcd, and external drives, so a that new machine with more ram would be perfect!
"Home on iPod" was a feature originally slated for Panther - it even appeared briefly on www.apple.com (on the Panther sneak preview microsite) before being removed without explanation. I suspect the problem was that Apple tries to hide the Music files when synced to the iPod (although they're actually easy to find with the terminal, here: /Volumes/IPODNAME/iPod_Control/Music). For Home in iPod to work, the music files would have to be in full view here: /Volumes/IPODNAME/Users/~/Music/iTunes, and I don't think that the music companies would like that very much!Marc the Mac said:
Everything looks pretty close except the fact that Cpu's are NOWHERE near that price for a G4 1.25ghz. I would guess apple lays these in for 50$ish.
Best way to come up with a fair price for this is to take an Ibook and start subtracting the laptop components.
Bill
Best way to come up with a fair price for this is to take an Ibook and start subtracting the laptop components.
Bill
Eric_Z said:
You've got your prices wrong. The G4 1.25 in volume = $30
Those replacement card vendors are relatively low volume and they still take you to the cleaners.
Those replacement card vendors are relatively low volume and they still take you to the cleaners.
Eric_Z said:
Have you read the thread, it has been updated to being under $600. IOW, Apple will sell this for $599, maybe $579. No way in hell do they sell a computer at 16% GM, way too low for them.
Assuming your cost numbers and factoring in other expenses (R&D, manufacturing, packaging, shipping), Apple can sell this for under $600 and keep their margins.
Marc the Mac said:
There was a rumor a while back about "Home on iPod", your home folder on your iPod. Never saw the light of day. The iPod's hard drive is not meant to be used as a desktop hard drive is. Unless you constantly skip tunes and don't use playlists, the drive spins up and loads up it's buffer and is not in use for long periods of time. Would not be the case if you were using it as your boot drive.
I know there is a lot of buzz but its just hard for me to get excited about another G4 based machine that for the most part will be dumbed down not to compete with the current imac which was dumbed down from the powermac which has been dumbed down from the original powermac run. How old is a 1.25 G4??? come on people i have had a 1.4 in my 733 for 2 years now and am using a Amd 3500 now. People getting excited about another old G4 machine
" At 600 people get highend desktops (if you are lucky add a free flat panel), not an entry level computer."
Ummm...$600 is NOT a highend desktop in the PC world. Im not sure where that thought came from.
\
Ummm...$600 is NOT a highend desktop in the PC world. Im not sure where that thought came from.
\
Rootman said:
Thanks for giving me an asthma attack,
that is the funniest thing I have read in ages. When the current King of Sarcasm dies, Rootman should have the crown.I've revised my own order in waiting - Im still going to get a miniMac for me, but have added one for my Dad and one for my sister's family - both parties badly beaten and shocked by assorted PC experiences. As people who know not the difference between G4, Pentium 4 or M4 (a London to Wales freeway for them reading from the States), they will love that it just works and links up to their existing monitors.
How much Memory??
This sounds great!
I read an article on CNN Money this morning about it. I have the first g4 (Yikes) that i was looking to upgrade for about 3-400 bucks. If this new Mac can sport a gig of ram my Yikes will join the ranks of my Performa 405
This sounds great!
I read an article on CNN Money this morning about it. I have the first g4 (Yikes) that i was looking to upgrade for about 3-400 bucks. If this new Mac can sport a gig of ram my Yikes will join the ranks of my Performa 405
Software demands for home computers have plateaued
People continue to claim that noone will buy a new Mac with yesterday's hardware. However, most people only run yesterday's software. You see for the basic home user, the hardware demands for what they do now and in the near future on their computer is not going to change. E-mail, web surfing, photo editing, video editing, *basic* gaming, office applications, and music playing are handled just fine by a 500MHz G3. I know because I have a house full of them. Other than the latest, graphics-heavy games, a 1.25GHz G4 is more than capable for handling these other tasks.
The paradox is that though that is all average computer user needs, average computer user thinks he needs a "fast" computer with more GHz than his last computer or his neighbor's computer. So how do you convince him an inexpensive Mac with a 1.25 GHz G4 will do the job? Start by marketing this new Mac on what it can do rather than focusing on the specifications. Wouldn't that be nice if that's how computers were sold. That's how they were marketed a long, long time ago. If only we could convince computer buyers that it makes no difference if their computer runs at XX GHz when it's plagued by viruses/spyware/etc and doesn't have the elegantly integrated software to make editing movies/music/photos/DVDs and joy.
People continue to claim that noone will buy a new Mac with yesterday's hardware. However, most people only run yesterday's software. You see for the basic home user, the hardware demands for what they do now and in the near future on their computer is not going to change. E-mail, web surfing, photo editing, video editing, *basic* gaming, office applications, and music playing are handled just fine by a 500MHz G3. I know because I have a house full of them. Other than the latest, graphics-heavy games, a 1.25GHz G4 is more than capable for handling these other tasks.
The paradox is that though that is all average computer user needs, average computer user thinks he needs a "fast" computer with more GHz than his last computer or his neighbor's computer. So how do you convince him an inexpensive Mac with a 1.25 GHz G4 will do the job? Start by marketing this new Mac on what it can do rather than focusing on the specifications. Wouldn't that be nice if that's how computers were sold. That's how they were marketed a long, long time ago. If only we could convince computer buyers that it makes no difference if their computer runs at XX GHz when it's plagued by viruses/spyware/etc and doesn't have the elegantly integrated software to make editing movies/music/photos/DVDs and joy.
Headless iMac and iPod evolution
I have 10.3.5 installed on my 20gig ipod along with Final Cut Express, Maya and some othe apps. The main problen is the ipod gets hot really quick when swapping to disk. At one point I though I fried the display. To fix it I used Swap Cop to change the location of the swap file from the ipod to the Macs own drive.
Overall Its a great idea!
Marc the Mac said:
I have 10.3.5 installed on my 20gig ipod along with Final Cut Express, Maya and some othe apps. The main problen is the ipod gets hot really quick when swapping to disk. At one point I though I fried the display. To fix it I used Swap Cop to change the location of the swap file from the ipod to the Macs own drive.
Overall Its a great idea!
I am surprised that some think that the iPod dock built in, is such a great idea. The reason Apple probably walked away from that idea, is that the form factor of the iPod will change over time. Andf already form factor of mini and standard Pod is different in size and thickness. So, it is hard to come up with a built-in option without making the options rather fast obsolete.
And the prices mentioned in the few post here above, are completely high end of spectrum. Volume discounts for Apple will be much higher when you order in the six or seven digit volumes. Apple's mark-up will be much higher than the 15-20 percentile. But margins still will be significant, like around 30%. Will Apple bring the price that low at introduction? Probably not. Later they will build an upgraded version, and the lower end will come down in price. That happened with the eMac, iMac and powerMac. I am really looking forward to this rumor to be true.
And the prices mentioned in the few post here above, are completely high end of spectrum. Volume discounts for Apple will be much higher when you order in the six or seven digit volumes. Apple's mark-up will be much higher than the 15-20 percentile. But margins still will be significant, like around 30%. Will Apple bring the price that low at introduction? Probably not. Later they will build an upgraded version, and the lower end will come down in price. That happened with the eMac, iMac and powerMac. I am really looking forward to this rumor to be true.
mactarkus said:
Exactly!!!!
I sold my PB 12" G4 867 and got an AMD 64 3000 Laptop from HP.
did i do it because 90% of the software titles i use ran like crap on the G4? No, it was fine with iLife, Macromedia MX, Photoshop, etc.. But 10% of the software i use, though i use it most of the time (Ableton Live and Native Instruments Reaktor) isn't altivec optimized, and therefore will give you alot more for your money on the Windows side of things. Since then i've traded up to AMD 64 3700, and i'm verry happy with this machine, but i do miss OSX.
It would be great to have my AMD laptop for the horsepower when making music and/or playing the occasional latest game releases, and a $499 G4 1.25ghz for 100% everything else. It will keep me off the PC for internet unless i'm travelling, and this will be safer. And i'll be able to get the OSX experience back. =)
i'm really looking forward to Expo and to see if Apple does announce this. I've got a spare Trinitron 17" flat CRT just waiting to be used and a $499 G4 would have to be the best use for it. It all reminds me of the Clone days, when you could get a Motorolla tower for dirt cheap, how exciting those days were ... and now a days we have OSX too ! And i have a birthday coming in March, i already know what i'm getting myself, so long as the rumor turns true.
rdowns said:
full agree apple will keep their margins ...they won't calculate very close ... there gotta be an _edu-price_ after all where they still make some money
cue the "artist renditions" of this headless imac (or really screenless emac/ibook) now please !
corywoolf said:
With all due respect:
The Florida hurricanes were bad - I was in Florida (on the panhandle) during part of one of them. However, the earthquake/tsunami in the Indian ocean area is many times worse. I haven't researched it, but I would venture to say this natural disaster has one of the highest death tolls in our milennium.
Needless to say, I am happy Apple is rumored to be making a sub-$500 computer!
mactarkus said:
Pundits have been making this claim for 15 years...its totally bogus. There will continue to be new applications that demand faster processors. Whether its PVR software for the PC, or just new graphical interfaces that demand more processor cycles. I think Apple's GUI is -- in some ways -- much better than it used to be due to the increased use of visual cues such as shadow and transparency....the ripple effect, the minimize effect, etc. are all useful and make the experience better, but in order to pull them off they need to be smooth. That calls for a fast CPU and bus. People will continue to make use of the extra power that is there.
Consider your argument: I was word processing and surfing the net with my Quadra 610, which had a 25 Mhz processor and 8 megs of RAM. Should I have kept that computer? I don't even play games on my Mac, nor render 3-d models...i only occasionally edit videos in iMovie. But I still appreciate the speed and new features of my G4 and OS X.
Dont Hurt Me said:I know there is a lot of buzz but its just hard for me to get excited about another G4 based machine that for the most part will be dumbed down not to compete with the current imac which was dumbed down from the powermac which has been dumbed down from the original powermac run. How old is a 1.25 G4??? come on people i have had a 1.4 in my 733 for 2 years now and am using a Amd 3500 now. People getting excited about another old G4 machine
i would say that "people get excited about an easier affordable mac who fits their needs"
this machine would not only be a desktop (i prefere them over laptops) with enough power for everything i do besides games (i can still play on my old pc fine), no all in one design and fits my price range exactly (i built my pc for 650)
sure i would take a 1600 G5 powermac but i don't have that much money
with the money iwould save myself i would be able to buy an internal dvd burner for my PC plus an ipod or perhaps even a brand new graphics card for my pc and i still would have money left (for a new table perhaps the computer has to stand somewhere
)Hardware requirements...
I'm not saying we won't ever need to have more capable software for the average home user. I just don't see any killer app on the scene right now that will demand faster hardware in the next year or so. I can see stuff like HDTV and 3D GUIs coming, but not today. As PVR duty, my 466MHz Beige G3 did similar chores for me for years via EyeTV. A 1.25GHz G4 can handle that no problem. With a suitable video card, this new Mac should be able to handle a shadow or two as well.
You don't have to tell me about real needs. I'm sitting here on a Dual 2.5GHz G5 with 2GB of RAM and an nVidia 6800 Ultra when the majority of of my tasks could be accomplished on that Quadra 610 -- I happen to still have one. Other than gaming, for me, movie editing is the only task that really needs this horsepower. However, I cranked out quite a few iMovies just fine on my 800MHz G4 iMac. It worked fine and served to motivate me to get something even faster. Hopefully a low cost Mac will do that for millions of new Mac users.
savar said:
I'm not saying we won't ever need to have more capable software for the average home user. I just don't see any killer app on the scene right now that will demand faster hardware in the next year or so. I can see stuff like HDTV and 3D GUIs coming, but not today. As PVR duty, my 466MHz Beige G3 did similar chores for me for years via EyeTV. A 1.25GHz G4 can handle that no problem. With a suitable video card, this new Mac should be able to handle a shadow or two as well.
savar said:
You don't have to tell me about real needs. I'm sitting here on a Dual 2.5GHz G5 with 2GB of RAM and an nVidia 6800 Ultra when the majority of of my tasks could be accomplished on that Quadra 610 -- I happen to still have one. Other than gaming, for me, movie editing is the only task that really needs this horsepower. However, I cranked out quite a few iMovies just fine on my 800MHz G4 iMac. It worked fine and served to motivate me to get something even faster. Hopefully a low cost Mac will do that for millions of new Mac users.
The age of the PC is over
I thought the age of the PC is over. Really!
I lost my Powerbook ~3 months, and never really have the motivation or urge to buy a new one. I have a computer at work, and it meets my needs. Quite frankly, I don't see a compelling reason to have a PC outside of work. One would argue that it really depends on your lifestyle. I agree, and I think a lot of people use theirs at home. For what? Sell their junk on eBay? Buy junk from eBay? Check email from mom?
I always think of myself as ahead of the technological curve e.g. buying cool gadgets before they become popular (iPod). If i'm one of those that sets the trend for what people will buy in the future, technology companies are in for a shocker! The next big thing? Technological regression is the next big thing! I'm gadget-out, man. F the email SH*T, i'm leaving that at work. I'm going to write my friends letters, and so what if it takes 4 days to get there. I'm turning off my cell phone when i leave work. My iPod is finding itself sitting on the dock more and more.
Although, a workable model of adult internet TV come around...Count me in!!
Chomo
I thought the age of the PC is over. Really!
I lost my Powerbook ~3 months, and never really have the motivation or urge to buy a new one. I have a computer at work, and it meets my needs. Quite frankly, I don't see a compelling reason to have a PC outside of work. One would argue that it really depends on your lifestyle. I agree, and I think a lot of people use theirs at home. For what? Sell their junk on eBay? Buy junk from eBay? Check email from mom?
I always think of myself as ahead of the technological curve e.g. buying cool gadgets before they become popular (iPod). If i'm one of those that sets the trend for what people will buy in the future, technology companies are in for a shocker! The next big thing? Technological regression is the next big thing! I'm gadget-out, man. F the email SH*T, i'm leaving that at work. I'm going to write my friends letters, and so what if it takes 4 days to get there. I'm turning off my cell phone when i leave work. My iPod is finding itself sitting on the dock more and more.
Although, a workable model of adult internet TV come around...Count me in!!
Chomo