Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
48
1123.6536.5321
MarkCollette said:
I think that an important point one can infer from your argument is that if Apple simply makes their iMacs or eMacs have the same specs (or worse) than the intro 1.6 GHz PowerMac, then they will compare unfavorably to a PC.

Which is why many of us say that the iMac should have a 2 GHz processor in it, which some say would necessitate a PowerMac bump before an iMac bump. If the PowerMacs are being bumped at WWDC, then that's a little late, and some of us have pinned our hopes on an iMac bump in April. So, we're headed for a let-down.

Now, one way around this, that I can see, would be for Apple to either allow an overlap in their pro an consumer lines, or do a mini-update to their pro lines. So, first off, give us single processor 1.8 and 2.0 GHz G5s in the iMac, and then either drop or leave the 1.6 GHz PowerMac.

But on thing is for sure: do not give us 1.2 and 1.4 GHz G5s in the iMac.


A 2 GHz G5 iMac would be amazing, don't get me wrong, but I just don't think we're going to see it. One question I have for you (I ask this with no sarcasm or hostile intentions whatsoever) is have you ever actually used a G5? If you have, you'll find them extremely quick, all things considered. Yes, not the quickest, and not mind-blowingly fast, but still fairly impressive nonetheless - I think this is a fair statement. So all I am getting at is that I think a 1.6 or 1.8 GHz G5 in an iMac would still be quite impressive, and for the consumer-level machine (along with a few more h/w upgrades to bring it on par with the existing PM towers, sans the expandibility), would be more than acceptable. Now then, this is assuming the PM's next speed bump is to 2.2, 2.4 and 2.6, or whatever they come out to be. By dropping the 1.6 and 1.8 G5s from the pro line, this would make their use in the iMacs more likely - in other words, there would still be enough product differentiation between the PM and iMac lines. However, if there are no PM updates until WWDC now, when we will presumably see 3 GHz PMs, hmm, perhaps we could see a 2 GHz G5 iMac soon thereafter, as the high-end iMac. However, I myself would prefer to see a G5 iMac sooner than WWDC, and if that means a 1.6 GHz G5, then so be it. Plus, my gut feeling tells me they won't jump up to a 2GHz iMac right off the bat - I just don't see it happening, but I've been wrong in the past. ;) :cool:
 

jade

macrumors 6502
May 3, 2003
332
2
thatwendigo said:
Let's try stating this a little more clearly. The G5 has SATA hard drives, twice the RAM expandability, the same graphics capability whenever the cards are ported over, the same speed DVD writer that you have in the Athlon 64 system (4x), Firewire 800, gigabit ethernet, internal wireless with an antenna attached to the case where almost every PC OEM uses USB bridges (latency, anyone?), more expandability in everything but optical drives, and most importantly of all, you get Mac OS X.

OS X is great...but if you are let's say a mid-level designer who spens all day using Adobe software, OS will not make a huge difference on your photoshop/illustrator/in design preformance. Personal preference is the winner here. Using wiindows or OS X will not make a difference in the quality of your output.

Come again? Both sides off Microsoft Office, which as much as I hate it, is the standard software package for "productivity," and the Apple iLife suite kicks the living hell out of the default software offered by other OEMs.

No one bundles office, but at leasty on the PC you get works or word perfect for basic productivity (which we all agree is on the level of Appleworks, but Word perfect is significantly better

The "net savings" you speak of leaves out a number of important factors, one of which is Panther, another of which is how much you have to spend to equal iLife, and the final one being the fact that a lot of this stuff that you're adding aftermarket (gigabit, firewire 800, and so on) are taking up your PCI slots and thus keeping you from other things you might need. The HP only has two open slots to begin with, remember... Just adding those two capabilities kills all expansion. Major points off, there.

in terms of expandability, my hypothetical customer (and many computer users) never really add anything internally in many cases...so it is perhaps a non-issue. FW 800 for many customers is not a necessity, as is gigabit ethernet...so these do not carry the same weight for me....and a huge margin of computer users I am hypothetically seling to

"Pretty good" is not the same as iLife, and OS is always a factor in cross-platform comparisons. Wannabes are wannabes, and you're just not getting the same quality. That's like saying that buying a Dell DJ and saving $50 over an iPod is just the same as owning an iPod... Ask anyone who's used the two, though, and see which one is more elegant and easier to use.

WE aren't talking ipods here there is no contest for mp3 players. Digital Camera use is painless with HP software, very iphoto like. The bundled movie editing software is decent, with a slight edge to imovie for ease of use, and a slight edge to microsoft for transitions. Arcsoft showbiz, i haven't used long enough to make a judgement compared to imovie. But the functionality is there and it is easy...so this is not the huge deal breaker you make it out to be..... unless you will only be editing movies all day (and then of course you would use FCP.

No, they're not. They're cheaply put together and sold by a company that is making little to no money from anything on the desktop market, propped up by their sales of printers, electronics, and server hardware. I ran the parts myself, and the nearest figure I came up with was around $900 on the machine you were saying costs $919.

What do HP's profit-making abilities have to do with whether or not an AMD 64 machine is a good performer compared with the 1.6 powermac. WE are comparing costs for the end users not company stockholders. At the end of the day in our Walmart-driven society...no one cares how much profit a manufacter makes on each product, as long as the pricing is something they are comfortable with paying.

Quite aside from that, most of the PC OEMs just buy someone else's software and rebrand it (Dell Jukebox, powered by MusicMatch, and HP with iTunes and the iPod, anyone?). Apple is a research company that is involved in every aspect of their computers, from motherboards to processors to OS to end-user software. Their overhead is vastly higher than a company that just takes parts off the shelf and sells them.

These are not comparable machines because they're not even produced in the same sort of manner, or sold by a company that's turning a profit on the desktop market. Hate it all you want, but the only company that can be compared to Apple is Dell, because all the others have killed themselves on trying to out-Dell the master of the low price game.


HP is not really trying to master the low end....they really sell to the enterprise market and the consumer space is a recent change for them. They never sold to consumers until the past few years. As long as HP continues to sell well in the enterprise with their higher end servers, workstations and sesktops, as well as their printers, their consumer product line doesn't need to generate mass profits. The same could be said for Apple. Apple aims to sell 60% pro mix overall and makes significantly less money on the consumer lineup. Not really important in terms of computer performance per dollar.

AS much as you like to say Apple and HP and other PC OEM's aren't competing in the same space, when it comes down to it they are competing for the same customer. And if these customers find more value per dollar on the PC side, well it makes perfect sense to get one. Among the graphic designers I have chatted with, many are facing an extremely difficult decision. Looking at the hardware on the PC, and the immense improvements in Windows ease of use and hardware performance in the necessary software, it doesn't always make sense to pay the Apple premium for their line of work.

In terms of home users, the reduced headaches and TCO of Apple may be worthwhile for some customers.

But we all need to be realistic here, Apple still needs to make some pretty serious leaps in price and performance to be a true option for a lot of computer users, and stop the Mac users fleeing for windows do to the cost of Apple hardware. Even if Apple makes the stockholders happy, they have a large responsibility to customers as well. In order to increase the rate os OS X adoption and OS X marketshare, Apple needs to keep pace with the competition.
 

paulsecic

macrumors regular
Feb 3, 2004
118
0
San Lorenzo, CA
Macrumors said:
According to Appleinsider, the eMac and iMac have been "end of lifed" (EOL'd).

End of life status on products occurs when products are discontinued or about to be upgraded.
My Macintosh came from Indianapolis . I didn't know they had a plant there. Its just sitting in the UPS warehouse. Its scheduled to be delivered on April 14th.
 

thatwendigo

macrumors 6502a
Nov 17, 2003
992
0
Sum, Ergo Sum.
jade said:
OS X is great...but if you are let's say a mid-level designer who spens all day using Adobe software, OS will not make a huge difference on your photoshop/illustrator/in design preformance. Personal preference is the winner here. Using wiindows or OS X will not make a difference in the quality of your output.

The OS will make a huge difference, actually, depending on the harrdware, optimizations, and other factors that the coding can make a big difference in. Remember when the G4 was still spanking higher-clocked systems in Photoshop? That wasn't just because it was a better chip for the job (at the time, at least), but also because Apple was perfectly happy to be sure that the program worked as well as possible within the space afforded it by the OS. To say anything else to show gross negligence, ignornace, or deliberate misrepresentation of the facts.

Would you honestly say that there is no difference between Windows 98 and Windows XP, or either of those two and OS X?


No one bundles office, but at leasty on the PC you get works or word perfect for basic productivity (which we all agree is on the level of Appleworks, but Word perfect is significantly better

WordPerfect tends to cost extra, even if it's $10-30.

in terms of expandability, my hypothetical customer (and many computer users) never really add anything internally in many cases...so it is perhaps a non-issue. FW 800 for many customers is not a necessity, as is gigabit ethernet...so these do not carry the same weight for me....and a huge margin of computer users I am hypothetically seling to

Then you hypothetical customer isn't likely to buy a mac in the first place, since we ]do tend to expand our machines and hold onto them. It could certainly be argued that this trend is because of cost and market pressure, but the simple truth is that for professionals and many home users, expandability is important. I can't count the number of people I know who have PCs that are in need of one update or another, and typically that comes in the form of a card of some sort. A card is cheaper than a whole new machine, when all you need is Firewire, or USB 2.0, or some other thing that might not be in the box you already have.

Weren't you the one who went on about costs?

WE aren't talking ipods here there is no contest for mp3 players. Digital Camera use is painless with HP software, very iphoto like. The bundled movie editing software is decent, with a slight edge to imovie for ease of use, and a slight edge to microsoft for transitions. Arcsoft showbiz, i haven't used long enough to make a judgement compared to imovie. But the functionality is there and it is easy...so this is not the huge deal breaker you make it out to be..... unless you will only be editing movies all day (and then of course you would use FCP.

Mmmmhmmm... iPhoto-like, iMove-like... The fact remains that they're not iLife, and even if they approximate the same functionality, they're still copies of the best suite on the market, created by second-rate programmers in an attempt to keep up with territory Apple mostly pionered in the digital lifestyle field. The final thing here, though, is that you're trying to push your opinion on me, and I'm merely stating what's widely held as a belief among people who have used macs without a pre-existing bias. It may not be a dealbreaker for you that iLife isn't included, but there's a point in there that no PC, no matter how price-performance attractive it may be, can never make up for - it doesn't run the Mac OS.

What do HP's profit-making abilities have to do with whether or not an AMD 64 machine is a good performer compared with the 1.6 powermac. WE are comparing costs for the end users not company stockholders. At the end of the day in our Walmart-driven society...no one cares how much profit a manufacter makes on each product, as long as the pricing is something they are comfortable with paying.

It has to do with the competitiveness because HP is selling computers that they make basically no money on, and yet you hold them up as what Apple needs to match. It's unrealistic, suicidal, and otherwise ludicrous to say that Apple should even try to keep up with the OEMs that have huge bases of finance that pile on top of the already huge component supply. Simple economies of scale are made all the worse when you competition also has a huge bank account to be buying their cheap computers with, and it only gets more nightmarish when you consider that HP is far from the only one that's selling on basically no margin. They don't need to turn a profit on consumer hardware to stay afloat, but Apples does.

Whether or not the peons who think that Wal-Mart is a good deal, rather than typically being a thinly-veiled excuse for selling substandard pap to undeducated and feckless consumers, the fact remains that you're trumpeting a business model that would annihilate Apple Computers and leave us with no Macintosh at all. Without a hardware margin, there is no money to keep researching new technologies, and I guarantee that the stagnation under Motorola would look like a paradise compared to what would happen if there was no R&D at Apple anymore.

That is how it matters. Do you get it now?

HP is not really trying to master the low end....they really sell to the enterprise market and the consumer space is a recent change for them. They never sold to consumers until the past few years. As long as HP continues to sell well in the enterprise with their higher end servers, workstations and sesktops, as well as their printers, their consumer product line doesn't need to generate mass profits. The same could be said for Apple. Apple aims to sell 60% pro mix overall and makes significantly less money on the consumer lineup. Not really important in terms of computer performance per dollar.

No, the same cannot be said for Apple, because they don't have the volume to cut the margins on the lowend. Dell does, HP does, Sony does... Not Apple. It's a bad situation, if you want to be greedy and demand cheap computers from circumstances that just aren't in favor of it, but hardly hopeless.

AS much as you like to say Apple and HP and other PC OEM's aren't competing in the same space, when it comes down to it they are competing for the same customer. And if these customers find more value per dollar on the PC side, well it makes perfect sense to get one. Among the graphic designers I have chatted with, many are facing an extremely difficult decision. Looking at the hardware on the PC, and the immense improvements in Windows ease of use and hardware performance in the necessary software, it doesn't always make sense to pay the Apple premium for their line of work.

No, they're not. People who believe a $400-600 retail computer isn't going to be built from crappy parts also aren't going to understand enough about machines that they'll be able to survive in the Apple market. They're the ones who will be upset that the animated .exe card sent by their neice doesn't work, or that some $5 bargain-bin PC game at Wal-Mart doesn't play. Also, if your graphics designer friends are so tempted to jump, then they ought to. Computers are tools, and you ought to use the one that gets the job done the best. For me, there has never been a PC that would make it worth switching, because I function so much better in OS X than I ever have in any version of Windows.

But we all need to be realistic here, Apple still needs to make some pretty serious leaps in price and performance to be a true option for a lot of computer users, and stop the Mac users fleeing for windows do to the cost of Apple hardware. Even if Apple makes the stockholders happy, they have a large responsibility to customers as well. In order to increase the rate os OS X adoption and OS X marketshare, Apple needs to keep pace with the competition.

We need to be realistic? Since when have I stopped doing it?

What you need to do is to start realizing that many, many parts in the machines Apple build are higher quality, and also just plain more expensive, than their PC counterparts. As I've said umpteen million times already, there are things Apple must pay a premium for or research and create for themselves, and almost all of those are commodity priced on the other side. When we're using custom-designed ASICs on a new processor, totally new motherboards that are run only for Apple, graphics cards that are run only for Apple... Do you understand at least that much?

Much of this is out of their hands. Without greater support from the hardware manufacturers, there isn't going to be a whole lot of change, and saying 'Apple should just eat the costs and be competitive,' is a recipe for their being no Apple anymore.
 

Lancetx

macrumors 68000
Aug 11, 2003
1,991
619
Macrumors said:
According to Appleinsider, the eMac and iMac have been "end of lifed" (EOL'd).

End of life status on products occurs when products are discontinued or about to be upgraded.

Well it looks like the new eMacs are finally here. The Apple Store is down as of right now.
 

dieselg4

macrumors regular
Oct 20, 2003
196
0
Rockin' Pittsburgh!
Back from the dead?

1.25 g4 and combo drive . . . not bad for $799 I guess, but would be more compelling for say, $599 or $699. My brother was looking at similarly equipped emachines and compaqs at best buy for $399-$499 sans monitor.
 

oingoboingo

macrumors 6502a
Jul 31, 2003
988
0
Sydney, Australia
Can we close this thread now?

Well it's finally happened...the long awaited and much debated eMac update. It's reasonably...reasonable. 1.25GHz G4 on a 167MHz FSB, with 512K of full speed L2 cache, coupled with 256MB of DDR333 SDRAM as standard. So that puts it on an even footing with the 1.25GHz 15" PowerBook...not a bad level of performance. The GPU has been upgraded to the Radeon 9200 with 32MB of DDR RAM...not a great GPU, but head and shoulders above the previous Radeon 7500, and as many have pointed out in this thread, a world away from the integrated 'Intel Extreme' crap in low-end PCs.

Also, the Superdrive model now has an 8x DVD burn capability...is this the fastest in Apple's lineup? In addition (at least in Australia), the price seems to have dropped a little too...only AU $1299 for the Combo drive model, and AU $1599 for the Superdrive model. It used to be AU $1850 (from memory).

I think it's a fairly decent update...25% higher clocked CPU on a faster bus, DDR RAM, and FINALLY 256MB AS STANDARD (!!!!!), much improved GPU, faster optical drives, USB2 ports, and of course a nice price reduction...all in all, a lot of the things people have been wishing for (and arguing, and insulting, and cursing...) for on this thread. Of course no G5, but did anyone really expect that? I think this increases the attractiveness of the eMac for the entry level shopper quite a bit...for the first time they can actually take the thing out of the box and start using all the included apps without forking out extra for another 128MB!!!!
 

Dont Hurt Me

macrumors 603
Dec 21, 2002
6,055
6
Yahooville S.C.
dieselg4 said:
1.25 g4 and combo drive . . . not bad for $799 I guess, but would be more compelling for say, $599 or $699. My brother was looking at similarly equipped emachines and compaqs at best buy for $399-$499 sans monitor.
when you figure the quality of the machine,the OS,ilife and the fact that it does not have integrated graphics like those cheap PCs this machine is a way better deal. your brother would be better served with a Emac. trust me.
 

aswitcher

macrumors 603
Oct 8, 2003
5,338
14
Canberra OZ
oingoboingo said:
Well it's finally happened...the long awaited and much debated eMac update. It's reasonably...reasonable. 1.25GHz G4 on a 167MHz FSB, with 512K of full speed L2 cache, coupled with 256MB of DDR333 SDRAM as standard. So that puts it on an even footing with the 1.25GHz 15" PowerBook...not a bad level of performance. The GPU has been upgraded to the Radeon 9200 with 32MB of DDR RAM...not a great GPU, but head and shoulders above the previous Radeon 7500, and as many have pointed out in this thread, a world away from the integrated 'Intel Extreme' crap in low-end PCs.

I am a little pissed that it still is hamstrung to reflection not screen spanning.

Also, the Superdrive model now has an 8x DVD burn capability...is this the fastest in Apple's lineup? In addition (at least in Australia), the price seems to have dropped a little too...only AU $1299 for the Combo drive model, and AU $1599 for the Superdrive model. It used to be AU $1850 (from memory).

$1899 - checked this morning. So $300 saving (plus Ram boost saving).

I think it's a fairly decent update...25% higher clocked CPU on a faster bus, DDR RAM, and FINALLY 256MB AS STANDARD (!!!!!), much improved GPU, faster optical drives, USB2 ports, and of course a nice price reduction...all in all, a lot of the things people have been wishing for (and arguing, and insulting, and cursing...) for on this thread. Of course no G5, but did anyone really expect that? I think this increases the attractiveness of the eMac for the entry level shopper quite a bit...for the first time they can actually take the thing out of the box and start using all the included apps without forking out extra for another 128MB!!!!

Yep. And now the iMac looks pretty weak being something like $1600 more AUD for 1" more TFT screen and a better graphics card. Thats the same cost as the base eMac super!
 

jade

macrumors 6502
May 3, 2003
332
2
thatwendigo said:
Would you honestly say that there is no difference between Windows 98 and Windows XP, or either of those two and OS X?

Of course I imagine we are talking current hardware. And of course I agree that there are significant differences between x and xp (the current oses) but if you use one, with a bit of time you can transition to the other.

WordPerfect tends to cost extra, even if it's $10-30.
Free on HPs

Then you hypothetical customer isn't likely to buy a mac in the first place, since we ]do tend to expand our machines and hold onto them. It could certainly be argued that this trend is because of cost and market pressure, but the simple truth is that for professionals and many home users, expandability is important. I can't count the number of people I know who have PCs that are in need of one update or another, and typically that comes in the form of a card of some sort. A card is cheaper than a whole new machine, when all you need is Firewire, or USB 2.0, or some other thing that might not be in the box you already have.

Weren't you the one who went on about costs?

My hypothertical customer has a mac and is debating on whether or not to get a new one (very key segment in preventing or accellerating increasing marketshare...the installed base)

Cost is important to a point. Paying a $200-300 premium for a Mac makes sense. Paying twice as much is much tougher to justify for money conscious consumers. Every dollar doesn't count, but when you are talking about hundreds of dollars you count your pennies.

I do not think Apple needs to compete in the ultra cheap space at all, but Apple does need to offer equivalent specs compared with other machines in the price class they compete in. If $1800 machines offer 512 PC3200 RAM, 128 VRAM, media card readers, 8 USB ports, 12x DVD burnersvand 160 gb hard drives, Apple needs to come close to approximating or meeting most of these specs. If Apple can not meet these requirements, well pricing needs to come down a bit. The most important specs are the easily comparable cross-platform. Ram, hard drives, video, ports, whatever.

Mmmmhmmm... iPhoto-like, iMove-like... The fact remains that they're not iLife, and even if they approximate the same functionality, they're still copies of the best suite on the market, created by second-rate programmers in an attempt to keep up with territory Apple mostly pionered in the digital lifestyle field. The final thing here, though, is that you're trying to push your opinion on me, and I'm merely stating what's widely held as a belief among people who have used macs without a pre-existing bias. It may not be a dealbreaker for you that iLife isn't included, but there's a point in there that no PC, no matter how price-performance attractive it may be, can never make up for - it doesn't run the Mac OS.

different customer have different hot buttons. I wholeheartedly agree that ilife is best-in-class, but people make it out that the PC equivalents are awful pieces of software. You can get the same things done with almost as much ease with the bundled software on mid-to-higher end pcs. End of story.

It has to do with the competitiveness because HP is selling computers that they make basically no money on, and yet you hold them up as what Apple needs to match. It's unrealistic, suicidal, and otherwise ludicrous to say that Apple should even try to keep up with the OEMs that have huge bases of finance that pile on top of the already huge component supply. Simple economies of scale are made all the worse when you competition also has a huge bank account to be buying their cheap computers with, and it only gets more nightmarish when you consider that HP is far from the only one that's selling on basically no margin. They don't need to turn a profit on consumer hardware to stay afloat, but Apples does.

Does Apple need to match HP pricing dollar for dollar? or Dell's pricing (the savings come from superior inventory management...Apple could take lessons here) or Sony? (well sony's PC division is a money losing vanity project).

Matching PC OEM pricing isn't realy the point in my book, but just remain fairly competitve. Apple has done a great jo with this in the notebook space, overall the notebooks are full featured and fairly price competitive. The desktops are out of wack at the consumer and mid range level. Looking across the board in PC-land you find very compareable machines at half the price. If Apple was 25% more the complaints would cease (well to a point) I saw on a message board somewhere: don't you think it is pretty sad that a basic $400 PC has more expandability than a $1500 imac. This is where the problem lies. Does apple have to compete in every space and beat all specs by 200%.... of course not...but we are still looking at 1ghz machines at 1999 prices when PCs are approaching 4ghz and the price has cut in half. Obviously Apple's profit margins are insane if Dell, Emachines (yup these guys are successful as well even though they sell the cheapest machines....they buld their machines when ordered so do not need to have markdowns or closeouts to clear out inventory) and Acer can make a profit.
Whether or not the peons who think that Wal-Mart is a good deal, rather than typically being a thinly-veiled excuse for selling substandard pap to undeducated and feckless consumers, the fact remains that you're trumpeting a business model that would annihilate Apple Computers and leave us with no Macintosh at all. Without a hardware margin, there is no money to keep researching new technologies, and I guarantee that the stagnation under Motorola would look like a paradise compared to what would happen if there was no R&D at Apple anymore.

Apple is sitting on a huge pile of cash right now. The momentum if moving in Apple's favor:
1. discontent with microsoft
2. longhorn delays
3. more web-based software
4. increasing consumer dependence on the digital lifestyle
5. powerpc performance advantages in video and other content creation apps
6. Apple is a media and wall street darling
7. Huge mindshare about Apple the brand
8. Scientific and high performance computing customers are interested in Apple
9. Storage is the new dot com boom and xserves are populr in the data centers
10. Less mac-using stigma

This is a golden opportunity for Apple to increase sales and marketshare...most of the stars are alligned, but the current hardware lineup is holding Apple back. By decreasing profit margins slightly Apples sales could increase dramatically. There are lots of PC owning customers wanting a mac...but when the consumer sweet spot is $1000 (the best stuff is about $800-1200) and the products Apple offers in that price range are sub-par...well no one is going to hop the fence.

No, they're not. People who believe a $400-600 retail computer isn't going to be built from crappy parts also aren't going to understand enough about machines that they'll be able to survive in the Apple market.

We need to be realistic? Since when have I stopped doing it?

What you need to do is to start realizing that many, many parts in the machines Apple build are higher quality, and also just plain more expensive, than their PC counterparts. As I've said umpteen million times already, there are things Apple must pay a premium for or research and create for themselves, and almost all of those are commodity priced on the other side. When we're using custom-designed ASICs on a new processor, totally new motherboards that are run only for Apple, graphics cards that are run only for Apple... Do you understand at least that much?

Much of this is out of their hands. Without greater support from the hardware manufacturers, there isn't going to be a whole lot of change, and saying 'Apple should just eat the costs and be competitive,' is a recipe for their being no Apple anymore.

Apple uses "superior parts" The same stuff that goes in the mid-range PCs (which are the ones that we use to compare)

The superior SATA hard drives...well the same guys make the PC ones and the macs ones...there is no difference here. The RAM, same story. Optical drive....oh they are the same again..... video cards...well these are 99% the smae as well. Simple hardware modification to put ADC and add the extra space for the extra Apple instructions. The only special Apple stuff is the case, the motherboard, and the chip. FW and USB controllers (as well as the wireless cards are all cross-platform) These components are not so much more than their true PC counter parts to justify an extra $900 on fairly comparable machines.

The cheap machines...yup they use crappy parts.... but the name brand systems use most of the smae stuff...so this superior parts super sized pricing arguement doesn't justify the price difference as much as you like to argue.


All the R&D in the world won't matter if third party developers do not see enough MAcs being sold to justify the expense of developing mac software and drivers. Ask Sun how it feels to make a great product..and have the cheaper guys come in and steal your customers. They got priced out of the market. Where Apple owns the niche like in audio and video...these people have Apple software and third party software to support all of their needs. The real people who suffer are us normal folks looking to do our banking, taxes and hooking up peripherals. Although Apple makes great software....I do not want to soley rely on Apple for hardware and software. And it looks to be coming more and more like a reality all the time.

That's the simple truth....
 

oingoboingo

macrumors 6502a
Jul 31, 2003
988
0
Sydney, Australia
aswitcher said:
I am a little pissed that it still is hamstrung to reflection not screen spanning.

Yes, a bit irritating, but I believe it is possible to get the eMac to do spanning in the same way that the iBook can be hacked to allow this.

Yep. And now the iMac looks pretty weak being something like $1600 more AUD for 1" more TFT screen and a better graphics card. Thats the same cost as the base eMac super!

Absolutely. The 1GHz 15" iMac is now a truly awful buy at AU $2299. Yes that's right folks, you get to pay AU $1000 extra to get a 250MHz slower CPU with only half the L2 cache, and a slower GPU (GeForce 4MX). The tradeoff is an 80GB hard drive versus 40GB (a $76 upgrade on the eMac), and of course the 15" LCD, versus the 17" CRT. Utterly bloody ridiculous, but I think this points at iMac updates not being too far away. How else could Apple sell such a system while not chortling loudly at customers?

By the way, have you also noticed that accessories pricing has dropped too? An AirPort Extreme card upgrade only costs $151.25 for the eMac (it used to be $199), and the Bluetooth module is only $76.38 (I think it used to be $89 or $99). Wierd prices too...I don't think I have my educational pricing turned on (the eMac price is still $1299 inc. GST), but the accessories are all cheaper and have odd non-rouded prices. Strange, but good...

In fact, looking more closely, I think the RAM pricing has dropped too (only AU $114.57 to go from 1 x 256MB DIMM to 1 x 512MB DIMM), and the tilt+swivel stand is now AU $125...I thought it was something like $135 or $150 before. Can anyone confirm the old prices?

Wow...the more I look at this, the more....well....uncharacteristically sane it seems. It's hard to believe I'm looking at an Apple :) Faster, cheaper...and cheaper accessories. What next? A G5 PowerBook :)
 

aswitcher

macrumors 603
Oct 8, 2003
5,338
14
Canberra OZ
oingoboingo said:
SNIP
Utterly bloody ridiculous, but I think this points at iMac updates not being too far away. How else could Apple sell such a system while not chortling loudly at customers?

I am not so sure. New iMacs need a complete overhaul to G5 if they are to make any real mark the way I see it. 20th an of the Mac and all as well. I still think WWDC

By the way, have you also noticed that accessories pricing has dropped too? An AirPort Extreme card upgrade only costs $151.25 for the eMac (it used to be $199), and the Bluetooth module is only $76.38 (I think it used to be $89 or $99). Wierd prices too...I don't think I have my educational pricing turned on (the eMac price is still $1299 inc. GST), but the accessories are all cheaper and have odd non-rouded prices. Strange, but good...

Yes I did see all that but haven't had time to check the other lines out yet to see if Apple Australia are finally reflecting the Aussie dollars strength...

In fact, looking more closely, I think the RAM pricing has dropped too (only AU $114.57 to go from 1 x 256MB DIMM to 1 x 512MB DIMM), and the tilt+swivel stand is now AU $125...I thought it was something like $135 or $150 before. Can anyone confirm the old prices?

Wow...the more I look at this, the more....well....uncharacteristically sane it seems. It's hard to believe I'm looking at an Apple :) Faster, cheaper...and cheaper accessories. What next? A G5 PowerBook :)

I bloody well hope so. But yes, I think the new eMac will do well.
 

nargot

macrumors regular
Jan 29, 2004
212
0
Australia
aswitcher said:
I am not so sure. New iMacs need a complete overhaul to G5 if they are to make any real mark the way I see it. 20th an of the Mac and all as well. I still think WWDC



Yes I did see all that but haven't had time to check the other lines out yet to see if Apple Australia are finally reflecting the Aussie dollars strength...



I bloody well hope so. But yes, I think the new eMac will do well.

The edu prices have dropped a bit... $110 for 256 mb ram, $75 for internal BT and $150 for APX. (approx prices from apple AU education store)
 

oingoboingo

macrumors 6502a
Jul 31, 2003
988
0
Sydney, Australia
aswitcher said:
Yes I did see all that but haven't had time to check the other lines out yet to see if Apple Australia are finally reflecting the Aussie dollars strength...

Just had a quick look around the store...there don't seem to be price cuts on anything else (not even the grossly overpriced 17" PowerBook at AU$5499), and interestingly, there are no price cuts on the AirPort Extreme card on any other systems...it's still $199. Wonder what's going on there? Are eMac buyers getting extra discounts on peripherals to really go for the entry-level market harder? Or is it just an Apple pricing screw-up?
 

oingoboingo

macrumors 6502a
Jul 31, 2003
988
0
Sydney, Australia
nargot said:
The edu prices have dropped a bit... $110 for 256 mb ram, $75 for internal BT and $150 for APX. (approx prices from apple AU education store)

OK, my bad. Looks like I was pulling out EDU pricing for accessories. Sorry for the bum steer.
 

aswitcher

macrumors 603
Oct 8, 2003
5,338
14
Canberra OZ
oingoboingo said:
Just had a quick look around the store...there don't seem to be price cuts on anything else (not even the grossly overpriced 17" PowerBook at AU$5499), and interestingly, there are no price cuts on the AirPort Extreme card on any other systems...it's still $199. Wonder what's going on there? Are eMac buyers getting extra discounts on peripherals to really go for the entry-level market harder? Or is it just an Apple pricing screw-up?


Lets see. Laziness...overcharging...weird business/accounting model...who knows but its disappointing.
 

nargot

macrumors regular
Jan 29, 2004
212
0
Australia
oingoboingo said:
OK, my bad. Looks like I was pulling out EDU pricing for accessories. Sorry for the bum steer.

No bad by you. The retail prices on BT, APX etc dropped in the normal store (when purchasing an emac) also, the edu prices are slightly less by a few dollars.
 

nargot

macrumors regular
Jan 29, 2004
212
0
Australia
aswitcher said:
Lets see. Laziness...overcharging...weird business/accounting model...who knows but its disappointing.

They probably havn't updated the rest of the store yet as it appears they changed the eMac prices and specs simultaneously worldwide to curb the demands for updates... to fit the 'magic tuesday' deadline.
 

oingoboingo

macrumors 6502a
Jul 31, 2003
988
0
Sydney, Australia
aswitcher said:
Lets see. Laziness...overcharging...weird business/accounting model...who knows but its disappointing.

I hereby call to order the inaugural meeting of the "Destroy Apple Australia" club. Tonight's winner of the lucky door prize will be flying to Honolulu, where they will be buying PowerBooks and accessories for everyone at normal US pricing!!! The runner-up will receive an all-expenses paid taxi ride to Frenchs Forest, where they will meet with Apple Australia executives, and instruct them on a) how to find the Commonwealth Bank's currency calculator web site and b) how to use it when calculating reasonable prices for hardware :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.