So what do people think that Apple should do with the consumer line now that the Pro line has been upgraded? The Pro line is great for margins, and I personally am planning to buy a Dual 2 Ghz tower, but if Apple really wants to stabilize/gain market share, they are going to have to do it through the consumer line. The greatest benefit of the 970 may well be that it allows Apple to improve the performance of its "consumer" Macs without having to worry about cannabalizing sales of the high end "professional" machines.
I have been a Mac user ever since I started using computers (Mac Plus!), but honestly I would have to think twice before strongly recommending an iMac or eMac to a friend who was in the market for a new "consumer" machine, because the hardware is just not competitive at the moment. For $1,000 on the PC side you can easily get complete system with a 2+ Ghz Celeron or a low end Pentium 4, and while it is true that the G4 is a more efficient chip per clock cycle than a P4 or a Celeron, there is no way that an 800 Mhz G4 with a 100 Mhz FSB can seriously compete with a 2 Ghz Celeron on a 400 Mhz effective FSB (well, 100 Mhz quad pumped).
So here is what I would love to see Apple do (but it's not necessarily what I predict they WILL do). Note that I have changed the G5 tower specs slightly, because I think that the current difference between the low end and the high end machines is too great - I suspect the Dual 2 Ghz might actually outsell both the 1.8 and 1.6 Ghz machines combined!
Pro Desktop:
high end: Dual 2 Ghz, same specs as current
mid range: Dual 1.6 Ghz, otherwise same specs as current
low end: Single 1.8 Ghz, DDR 400 instead of DDR 333 and 6 DIMM slots instead of 4, but otherwise same specs as current, and make it clear that it starts at $1799 w/o the Superdrive
Consumer Desktop:
17" iMac: Single 1.4 Ghz low voltage 970, dual channel DDR333, GeForce FX 5200
15" iMac: Single 1.2 Ghz low voltage 970, dual channel DDR266, GeForce4 MX
eMac: Single 1.3 Ghz 7447, 200 Mhz FSB, single channel DDR400, GeForce2 MX
Pro Laptop:
17"/15" Powerbooks: 1.5 Ghz 7457, 200 Mhz FSB, single channel DDR400, Mobility Radeon 9600
12" Powerbook: 1.25 Ghz 7457, 200 Mhz FSB, single channel DDR400, GeForce4 Go
Consumer Laptop:
iBooks: 1.1 Ghz 750GX, 200 Mhz FSB, single channel DDR400, Mobility Radeon 7500
A lineup like this would be able to compete with the 2+ Ghz Celerons and Pentium 4's that are found in Wintel "consumer" systems, but at the same time not eat into the sales of the "professional" G5 systems (for example, the low end PowerMac would still be 400 Mhz faster than the high end iMac and have far more expandability). This lineup would also help keep the Powerbooks competitive with Centrino based laptops until the 90 nm G5 debuts.
The main problem, of course, is that it is not clear how soon the 7457 and the 750GX will be available. But when they do become available, there is absolutely no excuse for Apple not to use a 200 Mhz FSB on both chips, given that they are in no way capable of "threatening" the 970 with its 800-1000 Mhz bus!
Once the 90 nm 970 is available, the Powerbooks should of course move to the 970 and the iBooks should move either to the 7457 or to the "750VX" (i.e. G3 with Altivec).
Finally, to answer the calls of technically oriented "switchers" who want a "cheap, expandable tower," Apple should perhaps try offering a machine loosely based on the current G4 case and motherboard for $899 with the following specs:
1.4 Ghz 7447 (NO L3 cache)
200 Mhz FSB
Single Channel DDR400 (4 slots)
Radeon 7500
3 PCI slots
No Modem
10/100 Ethernet (not Gigabit)
Minimal RAM and HD standard
CD-RW (not Combo Drive - you can always add a cheap DVD-ROM as the 2nd drive)
Single Firewire 400 port and USB 2.0
I am sure that many Slashdot types would still complain that this system should either be $200 cheaper or come with a PPC 970, but realistically there is no way that is possible as long as Apple continues to invest in developing OS X and gives things like the iApps away for free.
Thoughts? Comments? Anybody out there besides the "Apple should offer a Dual 2 Ghz iMac starting next week for $1299!!" posters? ;-)
I have been a Mac user ever since I started using computers (Mac Plus!), but honestly I would have to think twice before strongly recommending an iMac or eMac to a friend who was in the market for a new "consumer" machine, because the hardware is just not competitive at the moment. For $1,000 on the PC side you can easily get complete system with a 2+ Ghz Celeron or a low end Pentium 4, and while it is true that the G4 is a more efficient chip per clock cycle than a P4 or a Celeron, there is no way that an 800 Mhz G4 with a 100 Mhz FSB can seriously compete with a 2 Ghz Celeron on a 400 Mhz effective FSB (well, 100 Mhz quad pumped).
So here is what I would love to see Apple do (but it's not necessarily what I predict they WILL do). Note that I have changed the G5 tower specs slightly, because I think that the current difference between the low end and the high end machines is too great - I suspect the Dual 2 Ghz might actually outsell both the 1.8 and 1.6 Ghz machines combined!
Pro Desktop:
high end: Dual 2 Ghz, same specs as current
mid range: Dual 1.6 Ghz, otherwise same specs as current
low end: Single 1.8 Ghz, DDR 400 instead of DDR 333 and 6 DIMM slots instead of 4, but otherwise same specs as current, and make it clear that it starts at $1799 w/o the Superdrive
Consumer Desktop:
17" iMac: Single 1.4 Ghz low voltage 970, dual channel DDR333, GeForce FX 5200
15" iMac: Single 1.2 Ghz low voltage 970, dual channel DDR266, GeForce4 MX
eMac: Single 1.3 Ghz 7447, 200 Mhz FSB, single channel DDR400, GeForce2 MX
Pro Laptop:
17"/15" Powerbooks: 1.5 Ghz 7457, 200 Mhz FSB, single channel DDR400, Mobility Radeon 9600
12" Powerbook: 1.25 Ghz 7457, 200 Mhz FSB, single channel DDR400, GeForce4 Go
Consumer Laptop:
iBooks: 1.1 Ghz 750GX, 200 Mhz FSB, single channel DDR400, Mobility Radeon 7500
A lineup like this would be able to compete with the 2+ Ghz Celerons and Pentium 4's that are found in Wintel "consumer" systems, but at the same time not eat into the sales of the "professional" G5 systems (for example, the low end PowerMac would still be 400 Mhz faster than the high end iMac and have far more expandability). This lineup would also help keep the Powerbooks competitive with Centrino based laptops until the 90 nm G5 debuts.
The main problem, of course, is that it is not clear how soon the 7457 and the 750GX will be available. But when they do become available, there is absolutely no excuse for Apple not to use a 200 Mhz FSB on both chips, given that they are in no way capable of "threatening" the 970 with its 800-1000 Mhz bus!
Once the 90 nm 970 is available, the Powerbooks should of course move to the 970 and the iBooks should move either to the 7457 or to the "750VX" (i.e. G3 with Altivec).
Finally, to answer the calls of technically oriented "switchers" who want a "cheap, expandable tower," Apple should perhaps try offering a machine loosely based on the current G4 case and motherboard for $899 with the following specs:
1.4 Ghz 7447 (NO L3 cache)
200 Mhz FSB
Single Channel DDR400 (4 slots)
Radeon 7500
3 PCI slots
No Modem
10/100 Ethernet (not Gigabit)
Minimal RAM and HD standard
CD-RW (not Combo Drive - you can always add a cheap DVD-ROM as the 2nd drive)
Single Firewire 400 port and USB 2.0
I am sure that many Slashdot types would still complain that this system should either be $200 cheaper or come with a PPC 970, but realistically there is no way that is possible as long as Apple continues to invest in developing OS X and gives things like the iApps away for free.
Thoughts? Comments? Anybody out there besides the "Apple should offer a Dual 2 Ghz iMac starting next week for $1299!!" posters? ;-)
