Headless iMac or headless eMac?

[ChrisH3677]

It's clearly time for the eMac to be updated. An all-in-one might be appropriate but would limiting as some schools would want CRT and others LCD.

A headless eMac would be ideal. Maybe all this fuss over a supposed headless iMac is actually the eMac replacement.

It would make a lot of sense. There's a lot of schools with Windows who could switch and keep their old monitors.

 

[jimjiminyjim]

It would also make a lot of sense if it was simply called "iHome" as the 2nd page item suggests.

 

[joepunk]

I started thinking that all this talk of a "headless" iMac was really an eMac as well.

I however do not think that the entire line of eMacs will go headless. There would still be some people out there who would (I suppose) want one with a built in monitor.

I don't think that Apple would add two different processors to one consumer lineup. Spliting the iMacs into G5 and G4's would probably confuse some people. Now, making a headless eMac makes more sense to me.

 

[Sun Baked]

I however do not think that the entire line of eMacs will go headless. There would still be some people out there who would (I suppose) want one with a built in monitor.

Joe consumer don't mean didly for this machine, the education market will be the tail wagging this dog -- so it would most likely be an eMac.

Apple needs a machine that retails for around $599 complete.

Right now the education discounts on the eMac push the optical-less eMac down there with the retail 8-pack at $5000 (625 each) for the $699 education eMac.

You know Dell is quite a bit below at bulk prices, so Apple needs retail systems at $599 to compete.

If they can do this with cheap 3rd party LCDs or CRTs and a $499 machine -- that great.

Still don't really expect Apple to push any $99 CRT on the general public though.

Apple has been dumping anything that had a chance of dropping there well before it hit that number for years -- so it likely won't be an Apple monitor.

 

[ChrisH3677]

It would also make a lot of sense if it was simply called "iHome" as the 2nd page item suggests.

iCenter maybe, but it's bad marketing to name a product that defines how people will use it. They almost did it with the eMac (the e for education). Will schools be as keen if they think an iHome is something for home use? Ditto corporates.

If you have a generic sounding name, you leave it up to the buyers on how they wants to use.