Intel iMac Sales Sluggish?

[Yvan256]

This is very unlikely. You cannot expect Apple to produce a machine that is on par with their iMacs for less than half of the price.

When the Mac mini is released, I would expect to see a "Core Single" processor in it. Same goes for the iBooks.

I would expect the "Mac mini Pro" to be at least 25% more expensive than the regular Mac mini. That'd still half less expensive than the iMac.

That 17" widescreen LCD, iSight, keyboard and mouse aren't that cheap, I don't want an iSight and already got the rest. Why should I buy a PowerMac? I don't need that much power, just as much as the iMac but "headless".

I got a feeling of "Déjà vu", writing about "headless" and all...

In short: The "Mac mini Pro" would be the same specs as the entry model of the iMac, aside from the hard drive (or heck, make the Mac mini Pro twice as high and put a 3.5" SATA drive in it - that'll help cut the costs, those 2.5" drives are expensive and don't offer much storage space).

 

[Cranky McGuy]

Bollocks

We heard the same whining when the iPod nano came out. Two weeks out and the rumor and analysis sites were declaring it a flop. We all know what a "bomb" that product turned out to be. I think people are jumping the gun on this one.

Also, I keep hearing about pissed off consumers who picked up an iMac over Christmas. Where are these pissed off consumers? I haven't read any news items about angry iMac owners. In fact, all Apple news I hear is positive these days. I just heard three iPod related news items on my local news yesterday in a row. Surely that would have been a good time to slip in a "But not all are happy with Apple these days" announcement. They never failed to do so before.

This news item is bollocks.

Case in point: http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1490 Complete opposite report, but this time with stats to back up the claims...

 

[iMeowbot]

Just for fun, Apple Insider are now contradicting the Think Secret report

 

[Jon'sLightBulbs]

It's pretty simple. A year in advance, you give a kid a deadline of "sometime around 3rd quarter" for a book report, and what will you get? No book report until around the third quarter of the following year.

No due date for software (read: release date for Intel hardware) except for loose timetables that you beat by more than half a year? We're sticking the "fair warning" label on this nonsense?

No. Universal binaries are not availible from major software manufacturers because they were not given a real, concrete, date for Intel release. An "educated guess" that Intel hardware "might" be released at Macworld San Francisco is garbage.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Until Christmas '06, or more likely MWSF '07, it's pretty impossible to say definitively how the transition is faring.

By this time next year, when the transition is complete and all the relevent software has been ported/re-released or whatever, we can stand back and make an evaluation. But right now well over 90% of Apple's intalled base is still PPC.

So I'd take this article with a grain of salt - it's just too early to say one way or the other. Anyway the whining will cease when the big boys like Adobe and MS get off their butts and roll out X86 native Mac apps.

 

[SiliconAddict]

SiliconAddict, i will have to disagree with you. Saying that major companies should have somehow predicted that apple would release new products at MWSF just cause we expect apple to do so is not sound business logic. Think about it, suppose apple had released some new video ipod or some exotic product but no new computer hardware and a company (adobe) had already transitioned their products for this event even though apple told them sometime in june, who would pay them for lost economic opportunity?.. apple?. Why would a company transition their products months ahead of an announced deadline just cause mac geeks anticipate apple doing something before said deadline? Wow, maybe adobe should call you and listen to you instead of what apple tells them. No, apple chose this path. It's not like they were unaware that major vendors had not yet ported their applications. Also 7 months is not a lot of time. I am a developer for a large application that would probably take 2 years to transition to a new platform and i assume adobe software is much larger than the one i work for. I like how non-software developers (or those not familiar with large code bases) can always state how long it should take to port application X to Y platform. Silicon Addict, have you any real world experience with porting a large application to a new environment?. Just curious.

I've been involved with testing\porting our companies internal apps from Windows version to Windows version. While that hardly counts as a large project my main point was that there was/is a high probability that Adobe knew, not sure about Microsoft though, in advanced that Apple was migrating and I wouldn't be surprised if they were sent development kits about the same time Apple’s internal development started. My point is that Adobe and Microsoft aren't small companies. We aren't talking a development house of 5 people. If Adobe\Microsoft wanted to they could have at least beta versions of UB's out right now. Yes I'm aware that as a Carbon app a transition wouldn't be easy by any stretch of the imagination. But again with the resources available at such large companies it should be doable. And that was my overall point. Not that it would be easy but that these companies have the resources to plow ahead faster then others.
The question I have is realistically would an entire rewrite be necessary to get native x86 compatibility up and running on Adobe’s apps.

 

[Jon'sLightBulbs]

Look at it this way. The success and future perception of gaming consoles is defined by the number of interesting software titles availible at console launch. Without an announced hardware launch date, no game developer can realistically develop a game before the system is released. They simply cannot beat a deadline that doesn't exist. It's even hearder to enter the race on time when the starter fires the gun before he even announces"ready!" (MWSF instead of "3rd quarter 2006.")

The reason there were so many PSP titles availible at launch is because Sony actually announced a launch date.

Intel Mac: no availible titles at launch besides iLife and Handbrake, along with some other pretty obscure stuff. Of course people aren't biting yet, if this report is true.

 

[Brother Michael]

Yeah sorry Apple, I don't exactly have 2000 dollars to spend on a MacBook Pro. I have about 10 dollars in my savings account thanks to school.

Perhaps when a Mac Mini comes out I will have enough money to buy one. Until then, I am still using my G3 iBook.

 

[Choppaface]

why is office going to be a substantial project??? I can see where photoshop probably has a lot of optimizations and hardware supported features, but office?? there isn't a single (useful) feature in there that shouldn't be portable or better yet written for maximum portability. maybe Excel might have a few numerical things that need to be ported, but what else? it sounds like the office codebase is really hacked together.

 

[danielwsmithee]

Adobe, who I think makes the best applications when you compare them to the competing applications, and Microsoft should have made the transition from Carbon to Cocoa a couple of years ago, but have continued to take the easy way out. If they would have made the move to Cocoa with their last revisions then the current switch to universal binaries would be greatly simplified. I am anti-Quark, but I hope that they take advantage of every API Apple has built in to OS X (Core Image, Spotlight, etc) and puts InDesign to shame!

It has nothing to do with Carbon!

Carbon is the correct choice for these applications to be developed in.

 

[iReilly]

I think they are selling well

The wifey and I spent about 90 minutes in the Apple Store at the International Plaza in Tampa on Saturday and in those 90 minutes I saw four 20" iMacTels go out the door. The interesting thing to me was that all the people that bought appeared to be older then me. And I'm 50. They had 4 cashiers working and the waiting line had at least ten people in it the entire time we were there.

I think things are going well for Apple.

iReilly

 

[B. Hunter]

Slow Sales

I agree that releasing new computers after the holidays adds bitter spice to people that just bought a new iMac or Powerbook. But what can you say. People were expecting Apple to release new computers anyway.

By the way, I am still waiting for another Apple release.
I WANT MY MAC GEAR!
What happened to the hats, t-shirts, ties and other logo products?
It's time to roll out with these items!

 

[budugu]

Huh? NSThread anyone? NSTask? Cocoa has quite a bit of nice front-ends to the threading system, just like Carbon does.

Just because you CAN use the POSIX thread libs, doesn't mean you are forced to. We actually have three ways to do multithreading on OS X from pretty much any application: POSIX, Carbon (MacOS-style) and Cocoa (NeXT-style). To top it off, all three are part of the OS, well documented, and native.

NSThreads are just a wrapper arround POSIX threads (proabably a wrapper arround some (kernel) thing else in C). THey are clunky and no one uses them as you cannot have decent control on the thread execution. And hence by definition not native. Now you can impliment OpenMP libs, all the flavours of MPIs by writing wrapers arround the actual code, that does not make them native by any streach of imagination. Other examples Java etc have their 'own' threading functionality and there are C/C++/Fortran NATIVE implimentations of parallel/concurrent programming.

 

[gregarious119]

Similar to iPod nano "worries"

Does anyone remember an article (probably on AI) that said iPod nano sails weren't as high as expected a month after it's release.

14 Million iPods later (I know...video iPods included), we all found out that the worries about slow sales were a bit premature. I'm not worried at all about how fast they're selling. I don't think that massive hoards of people are "holding off" because of slow performance or pro apps not there yet. If I had 1500 to drop right now, I'd get one...period.

 

[budugu]

It has nothing to do with Carbon!

Carbon is the correct choice for these applications to be developed in.

if you mean CORE foundation then yes. Otherwise there is no great use using carbon vs Cocoa. Applications anyway are generally written so that interface is different from the back end (which usually exposes an API etc - example office tools) for the front end. I believe Microsoft though they could make their code more agile using (some .net port and XML stuff that they are doing on windows). And it is just not worth it to port a word processor and then redesign a whole new update. I am assuming that 50% penality word should be fine on Rosetta. THey will just get a new version of Office not just a port.

 

[Photorun]

Maybe Apple should have just bought adobe, then we would see some quicker transitions.

You laugh/smile, I'm dead serious that they should. They've got more actual capital ($20 billion in the bank, cold hard cash) and a MUCH larger market cap than Adobe, they could swallow them and keep 'em from effin' up Flash and Dreamweaver if not killing the latter.

Apple should buy Adobe, make all the apps work great on the Mac, then can all the peecee luser versions, eff 'em! Want to be a real designer they should be using Macs anyways, not PieceCraps! That'd help marketshare too. Sure some people will plod on and use worthless Microsuck Publisher or some Corel junk but they'd be the minority. C'mon Apple, buy Adobe!

 

[thejadedmonkey]

Well the the sales were lower than expected! that's what happens when you release crap that is lacking features that the previous gen had!

 

[Lancetx]

We heard the same whining when the iPod nano came out. Two weeks out and the rumor and analysis sites were declaring it a flop. We all know what a "bomb" that product turned out to be. I think people are jumping the gun on this one.

Also, I keep hearing about pissed off consumers who picked up an iMac over Christmas. Where are these pissed off consumers? I haven't read any news items about angry iMac owners. In fact, all Apple news I hear is positive these days. I just heard three iPod related news items on my local news yesterday in a row. Surely that would have been a good time to slip in a "But not all are happy with Apple these days" announcement. They never failed to do so before.

This news item is bollocks.

Case in point: http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1490 Complete opposite report, but this time with stats to back up the claims...

I was thinking the exact same thing. It's good to see that new research report posted on Apple Insider disputes the earlier TS report of weak sales. Think Secret's reliability has really gone downhill fast here in the past year after their run in with Apple.

 

[gunm]

Must be a slow week...nice bit of non-news from ThinkSecret...

 

[Lord Blackadder]

Well the the sales were lower than expected! that's what happens when you release crap that is lacking features that the previous gen had!

Dude you're so right! I can't belive they tried to pull the wool over our eyes, duh!

I mean it's been a whole 15 days or so since the MacBook and iMac came out...

 

[revfife]

It seems to me every other mac website besides TS is reporting that Apple is having trouble meeting demand for the new intel machines. And with TS's great history and all especially "guaranteeing" a widescreen iBook at MWSF, I really have to wonder why this isn't Page 2 worthy?

And I am dead serious, Apple could buy out Adobe and then we would see those Universal Binaries. As for M$ Office junk...do I really need it? iWork is native now and does just fine with doc formats.

 

[SiliconAddict]

You laugh/smile, I'm dead serious that they should. They've got more actual capital ($20 billion in the bank, cold hard cash) and a MUCH larger market cap than Adobe, they could swallow them and keep 'em from effin' up Flash and Dreamweaver if not killing the latter.

Apple should buy Adobe, make all the apps work great on the Mac, then can all the peecee luser versions, eff 'em! Want to be a real designer they should be using Macs anyways, not PieceCraps! That'd help marketshare too. Sure some people will plod on and use worthless Microsuck Publisher or some Corel junk but they'd be the minority. C'mon Apple, buy Adobe!

Umm yah then Microsoft kills all support for Apple. Including any video support. Office gone. End result being that there would be a large number of users who would say F-Apple. At this point might I suggest the following:

1. Apple buys out Adobe.
2. Apple doesn't discontinue ANYTHING.
3. Apple updates all the apps in adobe's inventory.
4. 6-12 months later Windows versions appear as well. Use the Microsoft technique. Support the platform but drag your heels doing it.

 

[hayesk]

This is the major pitfall of Apple's complete nondisclosure policy of leaving both consumer and developer in the dark about upcoming products. You leave Joe Imac buyer in the dark and he buys an imac for christmas, then is completely pissed that his new toy is obsolete within days.

Most iMac buyers don't know about the Intel Mac and probably don't even know there was a MacWorld Expo. The Mac geeks here and in other forums (including myself) are a tiny fraction of Mac users.

But much more importantly, you leave software developers in the dark as well in order to keep this veil of secrecy and keep current stock moving. The result is that absolutely no native apps are availible at the Intel Imac launch. Rosetta emulation of Adobe apps is pitiful, and no Apple pro apps are emulated at all.

The secrecy really bit apple in the butt this time.

Developers knew about this for seven months. But most non-developers posting here think giant applications like Photoshop can be ported in a couple of months just by throwing more "resources" at the project. It doesn't work like that. 20 people trying to update a guassian blur algorithm cannot do it 20x faster than one person. There's only so many people that you can throw at a single task before you see large reductions in economies of scale.

Anyway, real Mac professionals will buy G5s because it's the fastest machine for their work today and it will pay for itself. Only geeks are uptight about not having 100% Intel apps available on day one with months of advanced notice.

 

[SiliconAddict]

Well the the sales were lower than expected! that's what happens when you release crap that is lacking features that the previous gen had!

What features is the iMac lacking other then FireWire 800 and a method of heating your house?

 

[aegisdesign]

Interestingly enough - most of the poeple I know buying one or seriously contemplating are PC WIN owners right now. The MAC fans seem to be the ones holding off.....That alone kinda scares me - what do you guys know that we newbies don't????

That's easy. The iMacs aren't that much quicker than the old ones and without native apps are usually slower. MacBookPro's on the other hand should be enough of a step up for some people that they're more than worth it.

However, I'm still waiting for Merom and Conroe. Yonah is a fine start but I want something faster. We still don't know what the battery life is and I'd rather wait for OSX 10.5 anyway.

Adobe and Microsoft will release their software within their own product lifecycle regardless of Apple. It's got nothing to do with how difficult it is and nothing to do with carbon or cocoa. Adobe and Microsoft's problem is they have a lot of legacy code written in CodeWarrior which needs porting to XCode first. I'd have thought they'd have that done already but that still doesn't change their commercial desire to roll it in with the normal release cycles of Creative Suite v3 and Office 12 (or whatever the equivalent will be on the Mac). They aren't going to give you universal binaries for free, it'll be part of buying CS3 or Office.