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

when you register as a student developer, it doesn't say on your benefits page that you are eligible for a hardware discount, but you are. there's some documentation somewhere that says that it's once per lifetime sort of discount. you would order normally through the ADC discount page.

scott
 
Originally posted by wrldwzrd89
This doesn't surprise me at all. Previous rumors have hinted at Mac OS 10.3.3 being required for new hardware (specifically the Rev. B PowerMac G5s), but there is always the possibility of Apple releasing something entirely new and Mac OS X-powered.


perhaps powertune
 
Well we don't have long to find out. 10.3.3 is due out very soon. Maybe that's why the xServes have been delayed so long? Apple has had the chips, they just needed the software.

Apple Insider and MacOSRumors have been saying that the powermacs will require with 10.3.3...
 
The product lineup is well overdue for an upgrade ... especially the iMac which is laughable in terms of hardware. The PowerMac has fallen behind as well since its introduction.

What I'd hope to see is:

PowerMac: Dual Processors across the line, 2.4, 2.2, 2.0GHz options.

iMac: Single Processors across the line. 1.6, 1.8, 2GHz. Decent graphics card option for people who want to play games.

PowerBook: 1.6GHz G5

I expect that the iMac will not be fast or suitable for many typical consumer activities like gaming however. The PowerBook will remain with the G4 with a small speed bump.

Most people probably want something between an iMac and a PowerMac though. Reasonable expandability at a reasonable price point in a normal form factor. A single G5 in a cost reduced PowerMac style case with room for extra hard drives, reasonable memory expansion, the possibility to add a couple of PCI cards (better audio, etc), upgradable graphics (AGP 8x slot, or maybe even a PCI Express x16 slot given that is the major new thing this year). Nothing fancy, just a good solid reliable system that can compete with PCs in terms of features at hopefully not too much a price premium.
 
For those who believe the 1.5 ghz g4 will be in the next pbook lineup, the original article said the chips wouldnt be available for 3-6 months, so I doubt they will update the g4 with chips that arent available until june to maybe september.

G5's coming in june, with ibook's getting that 1.5 g4 in the highest configuration. It will be a newly designed ibook, whihc, if i remember correctly, is in need of a makeover.

Speculation obviously, but it makes the most sense out of all the arguments out there.
 
Hattig said:
The product lineup is well overdue for an upgrade ... especially the iMac which is laughable in terms of hardware. The PowerMac has fallen behind as well since its introduction.

What I'd hope to see is:

PowerMac: Dual Processors across the line, 2.4, 2.2, 2.0GHz options.

iMac: Single Processors across the line. 1.6, 1.8, 2GHz. Decent graphics card option for people who want to play games.

PowerBook: 1.6GHz G5

I expect that the iMac will not be fast or suitable for many typical consumer activities like gaming however. The PowerBook will remain with the G4 with a small speed bump.

Most people probably want something between an iMac and a PowerMac though. Reasonable expandability at a reasonable price point in a normal form factor. A single G5 in a cost reduced PowerMac style case with room for extra hard drives, reasonable memory expansion, the possibility to add a couple of PCI cards (better audio, etc), upgradable graphics (AGP 8x slot, or maybe even a PCI Express x16 slot given that is the major new thing this year). Nothing fancy, just a good solid reliable system that can compete with PCs in terms of features at hopefully not too much a price premium.

I've said this in other forums but I think the next iMac should be headless. This opens up everything. The new iMac should include a G5 running up to 1.6 GHz. It should be like a scaled down version of the PowerMac G5. People want expandability, or at least they think they do. Especially Windoze users. This would also allow for people to buy the display they want and actually get to keep their display when they want to upgrade. They could just buy the new tower instead of giving up this beautiful 17" widescreen display every time. Why should I have to pay for a display everytime? Doesn't make sense to me.

Here are the specs I think the new "headless" iMac should have:

1.4/1.6 GHz G5
700/800 MHz FSB
80/100 GB SATA drive
4x AGP
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra Graphics Card (DVI/ADC connectors)
256 MB PC2700 DDR RAM (exp. to 4 GB)
32x Combo Drive/4x SuperDrive
(2)FireWire 400 Ports
(5) USB 2.0 Ports
10/100 Ethernet
56k Modem
AirPort Extreme Ready
Bluetooth Ready
Same Aluminum enclosure, only a smaller tower

They should sell this for something that enables someone to buy the computer and display for under $1700 at the high end. They are basically doing the same thing with the current iMac so I don't see why they can't do this with a newly designed iMac.

It only makes sense to me that they make the iMac headless. Keep the eMac for the AIO machines that people will still want, including schools, businesses, etc... Apple would sell more displays, and therefore could make them cheaper, they would be buying more G5's which makes the cost of it go down, buy for NVIDIA graphics cards which in turn makes them go down. You get my drift here...
 
Wasn't there some talk (earlier in this thread)
about Apple purchasing some 'ad time' during tonight's Oscar's?

Has anyone seen the ad?


Ultimatetone.com
 
mklos said:
I've said this in other forums but I think the next iMac should be headless. SNIP

Here are the specs I think the new "headless" iMac should have:

1.4/1.6 GHz G5
700/800 MHz FSB
80/100 GB SATA drive
4x AGP
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra Graphics Card (DVI/ADC connectors)
256 MB PC2700 DDR RAM (exp. to 4 GB)
32x Combo Drive/4x SuperDrive
(2)FireWire 400 Ports
(5) USB 2.0 Ports
10/100 Ethernet
56k Modem
AirPort Extreme Ready
Bluetooth Ready
Same Aluminum enclosure, only a smaller tower

SNIP

160GB drive as standard. Its not that much extra.
I think it needs a better graphics card. Part of the problems with iMacs is lack of decent graphics support for game players.. a substantial part of the market...
Bluetooth should be standard.
Extreme might also need to be standard with a nice Aerial form factor as part of the design outside the faraday cage enclosure...
2 PCI slots...

my thoughts
 
Ultimatetone said:
Wasn't there some talk (earlier in this thread)
about Apple purchasing some 'ad time' during tonight's Oscar's?

Has anyone seen the ad?
Duff-Man says...that was just someone's speculation - there was never any concrete info that Apple was buying ad time during the Oscars....oh yeah!
 
Decision on new Mac

:rolleyes: I'm hoping that when the new systems (rev.B) are released the price on the current models will come down some. I'm currently on a 12" 800 mHz iBook G3. I've been SO drooling for a G5, y'all just can't believe how bad I want one.

Then I can splurge on a 20" Cinema Display, and get the 1.6 gHz G5.

Hey: after being on a G3 for more than 1 year, the G5 will seem like going from the Wright Brothers to a Borg Cube.
 
a17inchFuture said:
G5's coming in june, with ibook's getting that 1.5 g4 in the highest configuration. It will be a newly designed ibook, whihc, if i remember correctly, is in need of a makeover.
I hope you're wrong, as iBooks G4s are the most recently updated part of Apple's product line. They introduced new models in Oct. 2003, and the specs are such that they already cannibalize some of the PB line.
 
Apple's whole Hardware line is such a joke, other then the dual G5s everything else is very old slow and outdated. this Qtrs numbers are going to be very poor for Apple but i have a idea, since they allready count Emac as Imac sales why dont they just count all ipods& mini ipods as just consumer sales and add them to Emac/Imac and then they can say how Great Imacs are selling. :D they are spinning Imac numbers so they might as well spin them a little faster. 10 years later and its still the same story Mac Hardware sucks and they charge you twice what its worth. How many more years will it be before Apple has decent Hardware across the board. I say it will be at least 2 more motorola dragging years. Single G5s are still not that impressive and it takes 2 g5s to equal 1 Intel. :mad: same old Apple story. by the time Imac gets a G5 I will be wanting a G6.
 
Dont Hurt Me said:
they are spinning Imac numbers so they might as well spin them a little faster. 10 years later and its still the same story Mac Hardware sucks and they charge you twice what its worth. How many more years will it be before Apple has decent Hardware across the board. I say it will be at least 2 more motorola dragging years. Single G5s are still not that impressive and it takes 2 g5s to equal 1 Intel. :mad: same old Apple story. by the time Imac gets a G5 I will be wanting a G6.

Agreed, Apple need to swallow some pride and release a healess, bare bone box for the wider consumer. Imaging the sales of the PM if all you got was:
a case
powersupply
Motherboard
and bought the cpu's you wanted.
 
No, no, no.

Opteron said:
Agreed, Apple need to swallow some pride and release a healess, bare bone box for the wider consumer. Imaging the sales of the PM if all you got was:
a case
powersupply
Motherboard
and bought the cpu's you wanted.

Apple does need to swallow some pride and some profit and try to release a headless box for consumer usage, however you are missing the point of Apple: vertical integration. A case, powersupply, mobo and cpus only would suck. I want USB, Firewire, DVI, Airport, etc. in a box, I don't want to add in all the extra stuff just so I can have the same experience I do with a beige box. Apple's stuff works, at least in part, because they can create such specifically tweaked machines. Your suggestion adds in some many extra variables that they must as well license clones, which by the way sucked!
Apple has been behind the curve on the processor side (megahertz myth or not a 3.0Ghz PIV is faster than a 1.0Ghz G4) and they have been slow to bring in the best video cards (or they cost more) and memory. However, and this goes to Don't Hurt Me too, Apple makes a very nice machine. It's not the fastest, but they are clearly very stable and reliable. You will of course mention the iBooks, white-spots on the 15'' AlBooks, dead iPod batteries, noisy MDD G4s, figety G5 video, etc. and yet Apple still manages to do well in Consumer Reports and other reviews and continues to produce excellent computers. Do they f**k up? Definitely, but Apple does not produce crap, you make this wide knee-jerk reaction and yet ignore the whole thing that makes Apple IMHO better than the commodity PC makers they compete against.
 
hulugu said:
Apple does need to swallow some pride and some profit and try to release a headless box for consumer usage, however you are missing the point of Apple: vertical integration. A case, powersupply, mobo and cpus only would suck. I want USB, Firewire, DVI, Airport, etc. in a box, I don't want to add in all the extra stuff just so I can have the same experience I do with a beige box. Apple's stuff works, at least in part, because they can create such specifically tweaked machines. Your suggestion adds in some many extra variables that they must as well license clones, which by the way sucked!
Apple has been behind the curve on the processor side (megahertz myth or not a 3.0Ghz PIV is faster than a 1.0Ghz G4) and they have been slow to bring in the best video cards (or they cost more) and memory. However, and this goes to Don't Hurt Me too, Apple makes a very nice machine. It's not the fastest, but they are clearly very stable and reliable. You will of course mention the iBooks, white-spots on the 15'' AlBooks, dead iPod batteries, noisy MDD G4s, figety G5 video, etc. and yet Apple still manages to do well in Consumer Reports and other reviews and continues to produce excellent computers. Do they f**k up? Definitely, but Apple does not produce crap, you make this wide knee-jerk reaction and yet ignore the whole thing that makes Apple IMHO better than the commodity PC makers they compete against.

I would want those extra features on a cut down mac as well. Its just the head removal and a decent chip/bus etc I want to see.
 
hulugu said:
Apple does need to swallow some pride and some profit and try to release a headless box for consumer usage, however you are missing the point of Apple: vertical integration....that makes Apple IMHO better than the commodity PC makers they compete against.

Hi,

I guess some of you just miss the point. I have to agree with DHM. The point is that Apples marketshare dropped below 2%. And thats the point. They need more marketshare ! We currently have around 7 Mio active Mac users (even if Jobs tells that there are 25Mio) in comparison to 400 Mio PC users. Apple spended 1 billion dollars in developing OS X If they earn if they sell it for $120 and with a COS of $70 they only earn $50 they need 20E6 to buy it ! Or make the money with sales of hardware. With that low marketshare they have to charge more per unit. But how can you get more people to switch with outdated and overpriced hardware ? Apples marketshare dropped from 10% 15 years ago to 1.x% now and is still declining !!!! If this goes on we won't celebrate another 20 years. Period. The prices are so far away from the PC world right now !!!

In other words: they should release the iCube with G5 for $999-$1399 depending on speed and drives etc. and the price for the 17" screen should drop to $400.
 
Dont Hurt Me said:
this Qtrs numbers are going to be very poor for Apple...

Just so you know, Calendar Quarter 1 is always the slowest in the computer industry. It is always Apple's slowest period.
 
I agree mostly with the opinions of people wanting a headless iMac or something, and that lowering prices would allow for some more marketshare penetration at work and in the home. At the risk of getting flamed/pounded/ridiculed/laughed at, here goes. Apple's line within the year [ie by Jan 05], IMHO, should be:

PowerMac G5
All dual, also, get some uber-high-end vido card options for 3-D.
2.6Ghz, $1,499
3.0Ghz, $1,899
3.4Ghz, $2,299.

Displays
All widescreen
17" $449
20" $899
23" $1,499.

PowerBook G5
All have superdrive standard, combo as option. Same form factors as now.
12" 2.0Ghz, $1,499
15" 2.4Ghz, $1,999
17" 2.4Ghz, $2,399

iMac G5
Headless/No screens attached, use the displays from pro line, or get your own. DVI/ADC midline video card. Up to 2GB RAM, one PCI slot, one hard drive slot, full complement of ports. I dare say it may be time for the pizza box again, or something like it, small-form-factor. Add a superdrive for $100.
2.0Ghz, $899
2.4Ghz, $1,299

iBook G4
Yes, keep it G4, but pray all day that speed can be ramped up. It may be time to for Apple to pay for a liscence for IBM to manufacture and enhance the desktop G4. Same form factor as now. No superdrive option, all combo.
12" 2.0Ghz [or as close as possible], $899
14" 2.0Ghz [or as close as possible], $1,299

eMac G4
Same deal as iBook with the G4. Same as now, yes a superdrive option.
2.0Ghz [or as close as possible], combo drive $699
2.0Ghz [or as close as possible], superdrive $799

The key here is dropping priced to make the business buyers, lab managers and prosumers get interested in the headless iMac, cheapos in the eMac and iBook, and your real pros into more towers and PowerBooks.

We'll see huh?
;)
 
So it sounds as though the headless iMac would essentially be the return of Cube redesigned. Your prices are awesome primalman. Now if Steve would just fulfill your prognostication. I can see myself in that dual 3.0 or 3.4 with a 23" Cinema Display this Fall.
 
I hate marketshare; useless statistic. Bah!

CmdrLaForge said:
Hi,
I guess some of you just miss the point. I have to agree with DHM. The point is that Apples marketshare dropped below 2%. And thats the point. They need more marketshare ! We currently have around 7 Mio active Mac users (even if Jobs tells that there are 25Mio) in comparison to 400 Mio PC users. Apple spended 1 billion dollars in developing OS X If they earn if they sell it for $120 and with a COS of $70 they only earn $50 they need 20E6 to buy it ! Or make the money with sales of hardware. With that low marketshare they have to charge more per unit. But how can you get more people to switch with outdated and overpriced hardware ? Apples marketshare dropped from 10% 15 years ago to 1.x% now and is still declining !!!! If this goes on we won't celebrate another 20 years. Period. The prices are so far away from the PC world right now !!!

First, were do you get your numbers? Second, are you using pure marketshare data and are you comparing that against installed base? Marketshare is important, especially for the perception of consumers(I want what others have) and developers (I need a large base to sell to). However, we must be careful with this number because Apple does not sell to the entire computer industry, ie. cubicle farms for telemarketers, etc. This market is cut-rate, low-quality with a high-turnover, exactly the kind of market that Apple cannot compete in. Furthermore, and I know we go over this everytime some wag mentions market-share: if Apple sold 10,000 computers in 1984 (out of 1 million) and now sells 100,000 (out of 20 Million) you could say their market-share dropped from 10% to 5%, and yet they are selling 10x as many units. This isn't the whole story, but neither is market-share.
In my mind, Apple needs to do 3 things:
Headless iMac: Keep the iMac as a flagship product, but give people a renewed Cube (or another form figure, surprise me Apple!) with the fastest G5 possible. In fact, shove a G5 in everything you can and don't change the prices or if possible lower them. But Apple must be willing, this bears repeating, to lose some profitibility on its consumer machines. The G5 Powermac should be a money-maker, but the iBook and the eMac should be an easier entry into the Macintosh world. I've noticed once people buy a Mac they want to do it again.
Advertise: Get Chiat Day off their asses and start producing iLife commercials again. (Remember the iMovie/iDVD commercials?) And show OSX as well, advertise No virii, security, etc. You guys had the balls to proclaim you had the 'World Most Powerful Computer' so step up.
Innovate, innovate, innovate! Apple must be the bleeding edge for the computer industry, think about the iPad (a tablet that actually works for people) the video-iPod (I've been thinking about this one, not really a iPod for movies, but rather for photographers, be able to plug in your DV camera and dump the whole thing to your 40Gig drive and keep shooting, or for photographers. Maybe a smart-card port, and the ability to see pictures and organize them using gasp! iPhoto once it's plugged into a Mac.
I lied, I though of another: Be willing to deal with Windows. I know that battle has been lost in many respects, but a Mac should be able to coexist with Wintel. Keep working on the network connections, also port iChat AV to Windows, you'll sell more iSights that way. However, do NOT port the rest of iLife or anything else. Show someone iTunes/iChat AV and then tell them there's more on the other pasture. Do it in a commercial, in magazines, etc. And yeah, and mention it works with Linux. Push that, a Mac UNIX your grandmother could use, iLife MS Office for the rest of your life, the great negotiator works with Windows and Linux. But cooler.

Lastly, Apple's hardware, good stuff. Overpriced. Maybe. Outdated. I doubt it. But OSX. Priceless.
 
hulugu said:
Apple does need to swallow some pride and some profit and try to release a headless box for consumer usage, however you are missing the point of Apple: vertical integration. A case, powersupply, mobo and cpus only would suck. I want USB, Firewire, DVI, Airport, etc. in a box, I don't want to add in all the extra stuff just so I can have the same experience I do with a beige box. Apple's stuff works, at least in part, because they can create such specifically tweaked machines. Your suggestion adds in some many extra variables that they must as well license clones, which by the way sucked!

Firstly if I could buy a bearbone PM, have you looked at th back pannel of the mother board, notice all the ports that come standard. Firewire800, USB2, ....

Secondly whether or not your computer has DVI is dependent on the graphics card you use.

Hence I'm not saying Apple should drop their complete box/all in one idea, but just give the consumer another option.
 
Opteron said:
Firstly if I could buy a bearbone PM, have you looked at th back pannel of the mother board, notice all the ports that come standard. Firewire800, USB2, ....

Secondly whether or not your computer has DVI is dependent on the graphics card you use.

Hence I'm not saying Apple should drop their complete box/all in one idea, but just give the consumer another option.


Yep. I think this has found some concensus over the last 3-4 months.

This machine needs to be headless but performance wise should have a few models so that you can get a cheapy but also get something that is effectively a single G5 processor cut down PowerMac without the room to expand a real G5 has presently.

So a G5 Cube would be similiar as the G5 iMac described a few posts back, although I think room for 4 RAM slots for the single processor is a must so that we can get 2 gig from much cheaper 512 Ram sticks or 4Gig for those who so desire.

Also speed could go from 1.6Ghz up to almost the max - whatever that is next.

Access to a decent graphics card is a must to attract the gamer switchers who can't afford a full PowerMac but can afford the new MiniPowerMac (comes in 5 colours :p )

I actually think the form factor of a cube or even a current G5 sliced horizontally to be a log or stand up as a post could be workable.
 
I agree that Apple needs a consumer Mac that can increase overall marketshare, and leads to more people using the Mac OS. The problem I have with a "headless" computer is that it forces people to buy a non-Apple display. Why spend $500 to $1000 on a Mac, then have to spend almost as much on an Apple display? So a solution needs to be introduced.

Lower prices on the G5s? Forget -- won't happen. I bought an 8600 Power Mac seven years ago at the same price point as the dual 1.8 ghz G5. Apple will keep their price points right where they are -- give or take $100.

Right now, I think Apple is going to have to bust their tail in order to be able to introduce a G5 rev b by the end of March. There is some question whether Apple has really solved the power supply issue on the G5. If they haven't, they have got to find an all new power supply, yet again. (It's ironic that everyone here is screaming for G5s, and users of the G5 are screaming at Apple because of all the problems.)
 
hulugu said:
First, were do you get your numbers? Second, are you using pure marketshare data and are you comparing that against installed base? Marketshare is important, especially for the perception of consumers(I want what others have) and developers (I need a large base to sell to). However, we must be careful with this number because Apple does not sell to the entire computer industry, ie. cubicle farms for telemarketers, etc. This market is cut-rate, low-quality with a high-turnover, exactly the kind of market that Apple cannot compete in. Furthermore, and I know we go over this everytime some wag mentions market-share: if Apple sold 10,000 computers in 1984 (out of 1 million) and now sells 100,000 (out of 20 Million) you could say their market-share dropped from 10% to 5%, and yet they are selling 10x as many units. This isn't the whole story, but neither is market-share.

Good question: look here : http://www.insanely-great.com/news.php?id=3143 and here http://www.pegasus3d.com/total_share.html

Another interesting sidenote http://www.thinksecret.com/news/tsnotes10.html

Unit sells are up as well as investing costs ! Its very difficult to get the complete picture. Hopefully for software companys ROIC (return on invested capital) for Mac Apps is still good enough.
hulugu said:
In my mind, Apple needs to do 3 things:
Headless iMac: Keep the iMac as a flagship product, but give people a renewed Cube (or another form figure, surprise me Apple!) with the fastest G5 possible. In fact, shove a G5 in everything you can and don't change the prices or if possible lower them. But Apple must be willing, this bears repeating, to lose some profitibility on its consumer machines. The G5 Powermac should be a money-maker, but the iBook and the eMac should be an easier entry into the Macintosh world. I've noticed once people buy a Mac they want to do it again.
Advertise: Get Chiat Day off their asses and start producing iLife commercials again. (Remember the iMovie/iDVD commercials?) And show OSX as well, advertise No virii, security, etc. You guys had the balls to proclaim you had the 'World Most Powerful Computer' so step up.
Innovate, innovate, innovate! Apple must be the bleeding edge for the computer industry, think about the iPad (a tablet that actually works for people) the video-iPod (I've been thinking about this one, not really a iPod for movies, but rather for photographers, be able to plug in your DV camera and dump the whole thing to your 40Gig drive and keep shooting, or for photographers. Maybe a smart-card port, and the ability to see pictures and organize them using gasp! iPhoto once it's plugged into a Mac.
I lied, I though of another: Be willing to deal with Windows. I know that battle has been lost in many respects, but a Mac should be able to coexist with Wintel. Keep working on the network connections, also port iChat AV to Windows, you'll sell more iSights that way. However, do NOT port the rest of iLife or anything else. Show someone iTunes/iChat AV and then tell them there's more on the other pasture. Do it in a commercial, in magazines, etc. And yeah, and mention it works with Linux. Push that, a Mac UNIX your grandmother could use, iLife MS Office for the rest of your life, the great negotiator works with Windows and Linux. But cooler.

Lastly, Apple's hardware, good stuff. Overpriced. Maybe. Outdated. I doubt it. But OSX. Priceless.

I agree to most of your points. IMHO one is missing and that GAMES ! Quite important market, because a lot of people are not heavily gaming, just sometimes, but if they buy a computer for $2000 they want to be able to play the latest games.

But Outdated : YES ! The G4 machines at 1 (+ a little bit) are outdated.
iBook, eMac and G5 are great.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.