But isn't America Apple's best market? Surely their competitors must be doing better in other countries and therefore apple should be getting the finger out. Or is it more likely they don't give a monkey's.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Next-Generation iMacs to See Price Cuts?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But isn't America Apple's best market? Surely their competitors must be doing better in other countries and therefore apple should be getting the finger out. Or is it more likely they don't give a monkey's.
Lame-O
Sorry Apple...
But the iMac line has completely stagnated and there has been *zero* innovation since the iMac G5 was introduced 5 years ago. It's basically the same computer.
We have the same dinky screens, essentially the same form factor and the same Cadillac pricing. There is no compelling reason to upgrade. Where is the innovation?
For example:
Where is the 30" iMac? The 32" iMac?
Where is the revolutionary new form factor?
Why the laziness?
Sorry Apple...
But the iMac line has completely stagnated and there has been *zero* innovation since the iMac G5 was introduced 5 years ago. It's basically the same computer.
We have the same dinky screens, essentially the same form factor and the same Cadillac pricing. There is no compelling reason to upgrade. Where is the innovation?
For example:
Where is the 30" iMac? The 32" iMac?
Where is the revolutionary new form factor?
Why the laziness?
Where is the 30" iMac? The 32" iMac?
Where is the revolutionary new form factor?
Why the laziness?
And, where is the quad core Nehalem that other companies have for under $800?
The Imac has become a joke...
I'm in the same boat as you although I currently use an iMac. I'm waiting for the Apple tablet/netbook to come out for my daily needs and using my iMac at home. I had a macbook but sold it to get a cheaper imac at the time.
I expect the prices for the iMacs to go down especially after the cuts on the Macbook pros.
I want Windows 7 to be a hit because I really want Apple to retain a small market share. It seems that the bigger they get, the more the Apple magic is spread too thin and quality takes a dip. My Titanium PowerBook from nearly 8 years ago is still plugging along fine with Tiger and I still love using it. My 3 year old MacBook Pro is close to death.
no blu-ray = no buy.
i'm looking forward to getting a desktop next to my MBP, but it is not happening before it gets blu-ray. I want to burn video from my HD camcorder to a blu-ray + it'd be nice if i could view blu-rays on my desktop if i wanted to, have a ton of them already.
i'm looking forward to getting a desktop next to my MBP, but it is not happening before it gets blu-ray. I want to burn video from my HD camcorder to a blu-ray + it'd be nice if i could view blu-rays on my desktop if i wanted to, have a ton of them already.
Where is the 30" iMac? The 32" iMac?
Where is the revolutionary new form factor?
Why the laziness?
Agree they could offer bigger options & I'd like a matte one, but it'd be difficult to significantly change the design without sacrificing Apple's obsession with thinness. Doing away with the chin would necessitate having it thicker from the side - I wouldn't mind this at all, but making things thicker seems aesthetically anathema to Apple right now.
I expect £50 price cuts in UK &, hopefully, they'll improve the specs - IMO, it's ridiculous having only integrated 9400M graphics in a 24" iMac costing well over £1K. While I'm at it, how about sticking a 9600M in the higher-end Mini?
Overall, I think we'll see only minor updates (no blu-ray, etc.), though I hope I'm wrong.
On the other hand the Cinema 30" is much thicker from the side than the iMac 24" is... in fact it's twice as thick as most 30" monitors. Not sure why they made it so bulky, especially given their obsession with thinness. But they could certainly fit the innards of one if not two iMacs inside the current 30".
I'm always ambivalent about Apple cutting prices. On one hand their prices are ludicrous and any cuts should be welcome, but on the other hand I know from their history that these price cuts are never done by just shrinking their extreme profit margin down to normal levels, it's usually done by cutting corners on the hardware while preserving the extreme profit margin. Given that they already use a lot of second rate, cheapo stuff in the iMacs and MBPs, where will they go? Will all new iMacs be made with refurbished components? Will they revert to USB 1.0 and remove firewire? Will they buy damaged/discarded components from cheapo brands like Acer and Packard Bell? Will they get a bargain deal on screens with dead pixels? Will they scavenge the lo-tech scrapyard for remaining 4200 RPM, 40 GB hard drives? It will take a lot of corner cutting to lower the prices while still preserving the profit margin at one trillion percent.
It's hilarious to read people demanding Blu-Ray in the next iMac refresh.
Why?
Because if you're holding out on Apple giving you your first taste of Blu-Ray via your shiny new iMac, you're robbing yourself of a proper HD experience.
Perhaps you don't have an HD television and only have money for a new computer, I don't know. But a giant screen and a standalone player is the ONLY way to experience Blu-Ray.
I refuse to lower myself to sitting watching it on a computer. Even on a 32" HD television, you only begin to notice the difference between upscaled DVD via HDMI and Blu-Ray. Anything smaller, you're just using Blu-Ray for the sake of saying you have it.
Why?
Because if you're holding out on Apple giving you your first taste of Blu-Ray via your shiny new iMac, you're robbing yourself of a proper HD experience.
Perhaps you don't have an HD television and only have money for a new computer, I don't know. But a giant screen and a standalone player is the ONLY way to experience Blu-Ray.
I refuse to lower myself to sitting watching it on a computer. Even on a 32" HD television, you only begin to notice the difference between upscaled DVD via HDMI and Blu-Ray. Anything smaller, you're just using Blu-Ray for the sake of saying you have it.
Interesting about the 30" ACD's thickness. Other than indicating no compromise in the quality of the technology Apple use inside the ACDs, I can't imagine why so thick.
Good point. Apple have always been loath to sacrifice their (approx) 30% profit margins. If we see prices fall too steeply, sales may increase but quality will drop, which would be counter-productive to the Apple brand. However, as all components are always steadily falling in price anyway, even quality ones, I don't see any problem here for Apple offering price-cuts on the scale of perhaps those recently seen with their MBPs.
I assume you missed the winking smiley for that bit. Otherwise I'm not sure where you get the idea from that they already use such "cheapo" low-grade components. Certainly the 2 Macs I own (iBook & alum 20" iMac) continue working efficiently for me for many hours each day & appear to be well engineered, quality products. Apple's consistently excellent performance when it comes to customer satisfaction surveys, strongly suggests that many Mac owners feel similarly.
Good point. Apple have always been loath to sacrifice their (approx) 30% profit margins. If we see prices fall too steeply, sales may increase but quality will drop, which would be counter-productive to the Apple brand. However, as all components are always steadily falling in price anyway, even quality ones, I don't see any problem here for Apple offering price-cuts on the scale of perhaps those recently seen with their MBPs.
I assume you missed the winking smiley for that bit. Otherwise I'm not sure where you get the idea from that they already use such "cheapo" low-grade components.
Certainly the 2 Macs I own (iBook & alum 20" iMac) continue working efficiently for me for many hours each day & appear to be well engineered, quality products. Apple's consistently excellent performance when it comes to customer satisfaction surveys, strongly suggests that many Mac owners feel similarly. 
My HD LCD TV and my HD projector are capable of 720p/1080i, but my 24" Dell monitor can do 1080p, so there are some benefits to be had.
But yep, I'd rather watch upscaled DVDs on my 720p projector at 150-200" (oh yeah!) than 1080p bluray on my computer monitor.
Smiley? No. They do use second rate stuff. Just look at the MBP 17" I'm typing on. Looks great on the outside to feign the illusion of top notch stuff, but what's inside it? Let's see. Bottom-of-the-barrel AGERE firewire chipset, which has replaced the high-end Texas Instruments chipset they used in the past. AGERE is the bane of audio professionals everywhere. Then, we have the underwhelming midrange NVidia 9600M, which has no place in a "pro" machine. Broadcom WiFi (I suppose Intel's PRO line was too expensive so they went to the Wal-Mart of communication components), Broadcom Bluetooth, NVidia Ethernet (buggy crap on every PC I tried so I doubt this is any different). A cheapo Hitachi 5400 RPM drive which WD's 5400 RPM drives run circles around. Pro? Mmmmmkay. Sometimes they use components so antiquated that people sue them (read the Criticism part of this entry on iMacs).I assume you missed the winking smiley for that bit. Otherwise I'm not sure where you get the idea from that they already use such "cheapo" low-grade components.
Good for you. My iMac 24" died after 13 months. Had it been a Dell I would've made one phone call and had it repaired in my home within 24 hours, but since it's Apple"care", I had to pack it up and drive 60 miles roundtrip to drop it off at the nearest Apple place. It took them 3 weeks to replace the power supply. I drove 60 miles again to pick it up. It worked for 30 minutes before it died again, so now I have to do the whole thing over again, only this time I'll also have to ask them to remove the dust and smudges they put behind the screen glass during their last attempt to fix this piece of junk. I'm sure their service is "excellent" if you live next door from their flagship store, but internationally, their support is more like something out of the Monty Python parrot sketch.Certainly the 2 Macs I own (iBook & alum 20" iMac) continue working efficiently for me for many hours each day & appear to be well engineered, quality products. Apple's consistently excellent performance when it comes to customer satisfaction surveys, strongly suggests that many Mac owners feel similarly.
My brand new MBP 17" only had 91% battery health out of the box, and calibration didn't help, but I'm more or less forced to keep it because the alternative is to wait X number of weeks for those morons to replace it, and god knows what brand new faults the machine would get in the process.
I see your point. Though some people who've had bad luck with a product most other people find generally reliable are bound to have opinions skewed on the negative side, I think you're 100% right that not all Apple products have been up to the standard people expect for the good money they pay.
As well as the iMac article, there have been a fair few other recent issues where Mac users have apparently been quite innocent of neglecting their Macs, yet still experienced, for eg., easily broken screen-hinges on the MacBook Air, screens cracking on MacBooks, etc. all which Apple refused to accept under AppleCare. If I'd been on the receiving end of something so duff after paying good money, I'd definitely feel the same way! Examples like these strongly suggest these are product defects, which Apple continue to deny.
Also agree that AppleCare is quite poor value for the money charged. I too don't live close to an Apple Store. So if my iMac stopped working, not being allowed to pack the thing & send it to Apple, IMO, really isn't good enough. I'm facing at least one round trip a good distance, possibly 2, when many PC companies offer a collect & return service for less cost.
Apple make some great products, I have 2 of them, but I agree they could certainly do better in some depts for the relatively high prices charged! Love Macs, but not necessarily Apple's business practices.
Yeah... I feel that for the premium we do pay for Macs, we shouldn't have to bother ourselves with scrutinizing every new model to find out what they put in them in order to avoid unpleasant surprises later. We should be able to take for granted that whatever the best LCD screen, the best hard drives, the best chipsets etc are on the market right now, that's what Apple used.
It's not the first time there are problems with hinges, either. The hinges on the Titanium PowerBooks were notorious for cracking and snapping off... and then there was the Cube which developed cracks in the plastic. I don't think they stress test these things thoroughly. A Fujitsu-Siemens PC may be ugly, but I know that they stress test every new model thoroughly to check stuff like the hinges being able to withstand opening and closing the lid a million times, etc. Apple excels in industrial design from a visual POV, but many of these designs are unconventional if not unique and haven't undergone extensive real-world testing, so the customers have to act as guinea pigs.
It's certainly a problem, especially from a business point of view. I rely on my computers for a living (not my iMac, fortunately), and getting them up and running quickly when they break down is essential. Due to Apple's dodgy service and support I can't go 100% Mac, I need at least one Dell PC so that if for some weird reason all my computers would go down simultaneously, I know that I can have at least one of them up and running the next day, and not have to wait three effing weeks like I did with the iMac.Also agree that AppleCare is quite poor value for the money charged. I too don't live close to an Apple Store. So if my iMac stopped working, not being allowed to pack the thing & send it to Apple, IMO, really isn't good enough. I'm facing at least one round trip a good distance, possibly 2, when many PC companies offer a collect & return service for less cost.
In fairness though, anyone who says they notice a huge difference (if any) between big screen 720p and small screen 1080p, must have superb, better than 20/20 eyesight. 720p on a 42/51/60" screen and 1080p on a 24" monitor would look near identical.
HD was created not only for better resolution and more detail, but first and foremost it was created to give better clarity on bigger screen televisions.
I beg to differ. The difference between a Quicktime HD 720p or 1080p trailer and a DVD on an iMac 24" is monumental. After you've watched one of those trailers fullscreen, DVD looks like a poor DivX rip. Furthermore, Blu-ray is just as much about storage capacity. Backing up stuff to DVD is kind of useless, but 50 gigs would actually make optical useful again (I've barely used it since the CD-R days).
I agree, people have every right to expect those standards, however, as only Apple offer OS X & many users, particularly those long-term pro level users who've invested serious money in the OS X platform have no viable alternative, it's little wonder Apple continue getting away with some of the shoddier side of their QC.
True there have been a number of serious QC failures, but a bigger concern for me would be if things are getting worse in this respect than they used to be, hence I used recent examples. I have no statistics to make a judgement either way, but my feeling is that as Apple continue to grow their user base, we're likely to see only a proportionate rise in duds, only giving the impression things may be worse.
Interesting about the Fujitsu-Siemens & those stress tests. I wonder how well a MacBook Air would fare in comparison?
I think you're spot on about how Apple's aesthetic, innovative priorities can often turn out be their achilles heel. FWIW, personally I'd go for one of the Levono Thinkpad laptops over any MacBook Pro, if only they ran OS X.I think your personal experience with AC (& many others with similar), touches upon one of the fundamental reasons why Macs (regardless of overall good reputation for reliability) will most likely always have limited market share. As well as relatively high prices, a lack of compatibility with the general business industry, etc., unless Apple improve their customer services to specifically address the concerns of those using Macs daily for a living or in the business community, I expect most of Apple's customer-base will likely remain restricted to consumers. Considering all the abuse Dell gets on this forum, I find it rather ironic that people such as you have to rely on a Dell PC as back up.
Frankly, I sometimes wonder whether Apple care that much, or as much as they used to do, about those using Macs for business. Even changes to the so-called MBP range in recent years seem more targeted to cater to well-off consumers rather than the interests of pro users. For eg., expensive brand PC laptops aimed at business users offer a number of quality matte-screen options. Meantime, Apple appear to increasingly reduce choices across their range, despite growing its cash reserves to some $29 billion plus. Most consumers, I imagine, will be far less fussy in this respect than those sitting at their Macs 8+ hours daily for a living.
Movies are shot at 24 frames per second. If you're TV accepts 1080 lines at 60i (or, 30 fps), that's more than sufficient to display every last detail in the film. You'd only benefit from 1080p if you're watching something with a frame rate higher than 30, e.g., your PS3 and Gran Turismo 5.
Your 24" Dell has native resolution of 1280, so 1080 content is going to be stretched (resampled) and will lose some of the detail/sharpness.
If you had two versions of a trailer, both 720p, with one almost double the size of the other, you'll see the roughly the same monumental difference.
It will be letter-boxed, the Dell is 1920x1200 - there will be 60 black rows at the top and bottom.
Something "consumer" should not be so expensive anyways. The current iMacs are worth probably around $700.No matter what Apple does, people on the MacForums iMac board will still complain about color gamut and light bleed.
I have to loudly disagree here!
Yesterday, I was at Fry's Electronics and I saw a playback of a Blu-ray movie on a 20" LG Electronics W2053TQ 1600x900 LCD display fed from an HP Pavilion Elite d5200t with an ATI Radeon HD 4650 graphics card, with playback using PowerDVD 9 software. It was very sharp with excellent color details, to say the least; when the salesperson switched to a regular DVD the loss in detail is VERY visible, especially with a big loss in sharpness. If you can see the difference between DVD and Blu-ray clearly on a 20" widecreen monitor, you can see it even more vividly on a 24" monitor used by the higher-end iMacs. Remember, because you are working at a desktop computer you are sitting a LOT closer to the screen than a regular home theater setup, and as such even on a 20" monitor you can tell the superior sharpness of a Blu-ray disc.
Because Apple's current hardware is ready to support Blu-ray discs (Apple only needs to add a Blu-ray optical drive and appropriate extensions to MacOS X 10.5 and 10.6, since all the Apple hardware is HDCP-compliant), I would not be surprised that Apple will offer Blu-ray support on the higher-end iMacs and Mac Pros as early as October 2009.