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

Upcoming iMac Features/Pricing

Is this possible?

The larger a screen you go with, the greater a percentage of the total cost the screen is. This can be a problem since people don't want to have to buy the screen twice if they just upgrade the computer.

I know that it would be difficult for a home user to change the LCD on an iMac, but could apple run an upgrade program where you send in your old iMac, they take off the LCD and put it on a new base? Or it could even be done at an Apple Store.

My PC has a 5 year old 19" CRT that shows no signs of dying. Since I've had it I've bought one new computer, and will again soon.

On the Mac side, I know I would consider an iMac at 17" or 20" a much better value if I knew I could upgrade the base without reinvesting in an LCD.
 
LCD screens are not made invidually, but in large sheets. Manufacturers have been changing the dimensions of these sheets (and the equipment needed to make them) in the past year to maximize ultimate screen size and reduce cost. An 18 " screen doesn't fall into the parameters. I don't believe Apple will put a 20" screen on the current iMac simply because the esthetics of a too small base and a too large screen would make it ugly. Also there are weight considerations. One thing that may happen is a change from steel to aluminum on the arm. The 15" (possibly a wide-screen version) will remain as an entry level $999 iMac. The eMac will drop in price to $799.
 
Originally posted by JW Pepper
Let's assume that the iMacs are going to get price cuts in the same way that the Powermacs have. That means the 17" model will fall from it's current $1999 price tag.
Click to expand...

Did you guys read the first post in this thread?

The high end iMac should come it at $1799.

arn
 
ACK! Would canabilaize PM sales!

Originally posted by JW Pepper
Let's assume that the iMacs are going to get price cuts in the same way that the Powermacs have. That means the 17" model will fall from it's current $1999 price tag.

The difference in price between the 17" and 20" displays is only $600. Would you be prepared to pay $600 extra say $2400 for a 20" iMac, I would.

If Apple wanted to release such a machine they could make it work. These iMacs weigh 20lbs so they can easily support the additional weight.
Click to expand...

Don't you think that if you could buy a 1ghz iMac with a 20" screen and superdrive for $2400, that it would screw over the sales of the 1ghz PMG4 without a superdrive + 20" Cinema for $3000???? Apple would never do that!

I do not think that Apple will go beyond the 17" iMac screen, at least for the near term, say the next 18 months. LCD prices need to be DOWN before they would increase the size without really adding cost.

I believe Apple has a mandate: the iMac must never be more than $1999. Period. The eMac must never be more than $1499. Period. Yada yada yada.....
 
ACK! Again!

Originally posted by pkradd
LCD screens are not made invidually, but in large sheets. Manufacturers have been changing the dimensions of these sheets (and the equipment needed to make them) in the past year to maximize ultimate screen size and reduce cost. An 18 " screen doesn't fall into the parameters. ...
Click to expand...

If 18" does not fit in the parameters you speak of, then why do so many companies offer LCDs that are 18"? Let me know when you find out. Thanks. :)
 
Headless iMac

I hope the iMac comes in at 1.25ghz, but I think it will probably be 1ghz (boo hoo).

I would still love to see them make a "Headless" iMac. Just give me a DVI and ADC connector on the back. Then the monitor thing goes away. It basically becomes a new "cube" form factor.

Also, I wouldn't mind a single USB port on the front of the iMac base. This would be perfect for plugging in the keyboard.
 
What's DDR Ram? I'm a PC user.. going to make the switch...to an imac, and want to understand what it is vis a vis the 256, etc.


Thanks.
 
Re: Headless iMac

Originally posted by tcmcam

I would still love to see them make a "Headless" iMac. Just give me a DVI and ADC connector on the back. Then the monitor thing goes away. It basically becomes a new "cube" form factor.
Click to expand...

Given the failure of the cube, why would Apple make this mistake again? What's odd to me is that the Cube failed miserably, while the iMac has done relatively well, despite having the same limitations on upgradeability. Is the only difference the fact that the cube goes under a desk (normally), whereas the iMac sits on top of it?

Besides, why would I want a hemisphere on my desk?
 
Ibook 14" Price Drop ?

I dont know if i didnt read correctly last time I was browsing the Apple online store, but it now appears that all 14" models are $100 less than previously stated, with the US store displaying this fact and the UK one showing a "New Price" indicator.

Of course .. i could just be unobservant :)

link to image here
 
Re: Ibook 14" Price Drop ?

Originally posted by js995
I dont know if i didnt read correctly last time I was browsing the Apple online store, but it now appears that all 14" models are $100 less than previously stated, with the US store displaying this fact and the UK one showing a "New Price" indicator.

Of course .. i could just be unobservant :)

link to image here
Click to expand...

The price drop was to make "room" for the 12" powerbook...the price was dropped when the powerbooks were released.;)
 
Re: Headless iMac

Originally posted by tcmcam
I hope the iMac comes in at 1.25ghz, but I think it will probably be 1ghz (boo hoo).

I would still love to see them make a "Headless" iMac. Just give me a DVI and ADC connector on the back. Then the monitor thing goes away. It basically becomes a new "cube" form factor.

Also, I wouldn't mind a single USB port on the front of the iMac base. This would be perfect for plugging in the keyboard.
Click to expand...

And we all know what a success the cube was. :D
 
Re: Re: Headless iMac

Originally posted by Le Big Mac


Given the failure of the cube, why would Apple make this mistake again? What's odd to me is that the Cube failed miserably, while the iMac has done relatively well, despite having the same limitations on upgradeability. Is the only difference the fact that the cube goes under a desk (normally), whereas the iMac sits on top of it?

Besides, why would I want a hemisphere on my desk?
Click to expand...

For me the limiting factor for the Cube was the vertical feed drive and the fact that all cables connected underneath it. It was just too cumbersome and small.
 
Re: Re: Headless iMac

Originally posted by Le Big Mac


Given the failure of the cube, why would Apple make this mistake again? What's odd to me is that the Cube failed miserably, while the iMac has done relatively well, despite having the same limitations on upgradeability. Is the only difference the fact that the cube goes under a desk (normally), whereas the iMac sits on top of it?

Besides, why would I want a hemisphere on my desk?
Click to expand...

The Cube does NOT go under a desk (normally), it sits on top, like the iMac. That's why it has such a cool case, is fan-less, and has a power switch and a top loading CD/DVD drive.

Funny thing is that while I never wanted one when they came out, I ended up buying a used one last summer and I love it. I'm not sure why it failed, really, except that Apple's desktop line was just too muddy at the time. The Cube didn't really fit it. It wasn't compact like the original iMac and it wasn't as expandable as the tower.

The idea that someone would ask for a 'headless' iMac is interesting, because you'd end up with what is essentially an expansionless Cube. As it is now, you can still buy processor and video card upgrades for the Cube - you can't do that with an iMac.
 
Re: Re: Re: Headless iMac

Originally posted by CHess


The Cube does NOT go under a desk (normally), it sits on top, like the iMac. That's why it has such a cool case, is fan-less, and has a power switch and a top loading CD/DVD drive.

Funny thing is that while I never wanted one when they came out, I ended up buying a used one last summer and I love it. I'm not sure why it failed, really, except that Apple's desktop line was just too muddy at the time. The Cube didn't really fit it. It wasn't compact like the original iMac and it wasn't as expandable as the tower.

The idea that someone would ask for a 'headless' iMac is interesting, because you'd end up with what is essentially an expansionless Cube. As it is now, you can still buy processor and video card upgrades for the Cube - you can't do that with an iMac.
Click to expand...

Actually, I would have to say the Cube was way overpriced for its functionality. It made much more sense to buy a laptop than it did to buy the Cube. The Cube stock configuration was single processor, yet it was approaching the price of dual processor PowerMacs. The problem? Just because it had a G4 didn't mean people were willing to pay 2x what the machine was worth.....it wasn't that cool........and it didn't get the job done any better.

In my Opinion, Apple should phase out the G3 iMac immediately, and release a new iMac....that way you have the Flat Panel iMac, and a normal G4 iMac without a screen.......its not that hard to add the DVI port, and make an alternate cover with no arm socket. I'd sell it for $699 ... it would bring Apple into the Arena with Dell and Gateway....yet they'd probably make a good size profit from the mass production volume of the iMacs.
 
802.11b and g both use the same frequency spectrum. interference similar to microwave oven or 2.4GHz cordless phone with standard airport.

question though... the wintel based notebooks will have tri-band cards in the next few months. how soon for Apple???

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

tri-band = 802.11a/b/g

"b" and "g" are compatible, whereas "a" is seperate, but better for clusters of wireless stations than "g" is.
 
Originally posted by xrhajj
I smell new iMacs and iBooks right around the corner!!!

Also, dude you spelled February wrong!!!


:rolleyes: :rolleyes: ;) :p
Click to expand...

apple inc is in catch up mode across the board and quiet updates as well as macworld announcements are needed

we can't rely on updates only at macworld

1 ghz would be a good place to be for the consumer products on the high end
 
Posted by SwitchHitter
What's DDR Ram? I'm a PC user.. going to make the switch...to an imac, and want to understand what it is vis a vis the 256, etc.
Click to expand...
DDR means "double data rate". Right now the iMac only supports SDRAM (single data rate). The PowerMacs, and now some of the Powerbooks use DDR ram but Motorola's G4 processor doesn't take advantage of the extra speed. Once the memory controller gets it however, the memory can then talk to the chipset on the motherboard at DDR speed. The speculation is that upgraded iMacs will get a faster system bus (100 > 133 Mhz) and DDR memory.
 
Originally posted by pilotgi
Posted by SwitchHitter

DDR means "double data rate". Right now the iMac only supports SDRAM (single data rate). The PowerMacs, and now some of the Powerbooks use DDR ram but Motorola's G4 processor doesn't take advantage of the extra speed. Once the memory controller gets it however, the memory can then talk to the chipset on the motherboard at DDR speed. The speculation is that upgraded iMacs will get a faster system bus (100 > 133 Mhz) and DDR memory.
Click to expand...

Also, SDRAM stands for synchronous dynamic random access memory.

DDR - actually means double data rate.

Just in case you thought SDRAM meant single data random acceess memory
 
Originally posted by MacKid

Also, I sorta think the iMac would lose its appeal with white cords sticking all out the front.

But it's just an opinion!:D
Click to expand...

Why not design a keyboard with 2 Firewire 800 and 2 USB 1.1. With this, the only port you'll have on the back is the power, ehternet, keyboard and modem (but who uses modem port anymore). This is a simple and brilliant solution that Apple hasn't carry through to its completion.

I may have neglect the physical limitation of Firewire 800, however, I think this is a brilliant idea.:D
 
Originally posted by Chomolungma


Why not design a keyboard with 2 Firewire 800 and 2 USB 1.1. With this, the only port you'll have on the back is the power, ehternet, keyboard and modem (but who uses modem port anymore). This is a simple and brilliant solution that Apple hasn't carry through to its completion.

I may have neglect the physical limitation of Firewire 800, however, I think this is a brilliant idea.:D
Click to expand...

Yah, I agree. I had tried to promote this to the boards here and elsewhere last year. It would make sense to have a KB that has all the daily use/switching ports ready to go. Make the KB a powered USB/FW400/FW800 hub. Makes very good sense to me for the digital hub strategy.
 
Originally posted by Chomolungma


Why not design a keyboard with 2 Firewire 800 and 2 USB 1.1. With this, the only port you'll have on the back is the power, ehternet, keyboard and modem (but who uses modem port anymore). This is a simple and brilliant solution that Apple hasn't carry through to its completion.
Click to expand...

Strangely, yes they did - back in 1977. Minus Firewire, USB, and ethernet; floppy disk and modem extra as an add on card and/or external peripheral. So did Radio Shack. I still have an original Apple II (not II+) and TRS-80 Model I in my basement collecting dust and looking old. One of these days I'll finish refurbishing those dinosaurs. :) But they sure were fun machines in their day! --M
 
Cube was too expensive...

The cube wasn't targeted to consumers but to professionals who didn't need expandability... although even pros who don't need it... want to have the option.

But an iCube... i.e. a consumer version might work...sell it for under $1000 and then you have consumers lust for the nice big flat screens... think consumers would spend the $1299 for the 20"?
 
article updated

The article has been updated.

arn
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back