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

Will the iMac die this year?

T

TheMacOS.com

macrumors member
Original poster
Mar 16, 2004
41
0
South of Heaven, West of Hell
I was in aim chat room: panther

and someone said that they bet the imac will fizzle out this year... sales are down, and apple will scrap it before years end.

I dont agree with it, but it got me thinking....

could this happen? will apple scrap the imac soon? And move on to something else????

discuss.
 
Nope

I don't think it will die. Gotta keep the iMac around. So much money has been put into the name, image etc, it would be foolish to throw all of that away. Plus I thought they were working on the new iMac as we speak. Didn't Steve say it would be as big of a transition as the change from the original iMac to the FP iMac? Some one back me up here. Or shoot me down....
 
I could see them getting rid of the iMac and coming up with something eMac-y and call it the iMac. Basically turning the eMac into the iMac.
 
if apple gets a G5 in the iMac at the same prices as the current ones i think iMac sales will really pick up, of course this won't happen until the powermacs become faster so an older 1.6Ghz G5 can be put in the iMac
 
7on said:
I could see them getting rid of the iMac and coming up with something eMac-y and call it the iMac. Basically turning the eMac into the iMac.
Click to expand...
But wasn't it an iMac to begin with, then demoted it to eMac, and then came out the the current iMac?
 
What Apple should have done

Apple did put a lot of money into the iMac brand and image. It was suppose to be a cheap, easy-to-use computer for the masses. However, they kind of changed that when they switched over to the iMac G4. What they should have done is released the eMac under the iMac brand, and then called the iMac G4 something else (not the eMac, though). The iMac should also be marketed as what it is--it's no longer a low-end machine, but a mid-range model for people who want a little more power than the eMac, but don't want to spend the money on a PowerMac. They could then justify the higher price and a new G5 processor. It should also not be white plastic, but aluminum, or something in between :eek:
 
jamdr said:
Apple did put a lot of money into the iMac brand and image. It was suppose to be a cheap, easy-to-use computer for the masses. However, they kind of changed that when they switched over to the iMac G4. What they should have done is released the eMac under the iMac brand, and then called the iMac G4 something else (not the eMac, though). The iMac should also be marketed as what it is--it's no longer a low-end machine, but a mid-range model for people who want a little more power than the eMac, but don't want to spend the money on a PowerMac. They could then justify the higher price and a new G5 processor. It should also not be white plastic, but aluminum, or something in between :eek:
Click to expand...

Yep G5, possibly optional screen (G5 cube :p ) with a little more flexibility to allow for build options and possibly even PCI slots. 4GB ram ceiling (like the 1.6), good graphics card. Entirely new form factor...thats my wish list
 
iMac Branding...

I can't believe Apple could possibly be considering killing the iMac so early into its lifecycle. To the masses of the uninitiated the iMac *IS* Apple. It has got far more press coverage, simply by virtue of its cutting-edge industrial design, than a hundred boring PC-clone grey boxes. It may not be showcase technology anymore, but it remains a computer that would immensely satisfy 95% of its buyers.

Speaking personally, it was the iMac that brought me "into the fold" of Apple products after resisting buying a new home computer since the late 80's. I ended up buying a G4 iBook, but it was absolutely the iMac that got me into the Apple store. I have since given my friendly dealer more than $4,500 (Cdn) and yes I still dream of putting an iMac on my desk. (It's a lot like dating a supermodel -- they may be somewhat lacking in overall computational power, but geez they're nice to look at first thing in the morning!)

Sorry guys, but to the vast majority of the computer-buying world, the iMac is still Apple's flagship. And Apple can't afford to give that away.
 
I think it will become something new…

I would suggest that Apple know that the time of the PC as a standalone home device is now over.

I hope and dream that the next iMac will be something new, something that really justifies the name digital hub, something that is a computer FOR the home, not just a computer IN your home.

Something that is as disruptive a technology as the original Macintosh was.

They would then be the first again in an emerging market that will eventually make today's supposedly refined and hi-tech computers look as awkward, irrelevant, out of place and odd as a reel to reel tape deck looks now.

If they can be first to realise a truly user-friendly life-enhancing home multimedia device (that happens to be a computer), they will once again be insanely great.

I have no idea what this will actually look like or how it might work - that's the whole idea of innovation. If I could imagine it now, someone would have prototyped it ten years ago. ;)
 
They'll keep it for another year or two in it's form because it's a strong visual brand. There is still nothing in the market like it.

Sure, the technology needs a boost. When they zap up the graphics card and bring on 65nm G5, then it will be the flagship line again.

The fact that the last 'upgrade' was just a bigger screen tells me that the next one will be more significant. And it has to be this year.

G5 1.6ghz anyone??
 
Savage Henry said:
G5 1.6ghz anyone??
Click to expand...

1.6 is too slow, 1.8 or 2.0GHz base.
Note you can now build an Athlon-64 3200+ (2.0GHz,) with R9600XT, SATA 120HDD for under $2000AUD. With all the usual trimming (FW, USB2, Optical/coaxal audio, DVD Burner, 2 optical....)
 
Opteron said:
1.6 is too slow, 1.8 or 2.0GHz base.
Note you can now build an Athlon-64 3200+ (2.0GHz,) with R9600XT, SATA 120HDD for under $2000AUD. With all the usual trimming (FW, USB2, Optical/coaxal audio, DVD Burner, 2 optical....)
Click to expand...

I agree. If a new form factor (as it should) comes out then I would like to see chip speeds at the same level as the PMs, or there abouts. 2.0GHz single G5 should be about right after we see upgrades to the PM line that will probably leave 2.0 or 2.2/2.3 at the bottom. That should be at least the upper end of the new iMac line to punch up the competative power.

That coupled with 4 RAM slots, a real bus and a decent graphics card would allow for a kick ass mid range machine that Apple lacks in a small/meduim form factor.

A 150 Gig HDD is another must in these days of DV and multimedia stations.
 
aswitcher said:
I agree. If a new form factor (as it should) comes out then I would like to see chip speeds at the same level as the PMs, or there abouts. 2.0GHz single G5 should be about right after we see upgrades to the PM line that will probably leave 2.0 or 2.2/2.3 at the bottom. That should be at least the upper end of the new iMac line to punch up the competative power.

That coupled with 4 RAM slots, a real bus and a decent graphics card would allow for a kick ass mid range machine that Apple lacks in a small/meduim form factor.

A 150 Gig HDD is another must in these days of DV and multimedia stations.
Click to expand...

So how much would you think Apple will charge us for all that??? I don't think it will be in the current iMac price range.

I agree that the iMac needs a serious top to toe overhaul of the insides, but my slower suggestion of 1.6ghz was attempting to be a more realistic introduction into the G5 range that the iMac would probably get.

Your spec is absolutely spot for a good performance-competitive mid-range computer. But I think Apple will adopt the upgrapde with a Walking before Running approach.

I truly hope I'm wrong and you are right.
 
I just want a cheap but good (not 6 months old hardware) emac that I can use for at least 3 years !! I said "emac" cause the new imacs have to be the worse made computer around - if you have children, use the mac with other people, Live in Japan (my house is the size of one bedroom) or/and want to move house.

Steve got it wrong - the new imacs are crap !!! I would rather have a cube !!
 
Savage Henry said:
They'll keep it for another year or two in it's form because it's a strong visual brand. There is still nothing in the market like it.

Sure, the technology needs a boost. When they zap up the graphics card and bring on 65nm G5, then it will be the flagship line again.

The fact that the last 'upgrade' was just a bigger screen tells me that the next one will be more significant. And it has to be this year.

G5 1.6ghz anyone??
Click to expand...

That seems to me to be the most sensible strategy. Isn't the main complaint with the imac the amount of computer you get for the money? Well that's solved with a processor upgrade, and maybe some tweaks to the design. Or maybe slightly greater expandability. (Although what more do you need, other than extra memory and perhaps a larger HD, unless you're already in the pro. PM world?)

I love my year old iMac. Would I like to be able to have USB 2.0? Yes. Would I like to be able to upgrade it a bit? Yes. But overall, I'm quite happy with it.

I was setting up my wife's and my computers a couple of nights ago (moving the room around). She has a PC. Ugh. For her, I had at least 5 power cables to plug in, all getting tangled, plus cables for the keyboard, mouse, network, printer, monitor. Painful. Meanwhile, for the iMac, I was done in about three minutes. Power? Check. Network? Check. Printer? Check. Uhh, that's it.

All apple needs to do is alter the value proposition and give it some more power, perhaps update the design just because that's what people expect, and it should sell well for a couple more years.
 
imac_japan said:
I just want a cheap but good (not 6 months old hardware) emac that I can use for at least 3 years !! I said "emac" cause the new imacs have to be the worse made computer around - if you have children, use the mac with other people, Live in Japan (my house is the size of one bedroom) or/and want to move house.

Steve got it wrong - the new imacs are crap !!! I would rather have a cube !!
Click to expand...

The imacs are not crap!! however for your purposes the emac would be better becuase it is much more durable.

A farrari might be delecate however it's extremely well made. However an old humvee might be like a rock how ever not that well made. This is a similar situation
 
i think therefore i mac

I agree that the iMac low powered and needs a spankin G5 under the hood to rev up sales. However, in terms of current performance, the iMac is not that much slower than a $2,600 1.25 powerbook _and_ it has a much faster hard drive. It ain't the speed of the iMac that's the problem. It's the price. The iMac is too freaking expensive compared to a PC. Joe Schmo computer user doesn't doesn't want to plunk down that much money for a computer...no matter how useful, stylish and sexy it may be. We got the iPod mini. Now we need the iMac mini. Mini price.
 
512ke said:
We got the iPod mini. Now we need the iMac mini. Mini price.
Click to expand...

Isn't that an eMac? Other than the design, they already have that. If you want the cool floating screen, you have to pay extra. Just like you do after you realize that $499 Gateway has no memory, a tiny hardrive, and a crap monitor.
 
I'm the main voice aganist apple's high prices, but to get a imac well under $1000 isn't going to happen. I think we might see the 15" iMac at $899 or something close to that.
TheMacOS.com said:
I agree... the imac is very pricey. Apple needs a imac priced well under $1,000....

i'd like to know what it costs apple to make one imac... and what the markup is.... what their profit is on one unit.
Click to expand...
 
Savage Henry said:
So how much would you think Apple will charge us for all that??? I don't think it will be in the current iMac price range.

I agree that the iMac needs a serious top to toe overhaul of the insides, but my slower suggestion of 1.6ghz was attempting to be a more realistic introduction into the G5 range that the iMac would probably get.

Your spec is absolutely spot for a good performance-competitive mid-range computer. But I think Apple will adopt the upgrapde with a Walking before Running approach.

I truly hope I'm wrong and you are right.
Click to expand...

Would there be a great difference in chip manufacturing cost between a 1.6 and a 2.0?
 
aswitcher said:
Would there be a great difference in chip manufacturing cost between a 1.6 and a 2.0?
Click to expand...
the problem is, Apple rarely cares if 1.6 and 2.0 cost the same. In the name of separation, they actually underclocked the G4 chips in the eMac line (there is a thread that is dedicated to re-clocking the eMac).

Hopefully, Apple will eventually learn to differentiate lines by form-factor and not features. eMac BTO with 2Ghz G5+ATI 9800?
 
I could be completely wrong here, but I've always assumed that a good part of the reason for the relatively high cost of the LCD iMac was the LCD itself. When the transition was made from G3 CRT to G4 LCD, display costs had been dropping fairly steadily for a while and it was assumed that they were due to drop dramatically in the near future. They've continued to come down, but rather than a dramatic drop, it's been more of an unhurried amble. The early iMacs were expensive, as expected (and didn't the prices actually go UP at one point when Apple couldn't get displays in the quantities it required?), but the assumption at the time was that the displays would get cheaper and, as they did, so would the iMacs. Whoops.
 
javabear90 said:
The imacs are not crap!! however for your purposes the emac would be better becuase it is much more durable.
Click to expand...

I mean the NEW imacs......they are crap !! People want real computers not things that look like flowers...

Apple needs to get market share !! Build it STEVE....build a cheap Imac for the masses - around $500 would be good.

People will say "look an Apple for $500" - the point is that people will buy it for their children, parents, etc then they will look and buy a more expensive one for themselves
 
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