Fourteen months ago I wrote an editorial, suggesting that Apple should create an ultra cheap machine to battle the PC world. On that article, I suggested some specs for the hypothetical “Strawberry” computer. As technology is moving on fast, I am now updating these specs. To get the idea though, please make sure you read last year’s article before you read on this one.Things to consider before commenting:
* This machine is targetting switchers. Hence the mouse with the wheel and three buttons. Switchers that can’t take the girlie all-in-one eMac and want some PCI expandability and also switchers who are sensitive in prices.
* Such a machine could cannibalize the higher end Apple Macs. Therefore, eMacs, iMacs, Powerbooks, iBooks and PowerMacs should trim down $100 to $200 off their price. I believe that an iMac starting at $999 or an iBook starting at $999, or an eMac starting at $649 have better chances in today’s commoditized PC world and would play better with a release of a “Strawberry” line. In fact, it would be cool if Apple shave off these prices 2 months before the release of the “Strawberry” Mac, to create awareness, and look better in the quarter’s results.
* The CPU that would now be used, would be IBM’s new G3 family that Apple never shipped: “G3 with the Velocity Engine”. This CPU would marketed as “G4-lite”, because if you call it a “G3+”, no one would buy it. It’s a lot like the price of a random product at “$499” sounding better than the same product priced at “$500”.
* No iLife package would be bundled with that machine. Costs must go down. iLife available seperately.
* The fastest model is still slower than the low end eMac. This will help to not cannibalize the eMac sales, which are mostly targetting schools anyway.
* The graphics cards must be able to manage 1600×1200 @ 85 Hz (maximum 2048×1536 @ 60 Hz) just in case the user will use modern 21″ CRTs.
* YellowDogLinux 4.x could be an option. This way Apple could offer both OSX and Linux to diversify within its potential switchers who are bound to be mostly geeks.
* Again, before commenting, make sure you read last year’s, more explanatory on the subject, article.
If these prices seem too low to you, I would go as high as $349 for the Entry model and $499 for the Combo model. But higher prices than these would miss the point of the whole operation.
Having written all that, keep in mind that Apple has made clear in their SEC filing that they are not going to pursue the cheap PC market space, they only want to sell to a higher-end computer market. So, don’t dream too much of the above suggestions… 😉
If they can sell the eMac for $800 they can thow the same parts in a box without the monitor for $750. That would be good enough for me.
i think eugenias vision is nice, but it will never happen. Apple is too proud if their own creations, so they continue they product line like a onetrackmind. At least as long old Steve rocks the Apple… I say, they simply don’t want a cheap (and headless) machine, they want high-priced nice shiny stuff.
The only chance Apple had, was the cloning era. They couldn’t keep the up speed of the cloned machines, so they killed it. So, we get a dumbed-down OS, getting more than 100 “amazing new” <cough> features every release, but less bugfixing instead and hardware bound to that OS.
Add $40 and make the base RAM 512mb (put another 256 in 2nd slot). Even an “OS X Lite” performance would greatly benefit; and the initial reaction (showroom or out of box) would be extremely important to increasing market share.
I guess the assumption is IBM could supply these (G4eleron) chips in sufficient quantity — probably reasonable…
No.
Look the eMacs and iMacs. They also ship with 256 MB of RAM. You CAN’T offer more with the “Strawberry” PC than what you would get with the iMac/eMac. If you do, you just killed these two models, and that’s not what we are trying to do here.
Besides, Apple always places smaller RAM sizes on its machines on purpose. If you want more RAM, buy more. OSX will run on 256 MBs as far as Apple is concerned. Remember, we try to create a cheap machine here, not to load it with features that cost more money. In that case, go buy an iMac or a G5.
If they did that I would buy one…unfortunately due to the culture at Apple I don’t think it will ever happen.
I don’t think I could even build an equivalent x86 machine from scratch for that price. And that’s not including labor or software…the price doesn’t seem reasonable to me.
Eugenia, personally I think this could be a way for Apple to get more market share, more mind share, and reconquer some of the luster they have lost.
Two things:
1) At $299 sales price, the margins would be too slim. Apple would even lose money for each CPU sold. So, no go at that price level.
2) 2.5″ hard disk. 20GB is good enough (1 platter, 1 head).
Keep this idea alive… it’s a good one.
I got a 1.3 GHz AMD Duron PC with 128 MB of RAM and CD-ROM for $199 (all the rest parts were the same, I even got more USB 2.0 ports (6) and Linare Linux Professional on that PC). Add a DVD-ROM instead of a CD-ROM (for $8 more in wholesale), 128 MB more RAM (about $20-25 more) and there you go. This IBM G3 is not any better really than the AMD Duron 1.3 GHz (which has SSE support, so it’s on the same league as that G3).
So yeah. Such a Mac could be designed, and Apple could make an extra $60 than a PC maker would do for an equivelant PC.
> At $299 sales price, the margins would be too slim.
I would go as high as $349 for the Entry model and $499 for the Combo model. But more than that, it would miss the point of the whole operation.
> 2.5″ hard disk. 20GB is good enough
No, smaller drives are more expensive. A normal IDE desktop disk is cheaper and with more GBs.
I don’t think these articles are stupid at all. If there is a market for this kind of machine, maybe the Reality Distortion Fields will cancel each other out.
I would buy one of these machines in a heartbeat – actually I’d buy a lot of them and outfit my whole family!
I’ll note that I’m writing this on my $299, 333Mhz iMac that I bought on ebay and I tried for months to get one this cheap. Most of them get as high as $500 – and there’s always a ton of ’em on ebay. There would probably be thousands of instant converts if they make a modern box for this price – people are obviously willing to pay that for a lot less horsepower.
What about selling separate G4/G5 CPU’s and mobo’s?
Why would they do that? 99.9% of the people want full solutions. Apple is all about “just works”. Besides, buy a Pegasus if you want to tinker. Normal people don’t.
I seriously doubt a ppc machine could be built at that price point.
The machine would have to have a x86 chip to be sold at that price. Assuming Apple already has the OS ported as rumored.
Please, not another “need a headless Mac”, the cheapskates you’re targeting are computer morons, they want a cheap, low cost computer with more software than you can shake a stick at, and 9/10, the reason they choose the PC is because of a misconcieved notion that if they have a Mac, they will be incompatible with work.
Grab an eMac, up the processor to that nice new proposed e700 multi-core from Motorolla, chuck a nice Matrox p650 – IIRC it is Matrox’s moderate priced card, chuck 256MB DDR 400 memory, MacOS X + Office 2004, and sell it for $699.
Most of all, PUSH IT, PROMOTE IT! “IT RUNS OFFICE!”, “WORK FROM HOME USING A MAC!”, these are things that will grab the attention of the cheapskate user; their reaction, “oh, awsome! I get a computer AND a copy of Microsoft Office! I can get one of those awesomely easy to use Mac and be compatible with work!”
Seriously, this is not Apple’s market. They will never do this. They are not a white box maker. They are a “boutique” computer maker, and they sell to a high end market. There really isn’t any point them going after the low end market. As long as they’re making a profit where they are…
I can’t agree with kaiwai more. Excatly my thoughts put into word.
Besides, the whole “Lite” concept of the article is stupid. Why would you cripple a superb processor and OS just to cut a few bucks of the price. The development and marketing of these will not be justified by the sales. As kawai said, the targeted people (the cheapskates) of these “Lite” versions, will propably buy a PC anyway.
Apple has the right direction. It doesn’t need to conqueror anything back or be “brought the the masses”.
>Why would you cripple a superb processor
The CPU *already exists*. IBM sells it. It is not something that Apple has to cut down. It is already a product.
Why would a non-geek buy a mac? How would Apple market it to those guys? With iLife offcourse! So you really can’t leave it out of the deal.. That’s the whole strategy of Apple, use really good software, to sell their hardware with nice margins on it. It’s not to use cheap hardware to sell their software which doesn’t have really big margins on it.
Apple would be better of investing money in cheaper and faster production, and transport. It’s just plain silly that they can’t keep up with demand for their products, so before introducing yet another product, improve the production process. Faster and cheaper. Shave off a few 100$-200$ of the imacs, emacs, ibooks, powerbooks and powermacs, all at the same time.
Why do people buy Harley Motorcycles?.You might say: for every single type there is a “better” german,japanese alternative.
Apparantly there is a market for Life Style High End products.
Can’t argue over taste.Only cynics know the price of everything but the value of nothing.
apple will never make a machine like that.
its not their ussnies modell and it simply wont fly with apple.
ok its a nice fantasy but that is all.
I would pay up to 500 UKP or equivalent for a machine equivalent to the G4 450 Mhz – 750 Mhz without monitor. Most people already have a VGA monitor. The 500 UKP inclusive of a copy of OS X and Apple Works + Enhancement Pack from T & B.
With that you are compatible and have a super machine for the average person’s computer needs with firewire you can attach camera, external hard disks and do almost anything you can imagine.
So much better than a PC. Better to look at, more reliable, more secure, easy to use and yet have the use of Unix into the bargain – wow what a deal.
Of course one can already do this by buying second-hand. I have done just that. I don’t regret it for a minute. Should have done it a long time ago.
petitioning to Apple? Maybe they will consider it if there’re enough buyers.
I hate their television adverts (here in the UK): The New G5 powermac possibly the most…”
macs are made for Home machines. From a management perspective they dont do a single thing better than x86 thus they should promote their usability.
one.. say your Shuttle like box and bits is put together… the price will be higher then Shuttles as they dont add memory harddrive and a number of other parts… so you will be compeating with this sff market that already have strong players in the field…
two… you say this machine would not compeat with Apples products because the processor is older…. This is a faulse realisation how are you going to market this to a protential customer hey this is ur mac and this is one or two generations ago for todays prices..
Macs already look out dated in mhz specs… (the consumer does not know there can be a difference in mhz because most things are measured and they stay that measurement… one metre will be one metre 1000 years from now if the standard is not changed).
if its on the market and just one person says hey i’ll take one instead of a Mac then the two machines are in compertition…
if the consumer has the option to say well maybe i dont need the power of a G4 or G5 i really just like word processing….
like someone else said theres so many better areas for Apple to target reducing their prices if they wanted to…
The best way for Apple to create cheaper products is to let others in on the candy… It will mean a compleat shake up of the Apple market and kill it off from todays view point but if Apple want to take more profits from the x86 markets then they have to be bolder then they are…
which does not leave the question they might not want to take on x86 as they are happy with the pie they have baked.
The only way Apple will breakout is if they go in direct compertition to MS….
How much money did MS pay into Apple and two that means no more MS Office pie for Apple..
And Apple are and have been two scared of compeating with MS for decades..
….as one would most probably be killed off……
“petitioning to Apple? Maybe they will consider it if there’re enough buyers”
there already exists one petition
http://www.petitiononline.com/MacOSx86/petition.html
I just signed it, there’re only 320 signatures; not enough.
I know, let’s get Mercedes to offer us a car at the price of a Skoda while we’re at it.
Has it ever occurred to you that Jobs/Apple may not need to keep increasing market share? They have plenty of money in the bank, unlike many companies in IT.
And what is market share anyway? I have a couple of Wintels and Lintels. I keep using my iBook – here, Apple has 99% use (I only use the other butt-ugly machines to check the odd web-site) and only 20% market share. How many other Win/lintels are just lying around doing nothing? Market share is a concept developed by marketing drones and bean counters to justify their sorry existence.
People will always buy Mercedes/BMW (etc.) not because they’re cheap, but because they are expensive, high quality products. I know my Mac costs more, but it’s a pleasure to use. Call me elitist if you will, but I’m certainly not a pleb.
Cheers
“I would pay up to 500 UKP or equivalent for a machine equivalent to the G4 450 Mhz – 750 Mhz without monitor. Most people already have a VGA monitor. The 500 UKP inclusive of a copy of OS X and Apple Works + Enhancement Pack from T & B.”
What’s UKP supposed to mean, Ukranian somewthing? Nope that’s UAH.
http://europa.eu.int/comm/translation/currencies/entable1.htm
When using 3 letters currency abreviations don’t invent your own but use ISO-4217 so we don’t need to read your mind.
Completely agree.
Jusy go into the Australian Tax Office, they all run Windows XP, but none of the processing is done on the desktop. Is that desktop really being used? nope.
Go into any company, and you’d be hard pressed to find computers actually being used to their full potential, so the claim that there Apple use is in the minority is short sited at best.
As for the marketshare, Apple sells desktop systems than IBM does, and yet, does IBM give up? nope. IBM sells considerably less systems than HP and Dell, do they give up? nope. IBM has found their niche, just as Apple has found their niche.
I would buy the Strawberry Mac at that price, no doubt.
Add $40 and make the base RAM 512mb
I think we should leave 256, but obviously everybody would upgrade the same day to at least 512. I run 1GB RAM on my computer which has powerfull graphic design software and several programs running at the same time.
Of course Apple has a niche of power users, but hey, they could just keep these professional customers + open to domestic market, they wouldn’t loose their professional market, but still sell more and create more brand recognition among the masses.
With this product of “attention”, people would be more eager to buy later on a PowerPC. New customers would start buying the entry product at 300 bucks, and a year later they would buy an iMac. Why not?
More and more people could afford a Mac, and more and more wealthy people or professionals would know about tha Mac, and would buy a PowerPC later on.
Makes sense to me.
I’m assuming when the guy used UKP, he means UK Pound as there are many different countries that use the pound for their unit of currency.
That computer would be everything Apple is against. It leaves out much needed functionality out of the box. The best part about buying a Mac is what you can do with it right after opening it up.
No firewire and no iLife are the worst ideas. Add those two things back in to the mix and maybe it wouldn’t be so bad. A switcher should get that wow feeling out of the box with what they can do with no additional software needed.
On the other hand this would be a good machine for Apple to sell to businesses
Genesi published this picture of the new Pegasos a couple of weeks ago:
http://images.genesi.lu/pegasosnew.jpg
The only problem is the cost. I bought my G3 Pegasos for ~$350 when the G3 Pegasos II was still on sale. An inexpensive machine could be assembled with these components: Case w/PS $30.00, Cables $5.00, Memory $40.00, Graphics Card $50.00 (ATI 9200SE), Hard Drive $50.00, DVD/CD R/W $50.00, Keyboard and mouse $30.00. That is $605.00. Thanks to the SmartFirmware on the Pegasos you could just use a keyboard and mouse you have so say $575 (and an existing monitor too). The G3 runs like a champ. I have a second Pegasos I use as a webserver. Also G3 and works great ( Machine: Pegasos, OS: Debian GNU Linux, CPU: PowerPC, RAM: 512 MB, Database: MySQL Server, Web Server: Apache, Database Size: 1GB).
Why not sell Apple PowerPC motherboards ? If Apple made ATX-form PowerPC motherboards (with proprietary BIOS, etc, etc to not permit cloning), independent manufacturers could use standard (and cheap) PC cases to mount cheap computers. These motherboards could use standard PC parts, like AGP video adapters, PCI cards, etc.
If Intel makes motherboards (of excellent quality), why Apple cannot do the same ? Apple would remain selling hadware.
While apple remain with your elitist actitude they will remain with a little niche of market ?
Sorry for my bad english.
“Why would they do that? 99.9% of the people want full solutions. Apple is all about “just works”. Besides, buy a Pegasus if you want to tinker. Normal people don’t.”
Sorry, but this is american-only mentality. In developing countries everybody uses “grey” mounted PCs. If the user cannot mount the computer itself, some friend or little resellers can mount for him. We also don’t have money to buy a new machine every 3 years like americans. We generally make incremental upgrades, replacing processors, motherboards, video adapters, etc.
In fact many tech people in my country earn money to survive going to client’s home to mount or fix computers.
If Apple remains elitist IBM can take your market selling PoerPC-based motherboards. In fact, IBM will make PowerPC computers to rum exclusively linux. Why Apple cannot sell PowerPC motherboards like Pegasus ?
The design of Apple computers is beatifull to art museums. People need cheap, upgradeable and flexible computers.
I know someone who owns a kickboxing Gym. He charges 30%-40% more than all the other schools in the country. He is making good money and his studens are very happy there.
His prices alianate a huge group of potential stundents. His response is that there a plenty of schools that look after people looking for cheap lessons. He is targetting people willing to spend more and getting the value for that money. His business is very successfull though undoubtedly small in terms of total martial arts market. Indeed it is probably the most succesful school in these parts.
Apple doens’t want nor need people after cheap computers. They never in their entire history wanted nor needed them. why should they start now. I’m not saying it wouldn’t be nice for them to make cheaper machines !! I’m just saying it is marketed as and perceived to be a premium product. Why change that at the risk of compromising your brand (regardless of if you had it under a different brand and subsiduary).
Also, IMHO the machines proposed are way too crippled to be much fun. It would be like teasing people for money.
must have slipped under my radar but are you refering to the pegasosPPC stuff from ibm? hmm, maybe if it got out on the general market i would be interested. atleast it gives me the oportunity to try out a ppc with the right linux distro
it was not from ibm, it just refreneced as a solution on ibm’s pages…
Pegasos is everywhere on IBM
http://www.developer.ibm.com/solutions/isv/igssg.nsf/list/bycompany…
http://www-1.ibm.com/technology/power/newsletter/august2004/article…
…and Freescale too:
http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/overview.jsp?nodeId=018rH3…
This ia a good idea!
Just remembered the whole digital hub-thing doesn’t work on G3 computers..
Sell a mac without iLife? You’re crazy.. a Mac that doesn’t ship with iTunes, for example? Pffft…
What happens when you plug in a DigiCam.. “Please go to Apple’s site to download the free version of iPhoto”
Way to cut costs.. *shakes head..
Bottom line.. PC’s aren’t that cheap. They’re really not. PC users want tons of software and they want to play games. Playing games means getting a 1400-2000 computer.
This is breakeven at best market…
PS. Does Panther run in G3? God that would be slow..
http://www.pegasos-czech.com/
http://pegasos.amiga-klub.si/
http://www.morphos-news.de/
http://www.morphos-news.de/beta2help/
Apple don’t work like this, they sell relatively few machines but make a relatively big profit on them.
HP do it the other way around, they sell masses of computers but make very little profit on them.
I’d like to see them do something like this but I think it would cannabalise their higher machines so much it’d end up loseing them money.
What they could do is wait until everything else is using the G5 *then* release something like this but not have it directly associated with Apple, have a separate company and brand for it.
…shame it’s never going to happen.
apple needs to address the lower end of the market but not in this way.
this strategy would canibalize a lot of other sales and that is too risky. Furthermore, there is no evidence that suggests that Apple (not someone else but apple) could sell more computers at $299 then at $499, or $799 so why go with such a low price.
It is best for apple to continue to do what they are doing.
* increase value of platform via OS X and peripherals (ipod)
* go after higher margin markets (enterprise, small biz, research)
* include computing power in next gen iPods or other consumer device and keep scaling up in capabilities.
* gradually reduce pricing across the boards
* introduce a single processor pro machine for $999 (later)
* Introduce this eugenia machines for circa $500-600 (later)
apple lost the pc race. they can still win the next series is they try and that series consists of changing the nature of computing, which is happening.
This isn’t intended as flamebait but Apple is simply irrelevant. Since 1984 Apple has approximately halved in real capitalisation (accounting for inflation) and gone from 20% market share to perhaps <3%. The Mac may have been innovative but it has been a commercial failure since it’s inception. Apple earns less from its operations than it would by simply selling its assets and earning interest.
Someone can always create a better, faster + cheaper copy of almost any product.
People always talk about Apple being the BMW of the computer industry. The better analogy is that BMW is the Alienware of the automotive industry(BMWs are simply a high quality version of a generic vehicle type). In PCs cost and compatiblity are the only important criteria.
The US$300 headless Mac would be competing directly against far faster cube PCs.
The best thing that could happen to Apple and the world is that Steve Jobs leaves and the board sells Apple Inc to IBM. IBM could then dump the Mac and GPL parts of OSX.
This isn’t intended as flamebait but Apple is simply irrelevant. Since 1984 Apple has approximately halved in real capitalisation (accounting for inflation) and gone from 20% market share to perhaps <3%. The Mac may have been innovative but it has been a commercial failure since it’s inception. Apple earns less from its operations than it would by simply selling its assets and earning interest.
That has to be the most pathetic piece of garbage ever written on this forum.
Want to see a terrible invesment, just take AMD, over its whole existance, it has only made $150million in profit, thats the losses and profits taken into account; a pretty patehtic investment if you ask me, and yet, we have people like you who would praise the company to the hill!
They make a profit each quarter, they’re now leveraging their iPod brand to push Apple iBooks, Powerbooks and desktop systems. The fact remains, contra to the bullshit spread by so-called armchair CEO’s whose claim to fame is being a geek with zero interpersonal skills.
Let us remember one small little fact, Apple was up shit creek when Steve arrived, Steve was the one who turned it around, put the anti-Microsoft bullshit aside and realised that Apple is a BUSINESS and NOT a religion, movement, cult or guidance organisation to findings one zen in the universe.
So in comparision, AMD is has bee a complete commercial failure when compared to Apple who only went through a small rough patch, they’re back, they’re now dominating the portable player market, dominating the music downloads market, and just you watch, they’ll come back.
Sure, they won’t have the johnny, No Frills/Homebrand purchasing cheapskates such as yourself purchasing their hardware, but they will have the David Jones buying, $249 business shirt wearing crowd buying them, along with all the gizmos and other features.
I would certainly buy one without any hesitation…
Not the least because I would like to try a cheap apple box before buying a the real thing. Ppl brag about os x but I am very fond of my Dell laptop w/ Fedora Core 2
> I say, they simply don’t want a cheap (and headless) machine, they want high-priced nice shiny stuff.
>Please, not another “need a headless Mac”, the cheapskates you’re targeting are computer morons,
id be quite happy with an _expensive_ headless mac (as long as it was small and silent). like someone else here said, put an eMac into a Cube case without the monitor an id gladly pay the same price. better yet, put a base model G5 iMac into a Cube case without any monitor and id pay the same price. yes, i’d gladly pay $1300ish for a G5 Cube. i dont even need a kick ass graphics card (those unfortunately often have on card fans).
i own a 2Ghz G5 Powermac. love it except for its size and the 9800 Pro fan (ugh i never would have upgraded if i knew there was an on card fan)
now, i understand that not many people are as insane about size and noise as i am, but there are many. they are called ‘city dwellers’ who dont have a den, office, or basement. people who are lucky to have a second bedroom to put computers into. thats why anything that sells in tokyo has to be the size of a thimble even if it costs 8 times as much.
also, you cant tell me that steve cant at least cut the price of that model to $1000. perhaps as low as $800. at that price, id get 2. so wanting a headless mac doesnt make me a cheapskate. i just want that form factor. (btw i agree with steve that expandability for home users isnt that important. but it would be nice to be able to upgrade existing parts.)
on the other hand, to all the people who think that apples stuff is too expensive, there are many many people to whom money is not the limiting factor. look at all the folks who drop $300-$500 on a device that does nothing but play music. double that for a full computer is nothing.
there are also many people who realize that their time is worth money. building their own machine is simply too expensive when their own time is factored in. for alot of people, 4 hours building a machine is equivalent to $400-$1200. and it would take most of these people way more than 4 hours. its more efficient to bill a client an extra hour or two and buy prebuilt.
<Sure, they won’t have the johnny, No Frills/Homebrand purchasing cheapskates such as yourself purchasing their hardware, but they will have the David Jones buying, $249 business shirt wearing crowd buying them, along with all the gizmos and other features.>
Well Apple don’t actually make hardware. Everything in a Apple computer except the motherboard, case + CPU is a generic PC product. IBM make the CPUs and the motherboards are made in the same Chinese factories as cheap OEM products.
In Australia they used to sell and service a p.o.s Korean 4×4 called the Ssanyong Musso through Mercedes Benz dealers. It was powered by a license-built version of an obsolete MB engine. The deluded owners used to think it was a MB because it said ‘powered by Mercedes Benz’ on the tailgate. Some even placed MB badges on their vehicles. Ssanyong owners were very dismayed when the company was taken over by Hyundai and they had to take their vehicles to Hyundai dealers to be serviced.
To use an automotive analogy Apples are Hyundais styled and sold by Alfa Romeo. They then went to the trouble of fitting an engine that requires avgas just to make things a little more interesting and a lot more inconvenient.
One thought I had the other day was, why not a uniprocessor power mac? I mean, here in Aus, the powermacs start at $3.3k. That’s just too damn expensive.. there’s no midrange really. How about dropping a 2-2.5GHz G5 into a powermac case, with 512MB RAM, 200GB SATA, and NVIDIA 5900 or 6800GT, and sell it for $2.5k (Australian). It starts to look a bit more reasonable. That won’t cannibalise the iMac market, because the iMac includes a screen… and you pay for the small form factor and design of the iMac. I’m talking about an ordinary powermac case, but just with a single CPU, no PCI-X, etc…
There is definitely a gap in apple’s lineup. But el cheapo, crippled boxes aren’t it.
Worked at major pc retailer before. MAC buyers are either
1. Owned a MAC before
2. computer geek
people who buy cheapo machines wants XP. To them PC = XP. they won’t venture into MAC territory just because it’s cheap
I’ll chalk my opinion up here. I think its a great idea to offer entry level MACS, especially in the XPC form factor. If Apple did this, their OS and equipment would reach much deaper market penetration and they wouldn’t be able to keep these things in stock.
Great idea Eugenia
PS. Does Panther run in G3? God that would be slow.>>
Panther’s faster on a G3 than Jaguar was.
I have an iMac 350/320 with a slow ass 4400rpm harddrive that I use as my back up/test box.
When I put Panther on it, I stopwatched the boot to the login screen time at 50 seconds.
It took my dual 867/1.25 gigs of ram, 7200rpm harddrive Powermac 70 seconds to boot to the login screen in 10.2.8.
I also have an iBook 600/640 that’s had OS X on it from 10.1 and 10.3 is downright snappy on it.
This is not intended to be a joke.
If OSNews pays me us$10.- for each news that I read in its site, in about a week I´ll be able to buy my Double G5, 2.5 MHZ, dual 23″ monitor dreammachine. Next day, I´ll buy my 40GB iPod and in the next morning Office (just to let BG be happy, I´ll keep it in the wrapped box.) So start paying now, please! Also, add us$ for each comment, please.
Why “everybody” is trying to “tell Apple” how to do business? Business (at least in capitalism) usually involve decisions and risks. And a vision.
Why don´t you ask BMW to build a us$5.000.- M4? (As a mather of facts, they own the Mni Cooper if I not wrong.)
I live in an underdevelopment country, Argentina in particular (Do you hear about our debt default?) So Macs cost much more, in real bucks (transport, customs, etc. 60% up Apple store prices) than in US. So we have to make more thorougth decisions: Mac cost more (see Linux Insider review) but you produce a lor more value on them.
For me, the most important part is the “productivity” factor, so I have time to get new jobs (well, usually, I had to use this time to try to get paid, but my country is not your.)
So, the proposal is: Let Apple do its business as they like, and risk their jobs.
And pay us, readers, for reading your site! Or should I let you do your job at your own risc?
Bye
p.s.: You do a magnificent job, Eugenia. Thanks.
I’d bring back the LC Pizza box form factor and the LC name.
Processor: The low power g4 chips used in laptops @1.24ghz
Ram: 256mb, maxes out at 1gb
Video: ATI Radeon 9000 with 32mb ram (64 as an option) but on the mobo so not upgradable. (This is not an el-cheapo gamer box!). Standard DV plug.
HD: 120gb IDE ATA 133
Optical drive: Slot load Combo drive. (DVD burner not an option.)
Ports: USB 2.0 and Firewire 400.
OS: “OS X Lite” suggests crippled functionality. I would just have a special “OS X for LC” package. No Appleworks*, Omni Products, or IE. Of the iLife suite only iTunes and iPhoto.
Cost $450.
—
*Unless you were buying for a school district.
People will buy the cheap version and want to upgrade. They’ll have to hope Apple continues the cheap line or plunk down a chunk of change on the new G5’s. The biggest hurdle Apple has to adoption is the hardware cost. I can’t build my own Apple system nor can I simply upgrade my current Mac by keeping the enclosure and adding a new motherboard and CPU. If I want the new G5, I have to figure out what to do with my older G4 or G3. In the PC world, I could slap a newer P4 motherboard into my old Gateway Pentium-66 system with little trouble and It would work just fine. Try putting the new dual 2.5GHz G5 setup in the Beige PowerPC or the blue and white G3 boxes, assuming you could simply buy the new motherboard and keep any internal peripherals you had, not that Apple was really big on add-in cards. You bought the box and it contained everything you needed for the most part. Third Party vendors could offer turn key solutions (AVID for example) if there were special exceptions to the above. Apple’s not going to reach a critical mass of switchers until they switch the way to build their computers and I have a better chance of winning the lottery then Apple changing the way they do business.
If I were Apple, I would release “Mac OS X Home Edition” for the upcoming XboX2 which is based on PowerPC architecture. Seroiusly. That would not cannibalize Apple’s market, but would allow students and such to get accustomed to Apple, and later buy real macs. If they crippled it down enough they perhaps could even persuade Microsoft… (I hope it will happen anyway. If not by Apple themselves, then by some hackers who do it via emulation…)
i think its a rather interesting idea. the mac notebooks are really popular because they are competetive with the pc notebooks. however the low end mac(emac) cost atleast 799. For 300usd i’d probably recommend it. the mac is famous for its ease of use and how stuff just works(cant vouch for it though). I think it be great(less people calling me to troubleshoot
). What probably is going to be achieved by this is getting mind share? most users identify with the operating system and how it feels not what hardware is running underneath. This probably also means that mac would want to split up their hardware/software into different companies though.
Sorry about that UK Pounds. Sterling. GBP. Call it waht you will.
Well Apple don’t actually make hardware. Everything in a Apple computer except the motherboard, case + CPU is a generic PC product. IBM make the CPUs and the motherboards are made in the same Chinese factories as cheap OEM products.
What utter load of crap. Apple makes hardware. They desgin thier motherboards, every thing inside is custom. No PC has a round mother board.
What you refer to as cheap chinese OEM is called a JDM model of development, where Apple provides the desgin and other manufactures make the board to Spec. Almost every one does this.
Just because a pair of levis jeans and a pair of Armani pants use a YKK zipper or a X brand thread doesn’t make a Armani any less designer wear.
No manufacturer can make every diode, ASIC, IC and PCB from scratch and also make a profit.
Yes Apple makes hardware it doesn’t manufacture them. Don’t knock standard industry practices becuase you are ignorant.
@ JohnOne (IP: —.25-151.libero.it)
PS If you really want an alternative PowerPC mobo buy an AmigaOne. Belive me, the PegasOS is a… Sorry, but there aren’t words I can use freely. 😀
The Pegasos is the only solution for Amigans and users of alternative CPUs unlike the AmigaOne. MAI still can’t figure out how to get it’s ArticiaS chipset to work right in Linux even though they invented the damn thing.
Also remember the AmigaOne’s ArticiaS chipset still hasn’t been proven it’s not defective. And Amigans are waiting for Ultra DMA 5 speeds on their HDs and Ultra DMA 2 speeds on their DVD-ROMs without data loss.
Don’t troll, john.
Wow, this is an utopistic view, but it’s damn good! 😀
Really, it’s the first good thing about Apple from a OSNews reader I have read since ever, but I prefer “Mac OS X-2-BOX” as name. Ghghghgh! X-D
Do you imagine? A black box with a green X over a silver Apple logo and the name “Apple Mac OS X-2-BOX 10.4 Tiger” with the slogan “The Power of a true Mac within your XBOX2 console”.
Eh… How beautiful the dreams are… 🙂
I really like your ideas. It made me think about an idea I had for Windows I think would work really good here.
What I was thinking was a home network setup based around modular servers and clients. Basically, the servers weren’t typical boxes, but dual or quad processor net appliances using a client to log into, install apps, and mangage the server with. With the purchase of the server, you get 5 licences to install the client software on the client machines (cheap pc’s or cheap MS manufactured equipment). The server acts as a apps server, email server, firewall and access point for the clients, plus other functions. None of this is new, but using this concept as a commercial product for home use is. And it’s something that is needed, as in a lot of homes that I know, it’s no longer just the pc in the living room and maybe in the kid’s room. In my house, I have five pc’s running now, not just one or two.
But for Apple, I can see them making a high quality net applicance like server, your ‘strawberries’ that are fully capable clients, and combine them into a sweet home product.
Your biggest expense will be the server, $2-5k depending on options. But you get your value back in the strawberries which are only $200-400. They can do all the basic stuff onboard, including video processing, but a lot of the processing can be moved off board to the server using well tweaked giga-net.
Some of the advantages is the ease of developement. As servers are upgraded and the APIs change, the nature of the server means that clients don’t need to change in order to take advantage of the new capablities of the servers. You could upgrade every machine in your house by simply popping in a new server for 2k. That would be really inviting for home users as the pace of outdated technology is always cause for people whine.
And I could see who this could be upgraded to SMB use as well. Have special connecters for one server to hook directly into another server and violia, you have instant clustering. Also have it so that if a client goes inactive, the server can take over the client and add it to the cluster for more processing power. You could in effect, with a couple of servers and their clients, make a clustered supercomputer from SMBs based on inactive clients in a seti@home server-client model.
Anyways, I have a lot more to say about this subject, but I will leave it here for now.
But I hope you get the gist of what I was suggesting. I don’t see how MS could do this unless they alienated the PC industry. But since Apple is the way Apple is, they have complete control over all the hardware and software. With that much control, I think with enough R&D they could have plug n play equipment such as was described.
If you think this is a good idea buy old, non-functional Macs, take out the ROMs and use them to build machines that you can sell for this price. See how fast you can get rich. Good luck.
I think Apple’s market share has little to do with price. Much more to do with the various open and closed standards used in computers and with Apple’s advertising.
Personally, I don’t think this kind of machine would be useful. Apple could expand their product line but this is not a useful direction.
Actually, Apple seems to be doing much better in education this year. Just goes to show they can improve market share when they try hard.
If you really want a low cost Mac shop for a used one or claim an education discount.
Finally, I think OS X is a great OS. It is fast, very reliable and very secure. I use it because I it is a great tool for accomplishing my computer related tasks.
Gosh, I’m already an Apple snob feeling offended by the design of the thing! I never knew it would come so soon.
Honestly, this spells disaster. The return to USB 1.1, Mac OS X and G4 “Lite” and the absence of a flagship Apple product, iLife, just exudes “cheapness”, not “economy”. I understand perfectly the desire of having a headless white-box-style apple machine, but such a machine would be out of line with the rest of Apple’s products. Part of their appeal lies in the fact that everything they do is gorgeous and fits well together. Your user experience is consistent across the board: think of the poor slob who will buy the economy model, and will realize that his machine sucks and cannot get even with the rest of Apple products because it is crippled? Bang! You’ve destroyed Apple’s image.
Ship a slow stripped down Mac to be cost-competitive with fast loaded PCs.
OKAY DOKE.
There are Macs that compete with the low-end PC’s already.
Take a _HARD_ look at the $699 computers available at WalMart. Look at the print on the box: “Build with Refurbished parts.”
Give a Mac dealer a call, and ask about “Certified Used” and “Refurbished” Macs.
The difference between the Walmart $599 and $699 specials and the “Refurb” Macs is that Apple doesn’t hide behind fine print.
-Targhan
i have a similar plan in my head, but useing linux and building multimedia boxes. attach to tv and you can record shows, watch movies either of the net of dvds++, play games and then have a nice storage server that you can use as a information hub. hell maybe one could set up small hnadheld units so that you could sync with a sentral database in the server. have wifi enabled tablets that you can set on a table or hang on a wall en use it to watch movies, surf or just use it as a kind of advanced picture frame
and mesasage board. the only problem is power tho. current laptop battery tech isnt as good is one would like it to be for use like this…
marketing said: ‘…macs are made for Home machines. From a management perspective they dont do a single thing better than x86 thus they should promote their usability.’
Heaven help us from fools likje marketing! Macs!, only home machines?!? Obviously homes like the US Army, US Navy, NASA, Gentech, and countless others don’t know what they’re doing.
And as for ‘they dont do a single thing better than x86’ you’re quite correct –
Macs aren’t as good at getting viruses, worms, trojan horses (72,000 at latest count for PCs, 0 for OS X).
Macs aren’t as good at letting anyone have access to your computer via the internet or other networks.
Macs aren’t as good at keeping support costs in check.
Just won’t happen. Apple is already making “cheap BMWs” via the eMac and the cheaper Powerbooks. The BMW analogy holds up pretty well: its some kind of uniqueness other cars don’t have except for replicas, but it ain’t mandatory or so for everyone since for many the price ain’t worth it, or they can’t pay it. Also, its not as if BMW/Apple actually invented _all_ those features which make it so “cool”.
In short, this just doesn’t fall in Apple’s or BMW’s business model. So why bring it up? a ‘what if…’ like this just doesn’t make sense. If you really want a PPC, then wait a little while because with Motorola and IBM who might start market Pegasos/MorphOS as desktop OS, it might as well become something serious. Far more interesting IMO.
And you if you say “call me elitist, i’m not a pleb” you’re an idiot of an elitist. Buying something just because others don’t or can’t is oh-so ignorant. In the serious world, people buy something because they see a need of doing so.
One of the main attractions of the Mac is that everything just works. Plug in a digital camera, it automatically gets mounted on the desktop and iPhoto gets launched. Insert a DVD, and it starts to play. Removing the iLife apps will break that experience for the users.
Having a lite version of OS X is going to be a nightmare for Apple to maintain and for software developers to target. Microsoft can get away with it because they are a huge company, with billions of US$ at its disposal. Apple on the other hand is a lot smaller. Having to maintain three OS lines (OS X, OS X Lite, OS X Server) may be too much for them.
Software developers will have a harder time too. Who do you cater for? OS X Lite might not have the necessary libraries their apps require. What then? Do they use OS X lite as the lowest common denominator? That would mean that the extra features in regular OS X will not be used. Either that or they will need to develop two lines, one for OS X regular and another for OS X lite. Development costs will soar.
Macs are fine the way they are. If their prices came down by about 10%, that would be real sweet.
All I hear is that ‘people buy PCs because they’re cheaper’. [I’ll leave the difference between ‘cheaper’ vs. ‘less expensive’ for another forum]
I will state this unequivocally, “Macs cost the same or less that ‘comparably configured’ PCs regardless of price point.
Don’t believe me? Go here and see for yourself – http://systemshootouts.org/
They should try to compete with Dell, the bottom end and charge $400-450 for their cheap machine. And since they’re apple, they could reasonably charge $100 more, just for being an Apple.
iMac can’t sell for $1000. They probably cost Apple $1000, once the 1 year warranty costs are thrown in along with software.
Maybe not quite, but $1000 is a pretty slim price for a machine as nice as an iMac. Now what Apple should do is make more intermediate hardware upgrades… They have a tendency to change their entire design and charge the same price within a week, and I think that makes some people afraid of when to buy.
I say build on the new iMac’s design. I think it would be very cool if the main display could be seperated from the base and used as a wifi tablet.
The two big cost (and value) items in a Win box are the P4 chip and the OS software. The audio, video, modem are now mostly done in software as processing power and RAM increase. Motherboard costs have been pushed down and are now very cheap. There’s no way Apple could compete with Wintel on hardware cost in the consumer mass-market. Apple did the right thing with the new high-end machines although I prefer monospec and a single price point. Apple does have their core market which is multimedia pros and the high-end home user. Apple might try building a highly integrated x-86 box running Linux for the enterprise market, or SOHO, or the low-end home user. Apple might break into this market by taking a leadership position on the hardware side, OTOH, it might be more effort than it’s worth to them.
I was able to get an emachine for 300$ + rebates. This was during the holiday season, so only a handful of computers were availible. It included a
2.5ghz celeron processor
256mb ddr ram
60 gig hard drive
dvd-rom and a cd burner.
i845gv 3 pci slots, no agp slots.
Windows XP home.
This particular computer was an emachine, from all the hypothetical specs everyone else listed; I do not see how Mac could even compete, without it just being a “Mac”.
People I know in my school, who uses Mac, have a negative perception of Macs in general as being inferior; we run Mac OS 9 with its co-operative multi tasking.
…you dont seem to want to learn now…
I mean come one, a $890 mac (with educational discount) is not THAT expensive. A switcher would not be someone who wants a cheap computer (cheap usually equal underpowered). Most switchers are demanding users
Is there a Dell/HP/IBM/Toshiba that can compete price wise with the said eMachines? No? Does that mean that Dell and co can pack it in since they’re no longer competitive?
The eMachines uses a built-in video adapter. Without an AGP slot, there is very little chance of upgrading the video adapter. What about USB ports? Firewire?
It’s no wonder people in your school think macs are inferior. They’re still running OS 9 with it’s cooperative multi-tasking (in the 21st century?!?).
In the $300-$500 price range there might be $50-$100 profit for the manufacturer. [You sell a lot of inventory, but don’t make a lot of profit…just like the legal music download business, in general].
In the $600-$800 price range there might be $150-$300 profit for the manufacturer. [You sell a little less inventory, but you make a lot more profit.]
Always remember that the computer manufacturer, regardless of who, is a business out to make a profit for themselves and their shareholders. Any company (computer or otherwise) who doesn’t do that on a regular basis, doesn’t stay in business very long.
Different companies use various forms of leverage to help make profits. Apple uses the power of the iPod to increase music sales, innovative design to increase computer sales, and extremely well priced servers (without per-seat licences) to increase corporate and government buyers, thus increasing bottomline corporate profit. Dell uses the power of lowcost manufacturing and lowcost marketing. Real recently reduced the selling price of it’s music to $0.49. While that increased sales (some would say, temporairly), it cost Real over $2 million. HP is selling Apple’s iPod with a HP logo.
All four examples are valid uses of corporate leverage. Which one works better will ultimately be told not by market share, units sold, price, or even which offers the best hardware, software, or options.
The better ones are the ones that offer, and will continue to offer, profitability to the companies and their shareholders. Currently there are two, and only two, computer companies that manufacturer PCs in this country that are profitable – Dell, and Apple.
Panther works on G3 and it is not slow.
I have a B and W G3 and it runs w/o problems
@ Eugenia
No, smaller drives are more expensive.
Well, as you yourself wrote, technology is evolving fast. And MS is already using a 2.5″ hard disk in the X Box.
Anyways, that and the base price are minor points. Your idea is a very good one, and all the criticism I read here boils down to a lot of people saying: “it can’t be done”.
Well, if only for that, it should be done. I hope Apple is listening…
Xbox hard disks are 3.5″ (I have one I cracked open with a 10gb Seagate)
I think there are a lot of computer users that would go for these products just because they can run Mac OSx on it. There are the users who have always liked Macs but can no longer afford them. There are the users who like Unix(or more specifically, MACH kernels) and would like to try out one with a slick gui. There are the users who simply like to diversify their hardware with sparcs and x86s, c64s, etc.
Personally, I’ve always wanted a Mac just to play around with but have never had the funds or purpose to switch. I can build a fast Wintel machine cheaper than anyone can shake a stick at, and even though Mac OSX gave me even more reason to play, I just really can’t afford the price tag. Not everyone, who knows a lot about comuters, has money to burn.
“BrandX” is more in my price range. Furthermore, I remember when Apples were the only computers in schools. Now Wintels rule the school system, and a “headless mac” might change that faster than an eMac.
is old mac users that ran the classic os for varying degrees of time abandoning apple when they look at os x.
its all new and requires a fresh learning curve to get into it
machines that run it are expensive (especially when they look in the newspaper every week and see pcs with similar specs for on average half the price)
old hardware and software from classic days either doesnt run at all or runs poorly in almost all scenarios. launching a slow classic environment doesnt cut it.
so an old user of mac looking to upgrade sees this all new environment and realizes, whoa, if i have to go through all that i might as well buy a pc with the os and software that everyone else uses. my kids know it, my neighbors use it, my office uses it and ive grown used to it, the book section at the store is filled with training materials for it, the local community college has classes to learn it, on and on and on….
all those things i see about pcs….
more handheld devices work on pc
more phones integrate with windows
more scanners work on pcs
more printers work on pcs
the software that comes bundled with those peripherals many times is windows only
my local stores are filled with pcs so i can see and shop for them easily
the same stores are filled with windows software and games
mac users are switching to windows in droves. im one and i know many others. far more than those that switch from windows to mac.
fact is long time windows users have much to be happy about.
over their usage life they have seen software on pcs grow less expensive, they have seen pcs grow substantially less expensive, and most importantly they have seen steady improvement out of ms: windows xp is better than windows 2000 or ME, windows 2000 was better than windows 98 or NT 4, windows 98 was better than windows 95, and windows 95 was better than windows 3.1.
yes, they have security to worry about. or they are clueless and just deal with it or on the other hand they or someone that helps them has a clue and easily makes windows as secure as any other os with proper configuration and either for pay or free tools and software.
Eugenia’s idea is nice one, but unfortunately, those specs as she set up the low end machines are not far off what a base model emac contains. and they sell for at least 2x what she quoted for a suggested selling price. sorry, but apple isnt going to do it. a 17″ monitor doesnt add $400 to their costs.
apple cant lower prices as they have incredibly slim profits as it is.
its very sad as i would buy a better priced mac. they simply cost too much for what you get.
why we continue to have this sense of hope for apple when for a decade or more we have continued to wonder when we will see an affordable option or when we would see apple make some progress in the business world…
truth is apple makes no progress in the biz world…
truth is apple is nothing but a future fantasy…
and as the months and years go by we see no low priced macs ever released.
so if you want a budget machine you get something like the following…available now, not a dream, no distortion field, just get in your car and go to your local retailer and buy it:
circuit city has for $349 right now–
emachines t2824 with 17″ crt eview17f3
includes an inkjet printer lexmark z714
2.53ghz celeron d
256mb ddr ram
8 in 1 memory card reader
40gb hard drive
dvd and cd-rw combo drive
keyboard, mouse and 1 yr warranty just like a mac
(spend over 2x to get those features in the base emac)
for $449 you get it with a 80gb hard drive, separate dvd and cd-rw drives, and 512mb ddr ram
or how about an emachine from best buy for $599
again 17″ crt and lexmark printer but the pc includes:
amd athlon 3000+
512mb ddr ram
160gb hard drive
dvd-rw drive
8 in 1 card reader
or if you dont like emachines you can get a compaq from staples for $399
17″ crt and same specs as the $349 emachines but it doesnt have the card reader or the printer. you pay for the name it seems.
all of the above include windows xp home and a small bundle of basic software…
you likewise can always find a toshiba, emachine, or compaq laptop for $599 or $699…budget laptops abound as well.
meanwhile we keep dreaming apple can somehow make a profit selling macs for half of what they now sell them for. considering they barely turn a profit on $7 billion in sales and 3.2 million macs sold each yr over the last few yrs, it is hard to fathom how they can lower prices and remain profitable.
and as for all those folks that will scream that those pcs dont include iLife, which is a a very good bundle of consumer software, all we have to say is it looks like about 250 million people thus far are satisfied with the bundle they get with xp:
xp has windows media player in place of itunes and quicktime (quicktime is free for pcs too as is itunes though)
xp has windows movie maker in place of imovie
xp with a cd burner will come bundled with nero or sonic or roxios easy cd creator basic for cd handling
xp with a dvd burner will likewise come with some solution like idvd free.
xp doesnt include a replacement for garageband but then again i dont think that is one of those must have programs for about 99% of users.
if an xp user wants more software, in the same stores for sale are:
ms office student teacher for $109 with 3 licenses ($40 off)
norton anti virus 2005 free after rebates
ms works 8 for $24 (if the cheap pc doesnt have it already)
ms digital imaging suite 10 for half off to $69
adobe photoshop elements 2 for half off to $49 (it is also included free with some printer and or scanner purchases….as is adobe photoshop album)
roxio easy cd/dvd creator suite 7 for $59 ($20 off)
roxio easy cd/dvd creator 6 can be had for like $5.99 these days
so after the saved money on the budget PC, the consumer can buy a load of software and peripherals and still come out way less than the cheapest eMac.
oh….. considering it is very important to many millions, those same stores are filled with game software that runs from $4.99 up to the hot new releases like Doom 3 for $59 that do not run on macs.
I remember reading the original strawberry article and agreeing with its essential premise. Since then I acquired a 1.2 Ghz 14″ G4 ibook to play with and it is now my primary computer. In fact my 2 Ghz XP desktop is in the closet right now, I just moved and haven’t needed to unpack it yet. I am hardly a mac fanatic but with all the security issues related to windows computers I can’t imagine why apple wouldn’t want to mass market a computer that is easy to use, consumer friendly, and most importantly secure. I think a strawberry line should be limited to small desktop comptuers though, with the ibook and powerbook lines I think that apple does an excellent job in terms of their notebook offerings.
Your low end model is missing the firewire option. Sure ipods run on usb, however this is not the mac way of doing things. Lack of firewire will remove the possiblity to sell to the home film maker. This would prevent some sales of iLife and all sales of Final Cut Express.
Remember, Apple has followed the mantra of “everything you need, nothing you don’t.”
I’m sure Apple’s business analysts have crunched the numbers on this one:
– Relatively high fixed costs since you’re talking about a new hardware platform and (although not necessary) separate version of the OS
– Very low margins per unit, especially including technical support for confused “switchers” who can’t find the Start menu
– Likely cannibalization of several existing markets: education market (eMacs) and consumer market (iMacs, iBooks)
– A very small potential market … this is a supposed home PC that doesn’t come with a monitor and can’t play the latest games (or really any decent games, with a 1 Ghz G3!). And it won’t run Quicken, or Turbotax. It doesn’t appeal to the 12-year-old who probably has the most say in purchasing a new computer, and it doesn’t appeal to mom or dad either. It risks hurting Apple brand image, because it’s seriously underpowered for anything than websurfing and word processing, and it’ll look painfully sluggish doing that compared to the 2.8 Ghz eMachine next to it on the shelf at Best Buy. So the reality is that it *isn’t* a home PC (iMac or eMac are) … it’s for people who would otherwise have bought a $1200 PowerMac or a cheap linux box.
I love my Mac, but the reality of Apple’s Mac business is that most Mac buyers are already Mac users, or at least know someone with a Mac they’ve tried.
Apple has an extremely small market share, and they’re growing that share profitably and organically. Maybe there’s room to cut PowerMac G4 prices under a grand, so a 1.25 Ghz tower would cost, say, $50 less than it’s eMac counterpart. But there’s no reason to do that unless Apple thinks it could make up the lost margins in volume.
There seems to be this myth or cult among Mac lovers that if only Apple “did something” it could compete with Wintel. Maybe 20 years ago. 10 years ago Apple tried, and licensing the MacOS almost sent it under. Today the Mac is even more marginalized as a computing platform — sure OS X is better than XP, but with dwindling application support (no ACT, no Quicken, no Visio, no Outlook) the platform overall isn’t an easy sell. People aren’t going to buy lower-end Macs just because they’re almost as cheap as low-end PCs.
Today the Mac is even more marginalized as a computing platform — sure OS X is better than XP, but with dwindling application support (no ACT, no Quicken, no Visio, no Outlook) the platform overall isn’t an easy sell. People aren’t going to buy lower-end Macs just because they’re almost as cheap as low-end PCs.
That is the second time you said “no Quicken”. Intuit has a version of quicken for the Mac, in fact I run it.
http://www.shop.intuit.com/commerce/catalog/product.jhtml?priorityC…
There is a Turbotax for the Mac too. For that matter you can do turbotax online from a webbrowser. Entourage by Microsoft is the Outlook for Mac sans the worms.
This is the most funny article I have ever read on osnews.com. It reminds me the works of Freud and his ideas of undiscovered desires of a person.
Apple is a business company that makes profit by keeping a high quality image.
This article is more than a wish which will never be aplied cause that would be against all the philosophy of Apple.
Take for an example Mercedes -Benz. They will never make a cheep car and the less expensive of them is 20 000 euro.Cause they sell because of their image.
Apple is like Mercedes-Benz.
running os x on x86-64, and os x native applications in “emulation”
would allow apple product differentiation, plus amd and nvidia/via would shoulder R&D costs. want a white box? buy amd64 and run os x.
Buy an eMac on eBay !!!
Apple won’t sell those so cheap computers …
And i wouldn’t buy a Apple computer like taht neitheir …
Just just want a PC, so buy it and put linux on it.
I do have a G4/800 PowerMac SP with a 17Inch Cinema Display. I am very sattisfied with its performance, but the machine in not silent enough. So I really would like to upgrade.
I really do like the new iMac, just perfect, but I already have the 17Inch Cinema Display, so I have to look at the High End Powermacs, which I cannot justify.
Besides this, the enterprise world really could use a ‘crippled’ headless Mac. (No FireWire/USB2/DVD-CD burner, integrated Videocard), it does has not have to be as cheap as PC’s since it doesn’t run XP.
PS. Does Panther run in G3? God that would be slow..
-> Is running as slow as on g4/g5… os-x unbuilt slow-downers work on multiple cpu’s.
Why should apple sell 400dollar PCs, why not Sony, or Toshiba, or HP? You guys need to put things in perpective…or get an MBA…
Jobs’ first job at Apple (again) was killing clones. This idea is about reviving them(in some form). Say Strawberry, think Powercomputing.
“This article is more than a wish which will never be aplied cause that would be against all the philosophy of Apple.
Take for an example Mercedes -Benz. They will never make a cheep car and the less expensive of them is 20 000 euro.Cause they sell because of their image.
Apple is like Mercedes-Benz.”
Mercedes Benz makes millions cheap cars…they are called Chryslers.
I quite agree with your analisys, but regarding CPU, i don’t think is a good idea to support more CPUs, neither tecnically (more testing and optimization needed) nor commercially (higher volumes will cut prices of the selected CPUs).
I think also that Apple should change his mind regarding G5, their tdp is slightly higher than centrino’s one and they CAN be good notebook processor right now.
G4 should be relegated to ultraportable hardware, but slightly undervolted and underclocked G5 (i think it can be done also by software) would have a tdp and power consumption good also for ultraportables so G4 is defintely out jet at present days, and it would simplify the apple’s software optimization challange.
I think that G4 are still supported because they don’t want to rely only on a single CPU manifacturer.
Regarding no iLife bundle, i must agree that it would help in cutting prices, but it means to encourage piracy…
First of all, Apple officials – twice I believe – have said they are concentrating on high end computing. This is certainly confusing to anyone interested in the lower end.
Yet, they do come out with a new iMac. And, as someone pointed out to me, the advertising at the Apple site says, “From the creators of the iPod”. Well, it doesn’t surprise me Apple would try to drive sales of Macs with the iPod, but I was surprised they are doing it in such a blunt fashion. But, this doesn’t sound like “emphasis on high end computing only”. And, it seems to me, they do need a lower end Mac to go hand in hand with with the iPod. Or two.
Nothing Apple does will shoot them into the stratosphere, but what they could use is a real shot in the arm like the original multi-colored iMacs gave them. After a certain point, Apple made everything white or silver. They need something colorful again to catch the attention of teenagers, college students and others. The best way to do this is to retire the CRT eMac and replace it with such a Mac.
I saw a mock-up some guys, I think, from Germany, made when everyone was speculating about what the new iMac would look like. There idea was Cubes (headless) in different colors – the colors of the mini-iPods. The mock-up looked great.
Apple could offer a couple of LCDs the same quality as those of the now retired iLamp iMac, but with no obligation or tricks to almost force people to buy one. Make it as easy as can be for people to use their CRTs or non-Apple LCDs.
I don’t know about processor costs – perhaps Eugenia or someone could address this better – but what about using the 1.25 GHz G4 in current eMacs and that were in the discontinued iMacs? It runs Panther pretty well and I don’t recall there ever being a shortage of them, which was nice. I suppose the big thing would be the savings if people already have a display or want to purchase a less expensive one. Beyond that, there would be a new cool factor for the young. It could be “from the creators of the mini-iPod” 😉