[ballmann]

peter oppenheimer said it fews seconds ago during the conference call - the new iMac is based on the G5-Processor and therefor delayed due to manufacturing-problems by IBM.

[Eug Wanker]

Originally posted by ballmann:
peter oppenheimer said it fews seconds ago during the conference call - the new iMac is based on the G5-Processor and therefor delayed due to manufacturing-problems by IBM.

Yup, as we all (or at least some of us ) expected.

In other news, the G4 iMac barely sold 60000 units - compared to the 183000 of the eMac. (Yes, they finally separated the numbers.)

[turtle777]

Originally posted by ballmann:
peter oppenheimer said it fews seconds ago during the conference call - the new iMac is based on the G5-Processor and therefor delayed due to manufacturing-problems by IBM.

Great.
Waiting pays off.

I hope the new baby looks good, too.
From what I have read about the design, I can hardly imagine it being as elegant as the existing iMac though

-t

[gorickey]

Awesome, I can finally afford a G5...

[Augie50]

Goes to show AppleInsider is complete bunk, heat obviously had nothing to do with the delay at all. ThinkSecret is the only rumor site thats even close to decent.

[nabfa1]

Call me crazy, but I really think we all have seen the new iMacs... Where you say! Have anyone of you seen the new "tbs" channel commercial? The one where they are all behind White flat displays and typing while the actors and actresses from different show are saying one thing or another? Look at the displays, they look so much like iMacs and today I saw a glimps of the keyboard (located inside the desk) in the commercial for the "tbs" station, it looks exactly (exactly) like the iBook G4 keyBoards! Honest. I am not making this up! Can anyone else confirm this just incase you get this channel and see the commercial? Thank you.

[osxisfun]

Originally posted by Augie50:
Goes to show AppleInsider is complete bunk, heat obviously had nothing to do with the delay at all. ThinkSecret is the only rumor site thats even close to decent.

that is a very incorrect statement:

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=553

An analyst later alluded to today's AppleInsider iMac report on heating issues, asking Oppenheimer if heat issues were also to blame for the delay of the new iMacs, or if the issues stemmed exclusively from chip constraints. Oppenheimer would not deny the heating reports, but chose not to discuss the issue, stating only that the processor constraints are the "most critical issue." Oppenheimer later reiterated the aforementioned statement when pressed further.

[osxisfun]

Originally posted by nabfa1:
Call me crazy, but I really think we all have seen the new iMacs... Where you say! Have anyone of you seen the new "tbs" channel commercial? The one where they are all behind White flat displays and typing while the actors and actresses from different show are saying one thing or another? Look at the displays, they look so much like iMacs and today I saw a glimps of the keyboard (located inside the desk) in the commercial for the "tbs" station, it looks exactly (exactly) like the iBook G4 keyBoards! Honest. I am not making this up! Can anyone else confirm this just incase you get this channel and see the commercial? Thank you.

You are correct. We have seen the new imac G5s.

Look at the new 20" apple LCD. Reduce to 17" (and 15"?) and slap all the "dome" parts behind the LCD.

It would be nice if any apple LCD monitor could be attached because of the new VESA(sp) adapters on the new LCDs...

That's my take on it anyway.

[Augie50]

Originally posted by osxisfun:
that is a very incorrect statement:

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=553

Sounds like a very half-@ssed attempt at covering themselves to me. Apple themselves said that the issue is getting the G5s, not heat--you're telling me they're lying? AppleInsider has every reason in the world to slant the story so they save face.

On the conference call Apple says, "We could not secure the necessary supply of G5 processors to launch our new iMac on schedule." They also say dual 1.8s and dual 2.0s supplies will be contrained through July due to IBM, as well as the dual 2.5 throughout the entire new(current) quarter.

[osxisfun]

The apple CFOs non-denial denial about heat issues spoke volumes. The problems seem to be both a supply and a heat issue. G5 supply was the "most critical issue." issue but when the CFO had a chance to refute the heat problems he did not.

But you go ahead and take it anyway you like. No skin off my nose.

[Zoom]

I don't care what the problems are/were, as long as they're resolved and the product ships after it's announced at MW Paris! I knew it had to be a G5, that made way too much sense.

And yeah.... where's Mr. Ryan "it's a fact" "there will be no G5 iMac in 2004" Becker??? Part of me wants to say that he owes a lot of people here a deep apology, but frankly I'd rather that he just kept quiet.

I hope this is not another AIO design. I hope all the rumors about a "fat LCD" are wrong. I want a headless iMac. I know it's totally counter to the AIO concept that has been the one constant in the iMac design, but I hope Steve and Jonathan are smart and gutsy enough to throw that out the window and start over. The new VESA displays, to me, signal a headless iMac. Again, it just makes too much sense.

My wish list for the new iMac is here and some of my reasoning on the headless iMac is here.

[Rev-O]

Originally posted by osxisfun:
You are correct. We have seen the new imac G5s.

Look at the new 20" apple LCD. Reduce to 17" (and 15"?) and slap all the "dome" parts behind the LCD.

It would be nice if any apple LCD monitor could be attached because of the new VESA(sp) adapters on the new LCDs...

That's my take on it anyway.

Was my take on it back at the end of November, too...

Posted on : 11-28-2003 10:30 AM
__
The visual design evolution of the iMac has always favored the display over the "guts" of the computer. The original iMac was just a monitor, keyboard and mouse... with a computer hidden in there. The original flat panel iMac had the computer (gumdrop) sharing equal time with the display. The 20" is just reasserting the display's dominance in the over all visual design. Seems like a natural progression, imho.

Makes me wonder what the next generation/ form factor iMac will be. Consider the possibility of a return to the original iMac. If the original iMac was essentially a laptop encased in a CRT monitor... why not do this again. Imagine a Power Book internals seemsly grafted into an Apple cinema display. USB 2.0, Firewire 400 & 800, phone and ethernet on the bottom back of the monitor, slot loading superdrive on the edge, mounted vertically. You could have a 20" or 23" iMac that was perhaps 1" thicker than an existing cinema display.

I'd be geeked. Imagine, a huge honking 23" high def cinema display with a keyboard and a mouse sitting on your desktop... nothing else. That's be trick.

Link included while I'm reveling in my prestidigitation.



(of course this means the next iMac will look NOTHING like this... that's my luck!)

[Eriamjh]

Heat might have been a hurdle, but I get the impression Apple overcame it finally and that the G5 supply problem is what ultimately caused this delay. It's the only thing that makes sense.

As for the new design, I'm thinking it will be a magically floating display with the guts encased inside the display. Think of an iBook with the display on the outside. Slot loading CD on the side.

Wireless keyboard and mouse? Some threads say you have to have a wired keyboard to start the machine. Therefore an "on" button will be the only way to boot the machine. Who wants ugly wires for the KB and mouse?

Of course, it won't be "magically" floating. I'm picturing a translucent stand that appears invisible.

Whatever it is, it has to be cool. Jobs wouldn't allow the iMac to take a step backwards in styling... would he?

Any other comments?

[nabfa1]

In regards to my previous note.... noting that the computers in the commercial for the "tbs" channel are so very similiar to iMacs.... Is there anyone with a DVR that can capture an image of the computers in that commercial and post them???? I know this is allot to as, but I would almost bet that they are it! Dear readers please do not be annoyed at me for coming back ot this point, but I really yhink there is something BIG there! Those are the iMacs! In the commercial, the display unit is white, the display seems to be 3 to 4" thick ( allowing for space for other things back there), it is white in colour, the stand for the display is a translucent light blue plastic, and the keyboard which looks like that of the iBook G4, is ( in the commecial) in the desk! NO wires are noted ( even barely coming off the screen unit itself). Anyone have a DVR to catch these images? Thank you again.

[dru]

Originally posted by Zoom:
and some of my reasoning on the headless iMac is here.

They tried the headless iMac. It was called the PowerMac Cube. It was a MAJOR, MASSIVE, GIANT bomb.

Jeebuz people, will we ever get off the "headless iMac"

[nabfa1]

If you get the chance look at the following site ( neef Real or Win players) watch the " very funny name" and " very funny fringe one " . See what you think about the computers in these commercials! Here is the link: http://www.tbs.com/stories/story/0,,32661,00.html

[djohnson]

Originally posted by dru:
Jeebuz people, will we ever get off the "headless iMac"

Never People have to complain about something! What is wrong with an aio iMac with everything built into the display and a VESA connection point on the back of it? Then you can buy all of those cool "standards based" attachments and have the iMac hanging from your ceiling if you wanted!

[Zoom]

Originally posted by dru:
They tried the headless iMac. It was called the PowerMac Cube. It was a MAJOR, MASSIVE, GIANT bomb.

And yet the LC was a huge hit. Why? Price point, in both cases. The LC was priced right, the Cube wasn't (not even close). I'm not saying it had any higher margin than any other Mac product, but the price point was just too high for what it was and the market it addressed. If the Cube had been priced at $999, it would have been selling like hotcakes. Maybe Apple couldn't actually manufacture it for less than that, but that's not my point.

The Cube was Steve thinking that people would pay for style over substance. He was wrong. Some people will pay a premium for it, but not in the consumer market, which is where the Cube was targetted. The Cube was a technological wonder, a styling masterpiece, and a complete marketing failure.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by djohnson:
What is wrong with an aio iMac with everything built into the display and a VESA connection point on the back of it?

Because I don't want my LCD married to my CPU with no opportunity to divorce them. I want to buy and upgrade them independently. I want Apple to make a headless unit that can use the new displays. This is much more efficient for Apple, too. This is why car companies try so hard to reuse major parts across many car lines.

Anyway, I'm just telling you what I want. I'm not sure it makes sense from Apple's perspective given all the parameters that must go into their equation, but it makes sense to me.

I actually can't understand why people like the AIO design. It's like combination TV/VCR/DVD units... sure, it sounds like a good idea on paper and it's all in one nice, convenient package... but what if one part stops working? What if there's a new DVD format? What if you already own a nice DVD player? What if the specs on the TV aren't quite what you really want? At least in the consumer electronics world, you can go either way easily and have many choices. With Apple, you only have the one choice right now: AIO. If I had to choose one way or the other, I'd choose separate components. That's why I buy PowerMacs - not because I need all that horsepower, but because I want a separate display and at least a little upgradeability. If I could get a separate display, one PCI slot, and a user-replaceable GPU, I would be all over the iMac and loving it (and saving a ton of money).

[siflippant]

Does that mean this thread will be locked now?

http://forums.macnn.com/65/mac-desktops/218961/next-imac-revision-will-still-g4/

[OB1]

Do we even know for sure that the new iMac will look any different to the current iMacs? Don't worry, Apple's site says "awaiting transition to an 'all-new' iMac". To all those waiting patiently until September, I hope you get your wish! If a 'headless' iMac turns up, I might just be persuaded... See you all back here as the excitement builds!

I can't remember a time when we knew for sure a new product was coming from Apple, it's kinda cool...

[Zoom]

Originally posted by OB1:
I can't remember a time when we knew for sure a new product was coming from Apple, it's kinda cool...

Amen!!! I'm so sick of the secrecy stuff. Sure, if you're not in the market to buy, it's exciting to get the big new product announcements out of left field. But when you're thinking about actually buying one of the products, it's a living hell. Thank God, for once, when I'm actually in the market to buy, I at least have some clue what's going to happen.

[Voch]

Originally posted by dru:
Jeebuz people, will we ever get off the "headless iMac"

I'm considering one as a small, inexpensive G5 server that I could remotely control with my PowerBook. If I had to buy now I'd get a refurb G5/1.6 from the Apple Store ($1299) but am waiting to see what the iMacs are like and I also have a PC I remotely control that can do work in the interim.

[ph0ust]

Originally posted by nabfa1:
If you get the chance look at the following site ( neef Real or Win players) watch the " very funny name" and " very funny fringe one " . See what you think about the computers in these commercials! Here is the link: http://www.tbs.com/stories/story/0,,32661,00.html

that would be sweet if they look like that.... hadn't even planned on getting one, but if they are that cool i might just have to.

[nabfa1]

Originally posted by ph0ust:
that would be sweet if they look like that.... hadn't even planned on getting one, but if they are that cool i might just have to.

Thank you for looking at the link.... don't you think they look like iMacs? The screens look exactly like the current iMacs..... but they have a translucent stand, and the keyboard ( did you get a quick view?) looks like a G4 ibook! I wish more people would confirm this! Thanks again.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by nabfa1:
Thank you for looking at the link.... don't you think they look like iMacs? The screens look exactly like the current iMacs..... but they have a translucent stand, and the keyboard ( did you get a quick view?) looks like a G4 ibook! I wish more people would confirm this! Thanks again.

I suspect the machines in the ad are complete mock-ups dreamt up by some set designer and not iMac prototypes.

They look like Macs because they used available Mac parts to create fake, futuristic looking computer for the ad.

I mean, if you were a set designer and facing the challenge of creating realistic and ultra-futuristic PCs would you grab over-the-counter Dell parts? I don't think so. Mac stuff looks the part so they use it to create the illusion for the ad.

In other words, they're props not prototypes.

[nabfa1]

Originally posted by thunderous_funker:
I suspect the machines in the ad are complete mock-ups dreamt up by some set designer and not iMac prototypes.

They look like Macs because they used available Mac parts to create fake, futuristic looking computer for the ad.

I mean, if you were a set designer and facing the challenge of creating realistic and ultra-futuristic PCs would you grab over-the-counter Dell parts? I don't think so. Mac stuff looks the part so they use it to create the illusion for the ad.

In other words, they're props not prototypes.

Very good point! I do see your perspective! Thank you.

[rotuts]

Well I did look at the commercial and enjoyed it

they may or may not ever look like that, but itsn't the fun trying to make the best guess beforehand?

one of the "snoop" sites did have a brief jpg of the new large monitors before apple introduced them and that was the fun.

all should keep they eyes peeled for thar reason alone.

but the mock ups in the comercial did look good.

I have a dvr card in my G4dual but don't know anyting about that channel.

is it on cable? do the commecials air at a certain time.

I I get this cannel, and reliable info on when to try for the commercial Id be happy to do it.

remember, its the fun that matters now.

rotut

[rixter55]

Originally posted by Zoom:
Amen!!! I'm so sick of the secrecy stuff. Sure, if you're not in the market to buy, it's exciting to get the big new product announcements out of left field. But when you're thinking about actually buying one of the products, it's a living hell. Thank God, for once, when I'm actually in the market to buy, I at least have some clue what's going to happen.

Believe you me, if Apple hadn't run out of G4 iMacs to sell, we would still be speculating like mad. They wanted to give us a hint of what was coming so folks wouldn't give up and buy some other product. I've been salivating for an updated iMac for far too long, and I'm relieved to know that my wait will be rewarded soon, but I don't expect to see Apple do this again, EVER, if it can be avoided. They love the buzz of these rumor/forum sites, cuz it gets us all whipped up into a frenzy. And the fanfare around product announcements is what Steve-O lives for.

Regarding the headless iMac debate: I feel, if Apple were to introduce less expensive stand alone flat panel displays, I could see the logic in putting out a headless iMac. But those of us in the market for an affordable yet stylish and cool, cutting-edge consumer range machine are not going to shell out $1500 to $3000 for a slick Apple Flat Panel to attach to a headless iMac, no matter what price point it comes in at. And you know Apple doesn't want you getting your display anywhere else. So it seems only logical to me that the new G5 iMac will be an AIO machine. I agree that an affordable compact tower would be a nice option, but only if there is an affordable display option to accompany it.

I guess time will tell the tale.

[Zoom]

They would have to offer a bundle discount if you purchase a headless Mac with a display. Again, I personally think they'll offer this as a BTO option, and when you add a display, it will be for less than list price. Or, the display will be on it by default and when you remove it, you won't save the full price of the standalone display. Knowing Apple, I'd say the latter is most likely.

I postulated on pricing here.

[zeebe]

Originally posted by rotuts:
Well I did look at the commercial and enjoyed it

they may or may not ever look like that, but itsn't the fun trying to make the best guess beforehand?

one of the "snoop" sites did have a brief jpg of the new large monitors before apple introduced them and that was the fun.

all should keep they eyes peeled for thar reason alone.

but the mock ups in the comercial did look good.

I have a dvr card in my G4dual but don't know anyting about that channel.

is it on cable? do the commecials air at a certain time.

I I get this cannel, and reliable info on when to try for the commercial Id be happy to do it.

remember, its the fun that matters now.

rotut

Maybe Time will screw up and post pictures the night before like they did when Apple revised the iMac to flat screen. Anyone remember that???

[mrgaskell]

Originally posted by Zoom:
Because I don't want my LCD married to my CPU with no opportunity to divorce them. I want to buy and upgrade them independently. I want Apple to make a headless unit that can use the new displays. This is much more efficient for Apple, too. This is why car companies try so hard to reuse major parts across many car lines.

If that is what you want, then buy a PowerMac! The iMac is what it is. That is like wanting them to integrate a display into the PowerMac, or building a eMac with no display. It is what it is. Leave it alone. An iMac without the integrated display isn't an iMac any longer.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by zeebe:
Maybe Time will screw up and post pictures the night before like they did when Apple revised the iMac to flat screen. Anyone remember that???

Sure, I remember, but this time, I hope they screw up even earlier...

-t

[Simon]

Originally posted by zeebe:
Maybe Time will screw up and post pictures the night before like they did when Apple revised the iMac to flat screen. Anyone remember that???

Well actually, they didn't screw up. It was just the way the deal worked. Steve got insane and free publicity, but he had to live with Time's publishing schedule. Time would run the article, but they certainly wouldn't change their publishing/advertising/etc. just for him...

[Simon]

Regarding this whole LC vs. Cube debate and the headless iMac I think we have to remember that the Cube was a Steve machine, but the LC was under Sculley (Jobs left Apple 1985, the LC came out together with the Classic and the IIsi in 1990).

I think Steve went headless with the Cube because it was about style, maybe even art, and certainly because he felt margins would be good. I really think he's not a headless guy in general. Why run the risk of letting somebody else sell the screen?

[Zoom]

Originally posted by mrgaskell:
If that is what you want, then buy a PowerMac! The iMac is what it is. That is like wanting them to integrate a display into the PowerMac, or building a eMac with no display. It is what it is. Leave it alone. An iMac without the integrated display isn't an iMac any longer.

That's exactly what I've been doing (and I said so ... in one of the dozen or so 'G5 iMac' threads), but the PM's are too much horsepower and way too much coin for what I really need. As much as I'd love the responsiveness of a dual-CPU box, I couldn't justify spending $800-1000 more for it. Let's say a reasonably-priced G5 headless iMac is $999 or even $1199, the cheapest PM is $1999. If I could get a single CPU G5 iMac and a 20" LCD display for under $1999, I would do it and not think twice.

As for "it is the way it is", that's no argument. It could very easily NOT be that way. I don't care if the iMac is not longer an iMac, and frankly neither should Steve. He should care about (a) what the customers want and (b) what will make AAPL shareholders the most money.

The AIO design had its place in history. It served its purpose marvelously. However, I personally believe it only makes sense in the pre-LCD era. CRT monitors are huge, heavy, clunky, ugly things. Steve made it convenient and sexy - why not make the big thing 20% larger, with no extra footprint, and get rid of the CPU box? Makes perfect sense for a CRT. LCDs are an entirely new form factor.

They're also much more expensive than CRTs. I could spend $250 on a 17" CRT and not think much about replacing it; I can't drop $700-800 on an LCD and not flinch if I had to replace it just because I want a new CPU.

I don't need a 'fat LCD display' AIO Mac. If desk space was that precious, I'd get a PowerBook. How much better is this design that a PowerBook? It's worse. It's bigger, it's not portable, and it's useless without a keyboard and mouse. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

[zeebe]

Originally posted by Simon:
Well actually, they didn't screw up. It was just the way the deal worked. Steve got insane and free publicity, but he had to live with Time's publishing schedule. Time would run the article, but they certainly wouldn't change their publishing/advertising/etc. just for him...

Actually they did screw up. The Canadian version of their web site released pictures the night before the event. The Time Magazine was not to hit shelves until late Tuesday (after the keynote) or early Wednesday. So they did make a big mistake.

[zeebe]

Originally posted by Simon:
I think Steve went headless with the Cube because it was about style, maybe even art, and certainly because he felt margins would be good. I really think he's not a headless guy in general. Why run the risk of letting somebody else sell the screen?

Didn't Steve make the cube because that is what the next machines were??

[Simon]

Originally posted by zeebe:
Actually they did screw up. The Canadian version of their web site released pictures the night before the event. The Time Magazine was not to hit shelves until late Tuesday (after the keynote) or early Wednesday. So they did make a big mistake.

The Canadian website didn't do that by mistake.

[zeebe]

Originally posted by Simon:
The Canadian website didn't do that by mistake.

How do you know that?? Didn't Steve say something about it at the keynote (in an indirect kind of way)? Why was it not on the USA Time web site?

[Simon]

Originally posted by zeebe:
How do you know that?? Didn't Steve say something about it at the keynote (in an indirect kind of way)? Why was it not on the USA Time web site?

It was discussed at that time that this behavior was nothing unusual and that the Canadian website normally was first showing off topics of the new issue. Don't ask me why however.

[zeebe]

Originally posted by Simon:
It was discussed at that time that this behavior was nothing unusual and that the Canadian website normally was first showing off topics of the new issue. Don't ask me why however.

OK, kinda weird, I always thought it was a huge mistake on their part.

By the way, I hope I didn't come off sounding like a jerk asking you how you knew, I reread it after I saw your reply and I thought to myself, "God, did I sound like a jerk there."

[Simon]

No offense taken.

[DaBeav]

A G5 will definitely be nice, however I'm more excited about the faster architecture the G5 will bring along with it. However, more important to me, I would love to see Apple put a decent (not entry-level) graphics chip in the iMac. Upgradeable would be nice, or at least let users upgrade the VRAM when they order (like the 1.5GHz PowerBooks) or something.

The true successor to the original iMac is the eMac. Let that carry on in the tradition of the AIO design. Apple needs to acknowledge that the iMac is no longer an entry-level machine and equip it accordingly.

I just hope that with the new iMac, Apple is thinking differently.

[OB1]

Originally posted by Zoom:
The AIO design had its place in history. It served its purpose marvelously. However, I personally believe it only makes sense in the pre-LCD era. CRT monitors are huge, heavy, clunky, ugly things. Steve made it convenient and sexy - why not make the big thing 20% larger, with no extra footprint, and get rid of the CPU box? Makes perfect sense for a CRT. LCDs are an entirely new form factor.

They're also much more expensive than CRTs. I could spend $250 on a 17" CRT and not think much about replacing it; I can't drop $700-800 on an LCD and not flinch if I had to replace it just because I want a new CPU.

I don't need a 'fat LCD display' AIO Mac. If desk space was that precious, I'd get a PowerBook. How much better is this design that a PowerBook? It's worse. It's bigger, it's not portable, and it's useless without a keyboard and mouse. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

Very good points here.

[thunderous_funker]

Originally posted by DaBeav:
A G5 will definitely be nice, however I'm more excited about the faster architecture the G5 will bring along with it. However, more important to me, I would love to see Apple put a decent (not entry-level) graphics chip in the iMac. Upgradeable would be nice, or at least let users upgrade the VRAM when they order (like the 1.5GHz PowerBooks) or something.

The true successor to the original iMac is the eMac. Let that carry on in the tradition of the AIO design. Apple needs to acknowledge that the iMac is no longer an entry-level machine and equip it accordingly.

I just hope that with the new iMac, Apple is thinking differently.

A-mutha-freakin'-MEN!!

In the current product line if you want a Mac with an upgradable GPU, it will cost you $2000 w/o a monitor. That is retarded.

[chrisutley]

Um, the PowerMac Cube was a PowerMac which is a Pro machine. The iMac is a consumer machine. It is a widely known FACT that it failed because it was effectively a very expensive PowerMac, in a case that had very limited expandability.

You are comparing apples and oranges.

Jeebuz people, will we ever stop talking out our butts?

Originally posted by dru:
They tried the headless iMac. It was called the PowerMac Cube. It was a MAJOR, MASSIVE, GIANT bomb.

Jeebuz people, will we ever get off the "headless iMac"

[Evan_11]

Originally posted by chrisutley:

Jeebuz people, will we ever stop talking out our butts?

The only person talking out of their butt was me regarding the next iMac...

With that said Apple is losing out on a market that I see evident here everyday: The low end mac user. Yes, they guy (or shiela) who is say more a hobbiest than professional who can't afford nor really needs a Powermac but doesn't want another iMac or eMac. A single processor G5, a couple of pci slots, upgradeable video card etc. Nothing special. Doesn't even need to be a revolutionary design. Just make it without a monitor and price it under a thousand.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by Evan_11:
With that said Apple is losing out on a market that I see evident here everyday: The low end mac user. Yes, they guy (or shiela) who is say more a hobbiest than professional who can't afford nor really needs a Powermac but doesn't want another iMac or eMac. A single processor G5, a couple of pci slots, upgradeable video card etc. Nothing special. Doesn't even need to be a revolutionary design. Just make it without a monitor and price it under a thousand.

Right on, brother! That's precisely what I've been saying. I care most about price and function, form and style are second. Apple is capable of doing both and this is a perfect opportunity to show it.

[wuzup101]

IIRC correctly the cube failed because Jobs wanted the case to be a perfect cube. His engineers told him it would be quite a bit cheaper to make it "almost" a cube but to have the sides taper in slightly so that they could use a different manuf process. However, Jobs didn't buy it and the "cube" was a perfect cube. This ment prices were insane and it flopped. In a nut shell, it flopped because Jobs prefered form over function. The case was the most expensive component of the whole computer, go figure!