[Zoom]

Okay, I thought I was given to posting messages that were too long...

[MrForgetable]

Originally posted by Zoom:
Again, I disagree. Without repeating everything I wrote in this other post, basically the AIO design no longer makes sense when the display is an expensive, thin LCD. That's why I think the iMac AIO design can live on in the eMac (a CRT-based, super-cheap system). That's fine and there's definitely a market for that. Hell, drop the eMac name altogether and call them iMacs for all I care (I think many people are hung up on iMac==AIO), and let them be the entry-level model. But that doesn't mean that Apple doesn't need a mid-level, headless xMac with the basic qualities I described above.

"iMac Availability
Apple has stopped taking orders for the current iMac as we begin the transition from the current iMac line to an all-new iMac line which will be announced and available in September. We had planned to have our next generation iMac ready by the time the inventory of current iMacs runs out, but our planning was obviously less than perfect. We apologize for any inconvenience to our customers."
if they can name the eMac the iMac, then I think it's ok to have a headless hMac or whatever. But it seems as if they are keeping the iMacs name thus keeping the AIO design. If Apple comes out with a cheaper LCD display (17 inches) at like 300-400 dollars, then they can bring out a headless iMac. Unless they can make the headless iMac ultra cheap (under $1000US w/o monitor and $1350 w/ a quality Apple LCD), i don't see them bringing a headless iMac to the table, at least not yet.

but you see, a headless iMac from apple will mean the end of the world, so we wouldn't want that to happen, would we

[owl_luvr]

Right now, I'm not financially able to replace my iMac, but I know it's on borrowed time. Thus far, the only major component I haven't had replaced (under the extended warranty) is the internal power source/supply. I vowed my current iMac would be my last iMac, and I'm very leery about buying a first-generation New iMac.

iMac DV Special Edition <--- Kihei?
slot-loading
400 MHz, 13 GB internal HD
640 MB RAM
circa 1998-2000

Unfortunately, with its Powerbook line & Power Mac line, Apple leaves me almost no choice but to get another iMac, due to the prices of the Powerbook & Power Mac.

The discontinuation of Apple Loans doesn't help, either.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:

Not bad. I'd probably hit it.
If the price is not totaly screwed.

-t

[Powaqqatsi]

Look look, i conceived the ultimate Apple Product matrix for 2005.

3 lines: xLine, iLine and eLine. Pro, Consumer and Education respectively.
Including headless iMac and sub-notebook

Linkage

That would be the perfect line up. The current Apple line up is littlebit limited IMO. Apple needs to stop oversimplifying things.
Anyway this is in no way 100% meant, just the things I would LIKE to see.

[BenRoethig]

If Apple were to come out with the iCube, now would be a good time. The family PC is now offically unfixable. Don't want to buy another windows machine, don't need a (expensive) LCD display, would rather not buy an eMac, and even the 1.8ghz G5 is well out of the realm of affordability. That G5 cube would fit my current needs perfectly.

[plyxrbo]

ditto ... as i mentioned earlier, they might even get two out of me.

[MrForgetable]

Originally posted by turtle777:
Not bad. I'd probably hit it.
If the price is not totaly screwed.

-t

i like it too. eMac, iMac, iCubeMac, PowerMac

that would be a pretty nice desktop line for apple for years to come.

[OB1]

Originally posted by Powaqqatsi:
Look look, i conceived the ultimate Apple Product matrix for 2005.

3 lines: xLine, iLine and eLine. Pro, Consumer and Education respectively.
Including headless iMac and sub-notebook

Linkage

That would be the perfect line up. The current Apple line up is littlebit limited IMO. Apple needs to stop oversimplifying things.
Anyway this is in no way 100% meant, just the things I would LIKE to see.

Makes sense. That's what I'd like to see. I'm not convinced we will.

[FL!PNEUS]

http://www.thinksecret.com/news/imacg5specs.html

Darn, I can live with the AIO, but the price it too high and the built-in graphics don't make me jump for joy either.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by FL!PNEUS:
http://www.thinksecret.com/news/imacg5specs.html

Darn, I can live with the AIO, but the price it too high and the built-in graphics don't make me jump for joy either.

Damn. I'm sorry, but this is exactly what I didn't want. I really didn't want the display married to the CPU. They even went one step further and included built-in speakers. Why not attach the keyboard, too? And the mouse! Wait, you could put a handle on it and make it portable! No, I've got it - shrink the whole thing into a clamshell-like thing, where you open it up and the display is on the top part and the keyboard and mouse are on the bottom! No, not a mouse... a trackpad! Yeah! Wow, that would rock!



Looks like I'll have to suck it up and buy an overpriced, entirely too large PowerMac and save up for a display sometime later, or just stick it out with the 19" CRT I already have. It'll probably last another 3 years until I upgrade again.

[demograph68]

Originally posted by FL!PNEUS:
http://www.thinksecret.com/news/imacg5specs.html

Darn, I can live with the AIO, but the price it too high and the built-in graphics don't make me jump for joy either.

"64MB of DDR video memory" = crap! crap! crap!

[BenRoethig]

What do I like about it? The G5 and the large LCD display. What don't I like? 256mb of RAM, unreplaceable optical drive, bad video card. Apple is putting all their hopes in an expensive niche computer. If only the hardware division had the common sense the softeare division has. I'm sure It'll be a cool design, but it definately is not an average joe's computer. Nice iMac replacement, but a bad idea to replace the eMac too. This is going to end up costing Apple sales.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by demograph68:
"64MB of DDR video memory" = crap! crap! crap!

Why would you need any more... it's a consumer computer... Considering Dell, Gateway etc. etc. sell computers with on board video with shared ram... 64MB is fine.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
Why would you need any more... it's a consumer computer... Considering Dell, Gateway etc. etc. sell computers with on board video with shared ram... 64MB is fine.

Yeah, but on those models you can add whatever video card you want.

[babywriter2]

Originally posted by FL!PNEUS:
http://www.thinksecret.com/news/imacg5specs.html

Darn, I can live with the AIO, but the price it too high and the built-in graphics don't make me jump for joy either.

I'm not surprised, but I am disappointed. Not all of us have $1,300-1,500 to throw at a computer - that's double the entry-level price point of a Windows machine. And if the eMac gets pulled to make room for the educational iMac, it's even worse.

$1,300 for a computer that doesn't even have an optical drive? What is this, 1996?

- b

[MrForgetable]

i knew it wouldn't be cheap

[bborofka]

Originally posted by Zoom:
Damn. I'm sorry, but this is exactly what I didn't want. I really didn't want the display married to the CPU. They even went one step further and included built-in speakers. Why not attach the keyboard, too? And the mouse! Wait, you could put a handle on it and make it portable! No, I've got it - shrink the whole thing into a clamshell-like thing, where you open it up and the display is on the top part and the keyboard and mouse are on the bottom! No, not a mouse... a trackpad! Yeah! Wow, that would rock!



Looks like I'll have to suck it up and buy an overpriced, entirely too large PowerMac and save up for a display sometime later, or just stick it out with the 19" CRT I already have. It'll probably last another 3 years until I upgrade again.

Apple is damn lucky to have customers like you. It's really a shame they keep putting us through this endless cycle of dismal Mac updates, when they should be doing market research and give their customers more of what they want. No wonder the switch campaign failed horribly and Apple still can't crack 1 million units/quarter consistently.

[jcadam]

Originally posted by Chris Paveglio:
La Cube! The Cube was *almost* the perfect little Mac (Mac LC?). They priced it way too high, but it was a great idea. My company bought about 100 of them to save a lot of desk space, and none of our artists needed expansion, they all worked on a straight forward Quark/Illustrator/Photoshop basis. We'd buy way more of them if they were available at a reasonable price even today!
For the consumer, they would be a great buy too, if Apple could price them at about $600 bucks. A "mini-G5" would be awesome (or keep em cheap with dual g4's instead?). Check out the PC market, the "micro" systems seem to be growing in the market. 1 PCI slot, a good video card, 1 CD/DVD drive, the usual USB and FW ports in a small form factor. Apple could *easily* market this to switchers or first timers. Not as expensive, you can use any monitor you have around, and the low price certainly could leave more leaway for software, and the inevitable iPod (which would be great to offer a discount on when someone buys a CPU, maybe $50 to $100 off).
Apple, I bet most of us agree, REALLY needs to get into the lower end market SOON. They can't live forevery on the limited high end market. They must gain USER share in the long run, and they have to start with the cheaper systems and then build the owners up, just like a Scion car is targeted at teens, then the graduate to Toyotas as early adults, and Lexus when they are even more affluent.

I agree. Bring back the cube, make it cheaper.

Actually, the only thing REALLY keeping me on the PowerMac side of the product matrix is the non-expandable GPU.

That, and I can't bring myself to spend all that $$$ for a nice LCD display when it has the crappy little computer permanently attached to it

[BenRoethig]

Well, I think I can confirm that the optical drive will be of the notebook variety. There is no one who currently makes slot loading full sized combo drives or superdrives. That means it's either a custom job for apple (I sure hope so) or a notebook drive in a desktop. If true, this is another example of form over function from Apple.

[teknopimp]

Originally posted by BenRoethig:
Well, I think I can confirm that the optical drive will be of the notebook variety... it's either a custom job for apple (I sure hope so) or a notebook drive in a desktop. If true, this is another example of form over function from Apple.

not true because space saving is one function of the imac (and/or cube).

[Zoom]

Originally posted by teknopimp:
not true because space saving is one function of the imac (and/or cube).

But a costly one. Slot-loaded drives probably cost twice as much as a standard tray-load drive. Basically, they're using laptop or custom parts to create something overpriced for the market, just to be small. I was heavy on the sarcasm earlier, but my point remains: this is nothing but a damn laptop that you can't move (assuming the rumors are correct). What's the point in that? It's like trying to sell a car stereo as a compact, elegant home entertainment system.

I think they need to make this thing as small as possible while still using standard components: regular hard drive, regular optical drive, PCI and AGP slots, RAM, etc. Make them all easily replaceable. While I fully understand the business case for killing off the Apple clones, it makes me yearn for those days again. The clone manufacturers drove a lot of the standardization of the Mac. I miss my old PowerComputing box. Then there was the CoreCrib, that got killed by Apple. Even if Apple doesn't allow clones, can't they at least understand that there's a HUGE market for an affordable, plain-Jane Mac??

The iMacs, like the Cube, are made expensive by the wacky design, requiring all sorts of custom parts, which are very expensive and not as well tested, or laptop parts, which are also expensive and not nearly as reliable or powerful as their much more common desktop counterparts.

Apple's challenge is to take off-the-shelf components and create a slick little consumer Mac for a very reasonable price. Is that so hard to figure out?? I want the VolksMac! And I'm sorry, but another fancy, small, proprietary, sexy, expensive piece of Ive/Jobs artwork ain't it. The original iMac was that "vMac" concept. The second generation model went off into left field and got way too expensive. It's like revamping the VW Beetle product line into a BMW. Yeah, sure - looks great. Too bad most people can't afford it.

And I'll say it one more time: the AIO design concept fell apart with the introduction of the LCD display. If you're going to marry an expensive, thin display to the computer, why not just get a damn laptop?? You can still hook up a regular keyboard and mouse to that, plus you can unplug them and be portable! With a big, clunky CRT, it made sense. The eMac still makes perfect sense and is a great buy. The iMac needs to be headless and I won't buy one till it is (and I'll bet I'm not alone).

[Don Pickett]

Originally posted by Chris Paveglio:
Apple, I bet most of us agree, REALLY needs to get into the lower end market SOON. They can't live forevery on the limited high end market. They must gain USER share in the long run

People have been saying this for years. It hasn't ever been true, and it isn't true now. Computers are now (and have been for years) a commodity market. Brand differentiation is more important than features for Joe and Jane Average Computer User.

[teknopimp]

Originally posted by Don Pickett:
People have been saying this for years. It hasn't ever been true, and it isn't true now.

finally, a voice of reason here.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by Don Pickett:
People have been saying this for years. It hasn't ever been true, and it isn't true now. Computers are now (and have been for years) a commodity market. Brand differentiation is more important than features for Joe and Jane Average Computer User.

Since when does "brand differentiation" dictate that you produce overpriced, niche market products? If you're smart, you can differentiate your brand without resorting to designs that cost an arm and a leg, and then charge huge margins on top.

Look, if Apple wants to be like Mercedes, fine - just forego anything under $2000 and have a field day selling to rich people who care more about what their computer looks like than what it costs or what it can do. Stop wasting your time with Joe Public. They can't afford your stuff, anyway. Let the stupid, middle class sheep buy their cheap PCs with Windoze. And screw schools - everyone knows they can't even afford to pay salaries, let alone buy books, sports equipment and computers. No money to be made there.

Honestly, if I were in business and I could make that work, I could make the argument. But I'm one of those idealistic Mac fans that hark back to the day of the 1984 commercial, when Steve was more anti-establishment and cared about Joe and Jane Public. I think you can address that market, have wonderful brand recognition and differentiation and loyalty, and still not be this expensive. Maybe I should start a new computer company... Banana Jr, anyone?

[jcadam]

Originally posted by MrForgetable:
"iMac Availability
Apple has stopped taking orders for the current iMac as we begin the transition from the current iMac line to an all-new iMac line which will be announced and available in September. We had planned to have our next generation iMac ready by the time the inventory of current iMacs runs out, but our planning was obviously less than perfect. We apologize for any inconvenience to our customers."

Wow, I believe that's the first time I've ever seem Apple do that. Usually they keep accepting orders and just place the ESD at "8-12 weeks"

[bborofka]

Originally posted by Don Pickett:
People have been saying this for years. It hasn't ever been true, and it isn't true now. Computers are now (and have been for years) a commodity market. Brand differentiation is more important than features for Joe and Jane Average Computer User.

This is the kind of thinking that has Apple at 3% marketshare and stagnate unit growth.

[hmurchison2001]

The iMac G5 will sell briskly if it is $1299 for two important reasons.

1. It has a G5 and consumers have been told that "G5" is synonymous with speed. Consumers only harbor the perception that the speed is there as they don't bring stopwatches in or run benchmarks in the store.

2. 17" LCD. iMac G4s at this $1299 had a 15" LCD. LCDs aren't cool enough to go backwards in screen size. 17" makes that difference and people will respond positively if the 17" is of the same quality that the iMac G4 offered.

These two features will supercede any other feature aside of price that will come up with a majority of users. I'm praying it is not white though. That is far too appliance like.

[hmurchison2001]

Originally posted by bborofka:
This is the kind of thinking that has Apple at 3% marketshare and stagnate unit growth.

Can you please provide empirical evidence to support your statement that Apple's unit growth is stagnant. It should be easy for you since the Q3 results have recently been release. Failure to provide this information shall lead to a request for you to revoke this statement should it be deemed incorrect and misleading(which I believe it is).

[bborofka]

Originally posted by hmurchison2001:
Can you please provide empirical evidence to support your statement that Apple's unit growth is stagnant. It should be easy for you since the Q3 results have recently been release. Failure to provide this information shall lead to a request for you to revoke this statement should it be deemed incorrect and misleading(which I believe it is).

[Zoom]

Nicely done.

[BenRoethig]

Originally posted by hmurchison2001:
The iMac G5 will sell briskly if it is $1299 for two important reasons.

1. It has a G5 and consumers have been told that "G5" is synonymous with speed. Consumers only harbor the perception that the speed is there as they don't bring stopwatches in or run benchmarks in the store.

2. 17" LCD. iMac G4s at this $1299 had a 15" LCD. LCDs aren't cool enough to go backwards in screen size. 17" makes that difference and people will respond positively if the 17" is of the same quality that the iMac G4 offered.

These two features will supercede any other feature aside of price that will come up with a majority of users. I'm praying it is not white though. That is far too appliance like.

Consumers have also shown that given the choice between an LCD all in one machine and a minitower with similar specs, 99% of the time, they choose the minitower. Which is one of the reasons the iMac G4 was a flop, even among exisitng Mac users.

[hmurchison2001]

bborofka

That is sufficient. Sales have reached a plateau. Looking at more of Apple's financial history to me it seems evident that they are far too hardware centric. Yes OSX is the draw but their software is only pulling in 200 Million a qtr. The iMac G4 just killed them because no one wanted the 15" model and the 17" was way too expensive.

The iBook and Powerbook sales increase are nice. Apple needs to start moving more Powermacs and iMacs and Xserves. These underperforming lines are keeping Apple from hitting a million units per qtr sales.

Consumers have also shown that given the choice between an LCD all in one machine and a minitower with similar specs, 99% of the time, they choose the minitower. Which is one of the reasons the iMac G4 was a flop, even among exisitng Mac users.

This is also a reason why a headless Mac would also struggle. People are accustomed to towers being the quintessential computing form factor. Apple is trying to get people to understand that they don't need big rectangular boxes everywhere but old habits die hard.

I think from a form factor standpoint the next iMac looking like a widescreen monitor with a computer bolted on back is the best form Apple could use. I expect people to like it better than the "iLamp" overall.

[bborofka]

Originally posted by hmurchison2001:
bborofka

That is sufficient. Sales have reached a plateau. Looking at more of Apple's financial history to me it seems evident that they are far too hardware centric. Yes OSX is the draw but their software is only pulling in 200 Million a qtr. The iMac G4 just killed them because no one wanted the 15" model and the 17" was way too expensive.

Too hardware centric? I don't understand. Apple's always been a hardware company. They'll never make a lot of money on software with the little marketshare they have. And there were many more important things that killed the iMac than just screen size.

This is also a reason why a headless Mac would also struggle.

What is?

People are accustomed to towers being the quintessential computing form factor. Apple is trying to get people to understand that they don't need big rectangular boxes everywhere but old habits die hard.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard in defense of the iMac. Obviously, it's not working.

I think from a form factor standpoint the next iMac looking like a widescreen monitor with a computer bolted on back is the best form Apple could use. I expect people to like it better than the "iLamp" overall.

A computer bolted to the back of a widescreen LCD would repeat every mistake the iMac G4 made.

[mitchell_pgh]

I now believe the All-in-One concept simply doesn't work with an LCD screen.

Before, you had a box (the CRT) where you would slip a thin box (the computer) under it. Like adding a VCR under a CRT TV.

Now, try to place that same VCR under an plasma screen TV.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by hmurchison2001:
bborofka

This is also a reason why a headless Mac would also struggle. People are accustomed to towers being the quintessential computing form factor. Apple is trying to get people to understand that they don't need big rectangular boxes everywhere but old habits die hard.

I don't agree. People now get that you can have a powerful small computer.

Think laptop.

The cube died a horrible death for one and only one reason.

The Cube
450 Mhz G4
20 GB HD
64 MB of RAM
$1799

vs.

PowerMac
400 Mhz
64 MB of RAM
20 GB hard drive
$1599

And the cube was slower then the PowerMac in tests!

Also, this was when PCI and SCSI were still important to many people.

[OB1]

Originally posted by hmurchison2001:
People are accustomed to towers being the quintessential computing form factor. Apple is trying to get people to understand that they don't need big rectangular boxes everywhere but old habits die hard.

I think it's Apples habits that die hard, just look at how they've stuck to the one button mouse... I would dearly love a 'headless'/'mini tower' iMac because I want what most people want these days - a keyboard, a mouse and a flat panel monitor on my desk, and that's all. And I want the option of using that expensive monitor for other things, like console gaming, tv, and other computers. But I think Apple will stick to it's guns and stay with an AIO design.

I'm itching to find out what it looks like, but I've got a feeling I'm going to be disappointed.

[owl_luvr]

Originally posted by OB1:
I'm itching to find out what it looks like, but I've got a feeling I'm going to be disappointed.

What are the dates for the event when the new iMac will be introduced?

Thank you.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by OB1:
I think it's Apples habits that die hard, just look at how they've stuck to the one button mouse... I would dearly love a 'headless'/'mini tower' iMac because I want what most people want these days - a keyboard, a mouse and a flat panel monitor on my desk, and that's all. And I want the option of using that expensive monitor for other things, like console gaming, tv, and other computers. But I think Apple will stick to it's guns and stay with an AIO design.

I'm itching to find out what it looks like, but I've got a feeling I'm going to be disappointed.

I think no matter what they come up with, people will complain. I hear people complaining about 64MB video cards, 1.8 GHz CPUs, price, etc. etc.

I for one THANK GOD they stuck with the one button mouse. There are so many applications on Windows that use the right click inappropriately. It forces software developers to keep the design clean and simple.

Also, OS X loves extra mouse buttons so it's not like Apple isn't permitting more then one mouse button.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by owl_luvr:
What are the dates for the event when the new iMac will be introduced?

Thank you.

Aug 31 at the Paris MW Expo - apparently Steve won't even be there. I find that amazing. No matter how sick Steve is, I can't imagine him not being the one to introduce the new iMac. Here's a bet: Steve will pop in live from his hospital room (or home, wherever he's recovering) using his PowerBook, iSight and iChat to introduce the new iMac.

[plyxrbo]

Originally posted by Zoom:
Aug 31 at the Paris MW Expo - apparently Steve won't even be there. I find that amazing. No matter how sick Steve is, I can't imagine him not being the one to introduce the new iMac. Here's a bet: Steve will pop in live from his hospital room (or home, wherever he's recovering) using his PowerBook, iSight and iChat to introduce the new iMac.

yeah, and i bet he introduces some other product(s) from his bed as well. that would be pretty neat actually.

[Zoom]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
I for one THANK GOD they stuck with the one button mouse. There are so many applications on Windows that use the right click inappropriately. It forces software developers to keep the design clean and simple.

This is a topic for an entirely different thread, but I have to disagree with a vengeance. This is a case where Apple tried to enforce a standard and lost - Steve just refuses to admit it. The two-button mouse is here to stay. 95% of the computer users have one and are used to it. Using anything else seems awkward. Microsoft has instituted the contextual right-mouse menu and all software GUI designers use it. Even Apple uses it, forcing the user to hit a meta key AND the mouse button, which is insanely inefficient. It's pure ego that's kept the Apple mouse at 1 button. And now that we have the wheel mouse, the single-button Apple mouse is just an anachronistic paperweight.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by Zoom:
This is a topic for an entirely different thread, but I have to disagree with a vengeance. This is a case where Apple tried to enforce a standard and lost - Steve just refuses to admit it. The two-button mouse is here to stay. 95% of the computer users have one and are used to it. Using anything else seems awkward. Microsoft has instituted the contextual right-mouse menu and all software GUI designers use it. Even Apple uses it, forcing the user to hit a meta key AND the mouse button, which is insanely inefficient. It's pure ego that's kept the Apple mouse at 1 button. And now that we have the wheel mouse, the single-button Apple mouse is just an anachronistic paperweight.

Tell me what you really think about the one button mouse...

Also, regarding your prediction... I would agree. I'm sure he isn't going to be in a hospital room... When you are one of the richest people in the world, doctors come to you (other then surgery etc.).

[bborofka]

The one button mouse, while it illustrates Apple's stubbornness to listen to customer demand, doesn't belong here for the simple fact that it can easily be upgraded. The video card, monitor, HD, etc. on the iMac cannot.

[hmurchison2001]

Originally posted by bborofka:
The one button mouse, while it illustrates Apple's stubbornness to listen to customer demand, doesn't belong here for the simple fact that it can easily be upgraded. The video card, monitor, HD, etc. on the iMac cannot.

No it doesn't but this post illustrates that you are such a GD rookie. Apple "clearly" states in their HIG(Human Interface Guide) that contextual menu choices should never have choices that aren't available from the menu bar on top. Apple knows that if they ship a two button mouse the PC nightmare of cramming a bunch of menu options will happen "no don't right click the desktop ma'am you must right click the taskbar and then you'll get new choices"

geez bborofka stop being such an idiot neophyte. Apple doesn't exist to vex you. They're just saving you from your own stupidity.

[mitchell_pgh]

Just wait until you have a "mouse" with a keyboard on top of it.

I have a one button mouse at work and a five button mouse at home.

I enjoy them both.

[bborofka]

Originally posted by hmurchison2001:
No it doesn't but this post illustrates that you are such a GD rookie. Apple "clearly" states in their HIG(Human Interface Guide) that contextual menu choices should never have choices that aren't available from the menu bar on top. Apple knows that if they ship a two button mouse the PC nightmare of cramming a bunch of menu options will happen "no don't right click the desktop ma'am you must right click the taskbar and then you'll get new choices"

geez bborofka stop being such an idiot neophyte. Apple doesn't exist to vex you. They're just saving you from your own stupidity.

You are obviously here to attack me rather than discuss/debate the iMac. If you want to discuss the 1-mouse-button debate all over again, feel free to start another thread and I'll hop in. I'm not going to pollute this thread and go off on a tangent. I was merely making a point about the iMac's upgradeability with the 1-button-mouse comment.

While you're entitled to your opinions, I never go around and spew personal insults at people I consistently disagree with. I try to reason with them and focus on the discussion.

[Crusoe]

All the is required is that you need to be able to set it up without putting down the doughnut you have in your hand.

[turtle777]

Originally posted by Don Pickett:
People have been saying this for years. It hasn't ever been true, and it isn't true now. Computers are now (and have been for years) a commodity market. Brand differentiation is more important than features for Joe and Jane Average Computer User.

The same people complain that they can't get a BMW for the price of a Honda...

-t

[Zoom]

Originally posted by turtle777:
The same people complain that they can't get a BMW for the price of a Honda...

Wouldn't you complain if the Honda had more features, had cheap, user-replaceable parts, tons of low-cost (but high value) after-market add-ons, bigger interior, smaller exterior, seating for more people, cheaper insurance costs, roughly the same performance, slightly lower quality, and half the cost? Why would you buy the BMW? Status, looks or both. Most people can't afford that kind of a trade-off (or won't).