[lee vieira]

Originally posted by ajprice:
<STRONG>

Oh, and Lee, well done for keeping this going for 4 pages, even if it has been in an "I'm right, your wrong. Na na I'm not listening, na na! " kind of way. Face it Lee, if you carry on digging this hole, you'll need mountain climbing gear soon to get out of it!
</STRONG>

Thanks

But who's digging a hole?

All I've done is be realistic about under what circumstances and at what cost Apple can go LCD on the iMac.

Contrast this to some other folks who just blithely cite high iMac specs and big LCD screen combos at impossibly low prices, and say, "Oh yes, that's the way it will be at MWNY. Why? Because I say so."

Not that they're alone in doing this...even Ryan Meader over at mosr.com used to do that sort of thing.

People don't want to hear that an LCD iMac done in 2001 would have to be wimp spec'd and/or have a small screen in order to come in at a reasonable price, but sadly, 'tis true. That doesn't make the concept of an LCD iMac a horrible idea, though. I personally, under the right cirucmstances, would want one.

In any case, say what you will about me, but I usually back what I say up

Have a good weekend all.

"Woohoo, 200th reply in the thread."

--lee

[ 06-22-2001: Message edited by: lee vieira ]

[ 06-27-2001: Message edited by: lee vieira ]

[xandro]

Path 5: Apple goes LCD iMac at MWNY, and 'splits the difference' with a 13.3"-14" LCD line, resulting in some price increases/down-spec'ing. Lowest price iMac is $999(with wimp specs), no new low-price line.

Gosh Lee, I know you're just trying to keep us based in reality, but you do have a way of making all of the possible paths seem unattractive.

Path 5 seems the most likely to me: the infamous 14"-LCDs-supposedly-meant-for-iBooks-thing was just too coincidental. And the $999 iMac with wimp specs is exactly what Apple has been doing with all their lines: offering something cheap low-end that no one would want, and charging substantially more for a little more memory and a DVD and/or CDRW.

But that's OK. Actually Path 5 would be my choice, too.

[ 06-22-2001: Message edited by: xandro ]

[Nimisys]

Originally posted by ajprice:
<STRONG>
The 17" CRT is dead, making all Apple screens LCD (I know you'll argue 'til the cows come home on this one too, but wouldn't the best thing to do be to follow up the "all LCD displays" statement with an "all our products" statement?

</STRONG>

i am not positive this will happen... Apple killed of its CURRENT CRT's... that doesn't they won't coming out with new ones. Furthermore Just becuase they no longer sell their current CRT's doesn't mean that the iMAc has to go to it... it means no G4tower will have the current CRT.

I could venture to say the imac is left alone for now until the price drop on LCd's (figure 6 months more) and Instead Apple re-introduces the cube at the same price point as before but with a 15" LCD. Boom instant middle range, and now that the monitor is included it becomes much more cost effective to consumers. if those sell, it would drive down the LCD cost to allow iMAcs with LCD's even quicker.

[neilnet]

Over at AI (not 'Artificial Intelligence' Matrix fans - Apple Insider) they're speculating upon an iMac being launched at tomorrow's NEC. It does seem pretty likely that Steve would launch it there rather than MWNY - especially since he's so determined to claw back some of the education market.

So what are the chances of the Apple store being 'temporarily unavailable' on Monday?

Just thought I'd share some probably useless incorrect knowledge

Neil

[capone]

Unless they are going to completely reconstruct the iMac (which I think it is about time, but they wont do) they wont have LCDs.

[ajprice]

Quoted from www.macuser.co.uk 's 'Dead Cube' report:-

Highly reliable sources have reported that lacklustre sales and a new iMac design, which would put into question the Cube's product positioning, are among the reasons for the product's demise.

Sources within Apple confirmed the Cube will be replaced by a totally redesigned iMac with a flat-panel LCD display at the upcoming Macworld Expo in New York on 17 July. One insider said: 'When you see the new iMac, you'll understand why the Cube is gone.'

Apple can't keep the current casing for much longer. The current iMac casing has been around for over 18 months, they're running out of colours now, so we had patterns in February. Steve can only say "Ta daa! look at this." so many times with a computer that looks the same as the last one. The Educational Conference could well be the place to show it, as it would give more power to Apple's educational elbow, and would give it it's own fanfare, rather than the possibility of sharing the limelight with a new G4 at MWNY. 200 posts in the topic AND 5 pages now, yeeeah baby!

[lee vieira]

Originally posted by neilnet:
<STRONG>Over at AI (not 'Artificial Intelligence' Matrix fans - Apple Insider) they're speculating upon an iMac being launched at tomorrow's NEC. It does seem pretty likely that Steve would launch it there rather than MWNY - especially since he's so determined to claw back some of the education market.

So what are the chances of the Apple store being 'temporarily unavailable' on Monday?

Neil</STRONG>

Probably pretty low.

Apple usually runs down the stock on a model and clears out the old inventory before it brings in a new one.

Checking the Apple Store, all the Indigo/Graphite iMacs at all 3 pricepoints are available for next day shipping, i.e. they got lots of 'em still.

So it seems like MWNY is appointed place and time.

--lee

[lee vieira]

Originally posted by ajprice:
<STRONG>Quoted from www.macuser.co.uk 's 'Dead Cube' report:-

Highly reliable sources have reported that lacklustre sales and a new iMac design, which would put into question the Cube's product positioning, are among the reasons for the product's demise.

Sources within Apple confirmed the Cube will be replaced by a totally redesigned iMac with a flat-panel LCD display at the upcoming Macworld Expo in New York on 17 July. One insider said: 'When you see the new iMac, you'll understand why the Cube is gone.'

Apple can't keep the current casing for much longer. The current iMac casing has been around for over 18 months, they're running out of colours now, so we had patterns in February. Steve can only say "Ta daa! look at this." so many times with a computer that looks the same as the last one. The Educational Conference could well be the place to show it, as it would give more power to Apple's educational elbow, and would give it it's own fanfare, rather than the possibility of sharing the limelight with a new G4 at MWNY. 200 posts in the topic AND 5 pages now, yeeeah baby!</STRONG>

Well, I doubt it'll debut at the Educational Conference, for reasons I gave above.

If Apple does go LCD iMac @MWNY, it likely means a 13-14" LCD screen, wimp spec'ing, and a boost in price to the bottom model to at least $999. Plus some fairly crappy margins at the low-end despite all that.

The question then becomes, will there be a 'new Apple productline X' at MWNY to cover the low-end market, and if so, what will it be?

--lee

[georgius]

So, Lee, if the iMac doesn't go flat panel at MWNY, what then? A 19 inch translucent CRT monster? No thank you. Demise of the Cube? Double no thank you.

Apple could seriously cut costs with the iMac. As LCD prices drop, it becomes easier to include them in computer setups. It wouldn't be too hard (economic wise) to have all the new iMacs with an LCD...and not compromise on specs. I just don't see how the new iMacs (that we'll definaely get at MWNY) could be without LCDs.

Play it cool

[xandro]

You know, every time Lee runs the numbers on an LCD iMac I'm almost convinced that it can't be done.

But there's one thing . . . With all this speculation about an LCD iMac, wouldn't Apple put a clear stop to the rumors if they weren't true? Yes, I know that Apple "doesn't comment on future plans" but they did immediately shut down that rumor about the 14" iBook.

At this point if there's no LCD iMac at MWNY, there will be loud groans. I don't think Mr Jobs wants that, so if the rumors weren't true, wouldn't they shut them down?

Am I rambling? Am I making sense?

[Nicko]

Originally posted by xandro:
<STRONG>You know, every time Lee runs the numbers on an LCD iMac I'm almost convinced that it can't be done.


But there's one thing . . . With all this speculation about an LCD iMac, wouldn't Apple put a clear stop to the rumors if they weren't true? Yes, I know that Apple "doesn't comment on future plans" but they did immediately shut down that rumor about the 14" iBook.


At this point if there's no LCD iMac at MWNY, there will be loud groans. I don't think Mr Jobs wants that, so if the rumors weren't true, wouldn't they shut them down?


Am I rambling? Am I making sense? </STRONG>

I think you may be on to something

[lee vieira]

Originally posted by georgius:
<STRONG>So, Lee, if the iMac doesn't go flat panel at MWNY, what then? A 19 inch translucent CRT monster? No thank you. Demise of the Cube? Double no thank you.</STRONG>

I've never asked for a 19" CRT iMac. Wouldn't be practical, or even cost-efficient. 17" is entirely possible though, as even the very lame FuturePower Co. has managed to make a 17" iMac clone.

Far as the Cube goes, it's been dead for a long time...sold only 12K units last quarter. The only question is WHEN the guillotine will drop, not if (sad to say).

Sigh...on a side note, I have to observe that people think I'm so anti-LCD-iMac, and its way off the mark. I'm not anti-LCD-iMac at all. I wouldn't mind owning one, in fact.

I merely point out that, in 2001 anyways, there are some significant compromises should Apple go that route. And its not enough to say "Well, I think they should, it should be no problem, the specs should be great, yadda yadda yadda" if you can't back that statement up with at least a few facts.

<STRONG>Apple could seriously cut costs with the iMac. As LCD prices drop, it becomes easier to include them in computer setups. It wouldn't be too hard (economic wise) to have all the new iMacs with an LCD...and not compromise on specs.</STRONG>

Well, it goes like this:

1) current CRT on the iMac is like, really, really cheap
2) LCD prices, while having fallen a lot in the last year, are still a lot more expensive than similar-sized CRTs
3) in a near-recession economy (i.e. the world right now), companies lack the 'pricing power' to pass large new costs onto customers in the form of big price increases, so Apple has to maintain current iMac pricepoints or at least come very close
4) given that going LCD on the iMac RAISES COSTS in a situation where Apple CAN'T raise prices a great deal AND during a time when Apple will be adding expensive new features like combo drives, those costs have to come out of SOMEWHERE unless you believe in voodoo economics, and that somewhere is either

a) Apple's margins
b) specs, by making them lower/cheaper.

If it were to come out of a), then Apple would run the very real risk of running a loss, which would drive down their stock and start up the 'Apple is DEAD!' crap in the press again. Macs start to look like unsafe purchases, and Apple's sales and marketshare drop, drop, drop. And with it, so do things like, oh, say, developer support

So logically, it has to mainly come out of b) specs, unless Apple uses a very tiny and cheap LCD, like say 12.1" or so. Which would probably be a disaster sales-wise.

Also, their are reports that the LCD price drop phenomenon is slowing or coming to an end, at least for the rest of the year, because the LCD glut of the past few months is subsiding...demand is catching back up to supply, so LCD makers are free to charge more.

<STRONG> I just don't see how the new iMacs (that we'll definaely get at MWNY) could be without LCDs.

Play it cool

</STRONG>

They may very well be LCD, but if so, you also may very well be getting less comp for your money, at least for awhile, until LCD prices truly drop a whole bunch more(probably not until middle of next year, at best).

It's really all about how much you prioritize LCD vs specs, and how badly you want to believe that Apple can add a big-enough LCD without compromising specs or upping prices.

I personally prioritize specs a bit ahead of LCD, and while I want to believe in pie-in-the-sky 'something-for-nothing' scenarios, I know better.

My prediction remains: If they do go LCD iMac @MWNY, we're talking 13-14" LCD, fairly wimpy spec'ing, and minor pricepoint increases (to, say, $999/1299/1599, from the current $899/1199/1499).

Still seems like it'd be a worthwhile machine, what with OS X pre-loaded and the industrial design boys turning out some primo eye-candy.

What it won't be is some ridiculous bs like some people have been mentioning, 17" LCD, 1GHz cpu, 32 meg Radeon, yadda yadda yadda. If you believe that, give me your email, I have some prime Nebraskan oceanfront property I think you'd be interested in

--lee

[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: lee vieira ]

[ 06-25-2001: Message edited by: lee vieira ]

[BrunoBruin]

What it won't be is some ridiculous bs like some people have been mentioning, 17" LCD, 1GHz cpu, 32 meg Radeon, yadda yadda yadda.

Not to mention SuperDrive as well. *SNORT!!*

[GraphiteBoi]

Apple will not make a computer that doesnt have the ability to be powerful. If they make the LCD iMac, believe it that the SE model will be powerful...at least that.

[georgius]

I've never asked for a 19" CRT iMac. Wouldn't be practical, or even cost-efficient. 17" is entirely possible though, as even the very lame FuturePower Co. has managed to make a 17" iMac clone.

Far as the Cube goes, it's been dead for a long time...sold only 12K units last quarter. The only question is WHEN the guillotine will drop, not if (sad to say).

Sigh...on a side note, I have to observe that people think I'm so anti-LCD-iMac, and its way off the mark. I'm not anti-LCD-iMac at all. I wouldn't mind owning one, in fact.

I've seen the FuturePower "clone"...andwith 17-inches, the whole iMac ethos turns into a piece of plastic crapola...and moves away from the design ethos that Apple re-introduced 3 years ago.

Secondly...I've read a lot of this thread. I read a lot fo these forums - just never post...and I don't think that you're anti LCD. I do see that it is impractical...but Apple has reached a dead end. The old iMac shell is dead in the water. what other way can Apple go? There would be nothing more revolutionary than an LCD iMac.

If it were to come out of a), then Apple would run the very real risk of running a loss, which would drive down their stock and start up the 'Apple is DEAD!' crap in the press again. Macs start to look like unsafe purchases, and Apple's sales and marketshare drop, drop, drop. And with it, so do things like, oh, say, developer support

So logically, it has to mainly come out of b) specs, unless Apple uses a very tiny and cheap LCD, like say 12.1" or so. Which would probably be a disaster sales-wise.

If Apple were to come out with a LCD iMac - I doubt that Apple would get the same press abuse if it were to sell well. If it weren't to like the Cube (and by the way, I do read, and I do know that they sold very few and have masses of them swimming around in dealer chains), then there would be a definite problem.

But I don't think Apple - Steve especially - would be willing to let the computer that brought Apple back form the dead, die itself so quickly.

And its pretty impractical people asking for an 18 inch iMac LCD.I understand that. Remeber, this is still a consumer product - more often than not for first time buyers that don't what the difference a larger screen makes - and franky don't care two tosses.

My prediction remains: If they do go LCD iMac @MWNY, we're talking 13-14" LCD, fairly wimpy spec'ing, and minor pricepoint increases (to, say, $999/1299/1599, from the current $899/1199/1499).

Still seems like it'd be a worthwhile machine, what with OS X pre-loaded and the industrial design boys turning out some primo eye-candy.

What it won't be is some ridiculous bs like some people have been mentioning, 17" LCD, 1GHz cpu, 32 meg Radeon, yadda yadda yadda. If you believe that, give me your email, I have some prime Nebraskan oceanfront property I think you'd be interested in

13-14 inch is fine for most consumer userse. Most of you forget that this is still a consumer machine. With OS X pre loaded as the default OS would raise some eye brows but then make it even better fro consumers.

No 17" screen. No 32 MB Radeon. The ol' 128 Rage Pro is fine for m, and its mfienf ro most - playing Bugdom and Cro Mag doesn't demand too much.

And about that Nebraskan property...what's the square footage?

Play it cool

[lee vieira]

Originally posted by BrunoBruin:
<STRONG>

Not to mention SuperDrive as well. *SNORT!!*</STRONG>

So true. I keep hearing people specing these on the next iMac rev, even though they cost like $850 all by themselves. Sigh.

Another annoying thing is people who don't understand the difference between SuperDrives and combo drives(i.e. CD-RW/DVD-ROM drives), which are far cheaper than SuperDrives and are rapidly becoming the standard on the PC side of the aisle.

--lee

[BrunoBruin]

So true. I keep hearing people specing these on the next iMac rev, even though they cost like $850 all by themselves. Sigh.

What I don't get are these demands for what are essentially the guts of a tower -- G4, 133MHz bus, expansion, GeForce, SuperDrive... Hello? At that point, why not drop the iMac altogether and just sell the damn towers?!

Oh, but that's right, we also want to include a built-in 14-inch LCD and price it at $1,000. I think I understand now. The difference between consumer and professional products is not the SPECS, it's just the PRICE.

Cripes, Apple wants to extract $300 just for the combo drive over the straight DVD; where is there room for that in a $1,000 iMac?

[oranjdisc]

I've always felt the iMac got a little too "big for it's britches" by adding more HD space, more power, DVD, etc, etc, while at the same time ignoring bottom-end opportunities by making a CHEAPER model. They could have pushed out a $500 model, IMO.

Bring on the LCD....

[GraphiteBoi]

There won't be a $500 iMac, they need to keep improving the iMac, not take things away. The last iMac release increased the price $100. The iMac will be much different in July, and much better. I would not expect another price increase though

[Gregory]

Recoup the R&D of the Cube. Stimulate sales. To education. Make it something everyone wants. G4/400-600 and drop the G3. Give us the "Cube" we wanted and didn't get... lower cost, add LCD. If Apple can sell more LCD's maybe they can buy them for less...

14" digital is more resful, larger, better looking than the 13.8" viewable we have. Moto probably has the capacity to churn out a lot of low-power G4's but the Pro G4's want DP and higher clock (733+).

Is the 'puter in the base? back-side? box? IIci? The Cube is a slim-downed IIci sans slots.

[GraphiteBoi]

There will always be the iMac...end of story

[georgius]

Originally posted by GraphiteBoi:
<STRONG>There will always be the iMac...end of story</STRONG>

And they all lived happily ever after.

THE END

[lee vieira]

Re: the National Education Conference & Jobs' keynote speech at it.

I was right...no product announcements.

Macworld NY, babee. Dat's the time and place.

--lee

[Macintosh]

Being that the iMac design is dead in the water and nobody is trying to throw a life-jacket to it, Apple will indeed release a new iMac LCD. but......
Why doesnt Apple continue the old iMac design with the low end being the current 500mhz model? I know it may look like a different product it really is just a different screen. This way Apple could still sell a low cost iMac and have 2 higher end LCD iMacs. Then Apple could slowly phase out the old one and eventually replace the bottom line to all LCD's. It could work, but to the dismay of some it would be critisized for being a risky product strategy. Although I do not see why not. If Apple has to do this to bring LCD iMacs to the market then why the hell not? The old low end would only have to stay for about 4-5 months anyway.

Just a thought......
$899
500MHz
PowerPC G3
256K L2 cache
(at 500 MHz)
128MB SDRAM
20GB Ultra ATA drive
DVD Drive
RAGE 128 Ultra w/ 16MB
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
56K internal modem
15-inch display
Two USB ports
Two FireWire ports

$1199
600MHz
PowerPC G3
256K L2 cache
(at 600MHz)
128MB SDRAM
40GB Ultra ATA drive
CD-RW Drive or DVD Drive
RAGE 128 Ultra w/ 16MB
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
56K internal modem
15-inch *LCD* display
Two USB ports
Two FireWire ports

$1499
700MHz
PowerPC G3
256k L2 cache
(at 700MHz)
40 Gig Hard Drive
128MB SDRAM
Combo drive
Rage 128 Pro w/16MB
10/100BASE-T Ethernet
56K internal modem
15-inch *LCD* display
Two USB ports
Two FireWire ports

[SpeedRacer]

Just heard from a reliable source that there will be no iMac updates at MacWorld - maybe new colors, but not much else.

That said, i don't buy it for a second. Leaving your most popular product predominantly unchanged for over one year would be suicide. I sincerely hope Apple is merely keeping a very tight lid on this one.

Till then, i'm sticking to the LCD iMac theory.

Speed

[Lolo from Paris]

I think that we'll still have an iMac CRT maybe the low end and middle models. I do believe only iMac SE will have LCD...

LCD is pretty bad for Apple, it costs a lot of money to produce, it's far more expensive than CRT (look at the 15" LCD from Apple, it costs the price of a 19" CRT model), it's very fragile, so it won't be great for schools and children etc.

Plus, Apple won't be able to produce an iMac LCD for less than the iBook price. Okay RAM and HD are cheaper on desktop machines but the rest costs the same and even more (keyboard, mouse, N VIDIA Geforce 2)...Plus iMac won't sell without CDRW and DVD.

I'm sure you will be disapointed if we are looking for an iMac LCD at MWNY...Only the Special Edition will spot an LCD IMHO.

[georgius]

Originally posted by Lolo from Paris:
<STRONG>I think that we'll still have an iMac CRT maybe the low end and middle models. I do believe only iMac SE will have LCD...

LCD is pretty bad for Apple, it costs a lot of money to produce, it's far more expensive than CRT (look at the 15" LCD from Apple, it costs the price of a 19" CRT model), it's very fragile, so it won't be great for schools and children etc.

Plus, Apple won't be able to produce an iMac LCD for less than the iBook price. Okay RAM and HD are cheaper on desktop machines but the rest costs the same and even more (keyboard, mouse, N VIDIA Geforce 2)...Plus iMac won't sell without CDRW and DVD.

I'm sure you will be disapointed if we are looking for an iMac LCD at MWNY...Only the Special Edition will spot an LCD IMHO.</STRONG>

You could be right. The consumer range over the past two-three years has been about robustness. An LCD iMac wouldn't stand up to the rigour of a child's daytime activities.

However...I doubt that Steve would have the iMac line split into two sections - LCD and CRT. That would ruin all continuity...and introduce a more complex inventory and product line - something that he cut down on when he returned in '97.

Play it cool

[Lolo from Paris]

Originally posted by georgius:
<STRONG>

You could be right. The consumer range over the past two-three years has been about robustness. An LCD iMac wouldn't stand up to the rigour of a child's daytime activities.

However...I doubt that Steve would have the iMac line split into two sections - LCD and CRT. That would ruin all continuity...and introduce a more complex inventory and product line - something that he cut down on when he returned in '97.

Play it cool

</STRONG>

We will see, only a few days to wait ;-)

Stopping CRT iMac would be a mistake...schools, graphists and a lot of people (especially newbies) don't like LCD and would prefer bigger CRT or a flat one. There are short neck CRT screens too which can be an option.


If you look at the PC world, LCD consumers machines are still expensive (Packard Bell are selling one Diva with LCD), at least the price of the current iMac mid range model...So how Apple will be able to do the same but cheaper ?

Having only the Special Edition with LCD could be a good option, then they could see if it's a success or a cube-like story and afterwards made their models all LCD.


I would love to see a colorful iMac and not only one white model like the current iBook...but no LCD for me, I'd prefer big specs than LCD screen.

[BrunoBruin]

That said, i don't buy it for a second. Leaving your most popular product predominantly unchanged for over one year would be suicide. I sincerely hope Apple is merely keeping a very tight lid on this one.

Actually, the iMac was fairly significantly upgraded in February -- up to 600MHz processors, bigger hard drives, CD-RW, etc.

I vote for keeping the iMac as it is (with upgrades) for now, and calling this new LCD model a replacement for the Cube. Not manufactured on the same line as the iMacs and not even called an iMac. How about calling it...oh, I don't know... the MACINTOSH!

iMac. Macintosh. Power Macintosh. Naw, probably too streamlined for Apple.

[Mongrel]

If a flat screen iMac came out next month, I'm 95% positive I'd buy it, I'm tired of keeping up with the Joneses with my beige G3 tower... I have to upgrade exponentially faster to keep up nowadays...

Anyway, I'm thinking one way to overcome the challenge of producing affordable LCD iMacs would be to use the parts from all those CUBES they took back. The components are already designed for compact use, and what the hell else are they going to do with them, bury them in the landfill next to all those Lisas? Reworking the cube itself would be futile... it was a hot design, but that's about it. Now they have an opportunity to sell a 14" flat panel display for about, say, $6-700, which fits reasonably well into their current LCD pricing scheme. The other $2-300 you'd expect to pay goes into the new plastic casing, and the guts from thousands of homeless Cubes.

Maybe?

[Macintosh]

Listen to this and tell me if you think an iMac LCD will not come at MWNY.
http://www.geocities.com/franktau/sj84sfull.html

Hey Macintosh,
That clip proves what, exactly?

[zigzag]

Originally posted by lee vieira:
<STRONG>

Thanks

But who's digging a hole?

All I've done is be realistic about under what circumstances and at what cost Apple can go LCD on the iMac.

Contrast this to some other folks who just blithely cite high iMac specs and big CRT size combos at impossibly low prices, and say, "Oh yes, that's the way it will be at MWNY. Why? Because I say so."

People don't want to hear that an LCD iMac done in 2001 would have to be wimp spec'd and/or have a small screen in order to come in at a reasonable price, but sadly, 'tis true. That doesn't make the concept of an LCD iMac a horrible idea, though. I personally, under the right cirucmstances, would want one.

In any case, say what you will about me, but I usually back what I say up

[ 06-22-2001: Message edited by: lee vieira ]</STRONG>

lee, if some think you've dug a hole, it may be because some of the comments you've made in this thread could be considered, well, condescending, as if you're the only person who can back up your arguments. I don't think the people who have imagined an LCD iMac are as loony as you like to portray them - by and large, they accept that it will cost more, they just aren't as troubled by this prospect as you are. Many rational arguments have been made for the idea that it's the right time for an LCD iMac - not merely because they "say so". Nor do I see anyone seriously suggesting that a $1000 LCD iMac is going to have top-of-the-line specs. And rational arguments have been made to refute your assumption that it would cost at least $250-350 more (I'm not saying which is correct, only that rational arguments have been made). You yourself seem to have come around to the idea that it could be done for $999 with baseline specs (still a stretch, I think, but not irrational). As much or more rational, I think, in marketing terms, than your idea of a 133 bus and DDR-RAM in the iMac.

I happen to agree with you that MWNY may be too soon (although I hope to see it). But I don't think the LCD argument deserves to be depicted as irrational and without foundation.

Cheers, and knowing SJ, we'll probably all be proved wrong come July 18.

[ 06-27-2001: Message edited by: zigzag ]

[georgius]

I was just reading the link on the MacNN news page toMacUser UK magazine website.

They even report on a new LCD iMac.

They have been right over thepast few months - even when it comes to inside info.

The correctly predicted a new 17 inch flat panel.
The have predicted (correctly I might add) various releases by apple and updates for OS X.

I would trust them on this one. You may not. But I've read what they have had to say...and it all seems pretty legit.

I just can't wait till MWNY.

And o yes, Lee, you haven't dug yourself a hole...but most of the arguements put forward here are pretty reasonable.

But then..there is nothing wrong with thinking different Lee. If you don't think there will be an LCD iMac, you are well within your rights to do so.

But then there is nothing to stop me thinking that we'll get a 22-inch LCD iMac with a 700MHz G4, 40 GB HD, GeForce 3, that can be controlled by wiggling your genitals.

Nice thought though.

Play it cool

[lee vieira]

It's just flat out funny to me that people keep thinking I'm a naysayer to the entire IDEA of an LCD iMac, when all I've done is be realistic about the concept.

For example, here's my very first post about an LCD iMac in this thread (waaaay back at reply #1):

My educated guess on this topic remains: it could happen, but don't bet on it.

Yes, LCDs have gotten cheaper, but still not cheap enough. By my estimates, going 15" LCD on the iMac line would add at least $250 per machine, probably more.

You *could* do it, but you'd have to say buh-bye to the low-end iMac, and the mid- and upper- iMacs would have lower specs(no money for good specs anymore).

Maybe a small LCD would be cheaper(like a 13.3" viewable laptop LCD), but still, thanks to economies of scale nothing usuable is cheaper than a 15" CRT(or even 17" CRT, for that matter).

And rumors have Apple adding combo DVD/CD-RW drives and GeForce 2MX graphics chips to the iMac line... those things aren't cheap. Not much room $$$-wise to add an LCD.

--lee

Wow, I sure sound like I'm saying there will be absolutely no chance of an LCD-iMac at MWNY, don't I? Not.

Oh, and I don't mean to sound condescending... its just that some people clearly like to do their homework on an issue, while others just state their opinions. I tend to listen to the former group more.

Making that distinction isn't condescending, is it?


--lee

[ 06-27-2001: Message edited by: lee vieira ]

[lee vieira]

Originally posted by georgius:
<STRONG>

But then there is nothing to stop me thinking that we'll get a 22-inch LCD iMac with a 700MHz G4, 40 GB HD, GeForce 3, that can be controlled by wiggling your genitals.

</STRONG>

Sure. And you could also believe that Bill Clinton did NOT have sexual relations with that woman, the Backstreet Boys are the finest musicians in the world, and that Adolf Hitler was merely misunderstood.

There's nothing wrong with having an opinion, even one that is very likely wrong. If it makes you happy, go with it. That blind guy who climbed Everest was probably foolish to think he could do so, but that belief and high opinion of his own chances no doubt made it possible for him get him to the top.

But, by the same token, just as there's nothing wrong with having an opinion, there is also nothing wrong with others having an opinion of your opinion. Or of mine, for that matter.


--lee

[ 06-27-2001: Message edited by: lee vieira ]

[ 06-28-2001: Message edited by: lee vieira ]

[lee vieira]

Originally posted by zigzag:
<STRONG>

I don't think the people who have imagined an LCD iMac are as loony as you like to portray them - by and large, they accept that it will cost more, they just aren't as troubled by this prospect as you are. Many rational arguments have been made for the idea that it's the right time for an LCD iMac - not merely because they "say so". Nor do I see anyone seriously suggesting that a $1000 LCD iMac is going to have top-of-the-line specs. And rational arguments have been made to refute your assumption that it would cost at least $250-350 more (I'm not saying which is correct, only that rational arguments have been made).</STRONG>

Are we reading the same thread?

Yes, some LCD advocates have started being realistic about what an LCD iMac this year will REALLY price and spec like (though the pessimist in me says that's largely because of me presenting some inconvenient facts).

But for every one of those, you have a guy who blathers on about how 'economies of scale' will make magically make the CRT-LCD price gap a thing of the past, or how Apple can switch to a 15" LCD right now with no price increase or hit to specs.

Then there was the whole iBook argument, i.e. that you could price and spec an iMac for $400 under an iBook, because portables are so much more expensive than desktops. Of course, that completely ignored things like the fact that the iBook had a tiny and fairly cheap 12" LCD screen that an LCD iMac likely wouldn't have(let's just say I, and a lot of other people, fervently hope it doesn't).

<STRONG>You yourself seem to have come around to the idea that it could be done for $999 with baseline specs (still a stretch, I think, but not irrational). As much or more rational, I think, in marketing terms, than your idea of a 133 bus and DDR-RAM in the iMac. </STRONG>

$999 seems (barely) within reach, but as I've said many times, only in combination with a smaller LCD screen than many people have been saying, poor specs, and poor margins. Apple isn't a low-price leader, and the PC 15" LCD all-in-ones on the market go for $1250-$1700 and up. You do the math.

Far as 133 bus and DDR-RAM goes...hey, they help performance(a perceived iMac fault) and are a lot cheaper to implement than an LCD display, and a many PCs are 133 bus already. If not this iMac rev, then the next.

<STRONG>I happen to agree with you that MWNY may be too soon (although I hope to see it). But I don't think the LCD argument deserves to be depicted as irrational and without foundation.</STRONG>

I never have depicted the LCD argument as such. I've merely been frank about the costs and compromises involved. I think its more of a case of me 'raining on the parade' than anything else.

I guess if I told people that they really could have something for nothing, my opinions in this thread might be more popular. But unlike many a politician, I'm just no good at fibbing

--lee

[georgius]

I have got to say...the more and more I think about...the more and more I get confused.

I can't help thinking that as good as an LCD is...it wouldn't match the quality of a CRT...and that in contrast, the CRT is positively gigantic in comparison...and offers little more than a cheaper machine and enhanced color accuracy...

Who am I kidding? If anyone can pull off anything its most definitely Apple. If Apple wants to release a 16-inch LCD iMac and get away with it...they could do it. they learn form their mistakes. I doubt that the new iMac would be the same travesty as the Cube. An LCD iMac would - and could be - a great commercial success. Definitely. It could look great and keep the shareholders and customers happy for the next two to three years. Definitely. And what about its looks? Perhaps something like this...



But then I think about Lee's argument. You could be perfectly right. it would bump up the price, and in a "near recession economy", would mean the price being bumped up even more...something that Apple would want to avoid at all costs, especially if it were to keep the iMac as a low end consumer product.

Creating an LCD iMac would be like taking an iBook, splitting the screen from the keyboard part...attaching all of the internal works under the keyboard in the iBook to behind the LCD...and adding an external keyboard and mouse.

You're right Lee. It is effectively an iBook sawn in half...and then adding a slot loading drive...huh...you're looking at an extortionate price for the consumer.

But what else does a CRT offer?? This design has not been updated for 18 months. It is old. Even I get tired looking at my own. I long for something more exciting...more "risqu�"...and a CRT certainly doesn't offer that.

The current iMac shape has been pulled and twisted into what it is now. It has lasted a long time. it has been a great piece of kit, heck, it still is a great piece of kit. But, adding a larger CRT would ruin all of the proportions of this machine. The machine that brought Apple back from the brink. The machine that Apple owes so much to. And do you really think that Apple would let such a saviour just be passed of with a crappy, iBook colored design for the next 18 months?

I doubt it. It is way too special...and deserves a design that is equally as special. And to be perfectly frank...I don�t see how a CRT can offer this anymore.

If you disagree...feel free to continue to spar...I ain�t goin� no where any time soon.

Play it cool

[Cobra]

How about this?

Been doing some serious pondering on this one.

A flat screen iMac can certainly be accomplished at the $1200-1500
range. Very hard for a sub $1000.00 model.

Here is a prediction.

iMac Classic Line:

- 2 machines.
- Priced at $699.00 and $999.00.
- Both have 15" CRT displays
- G3 processors at 400 and 500mhz
- HD's at 10 and 20 GB
- CD-Rom or DVD in low end and DVD/CDR-W drives in high end model.
- 128 MB ram on both
- Both Airport ready
- Rage 128 in both models
- Some cosmetic changes to the case. Maybe a flat CRT? Conservative
coloring on cases.

Enough value added in the high end model to justify the added $300.00
price. Low end model would be popular with schools.

iMac II line:

- 2 machines
- Priced at $1299.00 and $1599.00
- Both have 15" LCD's
- G3 processors at 600 and 700 mhz
- HD's at 30 and 40 GB
- DVD/CDR-W drives in both models
- 128 MB ram on low end and 256 MB on high end
- Both Airport ready
- nVidia GeForce 2 MX on both models
- New, radical case design, of course. Styling cues from newly released
iBooks and TiPB's.

Major hit among consumers. Priced in a similar range that Cube should
have been. Really eliminates the need for the Cube.

Powermac line then starts at $1599.00. Would LOVE to see a PowerMac/15"
LCD bundle for the magic $1999.00 price point but I sort of doubt it.

Hows that?

Cobra

[zigzag]

Originally posted by lee vieira:
<STRONG>

I guess if I told people that they really could have something for nothing, my opinions in this thread might be more popular. But unlike many a politician, I'm just no good at fibbing

--lee</STRONG>

It's a matter of tone, but it's not worth arguing about. If you perceive that everyone just wants something for nothing, so be it. I think the debate has been more elevated than that. Cheers.

[zigzag]

Originally posted by georgius:
<STRONG>
it has been a great piece of kit, heck, it still is a great piece of kit.

</STRONG>

And you say you're not English?

[zigzag]

Cobra, I think your idea makes a lot of sense (others have suggested that scenario as well). I'd prefer to see 2 rather than 3 desktops in the product line, but the Classic iMac would maintain a presence in the sub-$1000 market as lee believes is critical. I would expect the LCD model to have a 14" rather than 15" screen, and the base model to have bare-bone specs (64 MG RAM, 10 GB, etc.) for a little less money, but we're pretty much just speculating at this point anyway.

[georgius]

Originally posted by zigzag:
<STRONG>

And you say you're not English? </STRONG>

I'm American. 16 years of age...from Santa Monica...

...so I'm not English...okay? Even though I do live in England.

Play it cool

[skeedog98]

If you want a flat screen iMac, why not just buy an iBook?

[georgius]

Well...Cobra, some of what you have said does make sense....but essentially it is deeply flawed.

posted 06-28-2001 09:33 AM ��� ���� �� �� ��
------------------------------------------------------------------------
How about this?

Been doing some serious pondering on this one.

A flat screen iMac can certainly be accomplished at the $1200-1500
range. Very hard for a sub $1000.00 model.

Here is a prediction.

iMac Classic Line:

- 2 machines.
- Priced at $699.00 and $999.00.
- Both have 15" CRT displays
- G3 processors at 400 and 500mhz
- HD's at 10 and 20 GB
- CD-Rom or DVD in low end and DVD/CDR-W drives in high end model.
- 128 MB ram on both
- Both Airport ready
- Rage 128 in both models
- Some cosmetic changes to the case. Maybe a flat CRT? Conservative
coloring on cases.

Enough value added in the high end model to justify the added $300.00
price. Low end model would be popular with schools.

The above model...is exactly what we have at the minute. A flat CRT would be a good idea...improve viewing and color accuracy - perhaps this iMac could have similair syling to the old transparent 17-inch Studio Display. But Cobra, man, we've already been there. The iMac classic line is exactly the same - just about - as we have now.

iMac II line:

- 2 machines
- Priced at $1299.00 and $1599.00
- Both have 15" LCD's
- G3 processors at 600 and 700 mhz
- HD's at 30 and 40 GB
- DVD/CDR-W drives in both models
- 128 MB ram on low end and 256 MB on high end
- Both Airport ready
- nVidia GeForce 2 MX on both models
- New, radical case design, of course. Styling cues from newly released
iBooks and TiPB's.

This makes slightly more sense. I like the price range. The Combo drive would have to be slot loading. And i'm serious. I could not ever see the iMac range going back to a tray optical drive. It reallly seems to be so "archaic" now that the iMac has had a slot loading drive for 18 months.

Secondly...all models should ship with 128 MB RAM as minimum. No more and definately no less. Okay...so 256 might be nice in a high end model, but 192 seems to be a much more reasinable figure. This mighyt drive the price up a bit too far, as after an all time low, RAM costs are starting to rise again.

They would never put a GeForce 2 in the iMac. Not yet anyway. A Radeon...maybe. A Rage 128 Pro more like. If you were to put such a powerful graphics card into the "iMac II" and leave the old iMac with a (less powerful) Rage 128, the classic machine would become defunct immidiately, as the consumer would scramble to get the better graphics card.

You HD siza and processor speed seem reasonable enough. But I don't like the styling ideas. iBook white? Titanium iMac? No thank you. As nice as the iBook and Ti look...the syling is everything that makes the iMac. It is menat to be made up of deep frutiy translucent plastics. It has to be made up of deep fruity translucent plastics. Without deep fruity translucent plastics it turns into a PC look-a-like running the Mac OS. It must come in colors. If not...there would be big trouble...or Steve would really have to pull out a new awesome design.

BUT ABOVE ALL, THIS PRODUCT LINE DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE!!!.

If I have said it once...I've said it a billion times...

You cannot split the iMac product line into two parts!

The introduction of just one consumer machine back in 1998 was meant to simplify a HU-UGE product line comprised of 14 products!

By introducing two sections made up of different parts but still called the same name would make things soooo complicated! It just wouldn't happen.

Sorry Cobra. Been there. Done that. Got the t-shirt, seen the film (Pirates of Silicon Valley), read the book (Gil Amelio's "My 500 Days at Apple").

And the book says it all: complicated product lines don't work!!!!

Play it cool

[dakiller]

How about this?

SJ announces LCD-iMac next month but ships it at November!

It took a pretty long time for PowerbookG4 and Geforce3 to be shipped, so why not LCD-iMac??

And by November,-end of 2001 that is- LCD price might drop further..
(Oh yeah, I've also read that article saying LCD's will rise.)

And Apple could sell current CRT-iMac at price like $499 and $699 till November.

Just one of my two-cents.

[Loco Engr]

Retro...




For clarification, the brown ends are intended to be natural wood while the rest is pure 'cubism' style.

[ 06-28-2001: Message edited by: Loco Engr ]

[georgius]

...maybe not Loco...

Play it cool

[zigzag]

Originally posted by georgius:
<STRONG>

...so I'm not English...okay?

</STRONG>

For goodness' sake, I was just kidding - I thought it was funny that you would take pains to point out that you weren't English while using the phrase "piece of kit", which is strictly English vernacular. Don't worry about it - I like the English. London is my favorite city.

[Cobra]

Georgius,

Why not have a GeForce 2 MX in the iMac. Lets face it. The Rage 128 is WAY out of date. Hell, the damn thing in intro'd in the B&W G3 towers in Jan. 1999. Came out on the PC in August of 1998 I believe. Thats close to 3 YEARS ago.

Hell, thats even worse that where we are at on the G4 processor speeds. A GeForce MX 2 chip ain't that much now. Heck, its even getting a bit long-in-the-tooth.

Yeah, the iMac Classic specs are similar to what there is now but they are cheaper.

But, it looks like you and Lee are content with your 15" CRT screens so I won't argue the point.

Latter,

Cobra

[ 06-28-2001: Message edited by: Cobra ]