[Vinnie_O_Toole]

Hello everyone I'm new to this forum but i've been visiting it a lot so here it is:

I've been saving money all winter and spring to buy an iMac 17" 1ghz with 768mb of ram and I was wondering if it would be logical from Apple to update the iMac in july at the next Keynote because nothing would piss me off more than knowing that 1 month after I bought my new computer a new faster one would be released.

If you follow Apple line of conduct for the past year since the release of the first FP iMac we can see that it has been updated every sixth month (on every keynote) so it would be logical to see an update on july but then again there is the BIG PPC970 that might take all the show ...

So tell me wether or not I should wait in july to buy my computer ?

[bstieritz]

Originally posted by Vinnie_O_Toole:
Hello everyone I'm new to this forum but i've been visiting it a lot so here it is:

I've been saving money all winter and spring to buy an iMac 17" 1ghz with 768mb of ram and I was wondering if it would be logical from Apple to update the iMac in july at the next Keynote because nothing would piss me off more than knowing that 1 month after I bought my new computer a new faster one would be released.

If you follow Apple line of conduct for the past year since the release of the first FP iMac we can see that it has been updated every sixth month (on every keynote) so it would be logical to see an update on july but then again there is the BIG PPC970 that might take all the show ...

So tell me wether or not I should wait in july to buy my computer ?

I racked my brain, too before buying my new 1ghz mac a week ago . . . even after hearing that an update was imminent for summer or fall.

Too bad I'm all about the instant gratification. Buy it now if it'll make you happy (carpe diem, baby).

[Paul Stephen C.]

I waited for ages for the IGHz 17" iMac - it didn't come at the expected keynote, but 2/3 months later.

From what I've read, Steve is trying to get away from predictable hardware upgrades at keynotes, more towards new software products, precisely because people were waiting for the 6 month cycle before spending their cash. If this becomes a predictable pattern, then you can imagine the marketing problems Apple face when trying to sell computers within 2/3 months of the next Steve Jobs big revelation.

The 17" Ultimate (full Apple Ram) iMac is the best computer you can buy if you want a machine for all imaginable home uses. The iLife software is incredible for music, photos, movies,DVDs, internet etc. I'm skimming over the possiblities, but to give an example, I've just preserved a whole lot of treasured cassette tapes and vinyl 45s forever with the future intention of digitally "fixing" hiss, crackle etc.

The flat screen display is second to none, and ease of use unbeatable. If you want a bargain Mac, get the 1GHz eMac.

If you want it now, buy it now.

If you want it later, buy it later.

I'm enjoying mine now!


Paul

[brucewayne]

I too have been saving my pennies for a 17" FP. As well, I've been troubled by the chance that an update might be coming in July.

However, my problem is that I've been planning on BUYING the baby in July. So...if an upgrade is announced, I'll have to decide if the new features are worth it, whether the price for the now obsolete one has dropped, and most important...WHEN will they be available in Canada. If it's just a minor speed bump, or I have to wait a couple of months, then screw it...I'll buy the "old" one.

This is kinda what happened to me when I bought my present tray-loading iMac. The day I went in to buy was the day that Jobs announced the slot-loaders with Firewire. At the time, I had no need for Firewire, and the price of the tray-loader had dropped $400. It was a no-brainer. (But who would would have thought that 4 years later that I'd be getting into making iMovies, etc?)

And, while I was - and still am - happy with my decision, it's bothered my the last couple of years that I didn't have the Firewire choice...you know...bootable from an external drive, target drive for transfering files, faster burner, etc.

So this time...well...we'll have to see if I can correctly anticipate future technologies that haven't been created yet and weigh them against my own personal future needs that I don't even know about.

Hmmm...might take a few beers.

[slider]

It's always a shot. Personally I am recommending to my friends to wait until after July, I am expecting at least a price drop, and probably minor processor updates. There is a hole jumping for 1299 to 1799, that is a big jump, I think we'll see it filled in some.

[meducus]

I too find myself in this predicament. I will have the $$ to buy a 17 inch imac in a few weeks...but an update must surely be close. In Particular the 15 inch version is looking very average (specs wise) at the moment and must be updated very soon - which means the 17 should also get some kind of boost.

But I am in Australia and some people I know have waited over a month to get their 17 inch imacs (weird that ibooks arive in less than a week). So even if a new is announced if the last 17inch is anything to go by it could still be another 2 months before actually getting it.

By the way I think it is freekin rediculous that any computer company could think it reasonable to allow a customer to wait for over a month (or even 2!) to get a computer that is advertised as available.

[Vinnie_O_Toole]

Thanks everyone for the Feedback

I think I'm going to buy my computer as predicted in two weeks

[bstieritz]

Originally posted by Vinnie_O_Toole:
Thanks everyone for the Feedback

I think I'm going to buy my computer as predicted in two weeks

Vinnie . . . you're doing the right thing. You'll be wishing you had if you hadn't and, unfortunetly, you'll wish you hadn't when the "next big thing" comes out . . . but, that's half the fun, isn't it ?!?!?

Have fun with your new machine.

[beb]

I got my 15" 800Mhz iMac in May of 2001. It replaced my 450Mhz smurftower which replaced my 5400.

I want my next iMac to have at least a 970 chip in it. I don't really know when they'll release it, but I do know that it'll be a better computer than any G4 based mac. An 18" screen would be nice too.

[Commodus]

If I were in this position, I'd either buy right away (which is quite reasonable) or else hold off until the end of July - past the MacWorld expo.

One interesting thought that has been discussed is that if Apple does release PPC 970 PowerMacs in the summer (between WWDC and the MacWorld expo), they may finally be able to give the iMac a more substantial speed upgrade. The wild fantasy situation is that the iMac either gets a PPC 970 (not as likely) or that it gets the current top-end G4 speeds. I'm sure that it would be nice to have a 1.42 GHz iMac in 2003!

However, that is definitely the mother of all "ifs." Unless performance is absolutely critical, I'd just buy when it's convenient.

[kooBi]

I'm also saving to buy the 17" iMac, based on a promise I made to myself way back that as soon as the iMac hit 1GHz, I'd buy one. I'm aiming for the so-called 'ultimate' btw.

Because I buy on 3 year cycles now (used to be 1 year cycles :sniff: ) waiting a couple of months won't make much difference, and pretty much anything would beat a graphite iBook SE

Having said that, I too live in Australia, and I think it's worse in the west, where you can wait for 3 months before seeing your machine. That's a long time to have to wait, anxious that another update could come out soon, but hopefully there'd be a rebate on some of the cash

Sometimes you wonder if the suppliers are still awake!



On the whole I agree with the carpe diem baby sentiment expressed above. Buy now, enjoy now (sulk later).

Cheers.

[Eug]

How about an update Aug. 15? That's the iMac's 5th anniversary. We're already over 6 months from the last iMac update.

I suspect it's a G4 7457 chip availability issue, which is also holding back the PowerBooks...

[Nebrie]

I don't think so. Unlike the powerbooks which are beginning to vanish, vendors are fully stocked with the 17" iMac. I wonder if they are going to do a once a year update thing like last year.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Nebrie:
I don't think so. Unlike the powerbooks which are beginning to vanish, vendors are fully stocked with the 17" iMac. I wonder if they are going to do a once a year update thing like last year.

I don't hope so, but it could actually be.

What does the iMac need? Let's see...

- USB2? Yes, definitely.
- FW800? Would be nice, but maybe Apple would like to have it be a "pro-feature" for some time
- Faster GPU? Sure. Rather possible as well.
- Faster Bus? 166MHz? Would be nice. But, will it happen? Highly questionable if Apple wants to lower the price and keep the margins up.
- Screens? Well, maybe the 15" could be dropped in favor of having two 17" models. One as consumer model and one as pro-sumer model maybe... It would also be nice to drop the 15" model to help distinguish the classy iMac from the cheaper eMac.

But all in all these are not huge upgrades. So, assuming the 7457 is not ready yet and the current 7455 are just too hot to have in an iMac at 1.25GHz (the max btw since the G4 PowerMacs can't be slower [in Apple's opinion] than the iMac), what should Apple do?

Since they could never keep the clock at 1GHz and just offer the above upgrades to constitute a new iMac I suppose the current models are here to stay for another while.

If the 7457 is ready for prime time on the other hand they could release higher clocked iMacs with the above upgrades and still keep the temperature low and thus the iMac quiet.

But again, it doesn't look like they could do more than 1.25GHz G4s because the G4 PowerMacs are stuck there. If we would still have a 1.42GHz G4 PowerMac the new iMacs could have been clocked faster...


Therefore, my prediction is:
The iMac is here to stay until the 7457 can ship at high volume. I'd expect we'll see that after we see the 7457 ship in all PowerBooks.
Once they ship I'd expect something like: 17" TFT, 1.25GHz 7457 running on a 133/266 DDR board, Radeon 9000 or GF4Ti, SuperDrive, 256MB RAM, 100GB HD, APX, BT, USB2 and FW400. Price point at about $1749.

[BrunoBruin]

Originally posted by Simon:
But all in all these are not huge upgrades.

Nope, they're all reasonable. The iMac (well, the 17 anyway) really only needs a speed bump and maybe a price drop. They already support Airport Extreme and BT, and have a 64MB GPU (don't expect a 128MB card in this model any time soon). We just got a bunch of them in my office and they are sweet machines.

I think they should keep the 15-inch screen, at a lower price point - screen size is a nice distinguishing feature for shoppers - but it needs the internal updates of the 17.

[StiZeven]

I hate Apple's idea of a 'Home User' versus a 'Pro User'. As far as I am concerned, a 'Home User' needs powerful GPUs (graphics, games) as well as huge HDs (mp3s, etc.) just like 'Pro Users' and sometimes more so. Why they have this need to 'dummy down' the iMac line is simply maddening. For the $2500 high-end their INDEED should be a 128MB GPU, but we are so conditioned to the Apple way of thinking that we think it's unheard of when really, even a 128MB GeForce Ti is quite outdated today. The next iMac update should include the following:

1.25GHz G4 or better (WITH the 1MB Cache)
120GB 7200RPM Hard Drive (with 8MB Cache)
128MB more powerful ATI or nVidia GPU
USB 2.0
Higher Screen Resolution

Call this the High-End, charge $2500-2700 and call it a day. Keep the 'dumbed down' version at $1999 for those who don't need or want these specs. Apple tends to offer extremes in configuration with minimal customization. From a marketing stand point, I guess if they would release an iMac with the above specs on the 15th (or sometime soon), I am sure many will go for the 'new iMac' over the horrendously priced and typically delayed G5 Tower. Then again, there is always the G4 PowerMac with the above available specs so I am not sure why Apple is limiting the features of the iMac.

[Simon]

Originally posted by StiZeven:
Why they have this need to 'dummy down' the iMac line is simply maddening. For the $2500 high-end their INDEED should be a 128MB GPU, but we are so conditioned to the Apple way of thinking that we think it's unheard of when really, even a 128MB GeForce Ti is quite outdated today. The next iMac update should include the following

[snip]

Call this the High-End, charge $2500-2700 and call it a day. Keep the 'dumbed down' version at $1999 for those who don't need or want these specs. Apple tends to offer extremes in configuration with minimal customization. From a marketing stand point, I guess if they would release an iMac with the above specs on the 15th (or sometime soon), I am sure many will go for the 'new iMac' over the horrendously priced and typically delayed G5 Tower. Then again, there is always the G4 PowerMac with the above available specs so I am not sure why Apple is limiting the features of the iMac.

I am afraid you do not understand their scheme.

There is no such thing as a $2500 iMac. Basically there is a $1299 and a $1799 model and then (as always with Apple) there is a max'ed RAM/HD version which is ridiculously priced so only an idiot would buy it.

Apple does not offer a non-pro Mac at $2500. No way. That's the kind of money they want to sell you a PowerMac for.

You see, your specs are nice and we would all like that, but Apple doesn't offer them because they're afraid that in such a case nobody would buy the PowerMac (or at least the lower PowerMacs) anymore.

If Apple would indeed sell an iMac for $2500 it would have to be so insanely great, that there would really be almost no reason to buy a 1.6GHz G5. And Apple hates to stack them up in the channel. They prefer selling them.

The way Apple sees it, the iMac is middle class. It doesn't get as much goodies as the PowerMac (like your 128MB graphics cards and huge HDs), but it gets more advanced stuff than the bottom of the line (like G4 instead of G3, TFT instead of CRT).

So, to cut it short, Apple designes the iMac not to please us iMac-lovers most, but to maximize its profit selling Macs in general. That's why "your iMac" doesn't exist even though I'm sure we would all like it.

[Simon]

Originally posted by StiZeven:
Apple tends to offer extremes in configuration with minimal customization.

I think you have an excellent point here.

Apple pre-configures much too much. Their "low-end" configs for every single product line aren't stripped down enough and their max'ed out machines are much too expensive.

Maybe this has to do with the fact that Apple wants the whole buying experience to be perfect and completely hassle-free, i.e. you can only buy complete systems (however, I can't see how the 128MB RAM base can be called complete with Jaguar, but whatever...).

IMHO Apple should be more like Dell when it comes to their online store. Offer stripped nbases and let users BTO as much as possible. RAM, HD, graphics card, APX, BT, you name it: Make it all BTO and offer a lot of possibilities to choose from. This is the online-store, it's all about being able to configure.

Use the pre-configured models to stock the dealers and shops.

Make it clear that the user has the choice: Go to a shop and have a pre-configured ready-to-go model in ten minutes with no waiting. Or, go to the AppleStore on the web, configure everything the way you want, but put up with a one or two week delay for building and shipping.

I think this would give customers much more freedom. The freaks get it their way with all their custom gimmicks, but Joe Sixpack can still get a working Mac with no hassle and w/o having to really know something about computers.

[ChadC]

well, I didn't wait the extra month or so to buy my Quicksilver G4(I bought in the middle of Dec. '02 when you could only but it w/ Education discount). If I woulda waited till after the keynote I would have at least a 1ghz MDD with a combo drive and better graphics card for the same price that was about $600 more at the time when I bought mine. But, I don't mind, because there's no sense worrying if you can't do anything about it! And, for that extra month I enjoyed mine.

-Chad

[brucewayne]

Well...I picked up my 1Ghz 17" baby last week and I'm glad I didn't wait.

I've got it networked with my "old" 333Mhz tray loader, and I can't believe the difference. I find it hard to go back and forth between the two as I find the older one's screen is so small and the resolution looks chunky.

However, I'm finding it hard to get my two scanners to work on the new one (the Canon requires Photoshop 7 to work natively (a bit out of my pricerange) and even though I've downloaded the updates for my Epson, it still won't work in OSX. So I have to use the older one to scan. I'm sure eventually I'll get it worked out, or I cold install the apps in OS9, but it's just as easy to lean over to the other beast, do the scans, then send them over via the network.

Aside for the sscanner thing, there's not a thing I would change, and can't think of what they could come up within the next five years that's make me abandon this thing,

[Anand]

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

I will stick with my original 15 inch FP iMac untill Spring of 2005. Will the iMac have a G5 by then?

[99RedSi]

Awesome!!! I'm glad I waited . Although I'm waiting to get a new 17" FP iMac until January .

[Manimac]

I've been waiting for an iMac update to officially switch to a Mac. I hope this is true, but not sure it was worth waiting for. I was hoping for FW800 or a larger hard drive or price cut. Either way I hope to join the club soon!

[StiZeven]

If true, this is a pathetic upgrade. Why would you limit the specs on a machine that you can not upgrade? Give it the most you can, it's not like components with double the specs that are being offered are even remotely expensive.

A 64MB Graphics Card? No 1MB Cache? Only 80GB hard drives? Apple must think that 'Home Users' are idiots who just play with email and iPhoto all day with no need for power or spacious storage. If you want a little more power I guess they want you to blow 3k on a 'PowerMac' with no monitor. The eMac is the low end, the iMac should be middle-ground, but with these specs the difference compared to the PowerMac models are just way too extreme.

I can't understand Apple expects to gain 'switchers' when they are offering the weakest specs in the business at a higher price. Aside from the G4 which they have no control over, these specs are very 2 years ago to the average PC user. One would think that Apple would offer better components in areas where they CAN improve performance (like video, HD, etc.) to compensate for lack of processing power.

Now that the G5s are out, there is no need to omit the 1MB cache on the iMac either. All this and a demoted keyboard and mouse too. The 'Pro' versions were lacking as it were, these new offerings just don't make sense.

Lets just hope these specs are nothing but safe guesses. If not, I honestly don't know what Apple is thinking and how they plan on gaining market share.