Slashdot Mirror
17-inch flat-Panel iMac Dead
EnlightenmentFan writes "Apple plans to stop production in June of the iMac with flat-panel 17-inch display, according to this article at Asian tech-news site Digitimes. As with the now-history 15" flat-panel iMac, sales started strong but stalled once the early-adopter crowd had bought in. Probably-not-unrelated story (also posted today): Chungwha Picture Tubes is boosting the price of its 17-inch LCD monitor panels."
So far as I can figure, there are two types of people who bought this thing. The first group is predictible and, as such, irrelevant: Mac die-hards who would buy the latest-and-greatest regardless.
Then, there's the people living in this posh little urban apartments who bought it because it'd look cool on their Britanny Computer Desk from Crate & Barrel. These people are a good market, because they have too much money and they use it to buy things to make them seem hip. This may be a slightly down time for these people, but they're still around and you can bet your bottom dollar they'll be back in force the second the economy upticks.
For a little while, it really looked as if that was the new key market for these iMacs -- the designer crowd. But the problem with selling to the designer crowd is that if you don't have something *different* every six months or so, you've destroyed the whole point of the attraction. Once grandmas in the Midwest start getting these things on their desk, it's time to move on.
Well, this thing's overstayed it's time, and there's still no heir apparent. C'mon, Jobs -- you decided on the target market. Start selling.
Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
.....of getting things wrong.
Actually the last quarter financials did not imply the LCD iMacs were quite so dead in the water. Most of Apple's $$$ recently has been from 10.2, and it is the G4 towers that have really not been selling as well as they should be. Everything else was steady. The reason Apple's profits were not as nice as some people would want (even in this market) was due to a lot of cash going to opening stores and in the buying a few software companies out.
It's possible Apple is switching to another plant. At one point Apple invested a lot of $$$$ in some LCD manufacturing plant, though i forget which one. That was why they did better in the LCD shortages than some other manufacturers. They traditionally have invested in some of the plants that produce their parts, and that seems to give them a bit of leverage when parts get tight and i guess helps them when they have their demands of secret products and quick production changes.
Somebody else would know better, but is the main Apple LCD supplying plant, or were they using it to get the initial supplies up to match initial demand? They have done that in the past too.
MacWorld Keynote is next week, i assume *something* will change there and maybe in the few weeks following. Last year the G4 towers were bumped to 1GHz in a no-press website update about 3 weeks after MacWorld SF.
Speaking as someone who is posting this from a G4 Cube, it wasn't and isn't that great a machine. All it has for a video connector in the back is an ADC connector
Hmm, odd. Maybe you should look again at this supposed cube you are posting from. All G4 Cubes came from the factory with an ATI Rage 128 with ADC and VGA ports, an ATI Radeon with the same ports, or a GeForce 2 MX with the same ports.
The G4 Cube was an awesome machine. It was nearly as powerful as the high end desktops, but also dead silent. The PC industry is now making machines that try to fit the market of small, powerful, and quiet with Shuttle boxes and such. The Cube died because Apple could not price the thing properly to sell, and never marketed it's main advantages. It didn't die due to any technical fault.
And returning to an On Topic discussion, I see no reason to kill the 17 inch iMac. Talking to a local Apple Reseller, it's still selling like hotcakes. It's the only model in the iMac lineup to offer DVD burning, and more and more people are getting into this.
But who wants an iMac when you can get a Dual G4 with one of those really pretty cinema displays
People without $6,000 to throw down, you idiot.
I make around $20,000 a year and I needed a new computer. I took out a loan and bought a midrange flatpanel iMac and I love it. I would've LOVED a 23" cinema display, but guess what? I couldn't afford one even with years of saving. I thought about spending the extra cash and get a tower but the form-factor of the iMac is so unassuming and the screen so wonderfully designed I can't believe I even thought about a tower. I also know myself and know that I'd much rather buy a new computer in 4 years than keep upgrading the tower. Ok, realistically if they had a cheaper 17"er I would've bought it, but I got my iMac for $1,350. Throw a 10 GB iPod in there and it's STILL cheaper than the cheapest tower/monitor combo, even with an education discount on the pre-windtunnel models.
So in short: you're either a troll or spoiled, and either way you need a serious dose of reality. Apparently you don't realise how hard money is to come by these days.
Triv
that's funny, I bought FOUR in the last 9 months.. a TiBook and G4 dual for home, a G4 for work, and a 17" iMac for my GF for xMas.
I'm going ot go out on a limb and say two things:
1. You have never USED a Mac running OS X (and you probably wouldn't know what to do with a shell, Apache, MySQL, a good GUI, etc anyway)
2. You have never actually built a box (or even better, bought one from Dell, Gateway, etc.) that was FEATURE EXACT and *then* made your "overpriced" out-your-ass comments. Given you cna't compare processor speeds per say (assume 1.5x to 2x speed of G4 == speed of Intel) go ahead. Make sure you include OS, basic productivity SW and so on.
God I hate moronic zealots (both PeeCee *and* Mac) it's fine to dislike somehing based on KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE... but fukcing-a 99% of the people who say "Macs suck, they are overpriced and blah blah blah" have never priced or USED one!!!!
OK, my rant for 2003 is done.
Department of Homeland Security: Removing the rights real patriots fought and died for since 2001
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
A few things:
You have a $200 walmart pc that will still have shaky support for a wide variety of devices. There will definately not be any of this plug and play nonsense.
Consumers will continue to buy macs just as they do BMWs or Mercedes - because they're willing to pay more money for something better. Apple will never nose out the Wintel duopoly, but it will always (hopefully) have a following of loyal users. I should know, I bought my second Tibook this year. My old one I sold to my friend to replace his iBook.
I've had, literally, dozens of x86 servers at home and have over the past 10 years. So, it's not that I don't know what cheap is. True, lets go down and buy the newest fastest video card or lets get some cheap drives and upgrade to raid. However tho, now I just want something portable that works.
The DVD playback on a Tibook has no equal. AND, since I can make movies and DVDs on my Tibook, the Fujitsu equivalent - the Celcius - (which is the only x86 laptop company I'd ever consider buying from after constant crap from Dell, Compaq, HP), doesn't even have DVD burning. But it does have 1/2 the ram costs $600 more. Laptops vs. desktops are different; true. But Apple designs machines, not commodities. Wintel is all about commodities. And there you have it.
Do not compare an iMac to a Dell workstation. That's not what I was doing. I was comparing it to a PowerMac G4, which is what it takes to get real work done.
... oh but it's fast too like Windows XP.
No it doesn't have an LCD. LCDs can not compare to a Trinitron CRT monitor. The quality of his monitor is infinitely better than an LCD of the same display (20" or better) and a fraction of the price. I would call a 21" flat CRT Trinitron at $700 and higher output a better buy than the leading Sony 20" LCD for $2,000 - wouldn't you?
I'm not encouraging anyone to shell out money for a DVD writer. If that were the case I would get a PowerMac, not an iMac.
No they're not using a Unix-based OS like Mac OS X. He's using Windows XP, which blows OS X out of the water. I don't wish to discuss this with anyone who has not used both operating systems for a prolonged time in a working environement on quality hardware. But if I wanted a UNIX operating system on my Dell I would probably run Mandrake 9. It's pretty, just like OS X
No it does not make a lot of racket with its two fans. The damn 17" iMac that sits on my boss's desk makes a lot of racket with its fan and unballanced DVD drive though. It does, however make a lot of racket with its Soundblaster Live audio and speakers. Lets see you do that with your iMac.
How about plugging a SCSI device into your iMac. Or an additional hard drive or CD/DVD drive. What about a second monitor? Oh, I guess you're shit out of luck.
I find it interesting how you say I've victimized my employee when he came to me and asked that I configure a comparable new Dell to a new PowerMac. He realized that the Dell was over a thousand dollars cheaper, had longer hardware support and life-span, and could communicate with other computers and the world much more effeciently.
Arguing on Slashdot is as good as pissing into the wind - I don't know why I do it. On this particular topic no one has a voice until they've played with both options in a high-end configuration doing high-end work loads. I have and for me Windows XP on a loaded Dell absolutely smokes OS X on a loaded PowerMac. And it does it at a bit of a cost break. If you're playing at home or running a business by yourself, spend your money however you want. When you work for someone that is trying to turn a profit in the real world you go with the best bang for the buck - for us that's XP on a Dell.
No sig for you. YOU GET NO SIG!
Too bad you're serious or this would be +5 Funny.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.