Apple Updates iMacs and eMacs

applematters writes "Apple has updated the iMacs, they are faster and incorporate AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth. There are two models, the 15-inch and 17-inch. For good measure the eMac has also been updated, and you can get it brand new for under a thousand bucks. Not bad."

Comments

Slight correction

[Anonymous Codger]

The eMacs have not been updated, only reduced in price. I'm not complaining - I may finally break down and order one at the new price

End of the G4?

[PsiFireWhite]

With the reduced pricing on the G4s lately it makes me wonder if Apple has finally picked a new flagship chip to use coming soon. It makes sense to get rid of as many G4s in stock if this is the case, and with the recent drops on the eMacs it's even more aparent.

All in all it seems a wise move to start the price dropping now when it is most needed. Hopefully an eMac that's both Classic and OS X bootable for under 1000 will be very appealing to schools. Apple needs to start clawing back it's Educational market share.

Re:End of the G4?

[Twirlip of the Mists]

With the reduced pricing on the G4s lately it makes me wonder if Apple has finally picked a new flagship chip to use coming soon.

Uh... no. There is talk about the PowerPC 970, but it's at least 6 months away from being available for testing, much less for production.

The price cuts are for one reason and one reason only: Apple wants to move more units. Last quarter was more or less a break-even for Apple, and the pace of sales has slowed as the economy has gotten steadily worse over the past two years. So Apple has revised (nearly) every product in the line over the past month, and is cutting prices across the low end to encourage people who were sitting on the fence to buy now.

Re:End of the G4?

[gsfprez]

no. but it sure is a clear sign that its the end of the G3. When the iBook is updated with a G4 later this year - that will be the end of non-AltiVec Macs.

I wonder how much longer apps/Mac OS X will support non-G4 machines.

i'm glad i concidered my iBook basically a "use, abuse, throw away" machine when i bought it...

Re:End of the G4?

[King Babar]

Uh... no. There is talk about the PowerPC 970, but it's at least 6 months away from being available for testing, much less for production.

You're right in that I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this chip, but I think you're being a bit pessimistic about the timing of its arrival. This page on the PowerPC 970 is decently informative and recent. It suggests sampling will start ti happen in the second quarter of 2003, and volume production will begin in the second half of 2003. Has the schedule already slipped this far? My impression was that IBM doesn't like to let these things slide.

There's no doubt that 2003 could be a pretty tricky year for Apple, but I think I like their roadmap leading to January 2004 *much* better than any other hardware vendor out there. Right now, Apple is basically in a position where they will make a little bit of money, and when their high-end hardware is actually really fast again...I don't think their sales are likely to go down.

Post Tramatic Stress!

[jptechnical]

I used to sell Apples and now is the time all the stores freak out about overstock. If you are looking for a good deal, and you don't mind being a little behind the curve, hit some of your smaller shops and you can really save some money.

The compulsary...

[Soul-Burn666]

eMacs?

I prefer Vi!

(Yes, I know what they meant)

Not bad? Try really bad

[X_Caffeine]

There was one point in the last decade where more Macintoshes were being sold to Windows users than people who already owned Macs. That was when the iMac was first introduced, at a $1000 price point. For the first time, a low-end Mac cost as much as a low-end PC, and buyers flocked to them.

Today a low-end PC can be had for ~$500 (less if you're willing to go with Lindows). If Apple really wants "switchers," they need to have a low-end machine for $500. The eMac just isn't affordable enough. (and there's no doubt in my mind that 700mhz G3 iMacs, which are still available for $800, could be sold profitably for about $500)

btw, the low-end eMacs are still shipping with 128mb RAM. Has anyone here tried running Jag with 256mb? What's another 128mb SDR cost, $20?

Re:Not bad? Try really bad

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Of course they have low-end machines -- the 700mhz iMac is low-end relative to the dual-proc 1.4ghz G4.

Yes, the iMac is relatively inferior to the G4. But the iMac is not a low-end computer. It has built-in FireWire, wireless networking, and one of the best flat-panel displays I've ever seen, just to name three things. The most bare-bones, stripped-down computer Apple sells is equivalent to everybody else's mid-range machines.

and those Airport antennas? it's just a cable whip, it couldn't cost more than a couple bucks

Then why doesn't anybody else include them?

It's ridiculous for them to be shipping machines with 256mb, even on their low end.

Oh, great. Yet another Monday-morning CEO. Tell you what. When you start your computer company, you can ship machines with as much RAM as you like. Until then, kindly hush up.

(Incidentally, everybody knows that Apple sells computers with only the minimum amount of RAM because everybody buys less expensive third-party RAM to put in them. If Apple sold their machines with more RAM, Monday-morning CEO's like yourself would just bitch that you're being forced to buy overpriced memory. Yawn.)

Re:Who cares?

[Draoi]

Apple sucks. It's not like they support Open Source.

*sigh* - trolling, I know ...

http://publicsource.apple.com

"We think Open Source is great!" - Steve Jobs

Interesting Note:

[Bob Wehadababyitsabo]

The top-end CRT iMac is $950 for a 600MHz G3 with a CD-ROM. For $50 more, you get the bottom end eMac, which is a 700MHz G4 with a Combo drive (not to mention the 17", 1280x960 display). Why doesn't Apple cut the G3 iMac's price to, say, $500? They'd move more units, and have a good bottom of the line machine for cheap.

These eMacs are great for some people

[stefanlasiewski]

My non-computer-literate godmother just bought one of these $800 eMacs for her 10 year old daughter.

It's perfect for her: It's got MS Office & Claris(?) Office for writing papers, a DVD player for watching movies, and her mom can go out and get some decent educational software at a variety of computer stores.

They have a DSL connection and one Power Mac already. We went out and bought a LinkSys Cable/DSL router for $50 at CompUSA, came home, fiddled with some ethernet wire, changed some settings, and boom: Two computers, a networked house, & shared printers.

Running these things on Linux just isn't practical for a 10 year old with an artist Mom. They have better things to do then download and install new libraries to get Gnome2.2 to compile.

Now that I did the initial setup for them, I'm quite confident that my godmother and godsister can deal with 95% of their computer problems without my help.

Look, I'm a big Linux fan, and have been using RH & Debian for about 5 years, but throwing any Linux on a cheap PC and expecting my godmother do simple things like hook up her Palm organizer or installing updates is unrealistic.

Re:Get something useful

[TonyMillion]

why do we need a WIN32 compatibility layer, you can get roughly the same effect by randomly dragging a piece of copper wire across the main circuit board.

You also avoid those nasty licencing issues.