Slashdot Mirror
Think Secret Predicts Sub-$500 Headless Mac
eadint writes "I have just read an article posted on Think Secret that discusses a
confirmed $499
Apple box sans monitor. According to the article, this has been
under development for almost one year and may be available towards the
end of 2005Q1. The system is rumored to be based on a G4 with 256MB
of RAM , 40-80GB HD with a combo drive (sorry, no SuperDrive). Although Apple has stated in the past that they have no motivation to
compete in the sub-$600 PC market, this system was based on polls showing that more people would buy it after initial exposure
to the iPod." "Confirmed" seems a strong word, but I hope this is more than wishful thinking.
I've never bought an Apple computer because the prices are too high to be an impulse purchase. At $500, though, I would pick one up along with a $50 keyboard/monitor switch and start playing around with it.
Plus, at $500, geeks can afford to buy it and find out if it's easy to get their work done on it. The easier it is to switch my day-to-day work over gradually to an Apple, the more likely I'd be to do it. I'm sure I'll have a couple/few apps that I have to run on Windows, but if you put them both on my desk and let me toy with both, I bet I'd be more likely to run my MS-only stuff on a virtual machine.
Could I get a $500 used Mac with a CRT monitor? Sure, but who wants that big bulky thing around? Instead, give me something I can use with a USB KVM switch, and then I can explore it on my own pace.
What's your damage, Heather?
I have asked for such a Mac for years... since they discontinued the cube...
I think it'd be a great decision... lets see how much it canablizes on Power Macs though.
Face it, geeks know the power of OSX but Apple hasn't done a great job of selling why a Mac today is differnet from the Macs of yesteryear. People either have ancidotal stories of how Macs don't play nice with Windows (which was never really true) or they have experiences with Mac-snobs or anti-Mac-snobs that have put them off even giving it a chance.
I recommended we look at replacing some of our desktop machines with eMacs or iMacs as a trial last year and senior management looked at me like I was nuts. "But...But...it's not a Dell! And it Doesn't-Run-Windows(tm)! How will anyone get any work done?"
It's harder to convince senior management to put out $20,000 for a ten box trial, but $5000 is much more palatable
So go Apple! Build your boxes; they'll sell like hotcakes (especially if you make a $700 headless mac / iPod bundle).
The biggest selling point is obviously security. EVERY average Joe computer user I know is compromised with spyware and viruses (especially those with kids). I tell everyone who'll listen to buy a Mac when they're looking for a new PC, because it'll actually work after two weeks of use. It's nice to see that Apple might actually have something affordable for these folks.
www.lonseidman.com
- with
a monitor for $499. On ebay you can find some pretty nice used machines for under $100.Over $1000 these days is where you can find some really nice machines. But $1000 is no longer the entry point. If you were someone buying your first computer, would you want to plunge right in to a $1000+ Macintosh, or go for a sub $500 PC?
It took long enough for Apple to see this, but they would have to be stupid to ignore it forever. It makes perfect sense to offer an entry point into Apple at the sub-$500 mark. And with the massive amount of cashflow they are getting from the overpriced iPod, they can certainly afford to cut their margins a bit on the low end in order to get the "apple" brand into the hands of the PC using public.
I never really pay much attention to apples, but I love competition in the marketplace, so I hope this is true.
But if you want to use it for office work or internet surfing, it's hard to see why you'd want or need PCI anyway.
It's funny, one thing I remember from WWDC this year was one of the sessions that attempted to debunk the myths about Apple Enterprise Computing - one big one was "It'll be too difficult to train out users on different software"
The next slide simply showed a class of 4-to-5 year olds sitting on the floor of a classroom learning how to use some new Macs, they all looked like they were having a great time.
The implication was very clear - either your employees are less capable than the average four-year old, or it's going to be a breeze to train them.
More seriously though, the whole training thing is a bit of a myth in itself - Microsoft has made a habit out of taking something they see on the Apple platform (in terms of GUI innovation) and breaking it just enough to make sure it doesn't look like a complete rip-off of the original. The consequence that I have found in training PC users to use OS X, is that they already understand how a feature is supposed to work except that in OS X, it actually WORKS like they expect it to finally.
This sig has been deprecated.
AARRARARARGH GOD!!!!!!!!!
I do not believe it.
Apple does the unthinkable - something they have CATAGORICALLY STATED was something they had no interest in, Something that has been asked of them for years, Something that Slashdot users are especially good at complaining about.
They finally release a sub-$500 Mac.
What is the Slashdot response?
"Meh, well it's cheaper but you know... I can get a cheaper box from WalMart so blah blah blah"
Whinypants.
This sig has been deprecated.
You want to run FCP and Motion, a suite of programs that runs 1300 bucks, but you won't spend more than 500 for the hardware to run it on?!?
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
For 500 dollars, without a monitor, you can do a lot of damage. I highly doubt Apple would put out a POS if it's being aimed squarely at those customers who are Apple-curious but haven't made the switch yet. That's probably the last crowd they'd want to turn off, and it's conceivable that Apple is willing to make a low profit margin on this one to penetrate the market. Their position is excellent... iPod popularity and Apple-awareness are pretty outstanding right now, this cheap Mac could probably be the key to moving these people over to Macs. I doubt Apple will make this computer junk (which wouldn't be conducive to their trackrecord lately anyhow).
500 dollars isn't cheap-o. I'd guess it'll basically be an iBook in a desktop, which can't cost that much.
Don't underestimate how important Apple might view this computer for their business.
Are you for real?
Why don't you let Apple release a 64-bit OS before you declare the 32-bit G4 and these new switchers "stuck with limited software choices". This is a freaking entry level Mac, not some pro-media editing workstation. It is for people who want to surf, email, IM, listen to music, and open a Word or Excel doc from work. What do they need 64-bit computing for in 2004?
Yeah, it will leave "headless switchers in the dust eventually", but so will a top of the line Apple, or for that matter any PC purchased today. That's just the marketspace.
I am using a 1st generation 400Mhz G4 PowerBook at home and while I wish it had a few of the bells and whistles of a newer system, this thing is totally capable for the tasks i described above. That said, it is my opnionion that the system described by ThinkSecret will not leave any Switcher disapointed in their investment.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
But at a sub-$500 price point, every dollar matters. If these things do sell like hotcakes, Apple needs to squeeze out the biggest margin they possibly can in order to make any money on it. This computer isn't going to be meant for the type of person who reads specs before they buy, it's for the people who just want to try out the new "Internet thingy" they've been hearing about these days. Apple wants people like you to shell out a bit more cash for your computer. I think that in this case, "underspeccing" is the way to go, since they know plenty of people will buy it regardless of specs because they just want to try Apple (if they're high end users) or own any computer at all (if they're low end users).
A great example, have you heard of the low end Palm Zire series? Absurdly underspecced--they even decreased the number of hardware buttons--but they became Palm's best selling unit for over a year. And it's simply because the type of people who bought it weren't power users and didn't demand competitive specs, they just wanted any Palm. For many, it was perfectly adequate, and for others, it whetted their apetite for a more powerful unit (more dollars for Palm)
If they're trying to woo the iPod users, they should provide a built-in iPod dock, and help reduce cable sprawl.
Apple produces "PCs" - Personal Computers. Its become a generic term for a Wintel based computer, but they produced the FIRST PCs!, I've got an old beige mac on the shelf here that says right on it "Power PC".
If you remember your geek history right, in the late 70s, early 80s the whole point of Apple was to produce computers normal people could afford. The mac and the snazziness came later, but the Apple Is and IIs were cheap compared to the alternatives (if there were any). Hell, the first apples sold for $666, I wouldn't advise using this price considering the current political climate, but something in that range would be very competitive.
I would love it if they would put out a nice little machine like this for the Web/Email crowd that will never produce a home movie, mix their own music, etc. A nicely priced secure box for the non savvy if you will. I've got a ton of people I know that ask me from time to time what computer to buy. The response after I mention a Mac is "they are so expensive, and I saw a dell in the paper for $400, the cheapest mac is like $1000." Believe me, these are people that will surf the web, play solitare, and write a letter or two. That's it.
Make a cheap mac for these folks. Be blunt about its limitations, but put it out there.
P
-- My dog can beat up your dog.
no way apple will lower prices, as they have highest margins in the PC world
That's not the concern it used to be. They have one of the hottest gadgets in recent memory with the iPod, and they make as much on that as they do with some of their computer line. They can afford to take a hit in profit to build up user base. It's called a "loss leader".
a clone mac was tried last year and it failed.If by "last year" you mean "1994", then you're correct. And they failed for a whole host of reasons, the least of which is that Apple killed OS licensing in 1996.
Besides,with bittorrent taking up 35% of net use,apple software would be canabalized and freeYou've never installed OS X, I take it. There is no serial number registration, there is no unique identifier for the disc. You can use the same disc to install OS X on any number of computers and they'll all work just fine. Illegally, but fine. :-) Apple doesn't think everyone in the world is a thief and lock you into DRM hell (okay, the iTMS is the exception. Compare their DRM to WindowsMCE, though). Look at the DRM that's packed with an iPod: a brief note exhorting you not to steal.
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
To most people, PCI slots don't matter. To a minority, they do matter, and to that minority, the lack may prevent them from buying a Mac. In my case, I have a tendency to upgrade older machines and move them into a server role as I replace them on the desktop, and this is not possible with the inexpensive Macs being discussed in this article.
For example, consider my current firewall/server machine and the upgrades I have done, relative to an iMac from the same time period. It's a Pentium 2 400 mhz from 1997 or so.
-Add another NIC so I can use it as a firewall... impossible on the iMac.
-Add an SATA card... impossible on the iMac.
-Add a 160 gb hard drive... impossible on the iMac as the ATA controllers of the time could not handle drives bigger than 128 gb.
-Use the drive at full speed... impossible on the iMac because the ATA controllers of the time were limited to ATA-33.
-Now using 2 hard drives... impossible on the iMac.
-Upgrade the second NIC to gigabit... impossible on the iMac. Impossible on current iMacs too.
-Upgrade the USB to USB 2.0... impossible on the iMac.
It's not that Apple computers don't have all the spiffy ports, it's that they can't be upgraded later on when the definition of "spiffy port" changes.
People usually argue that enthusiasts like myself should be buying PowerMacs, but the whole point is that a $500 PC is just as capable of doing these things as a $2000 PowerMac. PowerMacs have many benefits, but you pay for a lot of benefits that you don't need to buy the one benefit that you do.
I rarely criticize things I don't care about.
"Would a consumer rather buy a $500 headless Mac and a $100 CRT monitor then a $799 eMac?"
Yes. In fact, if this isn't just a rumor, I'll buy one.
"As an Apple Store employee, this just doesn't make sense to me. Why would they want to sell a $500 computer when the extra cost of a monitor would nullify the fact that it is a cheap Mac?"
500$ + 100$ = 600$
Cheap emac = 800$
Is the savings of two hundred dollars that confusing to you?
It matters.
Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.