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.
I imagine this (if it will actually exist) would be like the eMac: base model low specs with the combo drive and 256 MB ram, but you can upgrade from there so a Superdrive will set you back an additional $100.
;).
Kind of like the Dell machines that start at $400 or so, then by the time you add on the usual needs (bump up the RAM to at least 512) they come out to $500 - $600.
If this is the case, Apple now has a great chance to gain market share. I've wondered for years what would happen if a headless iMac comes out (since everybody already owns a monitor, why buy a machine with another one anyway?).
If it becomes popular, I wonder if more game companies will go the Blizzard route and dual-release their software for both the PC and the Mac. Hm. Well, I've got an hour before I have to go to work - time for a little Warcraft
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
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
the price difference between 40 and 80gb hdds is small. The price difference between 256mb and 512mb of RAM is not large.
The average Joe's perception of difference between a computer with 40gb of hdd & 256mb of RAM vs one with 80gb of hdd and 512mb of RAM as huge as a "3 megapixel camera" vs a "5 megapixel camera".
Apple needs to understand that underspeccing their computers to make a few dollars more per unit or to have the price slightly lower, actually costs them more than it makes. It furthermore makes people take Apple less seriously - they keep trying to push their out-of-date computers, *and* they're underspeccing them as if they're old stock or they're trying to cut every cent off of costs.
I seem to remember Commodore having a similar over-priced highend + underspecced low-end strategy.
"But, I can build an AMD 87GHZ box overclocked with a gajillion megs of video ram for $1.23 Canadian, why would I buy a Mac?"
"oohhh... I didn't know Schopenhauer was a philosopher!"
It would be interesting if it had an iPod dock built in given the target market. I know you can connect a dock via a Firewire cable, but with a built-in dock, Apple could market this baby Mac as an iPod accessory.
Last summer I read from a south asian government press release that Apple would be working with said government to build a cheap system for use only in that market. I firmly believe this rumored, stripped down machine is for that market.
Here's the press release
Just out of curiousity, what are you going to use those PCI slots for ?
There is already NIC, Firewire, USB, Sound and Video cards onboard. I've had several macs, and i've never installed a single addon card in any of them.
The only thing i've ever come up with was to use one as a firewall, in that case a second NIC would be desirable, but otherwise?
Probable impossibilities are to be preferred to improbable possibilities.
Aristotele
- 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.
It is silly to think that 256 is enough RAM to run 10.3. This 12" came standard with that and I couldn't use it w/o dropping another 512 into it. I think that 512 standard is more logical.
411 Y0UR 8453 4R3 8310NG 70 U5!! -NSA
This is not the machine you are looking for. You can go about your business. Move along.
When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
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.
Don't want to restate the obvious so I will restate what may not be so obvious:
A 1" thick headless unit fits nicely in my A/V cabinet.
Yeah, you heard me - network connection - audio line out (or atleast USB/Firewire for 3rd party)
This is the new Media server for my den.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
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.
If they're trying to woo the iPod users, they should provide a built-in iPod dock, and help reduce cable sprawl.
- 4 years old
- running nonstop (over 5 mos. this time)
- running no antivirus software and on a university network
- doing everything their new WinTel machines can, only smoothly (OK I've disabled chat services so they'll get some work done; likewise it is game-free)
- stock, but the heart of a productive video editing set-up (despite a wimpy video card)
- only slightly less snappy than the shiny new G5 in the next rack over, which is rated at over 5 times the MHz (well, until they rip or render).
Panther (10.3) actually sped up the 350MHz iBook w/ 384MB of RAM that I use for field work; even on that hand-crank antique OS X is eminently usable, and wows onlookers (although often it's Quicksilver's functionality that's really causing the eyepoppiing).OS X on a cheap G4 will convert people. The only key issues for me are stock RAM configurations and build quality.
Damn those pesky terrorists
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.
I just want to warn everyone that OS X is addictive. That $500 box will give way to a dual G5 tower very soon. They are just giving you the first hit cheep.
Crushing my karma one post at a time.
This box sounds like Apple's answer to small form factor PC's running Myth or Microsoft's media center software. It's a multimedia box.
There's been a sea change in monitors. Back in ye Olden Days, you had a Commodore 64 using a TV for a display. Fuzzy.
Then came RGB monitors, which cost more than a TV, couldn't be used as a TV, but made computer video output much more usable.
Then the monitors developed into hi-rez monsters. They showed TV better than TV sets showed TV.
But now, lookee: hi-end high def TV's can run 1080i, or even 1080p with a converter. We have consumer TV's that can handily act as a not-bad monitor for a PC.
What's an Apple to do with the situation of Microsoft end-running the entire entertainment industry by making their DRM and Media Center the de facto standard? They take the guts of a iMac and make a cheap Small Form Factor computer for cheap. It doesn't have Bill's virus problem inherent in the OS, and, also, most importantly, it doesn't crash.
Run, Steve, run!
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.