ACCORDING TO AN article published on Digitimes yesterday, Taiwanese manufacturers are reporting that Apple will stop production of the 17? iMac in June, just as it stopped manufacturing the 15? version in October. This is interesting if true, as it would most likely mark the death of Apple's most-visible product launch since the PowerMac Cube.
While the iMac has not sold as well as Apple might have hoped after its initial post-introduction sales boom, the design has still outsold the Cube by a wide margin. The Cube was introduced in August 2000 and cancelled in the summer of 2001, but sold only about 100,000 units in that time. The new iMac design, by contrast, has sold between 500 and 600 thousand units to date, and is expected to sell several hundred thousand more before June rolls around in 2003.
While the once-christened ?Lump-Stick-Rectangle? is a distinctive design, Apple's pricing and feature choices between the iMac, the eMac, and the G4 Tower is rather vague. Consider the three systems available for $1699 or $1658 in the case of the eMac.
For $1658 dollars you can have yourself an eMac with a 17? flatscreen CRT, 512 Meg of RAM, 60 gigabytes of hard drive space, and an 800 MHz G4. ?Not too shabby,? you might be thinking. For $1699, however, you can have yourself a top of the line 15? iMac?.but with only 256 meg of RAM. The two systems share the same 800 MHz G4 and 60 gigabyte HDD, with the iMac carrying an integrated Ethernet card. The two systems also carry the same GeForce2 MX video card. The eMac has Apple's SuperDrive?the iMac doesn't.
Heading over to the G4 side of things, (but still at our $1699 price point) we've got TWO CPU's (867 MHz apiece) , only 256 Meg of DDR RAM (but?its DDR rather than SDR), the same 60 gig HDD, a CD-RW, and a GeForce4 MX. The one major downside to the G4 Tower is that Apple seems to think a 17? LCD should cost $1000. Apple Studio Display or not, that price is extreme. Some buyers will doubtlessly choose the other models because of the cost of the display alone. Assuming, however, that you DON'T need a new Apple monitor, lets look at what we've got here.
Keep in mind, we've got a new operating system with requirements buyers (especially theoretical ?switchers?) aren't going to be as familiar with as Apple's classic OS products. Do I need 512 Meg of RAM, or is 256 Meg enough? Does OS:X really need two CPU's? Are these single G4's fasts enough to do the job? What about the SDRAM vs DDR RAM question?
It's a muddle?and the only buyers that are going to see their way clear are the ones already running OS:X on fairly high-end hardware (so as to make an educated guess at what performance is truly necessary). In fact, if you don't need a new display, the dual G4 tower definitely comes off looking better than either the eMac or the iMac in terms of price/performance ratio (at least as Apple markets it). You get DDR instead of SDR, two CPU's instead of one, an equally large HDD and CD-RW / DVD drive, faster CPU's, and a faster bus. Even if you end up kicking out for a few accessories like Apple Pro speakers, it's obvious which system is going to pack the best performance for the price?and it isn't the eMac or the iMac.
The original iMac made waves for its design, integration, and low cost, with a positioning that clearly differentiated it from Apple's other models of the time. The current iMac is distinctive and innovative, but Apple's decision to intro an updated ?old? iMac as an eMac has left the system sandwiched tightly between two more familiar (and hence, more comfortable) offerings.
While it wouldn't be surprising if the current rumors turn out to be false and Apple keeps the iMac line going, its definitely a product in need of an overhaul, both in design and in price. Rumors have persisted of a 19? version, but frankly, this is likely a step in the wrong direction. Not only does the larger screen begin to raise questions of how long the ?stick? can support it (and at what angles) its more of an excuse to jack prices higher rather than offering products consumers want. Apple has a real opportunity to offer solid low-priced hardware rather than the $699 crap that Dell and its ilk typically push out the door?only time will tell if the company seizes it (and more clearly differentiates its product line) or not.
Apple seems to have a great ability to see the trends of computing?the Newton is most definitely an early PDA, while the G4 Cube could readily be considered a Small Form Factor. When it comes to actually launching successful products based on these trends, however, the company's record is much less appealing. Hopefully the iMac won't soon be retired as an innovative idea that was poorly presented?and ultimately failed in the long run.
Source: The Inquirer
Linear Mode
