Quoted from "LindyChef"

Quoted from "Wexie"
However, to label Apple as the one who focuses on Form over function is a bit of a stretch. Both platforms are guilty of this, and both have made great strides in function. They both have their strengths and weaknesses.

When it comes to UI, Apple has done a nice job of making design and functionality work ... once you get used to it. I had a hard time dealing with OS X at first re: using a touchpad. But when you get right to the bottom of things: [Images Removed by Wexie] The left: Looks cool, but not upgradeable I'm paying a lot of money for the design The right: Ugly as sin, but upgradeable and customizeable I have more money to spend on a larger hard drive

Upgradable Vs. not-upgradable is not platform specific. Apple did create, if not popularize compact systems that are not easy to upgrade. However, PC vendors followed suit after Apple's success with these units. At the end of the day, Apple is hardly the only vendor who builds PCs with this type of form factor.

I think you make a good argument for upgradable systems. But compact systems have their place for cetain users with specific needs.

Quoted from "Wexie"
Upgradable Vs. not-upgradable is not platform specific. Apple did create, if not popularize compact systems that are not easy to upgrade. However, PC vendors followed suit after Apple's success with these units. At the end of the day, Apple is hardly the only vendor who builds PCs with this type of form factor.

True, but I believe that the small form factor and stylish design it brings is more appealing to the typical Apple user than the typical PC user ... I have yet to see a PC based all-in-one line be truly successful like Apple. Kudos to Jobs for finding that market and exploiting it.

The other difference with Apple is that the control the manufacturing of all Mac computers - they dictate everything about them, so what direction Apple decides to go with their platforms is very important to all Mac users. The individual direction of any PC manufacturer really doesn't have a large effect on the PC user base.

That is true ... until I look at the price ;)

Exactly. The iMac is a LOW-END model made for people who really don't want to (or expect to have to) take apart their computers and upgrade.

Every other appliance you own rarely needs seriously new parts. You don't open up your TV and replace the electron gun. You don't open your microwave to upgrade the lamps. You don't do any of that stuff anywhere else. The same goes for your computer. Do you honestly think that John Q. Consumer will think that his DVD drive needs upgrading? Why would he? It does everything to his satisfaction.

An iMac, well-maintained, will do EVERYTHING a low-end user needs (web, word processing, email, cd burning, digital photo management, digital video management) without much hassle or need for upgrades. That's the point. During the keynote, the VP of Apple delineated what the "soul" of the iMac model was: An all-in-one solution that made computing easy for "the rest of" the human population, while the geeks played around with the big toys.

I would also argue that there is a HUGE speculative market on upgrading PC's that really shouldn't exist. Mentally there is this culture of always having the best, the fastest, the biggest, the most efficient. My dual 1 gig G4 is nowhere NEAR the G5 in terms of speed. My pithy 512 megs of RAM can't keep up with the 8 gig expandable capability of the G5. My 80 gig hard drive has nothing to compete with these 250 gig monsters. My DVD burner is 2x.

So what? I don't really feel the need to upgrade those components. My computer does what I need it to do without much hassle, and the hassle it does give me is totally acceptable. It's still wicked fast, it runs beautifully, and it works for me. One of the downsides of the fractured PC market is the insane competition people have for the fastest possible components at the time. You're always in need of constant upgrades because the tech moves so fast. I don't upgrade until I feel a distinct inability to do what I need to do. The only upgrades I've made on my desktop are to add USB 2.0/extra Firewire ports and to add wireless capability. That's it. I'll probably double my RAM when I have more money.

Normal people don't belong to this culture of constant upgrades and upkeep. They want a computer that will last a long while (and Macs tend to last MUCH longer than PC's anyways) and won't give them trouble. And this one won't.

Power users who want to run Final Cut Pro and Motion while using two monitors with cutting edge graphics capabilities should opt for the G5 tower. That's why it's there. It's expandable if you need it. Enjoy.

Gamers should go PC.

And for the record...I've owned personal computers (Wintel and Mac) for over ten years now.

The only upgrades I've done have ever been to add larger drives (often times external on both platforms, incidentally), and more memory. I've added new (and additional) video cards on old Macs, but it's been years and years.

So I agree with Marcelo - I don't think there's THAT much upgrading that's going on out there. And again - for the average user who isn't doing major multimedia design heavy lifting, an iMac can last you over three years easily.

Quoted from "LindyChef"
(I disagree, though, that the iMac is a low end model ... at a price point starting at 1300 vs a new base model Dell starting at 520. It might be a low end model in relative terms of other Mac products, but not in terms of the market. It's like saying the BMW 3 series is a low end model).

You're still looking at only prices again. I think perhaps "consumer level" is a better term than "low end".

Quoted from "Mugsy Malone"
You're still looking at only prices again. I think perhaps "consumer level" is a better term than "low end".

Price is an important factor for those of us without six figure salaries. :wink:

I thought the BMW 3 series analogy was interesting. The sticker price is higher than a Hyundai, but that's only part of the equation, albeit an important part.

Quoted from "Mugsy Malone"

Quoted from "LindyChef"
(I disagree, though, that the iMac is a low end model ... at a price point starting at 1300 vs a new base model Dell starting at 520. It might be a low end model in relative terms of other Mac products, but not in terms of the market. It's like saying the BMW 3 series is a low end model).

You're still looking at only prices again. I think perhaps "consumer level" is a better term than "low end".

I don't think that looking at prices is the wrong way to look at it. After all, you're eventually going to have to pay for a computer if you buy one. Price is one objective factor to compare these items which are essentially a commodity. If they can both get me on the internet and help me work on my docs, then why is there a price premium? As one analyst said of Apple's pricing strategy recently, "'They tend to command premiums, and users are typically ready to pay more for the luxury of using well-made equipment."

If you look at it in terms of automobiles (which are also a commodity, they get you from point A to point B) then, at around the same price points, you have a BMW 325 vs a Hyundai Elantra. It's easy to see why a premium is justified there ... BMW spends a lot of time and effort to make sure that their cars look stylish, that they drive well, and provide a BMW experience.

Quoted from "LindyChef"
I don't think that looking at prices is the wrong way to look at it. After all, you're eventually going to have to pay for a computer if you buy one. Price is one objective factor to compare these items which are essentially a commodity. If they can both get me on the internet and help me work on my docs, then why is there a price premium? As one analyst said of Apple's pricing strategy recently, "'They tend to command premiums, and users are typically ready to pay more for the luxury of using well-made equipment." If you look at it in terms of automobiles (which are also a commodity, they get you from point A to point B) then, at around the same price points, you have a BMW 325 vs a Hyundai Elantra. It's easy to see why a premium is justified there ... BMW spends a lot of time and effort to make sure that their cars look stylish, that they drive well, and provide a BMW experience.

Right. So you compare the BMW (Apple) to the Ford (PC) - my point was that looking at ONLY price was a problem - not that price was not a factor.

Value is what it boils down to. To a segment of the population, there is a value on style as well as look and feel - not just the lowest price.

I'm not saying price is not a factor - I'm saying that Apple products are not geared to folks where price is the only (or even the main) factor. Just like BMW's.

Quoted from "LindyChef"

Quoted from "Mugsy Malone"
Value is what it boils down to. To a segment of the population, there is a value on style as well as look and feel - not just the lowest price.

And there we both agree :D

I think we've been agreeing for a while actually, and just arguing over semantics :)

Slightly new topic:

Apple has launched an <a href="http://www.apple.com/itunes/affiliates/">iTunes Affiliate Program</a> for websites. Now I think this could be a boon for swing websites everywhere (my own could definitely benefit from even this small amount of revenue), but there's some weirdness in the license agreement that I wanted to run by the geeks here.

Unfortunately you can't take a look at the agreement until after you fill out the form to sign up, but there's some language requiring that the website you are submitting to the program (you must be approved) be your primary source of income. Anyone know what's up with that?

Am I missing a point somewhere? Is this not as good an idea for a Lindy website (banners for songs-of-the-day, etc) as it sounds?

-- M

Stolen from here

With its new iMac G5, Apple Computer has once again come up with a unique package of design, power and ease of use. But will it be enough?

No. Apple has missed the opportunity to stay way ahead of its PC manufacturing competitors by not including Wi-Fi as standard and by failing to catch the early-adopter personal video recorder wave by including a TV tuner card.

At Apple Expo Paris on Tuesday, Philip Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of worldwide product marketing, unveiled the iMac G5.

Gone are the angle poise arm and spherical base station; in comes the world's thinnest all-in-one desktop PC, mounted on an aluminum standard similar to the new Apple Cinema Displays. This brand-new design aims to build on the success of the previous iterations--which have sold 7.5 million units over the past six years--and draw in the emerging iPod generation.

The three new iMac G5 models have these points in their favor:

They're the world's most minimal-looking home computers. By integrating all of the PC components, ports, media drives and even speakers into the 2-inch-thick display unit, Apple has created a design so simple that adding accessories like external hard disks and broadband modems risks ruining the smooth lines. By borrowing design elements from the iPod--Jonathan Ives designed both--these machines are designed to sit in a living room and be admired.

They benefit from a considerable increase in processor power. By using 1.6GHz and 1.8GHz G5 processors, Apple engineers have created a machine capable of coping with demanding digital hub tasks, such as tackling consumers' increasing usage of digital audio, photo and video content. (U.S. broadband households are three times more likely than U.S. dial-up households to download music or videos or listen to streaming audio.)

They're not as expensive as you might imagine. Starting at 1,299, the respectably equipped entry model of the new iMac range is considerably cheaper than the older 17-inch G4 machine, which was priced at about 1,799. This puts the machine more on a par with tricked-out Windows home PCs.

Where Apple stopped short This iMac is not as genre-defining as previous iterations have been--in fact, it misses a couple of the tricks Media Center PCs can already do.

Where is the connectivity to support bottom-up home networking? While Apple does great business in selling AirPort cards and AirPort Extreme Wi-Fi base stations, this should not have stopped it from building Wi-Fi directly into every new iMac--even Bluetooth would have been a start.

Better still would have been a software option to turn this machine into a full Wi-Fi access point: Intel's Grantsdale chipset already promises this functionality for PC owners. The lack of this connectivity means that Apple has missed an opportunity to build on its AirPort Express foundations and rule the roost in bottom-up networking.

Would including a TV tuner card have broken the bank? Digital video recorder functionality is becoming increasingly interesting to technology-literate consumers; TiVo in the United States and Sky in the United Kingdom are redefining how people consume TV programming.

Furthermore, Microsoft is forging ahead with its Windows XP Media Center Edition, looking to build on lessons from the past year. In the new iMac, Apple presents us with a fabulous living-room-compatible unit with an excellent display and lots of storage designed for digital media--but doesn't allow for connectivity to the broadcast network.

Sure, you can add an inexpensive box to do this, but you then ruin the sleek all-in-one design, which is what makes this machine so desirable.

2004, Forrester Research, Inc. All rights reserved. Information is based on best available resources. Opinions reflect judgment at the time and are subject to change.

I know several people who don't have a TV and watch movies on their computers. I would lay out the money for a large flat panel that I could use for TV, DVD, and computer.

Quoted from "skadoo"
I know several people who don't have a TV and watch movies on their computers. I would lay out the money for a large flat panel that I could use for TV, DVD, and computer.

You can do that with the iMac with a small add-on.

My point is...why make people pay for it if they don't need it? If everyone who wanted an iMac wanted to watch TV on it, then it makes sense.

Quoted from "Mugsy Malone"
I wanted to check that out...but iTunes's website is blocked at work. I'll look later when I get home. I think you're probably okay though...I mean, who makes their primary income from a website, unless it's porn? :)

Let me know what you find. I was looking at it at 4:00am this morning and was too overtired to commit to something that required my social security number and a review by people at Apple.

I'm also confused by what level of prominence they require affiliates to display iTMS stuff at.

If it turns out to be a good idea, though, I think this could be a very cool thing for sites like Yehoodi, Swingmonkey, Windyhop etc. There could be songs-of-the-day, favorite albums, all with previews and really, really simple purchasing.

-- M