 |
Search |
|
|
|
|
Classic 2 Guys |
|
10 Random Stories:
|
|
|
|
What's all the hubbub, bub? |
|
 Could the headless iMac be a reality!? Could the perhaps most-rumored product from Apple actually see the light of day? Am I writing this without wearing pants? All these questions answered and more in this episode of Jonahan muses about a rumored Apple product!
Ok folks, if you missed it, go here to read my fine writin' type things about aforementioned headless iMac. All caught up? Greaaaaat.
What can I say about headless Mac that hasn't already been said? Well, first of all is that there is no way in hell that Apple would sell such a thing ... for under $599. Secondly, I don't even know where I stand on the matter - if I should believe it ... or not.
On one hand Apple could make a HUGE land grab at marketshare by intro-ing a cheapMac. This is something that Uncle Steve has no doubt wanted to do since his return to Apple.
On the other hand, they run the risk of cannibalizing eMac and iMac sales and possibly diluting the quality of the Apple name. These, let's call them thinMacs for lack of a better word (I hate the "headless Mac" term) would be targeted at switchers, many of whom would be using their old displays. The amount of drivers that Apple would have to include in 10.4 would be immense, and even then there would be many problems. This is one of the factors of the Windows world that just doesn't exist on the Mac side, and I'm not sure we want it to!
I had an experience a few weeks ago, where just plugging a new monitor into a PC (which we were delousing of spyware) totally frigged the whole computer up. HTML Samurai had to drop it into safemode and remove some registry keys, then reinstall a new driver to get it working. It took quite a while, and I'm not sure this is the kind of experience Apple wants first-time buyers to have.
The flip-side of this however, is all of the people ready to jump ship from Windows to OS X if only they could get a Mac on the cheap. Spyware and viruses are one huge factor in this - people are just getting fed up, and that sort of thing just doesn't exist on the Mac side. (Hell, the amount of viruses in 2004 broke 100,000, and the average Windows XP SP1 system becomes a zombie bot within 4 minutes of being connected to the 'Net!)
A recent Wall Street Journal article talks about all the iPod users already making the switch to the Mac - which is a big argument for Apple not even having to release a thinMac. But then again, four people in that article mention price as the biggest deterrent to upgrading to a Mac.
So after thinking about this by way of writing, I still don't know what to think! I guess we should remember that it's better to err on the side of caution instead of throwing it to the wind. If nothing else, perhaps we should listen to Bill Palmer, as he keeps us on an even keel and reminds us why the thinMac (in his opinion) will never see the light of day.
There's still a lot more to be said on this subject, even if it's nothing more than rumor. The thinMac rumor is probably the touchiest of all because it addresses all of the (percieved) problems of Apple and is a magical device that lets Apple gain marketshare and rule the world. So I don't know about you, but I'll be thinking about it over this weekend and perhaps will have some more to say next week.
Have a great start to 2005, folks!
|
|
December 31 2004, 5:36 PM EDT, by
 |
Comments:
|
| DJLC |
1/1/05, 12:04 AM EDT |
It's true to how easy it is to "frig up" a Windows PC. It's taken me 3 days to install XP, and now it says it has 2 MB left. So now I get to have a fun New Years installing Win 98, Win XP, and big reformats. Whoopee....
|
| matty |
1/2/05, 8:02 AM EDT |
you promised us info on your pant wearing status at the time of writing. I feel a little cheated.
|
| rlhamon |
1/2/05, 12:00 PM EDT |
I don't see any harm into a cheep Mac .... I know what ever Apple does they will do it right!
|
| Jonahan |
1/3/05, 8:36 AM EDT |
Damnit, matty, I didn't hold up my end of bargain and my integrity as a writer is in peril. Not that I ever had any to begin with, but still.
And yes, I was wearing hot pants.
|
| DJLC |
1/3/05, 10:42 AM EDT |
Cool, you're a european prostitute! I never would've guessed. Man european prostitutes sure do look like guys... remind me not to go to Europe!
|
| Jonathan |
1/3/05, 2:53 PM EDT |
Hmm, I've plugged in many different monitors to a Mac and 99.9% of them have worked. The only thing stopping a PC monitor from working on a Mac is Resolution/refresh rate tho that's usually solved with a nice pram reset if it can be solved. I've never ever ever ever ever ever needed a driver for a monitor that's just silly..
|
| Jonahan |
1/4/05, 8:39 AM EDT |
Well that's true Jonathan, you don't need drivers per se like you do in Windows. If what you say is correct, and it just depends on your graphics card, then maybe there wouldn't be a problem here.
I have no idea what is entailed with OS X working with different types of monitors, but you have a great point - I have been able to plug my laptop into almost any external monitor and guess what? IT JUST WORKS! (*GASP!*)
|
| mactheplanet |
1/4/05, 11:35 PM EDT |
The hot pants are a sure fire keeper but I just don't know about this reborn LCII. I can't say I don't know about 10 or so PC users that would switch in a heartbeat, but I would feel slightly cheated if Apple released a thinned out bare bones model. We have come to love and cherish innovation and quality. I wouldn't like seeing the ford fiesta version of a mac mercedes, doesn't mean it wouldn't sell though! Cheers!
|
| HTML Samurai |
1/5/05, 9:05 AM EDT |
Here are a couple of other things to consider:
1. Power Macs (Towers) are not sold with displays built in. I use one at work, as do you Jonahan, and we do not use Apple displays. I am on my third monitor for this box, the first two were 17 inch CRTs, the current one is a 17 inch LCD. No problems with any of them.
2. I agree, Apple needs to make a move on market share, and with iPods everywhere this would be a perfect time to do it. Hell, I'd even buy one for my parents at $499 (or at least split the cost with them) so they could have a Mac.
3. Do we really want more market share tho? I am affraid viruses would be popping up all over the place for OS X if it had any more market share than it already has. ;-P
(Sorry, it just had to be said!)
|
| HTML Samurai |
1/5/05, 9:19 AM EDT |
I was also going to say something about Apple having a "lower end" 17 inch LCD available for those that buy the "thinMac", and then realize that their monitor sucks, but that would just make Bill Palmer completely implode!
|
| Jonahan |
1/5/05, 9:21 AM EDT |
Well remember, the main reason OS X doesn't have viruses is NOT security through obscurity. It's the same reason Linux viruses have a hard time propagating, they have a much harder time getting access to root-level/system-level processes.
|
| nhmacusr |
1/5/05, 10:04 AM EDT |
This debate comes up every year. One thing is for sure.... If you listen to Jobs and Apple's PR, then this will never happen. Jobs has said he doesn't want to play in the low end space because there is no profit margin there. I agree. Now, just because Jobs says stuff, doesn't mean he can't change his mind. If there is a new iMac, it will be more than $499. There is no profit on that price. The final asking price will be more. I could see $899 or $999. Just like the $99 flash player rumors. No way. That thing is going to come in at $199 (if it exists - it will be 1 Gig though). I think you would see a capacity jump for the mini as well (8 gig I would say).
|
This article is archived, so you may not comment on it.
(The good news is there's always the shoutbox, the forums or the contact form if you're socially-inclined at the moment!)
|
