We are on the same page - spot on.
Has Tim Cook lost the plot?
- Thread starter Faustus
- Start date
We are on the same page - spot on.
So pray tell us all - what are these huge numbers. You keep quoting this scenario but we have yet to see some real figures.
It isn't just the CPU which may be responsible for poor performance either. The 5400 HDD won't help at all - remember the MBA has the SSD. No discrete graphics either. It's akin to opening the bonnet of your shiny BMW only to find a Robin Reliant engine. For a Desktop computer it simply isn't good enough.
The same 5400 RPM hard drive that exists in the previous bottom of the range iMac, and the integrated graphics that are only different because of the CPU change?
I would get your point if the iMac name meant "go out and buy whatever one you want without thinking and you'll get a powerhouse of a machine", but it has never meant that, and never will mean that. If someone doesn't know anything about computers then the friendly chaps at the Apple store can help them pick an appropriate product. For everyone else this new SKU represents choice, and the ability to get an office machine with an SSD in for under £900 before the VAT, which is a massive deal.
To bite on your car analogy, if someone hops in their shiny new BMW and can appreciate the fit and finish of the thing, the after-sales care, the attention to detail, the experience of buying it etc., and they take it out to potter around town to go to the shops and it performs well enough at those tasks that they are utterly oblivious to the Reliant engine that is powering it then does it actually matter? Your argument seems to be that Apple should put high spec parts in their machines across the board and then price them at a point which makes sufficient margin, regardless of whether this is more machine than people actually need, which is perhaps why you are looking out for Apple's business interests on the OcUK forums instead of actually at Apple.
This isn't an Atom processor, it's a part that is quite happily powering hundreds of thousands of MacBook Airs. Yes, they have an SSD and this has a spinning disk, but so does every other iMac in the range. If you want to have a dig at something then criticize them for not going to SSDs by default across the board.
I would get your point if the iMac name meant "go out and buy whatever one you want without thinking and you'll get a powerhouse of a machine", but it has never meant that, and never will mean that. If someone doesn't know anything about computers then the friendly chaps at the Apple store can help them pick an appropriate product. For everyone else this new SKU represents choice, and the ability to get an office machine with an SSD in for under £900 before the VAT, which is a massive deal.
To bite on your car analogy, if someone hops in their shiny new BMW and can appreciate the fit and finish of the thing, the after-sales care, the attention to detail, the experience of buying it etc., and they take it out to potter around town to go to the shops and it performs well enough at those tasks that they are utterly oblivious to the Reliant engine that is powering it then does it actually matter? Your argument seems to be that Apple should put high spec parts in their machines across the board and then price them at a point which makes sufficient margin, regardless of whether this is more machine than people actually need, which is perhaps why you are looking out for Apple's business interests on the OcUK forums instead of actually at Apple.
This isn't an Atom processor, it's a part that is quite happily powering hundreds of thousands of MacBook Airs. Yes, they have an SSD and this has a spinning disk, but so does every other iMac in the range. If you want to have a dig at something then criticize them for not going to SSDs by default across the board.
Last edited:
I've added nothing here. I'll leave and never return.
And as a final comment: Low power CPU's aren't specifically aimed at the laptop market either. If I was using a machine simply for the basic things i've already mentioned, I'd want it to be efficient. Because of that, the computer is both quiet and cool allowing you to have it packaged easily into something like the iMac or Mac Mini's, Chrometops, etc. These paired with a hybrid drive like the fusion drive or an SSD make for a nice experience.
Pro's buy the Mac Pro or a competitor as they require computing power. Checking emails and holiday photo's just doesn't.
And as a final comment: Low power CPU's aren't specifically aimed at the laptop market either. If I was using a machine simply for the basic things i've already mentioned, I'd want it to be efficient. Because of that, the computer is both quiet and cool allowing you to have it packaged easily into something like the iMac or Mac Mini's, Chrometops, etc. These paired with a hybrid drive like the fusion drive or an SSD make for a nice experience.
Pro's buy the Mac Pro or a competitor as they require computing power. Checking emails and holiday photo's just doesn't.
As an Apple shareholder, I approve of this SKU 
I can see many businesses buying these (perhaps speccing with a small SSD) as a perfect office machine. Also think: shops, boutiques, checkout computers, CCTV computers, internet cafes, family internet browser, your parent's first Mac. All these things that don't require a hefty spec but a nice form-factor, perhaps laptop performance.
I can see many businesses buying these (perhaps speccing with a small SSD) as a perfect office machine. Also think: shops, boutiques, checkout computers, CCTV computers, internet cafes, family internet browser, your parent's first Mac. All these things that don't require a hefty spec but a nice form-factor, perhaps laptop performance.
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2010
- Posts
- 1,537
- Location
- London
This is a neat little machine that will do everything most home users will want it to in a pretty package and retains the Apple design elements that people will find appealling.
The product has a small footprint and clearly has appeal to the bsuienss and education markets too.
The product has a small footprint and clearly has appeal to the bsuienss and education markets too.
Exactly, but it's hard to get a computer forum to understand that!
Very valid its somethign i would consider deploying here at work for the marketing department who always say they must have a mac
An i5 Haswell-MB would be more than fine. The 22 W difference in TDP would have no significant effect on a desktop machine, but the 50% extra performance would give it a longer useable life span.
The 21" iMac is already designed for a more powerful CPU and is both quiet and cool with that, it doesn't need an over priced ULT CPU or are you suggesting a design flaw?. ¬_¬
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
If it's the same part as the MacBook Air, then perhaps it's likely that Intel have given Apple a MASSIVE discount for bulk buying, and Apple have taken the choice to ship a limited spec iMac for business and education.
Everyone else can buy the regular iMac with a bit more grunt?
Everyone else can buy the regular iMac with a bit more grunt?
The mac bookair is an ultra light/thin/lowpower high battery life laptop, the iMac isn't. They shouldn't be using the same CPU.
Any discount they are getting on the $315 CPU, it's still going to be more than the faster cheaper chip at $225.
Pretty much any direct buyer from Intel is bulk, I doubt they give much away even if you buy millions.
Having a slow CPU may make sence for Apple as it keeps the more expensive versions the only option for a lot of buyers, the better CPU would affect those sales more, but it's not good for it's customers given they could have more for less money.
Still as we see in this thread, Apple customers will brown nose the company even when they aren't giving them a good deal.
Any discount they are getting on the $315 CPU, it's still going to be more than the faster cheaper chip at $225.
Pretty much any direct buyer from Intel is bulk, I doubt they give much away even if you buy millions.
Having a slow CPU may make sence for Apple as it keeps the more expensive versions the only option for a lot of buyers, the better CPU would affect those sales more, but it's not good for it's customers given they could have more for less money.
Still as we see in this thread, Apple customers will brown nose the company even when they aren't giving them a good deal.
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
Do you want some vinegar with that chip, on your shoulder?
We don't know how much discount Apple would get, but I'd bet they'd be close to if not the largest customer of Intel chips. Perhaps Apple didn't want to use the Air chip, and had a surplus of chips to use, perhaps Apple got offered a load of chips because Intel want to concentrate on moving away from that design, who knows.
It's not the first time Apple has launched an iMac with a notebook CPU, or picked a chip that many would consider the "wrong choice", and it probably won't be the last (I recall they launched the G5 iMac a few months before the first intel ones).
Personally I don't care what they put in the thing. Ill never be in the market to bulk buy these but surely if businesses have the option of a cheaper iMac or no iMac they can decide for themselves.
Someone will find a use for them or be able to justify them. What minimum spec do you need to run a desktop publishing suite and email anyway?
We don't know how much discount Apple would get, but I'd bet they'd be close to if not the largest customer of Intel chips. Perhaps Apple didn't want to use the Air chip, and had a surplus of chips to use, perhaps Apple got offered a load of chips because Intel want to concentrate on moving away from that design, who knows.
It's not the first time Apple has launched an iMac with a notebook CPU, or picked a chip that many would consider the "wrong choice", and it probably won't be the last (I recall they launched the G5 iMac a few months before the first intel ones).
Personally I don't care what they put in the thing. Ill never be in the market to bulk buy these but surely if businesses have the option of a cheaper iMac or no iMac they can decide for themselves.
Someone will find a use for them or be able to justify them. What minimum spec do you need to run a desktop publishing suite and email anyway?
Don't confused Expensive with Premium.
Premium is almost always expensive. But expensive is not always premium.
Apple is not the 'Premium' brand you seem to envisage in your mind. You post and sound like it's some elite club and the halo that is all technology. That to even release a lower spec machine is inviting the non-elite to purchase and use the 'Apple' brand.
If it sells, in quantity, at profit - It's a win. NOBODY except the pretentious self-imaged elite would see it as a loss because it might "devalue" the brand. That won't matter anyway because said group of people will continue to pile cash into Apple products.
The mac bookair is an ultra light/thin/lowpower high battery life laptop, the iMac isn't. They shouldn't be using the same CPU.
Any discount they are getting on the $315 CPU, it's still going to be more than the faster cheaper chip at $225.
Pretty much any direct buyer from Intel is bulk, I doubt they give much away even if you buy millions.
Having a slow CPU may make sence for Apple as it keeps the more expensive versions the only option for a lot of buyers, the better CPU would affect those sales more, but it's not good for it's customers given they could have more for less money.
Still as we see in this thread, Apple customers will brown nose the company even when they aren't giving them a good deal.
You can't win with these guys. It seems pretty obvious some of them would buy sand whilst sat on a beach if it came in a package that said Apple.
Thank goodness there are some of us who are prepared to challenge Apple's marketing decisions. Having said that there are quite a few on the MR forum.
This plucked out of the air discount, surplus, (insert any other made up fact you can think of), makes the chip choice good for a potential customer in what way? My issue is with the bad choice of chip, any problem Apple has made up or not is pretty irrelevant.
I'd give Apple a tad more credit than you do thinking they would buy surplus chips and be forced to make a new line to shift them.
Also they aren't even close to being Intels largest customer, HP, Dell & Lenovo are far bigger.
Again, how is making a bad or similar choice in the past make this choice any better? (I'm pretty sure they haven't used an ultra low powered CPU before as Intel/IBM haven't been making them that long)
Any use or justification someone may have for buying one would surely be just as justified with a 50% faster CPU, that costs less?
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
I agree, it's a poor choice but it's hardly a pentium 4, is it? It does a job and is aimed at those who want a cheaper iMac.
They aren't creating a new line though. They're putting the same CPUs in use from another line, in an iMac.
How is it beyond the realms of possibility that they bought too many CPUs and chose to utilise them elsewhere? I admit it's a far stretch, but perhaps they overestimated the demand of the Air?
Do you have a source to backup the claim that Apple aren't their biggest customer?
I'm referring to the choices made.. Rightly or wrongly, they've used mobile CPUs and GPUs for the iMac, and this ultra low power one is just an extension of that. What are the benchmarks like for the new chip?
Any use or justification someone may have for buying one would surely be just as justified with a 50% faster CPU, that costs less?
I agree, but they aren't offering those, so you can't buy it
A £900 PC should not just do the job, it should have a decent future proof lifespan, most of Apples products do.
Using a different socket, and therefore mobo is a new line as far as I'm concerned. And most Apple fans refer to CPU refreshes as a new line and get overly excited.
Evidence that apple are minnows in the PC market. (It not hard to Google, but I'll help you)
http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2647517
http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/28/apple-q4-2013-iphone-ipad-mac-sales/
Apple sold 17.6M PCs in 2013, which put them in 6th place in term of unit sales, but only 5.58% of the world market, on unit sales.
Add the likes of Google and other large server buyers could well be bigger as they may well be buying less units, but considerably more expensive ones.
Intels x86 processor market share is 82.8%, AMD is 16.9% for 1Q14. 4% of that total for AMD is the next gen consoles, almost 25% of their x86 chips.
Not that any of this is relevant the chip is a poor option for consumers, it's just protects the sales of the more expensive models.
There's no logical reason to use an ultra low powered CPU in a desktop. Particularly when it's an all in one unit, so once it's too slow the whole lot becomes worthless and is discarded, any saving the planet credentials with lower power usage are lost by it's shorter lifespan.
The chip around the level of an Intel Core i3-3210. You can buy a Win 8 laptop with this for £350-£400. And this is a last gen CPU.
And finally you agree it's a bad choice. lol
Using a different socket, and therefore mobo is a new line as far as I'm concerned. And most Apple fans refer to CPU refreshes as a new line and get overly excited.
Evidence that apple are minnows in the PC market. (It not hard to Google, but I'll help you)
http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2647517
http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/28/apple-q4-2013-iphone-ipad-mac-sales/
Apple sold 17.6M PCs in 2013, which put them in 6th place in term of unit sales, but only 5.58% of the world market, on unit sales.
Add the likes of Google and other large server buyers could well be bigger as they may well be buying less units, but considerably more expensive ones.
Intels x86 processor market share is 82.8%, AMD is 16.9% for 1Q14. 4% of that total for AMD is the next gen consoles, almost 25% of their x86 chips.
Not that any of this is relevant the chip is a poor option for consumers, it's just protects the sales of the more expensive models.
There's no logical reason to use an ultra low powered CPU in a desktop. Particularly when it's an all in one unit, so once it's too slow the whole lot becomes worthless and is discarded, any saving the planet credentials with lower power usage are lost by it's shorter lifespan.
The chip around the level of an Intel Core i3-3210. You can buy a Win 8 laptop with this for £350-£400. And this is a last gen CPU.
And finally you agree it's a bad choice. lol
Last edited:
From the guy who made the leap to questioning "Has Tim Cook lost the plot". Over the release of a cheaper iMac model. Brilliant.
Shouldn't you be concerned with your returns then?
Apple releasing a cheaper model, which they probably would make a larger margin on, is a good thing for them!
How do you not get that?