[enb141]

Right now the most cheaper PowerMacs costs at least ($2000.00) so when are We going to see PowerMacs in ($1300.00) price rank?

[d00d]

I wouldn't hold my breath. There's always eBay.

[Praxis]

They should make a DP 1.6 for $1599, or something like that...or SP 1.8 for $1599, though that would ruin the all dual lineup.

[Grant_G]

There has NEVER been a "PowerMac" in the price-range you're seeking. That name belongs to the pro-level machines, i.e., Towers. If you can live with a mid-level Mac that's a kick-butt machine, the new G5 iMac meets your criterion, and the consumer level G4 eMacs are all now priced under $1000.
G

[yikes650]

In reply to:

---

There has NEVER been a "PowerMac" in the price-range you're seeking.

---

Perhaps not, but in 1999 with the B&W G3 and first G4, at least, the low end Power Mac was $1599. Now it's $1999. Given how drastically computer components have fallen in price over the years, the price point really SHOULD have gone down. Not up!

[r0b]

A cheap powermac seems unrealistic to me. Apple markets these machines at media professionals, people who really need all that power. Considering what one can accomplish with a G5 and OS X, $2000 USD sounds like a bargain. With some skill and a powermac one could surely make the $2k back very quickly. A media pro shouldn't consider $2000 much money. I mean $2k is a tiny project. I run a small independent design and development shop and as such I have small budget. Considering what my other costs are (rent, Internet, insurance, consumables, software, etc...) the cost of my powermac is relatively insignificant.
Furthermore, pricing a professional tool at the same level as a consumer tool seems like it would degrade the perception of the professional tool.
It seems to me that beating this long dead-horse is a waste of time. Apple isn't going to lower the prices on their pro machines to appease the masses because their pro machines are not intended for them and because of the prestige inherent in a professional tool. I'd suggest that if you can't afford a powermac get an iMac. Go find a project that will pay you enough to buy you a powermac and then sell your iMac on eBay. /forums/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif

[Ronaldinho]

Not really -- because few of the components in that '99 g3 and also in the '04 g5.
Optical drive? Nope. Memory subsystem? Nope. Graphics acceration? Nope.
Which components are you talking about, exactly?
It's also not clear what sort of market there'd be for a $1500 Power Mac; with a monitor, you're talking over $2k, but except for upgradability, it's not really much more of a computer than the new iMacs.

[yikes650]

In reply to:

---

Optical drive? Nope. Memory subsystem? Nope. Graphics acceration? Nope.
Which components are you talking about, exactly?

---

Which components? All of them. Look at the price of any Dell, Gateway, HP, Sony, or any computer besides Apple's. From your perspective, their prices should have gone up just like Apple's due to component cost. Is that the case? Not at all. The prices are dramatically lower than they were in 1999.
Are you telling me the prices have increased because we're getting so much more for the dollar? Yes, a brand new Power Mac G5 comes with a Pioneer DVR-107 Superdrive which is much better than the plain old DVD-ROM which came in my $1599 Power Mac G4. But guess what, that same Pioneer DVR-107 is available on NewEgg.com right now for $80... FAR CHEAPER than a plain DVD-ROM like mine sold for, back in 1999.

[Grant_G]

You're still trying to ride that poor dead horse though. Consider the development costs to Apple and IBM for the G5. The only reason they're as cheap as they are even now is because of mass production. But it's what everyone wanted, so it's what they got if they were willing to pay for it. As for the difference between $1599 in 1999 and $1999 today, consider inflation. Even at modest rates, in five years it increases the price equivalency a lot, i.e., they're not really much more expensive at all. And today's PowerMac really IS much more of a computer than those 1999s you're citing, just as the 1999 was so much better than the $1650 Mac LC II that I bought in around '91 or '92. Or my very first Mac in 1988, a MacPlus that I got at a half-off sale for $999 because the SE and SE 30 had made the Plus obsolete.
G

[yikes650]

If we consider the development costs between Apple and IBM for the G5, we also must consider the development costs between Apple and Motorolla for the G4. The only reason why a low end Power Mac is now $500 more than before is because Apple is testing the limits of what its loyal customer base is willing to pay. Now and more than ever, mac users are calling for headless iMac -- or something besides an all-in-one, which can be sold under the $2000 price point of low-end Power Mac G5.

In reply to:

---

And today's PowerMac really IS much more of a computer than those 1999s you're citing.

---

Absolutely, but like I already said, the newer, better parts are actually cheaper in price than the old stuff. RAM, hard drives, video cards, optical drives... just about any component you can think of, are less than half the price they were 5 years ago.
I'd just like to hear an explaination on why every other PC maker on the market is able to pass these lower costs to the consumer, while Apple does the opposite.

[Praxis]

In reply to:

---

A cheap powermac seems unrealistic to me.

---

Not cheap- affordable. Cheap is for eMac.
Most importantly, gamers.
The eMac is a sucky gaming machine. The iMac can play games nicely, but is held back by the low end Geforce FX 5200 Ultra card it has. To have a good gaming mac, you have to buy a DP 1.8 GHz PowerMac for $1999, plus $350 to upgrade to a Radeon 9800 Pro.
Yet, you can get an equivilant PC gaming machine for $1000. While the G5 will smash it in the processor department, the GRAPHICS CARD is what matters in gaming, not the processor.
The best solution, though, would be to simply make the iMac's graphics card upgradeable. An iMac with a Radeon 9800 Pro would be a fine gaming machine. However, a DP 1.6 or SP 1.8 PowerMac for $1599 would also be an acceptable solution.

[r0b]

In reply to:

---

Most importantly, gamers.

---

I don't think it is in Apple's business model to cater to gamers. Gaming seems to me like it is a secondary function on Macs.

In reply to:

---

The best solution, though, would be to simply make the iMac's graphics card upgradeable. An iMac with a Radeon 9800 Pro would be a fine gaming machine.

---

Agreed! Maybe when the G5 iMac revision 2 arrives...

[copywrite2004]

It may be me but I couldn't play Warcraft III well with a 32MB Graphics card on my old PC (1 GHZ) but now I have the G4 iMac 800MHZ and i can play war3 perfectly fine! I can even play most games today with my 32mb Graphics card.
BUT if you read the specs on the iMac page under "Design":
"Thats a 1.6 or 1.8GHz G5 processor, 533 or 600MHz frontside bus, 256MB DDR SDRAM running at 400MHz and NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra with 64MB graphics memory. So youll be able to play World of Warcraft, Doom III and other fantastic entertainment"
I've played doom 3 on my friends 3GHZ p4 with a ati radeon 9800 and it was good but he couldn't even push the game to the max.
What do you think? Will it "actually" be able to run it well?

But as for me, I'm waiting till the next revision to upgrade my iMac.

[Praxis]

In reply to:

---

I don't think it is in Apple's business model to cater to gamers. Gaming seems to me like it is a secondary function on Macs.

---

But there are SOME gamers. They should have the option, at least, instead of having to spend $2000 just for a machine with the OPTION of a decent graphics card.
An eMac or iMac with the ability to upgrade to a Radeon 9800 Pro would be perfect for that market.