Apple on Wednesday introduced a new entry level 21.5-inch iMac, which the company priced at $1,099.
The iMac comes with a 1.4 GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor with Turbo Boost Speeds up to 2.7 GHz, Intel HD 5000 graphics, 8GB of memory and a 500GB hard drive. It also has 802.11ac Wi-Fi, two Thunderbolt ports and four USB 3.0 ports.
You can boost some options with the new iMac, as well. Build-to-order options include a 1TB hard drive, a 1TB Fusion Drive, and up to 256GB flash storage, according to Apple.
Considering that the overall PC industry has declined 5 percent year-over-year, while the Mac has increased 12 percent in the same time, I’d say Apple is serious about its Mac business. There is no doubt that having a new inexpensive model of one of the most successful desktops will only push Apple further into the lead.
I can’t tell – that seems crazy, doesn’t it? For $200 more you get more disk and much more CPU. Yes, you have to give up something to save money, and the processor is comparable to the one in the low-end MacBook Air (although with a spinning disk attached instead of flash). But is anyone in the market for this computer?
Of course. Anybody who previously wouldn’t buy an iMac because of the price. This lowers the barrier for entry.
I think Apple could have lowered the barrier for entry without compromising so much on specs. It’s not like Mac margins are razor thin.
And, perhaps more importantly, many of these people newly considering a purchase of the base model at the new low price will end up deciding to just spend a little extra for an upgraded model.
Exactly.
Maybe they could have. Then again, they’re the successful company with billions in the bank, so maybe they know exactly what they’re doing here. I don’t think Apple is in a rush to sacrifice profits for Mac user base.
why do specs offend you? do low-end users of a low-cost mac care about specs?
nope.
Because I think at this price it’s a rip off. I’m sure these specs are perfectly fine for a lot of people. But I think Apple could have hit $999 price point if they wanted to.
Specs, specs, specs. Need to consider the value beyond specs my friend. OS X, iLife, iWork…
Apple isn’t interested in customers who think Apple gear is a “rip-off”. Apple wants customers who see the long term value of Apple products. You are free to believe that Apple products are overpriced, but please understand that Apple doesn’t want you as a customer.
If you compare two iMacs it’s all about specs. You have the same software value even on Mac mini which costs half the price.
This should sell like hotcakes to the education market (particularly K-6) where it will be $50 cheaper to boot.
no, that isnt rog’s point — he’s stating simply that this particular imac is “under-spec’d”. in other words, “over-priced”. to which, the reasonable response is — so what? hasnt that been the complaint of mac-critics since the mac?
I’m sure it still has a nice screen to go with its MacBook Air insides. And (to counter my own question earlier) it may “only” be $200 but that’s 15% cheaper than it was before, which can be a big difference. And maybe (as others say) it’s a stepping stone to get people in the door. Don’t know.
Microsoft was at the top of the heap once too. Where are they now? If Apple thinks these specs are perfectly suitable for the intended audience fine. They very well may be. The price accordingly. The MBA got a $100 price cut AND a spec bump. Why not do the same with the iMac? Especially if Apple is getting ready to introduce new iMac’s (perhaps with retina displays?) this fall.
I would love to disagree with you, but you’re wrong. Most of the world would be thrilled to give up features they don’t really understand for a $200 price break.
This is basically why Windows PCs thrived for years.
Then don’t buy this configuration of the iMac. Problem solved.