It's more than you've presented. I gave Apple's desktop sales collected from their quarterly reports, show me your numbers.
It's a simple concept.
Consumers are switching to Apple computers as a whole, why, IMHO the reason is OS X.
Apple laptops gaining market share.
Apple desktops are not gaining market share.
Simplest reason, Occam's razor and all that, is that people in general appreciate Apple's laptops but not their consumer desktop form factors.
Flippant responses still don't sway my beliefs.
This doesn't negate the fact that you've no idea about posters needs.
Not me, I just pointed out that most of the anger I've seen posted in this forum is aimed directly at you, not Apple.
Apparently you just don't get it. The very existence of this and the numerous other threads here and at other websites shows that there is a desire for an xMac, that is real.
Wants... needs, makes no difference to me.
But your continued belaboring of the actual needs or wants of posters here, especially the manner in which you post, only further incites anger, towards you, not Apple.
Never expected you to stop.
It's not Apple's offerings that are flame bait, it's your postings telling people what they need and the method in which you post it.
No, you haven't gotcha nothing.
AIO advantages
Easy set up when first bought.
To some(not all, need I mention the chin) very attractive design
Reduced desktop footprint/clutter(unless you add external harddrive and/or optical drive)
Actually, I'd say that it's our opinion that matters most. When surveys go out about Mac customer satisfaction, they conduct the survey among Mac users.
Disagree. We're dorky enough to post on an Apple fan site. We don't represent the market on the whole. We're only talking about a few hundred active posters at most, and a few dozen truly active posters. All total, there are probably only a few thousand people that really want one of these machines...taking into account all the rumor and news sites with BBs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker
Mac users would naturally be the highest percentage of people buying Mac computers. ANd as I said. If you get other stats I'll gladly look at them, but you can't discredit it because you don't agree with the majority.
The majority of whom? AI posters who happen to be posting in this thread? The vast majority of Mac users don't even know this or other sites even exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickag
It's more than you've presented. I gave Apple's desktop sales collected from their quarterly reports, show me your numbers.
But what you've presented doesn't prove any particular point we've been discussing. I'm not arguing that desktop sales aren't flat. I'm saying you've not offered any proof showing it's because people don't like Apple's desktop offerings. You're simply speculating.
Quote:
It's a simple concept.
Consumers are switching to Apple computers as a whole, why, IMHO the reason is OS X.p
I'd say that's reasonable.
Quote:
Apple laptops gaining market share.
Apple desktops are not gaining market share.
Simplest reason, Occam's razor and all that, is that people in general appreciate Apple's laptops but not their consumer desktop form factors.
OK, let's assume that's true. Does it then follow that the xMac is the answer? I don't think it does.
Quote:
Flippant responses still don't sway my beliefs.
Whatever
Quote:
This doesn't negate the fact that you've no idea about posters needs.
You really are a piece of work. Tell me, what special "needs" am I missing? Shit, you make it sound like we're talking about psychotherapy or something. It's a computer. There aren't that many possible needs.
Quote:
Not me, I just pointed out that most of the anger I've seen posted in this forum is aimed directly at you, not Apple.
Alright, maybe it's not anger. But it's frustration, and it's misplaced.
Quote:
Apparently you just don't get it. The very existence of this and the numerous other threads here and at other websites shows that there is a desire for an xMac, that is real.
Yes, it does. Among a small number of people that post on Mac rumor and info sites. That's all.
Quote:
Wants... needs, makes no difference to me.
But your continued belaboring of the actual needs or wants of posters here, especially the manner in which you post, only further incites anger, towards you, not Apple.
Wants vs Needs is important. A company truly ignoring a need is one thing. A company not catering to every special want is another. As for me posting style, I don't really care if it incites anger. That just shows me the people asking for the product are irrational...just as I've said all along.
Quote:
Never expected you to stop.
It's not Apple's offerings that are flame bait, it's your postings telling people what they need and the method in which you post it.
So let me get this straight...I'm posting just to piss people off? That's what flame bait is, champ.
Quote:
No, you haven't gotcha nothing.
AIO advantages
Easy set up when first bought.
To some(not all, need I mention the chin) very attractive design
Reduced desktop footprint/clutter(unless you add external harddrive and/or optical drive)
xMac advantages
Separate monitor Why is this an advantage?
Internal optical drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro
Internal hard drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter)Mac Pro
Slots for future technological changes and/or repairs(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro
Graphic card slot for those that so desire Mac Pro
----note the above items increase cost nigh to nothing Prove it
Use of desktop processor reduces cost to Apple and consumer Fair enough
Use of desktop hard drive(compared to mini only) reduces cost to Apple and consumer irrelevant
Use of desktop ram reduces cost to Apple and consumer. irrelevant
Ports on front reduces clutter for perpherals only periodically plugged in(ie.Camcorder, iPod, PDAs) irrelevant
Mac mini advantages
Small
Separate monitor
Obviously there is a market for an xMac, it's only the size of that market that is in question. See the above statements about increasing Apple laptop market share and the lack of increasing Apple desktop market share.
That's the point though. If the market is not BIG enough, they won't make it. And they're stupid if they do.
With all due respect (I mean it I'm not looking to fight or insult), I think your really asking for a Mac Pro. The xMac, if it's ever made, simply can't have all the features you want as it would be a cheaper Mac Pro.
IMO, if an xMac is ever made it will be a headless iMac with maybe a better processor and a slightly higher price when you factor in a monitor. I don't think it'll have multiple internal drives and I don't think you'll be able to get anything better than a mid level graphics card.
I agree that what I do would be far better done on a Mac Pro than any of the lineup as I find I use a quad G5 more than any machine in the office I work in to get the heavy lifting done but I said before about where I work and how our computers are so varied because of the price. This is really where the point about the mid-range machine comes in. Everyone I work with can all settle with a mid-range machine instead of some people getting high end and others low end. The iMac isn't cost effective in a business environment due to the built-in screen.
I think that you would be able to get better parts as desktop parts are cheaper and you don't have to factor in the cost of the display. It doesn't have to be significantly better but it would most certainly be better at the same price without the display.
I know that some people then say that Apple don't target businesses just like they don't target gamers but that's why they are in a niche with the iMac. They're only targeting people who don't really care what computer they use and pretty = better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by splinemodel
The people in Apple's business unit are pros. They know more about their market than anyone else. If Apple releases a low cost tower, then fine, but you can't imagine how domb people sound when they claim they know better than Apple about Apple.
So what you're saying is that I and all the professional designers and film makers I work beside and am related to are not part of Apple's target audience? What is Apple's target audience exactly - they don't target businesses, they don't target gamers - are all the Macs under £1500 intended for old people who want to surf the internet?
This is the point I'm making. Apple's OS is great because they've taken an extremely powerful unix system and made it easier to use than any other system. This is perfect in all sorts of businesses. What is stopping them is their desktop lineup. I speak to people who have local businesses all the time and they often ask us why we use Macs and they give us the same reasons over and over again why they prefer PC hardware and I agree with them - they hardly ever say why Windows is a better operating system because they know it's not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
Disagree. We're dorky enough to post on an Apple fan site. We don't represent the market on the whole. We're only talking about a few hundred active posters at most, and a few dozen truly active posters. All total, there are probably only a few thousand people that really want one of these machines...taking into account all the rumor and news sites with BBs.
A few thousand?? You can't be seriously talking about a few thousand out of the 500 million or so PC users in the world. This isn't based on anything except a need for you to back up your own opinion, which has no other purpose than to prove yourself right for the sake of it. Again I'd ask, why don't people want a small tower introduced?
I can understand that you might think it's not necessary but you clearly think it will be a bad move and yet there are no rational explanations as to why you believe that. Would you still object if Apple actually made one or would you buy it?
To this you'd say get a Mac Pro and I would but it's bigger than I need by at least double and it's 50% more expensive than I need. £800-900 is a perfect price point for me. Take an £800 20" iMac, throw away the screen, use desktop components and a better GPU, two desktop HDs and boom, one happy camper.
Quad Conroe. And a decent GPU.
Yeesh. It's easy.
Price? 800-1200 pounds.
ie get rid of the iMac monitor and the relatively expensive laptop components go.
You get the 'Mac' (Pro) for the rest of us.
A cuboid expandable mini-tower. It would sit quite well above the Mini. Under the Pro Octo Uber. And alongside the iMac. Simple mini pro case styling. Or even something inspired by the rather sexy iMac case. ie A consumer tower. It's not like Apple can't do stylish.
As for the cannibilisation? well, as Jobs says? We'd rather lose sales to ourselves than our competition...
And for the record. I covet the new iMac like no other computer Apple have made.
However, I can't help but feel that buying a Dual core now is a sideways step when Intel and Amd are going Quad mainstream.
2ndly? The gpu. People, PEOPLE! It's the gpu! Pro? At least make it the Radeon 2600xt... (Looks skywards. It's like the return of the Ati Rage 16 nightmare all over a gain...)
If Apple offered a Quad conroe 30 incher with decent GPU? I'd be all over it. I guess it will come eventually...when the quad laptop cpu arrives mid 2008 and 30 incher prices plummet.
A few thousand?? You can't be seriously talking about a few thousand out of the 500 million or so PC users in the world. This isn't based on anything except a need for you to back up your own opinion, which has no other purpose than to prove yourself right for the sake of it.
Well why not? Others have claimed that these sites represent a sizable market. Let's say every major rumor site has 100 active posters that want the product. Do the math. That's the only support that's been offered so far. So guess what? It works both ways. Now, do I really think they'd only sell a few thousand units? No.
Quote:
Again I'd ask, why don't people want a small tower introduced?
Wrong question. Why DO they want it. That's the question.
Quote:
I can understand that you might think it's not necessary but you clearly think it will be a bad move and yet there are no rational explanations as to why you believe that. Would you still object if Apple actually made one or would you buy it?
Uh, no rational explanation? Seriously? How about:
1. No major market. Why?
a. Too expensive compared to mini
b. Same price as iMac, no screen
c. Mac Pro is what people really need for expandability.
d. People can buy a used Mac Pro for the same or near the same price.
2. Doesn't fit product Matrix.
a. Mini $599-799
b. iMac $1199-2299 with screen
c. Mac Pro $2299+
d. Minitower? $1599.
3. If there is no market it won't be profitable. If it's not profitable, why would Apple make it?
Need I go on? As for me, I wouldn't buy one because I am fine using my MBP. If I were up for a desktop, it would either be an iMac or a Mac Pro.
So what you're saying is that I and all the professional designers and film makers I work beside and am related to are not part of Apple's target audience?
You're foolish to think that Apple Marketing hasn't investigated your market. You also still don't get it. I give up. You guys are simply too thick.
Others have claimed that these sites represent a sizable market. Let's say every major rumor site has 100 active posters that want the product. Do the math. That's the only support that's been offered so far. So guess what? It works both ways. Now, do I really think they'd only sell a few thousand units? No.
These sites represent a percentage of the market interested in the product, you don't base it on numbers alone as no survey ever does that. They don't say we surveyed 1000 people and 100 of them have opinion x, this means 100 people have opinion x. They say 10% have opinion x as they extrapolate the stats.
The stats in the computing world as I've shown before are that there are close to 1 billion PCs worldwide. Recent figures suggest that 20% of those at most are laptops but to be conservative, we'll say desktops are about 500 million.
If Apple owns 5% then they have 25 million desktops worldwide, which is reasonable. Now even if the iMacs account for 50% of all of those (considering there are a huge number of G4, G5, Mac Pro towers and Mini users out there) then that figure is 12.5 million but to be conservative again, we'll say 15 million.
Now look at the number of AIO designs sold in the PC world. According to this site:
"Sony is still taking a fairly big risk with the W. Aside from Apple's iMac, "there's really not been any successful all-in-one PCs," Baker said.
Part of that has to do with price. All-in-one computers typically cost more than a PC and monitor purchased separately. Also, businesses have shown they prefer to keep PCs and monitors separate as monitors can be replaced less often than PCs. Such a setup also simplifies repairs.
Because of the difference in PC and monitor upgrade cycles, IBM discontinued its all-in-one NetVista X Series PC."
it's an old article but it's still fairly relevant. PC AIOs are not popular. Apple's are because it's all they offer. So let's say that the desktop AIO PC market is at 10% (and I'm sure you'll agree that's more than generous), we get
500 million - Apple's 25 million = 475 million * 0.9 = 427 million
Assuming the same distribution between high end and low end as Apple have with the iMac taking the most at 50% then we get 213 million mid-range headless PCs.
So the market for the product we want in this thread has 213 million people in it.
The market that the iMac can aim at contains only 12.5 million + 47.5 million = 60 million.
So the market for a mid-range headless computer is at least 3 times larger than the market for an all-in-one in the same price/spec category.
Of course Apple have two choices, they can either give that market what they want or try and convert the 213 million people over to their way of thinking. Maybe they will but I doubt it for the many places where the iMac is lacking at least for the next two years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
Wrong question. Why DO they want it. That's the question.
That's been answered with many good and varied reasons. My question is why are you objecting to it? If you are not going to buy one then what difference does it make?
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
a. Too expensive compared to mini
It has better components than the Mini as does the iMac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
b. Same price as iMac, no screen
It doesn't have to be but I'd buy it even if it was because it would be a proper desktop and I wouldn't feel burdened by having a sealed in screen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
c. Mac Pro is what people really need for expandability.
For ultimate expandability yes i.e 4 hard drives, 16GB Ram, two graphics cards etc. That isn't needed in the mid range.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
d. People can buy a used Mac Pro for the same or near the same price.
The Mac Pro is big and I doubt you can get even a used Mac Pro for £800. Maybe in a year or two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
2. Doesn't fit product Matrix.
a. Mini $599-799
b. iMac $1199-2299 with screen
c. Mac Pro $2299+
d. Minitower? $1599.
No. Mini tower: $799-1999 is a possibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
3. If there is no market it won't be profitable. If it's not profitable, why would Apple make it?
Ok but that's not an issue as there is a market and it's the same market the iMac aims at and fails to impress the majority.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
Need I go on? As for me, I wouldn't buy one because I am fine using my MBP. If I were up for a desktop, it would either be an iMac or a Mac Pro.
I would actually take a MBP over an iMac. If you are paying for an AIO with the iMac, you may as well get a laptop as it depreciates less and you actually get the portability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by splinemodel
You're foolish to think that Apple Marketing hasn't investigated your market.
Ok so assuming they have investigated it then why don't they offer a product to satisfy it? Is it a market they don't care about? It's clear this can't be the case because Final Cut and their audio software is aimed directly at this market. But one thing this market definitely likes is matching dual displays and RAID systems because for video work at least, the hard drives are the biggest bottleneck when you are dealing with 20GB+ DV files.
Quote:
Originally Posted by backtomac
Apple should just redo the Mac Pro with Conroe parts, get rid of the FB DIMMS and lower the price if that's the case.
Who would buy a Mac Pro if they could get what you propose?
Knowing the base model Mac Pro is £1400, if they can get that below £1000 just by replacing some parts then I'd seriously consider it. The sheer bulk and unneeded expansion is still an issue though. Like I say, I have G5 towers where I work and we simply haven't upgraded them at all really but we have struggled to transport them. We considered a PCI card at one point but we just use a firewire device instead so all we really need is two drives, the possibility of a quad (though a Core 2 Extreme is good), a decent GPU (our G5s only have the 256MB Geforce 6600s) with dual display support and 4GB Ram. We just don't use more than 4GB.
These sites represent a percentage of the market interested in the product, you don't base it on numbers alone as no survey ever does that. They don't say we surveyed 1000 people and 100 of them have opinion x, this means 100 people have opinion x. They say 10% have opinion x as they extrapolate the stats.
I have to agree with others on this board, "we" are the niche. I've installed many different configs for people over the years and NONE of them use computers (or have the knowledge or interest to use them) as "we" do. The vast majority of users have simple needs and Apple of course is all about simplification. Period. That Philosophy has made many clients very happy because their machines do what they want everytime they want it to, without having to learn a new way of doing it or fixing each time they do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
So what you're saying is that I and all the professional designers and filmmakers I work beside and am related to are not part of Apple's target audience?
Apple's target is CONSUMERS! If you're trying to do 3d work on a mini or an imac or anything more than dv editing on an imac you're asking for trouble and you're NOT A PRO ! If you haven't been doing it for 10 years and you haven't shelled out 20 - 30 K on you're gear you're an enthusiast or a prosumer, but not a pro.
You may be getting paid for your gigs but I hate to burst your bubble, there is actually a very small number of PRO's out there and they don't complain about the cost of thier equipment because their studios are paying for the gear. What would you guys do if all we had were SGI machines again? You wouldn?t be trying to call yourself a pro and as a matter of fact you?d probably be ?accountants? or some flavor of generic business major. Do you have any Idea how much gear you're average DP needs on a film shoot? or how many servers it takes to render a 3D scene in a respectable amount of time?
To put it simply consumers are too "stupid" to handle problems and pros are too "smart" to not avoid them. In other words, a consumer has to have a system designed so that they never encounter a problem because they won't ever fix it or they?ll get so frustrated that they?ll blame the product and never buy another, let?s say Apple, again.
A pro will just avoid the problem of reliability by using "older" gear that they now is stable in favoring reliability for the latest greatest fastest whatever
Prosumer equipment has evolved into a neutered, beta version of ??future feature? pro gear and it will always need mods and time to allow for the glitches because it?s a new product, that uses new tech to make what was unaffordable, affordable to the high end consumer (i.e. Prosumer) market.
Grouping the needs of a pro and a enthusiast together is part of the problem in my opinion. You'd be seriously disappointed if you had to get into a Union. How much time and commitment do you think it takes to really call yourself a pro around those guys and yeah you need the gear to go along with it. I remember quite well how embarrassed I was the first time I pulled out a regular extension cord from my "kit" on one of my first jobs as an assistant to the DP. I didn't think it made a difference "it was a really good AWG 12/3 extension cord after all" and we were trouble shooting a problem anyway, but you bet your ass I bought a "stinger" after taking shit from the crew all month about it.
Don't be crazy! You're lost in prosumer limbo... sorry but that's a market that will always have problems and never offer the right thing because the definitions are always changing. That's the nature of the beast. Prosumers always want the latest, greatest tech because it makes it affordable to do things only "pros" (people with "studio" Boutique or otherwise, budgets) could do before. Panasonic is doing a fine job of ripping off prosumers with their silly ass p2 camera's right now as just one example of a cluster FU_- of a prosumer product. Not that it won't be great in 5 -10 years but this is not a mature technology and their using Prosumers as the beta testers.
Only someone who is content with lots of glitches, making modifications and possible downtime, messing about with 3rd party option, upgrading etc etc would want a "mini" tower. I mean if it won't fit a full size card why would you want it anyway... and if you need a full size card capable machine then you just need the capital to buy a tower and if you?re really into the game you?ll probably need several.
Apple is consumer oriented because it makes them the most money, Pros had been disappointed with Apple?s offerings for years and we?ve always had other proprietary options at our disposal, so it never really mattered. Recently they?ve made changes but they aren?t the only game in town and Apple knows it so they stick to the consumers needs and the consumers needs are simple for a slew of reasons and Apple likes simple because it makes customer support easier and return clients more frequent because everyone is happy.
There's no point in arguing w/ the people who don't want to see an xMac come out, they refuse to allow logic and stats to sway them. This is for a good reason, they're terrified that an xMac would kill the iMac. Would it? It would definitely outsell the iMac as well as steal sales from it, but that doesn't mean Apple would have to kill off the iMac.
If they began selling xMac displays using the same screens as the iMac uses they could keep their iMac costs down. Further they could kill the Mini and replace it w/ a low-end xMac to reduce overhead while still offering a very reasonable entry-level system, although i'd think in this case it should start closer to $700 than $500. Most likely though is they'd keep the Mini around start the xMac at $1000-1200 w/ configurations going up to close to $3000 on the top end.
I feel a pizza box form factor (stylish of course-Ives can do it I'm sure) would be best simply because a tower offering just feels like it wants to compete w/ the MacPro. It would still have room for 2 hds, 2 pcie slots, and at least one 5.25 drive. Much more expandability and it would be competing too closely w/ the MacPro, any less and one might as well get a Mini or iMac and deal w/ their failings.
I have to agree with others on this board, "we" are the niche. I've installed many different configs for people over the years and NONE of them use computers (or have the knowledge or interest to use them) as "we" do. The vast majority of users have simple needs and Apple of course is all about simplification. Period. That Philosophy has made many clients very happy because their machines do what they want everytime they want it to, without having to learn a new way of doing it or fixing each time they do it.
Actually, any AIO desktop falls into the niche category. It is only Apple forcing the issue by not offering anything but the iMac and Mac mini. So no we are not a niche.
If the "majority of users have simple needs" then the iMac is way over powered for their needs. And apparently, based on speculation, the Mac mini isn't racking up great sales numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey
Apple's target is CONSUMERS! If you're trying to do 3d work on a mini or an imac or anything more than dv editing on an imac you're asking for trouble and you're NOT A PRO ! If you haven't been doing it for 10 years and you haven't shelled out 20 - 30 K on you're gear you're an enthusiast or a prosumer, but not a pro.
Can't speak for all pros, I'm definitely not one, but let the Pros buy the Mac Pro and offer an xMac to the rest of us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey
You may be getting paid for your gigs but I hate to burst your bubble, there is actually a very small number of PRO's out there and they don't complain about the cost of thier equipment because their studios are paying for the gear. What would you guys do if all we had were SGI machines again? You wouldn?t be trying to call yourself a pro and as a matter of fact you?d probably be ?accountants? or some flavor of generic business major. Do you have any Idea how much gear you're average DP needs on a film shoot? or how many servers it takes to render a 3D scene in a respectable amount of time?
Us poor consumers would like to have reasonable speed for our iMovie and/or Final Cut Express projects too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey
To put it simply consumers are too "stupid" to handle problems and pros are too "smart" to not avoid them. In other words, a consumer has to have a system designed so that they never encounter a problem because they won't ever fix it or they?ll get so frustrated that they?ll blame the product and never buy another, let?s say Apple, again.
A pro will just avoid the problem of reliability by using "older" gear that they now is stable in favoring reliability for the latest greatest fastest whatever
Prosumer equipment has evolved into a neutered, beta version of ??future feature? pro gear and it will always need mods and time to allow for the glitches because it?s a new product, that uses new tech to make what was unaffordable, affordable to the high end consumer (i.e. Prosumer) market.
Grouping the needs of a pro and a enthusiast together is part of the problem in my opinion. You'd be seriously disappointed if you had to get into a Union. How much time and commitment do you think it takes to really call yourself a pro around those guys and yeah you need the gear to go along with it. I remember quite well how embarrassed I was the first time I pulled out a regular extension cord from my "kit" on one of my first jobs as an assistant to the DP. I didn't think it made a difference "it was a really good AWG 12/3 extension cord after all" and we were trouble shooting a problem anyway, but you bet your ass I bought a "stinger" after taking shit from the crew all month about it.
Don't be crazy! You're lost in prosumer limbo... sorry but that's a market that will always have problems and never offer the right thing because the definitions are always changing. That's the nature of the beast. Prosumers always want the latest, greatest tech because it makes it affordable to do things only "pros" (people with "studio" Boutique or otherwise, budgets) could do before. Panasonic is doing a fine job of ripping off prosumers with their silly ass p2 camera's right now as just one example of a cluster FU_- of a prosumer product. Not that it won't be great in 5 -10 years but this is not a mature technology and their using Prosumers as the beta testers.
Only someone who is content with lots of glitches, making modifications and possible downtime, messing about with 3rd party option, upgrading etc etc would want a "mini" tower. I mean if it won't fit a full size card why would you want it anyway... and if you need a full size card capable machine then you just need the capital to buy a tower and if you?re really into the game you?ll probably need several.
I'm not a geek by any stretch of the imagination, but I have installed a video card, USB/Firewire card and a Sonnet upgrade card with absolutely no problems, at all. The vast mafority of desktop computers sold are towers of some kind, the AIO doesn't sell, maybe consumers don't need towers, but they surely do prefer them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey
Apple is consumer oriented because it makes them the most money, Pros had been disappointed with Apple?s offerings for years and we?ve always had other proprietary options at our disposal, so it never really mattered. Recently they?ve made changes but they aren?t the only game in town and Apple knows it so they stick to the consumers needs and the consumers needs are simple for a slew of reasons and Apple likes simple because it makes customer support easier and return clients more frequent because everyone is happy.
Not everyone is happy as evidenced by this and the numberous threads on many Applecentric boards.
Why, I think, ...... well it could be,...... yes I do believe it'a a phenmenon....... occuring all over the web, it's xMac lust.
Disagree. We're dorky enough to post on an Apple fan site. We don't represent the market on the whole. We're only talking about a few hundred active posters at most, and a few dozen truly active posters. All total, there are probably only a few thousand people that really want one of these machines...taking into account all the rumor and news sites with BBs.
The majority of whom? AI posters who happen to be posting in this thread? The vast majority of Mac users don't even know this or other sites even exist.
AppleInsider 40,321 members
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
But what you've presented doesn't prove any particular point we've been discussing. I'm not arguing that desktop sales aren't flat. I'm saying you've not offered any proof showing it's because people don't like Apple's desktop offerings. You're simply speculating.
Yes, speculating, based on Apple's own numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
I'd say that's reasonable.
OK, let's assume that's true. Does it then follow that the xMac is the answer? I don't think it does.
Based on what sells on the Windows side, I think it does.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
You really are a piece of work. Tell me, what special "needs" am I missing? Shit, you make it sound like we're talking about psychotherapy or something. It's a computer. There aren't that many possible needs.
No, not psychotherapy, simply stating the facts. I don't know their needs, nor do you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
Yes, it does. Among a small number of people that post on Mac rumor and info sites. That's all.
The small number is growing. Assuming you are correct, that only a small number of people post, then it is somewhat revealing that a recent blog post expressing a desire for an xMac resulted in over 4,000 diggs. Speculating here: Then that small number of actual people posting and reading these blogs/posts, that you identified, may in fact represent a much larger percentage of the population.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
Wants vs Needs is important. A company truly ignoring a need is one thing. A company not catering to every special want is another. As for me posting style, I don't really care if it incites anger. That just shows me the people asking for the product are irrational...just as I've said all along.
No, not irrational. It is not irrational to look at the other manufacturers of computers, observe that over the years they have offered AIO computers that just haven't sold and represent a small niche. It's logic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
So let me get this straight...I'm posting just to piss people off? That's what flame bait is, champ.
Your reasons are known only to you, the results are obvious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
AIO advantages
Easy set up when first bought.
To some(not all, need I mention the chin) very attractive design
Reduced desktop footprint/clutter(unless you add external harddrive and/or optical drive)
xMac advantages
Separate monitor Why is this an advantage? Your kidding right
Internal optical drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive
Internal hard drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter)Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive
Slots for future technological changes and/or repairs(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive
Graphic card slot for those that so desire Mac ProToo expensive, ram too expensive
----note the above items increase cost nigh to nothing Prove it Look at motherboard prices
Use of desktop processor reduces cost to Apple and consumer Fair enough
Use of desktop hard drive(compared to mini only) reduces cost to Apple and consumer irrelevant Lower cost is not irrelvant? Economic theory disagrees with you
Use of desktop ram reduces cost to Apple and consumer. irrelevant Lower cost is not irrelvant? Economic theory disagrees with you
Ports on front reduces clutter for perpherals only periodically plugged in(ie.Camcorder, iPod, PDAs) irrelevant Reduced desktop clutter is not irrelevant
Mac mini advantages
Small
Separate monitor
Obviously there is a market for an xMac, it's only the size of that market that is in question. See the above statements about increasing Apple laptop market share and the lack of increasing Apple desktop market share.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
That's the point though. If the market is not BIG enough, they won't make it. And they're stupid if they do.
The numbers disagree with you. AIO on the Windows side is a very small niche market, Why?
Apples laptops are increasing market share, Apple desktops are not increasing market share.
You admit Apple is selling to switchers do to Mac OS X. If it is Mac OS X, then why not a similare increase in desktop market share?
Even assuming the market is not big enough for an xMac, then the simple solution is to stop selling it if it does not sell or threatens iMac sales or margins. This is a very low risk option as opposed to the high risk options Apple has taken, Cube, iPod, iPhone, Pippin, Newton, etc.
Apple's target is CONSUMERS! If you're trying to do 3d work on a mini or an imac or anything more than dv editing on an imac you're asking for trouble and you're NOT A PRO ! If you haven't been doing it for 10 years and you haven't shelled out 20 - 30 K on you're gear you're an enthusiast or a prosumer, but not a pro.
I would agree to an extent but I've benchmarked the Mini, iMac and towers and the term 'pro' for computers these days is quite naive. As Splinemodel pointed out and I agree with, mid-range computers today are more powerful than computers that pros used a few years ago so it is perfectly possible to do professional work on mid-range computers. What my objection to is the niche form factor the spec is presented in.
Your opinion seems to be similar to Apple's, which is that say a pro from 5 years ago has a dual G4 tower all specced out, you'd say he was a pro back then. But if that same person migrated to an iMac today, even if he produced the same work and knowing the iMac is faster than the old tower, you'd say he wasn't a pro? That doesn't make any sense to me. The computer doesn't define the individual using it but Apple likes to dumb computers down into stupid stereotypes that have no relevance today and people lap it up. The person who runs the company I'm at has a Macbook 'PRO'. Y'know what he uses it for? Email. He's a professional emailer I'll admit but you see where I'm coming from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey
Do you have any Idea how much gear you're average DP needs on a film shoot? or how many servers it takes to render a 3D scene in a respectable amount of time?
Yeah we've spent probably £20k+ on equipment, close to half of that is on Macs (we have a few laptops) but I'd say the work we do can be classed under prosumer and not pro - I would usually define prosumer as maybe a freelance individual or something though. By no means will we compete with large companies who can easily shell out £100k+ (possibly millions) on equipment but we certainly need more than the iMac offers because we have some and they just aren't cutting it and this thread is about a mid-range tower, not a cheap Mac Pro.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey
a consumer has to have a system designed so that they never encounter a problem because they won't ever fix it
Only someone who is content with lots of glitches, making modifications and possible downtime, messing about with 3rd party option, upgrading etc etc would want a "mini" tower.
I don't follow you there at all. If Apple design the machine, I don't see how it's any more difficult to work with than the rest of their products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by spliff monkey
Apple is consumer oriented because it makes them the most money, Pros had been disappointed with Apple?s offerings for years and we?ve always had other proprietary options at our disposal, so it never really mattered. Recently they?ve made changes but they aren?t the only game in town and Apple knows it so they stick to the consumers needs and the consumers needs are simple for a slew of reasons and Apple likes simple because it makes customer support easier and return clients more frequent because everyone is happy.
So you're saying the same thing as Splinemodel appears to be saying and that is that Apple products aren't good enough for this market segment? I agree but that's why we are asking for a product that is good enough.
These sites represent a percentage of the market interested in the product, you don't base it on numbers alone as no survey ever does that. They don't say we surveyed 1000 people and 100 of them have opinion x, this means 100 people have opinion x. They say 10% have opinion x as they extrapolate the stats.
The stats in the computing world as I've shown before are that there are close to 1 billion PCs worldwide. Recent figures suggest that 20% of those at most are laptops but to be conservative, we'll say desktops are about 500 million.
If Apple owns 5% then they have 25 million desktops worldwide, which is reasonable. Now even if the iMacs account for 50% of all of those (considering there are a huge number of G4, G5, Mac Pro towers and Mini users out there) then that figure is 12.5 million but to be conservative again, we'll say 15 million.
Now look at the number of AIO designs sold in the PC world. According to this site:
"Sony is still taking a fairly big risk with the W. Aside from Apple's iMac, "there's really not been any successful all-in-one PCs," Baker said.
Part of that has to do with price. All-in-one computers typically cost more than a PC and monitor purchased separately. Also, businesses have shown they prefer to keep PCs and monitors separate as monitors can be replaced less often than PCs. Such a setup also simplifies repairs.
Because of the difference in PC and monitor upgrade cycles, IBM discontinued its all-in-one NetVista X Series PC."
it's an old article but it's still fairly relevant. PC AIOs are not popular. Apple's are because it's all they offer. So let's say that the desktop AIO PC market is at 10% (and I'm sure you'll agree that's more than generous), we get
500 million - Apple's 25 million = 475 million * 0.9 = 427 million
Assuming the same distribution between high end and low end as Apple have with the iMac taking the most at 50% then we get 213 million mid-range headless PCs.
So the market for the product we want in this thread has 213 million people in it.
The market that the iMac can aim at contains only 12.5 million + 47.5 million = 60 million.
So the market for a mid-range headless computer is at least 3 times larger than the market for an all-in-one in the same price/spec category.
Of course Apple have two choices, they can either give that market what they want or try and convert the 213 million people over to their way of thinking. Maybe they will but I doubt it for the many places where the iMac is lacking at least for the next two years.
Wow, you really have some time on your hands, huh? Once again, I didn't claim they would only sell a few thousand machines. I claimed that in total, there were probably only a few thousand active mac forum posters that would...which is what those supporting the tower have been pointing to. It's not something that can be extrapolated like you attempted to do. We don't represent average PC users or even Mac users here.
Quote:
That's been answered with many good and varied reasons. My question is why are you objecting to it? If you are not going to buy one then what difference does it make?
It's been answered with no good reasons. None at all. I object to it because it's not a smart move for Apple.
Quote:
It has better components than the Mini as does the iMac.
Uh, so?
Quote:
It doesn't have to be but I'd buy it even if it was because it would be a proper desktop and I wouldn't feel burdened by having a sealed in screen.
That's exactly the kind of response I'm talking about. Who cares if you're "sealed to a screen" when the screen is great? And big? And what the hell is a "proper desktop?" See, it's all based on emotion and even image, not need.
Quote:
For ultimate expandability yes i.e 4 hard drives, 16GB Ram, two graphics cards etc. That isn't needed in the mid range.
Oh I see...you need some expandability but not that much. Gotcha.
Quote:
The Mac Pro is big and I doubt you can get even a used Mac Pro for £800. Maybe in a year or two.
You can get one for about that, yes.
Quote:
No. Mini tower: $799-1999 is a possibility.
$799? Keep dreaming.
Quote:
Ok but that's not an issue as there is a market and it's the same market the iMac aims at and fails to impress the majority.
1. You haven't proven there is a market.
2. The iMac still sells relatively well. It's certainly impresses the majority...just not you.
Quote:
I would actually take a MBP over an iMac. If you are paying for an AIO with the iMac, you may as well get a laptop as it depreciates less and you actually get the portability.
OK, I agree there.
Quote:
Ok so assuming they have investigated it then why don't they offer a product to satisfy it? Is it a market they don't care about?
Uh no. They know the market is not big enough to justify making the product.
Quote:
It's clear this can't be the case because Final Cut and their audio software is aimed directly at this market. But one thing this market definitely likes is matching dual displays and RAID systems because for video work at least, the hard drives are the biggest bottleneck when you are dealing with 20GB+ DV files.
No, that's the MAC PRO market. Really, I assured you
Quote:
Knowing the base model Mac Pro is £1400, if they can get that below £1000 just by replacing some parts then I'd seriously consider it. The sheer bulk and unneeded expansion is still an issue though. Like I say, I have G5 towers where I work and we simply haven't upgraded them at all really but we have struggled to transport them. We considered a PCI card at one point but we just use a firewire device instead so all we really need is two drives, the possibility of a quad (though a Core 2 Extreme is good), a decent GPU (our G5s only have the 256MB Geforce 6600s) with dual display support and 4GB Ram. We just don't use more than 4GB.
Backtomac is right though. If someone can get a fast, expandable machine for that money, there is no reason to buy a Mac Pro except in the case someone needs the utmost in speed. They could end depressing Mac Pro sales for the sake of niche product.
Wow, you really have some time on your hands, huh? \\
Actually you seem to be the one with a lot of time on their hands. If you don't want, or have any interest in the Macs we have been discussing why are you in here? Why don't you find a thread that you like, not try and terrorize users for having different expectations and needs than yours? Your obviously not contributing anything positive to this discussion. Even though your opinion is in the minority you still seem to think this thread is all about your opinion. Get a clue.
Yes, but still speculating. It's actually really easy to do. Using those numbers, I'll do the same: Clearly the gap in desktops and laptops is due to Apple sales staff whispering "don't buy a desktop" in customers ears. See how easy that was?
Quote:
Based on what sells on the Windows side, I think it does.
We've been through this. The Windows side does not necessarily equate the the Mac side. You know this.
Quote:
No, not psychotherapy, simply stating the facts. I don't know their needs, nor do you.
2. Prosumer, above plus video editing, encoding, some audio recording, more advanced games/graphics needs, etc.
3. Pro: Above plus heavy photo/video/audio work, expandability and speed a must, heavy rendering uses, massive storage needs.
That's really all there is. It's a computer. The rest of it relates to whether or not someone has a monitor and what he can afford.
Quote:
The small number is growing. Assuming you are correct, that only a small number of people post, then it is somewhat revealing that a recent blog post expressing a desire for an xMac resulted in over 4,000 diggs. Speculating here: Then that small number of actual people posting and reading these blogs/posts, that you identified, may in fact represent a much larger percentage of the population.
Yep, that's right. It's speculation.
Quote:
No, not irrational. It is not irrational to look at the other manufacturers of computers, observe that over the years they have offered AIO computers that just haven't sold and represent a small niche. It's logic.
It's flawed logic when you compare to the two markets as if they're the same. If they were, the original iMac would have failed miserably.
Quote:
Your reasons are known only to you, the results are obvious.
Rhetorical nonsense.
Quote:
Obviously there is a market for an xMac, it's only the size of that market that is in question. See the above statements about increasing Apple laptop market share and the lack of increasing Apple desktop market share.
Maybe because Apple's laptop offerings are that compelling?
Quote:
The numbers disagree with you. AIO on the Windows side is a very small niche market, Why?
Asked and answered multiple times.
Quote:
Apples laptops are increasing market share, Apple desktops are not increasing market share.
You admit Apple is selling to switchers do to Mac OS X. If it is Mac OS X, then why not a similare increase in desktop market share?
Because of several reasons. First, Apple's laptops are very compelling offerings, as I just said. Secondly, consumers are moving more towards laptops in general. They are becoming more powerful and less expensive. People are also putting more of a priority on portability.
Quote:
Even assuming the market is not big enough for an xMac, then the simple solution is to stop selling it if it does not sell or threatens iMac sales or margins. This is a very low risk option as opposed to the high risk options Apple has taken, Cube, iPod, iPhone, Pippin, Newton, etc.
There would still be research, development and marketing costs. It's not free to put a machine out there. It might be lower risk, but it's still a risk....obviously one Apple is not willing to take.
-------------
Mac advantages
Separate monitor Why is this an advantage? Your kidding right. No. you?
Internal optical drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive. Too expensive for whom? And for what it is? Same goes for ram.
Internal hard drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter)Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive Too expensive for whom? And for what it is? Same goes for ram.
Slots for future technological changes and/or repairs(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive
Graphic card slot for those that so desire Mac ProToo expensive, ram too expensive
----note the above items increase cost nigh to nothing Prove it Look at motherboard prices Too expensive for whom? And for what it is? Same goes for ram.
Use of desktop processor reduces cost to Apple and consumer Fair enough
Use of desktop hard drive(compared to mini only) reduces cost to Apple and consumer irrelevant Lower cost is not irrelvant? Economic theory disagrees with you "Economic "theory?" WTF? It's irrelevant because the mid pro would not compete against the mini
Use of desktop ram reduces cost to Apple and consumer. irrelevant Lower cost is not irrelvant? Economic theory disagrees with you How much does it reduce it?.
Ports on front reduces clutter for perpherals only periodically plugged in(ie.Camcorder, iPod, PDAs) irrelevant Reduced desktop clutter is not irrelevant It is when an iMac would do the same thing....and better.
Obviously there is a market for an xMac, it's only the size of that market that is in question.
The market for an xMac is evidently smaller than the market for an Apple tablet. At least that seems to be the business decision for the makers of the ModBook*.
Likewise a discussion here on how to build a Mini based tower garnered scant attention but yet folks continue to claim that OMG there's a huge market for a headless mac with better expansion than the Mini but less than the Mac Pro.
Vinea
* Odds are they built the ModBook to scratch an itch rather than do so based on some analysis of what could sell. However, that no one has bothered for the tower market is telling is it not? If there was a huge pent up demand for such a thing then technically it is feasible.
You said the xMac wouldn't sell because it's more expensive than a Mini, I was just pointing out that an iMac is more expensive than a Mini.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
That's exactly the kind of response I'm talking about. Who cares if you're "sealed to a screen" when the screen is great? And big? And what the hell is a "proper desktop?" See, it's all based on emotion and even image, not need.
You know the iMac has laptop parts in it? This makes it unnecessarily more expensive and less powerful. There is no problem with the screen until it breaks or it gets dead pixels and then you have to send your whole computer away for ages until it's repaired or you get another one - it's not practical.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
You can get one for about that, yes.
Where about? I checked ebay and they aren't going that cheap.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
$799? Keep dreaming.
That was taking into consideration that they could take the Mini ($599) and put it in a bigger box and get round about the same price point. It can easily be cheaper than the iMac with no screen and desktop parts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
The iMac still sells relatively well. It's certainly impresses the majority...just not you.
The majority of what market? I'd put it to you that it has close to a 100% majority holding of the niche it serves because hardly anybody else wants to target it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
Uh no. They know the market is not big enough to justify making the product.
Of course that assumes the only people who want it are prosumers but add in the gamers and PC users who have displays already but want a more powerful machine then the market suddenly gets pretty big.
You're not counting the people who own iMacs who would have chosen a tower given the option. There was someone on the forum did that recently and another one has appeared just today. They can't decide between an iMac or Mac Pro because neither are really ideal. I think the number of people who own an imac and would rather have something else are more than you and Apple would like to believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
No, that's the MAC PRO market. Really, I assured you
Kind of - I know Final Cut can strain a Mac tower at times too - but most of the time, the resources used by it are lower and a smaller machine is appealing because of the form factor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
Backtomac is right though. If someone can get a fast, expandable machine for that money, there is no reason to buy a Mac Pro except in the case someone needs the utmost in speed. They could end depressing Mac Pro sales for the sake of niche product.
Then maybe Apple needs to rethink the Mac Pro. If they believe the world is all-in-one then maybe the world is also one where people don't need expandable towers. They've already crippled the low and mid-range, why not go all out and do the same with the only configurable machine they have left? Like I say I work with towers and we don't upgrade them at all besides extra storage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001
We've been through this. The Windows side does not necessarily equate the the Mac side. You know this.
No, it equates to the opposite side i.e if someone is buying a PC then it's because Apple don't offer what they want. Windows is not an argument any more now that Macs run Windows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
The market for an xMac is evidently smaller than the market for an Apple tablet. At least that seems to be the business decision for the makers of the ModBook*.
That's a good point but I think that's different because all they're doing is replacing the screen on a Macbook. What we need is a whole new model of computer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
Likewise a discussion here on how to build a Mini based tower garnered scant attention but yet folks continue to claim that OMG there's a huge market for a headless mac with better expansion than the Mini but less than the Mac Pro.
We're behind your thread on that attempt, it's just that there's little to discuss because in the end, the best that we can hope to get is a hacked Mini. It's still not the proper desktop we want and it won't have the design of an Apple product. I hope you continue with it though because if you can get a good GPU and a couple of hard drives hooked to the Mini then it's probably the closest we'll get short of a hackintosh.
Comments
It's more than you've presented. I gave Apple's desktop sales collected from their quarterly reports, show me your numbers.
It's a simple concept.
Consumers are switching to Apple computers as a whole, why, IMHO the reason is OS X.
Apple laptops gaining market share.
Apple desktops are not gaining market share.
Simplest reason, Occam's razor and all that, is that people in general appreciate Apple's laptops but not their consumer desktop form factors.
Flippant responses still don't sway my beliefs.
This doesn't negate the fact that you've no idea about posters needs.
Not me, I just pointed out that most of the anger I've seen posted in this forum is aimed directly at you, not Apple.
Apparently you just don't get it. The very existence of this and the numerous other threads here and at other websites shows that there is a desire for an xMac, that is real.
Wants... needs, makes no difference to me.
But your continued belaboring of the actual needs or wants of posters here, especially the manner in which you post, only further incites anger, towards you, not Apple.
Never expected you to stop.
It's not Apple's offerings that are flame bait, it's your postings telling people what they need and the method in which you post it.
No, you haven't gotcha nothing.
AIO advantages
Easy set up when first bought.
To some(not all, need I mention the chin) very attractive design
Reduced desktop footprint/clutter(unless you add external harddrive and/or optical drive)
xMac advantages
Separate monitor
Internal optical drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter)
Internal hard drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter)
Slots for future technological changes and/or repairs(less expensive reduces clutter)
Graphic card slot for those that so desire
----note the above items increase cost nigh to nothing
Use of desktop processor reduces cost to Apple and consumer
Use of desktop hard drive(compared to mini only) reduces cost to Apple and consumer
Use of desktop ram reduces cost to Apple and consumer.
Ports on front reduces clutter for perpherals only periodically plugged in(ie.Camcorder, iPod, PDAs)
desktops also have better cooling so you can use higher end cpus and video cards.
Actually, I'd say that it's our opinion that matters most. When surveys go out about Mac customer satisfaction, they conduct the survey among Mac users.
Disagree. We're dorky enough to post on an Apple fan site. We don't represent the market on the whole. We're only talking about a few hundred active posters at most, and a few dozen truly active posters. All total, there are probably only a few thousand people that really want one of these machines...taking into account all the rumor and news sites with BBs.
Mac users would naturally be the highest percentage of people buying Mac computers. ANd as I said. If you get other stats I'll gladly look at them, but you can't discredit it because you don't agree with the majority.
The majority of whom? AI posters who happen to be posting in this thread? The vast majority of Mac users don't even know this or other sites even exist.
It's more than you've presented. I gave Apple's desktop sales collected from their quarterly reports, show me your numbers.
But what you've presented doesn't prove any particular point we've been discussing. I'm not arguing that desktop sales aren't flat. I'm saying you've not offered any proof showing it's because people don't like Apple's desktop offerings. You're simply speculating.
It's a simple concept.
Consumers are switching to Apple computers as a whole, why, IMHO the reason is OS X.p
I'd say that's reasonable.
Apple laptops gaining market share.
Apple desktops are not gaining market share.
Simplest reason, Occam's razor and all that, is that people in general appreciate Apple's laptops but not their consumer desktop form factors.
OK, let's assume that's true. Does it then follow that the xMac is the answer? I don't think it does.
Flippant responses still don't sway my beliefs.
Whatever
This doesn't negate the fact that you've no idea about posters needs.
Not me, I just pointed out that most of the anger I've seen posted in this forum is aimed directly at you, not Apple.
Alright, maybe it's not anger. But it's frustration, and it's misplaced.
Apparently you just don't get it. The very existence of this and the numerous other threads here and at other websites shows that there is a desire for an xMac, that is real.
Yes, it does. Among a small number of people that post on Mac rumor and info sites. That's all.
Wants... needs, makes no difference to me.
But your continued belaboring of the actual needs or wants of posters here, especially the manner in which you post, only further incites anger, towards you, not Apple.
Wants vs Needs is important. A company truly ignoring a need is one thing. A company not catering to every special want is another. As for me posting style, I don't really care if it incites anger. That just shows me the people asking for the product are irrational...just as I've said all along.
Never expected you to stop.
It's not Apple's offerings that are flame bait, it's your postings telling people what they need and the method in which you post it.
So let me get this straight...I'm posting just to piss people off? That's what flame bait is, champ.
No, you haven't gotcha nothing.
AIO advantages
Easy set up when first bought.
To some(not all, need I mention the chin) very attractive design
Reduced desktop footprint/clutter(unless you add external harddrive and/or optical drive)
xMac advantages
Separate monitor Why is this an advantage?
Internal optical drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro
Internal hard drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter)Mac Pro
Slots for future technological changes and/or repairs(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro
Graphic card slot for those that so desire Mac Pro
----note the above items increase cost nigh to nothing Prove it
Use of desktop processor reduces cost to Apple and consumer Fair enough
Use of desktop hard drive(compared to mini only) reduces cost to Apple and consumer irrelevant
Use of desktop ram reduces cost to Apple and consumer. irrelevant
Ports on front reduces clutter for perpherals only periodically plugged in(ie.Camcorder, iPod, PDAs) irrelevant
Mac mini advantages
Small
Separate monitor
Obviously there is a market for an xMac, it's only the size of that market that is in question. See the above statements about increasing Apple laptop market share and the lack of increasing Apple desktop market share.
That's the point though. If the market is not BIG enough, they won't make it. And they're stupid if they do.
Marvin,
With all due respect (I mean it I'm not looking to fight or insult), I think your really asking for a Mac Pro. The xMac, if it's ever made, simply can't have all the features you want as it would be a cheaper Mac Pro.
IMO, if an xMac is ever made it will be a headless iMac with maybe a better processor and a slightly higher price when you factor in a monitor. I don't think it'll have multiple internal drives and I don't think you'll be able to get anything better than a mid level graphics card.
I agree that what I do would be far better done on a Mac Pro than any of the lineup as I find I use a quad G5 more than any machine in the office I work in to get the heavy lifting done but I said before about where I work and how our computers are so varied because of the price. This is really where the point about the mid-range machine comes in. Everyone I work with can all settle with a mid-range machine instead of some people getting high end and others low end. The iMac isn't cost effective in a business environment due to the built-in screen.
I think that you would be able to get better parts as desktop parts are cheaper and you don't have to factor in the cost of the display. It doesn't have to be significantly better but it would most certainly be better at the same price without the display.
I know that some people then say that Apple don't target businesses just like they don't target gamers but that's why they are in a niche with the iMac. They're only targeting people who don't really care what computer they use and pretty = better.
The people in Apple's business unit are pros. They know more about their market than anyone else. If Apple releases a low cost tower, then fine, but you can't imagine how domb people sound when they claim they know better than Apple about Apple.
So what you're saying is that I and all the professional designers and film makers I work beside and am related to are not part of Apple's target audience? What is Apple's target audience exactly - they don't target businesses, they don't target gamers - are all the Macs under £1500 intended for old people who want to surf the internet?
This is the point I'm making. Apple's OS is great because they've taken an extremely powerful unix system and made it easier to use than any other system. This is perfect in all sorts of businesses. What is stopping them is their desktop lineup. I speak to people who have local businesses all the time and they often ask us why we use Macs and they give us the same reasons over and over again why they prefer PC hardware and I agree with them - they hardly ever say why Windows is a better operating system because they know it's not.
Disagree. We're dorky enough to post on an Apple fan site. We don't represent the market on the whole. We're only talking about a few hundred active posters at most, and a few dozen truly active posters. All total, there are probably only a few thousand people that really want one of these machines...taking into account all the rumor and news sites with BBs.
A few thousand?? You can't be seriously talking about a few thousand out of the 500 million or so PC users in the world. This isn't based on anything except a need for you to back up your own opinion, which has no other purpose than to prove yourself right for the sake of it. Again I'd ask, why don't people want a small tower introduced?
I can understand that you might think it's not necessary but you clearly think it will be a bad move and yet there are no rational explanations as to why you believe that. Would you still object if Apple actually made one or would you buy it?
To this you'd say get a Mac Pro and I would but it's bigger than I need by at least double and it's 50% more expensive than I need. £800-900 is a perfect price point for me. Take an £800 20" iMac, throw away the screen, use desktop components and a better GPU, two desktop HDs and boom, one happy camper.
Quad Conroe. And a decent GPU.
Yeesh. It's easy.
Price? 800-1200 pounds.
ie get rid of the iMac monitor and the relatively expensive laptop components go.
You get the 'Mac' (Pro) for the rest of us.
A cuboid expandable mini-tower. It would sit quite well above the Mini. Under the Pro Octo Uber. And alongside the iMac. Simple mini pro case styling. Or even something inspired by the rather sexy iMac case. ie A consumer tower. It's not like Apple can't do stylish.
As for the cannibilisation? well, as Jobs says? We'd rather lose sales to ourselves than our competition...
Apple wins either way.
Lemon Bon Bon.
However, I can't help but feel that buying a Dual core now is a sideways step when Intel and Amd are going Quad mainstream.
2ndly? The gpu. People, PEOPLE! It's the gpu! Pro? At least make it the Radeon 2600xt... (Looks skywards. It's like the return of the Ati Rage 16 nightmare all over a gain...)
If Apple offered a Quad conroe 30 incher with decent GPU? I'd be all over it. I guess it will come eventually...when the quad laptop cpu arrives mid 2008 and 30 incher prices plummet.
Lemon Bon Bon
A few thousand?? You can't be seriously talking about a few thousand out of the 500 million or so PC users in the world. This isn't based on anything except a need for you to back up your own opinion, which has no other purpose than to prove yourself right for the sake of it.
Well why not? Others have claimed that these sites represent a sizable market. Let's say every major rumor site has 100 active posters that want the product. Do the math. That's the only support that's been offered so far. So guess what? It works both ways. Now, do I really think they'd only sell a few thousand units? No.
Again I'd ask, why don't people want a small tower introduced?
Wrong question. Why DO they want it. That's the question.
I can understand that you might think it's not necessary but you clearly think it will be a bad move and yet there are no rational explanations as to why you believe that. Would you still object if Apple actually made one or would you buy it?
1. No major market. Why?
a. Too expensive compared to mini
b. Same price as iMac, no screen
c. Mac Pro is what people really need for expandability.
d. People can buy a used Mac Pro for the same or near the same price.
2. Doesn't fit product Matrix.
a. Mini $599-799
b. iMac $1199-2299 with screen
c. Mac Pro $2299+
d. Minitower? $1599.
3. If there is no market it won't be profitable. If it's not profitable, why would Apple make it?
Need I go on? As for me, I wouldn't buy one because I am fine using my MBP. If I were up for a desktop, it would either be an iMac or a Mac Pro.
So what you're saying is that I and all the professional designers and film makers I work beside and am related to are not part of Apple's target audience?
You're foolish to think that Apple Marketing hasn't investigated your market. You also still don't get it. I give up. You guys are simply too thick.
Quad Conroe. And a decent GPU.
Yeesh. It's easy.
Price? 800-1200 pounds.
What you're asking for is a Mac Pro. For less.
Apple should just redo the Mac Pro with Conroe parts, get rid of the FB DIMMS and lower the price if that's the case.
Who would buy a Mac Pro if they could get what you propose?
Others have claimed that these sites represent a sizable market. Let's say every major rumor site has 100 active posters that want the product. Do the math. That's the only support that's been offered so far. So guess what? It works both ways. Now, do I really think they'd only sell a few thousand units? No.
These sites represent a percentage of the market interested in the product, you don't base it on numbers alone as no survey ever does that. They don't say we surveyed 1000 people and 100 of them have opinion x, this means 100 people have opinion x. They say 10% have opinion x as they extrapolate the stats.
The stats in the computing world as I've shown before are that there are close to 1 billion PCs worldwide. Recent figures suggest that 20% of those at most are laptops but to be conservative, we'll say desktops are about 500 million.
If Apple owns 5% then they have 25 million desktops worldwide, which is reasonable. Now even if the iMacs account for 50% of all of those (considering there are a huge number of G4, G5, Mac Pro towers and Mini users out there) then that figure is 12.5 million but to be conservative again, we'll say 15 million.
Now look at the number of AIO designs sold in the PC world. According to this site:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1...2123330,00.htm
"Sony is still taking a fairly big risk with the W. Aside from Apple's iMac, "there's really not been any successful all-in-one PCs," Baker said.
Part of that has to do with price. All-in-one computers typically cost more than a PC and monitor purchased separately. Also, businesses have shown they prefer to keep PCs and monitors separate as monitors can be replaced less often than PCs. Such a setup also simplifies repairs.
Because of the difference in PC and monitor upgrade cycles, IBM discontinued its all-in-one NetVista X Series PC."
it's an old article but it's still fairly relevant. PC AIOs are not popular. Apple's are because it's all they offer. So let's say that the desktop AIO PC market is at 10% (and I'm sure you'll agree that's more than generous), we get
500 million - Apple's 25 million = 475 million * 0.9 = 427 million
Assuming the same distribution between high end and low end as Apple have with the iMac taking the most at 50% then we get 213 million mid-range headless PCs.
So the market for the product we want in this thread has 213 million people in it.
The market that the iMac can aim at contains only 12.5 million + 47.5 million = 60 million.
So the market for a mid-range headless computer is at least 3 times larger than the market for an all-in-one in the same price/spec category.
Of course Apple have two choices, they can either give that market what they want or try and convert the 213 million people over to their way of thinking. Maybe they will but I doubt it for the many places where the iMac is lacking at least for the next two years.
Wrong question. Why DO they want it. That's the question.
That's been answered with many good and varied reasons. My question is why are you objecting to it? If you are not going to buy one then what difference does it make?
a. Too expensive compared to mini
It has better components than the Mini as does the iMac.
b. Same price as iMac, no screen
It doesn't have to be but I'd buy it even if it was because it would be a proper desktop and I wouldn't feel burdened by having a sealed in screen.
c. Mac Pro is what people really need for expandability.
For ultimate expandability yes i.e 4 hard drives, 16GB Ram, two graphics cards etc. That isn't needed in the mid range.
d. People can buy a used Mac Pro for the same or near the same price.
The Mac Pro is big and I doubt you can get even a used Mac Pro for £800. Maybe in a year or two.
2. Doesn't fit product Matrix.
a. Mini $599-799
b. iMac $1199-2299 with screen
c. Mac Pro $2299+
d. Minitower? $1599.
No. Mini tower: $799-1999 is a possibility.
3. If there is no market it won't be profitable. If it's not profitable, why would Apple make it?
Ok but that's not an issue as there is a market and it's the same market the iMac aims at and fails to impress the majority.
Need I go on? As for me, I wouldn't buy one because I am fine using my MBP. If I were up for a desktop, it would either be an iMac or a Mac Pro.
I would actually take a MBP over an iMac. If you are paying for an AIO with the iMac, you may as well get a laptop as it depreciates less and you actually get the portability.
You're foolish to think that Apple Marketing hasn't investigated your market.
Ok so assuming they have investigated it then why don't they offer a product to satisfy it? Is it a market they don't care about? It's clear this can't be the case because Final Cut and their audio software is aimed directly at this market. But one thing this market definitely likes is matching dual displays and RAID systems because for video work at least, the hard drives are the biggest bottleneck when you are dealing with 20GB+ DV files.
Apple should just redo the Mac Pro with Conroe parts, get rid of the FB DIMMS and lower the price if that's the case.
Who would buy a Mac Pro if they could get what you propose?
Knowing the base model Mac Pro is £1400, if they can get that below £1000 just by replacing some parts then I'd seriously consider it. The sheer bulk and unneeded expansion is still an issue though. Like I say, I have G5 towers where I work and we simply haven't upgraded them at all really but we have struggled to transport them. We considered a PCI card at one point but we just use a firewire device instead so all we really need is two drives, the possibility of a quad (though a Core 2 Extreme is good), a decent GPU (our G5s only have the 256MB Geforce 6600s) with dual display support and 4GB Ram. We just don't use more than 4GB.
These sites represent a percentage of the market interested in the product, you don't base it on numbers alone as no survey ever does that. They don't say we surveyed 1000 people and 100 of them have opinion x, this means 100 people have opinion x. They say 10% have opinion x as they extrapolate the stats.
I have to agree with others on this board, "we" are the niche. I've installed many different configs for people over the years and NONE of them use computers (or have the knowledge or interest to use them) as "we" do. The vast majority of users have simple needs and Apple of course is all about simplification. Period. That Philosophy has made many clients very happy because their machines do what they want everytime they want it to, without having to learn a new way of doing it or fixing each time they do it.
So what you're saying is that I and all the professional designers and filmmakers I work beside and am related to are not part of Apple's target audience?
Apple's target is CONSUMERS! If you're trying to do 3d work on a mini or an imac or anything more than dv editing on an imac you're asking for trouble and you're NOT A PRO
You may be getting paid for your gigs but I hate to burst your bubble, there is actually a very small number of PRO's out there and they don't complain about the cost of thier equipment because their studios are paying for the gear. What would you guys do if all we had were SGI machines again? You wouldn?t be trying to call yourself a pro and as a matter of fact you?d probably be ?accountants? or some flavor of generic business major. Do you have any Idea how much gear you're average DP needs on a film shoot? or how many servers it takes to render a 3D scene in a respectable amount of time?
To put it simply consumers are too "stupid" to handle problems and pros are too "smart" to not avoid them. In other words, a consumer has to have a system designed so that they never encounter a problem because they won't ever fix it or they?ll get so frustrated that they?ll blame the product and never buy another, let?s say Apple, again.
A pro will just avoid the problem of reliability by using "older" gear that they now is stable in favoring reliability for the latest greatest fastest whatever
Prosumer equipment has evolved into a neutered, beta version of ??future feature? pro gear and it will always need mods and time to allow for the glitches because it?s a new product, that uses new tech to make what was unaffordable, affordable to the high end consumer (i.e. Prosumer) market.
Grouping the needs of a pro and a enthusiast together is part of the problem in my opinion. You'd be seriously disappointed if you had to get into a Union. How much time and commitment do you think it takes to really call yourself a pro around those guys and yeah you need the gear to go along with it. I remember quite well how embarrassed I was the first time I pulled out a regular extension cord from my "kit" on one of my first jobs as an assistant to the DP. I didn't think it made a difference "it was a really good AWG 12/3 extension cord after all" and we were trouble shooting a problem anyway, but you bet your ass I bought a "stinger" after taking shit from the crew all month about it.
Don't be crazy! You're lost in prosumer limbo... sorry but that's a market that will always have problems and never offer the right thing because the definitions are always changing. That's the nature of the beast. Prosumers always want the latest, greatest tech because it makes it affordable to do things only "pros" (people with "studio" Boutique or otherwise, budgets) could do before. Panasonic is doing a fine job of ripping off prosumers with their silly ass p2 camera's right now as just one example of a cluster FU_- of a prosumer product. Not that it won't be great in 5 -10 years but this is not a mature technology and their using Prosumers as the beta testers.
Only someone who is content with lots of glitches, making modifications and possible downtime, messing about with 3rd party option, upgrading etc etc would want a "mini" tower. I mean if it won't fit a full size card why would you want it anyway... and if you need a full size card capable machine then you just need the capital to buy a tower and if you?re really into the game you?ll probably need several.
Apple is consumer oriented because it makes them the most money, Pros had been disappointed with Apple?s offerings for years and we?ve always had other proprietary options at our disposal, so it never really mattered. Recently they?ve made changes but they aren?t the only game in town and Apple knows it so they stick to the consumers needs and the consumers needs are simple for a slew of reasons and Apple likes simple because it makes customer support easier and return clients more frequent because everyone is happy.
If they began selling xMac displays using the same screens as the iMac uses they could keep their iMac costs down. Further they could kill the Mini and replace it w/ a low-end xMac to reduce overhead while still offering a very reasonable entry-level system, although i'd think in this case it should start closer to $700 than $500. Most likely though is they'd keep the Mini around start the xMac at $1000-1200 w/ configurations going up to close to $3000 on the top end.
I feel a pizza box form factor (stylish of course-Ives can do it I'm sure) would be best simply because a tower offering just feels like it wants to compete w/ the MacPro. It would still have room for 2 hds, 2 pcie slots, and at least one 5.25 drive. Much more expandability and it would be competing too closely w/ the MacPro, any less and one might as well get a Mini or iMac and deal w/ their failings.
I have to agree with others on this board, "we" are the niche. I've installed many different configs for people over the years and NONE of them use computers (or have the knowledge or interest to use them) as "we" do. The vast majority of users have simple needs and Apple of course is all about simplification. Period. That Philosophy has made many clients very happy because their machines do what they want everytime they want it to, without having to learn a new way of doing it or fixing each time they do it.
Actually, any AIO desktop falls into the niche category. It is only Apple forcing the issue by not offering anything but the iMac and Mac mini. So no we are not a niche.
If the "majority of users have simple needs" then the iMac is way over powered for their needs. And apparently, based on speculation, the Mac mini isn't racking up great sales numbers.
Apple's target is CONSUMERS! If you're trying to do 3d work on a mini or an imac or anything more than dv editing on an imac you're asking for trouble and you're NOT A PRO
Can't speak for all pros, I'm definitely not one, but let the Pros buy the Mac Pro and offer an xMac to the rest of us.
You may be getting paid for your gigs but I hate to burst your bubble, there is actually a very small number of PRO's out there and they don't complain about the cost of thier equipment because their studios are paying for the gear. What would you guys do if all we had were SGI machines again? You wouldn?t be trying to call yourself a pro and as a matter of fact you?d probably be ?accountants? or some flavor of generic business major. Do you have any Idea how much gear you're average DP needs on a film shoot? or how many servers it takes to render a 3D scene in a respectable amount of time?
Us poor consumers would like to have reasonable speed for our iMovie and/or Final Cut Express projects too.
To put it simply consumers are too "stupid" to handle problems and pros are too "smart" to not avoid them. In other words, a consumer has to have a system designed so that they never encounter a problem because they won't ever fix it or they?ll get so frustrated that they?ll blame the product and never buy another, let?s say Apple, again.
A pro will just avoid the problem of reliability by using "older" gear that they now is stable in favoring reliability for the latest greatest fastest whatever
Prosumer equipment has evolved into a neutered, beta version of ??future feature? pro gear and it will always need mods and time to allow for the glitches because it?s a new product, that uses new tech to make what was unaffordable, affordable to the high end consumer (i.e. Prosumer) market.
Grouping the needs of a pro and a enthusiast together is part of the problem in my opinion. You'd be seriously disappointed if you had to get into a Union. How much time and commitment do you think it takes to really call yourself a pro around those guys and yeah you need the gear to go along with it. I remember quite well how embarrassed I was the first time I pulled out a regular extension cord from my "kit" on one of my first jobs as an assistant to the DP. I didn't think it made a difference "it was a really good AWG 12/3 extension cord after all" and we were trouble shooting a problem anyway, but you bet your ass I bought a "stinger" after taking shit from the crew all month about it.
Don't be crazy! You're lost in prosumer limbo... sorry but that's a market that will always have problems and never offer the right thing because the definitions are always changing. That's the nature of the beast. Prosumers always want the latest, greatest tech because it makes it affordable to do things only "pros" (people with "studio" Boutique or otherwise, budgets) could do before. Panasonic is doing a fine job of ripping off prosumers with their silly ass p2 camera's right now as just one example of a cluster FU_- of a prosumer product. Not that it won't be great in 5 -10 years but this is not a mature technology and their using Prosumers as the beta testers.
Only someone who is content with lots of glitches, making modifications and possible downtime, messing about with 3rd party option, upgrading etc etc would want a "mini" tower. I mean if it won't fit a full size card why would you want it anyway... and if you need a full size card capable machine then you just need the capital to buy a tower and if you?re really into the game you?ll probably need several.
I'm not a geek by any stretch of the imagination, but I have installed a video card, USB/Firewire card and a Sonnet upgrade card with absolutely no problems, at all. The vast mafority of desktop computers sold are towers of some kind, the AIO doesn't sell, maybe consumers don't need towers, but they surely do prefer them.
Apple is consumer oriented because it makes them the most money, Pros had been disappointed with Apple?s offerings for years and we?ve always had other proprietary options at our disposal, so it never really mattered. Recently they?ve made changes but they aren?t the only game in town and Apple knows it so they stick to the consumers needs and the consumers needs are simple for a slew of reasons and Apple likes simple because it makes customer support easier and return clients more frequent because everyone is happy.
Not everyone is happy as evidenced by this and the numberous threads on many Applecentric boards.
Why, I think, ...... well it could be,...... yes I do believe it'a a phenmenon....... occuring all over the web, it's xMac lust.
Disagree. We're dorky enough to post on an Apple fan site. We don't represent the market on the whole. We're only talking about a few hundred active posters at most, and a few dozen truly active posters. All total, there are probably only a few thousand people that really want one of these machines...taking into account all the rumor and news sites with BBs.
The majority of whom? AI posters who happen to be posting in this thread? The vast majority of Mac users don't even know this or other sites even exist.
AppleInsider 40,321 members
But what you've presented doesn't prove any particular point we've been discussing. I'm not arguing that desktop sales aren't flat. I'm saying you've not offered any proof showing it's because people don't like Apple's desktop offerings. You're simply speculating.
Yes, speculating, based on Apple's own numbers.
I'd say that's reasonable.
OK, let's assume that's true. Does it then follow that the xMac is the answer? I don't think it does.
Based on what sells on the Windows side, I think it does.
No, not psychotherapy, simply stating the facts. I don't know their needs, nor do you.
Yes, it does. Among a small number of people that post on Mac rumor and info sites. That's all.
The small number is growing. Assuming you are correct, that only a small number of people post, then it is somewhat revealing that a recent blog post expressing a desire for an xMac resulted in over 4,000 diggs. Speculating here: Then that small number of actual people posting and reading these blogs/posts, that you identified, may in fact represent a much larger percentage of the population.
Wants vs Needs is important. A company truly ignoring a need is one thing. A company not catering to every special want is another. As for me posting style, I don't really care if it incites anger. That just shows me the people asking for the product are irrational...just as I've said all along.
No, not irrational. It is not irrational to look at the other manufacturers of computers, observe that over the years they have offered AIO computers that just haven't sold and represent a small niche. It's logic.
So let me get this straight...I'm posting just to piss people off? That's what flame bait is, champ.
Your reasons are known only to you, the results are obvious.
AIO advantages
Easy set up when first bought.
To some(not all, need I mention the chin) very attractive design
Reduced desktop footprint/clutter(unless you add external harddrive and/or optical drive)
xMac advantages
Separate monitor Why is this an advantage? Your kidding right
Internal optical drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive
Internal hard drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter)Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive
Slots for future technological changes and/or repairs(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive
Graphic card slot for those that so desire Mac ProToo expensive, ram too expensive
----note the above items increase cost nigh to nothing Prove it Look at motherboard prices
Use of desktop processor reduces cost to Apple and consumer Fair enough
Use of desktop hard drive(compared to mini only) reduces cost to Apple and consumer irrelevant Lower cost is not irrelvant? Economic theory disagrees with you
Use of desktop ram reduces cost to Apple and consumer. irrelevant Lower cost is not irrelvant? Economic theory disagrees with you
Ports on front reduces clutter for perpherals only periodically plugged in(ie.Camcorder, iPod, PDAs) irrelevant Reduced desktop clutter is not irrelevant
Mac mini advantages
Small
Separate monitor
Obviously there is a market for an xMac, it's only the size of that market that is in question. See the above statements about increasing Apple laptop market share and the lack of increasing Apple desktop market share.
That's the point though. If the market is not BIG enough, they won't make it. And they're stupid if they do.
The numbers disagree with you. AIO on the Windows side is a very small niche market, Why?
Apples laptops are increasing market share, Apple desktops are not increasing market share.
You admit Apple is selling to switchers do to Mac OS X. If it is Mac OS X, then why not a similare increase in desktop market share?
Even assuming the market is not big enough for an xMac, then the simple solution is to stop selling it if it does not sell or threatens iMac sales or margins. This is a very low risk option as opposed to the high risk options Apple has taken, Cube, iPod, iPhone, Pippin, Newton, etc.
Apple's target is CONSUMERS! If you're trying to do 3d work on a mini or an imac or anything more than dv editing on an imac you're asking for trouble and you're NOT A PRO
I would agree to an extent but I've benchmarked the Mini, iMac and towers and the term 'pro' for computers these days is quite naive. As Splinemodel pointed out and I agree with, mid-range computers today are more powerful than computers that pros used a few years ago so it is perfectly possible to do professional work on mid-range computers. What my objection to is the niche form factor the spec is presented in.
Your opinion seems to be similar to Apple's, which is that say a pro from 5 years ago has a dual G4 tower all specced out, you'd say he was a pro back then. But if that same person migrated to an iMac today, even if he produced the same work and knowing the iMac is faster than the old tower, you'd say he wasn't a pro? That doesn't make any sense to me. The computer doesn't define the individual using it but Apple likes to dumb computers down into stupid stereotypes that have no relevance today and people lap it up. The person who runs the company I'm at has a Macbook 'PRO'. Y'know what he uses it for? Email. He's a professional emailer I'll admit but you see where I'm coming from.
Do you have any Idea how much gear you're average DP needs on a film shoot? or how many servers it takes to render a 3D scene in a respectable amount of time?
Yeah we've spent probably £20k+ on equipment, close to half of that is on Macs (we have a few laptops) but I'd say the work we do can be classed under prosumer and not pro - I would usually define prosumer as maybe a freelance individual or something though. By no means will we compete with large companies who can easily shell out £100k+ (possibly millions) on equipment but we certainly need more than the iMac offers because we have some and they just aren't cutting it and this thread is about a mid-range tower, not a cheap Mac Pro.
a consumer has to have a system designed so that they never encounter a problem because they won't ever fix it
Only someone who is content with lots of glitches, making modifications and possible downtime, messing about with 3rd party option, upgrading etc etc would want a "mini" tower.
I don't follow you there at all. If Apple design the machine, I don't see how it's any more difficult to work with than the rest of their products.
Apple is consumer oriented because it makes them the most money, Pros had been disappointed with Apple?s offerings for years and we?ve always had other proprietary options at our disposal, so it never really mattered. Recently they?ve made changes but they aren?t the only game in town and Apple knows it so they stick to the consumers needs and the consumers needs are simple for a slew of reasons and Apple likes simple because it makes customer support easier and return clients more frequent because everyone is happy.
So you're saying the same thing as Splinemodel appears to be saying and that is that Apple products aren't good enough for this market segment? I agree but that's why we are asking for a product that is good enough.
These sites represent a percentage of the market interested in the product, you don't base it on numbers alone as no survey ever does that. They don't say we surveyed 1000 people and 100 of them have opinion x, this means 100 people have opinion x. They say 10% have opinion x as they extrapolate the stats.
The stats in the computing world as I've shown before are that there are close to 1 billion PCs worldwide. Recent figures suggest that 20% of those at most are laptops but to be conservative, we'll say desktops are about 500 million.
If Apple owns 5% then they have 25 million desktops worldwide, which is reasonable. Now even if the iMacs account for 50% of all of those (considering there are a huge number of G4, G5, Mac Pro towers and Mini users out there) then that figure is 12.5 million but to be conservative again, we'll say 15 million.
Now look at the number of AIO designs sold in the PC world. According to this site:
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1...2123330,00.htm
"Sony is still taking a fairly big risk with the W. Aside from Apple's iMac, "there's really not been any successful all-in-one PCs," Baker said.
Part of that has to do with price. All-in-one computers typically cost more than a PC and monitor purchased separately. Also, businesses have shown they prefer to keep PCs and monitors separate as monitors can be replaced less often than PCs. Such a setup also simplifies repairs.
Because of the difference in PC and monitor upgrade cycles, IBM discontinued its all-in-one NetVista X Series PC."
it's an old article but it's still fairly relevant. PC AIOs are not popular. Apple's are because it's all they offer. So let's say that the desktop AIO PC market is at 10% (and I'm sure you'll agree that's more than generous), we get
500 million - Apple's 25 million = 475 million * 0.9 = 427 million
Assuming the same distribution between high end and low end as Apple have with the iMac taking the most at 50% then we get 213 million mid-range headless PCs.
So the market for the product we want in this thread has 213 million people in it.
The market that the iMac can aim at contains only 12.5 million + 47.5 million = 60 million.
So the market for a mid-range headless computer is at least 3 times larger than the market for an all-in-one in the same price/spec category.
Of course Apple have two choices, they can either give that market what they want or try and convert the 213 million people over to their way of thinking. Maybe they will but I doubt it for the many places where the iMac is lacking at least for the next two years.
Wow, you really have some time on your hands, huh? Once again, I didn't claim they would only sell a few thousand machines. I claimed that in total, there were probably only a few thousand active mac forum posters that would...which is what those supporting the tower have been pointing to. It's not something that can be extrapolated like you attempted to do. We don't represent average PC users or even Mac users here.
That's been answered with many good and varied reasons. My question is why are you objecting to it? If you are not going to buy one then what difference does it make?
It's been answered with no good reasons. None at all. I object to it because it's not a smart move for Apple.
It has better components than the Mini as does the iMac.
Uh, so?
It doesn't have to be but I'd buy it even if it was because it would be a proper desktop and I wouldn't feel burdened by having a sealed in screen.
That's exactly the kind of response I'm talking about. Who cares if you're "sealed to a screen" when the screen is great? And big? And what the hell is a "proper desktop?" See, it's all based on emotion and even image, not need.
For ultimate expandability yes i.e 4 hard drives, 16GB Ram, two graphics cards etc. That isn't needed in the mid range.
Oh I see...you need some expandability but not that much. Gotcha.
The Mac Pro is big and I doubt you can get even a used Mac Pro for £800. Maybe in a year or two.
You can get one for about that, yes.
No. Mini tower: $799-1999 is a possibility.
$799? Keep dreaming.
Ok but that's not an issue as there is a market and it's the same market the iMac aims at and fails to impress the majority.
1. You haven't proven there is a market.
2. The iMac still sells relatively well. It's certainly impresses the majority...just not you.
I would actually take a MBP over an iMac. If you are paying for an AIO with the iMac, you may as well get a laptop as it depreciates less and you actually get the portability.
OK, I agree there.
Ok so assuming they have investigated it then why don't they offer a product to satisfy it? Is it a market they don't care about?
Uh no. They know the market is not big enough to justify making the product.
It's clear this can't be the case because Final Cut and their audio software is aimed directly at this market. But one thing this market definitely likes is matching dual displays and RAID systems because for video work at least, the hard drives are the biggest bottleneck when you are dealing with 20GB+ DV files.
No, that's the MAC PRO market. Really, I assured you
Knowing the base model Mac Pro is £1400, if they can get that below £1000 just by replacing some parts then I'd seriously consider it. The sheer bulk and unneeded expansion is still an issue though. Like I say, I have G5 towers where I work and we simply haven't upgraded them at all really but we have struggled to transport them. We considered a PCI card at one point but we just use a firewire device instead so all we really need is two drives, the possibility of a quad (though a Core 2 Extreme is good), a decent GPU (our G5s only have the 256MB Geforce 6600s) with dual display support and 4GB Ram. We just don't use more than 4GB.
Backtomac is right though. If someone can get a fast, expandable machine for that money, there is no reason to buy a Mac Pro except in the case someone needs the utmost in speed. They could end depressing Mac Pro sales for the sake of niche product.
Wow, you really have some time on your hands, huh? \\
Actually you seem to be the one with a lot of time on their hands. If you don't want, or have any interest in the Macs we have been discussing why are you in here? Why don't you find a thread that you like, not try and terrorize users for having different expectations and needs than yours? Your obviously not contributing anything positive to this discussion. Even though your opinion is in the minority you still seem to think this thread is all about your opinion. Get a clue.
AppleInsider 40,321 members
Yeah, and about 300 with more than 1,000 posts.
Yes, speculating, based on Apple's own numbers.
Yes, but still speculating. It's actually really easy to do. Using those numbers, I'll do the same: Clearly the gap in desktops and laptops is due to Apple sales staff whispering "don't buy a desktop" in customers ears. See how easy that was?
Based on what sells on the Windows side, I think it does.
We've been through this. The Windows side does not necessarily equate the the Mac side. You know this.
No, not psychotherapy, simply stating the facts. I don't know their needs, nor do you.
Oh stop. Sure I do. Their needs are either:
1. Basic consumer level: e-mail, internet, basic games, ilife, basic documents.
2. Prosumer, above plus video editing, encoding, some audio recording, more advanced games/graphics needs, etc.
3. Pro: Above plus heavy photo/video/audio work, expandability and speed a must, heavy rendering uses, massive storage needs.
That's really all there is. It's a computer. The rest of it relates to whether or not someone has a monitor and what he can afford.
The small number is growing. Assuming you are correct, that only a small number of people post, then it is somewhat revealing that a recent blog post expressing a desire for an xMac resulted in over 4,000 diggs. Speculating here: Then that small number of actual people posting and reading these blogs/posts, that you identified, may in fact represent a much larger percentage of the population.
Yep, that's right. It's speculation.
No, not irrational. It is not irrational to look at the other manufacturers of computers, observe that over the years they have offered AIO computers that just haven't sold and represent a small niche. It's logic.
It's flawed logic when you compare to the two markets as if they're the same. If they were, the original iMac would have failed miserably.
Your reasons are known only to you, the results are obvious.
Rhetorical nonsense.
Obviously there is a market for an xMac, it's only the size of that market that is in question. See the above statements about increasing Apple laptop market share and the lack of increasing Apple desktop market share.
Maybe because Apple's laptop offerings are that compelling?
The numbers disagree with you. AIO on the Windows side is a very small niche market, Why?
Asked and answered multiple times.
Apples laptops are increasing market share, Apple desktops are not increasing market share.
You admit Apple is selling to switchers do to Mac OS X. If it is Mac OS X, then why not a similare increase in desktop market share?
Because of several reasons. First, Apple's laptops are very compelling offerings, as I just said. Secondly, consumers are moving more towards laptops in general. They are becoming more powerful and less expensive. People are also putting more of a priority on portability.
Even assuming the market is not big enough for an xMac, then the simple solution is to stop selling it if it does not sell or threatens iMac sales or margins. This is a very low risk option as opposed to the high risk options Apple has taken, Cube, iPod, iPhone, Pippin, Newton, etc.
There would still be research, development and marketing costs. It's not free to put a machine out there. It might be lower risk, but it's still a risk....obviously one Apple is not willing to take.
-------------
Mac advantages
Separate monitor Why is this an advantage? Your kidding right. No. you?
Internal optical drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive. Too expensive for whom? And for what it is? Same goes for ram.
Internal hard drive expansion(less expensive reduces clutter)Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive Too expensive for whom? And for what it is? Same goes for ram.
Slots for future technological changes and/or repairs(less expensive reduces clutter) Mac Pro Too expensive, ram too expensive
Graphic card slot for those that so desire Mac ProToo expensive, ram too expensive
----note the above items increase cost nigh to nothing Prove it Look at motherboard prices Too expensive for whom? And for what it is? Same goes for ram.
Use of desktop processor reduces cost to Apple and consumer Fair enough
Use of desktop hard drive(compared to mini only) reduces cost to Apple and consumer irrelevant Lower cost is not irrelvant? Economic theory disagrees with you "Economic "theory?" WTF? It's irrelevant because the mid pro would not compete against the mini
Use of desktop ram reduces cost to Apple and consumer. irrelevant Lower cost is not irrelvant? Economic theory disagrees with you How much does it reduce it?.
Ports on front reduces clutter for perpherals only periodically plugged in(ie.Camcorder, iPod, PDAs) irrelevant Reduced desktop clutter is not irrelevant It is when an iMac would do the same thing....and better.
Obviously there is a market for an xMac, it's only the size of that market that is in question.
The market for an xMac is evidently smaller than the market for an Apple tablet. At least that seems to be the business decision for the makers of the ModBook*.
Likewise a discussion here on how to build a Mini based tower garnered scant attention but yet folks continue to claim that OMG there's a huge market for a headless mac with better expansion than the Mini but less than the Mac Pro.
Vinea
* Odds are they built the ModBook to scratch an itch rather than do so based on some analysis of what could sell. However, that no one has bothered for the tower market is telling is it not? If there was a huge pent up demand for such a thing then technically it is feasible.
Uh, so?
You said the xMac wouldn't sell because it's more expensive than a Mini, I was just pointing out that an iMac is more expensive than a Mini.
That's exactly the kind of response I'm talking about. Who cares if you're "sealed to a screen" when the screen is great? And big? And what the hell is a "proper desktop?" See, it's all based on emotion and even image, not need.
You know the iMac has laptop parts in it? This makes it unnecessarily more expensive and less powerful. There is no problem with the screen until it breaks or it gets dead pixels and then you have to send your whole computer away for ages until it's repaired or you get another one - it's not practical.
You can get one for about that, yes.
Where about? I checked ebay and they aren't going that cheap.
$799? Keep dreaming.
That was taking into consideration that they could take the Mini ($599) and put it in a bigger box and get round about the same price point. It can easily be cheaper than the iMac with no screen and desktop parts.
The iMac still sells relatively well. It's certainly impresses the majority...just not you.
The majority of what market? I'd put it to you that it has close to a 100% majority holding of the niche it serves because hardly anybody else wants to target it.
Uh no. They know the market is not big enough to justify making the product.
Of course that assumes the only people who want it are prosumers but add in the gamers and PC users who have displays already but want a more powerful machine then the market suddenly gets pretty big.
You're not counting the people who own iMacs who would have chosen a tower given the option. There was someone on the forum did that recently and another one has appeared just today. They can't decide between an iMac or Mac Pro because neither are really ideal. I think the number of people who own an imac and would rather have something else are more than you and Apple would like to believe.
No, that's the MAC PRO market. Really, I assured you
Kind of - I know Final Cut can strain a Mac tower at times too - but most of the time, the resources used by it are lower and a smaller machine is appealing because of the form factor.
Backtomac is right though. If someone can get a fast, expandable machine for that money, there is no reason to buy a Mac Pro except in the case someone needs the utmost in speed. They could end depressing Mac Pro sales for the sake of niche product.
Then maybe Apple needs to rethink the Mac Pro. If they believe the world is all-in-one then maybe the world is also one where people don't need expandable towers. They've already crippled the low and mid-range, why not go all out and do the same with the only configurable machine they have left? Like I say I work with towers and we don't upgrade them at all besides extra storage.
We've been through this. The Windows side does not necessarily equate the the Mac side. You know this.
No, it equates to the opposite side i.e if someone is buying a PC then it's because Apple don't offer what they want. Windows is not an argument any more now that Macs run Windows.
The market for an xMac is evidently smaller than the market for an Apple tablet. At least that seems to be the business decision for the makers of the ModBook*.
That's a good point but I think that's different because all they're doing is replacing the screen on a Macbook. What we need is a whole new model of computer.
Likewise a discussion here on how to build a Mini based tower garnered scant attention but yet folks continue to claim that OMG there's a huge market for a headless mac with better expansion than the Mini but less than the Mac Pro.
We're behind your thread on that attempt, it's just that there's little to discuss because in the end, the best that we can hope to get is a hacked Mini. It's still not the proper desktop we want and it won't have the design of an Apple product. I hope you continue with it though because if you can get a good GPU and a couple of hard drives hooked to the Mini then it's probably the closest we'll get short of a hackintosh.