or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › If the Cube came back...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

If the Cube came back...

post #1 of 68
Thread Starter 
at $799, would you buy it? Add a 15" LCD for $499 (hoping for a price drop) and you've got your LCD iMac for $1298. With combo drive. Would that be enough? To me, technically, it would be just about the same as what I would hope for in the new iMac. But for some reason, psychologically, it doesn't move me as much. Your thoughts?
post #2 of 68
Yeah....I don't really see a need, considering how small the iMac's footprint is. But, if I were to do this, I would make the new iMac up $1300 or so. Assuming the iMac is G4, you can make a Cube separate from it by including a few "premium" items the iMac doesn't have yet. Better graphics, superdrive, maybe gigabit ethernet or something. Make it $1500-$1600 and include a mandatory 15-inch display to avoid gouging the PM line. PowerMacs start at $1700-$1800 without a display, and are more expandable and likely faster than the cube. Plus PM screens would start at 17".

Seems like an arrangement kinda like this, except thought out for more than 5 seconds like mine was would cover a good deal of demand and price ranges.

-S
post #3 of 68
In Apple's own words - "The Cube was put on ice" - Maybe it's time to bring it out of the freezer. At the time of it's "shelving" the Circuit City stores were told by Apple to put the Cube end-caps into storage for "later use".

The Cube is the most beautiful and revolutionary computer design ever produced. If there was ever a candidate for a remake this is it. The dual G4 mod shows that there is plenty of headroom in it's form factor. The R&D on it's design is done, and production issues have been worked out already. This baby is ready to be reborn, but as what? Wait, I'll answer that... "THE APPLE DIGITAL HUB"

Add TiVo capability and an HDTV tuner and the Cube becomes the missing link to the "Digital Lifestyle" Apple can not ignore TV as part of this convergence. Throw a G5 and a SuperDrive in it and sell it for $5000 bundled with a Cinema Display and I'll order mine the day it is announced.
OSX + Duals, Quads & Octos = World Domination
Reply
OSX + Duals, Quads & Octos = World Domination
Reply
post #4 of 68
LOL yeah... "Let's bring back the cube and make it more crack-filled and expensive than ever before!"

</sarcasm>

-S
post #5 of 68
I would buy one immediately, 'nuff said
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
I have a fever and the only prescription is more cowbell.
Reply
post #6 of 68
I think that on principle the Cube has to be less than the G4/G5/Whatever. Simply because of it's lack of expandability. It could strike gold as a true consumer machine.

Although I wished from the beginning that they'd sell a separate cube with some PCI slots and a proprietary connection to the main Cube. Could be an elegant but professional system that way.

-S
post #7 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by SpiffyGuyC:
LOL yeah... "Let's bring back the cube and make it more crack-filled and expensive than ever before!"
<hr></blockquote>

The new Cube will be for the people with the vision to understand it's significance and value, not for the whinners and naysayers that torpedoed the original for it's mold lines ("crack-filled"?)

keep your smurf Mac running 8.7 Spiffy, the Mac World will go forward without your help.
OSX + Duals, Quads & Octos = World Domination
Reply
OSX + Duals, Quads & Octos = World Domination
Reply
post #8 of 68
I was lucky enough to have bought one when it was offered.
post #9 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by Aphelion:
<strong>

The new Cube will be for the people with the vision to understand it's significance and value, not for the whinners and naysayers that torpedoed the original for it's mold lines ("crack-filled"?)

keep your smurf Mac running 8.7 Spiffy, the Mac World will go forward without your help.</strong><hr></blockquote>

That's going too far. First of all, I run OS X on a TiBook and I'm about as power user as it gets.

Second, I was EXAGGERATING to prove a point - the original cube WAS expensive and because of that it didn't sell. I was a fan, actually, but in general people complained that it was sitting up in the PowerMac price range while not offering the same speed or expandability. Yes, it was an excellent value, a beautiful machine, but my point is that the market was too dense to understand how and why it was worth its initial cost and how amzing it was that Apple fit what it DID into such a small space.

Taking all that into account, I think it's absurd to suggest that Apple would release an even more expensive version of the Cube.

-S
post #10 of 68
I think that the market for a sub-$1000 headless Mac would be huge.

Apple seems loathe to go down that road, though. Pity.

Personally, I simply adored the G4 Cube. As with many others, the only stumbling block to my actually buying one was the boneheaded asking price.


Cheers,

Mark.
post #11 of 68
[quote]at $799, would you buy it? Add a 15" LCD for $499 (hoping for a price drop) and you've got your LCD iMac for $1298. With combo drive. Would that be enough? To me, technically, it would be just about the same as what I would hope for in the new iMac. But for some reason, psychologically, it doesn't move me as much. <hr></blockquote>

Hell yeah! Except I would spend $500 on a larger CRT display and it would be a bitchin' system. This is what Apple should be doing...forget the iMac, it's a joke. So many people forego the iMac because of it's display size. Even a 15" LCD display is too small, people demand more, and they are accustomed to more.

But a sub-$1000 cube would be the final solution. Apple could package it with their own displays, or you could buy the cube and a good monitor separately.

Dig it, the new cube (assuming a G5 powermac):

G4 processor (Apollo), 1.0, 1.133, 1.266 GHz
CD-ROM, CD-RW, combo drive
1 full-sized AGP slot
1 FAN, so the GeForce 3 stays cool.

Of course, this cube would be much taller, so there's room for a full sized video card. In Making the cube taller and adding a fan, this will reduce Apple's cost because they don't have to miniaturize everything so much. Cooling is easier, and a real video card can be used. Furthermore, and this is vitally important:

The USB, Firewire, and Audio ports go on the OUTSIDE of the cube, in addition to some on the bottom. This way, the permanent connections are on the bottom, but the temporary connections go on the front, behind a little door. This way one doesn't have to man-handle the cube just to plug in a damn iPod.

So what about price? Here's a stab at it:

Display prices (if bought with cube):
17" LCD: 850
15" LCD: 450

Cube prices (alone/cube+15"LCD/cube+17"LCD)

1.00 GHz 999, 1449, 1849
CD-ROM
GeForce 2MX
128 MB RAM
30 GB HD

1.133 GHz 1299, 1749, 2149
CD-RW
GeForce 2MX
256 MB RAM
60 GB HD

1.266 GHz 1499, 1949, 2349
CD-RW, DVD-ROM
GeForce 2MX
256 MB RAM
80 GB HD

The very lowest end cube system w/ 15" LCD is priced at 1449, but of course if a person was smart they would just buy the 999 cube, and add a nice 17" CRT for 300, coming out at 1300 for a nice Mac system. So what about the iMac?

This would push the price of the high end iMac down to about 1200, which is exactly where it ought to be. With complete wintel systems going for 999, the iMac must come down in price. for the iMac lineup, this means:

799, 999, 1199

And this is where it's price ought to be.

What Apple would find is that this sort of cube would fly off the shelves. It offers consumers what they've wanted all along; a mac system midway between 1000 and 2000, with a good display. The current iMac is hurting Apple sales so much! People do not want a tiny display, and Apple offers no choice beyond a miserable 15" display on a Mac system for less than $2200 or so. This is outrageous and it must end.
post #12 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by SpiffyGuyC:


That's going too far. First of all, I run OS X on a TiBook and I'm about as power user as it gets.

Second, I was EXAGGERATING to prove a point - the original cube WAS expensive and because of that it didn't sell. I was a fan, actually, but in general people complained that it was sitting up in the PowerMac price range while not offering the same speed or expandability. Yes, it was an excellent value, a beautiful machine, but my point is that the market was too dense to understand how and why it was worth its initial cost and how amzing it was that Apple fit what it DID into such a small space.

Taking all that into account, I think it's absurd to suggest that Apple would release an even more expensive version of the Cube.

<hr></blockquote>

OK, Spiffy my apologies, I too was proving a point with my Smurf G3 comment, it's just that I get discouraged with the Mac "Faithful" bitching and moaning about something revolutionary like the Cube or OSX. The fact that you are running OSX on a TiBook shows that you will spend $3K on something elegant and useful. You wouldn't spend the same on a Digital Hub that would be your file server, web firewall and broadband host, not to mention stream HDTV to your TiBook?
OSX + Duals, Quads & Octos = World Domination
Reply
OSX + Duals, Quads & Octos = World Domination
Reply
post #13 of 68
Thread Starter 
But would a repriced Cube have the same "WOW!! I gotta have one!!" effect that the LCD iMac will probably have? I dunno...
post #14 of 68
I like the HDTV idea - it would be cool if the iMac had this feature.

As for server stuff, I don't want a cube - I want Apple to come out with a rackmount. Talk about minimal R&D at this point...

-S
post #15 of 68
And, from a certain standpoint, if the G5 is ready this lineup could make some sense:

Sahra G3 iMac
G4 Cube
PowerMac G5
post #16 of 68
I, too did not buy a Cube simply for it's outrageously high price. I loved that machine, though. When it was out, I helped my now-ex-girlfriend buy it (educational Cube & 17" CRT bundle). After it was discontinued I told her to call me if she EVER wanted to get rid of it.

I'd love to see it come back, even somewhat retooled. Put in ONE PCI slot and keep the rest like it was (maybe now a Combo or Superdrive instead, of course ) and I'd consider that the perfect machine for me.
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #17 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by SpiffyGuyC:
<strong>And, from a certain standpoint, if the G5 is ready this lineup could make some sense:

Sahra G3 iMac
G4 Cube
PowerMac G5</strong><hr></blockquote>

You know, I think this still misses the biggest problem with the cube. Pros did not want to buy the cube because it lacked expandability, consumers did not want it because it was too expensive without really adding big value over the iMac.

Here is what I think the lineup should be:
  • Sahara G3 iCube starting at $699
    Apollo G4 Flat Panel iMac starting at $1099
    Power Macintosh G5 starting at $1599

Make the new iMac a "revolutionary" tablet computer. The detachable touch screen contains all of the guts and ports save for the optical drive. The desktop stand contains the optical drive, ethernet port, USB and Firewire for when the tablet is docked, and an airport base station built-in. You have a keyboard and mouse plugged into the desktop stand for normal desktop use, and InkWell handwriting recognition for use away from the desktop.

This justifies a higher price for the iMac and creates the price/performace space that the cube was meant for all along. It belongs below, not above, the iMac.

Build a cube with simplicity as its goal. This way, when Joe Bob wants to upgrade his grandma's e-machine that already has a VGA monitor, he has the monitor- less iCube G3 or another e-machines box to choose from.

Easy choice. Big sales for Apple and much rejoicing in MacLand.
post #18 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by A/UX:
<strong>

You know, I think this still misses the biggest problem with the cube. Pros did not want to buy the cube because it lacked expandability, consumers did not want it because it was too expensive without really adding big value over the iMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>

that is bullshit. pros didn't buy it not because of its "lack of expansion" but because you could get a better tower for the same price or less.

if the cube was priced below the towers pros would have eaten it up.

which btings up my question: What lack of expansion do you talk about?
up to a 120 GB HD now internal
upgradable processor
1.5 GB max of RAM
swappable graphic card slot compatible with radeon and geforce 2 mx and several other cards including a dual head by promax.
firewire, usb, ethernet, airport

I think expansion was the least of its worries.

oh no PCI slot. yea we all know that graphic artists require a PCI slot
post #19 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>
if the cube was priced below the towers pros would have eaten it up.
</strong>
<hr></blockquote>

So you thought that this was a good idea? Thanks for the complement, I think.

[quote]
<strong>
. . .

I think expansion was the least of its worries.

oh no PCI slot. yea we all know that graphic artists require a PCI slot </strong><hr></blockquote>

So what did you think of the proposal? Maybe I oversimplified the plight of the pros into "it lacked expandability," but the point was that the cube just did not fit between the iMac and the Power Macintosh. It was too expensive for everyone and yes, many pro users do like pci slots.

IMHO, the cube's second coming should be as Apple's monitor-less consumer machine. What say you about that applenut?

[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: A/UX ]</p>
post #20 of 68
well, i think the cube is ideal for the pro user's home, and that's where i use mine. for a pro business machine, i'd get a tower.

i dearly want an iPod too, but i can't quite swing the price. eventually i'll end up with one though.
post #21 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by A/UX:
<strong>

So what did you think of the proposal? Maybe I oversimplified the plight of the pros into "it lacked expandability," but the point was that the cube just did not fit between the iMac and the Power Macintosh. It was too expensive for everyone and yes, many pro users do like pci slots.

IMHO, the cube's second coming should be as Apple's monitor-less consumer machine. What say you about that applenut? </strong><hr></blockquote>


by titling it "consumer machine" what would that sacrifice to make it "consumer".


what people fail to realize is that the cube at the end would have been a success if faster G4s were available. it's kind of hard to do much with the cube when the fastest processor that is available and will work is the 500Mhz G4. That's why Apple left it open for a return. with the new faster and cooler apollo Apple can ship a 1 Ghz cube for maybe 1300.

but to think it will be any lower is insane.

btw, name a reason why I would need a PCI slot if I used any of the following apps
Photoshop
Illustrator
DreamWeaver
FCP 3
Go Live
Free Hand
File Maker Pro
Office V.X
etc

not one need for a PCI slot there except if you are doing uncompressed analog video with FCP in which case you would be using a tower anyways
post #22 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>btw, name a reason why I would need a PCI slot if I used any of the following apps
Photoshop
Illustrator
DreamWeaver
FCP 3
Go Live
Free Hand
File Maker Pro
Office V.X
etc
</strong><hr></blockquote>

need, no. in fact i could make a living using older versions of software on a PPC604e - it just isn't as efficient. not a big deal in my home, i can do anything if i need to, but i don't want to work at home (in fact a nearly silent computer is a blessing in my home). in the office i want efficiency and speed. umm, a pci slot would be handy to drive a second monitor.
post #23 of 68
I'd consider myself a "prosumer," and if the Cube reincarnation had a single PCI slot, it'd be nice for any *possible* future needs or second monitor. Because I'm not fully "pro" though, I don't need multiple slots.
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #24 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>
by titling it "consumer machine" what would that sacrifice to make it "consumer".
</strong>
<hr></blockquote>
Put a G3 in it and a $699 price tag. Did you read my first post? I think that the cube fits better here.

Regardless of your opinion of the cube as a pro machine, don't you think that it would make a pretty trick baseline G3?
[quote]
<strong>
btw, name a reason why I would need a PCI slot if I used any of the following apps
Photoshop
Illustrator
DreamWeaver
FCP 3
Go Live
Free Hand
File Maker Pro
Office V.X
etc
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I would not need a PCI slot for any of these applications. I also am not going to pay more for a machine that does not have PCI slots simply because I do not need them. That is like paying more for a car without air conditioning because I live in Alaska.

I won't argue with you that the cube would have had more success if it were priced lower. This is clear.

My argument for positioning the cube below the iMac is simple. It costs less to build a machine without an integrated display.

Put a G4 in the iMac and the price differential makes even more sense. I'm not dogging your obvious adoration of the Power Mac G4 Cube. I just think that it's a better fit as a G3 iCube. What do others think?

[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: A/UX ]</p>
post #25 of 68
I'd like a PCI slot not for graphic apps but for audio ones. Wouldn't even be able to add a SoundBlaster or surround decoder card, let alone anything in the way of pro recording/editing except the MOTU 828.
post #26 of 68
btw - Great thread torifile!
post #27 of 68
Put the the first G5 in the Cube and call it "Steve's Revenge"

Tower G5's to follow in July
OSX + Duals, Quads & Octos = World Domination
Reply
OSX + Duals, Quads & Octos = World Domination
Reply
post #28 of 68
[quote]Put a G3 in it and a $699 price tag. Did you read my first post? I think that the cube fits better here.

Regardless of your opinion of the cube as a pro machine, don't you think that it would make a pretty trick baseline G3?
<hr></blockquote>

1.) how would the difference in price of a G3 and G4 (as little as 40 dollars to as much as 200) result in a price drop from 1299 to 699? are you even trying to be realistic

2.) no I think it would make a horrible baseline G3 and sell even worse because it would cost more to make then the price you quoted.

[quote]I would not need a PCI slot for any of these applications. I also am not going to pay more for a machine that does not have PCI slots simply because I do not need them. That is like paying more for a car without air conditioning because I live in Alaska. <hr></blockquote>

did you even read my post? I said for 1300. which was the final price of the cube after Apple cut prices.

[quote]
My argument for positioning the cube below the iMac is simple. It costs less to build a machine without an integrated display.<hr></blockquote>

and you're point? besides that neccessarily being true?

[quote]
Put a G4 in the iMac and the price differential makes even more sense. I'm not dogging your obvious adoration of the Power Mac G4 Cube. I just think that it's a better fit as a G3 iCube. What do others think?<hr></blockquote>

I think you don't understand that the price difference between a G3 and G4 is not 900 dollars and that it would not be possible to do what you describe.

[quote]I'd like a PCI slot not for graphic apps but for audio ones. Wouldn't even be able to add a SoundBlaster or surround decoder card, let alone anything in the way of pro recording/editing except the MOTU 828. <hr></blockquote>

The Cube is being used in the pro audio area with firewire.

I would like a soundblaster but I would rather Apple integrate it into the cube.
post #29 of 68
[quote]<strong>
1.) how would the difference in price of a G3 and G4 (as little as 40 dollars to as much as 200) result in a price drop from 1299 to 699? are you even trying to be realistic

2.) no I think it would make a horrible baseline G3 and sell even worse because it would cost more to make then the price you quoted.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay, applenut, it's clear that you think the Cube should be a G4 and be priced between the iMac and Power Mac G? at $1300. I think that this is too expensive for what your Cube would be: an iMac without a monitor and a G4 in it.

The Cube does not cost any more to manufacture than the iMac if you don't use more expensive components. Any and all R&D costs related to packing all of that cool stuff into the small package are already sunk costs and are not relevant to our discussion.

Apple can and should get the cost of the cube down to $699 where consumers can and will afford it. Use current specs for the iMac and remove the CRT, speakers, extra plastics, etc. Slap in a Sahara G3 and you have the iCube at $699, or at least $799, but not $1300.

[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: A/UX ]</p>
post #30 of 68
lol. it's like dealing with SDW2001
post #31 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>lol. it's like dealing with SDW2001 </strong><hr></blockquote>

I am persistent, but enjoying the lively discussion. Why couldn't Apple make a cube for less than $700.

Call me a crazy optimist, but the numbers seem to add up. Current base iMac = $799. No CRT + No Speakers + smaller enclosure = $100 savings at least.

SDW2001 seems to never be interested in the opinions of others. I'm all ears.
post #32 of 68
Not necessarily. IF the revamped Cube is similar to the old, they might have higher costs for the clear plastic they use for the case, the materials for the pop-up handle, etc. Who knows?

I'm not saything that's the case, but it could be.
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #33 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by A/UX:
<strong>

Call me a crazy optimist, but the numbers seem to add up. Current base iMac = $799. No CRT + No Speakers + smaller enclosure = $100 savings at least.</strong><hr></blockquote>

they couldn't make a cube for 1000 before how could they do it now? at 1299 their margins were too small to maintain the product.

how is the switch from a G4 to a G3 going to solve those problems.

I would say that the cube's case and internal motherboard cost a whole lot more than the iMac's. the cube was not cheap to make, you seem to think it was.

the cube should and could be better placed with specs like this:
733 Mhz G4
256 MB RAM
60 GB HD
Geforce 3 MX
56K Modem
10/100/1000 Ethernet
Superdrive
$1299

The Cube could be positioned as the consumers or prosumers entry to iDVD 2 machine because its just a bit unrealistic the imac will have a superdrive yet.

I just don't see how you could think a cheap cube for 699 which would HAVE to suffer in the quality of the design and features to make that price would be a better move. Apple is not a low margin cheap computer maker. anyone who tries to compete in that area almost always loses

[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: applenut ]</p>
post #34 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by Aphelion:
<strong>Add TiVo capability and an HDTV tuner and the Cube becomes the missing link to the "Digital Lifestyle" Apple can not ignore TV as part of this convergence. Throw a G5 and a SuperDrive in it and sell it for $5000 bundled with a Cinema Display and I'll order mine the day it is announced.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Apple has ignored tv and they will continue to do so. Steve sees no convergence between computers and tv and wishes to keep them entirely separate. You might recall that at one point he said something along the lines of: "You go to the tv to turn your mind off, you go to your computer to turn your mind on".

To Apple the digital lifestyle covers the following areas: music, movies, pictures and burning these forms of data onto Cds and DVDs. Apple need only to introduce a piece of software that deals with photos and they have covered everything.

To Apple the digital lifestyle includes the following devices: digital cameras, camcorders and organizers as well as mp3 players. Apple only has an mp3 player so far. A camcorder is next up, as digital movies have obviously been a priority to Apple. A camera will come soon after or at the same time as some form of iphoto software is announced. Apple has shown no discernible interest in digital organizers outside of supporting them so as to play nice. Apple is only on record as insulting them and downplaying their importance. It is unlikely we will ever see a Newton2 or any kind of tablet. Apple is playing it safe and refining what already exists in large markets with high demand, creating products which are the best of their class. The market for digital organizers and handheld computers is shrinking and presently of no interest to Apple.

Look for a DV camcorder at the next MacWorld to go along with the SuperDrive penetrating Apples line up as much as possible. Home made DVDs are one of Steves main visions. This MacWorld will focus on this, among other things, once again.

Sorry for the thread drift <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />

[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: nathan22t ]</p>
post #35 of 68
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>

they couldn't make a cube for 1000 before how could they do it now? at 1299 their margins were too small to maintain the product.

how is the switch from a G4 to a G3 going to solve those problems.

I would say that the cube's case and internal motherboard cost a whole lot more than the iMac's. the cube was not cheap to make, you seem to think it was.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Fair enough. Maybe what I am wanting is not a Cube at all, but the "iSlab." Basically a monitorless iMac in a relatively small form factor at $699. You have a good point.

[quote]<strong>
. . .

Apple is not a low margin cheap computer maker. anyone who tries to compete in that area almost always loses
</strong><hr></blockquote>
I also agree with you here. You and I know that Apple machines are built to a higher quality standard and are worth every penny.

The problem is that Apple is forced to compete here. Non-Mac-owners will always compare cut-rate no-name PeeCees with the low-end Apple machine. This is Apple's new target audience, they must attract new users.

Apple could make a top-notch G3 without a monitor for $699 and raise the price on the iMac to offset the cost of LCDs. This would also sell more Apple Displays as folks could afford them bundled with the new machines.
post #36 of 68
I don't think that is Apple's market at all. I don't think they are aiming at all to the type of people who buy a 500-600 dollar computer or buy one with a 400 dollar MSN rebate or off of the HSN.

and I don't think the people buying those computers are even thinking about Apple.

that really is th last market I want to see Apple get into.
post #37 of 68
If the cube returned, I'd like to see it target middle consumers like myself...who want a powerful machine with good features for a cheap price (doesn't everybody?). I'm with applenut on the price rangethe cube is a prosumer device, not a consumer computer to be priced below the iMac. That would merely cannibalize sales. A reasonably priced TFT iMac would fill the entry level slots nicely. Apple can't get much cheaper than that...they have an extremely small, or no margin on the iMac. The cube with it's small, expensive parts is harder to manufacture. An AGP card is much more expensive than integrated graphics, especially when it is miniturized.

The iMac and Cube could overlap slightly on the low end, as the iMac already has it's display but cube buyers still have to buy one, that can be an additional 200-300 dollars at the least. Applenut's specs seem very optimistic, especially since there is no such thing as a GeForce 3MX (do you mean a GeForce 3 Ti 200?), especially for the Mac.

The iMac is not gonna hit much lower than $1000. $899 is the absolute best we could hope for, with other configs of $1199 and $1399. This would allow the cube to come in at $1199, or $1099. Figure two different configurations, completely BTO-able.

Cube A:
733MHz PPC 7440
256MB RAM
40GB HD
GeForce 2MX
DVD
$1099

Cube B:
933MHz PPC 7460
256MB RAM
60GB HD
Radeon 8500
Combo
$1599

Even this is extremely optimistic, considering the "B" configuration features a chip we are not quite sure exists yet.

But I'd take that entry level cube, spruce it up with an 8500 or GF3, add a LaCie 19" Electron Blue 3 for $400, and have a beautiful system for under $2000. Of course, I'd still need some surround sound speakers.
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
*Registered March 1, 1999*
Member #14
Reply
post #38 of 68
Maybe I shouldn't have posted in the cube-lover's thread! I hope that Apple gives you guys the machine that you want.

To each his own.
post #39 of 68
___________________________________________
applenut: the cube should and could be better placed with specs like this:
733 Mhz G4
256 MB RAM
60 GB HD
Geforce 3 MX
56K Modem
10/100/1000 Ethernet
Superdrive
$1299
____________________________________________

exactly---don't think it will happen as i think that the cube is dead (no, i have ABSOLUTELY no insider info regarding this or any other apple plans), but i would buy that... even over an iMac LCD (the cube's design is beautiful and, on a desk, it and the separate screen can easily be moved about)---bundle the "New Cube" or "Applenut" Cube with a 15" lcd ASD for $1749 and a 17" lcd ASD for $1999 and apple wouldn't be able to keep them in stock....g

[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: thegelding ]</p>
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
it's all fun till somebody loses an eye
Reply
post #40 of 68
So when can we expect to see the new cube?

Hopefuly MWNY '02, or MWSF '03
"Its a good thing theres no law against a company having a monopoly of good ideas. Otherwise Apple would be in deep yogurt..."
-Apple Press Release
Reply
"Its a good thing theres no law against a company having a monopoly of good ideas. Otherwise Apple would be in deep yogurt..."
-Apple Press Release
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › If the Cube came back...