or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › G5 Trinity @ WWDC
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

G5 Trinity @ WWDC - Page 3

post #81 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by emig647
...Even with the discount 3500 isn't WAY too high and apple knows it.

I would hope that Apple realizes that the low end PM is too high as well. Currently at $1799, a $200 price increase would be hard to sell. In todays market it really needs to get back down to $1599, the starting price for the Blue and White, Yikes and Sawtooth models. To be more competitive they should really shoot for $1499 or even less, though that would admittedly be pushing it for Apple's marketing strategy. If Apple can't achieve this with the current G5 tower then they need to introduce a new model that will address the lower-end needs of the professional market, such as Graphics production, which needs a lower cost computer but whose needs are not met by the iMac or eMac.
post #82 of 492
Quote:
My friends at work already mock me bad enough for wanting to spend $2500 for a PMac vs $1000 for a homebrew PC

It's this myopia that irks me about PC bigots. You cannot build a equivalent PC to a Dual PM for $1000. Yes you can build a nice fast single processor computer for that but once you add the extra processor you have additional motherboard and CPU costs that many so easily seem to forget.

I think @homenow is correct. I could actually see Apple moving to 4 PM configs before jacking up the lowend.

2Ghz PM -$1599

Dual 2.2- $2399

Dual 2.6= $2999

Dual 3.0- $3499 this would have Quadro or FireGL card standard. 1GB memory and possibly over features.

I don't mind Apple having a $3500 configuration. This is a workstation and $3500 for a workstation isn't huge money by any stretch of the imagination. What this computer needs is a beefy configuration so that 3D, Audio and Video pros know they're getting the fastest speeds possible. The sales numbers would be low but margin high.

Hell I can buy a hopped up Dual Xeon system from Alienware for $4600. When I hear people talk about Apple needing to keep the PMs under $3k I realize this isn't a person that needs to make money with their computer. This is a consumer lusting after the top end but stuck with a modest budget.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #83 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Hell I can buy a hopped up Dual Xeon system from Alienware for $4600. When I hear people talk about Apple needing to keep the PMs under $3k I realize this isn't a person that needs to make money with their computer. This is a consumer lusting after the top end but stuck with a modest budget.

And that's exactly the point. I use a mac for video editing. It's the center of my business. I'm currently running a dual 1.3 G4 and I have a basic rule - don't drop more money until you can get at least 2x, preferably 3x the power. That usually works out to around 3 years - about the time the IRS lets me depreciate it over.

Would I buy a dual 3Gig G5 for $3499 - probably $4500 once I pack it with more RAM and more disk (please, oh please 4 internal drives) - Absolutely. I can make that much back in about a year because I can turn jobs around faster.

So many here don't really "need" the power of dual 3G machines. Heck, I don't "need" it either, my business runs fine with what I have, but I sure would like the extra productivity - another $15K made over a couple of years is a nice return.

If I was just buying it for myself, I'd still have the old PM7200 I had several years ago because my wife wouldn't let me buy any more toys - seems she wants a new house
The Mad Kiwi Winemaker
Reply
The Mad Kiwi Winemaker
Reply
post #84 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
2Ghz PM -$1599

Dual 2.2- $2399

Dual 2.6= $2999

Dual 3.0- $3499 this would have Quadro or FireGL card standard. 1GB memory and possibly over features.

It wouldn't bother me that their top config would be 3500... if you could build to order it close to the top mid model. Lets say you just want the processor speed but don't want the graphics card... to me that graphics card is worth 500 dollars... drop it and drop the price down to 3150 or so. That works out fine.

I would be very disapppointed if they forced you to buy the graphics card if you didn't want it in order to get the high end model.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #85 of 492
The low-end G5 config should be $999. Mid-range and High-end models should be $1,599 and $1,999 respectively. This would be competitive. Anything else above that would be gravy.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #86 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by DHagan4755
The low-end G5 config should be $999. Mid-range and High-end models should be $1,599 and $1,999 respectively. This would be competitive. Anything else above that would be gravy.

What would you put in the lowend G5? $999 doesn't leave any room on you have the goods and then the 3x-5x markup. Apple would have to have a parts bill of less than $450. No way you're keeping an Aluminum case and decent HD and RAM at that level.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #87 of 492
This is a bit mis guided but you can get awfully close for $1000 if not a bit less. That is a system without a monitor just like the PowerMac. Go the opteron route and you will get very similar performance to Apples top end model for a little extra.

This isn't the rambling of a PC bigot, it just being observant and watching prices. An agressive local vendor helps a bit two!

Ever since OS/X came out I've had a desire to get back into a Mac. The problem with getting there is two fold. One is the rather high cost to get contemporary performance. The other is software which in my case is Linux. It would be nice to be able to run things like EMC on a PowerMac, but I'm not even sure if the OS/X kernel has the realtime capability to do it.

Off the desktop Apple use to do much better price performance wise. That is quickly becoming an issue now with Dothan and all the round better hardware from the PC vendors.

Thanks
dave


Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
It's this myopia that irks me about PC bigots. You cannot build a equivalent PC to a Dual PM for $1000.
post #88 of 492
One can only build a PC that competes with Apples top PM in single processor apps.

I could easily build a nice system based on an Athlon 64 3000+ processor. And yes it would compete favorably against Apples Dual 2Ghz but the bottleneck really isn't the hardware but the software.

Reminds of Adobe's "PC Preferred" advertising. No one ever questions application performance. Once people hacked After Effects to enable the second processor things changed really fast.

Dual processors work. Apples biggest issue right now is getting lazy developers like Adobe to actually utilize Apple hardware tech right. Hell we could have Dual 4Ghz but if developers won't optimize their apps then it's all for naught.

I noticed that Word 2004 is not any faster either scroll.

My recommendation is for Apple to continue to do what they have been doing. Using Apple Pro apps to show the power of the PM G5s and generate excitement on the platform. You know screw After Effects Adobe doesn't get off their azzes until competition is beating down their door. Maybe we need a Motion Pro in a year or two.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #89 of 492
I have to wonder how much you think Apple is paying for the hardware now? You do realize that Apple has some of the highest gross margins in the industry.

Further Apple isn't really doing very well on the HD or delivered RAM departments anyway. In fact RAM has been a big failing at Apple for years, they got away with it in the days of OS-9 because of the limited capacity to use that RAM. Now that they have a real OS that can effectively make use of the installed RAM, they still ship systems with 1/4 to 1/2 what is the norm in the PC world. Please don't try to sell me any whining stories about the quality of Apples RAM or any of the other common sob stories that are used to justify the great Apple RAM ripoff. This stuff is built to standards; the same standards used in the PC world.

Delivering a low end G5 is simply an engineering execise. If Apple isn't willing to play in this market segment then eventually they will go the same way as Apollo and some of the other once great UNIX vendors.

I have nothing agianst Apple playing in the high end of the market but one has to realize that the G5 Tower would not be clasified as a high end work station by many. It is simply misisng to many features in the price segment it occupies. So what we have in the G5 Tower is a machine that wants to think that it is a high end machine and is priced accordingly but in reality only has the processor of a high end machine. For some markets that is fine, but it certianly is not the case for all.

At the very least to justify the price, the Tower needs hardware that is common in that price range. To start more internal HD space with the ability to run hardware RAID would help.

What it comes down to, is that history has shown us that computer companies that concentrate on high end workstations don't stay around long. Niether do companies that engage in over pricing their hardware. The sales figures for the Tower pretty much show where Apple is going.

Dave


Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
What would you put in the lowend G5? $999 doesn't leave any room on you have the goods and then the 3x-5x markup. Apple would have to have a parts bill of less than $450. No way you're keeping an Aluminum case and decent HD and RAM at that level.
post #90 of 492
not too expensive for a Dual 3GHz, 64bit machine with everything standard and pro graphics.

i think they should make a single 2.5, Dual 2.5, and a single 3, dual 3. Single 3 should be about the same price as dual 2.5, or maybe 100 cheaper
Ranger in training
PMDF
Ashan McNealy
Reply
Ranger in training
PMDF
Ashan McNealy
Reply
post #91 of 492
What are you talking about here? You can build quad systems if you have the paycheck to pay for it.

Dual Opteron is possible, yes the base system may be slightly over the $1000 limit but you will still have a system that is as fast as anything Apple offers and in some ways faster. If one looks around the 242 opeteron can be had for under $300, get two in a set with a motherboard and you are in nice shape to hit your price point.

Opteron has some very unique features, it is possibly the closest competitor to the 970, that currently exist and has been successful sales wise. Intels move to Dothan in my mind is a very obvious move to compete with these processors.

Now I'm not about to say that a PC built with bottom of the barrel components will have the overall quality of a PowerMac. What I will say is that it will have comparable performance for many usages, and will last long enough that it will be very outdated when it comes time to replace it. Besides Apple is using AMD technology as it is, the difference is not all that great.

Thanks
Dave



Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
One can only build a PC that competes with Apples top PM in single processor apps.
post #92 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
It's this myopia that irks me about PC bigots. You cannot build a equivalent PC to a Dual PM for $1000. Yes you can build a nice fast single processor computer for that but once you add the extra processor you have additional motherboard and CPU costs that many so easily seem to forget.

I think @homenow is correct. I could actually see Apple moving to 4 PM configs before jacking up the lowend.

2Ghz PM -$1599

Dual 2.2- $2399

Dual 2.6= $2999

Dual 3.0- $3499 this would have Quadro or FireGL card standard. 1GB memory and possibly over features.

I don't mind Apple having a $3500 configuration. This is a workstation and $3500 for a workstation isn't huge money by any stretch of the imagination. What this computer needs is a beefy configuration so that 3D, Audio and Video pros know they're getting the fastest speeds possible. The sales numbers would be low but margin high.

Hell I can buy a hopped up Dual Xeon system from Alienware for $4600. When I hear people talk about Apple needing to keep the PMs under $3k I realize this isn't a person that needs to make money with their computer. This is a consumer lusting after the top end but stuck with a modest budget.


I have a few things to state.
  • I'll believe that Mac exists when I see it.
  • Alienware is a bad example because they make the most expensive systems with equal components vs. other PC systems out of anybody. Configure that same setup at BOXXTECH, and you'll drop $1,500.00 off the price, plus get more features.
  • If Apple gets PCIe before anybody I'd spit a twinkie out of my eye socket.
  • Anyway. I think Apple would charge $5000 for that setup, but If that setup had Dual 3GHz G5's with 1,5 GHz FSB, 2GB RAM, 16x PCI-Express, NVIDIA Quadro FX 4000, and an 8x DVD-R/DVD+R Superdrive I'd buy it in a second.
What are the chances of that?
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
post #93 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison:
I could easily build a nice system based on an Athlon 64 3000+ processor. And yes it would compete favorably against Apples Dual 2Ghz but the bottleneck really isn't the hardware but the software.

Sadly, we will only see a real push towards multithreaded apps when it is dictated by the PC industry. And that won't begin happen until next year and 2006 with Intel and AMD going multicore themselves. That assumes, of course, that apps ported over to the Mac maintain their "multithreadedness"... I really hope that Apple doesn't price their machines even more out of touch with the rest of the industry (on a price/performance scale). Not unless they can offer something in the hardware department that can truly generate some excitement in the industry.
Quote:
My recommendation is for Apple to continue to do what they have been doing. Using Apple Pro apps to show the power of the PM G5s and generate excitement on the platform.

It's not enough - they need to do more. They need *something* to get people excited about their machines again. For the last 8 years or so we've watched Apple sell fewer and fewer computers. Sales have been flat the last couple of years even with the introduction of the G5 and an increasingly solid OS:X.


C.
post #94 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by emig647
Think about the ratio... if it goes dual 2.2, dual 2.6, dual 3.0... the ratio's are completely wrong...

The ratio's what are completely wrong?

Oh, and there's no chance in Hell the low end G5 will be dual.
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
post #95 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Reminds of Adobe's "PC Preferred" advertising. No one ever questions application performance. Once people hacked After Effects to enable the second processor things changed really fast.

Dual processors work. Apples biggest issue right now is getting lazy developers like Adobe to actually utilize Apple hardware tech right. Hell we could have Dual 4Ghz but if developers won't optimize their apps then it's all for naught.

On this note, I saw a recent review of Apple's G5 vs. the others using After effects mostly. Lot's of Benchmarks and prices for those who are interested.

"Since most of our benchmarks involve Adobe After Effects, the most widely used processor-intensive application used by digital video editors and compositors, there's a speedup in the offing there, too, where we noticed faster render times using a beta copy of After Effects 6.5 for the Mac (see table below comparing AE 6.0 times with AE 6.5). Apparently Adobe has been doing some optimization of its own, goosing the performance of After Effects on the Mac."

Bottom line: Apple doesn't always win, but "Apple has decided to competitively price the G5, where it's much less expansive than its similarly-configured PC competitors, which beat it by only slight margins in the benchmarks yet some cost over $1000 more than a comparably-equipped $4398 G5."

http://www.creativemac.com/articles/...e.jsp?id=25633
post #96 of 492
Well it's not that I don't recognize the tech that X86 world is bringing it's just that PCs are overhyped and Macs are downplayed.

Powermac G5s have had for 9 shipping months

An 8 layer PCB motherboard with Dual Procs, 16 and 8 bit Hypertransport links. Gigabit Ethernet. FW 400/800, PCI-X and yet some PC yokel is trying to tell me Apple's hardware sucks??

Todays pricing buys me a Dual Opteron system minus the FW and PCI-X for roughly $1350 with me providing the sweat equity. With that in mind I think Apple should move all dual for the PM lineup starting at $1599(I know i'm dreaming) and going up to 3499 for a firebreather.

Apple does need to lower pricing but I don't think this will happen until they can exceed 10 Billion in revenue. They gotta generate more money.

Concord So true. Consumers are very happy with the current sub $1k offerings and see no reason to spend more money. Apple cannot force people to the Powermacs. They have to "innovate". I feel for our favorite fruit company. I can only imagine the "Boardroom Brawls" they must have over the future direction of the company.

Quote:
Anyway. I think Apple would charge $5000 for that setup, but If that setup had Dual 3GHz G5's with 1,5 GHz FSB, 2GB RAM, 16x PCI-Express, NVIDIA Quadro FX 4000, and an 8x DVD-R/DVD+R Superdrive I'd buy it in a second.

<Drool> Hell if i'm spending $5k make my DVD Burner 12 or 16x. Onlooker I know you're a CG Junkie. What are your thoughts about Apple creating a 3D app? I must admit I was suprised about hearing no rumors about Apple being interested in Maya. Could they have something being worked on now? I tend to doubt it because Apple doesn't seem to have many 3D experienced programmers unless they nabbed some from Discreet(which I doubt I believe they were combustion programmers). I thought Apple could slide here but Avid has nice bundle with ProTools 6.4 and a 3D app that could prove to be competitive with Final Cut Pro.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #97 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by onlooker
I have a few things to state.
  • I'll believe that Mac exists when I see it.

  • Apples in a position where they have to deliver big time. They can't release an update at WWDC without PCI-Express and then wait another year to deliver. That simply won't work.
    Quote:
  • Alienware is a bad example because they make the most expensive systems with equal components vs. other PC systems out of anybody. Configure that same setup at BOXXTECH, and you'll drop $1,500.00 off the price, plus get more features.
    I've found the best way to buy PC hardware is to go to the local PC store and have them make one up. We are talking local independant operators here.

    Even without that advantage the Apple hardware just doesn't look all that good if you concentrate on price/performance.
    Quote:
  • If Apple gets PCIe before anybody I'd spit a twinkie out of my eye socket.
    It will probally be a bit of a shock if they make it to me also, but they really have no choice. If they release hardware now without PCI-Exprees you have to figure that the next rev form Apple would be 6 months at best to more than a year. With the PC vendors getting ready to go on this very soon this simply is not acceptable if Steve is concerned about Apples sales and its standing as an innovator.

    They may not beat everybody with shipping product, but they can't be far behind if the company expects to stay with the pack.
    Quote:
  • Anyway. I think Apple would charge $5000 for that setup, but If that setup had Dual 3GHz G5's with 1,5 GHz FSB, 2GB RAM, 16x PCI-Express, NVIDIA Quadro FX 4000, and an 8x DVD-R/DVD+R Superdrive I'd buy it in a second.
    If Apple tried to sell those for that sum it would be like the Lisa all over again. They will be lucky to move this product at the current price much less increase the price.

    Remember PC hardware will be improving at the same time. Further the value of some of that stuff is highly suspect, 2GB off ram for example is no big deal anymore.

    Thanks
    Dave

    Quote:

Quote:
What are the chances of that?

post #98 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69
What are you talking about here? You can build quad systems if you have the paycheck to pay for it.

Dual Opteron is possible, yes the base system may be slightly over the $1000 limit but you will still have a system that is as fast as anything Apple offers and in some ways faster. If one looks around the 242 opeteron can be had for under $300, get two in a set with a motherboard and you are in nice shape to hit your price point.

Opteron has some very unique features, it is possibly the closest competitor to the 970, that currently exist and has been successful sales wise. Intels move to Dothan in my mind is a very obvious move to compete with these processors.

Now I'm not about to say that a PC built with bottom of the barrel components will have the overall quality of a PowerMac. What I will say is that it will have comparable performance for many usages, and will last long enough that it will be very outdated when it comes time to replace it. Besides Apple is using AMD technology as it is, the difference is not all that great.

Thanks
Dave

YOu get quality for that extra money dave. OS X is so much nicer then any os out there... and I don't mean that from a gui perspective. I mean that from a compatibility, stability, and performance perspective. Who cares if the hardware is more expensive. As long as its as competitive whats it matter. YOu're paying for the OS IMO.

I'm dying to get a new g5... I'm so sick of windows and Suse/Mandrake/RH/Debian and Gentoo... They aren't fast OS's... and they aren't as stable as OS X. I have yet to see a linux box be as stable. There is a reason for this... it's not because apple has really good programmers... its because they have standardized hardware. The problem with the PC world is there are too many different vendors... Personally I dont' see how any OS is stable on a pc. Take my work box for example.

Biostar MCNPro NForce2 mobo, 2800+ Thoro, Mushkin Ram, Apollo gf fx 5200, etc etc etc... its a MUTT!!

How can anything be stable on it? Well amazingly Mandrake 10 and XP are fairly stable... my point is... Apple knows whats going into their machines... everything from the rom to the silicon it was put on. Makes that much easier to program for.

I'd definitely pay 2000+ dollars just to use OS X over XP any time... assuming that the hardware is comparable.

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply

 

 

Quote:
The reason why they are analysts is because they failed at running businesses.

 

Reply
post #99 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Well it's not that I don't recognize the tech that X86 world is bringing it's just that PCs are overhyped and Macs are downplayed.


I don't believe this is the case. Many people recognixe the performance of the PowerMac for certian applications. They also recognize that here is no low cost alternative PowerMac Tower. Apples Tower line starts expensive and just gets worst.

So lets say you have a need for a PC with a expansion slot, the platform doesn't matter but cost do. This is where Macs simply can't compete. And lets be honest the performance isn't tha earth shaking for the single processor machine.
Quote:

Powermac G5s have had for 9 shipping months

An 8 layer PCB motherboard with Dual Procs, 16 and 8 bit Hypertransport links. Gigabit Ethernet. FW 400/800, PCI-X and yet some PC yokel is trying to tell me Apple's hardware sucks??

It sucks because in many cases you are paying for the wrong technology. Apple would do its customers a big favor if it would simply addressed the base memory and storage issues. To much of Apples efforts seemed to be centered around making the tower look nice instead of being practical. They already have a cute computer, which is fine if a little slow, they don't have practical tower.

They seemed to miss the whole point of a tower. What you describe above is good technology for a iMac not a tower.
Quote:

Todays pricing buys me a Dual Opteron system minus the FW and PCI-X for roughly $1350 with me providing the sweat equity. With that in mind I think Apple should move all dual for the PM lineup starting at $1599(I know i'm dreaming) and going up to 3499 for a firebreather.

Your Dual Opteron seems to be abotu right maybe just slightly high, but that doesn't really matter. Apple might as well go all dual it is pretty obvious that the people who do buy towers are also the people that make use of duals. Beyond that the world is quickly becoming multithreaded.

Unless Apple drastically changes the towers design, the prices you suggest are just crazy. Apple can't even sell the current models in any volume at todays prices. A price increase won't help. What Apple needs to do is to lower prices across the board aobut a thousand dollars when the improve processor come out.

It is clear what has happened with Apple up to this point. Excessively high prices and poor hardware configurations have driven their sales into the ground. In the end they may need to offer two different towers to address this issue, one high performance the other agressive in the cost parammeter.

Either way Apple needs to deal with the perception that their machines screw the user by offering to little for the money. Actually it isn't so much a perception as it is a fact. Is it to much ot ask for (in the age of OS/X) to have a machine with a reasonable amount of RAM and disk storage. These are professional machines we are talking about here. The people they are bien marketed to are not complete dummys, even if that is the perception of the Mac market, they don't want to be taken to the cleaners for last years technology.

Thanks
Dave

Quote:

Apple does need to lower pricing but I don't think this will happen until they can exceed 10 Billion in revenue. They gotta generate more money.

Concord So true. Consumers are very happy with the current sub $1k offerings and see no reason to spend more money. Apple cannot force people to the Powermacs. They have to "innovate". I feel for our favorite fruit company. I can only imagine the "Boardroom Brawls" they must have over the future direction of the company.



<Drool> Hell if i'm spending $5k make my DVD Burner 12 or 16x. Onlooker I know you're a CG Junkie. What are your thoughts about Apple creating a 3D app? I must admit I was suprised about hearing no rumors about Apple being interested in Maya. Could they have something being worked on now? I tend to doubt it because Apple doesn't seem to have many 3D experienced programmers unless they nabbed some from Discreet(which I doubt I believe they were combustion programmers). I thought Apple could slide here but Avid has nice bundle with ProTools 6.4 and a 3D app that could prove to be competitive with Final Cut Pro.
post #100 of 492
Well I tend to frequent Audio Production and Video Production boards and I don't really get that they are unhappy with the speed unless we're talking Powerbooks(G5 needed their and quick).

Frankly I don't think any of us thought it would take almost a year for RevB PMs to hit. The only people buying right now are those in a pinch. Hell Motion alone may get some people to upgrade their computers. What it takes is a new killer feature that is worth opening up the bank again. Apple could sell Powermacs up to 5k easily. There is someone at every level that needs the power.

I'm disappointed that it's taken this long but I think Apple must have made the decision to skip a small refresh and hit with something big. WWDC has me very excited. I think things are just getting started. I never really expected gonzo PM sales. Creatives are willing to spend the money but the typical consumer is going to be cool with something a little less beefy.

My guess is that PMs hit 3Ghz by late summer. Apple will have 4 Drive Bays and a beefier audio specification. Another Pro App is coming down the pipe as well. People have the money...you just gotta make them dig deeeeeeep.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #101 of 492
Hi emig

Well that is where we may have an issue in communicaitons here. You get the same quality in PC hardware for alot less. There was a time when I honestly believed that Apple had better hardware but that time has passed.

AS to OS/X, yes it is very nice. One of the reasons I left the Mac world was the state of Apples old OS, which caused me to move briefly to NT. But to be honest with you most of my OS issue went away with the transition to Redhat and now Fedora. I like the idea that OS/X offer similar power but am put off buy the platform needed to run it as well as Linux.

As to Apples hardware being competitive that simply is not the case. Every platoform they have you imemdiately have to go out and upgrade to make best use of the machine. Oftne that means buying RAM and harddisk just to bring the machine up to the same values avaliable form the mainline PC vendors. Is a machine that comes with far to little RAM to run its own OS a good bargin?

As to the OS - its mostly BSD with a different graphical environment. While Apple has done a nice job with it, it certainly isn't light years ahead of any other BSD distribution. Let me tell you though, Linux is moving along at a rather impressive clip. Sure it is not perfect, no OS is, but it is far more stable than some of the old MS OS'es.

So agian where is the money going, into quality -nope-, into nice hardware -nope-, into the highest margins in the industry -yep-.

Your argument comes down to the idea that the OS is worth $2000. Well I do know that some could easly justify spending $2000 on an OS but the vast majority of the people out there see it as an expense. An expense that can be reduced or eliminated by choosing a different path. That path may not involve MS, Linux offers an environment that is very similar to OS/X in capabilities at a greatly reduced cost and on hardware that is far cheaper.

So I'm sitting here and I see OS/X as it is now. It is not bad but it is not pulling me off the hardware I'm on now. When it coems right down to it that is Apples problem, there are a lot of us that have no interest in MS OS'es but on the other hand are not willing to pay Apples tax. When it comes right down to it that is really what is happening, your being taxed for a name, because that extra money you are spending isn't going into either hardware or software. Sometimes I have to laugh when I hear about the RDF, but apparently it still works on people. The thing is they would even need the RDF if they just would attempt to meet customer needs on the simplest things.

Thanks
Dave


Quote:
Originally posted by emig647
YOu get quality for that extra money dave. OS X is so much nicer then any os out there... and I don't mean that from a gui perspective. I mean that from a compatibility, stability, and performance perspective. Who cares if the hardware is more expensive. As long as its as competitive whats it matter. YOu're paying for the OS IMO.

I'm dying to get a new g5... I'm so sick of windows and Suse/Mandrake/RH/Debian and Gentoo... They aren't fast OS's... and they aren't as stable as OS X. I have yet to see a linux box be as stable. There is a reason for this... it's not because apple has really good programmers... its because they have standardized hardware. The problem with the PC world is there are too many different vendors... Personally I dont' see how any OS is stable on a pc. Take my work box for example.

Biostar MCNPro NForce2 mobo, 2800+ Thoro, Mushkin Ram, Apollo gf fx 5200, etc etc etc... its a MUTT!!

How can anything be stable on it? Well amazingly Mandrake 10 and XP are fairly stable... my point is... Apple knows whats going into their machines... everything from the rom to the silicon it was put on. Makes that much easier to program for.

I'd definitely pay 2000+ dollars just to use OS X over XP any time... assuming that the hardware is comparable.
post #102 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Well I tend to frequent Audio Production and Video Production boards and I don't really get that they are unhappy with the speed unless we're talking Powerbooks(G5 needed their and quick).

The PowerBooks do have a big problem!

Speed is interesting feature. Two things happen, one is software that takes advantage fo that spped and then could use more. The others are users adapting to that speed and then finding they can use more.

There are also the people that never have fast enough machines. Thankfully I'm not currently in that position, but there are ligitimate examples.
Quote:

Frankly I don't think any of us thought it would take almost a year for RevB PMs to hit. The only people buying right now are those in a pinch. Hell Motion alone may get some people to upgrade their computers. What it takes is a new killer feature that is worth opening up the bank again. Apple could sell Powermacs up to 5k easily. There is someone at every level that needs the power.

5K for a computer, not any of the current towers I can tell you that much for sure. No matter how fast the chip is in them. Now that doesn't mean that Apple wouldn't try it, but it would be a huge mistake from the marketing point of view.

First is the issue of what to call it. Call it a PowerMac and it will feed the perception that Macs are grossly over priced and have the effect of driving sales downward even more. Apple can't afford fewer sales. Haivng 4 or 5 PowerMac models spread out over a range of frequencies, with basically the same features, is going to be very hard to pull off also.

Call it a workstation of some sort, then you end up in the same situation that all of the other workstation builders are in. That is declining sales in the face of standard hardware ---- THINK SUN ----

Even the conventional server market is beginning to reject high priced hardware. The current PowerMacs could not pass as servers anyways and it isn't to clear that the newer machines would address shortcomings here either.

The last thing Apple needs to do is to jack up the price of the PowerMacs. They are to expensive as it is the market is has been very clear about that. I don't buy the idea that All of Apples customers are sitting back waiting for the next release. That implies a few ugly things, one of which is that the customer base is shrinking. Another is that the whole of the customer base is equal to the number of PowerMacs sold to date. Which if true means that Apple really doesn't have much of a market left.
Quote:

I'm disappointed that it's taken this long but I think Apple must have made the decision to skip a small refresh and hit with something big. WWDC has me very excited. I think things are just getting started. I never really expected gonzo PM sales. Creatives are willing to spend the money but the typical consumer is going to be cool with something a little less beefy.

I certainly agree that Apple has something up its sleeves. At this point they almost have to come out with a PCI-Express machine.

It is sad that Apple created a situatuion where you didin't expect good PM sales. But you do seem to have the wrong impression about consumers. The problem is that there is little beef there and consumers want that beef for thier dollar. This brings back to memeory the old where the beef commercials of some years back. When one looks at a PM in the store the first thing that comes to mind is where the beef. Or more exactly there is a nice price tag here but one isle over I can double my HD size and 4X my RAM size for less money -- so where the beef?

You may believe that "creative" are willing to spend the money but more and more shops now have PC hardware in them. Just because people are "creative" does not imply that they are foolish with their money. You will find that people are being much more selective with their PC buying dollar, Macs need a clear advantage to justify their price.
Quote:

My guess is that PMs hit 3Ghz by late summer. Apple will have 4 Drive Bays and a beefier audio specification. Another Pro App is coming down the pipe as well. People have the money...you just gotta make them dig deeeeeeep.

You are very optimistic about getting people to dig deep! Apple needs compelling hardware at reasonable prices to get people to do that. As far as new machines go I'm thinking 3GHz at WWDC. Mostly because Apple needs to address sagging sales of the desktop hardware. This implies a minimal 2GHx imac or replacement and proportionally faster Towers. They also need to correct the joke that the orginal G5 release created when it was claimed to be the fastest PC available. Apple needs to be able to keep that crown for a long time to recoup from that little mistake. Further the machine needs to be marketed at PC prices, not server prices if it is going to compete in the desktop market.
post #103 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69
Hi emig

Well that is where we may have an issue in communicaitons here. You get the same quality in PC hardware for alot less. There was a time when I honestly believed that Apple had better hardware but that time has passed.

AS to OS/X, yes it is very nice. One of the reasons I left the Mac world was the state of Apples old OS, which caused me to move briefly to NT. But to be honest with you most of my OS issue went away with the transition to Redhat and now Fedora. I like the idea that OS/X offer similar power but am put off buy the platform needed to run it as well as Linux.

As to Apples hardware being competitive that simply is not the case. Every platoform they have you imemdiately have to go out and upgrade to make best use of the machine. Oftne that means buying RAM and harddisk just to bring the machine up to the same values avaliable form the mainline PC vendors. Is a machine that comes with far to little RAM to run its own OS a good bargin?

As to the OS - its mostly BSD with a different graphical environment. While Apple has done a nice job with it, it certainly isn't light years ahead of any other BSD distribution. Let me tell you though, Linux is moving along at a rather impressive clip. Sure it is not perfect, no OS is, but it is far more stable than some of the old MS OS'es.

So agian where is the money going, into quality -nope-, into nice hardware -nope-, into the highest margins in the industry -yep-.

Your argument comes down to the idea that the OS is worth $2000. Well I do know that some could easly justify spending $2000 on an OS but the vast majority of the people out there see it as an expense. An expense that can be reduced or eliminated by choosing a different path. That path may not involve MS, Linux offers an environment that is very similar to OS/X in capabilities at a greatly reduced cost and on hardware that is far cheaper.

So I'm sitting here and I see OS/X as it is now. It is not bad but it is not pulling me off the hardware I'm on now. When it coems right down to it that is Apples problem, there are a lot of us that have no interest in MS OS'es but on the other hand are not willing to pay Apples tax. When it comes right down to it that is really what is happening, your being taxed for a name, because that extra money you are spending isn't going into either hardware or software. Sometimes I have to laugh when I hear about the RDF, but apparently it still works on people. The thing is they would even need the RDF if they just would attempt to meet customer needs on the simplest things.

Thanks
Dave


01010101

01010010

01000100
01110101
01101101
01100010
====
"The Matrix is here, and it's vegan-friendly." (TM) 2004, Trinity Life Systems
Reply
====
"The Matrix is here, and it's vegan-friendly." (TM) 2004, Trinity Life Systems
Reply
post #104 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Hell Motion alone may get some people to upgrade their computers.

If you had seen the live demo as I did then you wouldn't say "maybe". This app will absolutely blow you away when you get get your hands on it. I guarantee it. People won't just upgrade because of it, they'll switch their whole workflows to the Mac platform because of it. It's that good.

In fact Motion's system requirements (2x2 G5 with 2GB RAM and a Radeon 9800 Pro is the recommended system ) is what gives me confidence in the upcoming G5 revs. Apple is crazy serious about the video and post production markets and apps like Motion mean Apple must have some very serious hardware in store.

I really believe Steve is going to give us Dual 3GHz 975 Power Macs with PCIe native ATi x800 graphics at WWDC. He never would have made that promise last year if we wasn't DAMN sure.
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
Attention Internet Users!

"it's" contraction of "it is"
"its" possessive form of the pronoun "it".

It's shameful how grammar on the Internet is losing its accuracy.
Reply
post #105 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by wizard69

As to Apples hardware being competitive that simply is not the case. Every platoform they have you imemdiately have to go out and upgrade to make best use of the machine.

I think you have crossed the line to pointles whining here. Almost anyone I know is able to push a RAM stick or two in the slots and most people are quite happy to go and buy RAM at spot market prices.

Go and look at Dell or IBM or Sony for a comparison, not some one-man show around the corner. Their RAM and HD offerings are frequently quite modest, whereas their prices are not.
Quote:

As to the OS - its mostly BSD with a different graphical environment. While Apple has done a nice job with it, it certainly isn't light years ahead of any other BSD distribution. Let me tell you though, Linux is moving along at a rather impressive clip. Sure it is not perfect, no OS is, but it is far more stable than some of the old MS OS'es.

Another bitch-fest.
Linux is moving along rather impressively? I'd love to see the day when their UI has turned from ridiculous to "something akin to Win2K".
The important part of an OS today are no longer the IP stack, the RAM subsystem, but the higher level APIs. Linux is so far behind here, it's not even funny any longer. MS's .NET/C# is currently the gold standard (which is why the Linux guys were scrambling to copy it) with Apple's Cocoa/obj-C and Sun's J2*/Java following suit.

Linux? QT - based on C++. Technically sound, but totally lackluster - in the days of Ghz-CPUs, C++ is no longer interesting for a lot of developers.

Even lower level structures like the graphics layer (XWindows haha) and audio architecture are more modern on OS X - and if MS ever comes out with Longhorn, they might even leapfrog Apple here.

Heck, it took Linux until Kernel revision 2.6 to get a well performing and elegant threading architecture...
post #106 of 492
Errrmm... Sorry, didn't mean to send this thread off into a price war, Wintel vs Mac flame fest. The original rumor at the start was very encouraging, and the "confirmations" along the way made it more so. Here's to killer new machines at WWDC. (And prices staying out of the stratosphere.)

The commonality that I've seen in this thread (and the many others just like it):
1. You can build a much cheaper Windows box than Apple can build a Mac. That's an apple to oranges comparison. You can't compare self-serve to full-serve. Apple is full-serve. Compare their prices to other full-serve vendors and Apple does better. If you believe all full-serve vendors are overpriced, that's fine; but Apple holds no special place in that comparison.

2. If you make $$$ with a Mac, and more specifically with the very fine apps Apple makes, the price for the hardware doesn't matter very much. Their Pro apps are great and very reasonably priced. The "premium" for Apple hardware disappears into the cost of doing business and is paid for by added productivity.

I just hope Apple doesn't put too much focus on that segment of the market. I think there are plenty of "prosumers" and general business users who aren't married to Apple's apps but prefer the PMac line to iMacs for many reasons. Pushing the PMac price into the "workstation" space will drive some (many?) of those sales to the Wintel camp. Apple might not care if they are making enough money, but as a part of that "don't really need a PMac but want one anyway" market, I do.

- Jasen.
post #107 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by jasenj1
I just hope Apple doesn't put too much focus on that segment of the market. I think there are plenty of "prosumers" and general business users who aren't married to Apple's apps but prefer the PMac line to iMacs for many reasons. Pushing the PMac price into the "workstation" space will drive some (many?) of those sales to the Wintel camp. Apple might not care if they are making enough money, but as a part of that "don't really need a PMac but want one anyway" market, I do.

- Jasen.

Interesting point you make. When Steve-O returned back in the 90's, he simplified Apple's offering into the famous quadrants (iMac, PMac, iBook, PBook) to get Apple's house back in order.

Now that the OSX migration has occured and that a buch of good apps are in place, perhaps now is the time for Apple to consider materially expanding its offering: eMac, AIO iMac, headless Mac (G5 SP), and top end (DP, QP G5) workstations; and in the laptop line 2 or 3 G4 iBook configurations, PowerBook (ultra portable 10" no CD drive, 12/13", 15" and 17" widescreen). Better for Apple to cannabalise its own share than for it to lose share elsewhere.

MacPro 2 x 3GHz, 8GB RAM, 4x1000 HD, 2x23" ACD
15" rMBP; 17" MBP

Reply

MacPro 2 x 3GHz, 8GB RAM, 4x1000 HD, 2x23" ACD
15" rMBP; 17" MBP

Reply
post #108 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by jasenj1
Errrmm... Sorry, didn't mean to send this thread off into a price war, Wintel vs Mac flame fest. The original rumor at the start was very encouraging, and the "confirmations" along the way made it more so. Here's to killer new machines at WWDC. (And prices staying out of the stratosphere.)


It wasn't my intent to throw this into a price war discussion, rather an attempt to address the thought that Apples raising prices would be OK. Apple needs to lower prices not raise them. $5000 for a base machine is just to much considering Apples market performance.
Quote:

The commonality that I've seen in this thread (and the many others just like it):
1. You can build a much cheaper Windows box than Apple can build a Mac. That's an apple to oranges comparison. You can't compare self-serve to full-serve. Apple is full-serve. Compare their prices to other full-serve vendors and Apple does better. If you believe all full-serve vendors are overpriced, that's fine; but Apple holds no special place in that comparison.

It goes well beyond what you can build yourself. Lets face it building yourself is not exactly an economical approach when buy componenets retail. The problem is the other vendors, of complete systems, do offer more for the money. They especially offer more where the consumer needs it.
Quote:

2. If you make $$$ with a Mac, and more specifically with the very fine apps Apple makes, the price for the hardware doesn't matter very much. Their Pro apps are great and very reasonably priced. The "premium" for Apple hardware disappears into the cost of doing business and is paid for by added productivity.

This is one thing I disagree on. In a tight economy the price differrential can make a differrence in a buy decision. Beyond that you have the flexibility of a PC competeing against a Mac. There are many ways to measure productivity, sometimes the Mac wins sometimes not.
Quote:

I just hope Apple doesn't put too much focus on that segment of the market. I think there are plenty of "prosumers" and general business users who aren't married to Apple's apps but prefer the PMac line to iMacs for many reasons. Pushing the PMac price into the "workstation" space will drive some (many?) of those sales to the Wintel camp. Apple might not care if they are making enough money, but as a part of that "don't really need a PMac but want one anyway" market, I do.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Simply having a need for internal HD expansion or a PCI slot puts you into expensive Mac hardware.

The point is Apple has already push customers away with their pricing. If they think that having their top performing CPU priced at $5000 dollars is going to help then they need to be reeducated a bit. Or at the very least have their noises rubbed into the current sales figures.
Quote:

- Jasen.
post #109 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by cubist
Hold on... we knew plenty about the 970 by January '03, but the Apple G5 machines weren't released until June '03. We had photos of the chip (with feathers!), data sheets, all kinds of information on the chip from IBM, altho nothing from Apple....

Semantics. What makes something vaporware is not that there is available information on the product but that the product itself is not available. Following your logic Longhorn isn't vaporware, then, since there are demos, screenshots...

a_greer: Redheads are the best I shure loves my redhead

975 at WWDC
post #110 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by concentricity
01010101

01010010

01000100
01110101
01101101
01100010

U

R

D
u
m
b

Isn't this a little rude.
post #111 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by lloyddean
U

R

D
u
m
b

Isn't this a little rude.

Sorry, I guess I forgot to add a smiley. And it's just too darn frustrating to try to explain why this whole arguement is retarded for the 100th time. Hope nobody was terribly offended.
====
"The Matrix is here, and it's vegan-friendly." (TM) 2004, Trinity Life Systems
Reply
====
"The Matrix is here, and it's vegan-friendly." (TM) 2004, Trinity Life Systems
Reply
post #112 of 492
hmurchison,
I don't think Apple will create a 3D app from the ground up, and they didn't buy Alias, but I do think they could be a formidable player in CG.
I just keep thinking about renderman, and renderman artist tools (which is not available for Mac OS yet), and all of Apples other pro applications. They have products that need to be on the cutting edge of power, and graphics.

Apple could have a first class 3D workstation if they had the good 3D video card support like PC's do. That alone is holding them back big time. Plus the fact that they are still one step behind in processing power AFAIAC. If they hit 3GHz a lot of people will take another look at the G5 because it will be seriously competitive, and a leader in performance speed wise in many more areas, but the graphics card is still their biggest hurdle.

If Apple gets 3D video card support they seriously need an NVIDIA card manufacturer's help. ATI has been a big supporter of the Mac in the past, and I have great respect for them for that. I would love to support them just for this reason, but I keep hearing to stay away from ATI 3D cards because their OpenGL support is very poor, and that NVIDIA is the only true choice for a workstation class computer in 3D.

Who ever said a $5,000.00 is too expensive for the configuration I came up with is off their rocker. The Graphics card I listed alone is worth like $2,500.00.

But when I put that card in there I didn't mean it as a base configuration. I was suggesting offering a more professional card as a BTO option.
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
onlooker
Registered User

Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: parts unknown




http://www.apple.com/feedback/macpro.html
Reply
post #113 of 492
Quote:
Sorry, I guess I forgot to add a smiley. And it's just too darn frustrating to try to explain why this whole arguement is retarded for the 100th time. Hope nobody was terribly offended.

Nah I wasn't offended. I agree this arguement happens all the time. Typically when Apple is in the 11th hour of a product cycle and the vultures swoop in to compare a 9 month old Mac with a new PC that was just released. It's pointless and stale.

What bothers me the most is people that cannot "shift their center". Is it so hard to realize that a consumer and a profesional have two different ways of looking at something?

How many times do we have to hear someone complain that the Xserve doesn't have the fastest processor because Servers value stability over overall speed.

How many to do we have to hear about Apples insane ram costs when www.crucial.com or www.corsair.com is a freakin website away.

The norm on the net seems to be hyperbole and FUD. I get Mac and PC users alike trying to pull the wool over my eyes. It's the politics of computing nowadays.

The truth is we're all right. There is someone out there that feels exactly like we're describing. Just some of us have more allies than others.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #114 of 492
Onlooker

Yeah I see your point. Apple does have the inside track to Pixar tech tsk tsk tsk. They most definitely do need to get the Quadro FX series on the Mac.

Let's be honest. store.apple.com is quite boring. There needs to be a section showing hotrodded Macs.

Like

Powermac G5 DCC
2.6 Dual G5s
2GB RAM
500GB of SATA HD
DVD Burner
Quadro FX 2000
$5999

Offer other configurations with preinstalled software. Apples goal should be to hit 15 Billion in revenue within the next 2-3 yrs. That means hitting on all cylinders everywhere and making themselves indespensable.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #115 of 492
People who are expecting 999 for the low end and less than 2000 for the top end are being unrealistic.

Apple is a company that innovates new software, hardware, and high quality enclosure cases. The R&D costs need to be covered. Then a reasonable profit margin needs to be established to ensure future R&D. Money has to be saved up to ensure that the company can cover the unexpected.

On top of that, Apple uses high quality hardware that you'd never find in a $999 box.

And some of you expect the high end professional PowerMac to go under 1k? Get real. You're in the wrong forum too...SpyMac and other kiddie forums are thaddaway .
post #116 of 492
Quote:
onlooker said:
Anyway. I think Apple would charge $5000 for that setup, but If that setup had Dual 3GHz G5's with 1,5 GHz FSB, 2GB RAM, 16x PCI-Express, NVIDIA Quadro FX 4000, and an 8x DVD-R/DVD+R Superdrive I'd buy it in a second.

Quote:
hmurchison said:
Powermac G5 DCC
2.6 Dual G5s
2GB RAM
500GB of SATA HD
DVD Burner
Quadro FX 2000
$5999

I say the rig onlooker specs out is more realistic, price-wise...

I would like to have dual PCI-Express slots on the motherboard at the least, and the ability to run two seperate OpenGL/display cards...

Of course, PCI-Express for all expansion slots would be nice..!
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #117 of 492
What's about Architosh
Waiting for the Power Mac G5 since Oktober 2001
Reply
Waiting for the Power Mac G5 since Oktober 2001
Reply
post #118 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Onlooker

Powermac G5 DCC
2.6 Dual G5s
2GB RAM
500GB of SATA HD
DVD Burner
Quadro FX 2000
$5999

Let's hope the days of $6,000 Macs are gone and will never return
post #119 of 492
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Onlooker

[snip]

Let's be honest. store.apple.com is quite boring. There needs to be a section showing hotrodded Macs.

[snip]

Offer other configurations with preinstalled software. Apples goal should be to hit 15 Billion in revenue within the next 2-3 yrs. That means hitting on all cylinders everywhere and making themselves indespensable.

this is a great point, and I think you're on to something bigger...

think about what apple has done to build support in the open source community. they (mostly) opened their code, have put money and resources into the darwin camp, and have embraced an entirely new and open attitude in OS development. And it worked.

why not do the same type of thing with the hardware platform, in the sense of providing a welcoming environment, officially, like with darwin, for the DIY / HW hack people, third party hardware developers, etc. Maybe it's a seperate section of the web site, and has a page off of the regular store. bundle third party hardware and gadgets, etc. maybe even a forum, seperate from the lame @ss support forums, for DIYers and highlight cool mods/upgrades. If they were feeling really ballsy, they could offer stripped down towers for cheap, with a purchasing contract similar to developers that says you can only buy for yourself, and are not permitted to resell. I'd love to be able to buy a stripped down G5 with just the enclosure, MB, processors, etc, but NO ram, HD, GFX, optical... it would still cost more than a _partly_ equivalent beige-box, but I'm not going to get sucked in to that BS.
====
"The Matrix is here, and it's vegan-friendly." (TM) 2004, Trinity Life Systems
Reply
====
"The Matrix is here, and it's vegan-friendly." (TM) 2004, Trinity Life Systems
Reply
post #120 of 492
Quote:
I say the rig onlooker specs out is more realistic, price-wise.

Dual 2.6 PM- $3000 (Base config w/dvd brnr, 1GB RAM, 9800 gpu 250GB HD
500GB Sata- $300 extra
Quadro 2000- $1300 extra
2GB of RAM- $ $500 extra

Yeah 6k would be too much. 5K is more likely for a hyped up version.


Quote:
Let's hope the days of $6,000 Macs are gone and will never return

Indeed. I'd love to see an $8000 turnkey Mac someday with

The fastest PM Apple could ship with Dual Procs
4GB of RAM at least
Terabyte of HD space min
FCP Suite(FCP/Motion Pro/DVDSP/3D App/Apple DAW/Xsan preloaded and ready to roll.

It's human nature to look at the unobtainable and lust for it. I just don't have lust for the Dual 2Gh anymore. It's become somewhat passe. It's time to change that.

Concentricity

Great point! I wish Apple would eventually do something like this with Darwin. There is a huge desire in many of us to "Roll our own". The question is how can we reach a happy medium with Apple? Wouldn't it be great to have motherboards from Apple and the ability to purchase PPC processor from them. The computers wouldn't need to run OSX but maybe an advanced Darwin. Many computer fans love to build their own computers. It fosters a nice "can do" mentality. Well one can dream right?
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › G5 Trinity @ WWDC