or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Why do you want a minitower?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why do you want a minitower? - Page 2

Poll Results: Why a minitower as opposed to a Mac Pro?

This is a multiple choice poll
  • 24% (26)
    Take up less desk space
  • 36% (38)
    Cost (but what should be missing cf the Pro?)
  • 22% (24)
    Don't need the power of a Pro (but why not a Mini then?)
  • 16% (17)
    Other reason (please reply)
105 Total Votes  
post #41 of 241
not really, but thankyou royboy
and mrtotes? steve told me "no" ;-)
peve

and by the way...
no. english is not my native language.
Reply
peve

and by the way...
no. english is not my native language.
Reply
post #42 of 241
The mac pro is kind of overkill for me, but I'd love to have a drive bay for an internal drive and PCI slots for audio dsp cards and or sound cards.
post #43 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by iDave View Post

Need check box that says "all of the above."

Absolutely!
"Run faster. History is a constant race between invention and catastrophe. Education helps but it is never enough. You must also run." Leto Atreides II
Reply
"Run faster. History is a constant race between invention and catastrophe. Education helps but it is never enough. You must also run." Leto Atreides II
Reply
post #44 of 241
As has been said before, headless macs need to have a midway. The mac mini is great but too week. The Mac Pro Overkill. I've been wanting to build a media server for the front room. Something to run front row, surf the net and email, and play games like unreal and various mods.

The only changes I would make to some of the suggestions, is fit the drive with a blu-ray drive. It is the future, and the product needs to be built for it. At least have it as an option.

The second is have a option IO board with HDMI output that can carry fully audio signals up to 7.1

The device can than then be built for all the needs.

Some people may say, why don't I buy a apple TV - It's good, but it' doesn't do it all.

The mac mini is so close, just the graphics need the push.

From what I have read on previous topics, some people believe that Mr Jobs doesn't believe in media like CD's and things. Storage should all on line and on Flash cards. Although I see the future eventualy ending up like this, not for 10-15 years. In the meantime, lets continue with them.
post #45 of 241
There has to be a market for a well placed mid-tower. I rarely see towers with fully loaded PCI slots and fully stocked ram slots. Obviously there are many power users with fully tricked out machines, but most people need something more than a mini but not a tower.
post #46 of 241
There are some science centers that use quite a few decked-out PMs, and Apple is more than happy to supply them.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #47 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherman Homan View Post

There has to be a market for a well placed mid-tower. I rarely see towers with fully loaded PCI slots and fully stocked ram slots. Obviously there are many power users with fully tricked out machines, but most people need something more than a mini but not a tower.

What they want is piece of mind. We Tower users generally have a better safe than sorry attitude.
post #48 of 241
I really like the mini, I think it is a very cool little machine. But Final Cut Studio won't run on it (it does not work with integrated graphics).

I don't want to buy an iMac (have already a few screens), Mac Pro is too expensive.

So I'd need something with a dedicated graphics processor, and two DVI ports, if possible.

Given the current product matrix, I'll buy an iMac and sell one of my LCDs.
post #49 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by durin oakenskin View Post

I really like the mini, I think it is a very cool little machine. But Final Cut Studio won't run on it (it does not work with integrated graphics).

I don't want to buy an iMac (have already a few screens), Mac Pro is too expensive.

So I'd need something with a dedicated graphics processor, and two DVI ports, if possible.

Given the current product matrix, I'll buy an iMac and sell one of my LCDs.

Apple's only answer for your needs is the used market.
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
post #50 of 241
The reason Apple should make a new Mac Cube (minitower) is obvious: PEOPLE WANT ONE! Call it the MacPro Cube and charge $1299 for it using the same components as the MacCube. Apple is really hurting its customers by using laptop parts and taking shortcuts with their consumer desktops (the iMac and mini.)

peve, regarding your mockup, it is too tall. It needs to fit onto the shelf below an HDTV or on a desk and not be obnoxious. If you took the innards of a Mac Pro and removed the empty space you could easily fit it all into an 8" cube.
post #51 of 241
I have a 24 inch display that I would like to use with a Mac non-laptop. (I'm not buying an iMac with display)
post #52 of 241
I would buy this if it was available with performance and capacity equal to or better than the MacPro:

Ports will need to look like this though:
post #53 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by killerapp View Post

I would buy this if it was available with performance and capacity equal to or better than the MacPro:

How are you supposed to get performance and capacity equal to or better than a Mac Pro with that? And what the hell are you taking about, do you have any idea what your saying?

If you had performance and capacity equal to or better than a Mac Pro you would have a Mac Pro. What are you talking about?

#1 you would never fit 4 drive Bays, 4 PCI-E slots, and Dual CPU sockets, and 4 RAM slots in there with the same Power Unit/supply. It's not possible.

#2 See #1

#3 The point of the Mac Semi-Pro Slim Tower is to reduce components and power to a minimum, still giving it some expansion and customizability.

Your post is so ridiculous it's pissing me off.
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 #54 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post

How are you supposed to get performance and capacity equal to or better than a Mac Pro with that? And what the hell are you taking about, do you have any idea what your saying?

If you had performance and capacity equal to or better than a Mac Pro you would have a Mac Pro. What are you talking about?

#1 you would never fit 4 drive Bays, 4 PCI-E slots, and Dual CPU sockets, and 4 RAM slots in there with the same Power Unit/supply. It's not possible.

#2 See #1

#3 The point of the Mac Semi-Pro Slim Tower is to reduce components and power to a minimum, still giving it some expansion and customizability.

Your post is so ridiculous it's pissing me off.

Don't worry. Apple is never going to make anything like that. They may never make a Mini-Tower, Mid-Tower, Mid-range headless Mac, or X-Mac tower.
2009 Quad 2.66 Mac Pro, 12 GB OWC RAM, ATI 4870, Wi-Fi Card 802.11n, AppleCare, 4 WD Caviar Black 1TB HD's, 2 SuperDrives, 24" Apple LED Display.
Reply
2009 Quad 2.66 Mac Pro, 12 GB OWC RAM, ATI 4870, Wi-Fi Card 802.11n, AppleCare, 4 WD Caviar Black 1TB HD's, 2 SuperDrives, 24" Apple LED Display.
Reply
post #55 of 241
I'm sorry you find my suggestion so frustrating. It's simple, really. When you buy a mac pro off the shelf it's a big empty box. If you get rid of all the empty space, you're left with a machine of identical performance but much reduced physical size. That's what I want, and that's what hundreds of thousands of other people want as well.
post #56 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by killerapp View Post

That's what I want, and that's what hundreds of thousands of other people want as well.

The first part of that statement is true, but I'm not sure about the second. Do you have a list of names or any survey results? I am fairly sure that Apple conducts market surveys and that they have a business plan, and at least for the moment fairly obviously, they don't think thousands and thousands of people want minitowers.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #57 of 241
when will you realize that just because apple could make an upgradable computer that you could NOT use your own graphics card unless you bought it through apple with EFI.
post #58 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by killerapp View Post

I would buy this if it was available with performance and capacity equal to or better than the MacPro:
Ports will need to look like this though:

Of course it wouldn't be better than a Mac Pro otherwise Apple wouldn't make a Mac Pro. I guess it could have a similar spec but I think one quad on the high end would be enough and it would maybe be the same as the lowest end Mac Pro. With a more restrictive case, it would be harder to get the same airflow and I doubt you'd fit an X1900XT in there if they are overheating Mac Pros.

I actually do like that size in the picture and I'd buy one with that design. I like easy access to drives and Ram though so a side panel like the towers would be perfect. Enough room for two drives and a capable graphics card - irrespective of upgrades, it's good to have the assurance that if it dies, you don't have to fork out a huge amount of cash for a repair. You just get another card and whether or not the options are limited, they are not non-existant.

I'd see the ports being the same as the Mini but with two display connections and possibly eSATA but FW800 would suffice IMO. I'd prefer a tray-loading optical drive too.
post #59 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrpiddly View Post

when will you realize that just because apple could make an upgradable computer that you could NOT use your own graphics card unless you bought it through apple with EFI.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say, but IF Apple releases another "upgradable" computer, I'm pretty sure that you could use most of the Mac Pro GPUs (they are not currently the best around, but they exist), AND if Apple had a second Mac with upgradeable graphics, I'm pretty sure that ATI and nvidia would work with Apple to make more cards available. The mythical xMac being a mid-range product, it would surely sell more units than the Mac Pro and make it profitable to develop more options. I don't care if the card/computer uses EFI or whatever, I just need a few choices. The more Macs with PCIe slot, the more Apple and 3rd parties developers will want to make cards for the Mac, the more cards/choices we will have for the xMac and the Mac Pro too!
post #60 of 241
Some people around here know me as the guy who shits on minitower threads. If Apple made a minitower, it would certainly be an interesting computer, and while I don't think its sales numbers would be great, I don't think they'd be worse than the mini's.

The reason why I shit on minitower threads is because it's bad business practice. First off, it would be a low-margin product. Low margin, commodity products offer little value proposition to Apple as sources of profit, and more importantly they tarnish the brand. Apple can sell high-margin products because they build wow-factor into them. Even if the proposed minitower had wow factor, unless it were paired with an Apple display the system as a unit would have little to no wow-factor.

In other words, Apple will do whatever Adolf Loos says, and Loos hates minitowers.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #61 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post


The reason why I shit on minitower threads is because it's bad business practice. First off, it would be a low-margin product.


This assumption keeps coming up over and over again, and folks have been pointing out that Apple sets whatever profit margin it wants. There is no "margin rule" that Apple must follow. Sure, Windows minitowers will sell for less, but Mac users buy Macs.

post #62 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by killerapp View Post

I'm sorry you find my suggestion so frustrating. It's simple, really. When you buy a mac pro off the shelf it's a big empty box. If you get rid of all the empty space, you're left with a machine of identical performance but much reduced physical size. That's what I want, and that's what hundreds of thousands of other people want as well.

Bullshit! Your still going to pay for all the components and you still need airflow. Was your head attached to your body when you typed this shit today? The point of the mini tower is also to reduce price. Your not going to do that with all the same components. Your going to have to sacrifice a CPU, a couple PCI-E slots, a couple drive bays. We would probably be better off if the memory were approximately the same, but doing what you said is not going to happen in a million years. Your just saying reduce the size of the Mac Pro but keep it the same. Well that's a different product for a Mac Pro thread, because your still talking about a hypothetical Mac Pro. This is not one. We are not talking about a Mac Pro in here. We are talking about a Semi-Pro Mac that is more expandable than an iMac, uses a true Desktop CPU, Has a Graphics Card, that is not as powerful as a Mac Pro, but will still be a good midrange desktop computer with equal specs to PC desktops. We are not talking about a Workstation. The Mac Pro is supposed to be Apples Workstation. We are tallking about a true Apple desktop. Get it?
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 #63 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by snoopy View Post

This assumption keeps coming up over and over again, and folks have been pointing out that Apple sets whatever profit margin it wants. There is no "margin rule" that Apple must follow. Sure, Windows minitowers will sell for less, but Mac users buy Macs.


The high margin minitower was called the Cube, and besides that everyone in this thread seems to be in concert of the opinion that low-cost is an important attribute here.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #64 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

The high margin minitower was called the Cube, and besides that everyone in this thread seems to be in concert of the opinion that low-cost is an important attribute here.

No, the high margin minitower was called the PowerMac. It got replaced by the 24" iMac in the desktop segment. Now anyone who wants a tower must move up to the workstation segment and the Mac Pro.
post #65 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by snoopy View Post

This assumption keeps coming up over and over again, and folks have been pointing out that Apple sets whatever profit margin it wants. There is no "margin rule" that Apple must follow. Sure, Windows minitowers will sell for less, but Mac users buy Macs.


There's also the ignorant assumption that tower users are also low budget. There's a lot of high margin companies making towers. In fact, Apple is the only one forcing you into an alll in one.
post #66 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

Apple can sell high-margin products because they build wow-factor into them.

The MacPro sure has WOW factor, as in
"Wow, what a big, ugly box"
"Wow this thing is expensive and heavy"
"Wow, sure has a lot of empty expansion space I'll never use"

I've bought just about every Macintosh out there since the MacPlus, except for the big ugly boxes (BUBs). The BUB started with the G3 in that obnoxiously large blue plastic housing that couldn't fit in or on my desk.



WOW what a lot of empty space that I'll never use! There are many people like me that want the capability of a stock MacPro but can't bear the BUB.
post #67 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

Some people around here know me as the guy who shits on minitower threads.

quick somebody change his name from registered user to 'the guy who shits on minitower threads'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

First off, it would be a low-margin product. Low margin, commodity products offer little value proposition to Apple as sources of profit, and more importantly they tarnish the brand.

Let's put it this way. The lowest end iMac is £800. If they made a Core 2 Duo mini-tower with a good graphics card and desktop hard drives/components for £800, I would buy one without hesitating - the iMac is nowhere near even considering for me. Since it has no display and no laptop parts, it is cheaper for Apple to build therefore the margin they'd make is more than they make on the iMac. Now take £100 off it so they get the same or possibly still more money than the iMac and I'd want to buy it even more. I'd gladly pay £700 for a decent mini-tower.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

Even if the proposed minitower had wow factor, unless it were paired with an Apple display the system as a unit would have little to no wow-factor.

Well they couldn't do that unless they started building Cinema displays with cheaper components. I'd quite like that though as I find the Cinema display design very nice indeed. Maybe just a consumer version so you get Cinema Display and Cinema Display Pro.
post #68 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by killerapp View Post

The MacPro sure has WOW factor, as in
"Wow, what a big, ugly box"
"Wow this thing is expensive and heavy"
"Wow, sure has a lot of empty expansion space I'll never use"

I've bought just about every Macintosh out there since the MacPlus, except for the big ugly boxes (BUBs). The BUB started with the G3 in that obnoxiously large blue plastic housing that couldn't fit in or on my desk.



WOW what a lot of empty space that I'll never use! There are many people like me that want the capability of a stock MacPro but can't bear the BUB.

You're a prime example of a candidate for Apple's less is more approach. A lot of us who have been here for a while and most potential switchers in Apple's price category are not. Look, I have the 20 AL iMac. When it comes down to it, a lot of its features are nice, but they are valid to say my little sister than they are me and most of those could be added with a new iSight/front row cinema display based off of the iMac panels.

For a Mac Pro I see
"Wow, the brushed metal looks great"
"Wow, there's room for four hard drives and its super easy to work inside."
"Wow, I don't have to litter my desk and power strip with external devices just ot make it functional like i do with my iMac"

I don't understand the out way or the highway approach of the current Mac users. We used to be the educated elite, not a bunch of arrogant fansboys as Mac users are not.
post #69 of 241
As before, this is pointless. You can try to justify the business case for a cheap minitower, but if there were more than a marginal business case, you'd see one. In this argument, I'm telling you that the minitower mac has little business case, and you're trying to prove to me that a minitower mac would be a good computer.

What you have to understand is that there isn't overlap here. I'm sure the minitower mac wuld be a good computer. It just wouldn't be a particularly profitable or well-branded machine.
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #70 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

As before, this is pointless. You can try to justify the business case for a cheap minitower, but if there were more than a marginal business case, you'd see one. In this argument, I'm telling you that the minitower mac has little business case, and you're trying to prove to me that a minitower mac would be a good computer.

What you have to understand is that there isn't overlap here. I'm sure the minitower mac wuld be a good computer. It just wouldn't be a particularly profitable or well-branded machine.

Apple doesn't run on business cases like a normal business. They run on an almost cult-like loyalty and a man's vision of what a computer should be. The reason they don't make one is because Steve thinks an less powerful, but integrated computer is better than a more powerful, but less integrated one.
post #71 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

Apple doesn't run on business cases like a normal business. They run on an almost cult-like loyalty and a man's vision of what a computer should be. The reason they don't make one is because Steve thinks an less powerful, but integrated computer is better than a more powerful, but less integrated one.

You clearly are in a situation where you've decided to substitute reality with your own version. Regardless of what goes on behind Apple's closed doors -- which neither of us have a clue about -- they have been very successful since they've adopted a brand promotion strategy. The lack of business case for the minitower is that it doesn't fit into this strategy.

Of course Apple runs on business cases. They are, afterall, a business. Are you thick?
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #72 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

The high margin minitower was called the Cube, and besides that everyone in this thread seems to be in concert of the opinion that low-cost is an important attribute here.

The Cube was cool looking. I saw one in person once and was impressed, but I think Apple should go with a new form factor. Basically the size would be like Slicing the current Mac Pro straight down the middle. Just use a thin tower case. Alienware had one of these a few years ago, and it looked hot. It was an "Alienware for everyone" type computer. They got rid of it when DELL bought them out because DELL became the Alienware for everyone, but It was a sweet looking case. Really thin, black, and sleek.
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 #73 of 241
Marvin gave a great description of a Mini awhile back. I thought," That's the computer for me." Then I realized that the Mac Mini is ALMOST enough for what I need. Actually, the fact that's makes me hesitate is that it only has one DVI out. I have two large displays that I'd like to use. With one DVI, that's not possible.
Paying twice as much for an iMac still wouldn't give me the opportunity to use my 2 displays either. To me that's not a gap, it's a crevasse. To have what I want, I'd have to go to a Mac Pro which would be like driving an 18 wheeler to the supermarket. Extreme overkill.
The mini is about 2 inches tall; I'd like a mini about 4" tall, but that is more accessible, so you could easily add memory and ..., plus a few more ports, especially, another DVI port, and possibly eliminate the power dongle. That would be the perfect computer for me.
ADS
Reply
ADS
Reply
post #74 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by sequitur View Post

...a Mac Pro which would be like driving an 18 wheeler to the supermarket...

Since you like analogies, I think of the Mac Pro like driving an EMPTY 18-wheeler to Amarillo. Sure it has lots of power and torque, but you don't need to haul the big empty box. In reality you just want a BMW sedan to get you to Amarillo -- still great power and torque, but no big ugly box (BUB).
post #75 of 241


It appears DELL reared it's ugly head, and has the Alienware design I was talking about in a DELL.

I think this would be a good size case for a Semi-Pro Mac. It looks elegant to me. Obviously Apple would dress it up to Apple standards, but I think less is more with a case like this.


Quote:
Originally Posted by dell

Easy Expandability
The Inspiron slim desktop comes standard with 4 external slots, 1 external 5.25” bay, 1 external 3.5” bay, and 6 external USB 2.0 ports – 2 at front and 4 at back and space for 2 internal hard drives. With Inspiron, you’ve got room to grow.
With upgradeable graphics options, Inspiron desktops deliver ultra-sharp, ultra-smooth visuals for games, movies and more.

I think that is better than a cube, and Apple would do it's own take on it.

I do think there is a place for a computer like this in the Apple lineup.
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 #76 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post



It appears DELL reared it's ugly head, and has the Alienware design I was talking about in a DELL.

I think this would be a good size case for a Semi-Pro Mac. It looks elegant to me. Obviously Apple would dress it up to Apple standards, but I think less is more with a case like this.




I think that is better than a cube, and Apple would do it's own take on it.

I do think there is a place for a computer like this in the Apple lineup.

I have to admit that Dell is getting much better at designing computers that are pleasing to the eye. I can only hope that Apple would someday offer an equivalently spec.'d computer, when looking at the higher end range of this model. Intel Core 2 Duo, larger hard drive option, etc.
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
just waiting to be included in one of Apple's target markets.
Don't get me wrong, I like the flat panel iMac, actually own an iMac, and I like the Mac mini, but...........
Reply
post #77 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by killerapp View Post

Since you like analogies, I think of the Mac Pro like driving an EMPTY 18-wheeler to Amarillo. Sure it has lots of power and torque, but you don't need to haul the big empty box. In reality you just want a BMW sedan to get you to Amarillo -- still great power and torque, but no big ugly box (BUB).

The iMac is like the BMW sedan. What we're really looking for is a full size pickup.

Desktop core 2 Duo/Quad
4 DIMM slots
2 Optical (full sized) drives slots
2 hard drive slots
1 x16 and a couple of x1 slots.
Why is this really too much to ask.
post #78 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post



I think that is better than a cube, and Apple would do it's own take on it.

I do think there is a place for a computer like this in the Apple lineup.

Such a computer used to be the mainstay of Apple's lineup. Apple then decided that we should be buying all in ones instead.
post #79 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

Such a computer used to be the mainstay of Apple's lineup. Apple then decided that we should be buying all in ones instead.

A lot of people blame this on Steve Jobs, but I thought I read somewhere that the IMac was already in development when he came back to Apple.
2009 Quad 2.66 Mac Pro, 12 GB OWC RAM, ATI 4870, Wi-Fi Card 802.11n, AppleCare, 4 WD Caviar Black 1TB HD's, 2 SuperDrives, 24" Apple LED Display.
Reply
2009 Quad 2.66 Mac Pro, 12 GB OWC RAM, ATI 4870, Wi-Fi Card 802.11n, AppleCare, 4 WD Caviar Black 1TB HD's, 2 SuperDrives, 24" Apple LED Display.
Reply
post #80 of 241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel View Post

You clearly are in a situation where you've decided to substitute reality with your own version.

You mean the one were apple is not perfect.

Quote:
Regardless of what goes on behind Apple's closed doors -- which neither of us have a clue about -- they have been very successful since they've adopted a brand promotion strategy. The lack of business case for the minitower is that it doesn't fit into this strategy.

They've been successful on notebook sales and selling to the GQ crowd. It doesn't make very good business sense to base your core business on trends and fads. The way Apple is setting things up, they can fall as fast as they've risen. That's exactly what happened with the boom after the original iMac. We need stability for the Mac as a platform. You can't have that when you're turning away customers because they're not hip or professional enough.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Why do you want a minitower?