or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › A True Desktop Class Mac, or another Cube?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A True Desktop Class Mac, or another Cube?

Poll Results: Cube or Desktop.

This is a multiple choice poll
  • 35% (44)
    CUBE
  • 58% (72)
    True Desktop
  • 6% (8)
    Something I'll explain.
124 Total Votes  
post #1 of 647
Thread Starter 
So the question is would you prefer:

A) Another Cube, or pretty much locked down non upgradable Mac that's just a little bigger than the mini.


B) Or a smaller desktop that falls between the iMac, and Mac Pro with Desktop Class parts, Upgradable graphics slot, and HD's Just not as excessive as the Mac Pro?

Something closer in size to this.

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 #2 of 647
Neither, I prefer

C) A cube-shaped computer that is beautiful, fits on my desk, and has the same components found in a Mac Pro, just without the Big Empty Box.

post #3 of 647
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by killerapp View Post

Neither, I prefer

C) A cube-shaped computer that is beautiful, fits on my desk, and has the same components found in a Mac Pro, just without the Big Empty Box.

Obviously that's not going to happen because Mac Pro users out # you by thousands. Maybe Millions.
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 #4 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by killerapp View Post

Neither, I prefer

C) A cube-shaped computer that is beautiful, fits on my desk, and has the same components found in a Mac Pro, just without the Big Empty Box.


You do realize that a computer that size with those components would probably generate enough airflow to recirculate the air in your house every thirty minutes?
post #5 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post


So the question is would you prefer:


Why not both A and B? I could use both, eventually. For a music workstation, I want more than a PCI-e graphics card slot. I want a professional 24 bit audio PCI-e card for recording, and playback. Three PCI-e slots would be just right.

For the office, a cube like Mac would be fine.

post #6 of 647
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snoopy View Post

Why not both A and B? I could use both, eventually. For a music workstation, I want more than a PCI-e graphics card slot. I want a professional 24 bit audio PCI-e card for recording, and playback. Three PCI-e slots would be just right.

For the office, a cube like Mac would be fine.


In the best of worlds apple would increase it's Mac Products to accomidate a few more spaces. I think we will be lucky to get one.
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 #7 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post

Obviously that's not going to happen because Mac Pro users out # you by thousands. Maybe Millions.

Do you mean specifically Mac Pro users or that Apple has sold millions of Mac Pro computers? If the latter, then how many millions of Mac Pro computers do you think Apple has sold in the one year that Mac Pro computers have been manufactured by 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 #8 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post

A) Another Cube, or pretty much locked down non upgradable Mac that's just a little bigger than the mini.

That's not a little bigger than the Mini - it's at least 3 times the height. Since this is big enough to accommodate the required upgrades, then on a design level, it would be more appealing.

The ability to upgrade things like the GPU easily is not important to me as I probably couldn't get the parts easily anyway, I just want a machine that I can configure when I buy it and then the Apple store can put in the parts.

It should still be fairly easy to upgrade though so that BTO options don't cause a backlog in the Apple Store orders.
post #9 of 647
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Royboy View Post

Do you mean specifically Mac Pro users or that Apple has sold millions of Mac Pro computers? If the latter, then how many millions of Mac Pro computers do you think Apple has sold in the one year that Mac Pro computers have been manufactured by Apple?.

Millions of Pro customers are out there, just not all of them have made the transition from PowerMac to Mac Pro.
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 #10 of 647
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

That's not a little bigger than the Mini - it's at least 3 times the height. Since this is big enough to accommodate the required upgrades, then on a design level, it would be more appealing.

The ability to upgrade things like the GPU easily is not important to me as I probably couldn't get the parts easily anyway, I just want a machine that I can configure when I buy it and then the Apple store can put in the parts.

It should still be fairly easy to upgrade though so that BTO options don't cause a backlog in the Apple Store orders.

Then I believe something like this is what your looking for. It's already available.

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 #11 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by killerapp View Post

Neither, I prefer

C) A cube-shaped computer that is beautiful, fits on my desk, and has the same components found in a Mac Pro, just without the Big Empty Box.


that's pretty ugly actually, it's like a fat midget.
post #12 of 647
I like the cube form factor. This is what I voted for. I'm assuming such a machine has one expansion slot and would have dedicated graphics such that it fills the void between mini and MP.
post #13 of 647
Here are some other images, more in Apple style:

slim tower (with 2 PCIe slots, I suppose):


mini cube (PCIe slots not shown!):


Keep in mind that full-sized PCI cards are 12.28" long by 4.xx" tall. Half-sized PCI cards are 6.6" long (could fit in a 7"^3 or 8"^3 enclosure). Still, something smaller than 10"x10" would need a custom-size motherboard/power supply, while there are lots of microATX motherboards/power supplies, and I am sure that Intel would be please to rework one of their motherboards to meet Apple (our) requierements...

I wouldn't mind the mythical xMac to be bigger than smaller, I can certainly imagine it being neither a cube or slim tower as shown, but half-a-cube of 13"x13"x6.5" that could accomodate:
- a microATX motherboard G31/G33/G35/Q35/P35 chipset, C2D/C2Q, 4 RAM slots (up to 8GB)
- One 16x PCIe slot and Three 1x PCIe slots (or One 4x slot for the slim tower design)
- One desktop optical drive
- Two desktop 3.5" hard disk drives (if not four, depending on the interior design: 2 on top below the ODD, and two at the bottom, if you start from the Mac Pro interior design)
- the usual complete range of ports (usb2/FW400/FW800/Gb Ethernet/audio...)

If I was in charge of the specs, I would make it with integrated graphics standard because not everybody needs dedicated graphics, and those who need it could still add a dedicated card), I'd use one of the chipsets mentionned above, so that it would allow for dual and quad chips and compatibility with the upcoming penryn desktop chips (at least for the G33/G35 chipset).
I would offer a barebone configuation at the free $999 price spot, two better/best configurations at $1299 (quad-core) and $1999 (EE quad-core), and offer all the BTO options of the Mac Pro and more...

If there were more PCIe Macs, manufacturers of PCIe cards would create more compatible drivers for the Mac and make more PCIe products available, including graphics cards. Ditto for Expresscard products by the way. Too bad the new iMac doesn't offer one Expresscard slot.
post #14 of 647
^ Bingo!
post #15 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post


In the best of worlds apple would increase it's Mac Products to accomidate a few more spaces. I think we will be lucky to get one.


As I see it, we already have the low end Mac, the Mac Mini. Apple can do a a major revision, making it taller and cube shaped. A mini tower would be the only new product in the lineup.

post #16 of 647
I disagree with the poll...the real debate is really SFF vs Tower.

The slim Mac Lite above and the Cube are likely about the same in^c inside. Note that the cube had a half length PCI slot. I think the 7300GT card used by Apple is a half length PCIe card. So a Cube doesn't need to be "locked down".

I believe the Mac Lite would be acceptable to anyone hoping for a Cube. Its small, its elegant and it offers some but limited expansion and its not really a "tower" or as you phrase it "true desktop".

Likewise the Shuttle SG33G5 would likely fit most Cube proponent desires and is not a cube since its deeper than it is wide or tall (12.2" x 7.8" x 7.2"):



http://hq1.shuttle.com/products_page...LLI=551&PI=635

But I doubt that would satisfy some of the folks that argue for a xMac tower desktop. But I bet many folks that would buy a mini or cube would flock to the thing.

Its actually a sweet little box. GMA X3100, 1 PCIe slot, 1 PCI slot, 2xDDR2 DIMM, eSATA, HDMI !!!!, S/PDIF in/out, FW, 2x3.5" bays, 1x5.25" bay.

I think Cube proponents really DON'T want this:



Vinea
post #17 of 647
The difference between a Shuttle designed enclosure and an Apple designed enclosure is that the Apple designed enclosure looks good from all sides...

All the Shuttles look like PCs from behind. Butt ugly bare metal.
post #18 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix View Post

Here are some other images, more in Apple style:

slim tower (with 2 PCIe slots, I suppose):


mini cube (PCIe slots not shown!):


Keep in mind that full-sized PCI cards are 12.28" long by 4.xx" tall. Half-sized PCI cards are 6.6" long (could fit in a 7"^3 or 8"^3 enclosure). Still, something smaller than 10"x10" would need a custom-size motherboard/power supply, while there are lots of microATX motherboards/power supplies, and I am sure that Intel would be please to rework one of their motherboards to meet Apple (our) requierements...

I wouldn't mind the mythical xMac to be bigger than smaller, I can certainly imagine it being neither a cube or slim tower as shown, but half-a-cube of 13"x13"x6.5" that could accomodate:
- a microATX motherboard G31/G33/G35/Q35/P35 chipset, C2D/C2Q, 4 RAM slots (up to 8GB)
- One 16x PCIe slot and Three 1x PCIe slots (or One 4x slot for the slim tower design)
- One desktop optical drive
- Two desktop 3.5" hard disk drives (if not four, depending on the interior design: 2 on top below the ODD, and two at the bottom, if you start from the Mac Pro interior design)
- the usual complete range of ports (usb2/FW400/FW800/Gb Ethernet/audio...)

If I was in charge of the specs, I would make it with integrated graphics standard because not everybody needs dedicated graphics, and those who need it could still add a dedicated card), I'd use one of the chipsets mentionned above, so that it would allow for dual and quad chips and compatibility with the upcoming penryn desktop chips (at least for the G33/G35 chipset).
I would offer a barebone configuation at the free $999 price spot, two better/best configurations at $1299 (quad-core) and $1999 (EE quad-core), and offer all the BTO options of the Mac Pro and more...

If there were more PCIe Macs, manufacturers of PCIe cards would create more compatible drivers for the Mac and make more PCIe products available, including graphics cards. Ditto for Expresscard products by the way. Too bad the new iMac doesn't offer one Expresscard slot.

$999 is to high for a desktop with on board video drop start it the mini price levels.
post #19 of 647


One of my favorite Shuttle boxes. PCI Express slot and a PCI slot (usable if the GPU isn't double-height.) But some of the newer Shuttles (slightly larger) also have room for as many as 3 HDDs.

I'd like to see Apple "Mac-ify" this form factor, or at least have a MacPro model with the specs brought back down to prosumer level.
post #20 of 647
xMac thread never dies huh?

Steve should read this forums!!!

i am impressed with MacLite 0702!

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply
post #21 of 647
I think a desktop, using desktop components, with the following (max) specs would be a good buy:
  • 1 processor
  • 1 optical drive
  • 2 hard drives
  • 1 PCI Express x16 (graphics card) no onboard video
  • 1 PCI Express x1 (USB, FireWire, sound card, etc.)
  • 4 GB RAM
  • 2 FireWire 400 (1 front, 1 back)
  • 4 USB 2.0 (1 front, 3 back)
  • 1 headphone jack in front
  • 1 Gigabit Ethernet
  • audio in/out
  • 802.11n
  • Bluetooth
  • onboard audio that can be disabled
I do not have any hard numbers but I think if Apple sold my system with 8GB RAM there would be a significant drop, up to 15%, in Mac Pro sales. Given a choice, especially with quad-cores available, people will gladly trade an extra processor for more RAM, which is why I intentionally kept it at 4GB. Not including FireWire 800 keeps another "pro" feature off my consumer system. I could even go without the second PCI Express slot.
post #22 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by troberts View Post

I think a desktop, using desktop components, with the following (max) specs would be a good buy:
  • 1 processor
  • 1 optical drive
  • 2 hard drives
  • 1 PCI Express x16 (graphics card) no onboard video
  • 1 PCI Express x1 (USB, FireWire, sound card, etc.)
  • 4 GB RAM
  • 2 FireWire 400 (1 front, 1 back)
  • 4 USB 2.0 (1 front, 3 back)
  • 1 headphone jack in front
  • 1 Gigabit Ethernet
  • audio in/out
  • 802.11n
  • Bluetooth
  • onboard audio that can be disabled
I do not have any hard numbers but I think if Apple sold my system with 8GB RAM there would be a significant drop, up to 15%, in Mac Pro sales. Given a choice, especially with quad-cores available, people will gladly trade an extra processor for more RAM, which is why I intentionally kept it at 4GB. Not including FireWire 800 keeps another "pro" feature off my consumer system. I could even go without the second PCI Express slot.

I basically agree with you but would define it differently.

2 externally accessible drive slots 1 populated with an optical drive.
2 card expansion slots PCI-e or what ever 1 for graphics card
3 fire wire 1 800 1 400 in back 1 800 in front
4 memory slots (capable of taking 2 GB modules)
3 USB 2.0 connectors 1 front 2 back
1 eSata connector
Gigabit Ethernet
Headphone Jack in front

This could fit into a case less than 1/2 the size of the current Mac Pro.

Only 4 drive spaces rather than 6, 1/2 the card expansion slots, 1/2 the memory module slots, smaller Power supply, Less board space for the CPU.
post #23 of 647
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by troberts View Post

I think a desktop, using desktop components, with the following (max) specs would be a good buy:
  • 1 processor
  • 1 optical drive
  • 2 hard drives
  • 1 PCI Express x16 (graphics card) no onboard video
  • 1 PCI Express x1 (USB, FireWire, sound card, etc.)
  • 4 GB RAM
  • 2 FireWire 400 (1 front, 1 back)
  • 4 USB 2.0 (1 front, 3 back)
  • 1 headphone jack in front
  • 1 Gigabit Ethernet
  • audio in/out
  • 802.11n
  • Bluetooth
  • onboard audio that can be disabled
I do not have any hard numbers but I think if Apple sold my system with 8GB RAM there would be a significant drop, up to 15%, in Mac Pro sales. Given a choice, especially with quad-cores available, people will gladly trade an extra processor for more RAM, which is why I intentionally kept it at 4GB. Not including FireWire 800 keeps another "pro" feature off my consumer system. I could even go without the second PCI Express slot.


That is exactly what I was thinking would fit in a slim tower this size.

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 #24 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post

That is exactly what I was thinking would fit in a slim tower this size.



If it's the Inspirion 531s model, I've just realized that this computer can hold 4 PCI cards, 2 HDDs, 1 ODD, 1 other drive (floppy/card reader), 4 RAM slots and some models are based on the G33 chipset with 3100 integrated graphics and support the newly released 1333FSB Conroe chips (up to 2.33GHz according to Dell's site) at around $700-800 for the 2.33/1333 model.

Expansion Slots
PCI: 2 Slots
PCIe x1: 1 Slot
PCIe x16 (Graphics): 1 Slots

Chassis
250 Watt DC Power Supply
Backup battery: 3-V CR2032 lithium coin cell
3.5" Bays: 3 bays (two internal, one external)
5.25" Bays: 1 bays
Memory DIMM slots: 4 available

Dimensions
H: 14.2 inches (36.2 cm)
W: 3.9 inches (10.0 cm)
D: 17.1 inches (43.5 cm)

It does much more than what you're asking for... Well redesigned by Apple, it surely fits the bill. Even if it's starts at $999.
post #25 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by onlooker View Post


That is exactly what I was thinking would fit in a slim tower this size.


It would not be difficult to add one more PCI-e slot. Slots are cheap once you have one, so why skimp?

post #26 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by snoopy View Post

It would not be difficult to add one more PCI-e slot. Slots are cheap once you have one, so why skimp?


Just size.
post #27 of 647
I beg of you all: Please stop. I simply do not understand the demand for this product, nor do I think Apple will release a mid pro tower.

Apple's computer line is complete. The mini fills the bargain basement category. It's actually quite capable as a basic machine. The iMac is complete and quite powerful. For expandibility and pro use, there is the Mac pro. There is simply no reason to come up with a crippled Mac pro.

I do understand the biggest reason is "expandability." But I wonder how many people actually need that, beyond upgrading an HD or Ram. Does someone who won't spend the cash for a Mac pro really need PCI slots? I really don't think they do.

My feeling is that such a machine would just cut into Mac Pro sales and possibly iMac sales as well.

Lastly, look at the pricing scheme a tell me where it fits?

Mini $599-799

iMac $1199, 1499, 1799, 2299

Pro $2200+


So let's see. The machine that is being discussed, with a single C2D, will have nearly the specs as the iMac, but without the display. In addition, it would have more slots, drive bays, etc. What would it cost? $1299-$1799? The problem with that is you're into the iMac range, and you don't get a display. You get about the same power, so why buy it without that display? The few who would buy one due to expandability would not constitute a big enough market IMO. The other market would be people that just don't have the extra $1K for a Mac pro. But really...it would seem to me that such a person would do absolutely fine with an iMac.

I know many disagree with me on this and I'll get a flood of people saying "shut up SDW...I want one...he wants one...look at all these people that want one!....you're wrong!" But AI doesn't comprise "the market" I'm sorry to say.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #28 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I beg of you all: Please stop. I simply do not understand the demand for this product, nor do I think Apple will release a mid pro tower.

Apple's computer line is complete. The mini fills the bargain basement category. It's actually quite capable as a basic machine. The iMac is complete and quite powerful. For expandibility and pro use, there is the Mac pro. There is simply no reason to come up with a crippled Mac pro.

I do understand the biggest reason is "expandability." But I wonder how many people actually need that, beyond upgrading an HD or Ram. Does someone who won't spend the cash for a Mac pro really need PCI slots? I really don't think they do.

My feeling is that such a machine would just cut into Mac Pro sales and possibly iMac sales as well.

Lastly, look at the pricing scheme a tell me where it fits?

Mini $599-799

iMac $1199, 1499, 1799, 2299

Pro $2200+


So let's see. The machine that is being discussed, with a single C2D, will have nearly the specs as the iMac, but without the display. In addition, it would have more slots, drive bays, etc. What would it cost? $1299-$1799? The problem with that is you're into the iMac range, and you don't get a display. You get about the same power, so why buy it without that display? The few who would buy one due to expandability would not constitute a big enough market IMO. The other market would be people that just don't have the extra $1K for a Mac pro. But really...it would seem to me that such a person would do absolutely fine with an iMac.

The imac have a screen that is NOT THAT GOOD FOR PHOTO SHOP TYPE WORK and min-range video cards that will be slow with games on imac's build screen at its screen res.

The mini a $599-799 is over priced for laptop parts in a desktop and GMA 950 and is under powered for most uses.

The macpro is over powered for most uses and only comes a 7300gt in a $2000+ system making it suck for gameing and the FB-DIMM's do not help at all.

The MAC BOOK PRO is a better deal x2 the ram that you can up to 4GB for $250 with a $40 buy back for your base system ram and a better video card with a good build in screen for PHOTO SHOP TYPE WORK.

A new mac pro with DDR2 ECC at the same price will be better also upping the base ram to 2gb will aslo help.

A desktop that replace the mini at the high end or altogether with on board video g33 / g35 with pci-e x16 and a pci-e x4 slot and maybe 1-2 pci slots or a x16 and 2-3 pci-e x1 slots will fit in for games and people who need a good desktop system not a sever / workstation system.
starting at $650-$800 and up
or starting at $500-$700 and up
also put firewire 400 / 800 on the pci-e bus.
pci slots for sound cards will be a good thing for gameing.

maybe even have a higher end gameing system / high end desktop / min-range workstation system.
x38 or dual xeon with DDR2 ECC ram.
post #29 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


I beg of you all: Please stop. I simply do not understand the demand for this product, nor do I think Apple will release a mid pro tower.


If the moderators want to kill this thread they can, but many of us simply want a lower priced, expandable tower and we will not stop discussing it.


Quote:

Does someone who won't spend the cash for a Mac pro really need PCI slots? I really don't think they do.


There are many things in this world that people don't need, yet they BUY them anyway. People buy what they WANT, and many computer users want an expandable mid-range tower -- not a cheap tower nor a professional workstation.

I have a small music studio. I could get a rack and mount my audio gear in that, but I don't want to. I have a dual G4 PowerMac with expansions slots filled up. For me, a $1000 mini-tower would work fine. Heck, some people are running Apple's Logic software on a Mac Mini. I could do that too, but I won't. I'd rather stick with my old dual G4 with its PCI slots and keep down the clutter.

I don't want to quibble about the price, but a little dual core tower should go for $1000. A quad core would sell for more, but still far from Mac Pro workstation territory. You say a mid priced tower would cut into Mac Pro sales. Nonsense. As I said, some folks run Logic on a Mini. A mid-range Mac tower would cut into Mini sales, and I don't think Apple would be complaining about that. BTW, a mid-range Mac tower would certainly NOT be a crippled Mac Pro. Your bias is showing.

post #30 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon View Post

The imac have a screen that is NOT THAT GOOD FOR PHOTO SHOP TYPE WORK and min-range video cards that will be slow with games on imac's build screen at its screen res.

You do realise that the panel used in the new 24" iMac is superior to the one used in the Apple Cinema Displays right?

H-IPS is better than S-IPS panels.

The gaming point is mute, how many Mac people actually game? The PC gaming market is minuscule compared to the console market anyway.
Never Argue With An Idiot. They'll Lower You To Their Level And Then Beat You With Experience!
Reply
Never Argue With An Idiot. They'll Lower You To Their Level And Then Beat You With Experience!
Reply
post #31 of 647
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPL...esktop/mac_pro

is this new? (comparision of 24" iMac and Mac Pro) if so xMac is dead and move on ...

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply

Nov '09 | iMac 21.5" C2D 3.06 Ghz | Intel 330 240GB SSD | ATI

Sep '12| Toshiba 14" 1366 x 768! | i5 3rd Gen 6GB| Intel x25-m 120GB SSD | Win 7|  Viewsonic VX2255wmb 22" LCD
iPhone 4S| iPad 2 wifi

Reply
post #32 of 647
what is this mac cube? Can anyone enlighten me? It looks like a new Mac, to fit in the gap between Mini and iMac? Any news about the specs?
Apple is a hardware company, dont believe me? Read this Article!. For those who understand my message, help me spread this info to those who dont get it.
Reply
Apple is a hardware company, dont believe me? Read this Article!. For those who understand my message, help me spread this info to those who dont get it.
Reply
post #33 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by gloss View Post

You do realize that a computer that size with those components would probably generate enough airflow to recirculate the air in your house every thirty minutes?

If the Cube (AllSpark!!!) is more powerful then a iMac and its same or cheaper then the iMac, im buying it as my next comp, and maybe I can get myself a Apple Cinema HD screen
Apple is a hardware company, dont believe me? Read this Article!. For those who understand my message, help me spread this info to those who dont get it.
Reply
Apple is a hardware company, dont believe me? Read this Article!. For those who understand my message, help me spread this info to those who dont get it.
Reply
post #34 of 647
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix View Post



If it's the Inspirion 531s model, I've just realized that this computer can hold 4 PCI cards, 2 HDDs, 1 ODD, 1 other drive (floppy/card reader), 4 RAM slots and some models are based on the G33 chipset with 3100 integrated graphics and support the newly released 1333FSB Conroe chips (up to 2.33GHz according to Dell's site) at around $700-800 for the 2.33/1333 model.

Expansion Slots
PCI: 2 Slots
PCIe x1: 1 Slot
PCIe x16 (Graphics): 1 Slots

Chassis
250 Watt DC Power Supply
Backup battery: 3-V CR2032 lithium coin cell
3.5" Bays: 3 bays (two internal, one external)
5.25" Bays: 1 bays
Memory DIMM slots: 4 available

Dimensions
H: 14.2 inches (36.2 cm)
W: 3.9 inches (10.0 cm)
D: 17.1 inches (43.5 cm)

It does much more than what you're asking for... Well redesigned by Apple, it surely fits the bill. Even if it's starts at $999.

I didn't realize a slim tower that small could hold that much. Personally I don't think it needs 4 PCI slots, but I am aware that some people would prefer it, I think I would increase the power supply instead.
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 #35 of 647
The Mini's innards (hard drive, graphics card and RAM) should be user-accessible.
There's no reason a 2007 Mac should be less accessible than a Mac LC.

With Leopard, it would be nice to have a way to put another hard drive in for Time Machine.
Firewire's good for a scanner, hub or the occasional TDM access, but I've never personally trusted it for an always-on hard drive.

The third thing is the ability to drive the 30" display. That would be nice.

Slots aren't necessary in a budget desktop anymore and with those three things taken care of, the mini is fine as a midrange mac desktop.

If Jobs wants to go the "one more thing" route, he can add an Expresscard slot on the side just for the fun of it.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #36 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix View Post

Here are some other images, more in Apple style:

slim tower (with 2 PCIe slots, I suppose):


mini cube (PCIe slots not shown!):


Keep in mind that full-sized PCI cards are 12.28" long by 4.xx" tall. Half-sized PCI cards are 6.6" long (could fit in a 7"^3 or 8"^3 enclosure). Still, something smaller than 10"x10" would need a custom-size motherboard/power supply, while there are lots of microATX motherboards/power supplies, and I am sure that Intel would be please to rework one of their motherboards to meet Apple (our) requierements...

I wouldn't mind the mythical xMac to be bigger than smaller, I can certainly imagine it being neither a cube or slim tower as shown, but half-a-cube of 13"x13"x6.5" that could accomodate:
- a microATX motherboard G31/G33/G35/Q35/P35 chipset, C2D/C2Q, 4 RAM slots (up to 8GB)
- One 16x PCIe slot and Three 1x PCIe slots (or One 4x slot for the slim tower design)
- One desktop optical drive
- Two desktop 3.5" hard disk drives (if not four, depending on the interior design: 2 on top below the ODD, and two at the bottom, if you start from the Mac Pro interior design)
- the usual complete range of ports (usb2/FW400/FW800/Gb Ethernet/audio...)

If I was in charge of the specs, I would make it with integrated graphics standard because not everybody needs dedicated graphics, and those who need it could still add a dedicated card), I'd use one of the chipsets mentionned above, so that it would allow for dual and quad chips and compatibility with the upcoming penryn desktop chips (at least for the G33/G35 chipset).
I would offer a barebone configuation at the free $999 price spot, two better/best configurations at $1299 (quad-core) and $1999 (EE quad-core), and offer all the BTO options of the Mac Pro and more...

If there were more PCIe Macs, manufacturers of PCIe cards would create more compatible drivers for the Mac and make more PCIe products available, including graphics cards. Ditto for Expresscard products by the way. Too bad the new iMac doesn't offer one Expresscard slot.

sign me up.
post #37 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea View Post

I disagree with the poll...the real debate is really SFF vs Tower.

The slim Mac Lite above and the Cube are likely about the same in^c inside. Note that the cube had a half length PCI slot. I think the 7300GT card used by Apple is a half length PCIe card. So a Cube doesn't need to be "locked down".

I believe the Mac Lite would be acceptable to anyone hoping for a Cube. Its small, its elegant and it offers some but limited expansion and its not really a "tower" or as you phrase it "true desktop".

Likewise the Shuttle SG33G5 would likely fit most Cube proponent desires and is not a cube since its deeper than it is wide or tall (12.2" x 7.8" x 7.2"):



http://hq1.shuttle.com/products_page...LLI=551&PI=635

But I doubt that would satisfy some of the folks that argue for a xMac tower desktop. But I bet many folks that would buy a mini or cube would flock to the thing.

Its actually a sweet little box. GMA X3100, 1 PCIe slot, 1 PCI slot, 2xDDR2 DIMM, eSATA, HDMI !!!!, S/PDIF in/out, FW, 2x3.5" bays, 1x5.25" bay.

I think Cube proponents really DON'T want this:



Vinea

A Cube like that could definitely be acceptable. My fear though is that it would be shorted four inches to make it more symmetrical. with only half length cards it would be little better than the iMac.
post #38 of 647
Quote:
Originally Posted by shanmugam View Post

http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPL...esktop/mac_pro

is this new? (comparision of 24" iMac and Mac Pro) if so xMac is dead and move on ...

There's still that giant gap between the family iMac and the ultra professional Mac Pro.
post #39 of 647


looks perfect! But a white light instead of green
post #40 of 647
Thread Starter 
Personally I don't like the design that Isamu Sanada did. It's not clean like Apple would do. That cutaway down the middle looks like shit.
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
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › A True Desktop Class Mac, or another Cube?