A True Desktop Class Mac, or another Cube? - Page 8

First, I am not claiming anyone agrees with me. I'm telling you the way it is. Secondly, Mac is not a niche product. They have targeted consumers, educators and creative professionals. This is literally common knowledge.


[quote]

I don't really claim to like the Mini. But, it does give you basic Mac functionality and will run quite an array of software with it's new Core Duo design.


Come on. It's for low, mid and even prosumers. Look at its benchmarks above.


...and high end prosumers with demand a desktop form factor.


What needs does that segment have than cannot be met by the iMac or low end Mac pro? Hmmm?



Don't be an asshole. It has nothing to do with me. I have a Macbook Pro that works fine. I realize many people here want this product. The point is the OVERALL MARKET doesn't agree with YOU.

[quote]


I would really like to know what a niche market is according to you.





Yup. Bingo. This is not your older brother's bondi blue iMac.

[quote]

According to you the gains exceed the losses. It won't if Apple take a PR hit from releasing another failed product.


Rhetorical. Next.


If you want more power than an iMac, you need a Mac Pro. The midpro will not be more powerful according to the specs I've seen people advocate.


An intel iMac?


Your options are to buy an iMac or Mac Pro. Blah.


Another asshole comment. How much would it cost then. Really, I'm asking your opinion.


Let's see the prices then. Also, don't forget a totally different motherboard with PCI slots, removable bays, etc.


Apparently not enough of you actually want it. That much is obvious. And the "pretend list of needs" line just continues.


The hardware offered is different. The OS is different. Even some of the targeted types of users is different. The prices are different. The designs are different. It's different. Duh.


So the quality is low enough that a consumer will chose a machine that's the same price (or about the same) with NO DISPLAY instead of one with a display? Uh-uh, champ.

Maybe I missed something, but why is anyone comparing an Intel cpu with an IBM cpu?

Unless someone can prove that laptop cpus at the same processor speed cost the same as desktop cpus the argument stands that using laptop cpus increase cost(re: with the related increase in ram costs)

Yes, as the cpu life continues these differences narrow, but as soon as the latest greates come out the differences in price expand out again, to hundreds of dollars of differnece. Me, I could care less how the Intel cpus compare against IBM's cpus.

And yes, even with penryn or whatever comes out the costs will remain higher for laptop parts. They are higher binned parts, designed differenently and have different design goals.

Who made you God and gave you the right to? That's exactly the kind of arrogance that gives Mac users a bad name.


And that is the definition of a niche, a specific group outside the mainstream. The iMac is not for the mainstream.


But at a hefty premium.


The benchmarks don't give me 4 DIMM slots or room for a second hard drive or a regular optical drive or allow me to add E-SATA when it replaces firewire for external devices a tower does.



and are committed enough to Mac OS X to pay twice the price high end manufacturers are charging. Most just skip the platform all together and make do with windows or are forced to soldier on with inferior hardware. I'm going to say this once more in a futile attempt to get it through your skulls THE MAC PRO IS A WORKSTATION, NOT A DESKTOP.




The ability to have power with expansion and not have to mortgage your house for it.





You realize there is another 96% of computer users right and the mac market is not all that there is right? Then again, by your comments you obviously do not. You also obviously think that your needs are somehow universal for everyone.


A small group with needs or wants outside the mainstream, i.e. those who value simplicity, elegance, or the ability to save space over practicality. In other words, the hard core Mac crowd


But it has the same inherent flaws that the G3 iMac as had the Performa 5200CD that i owned for 5 years. The difference between a tower and a iMac is like the difference between a BMW 5-series and a pickup. They ay both have V8s, but they are designed for very different users with different tasks.


You mean like the Mini or the Cube. They failed because they went so overboard on trying to minimize the space that they came up with products that were unappealing to the target audiences. Apple under Jobs is much better at revolution than they are evolution. As a result they sometimes break the wheel trying to fix it their way.


1. Power isn't the only factor there is expansion

2. 2.66 or 3.0ghz desktop Core 2 Duo is faster than a 2.4ghz Core 2 Duo and both cost less than the mobile part. Also, a higher end video card that could be used when not restricted by form factor.

Once again you shove everyone into two blanket categories,


Own one, it would be great if I had kids, but I find it very limiting in what it can do.



Or bypass the Mac entirely in which Apple receives no money.



Intel Core 2 Duo
Intel PM965 Motherboard
DDR2 RAM
ATI radeon 2600HD
EFI ROM, hey I finally found a difference

From factor different, hardware not so much


The OS is further evolved. Functionality wise, it does the same things, only better


Only because they suite Apple's niche as a computer maker.


If you look at other premium computer makers, they really aren't. Apple makes money not because they make certain kinds of computers, they make money because they have higher margins that are more constant throughout the lineup. The larger brands have paper thin margins on the low end consumer machine,, but make up for it by overcharging professionals. The higher end PC makers like Velocity Micro have the same margins strategy that Apple has.


Only the iMac and Mac Mini. The Macbooks look and function exactly like any other premium notebook and the Mac Pro isn't too different than the other workstations out there. Interestingly enough, the markets where the hardware is familiar, they do very well in.


Not really no.


No, the quality will be high and the customer will be getting whatever display they choose. Is the prospect of choice so foreign to you?

I'm not saying it has to only have a quad core in it but it can have a quad core for the same price as the dual mobile chips. If it had the same spec but headless, I'd quite possibly buy one as long as I could get an nvidia GPU and two hard drives. The CPU is but one of the many reasons.


As I said before, Apple making good money is of no interest to me whatsoever. There is not a single store that I go into where I'd see an overpriced novelty item and be content that the company was making money.


So again it seems that Apple are trying to steer the market instead of satisfying it. The more mobile components they get, the cheaper they get, therefore the cheaper the laptop based products are so more people buy laptop-based products. Still, it makes you wonder if they get such good discounts why their products are still more expensive than PC manufacturers. Sony's AIOs are almost the same price as Apple's and yet the bulk of Sony's sales are headless desktops.


You could have said the same about the iphone and Apple TV, which they still released.


It won't be more powerful than a Mac Pro but it will be cheaper.


I gave a rough idea comparing the Core 2 Extreme iMac. If you take off the 24" screen, you save maybe $200 (conservative) and replace the $851 Core 2 Extreme with a Core 2 Quad at $266 and you save a whopping $785. This means it could easily be $2299 - $785 ~ $1499.


http://www.intel.com/intel/finance/p...price_list.pdf

One thing that's weird is the Core 2 Duo Extreme desktop costs the same as the Core 2 Extreme Quad and all the Core 2 Extreme Quads costs the same. Anyway, you can still buy quads for the same price as any of the dual core CPUs and the desktop dual cores are half the price of the mobile versions. maybe this will change with Penryn but I guess we'll see in November. More waiting.


That doesn't change the fact that it's the same market.


They would for higher quality at a lower price though, which is what it would be.


Tenobell wants to convince us that if an Intel iMac is faster than a two year old high end desktop then it's ok for the midrange.


Yep, at least for a couple of years this will be true. Like I say, once laptop components are so cheap that you won't need the extra power deskotp parts have then I reckon there's no need for power hungry desktop components. That time is not now though.

Yeah, 'cause I'm worried about how I'm defined on a fucking internet message board. Take a pill.


The iMac is for consumers. You said so yourself. So consumers are a niche? Or, is the midpro people that are? Seems to me you've got it backwards, cap'n.


What does that mean? It's not as cheap as a PC, but it is cheap. Are you suggesting Apple competes in the bargain basement category? That's a different argument.


I see, we're back to the expandability. First, who needs four DIMMs? You can pack 4gb of RAM in there, yes? That will be enough for quite some time. If you need more, you need a pro machine anyway.


So now the Mac Pro is too expensive for what it is? Anyone who doesn't need that level of performance...really...ANYONE...would do fine with either a used MP or an iMac.


Dude...don't exaggerate. We're talking about what would likely be a $800 difference in price.


1. I clearly understand. What you don't understand is that Apple's products meet their needs just fine.

2. We've been through this. There are only so many uses for a computer. There are no magical prosumer uses that only people that do the secret handshake can learn about. I'm NOT talking about my needs at all.


So, midpro tower people then. Gotcha.


Don't be absurd. The intel iMac is damn capable machine.


Well, the mini is still around, but the cube failed mostly because it targeted completely the wrong segment. If it was $1000 cheaper it might have sold.


Whatever. There is what there is. Once again you invent magical, non-enumerated needs.


Bullshit. What can you not do? Let's hear it.


Your choice.



Well, you say it's the same and I say it's different. We're probably both right in certain ways.

The point is there isn't a strong market for a midpro tower. That's all.

No. If you had kids (small ones) you'd realize that an LCD screen that's angled up cannot be viewed from a height of three feet. That means you need to lift up the kid to see better whenever they want to see what you're doing.

The screen is the big reason why I'm wary of buying an iMac.

I'm pretty sure it's how you're defined in real life too. Learn to respect other people and their right to choose, you will go much further than if you try to control what everyone does based on what you like.


It may work for low end consumer and probably be a better system, but they're sure not buying it.


Tower+ bargain basement Dell. Right. Try expanding your horizons for a change.


Do I need 4 DIMMS, no. Would i like the option of saving $150 upgrading to 4GB of memory? Hell Yes.

[quote]So now the Mac Pro is too expensive for what it is? Anyone who doesn't need that level of performance...really...ANYONE...would do fine with either a used MP or an iMac. {/quote]

It's perfectly fine for what it is, it's too expensive for what it's not, a desktop.

Velocity Micro Promagix
2.66ghz Core 2 Duo
2GB regular memory
250GB Hard drive
20x DVD burner
512mb Radeon HD 2900XT
$1800

Mac Pro
2x 2.66ghz Xeon
2GB memory on twice as expensive FB-DIMMS
250GB Hard drive
16x DVD burner
512mb Radeon X1900XT
$3000

Difference in performance if they were on the same operating system: little to none (besides the outdated video card which will be corrected soon enough).

Difference in price: $1200. Mind you that is on top of the roughly $300-400 a top flight maker charges over what bargain basement Dell would sell you something similar.

That's $1200 for server RAM, a server motherboard, and a second server CPU that if used as a desktop add nothing but expense. That may be insignificant to people who don't have the concept of a budget, but reasonable people cannot justify throwing over $1000 out the window for no gain..


Like I just said, for those of us who don't have an unlimited money supply, that's a huge chunk of change that can be better spent elsewhere.



You're putting words in the mouths of people you clearly have no clue about.


There are a lot more uses than you care to realize and then there is the concept of degree which you clearly have no concept of.


Nope. the only thing you've said is that someone you know what others want and what they do better than they do.


Then why does it have hang ups in a three year old game?


It failed because the tower g4 was a far better machine for less money.


Invent? Faster machine for less money and more expandability is inventing something?


Burn a DVD in under a half hour, change my video card if I'm unhappy with the 2600Pro,easily and cheaply upgrade my hard drive or DVD burner, upgrade my wireless when -N is replaced, upgrade to wireless USB. I'm stuck with what's available in summer 2007 for the life of this machine. That means it becomes obsolete way sooner.


Turning people away is bad for both business and the health of the platform.



Considering that about 35% of desktop sales are $1000+ towers I think there is. Your best seller all in one iMac makes up about 3%. Then again, don't let meaningless things like reality get in the way of you preconceived misconceptions.

The viewing angle is just fine. Colors wash a bit from different angles, but I can see exactly what is on the screen and from pretty much across the room. It's not like a old LCD notebook where it would go black if you weren't looking at it head on.

I'm not talking about a little to the side or across the room. I'm talking about standing right next to the desk when you're not quite as tall as the desk. Can you still view the pictures OK?

If so, I might still get one, although I would rather have a screen that's not glossy and that can be tilted.

I put this in another thread but I can't resist pointing out that there is another factor in this war of worlds: For some years, Apple has given us an easy way to open a Mac and drop in memory, HDD's, and cards. I'm not tech experienced, but that is something I was able to do. I was always pointing that out to my old PC friends and office mates. Now, APPLE has pulled the rug out from under us. I'll never be able to have that ease of making changes, again unless I buy a work station that I don't need.
Every time time I read a post telling me I don't need anything more than what Apple is foisting on me, I see RED.
If you are satisfied with what you can buy, that's fine. But get off this thread and quit telling me that I want what you want. You have as much arrogance as Apple has. Be happy you're satisfied with what you have and shut up.
I've tried my best not to flame since becoming an AI member, but you are trying my patience.

One more thing. Do not respond to this post. Go some place, curl up in a corner, and lick your balls.

AI members, I think you are buying into these creeps' insane need to be naysayers. Don't encourage them with trying to reason with them. You're giving them more credibility than they deserve.

I apologize to anyone I've offended - except for the naysayers.

Well, here lies the problem. Many, not just you, are confusing markets with products. These are two separate things.

A market (segment) is a group of consumers who have a common need. These consumers are faced with choosing a product to satisfy their needs. The question is how well does a particular product satisfy their needs, and how does it's price compare with competing products that also satisfy their needs? Such is the structure that we are looking at.

There is not a Windows market or Mac per se. Rather there is, for example, a graphics art market, and some users need a Windows OS, others a Mac OS. So Windows and Mac are only sub groups within each market.

Now for example, the iMac sells into the Mac subgroup of several different markets. Used Macs also sell into these same markets. Keeping this structure in mind, we can indeed "look at what Windows is selling." It is perfectly valid.

Considering the number of thread such as this that have sprung up over the years, it appears obvious that many Mac users are unhappy with Apple's product offering of desktops. I submit this as evidence that Apple needs to offer something more in line with the desires of these consumers.

Now, can you offer the same kind of evidence that Windows users are unhappy with the typical mid towers being offered to the Windows sub group of these markets? Links to Windows users forums such as this would be fine, thank you.

Yah lets not generalize everyone in this. I do however agree with you mostly. I'm tired of people telling me the form factor I have to use. I know what I want. I wanted it so badly I gave up on apple and went hack. Don't get me wrong, a real mac beats the hell out of a hack. My main work machine is a 2.33 mbp. And my overclocked 3.25ghz core2duo hack is my back up machine.

Anways, I don't want to reiterate what's already been said. But there are numerous reasons (and by that I mean MANY MANY reasons), that there should be a pro-sumer apple desktop. Anyone who says otherwise is
A) upset it isn't offered and settles...
B) Doesn't need it themselves...
C) Is a Steve Jobs Fanboi...
D) Bleeds applesauce if you cut them.

I've been on macs since 1992. Out of all the machines I owned, my favorite were the Quicksilver G4, B+W G3, Umax s900 (most favorite), and Performa 6400... all towers. I liked them because they fit my needs. Expandability, more reliable desktop components, dual matching lcds, internal harddrive upgrades, bigger harddrives available, graphics cards upgrades, higher ram upgrades, lower temps, low clutter of cables on my desk, faster cd / dvd burns, etc, etc, etc ?.

Stop telling me what form factor fits me, for a work computer a mid-sized tower is the best option.

Who is getting personal now? How can you be "pretty sure" about who I am in RL when you've never met me? And besides, you're confusing a heated debate with true personal acrimony. I'm not one acting like a 12 year old cry baby here....I'm not the one whining that Apple and Big Bad SDW don't want them to have their perfect, affordable computer.


Uh, define "not buying it." They ARE buying it. Granted, laptops are selling better, but a good part of that is a well established industry trend. There's little reason for the majority of consumers to own a desktop anymore. A laptop can do what a desktop can do with some limitations.


I honestly am not sure what you mean by that.


I had thought of that and I agree it's a good point. It's one of the few good points I've heard with the midpro.



Invalid and inaccurate comparison. See below

You compared a SINGLE PROCESSOR machine with a DUAL PROCESSOR machine. Jesus Christ. It doesn't matter anyway, because that is not the topic we're discussing. I've never argued that the Mac Pro shouldn't be cheaper.


Well, I certainly don't think it's chump change. But let me tell you...if I really needed that much machine, I save for it and get it.


Here we go again. The Mythical Prosumer's Magical and Invisible Needs that SDW Cannot Comprehend.


Name them. You second sentence is not clearly stated.


Ah, but you're wrong. I'm not telling them what they WANT, I'm telling them what they want is not what they NEED. They, in turn, are pretending that those WANTS are NEEDS. Further, they are the ones claiming a market exists when one clearly does not, JUST BECAUSE they personally want the product themselves.

It's a little like talking to my elementary students. They are just learning about what they want to happens vs. what is actually likely to happen.


Which game is that? It's likely a software issue.



Wrong. Most models of the G4 Tower were more expensive.


1. External high speed drive or Mac Pro
2. If you need to do that, you need a MP
3. Simple solution: Buy a big enough drive. It's not like the machine is going to last more than 4-5 years anyway. If you have those kind of storage needs, you need an external drive anyway. Or a...wait for it...Mac Pro.
4. Whatever. N isn't even mainstream yet.
5. That won't be necessary for anyone.
6. No it doesn't. It's going to become obsolete at nearly the same pace, because motherboard and processor technology will change significantly, and you can't really change that. Upgrading anything other than HD and RAM is usually useless.


Apple is turning people away from the platform? You mean the Apple that setting records for sales, profiting in the billions, and gaining market share? That Apple?


Your intellectual dishonesty is disgusting. You're talking about 35% of all desktops, including Windows. As I've already stated, the Wintel world lives off of midpros because that's been the PC model for years. Apple has never followed that model, and when they do, it goes badly for them.

Secondly, the iMac is 3% of WHAT? Overall desktop sales or overall Mac desktop sales?

The other point you fail to understand is that, again, we do not represent the majority of consumers here, or even Mac users. People don't walk into the Apple Store and see an iMac and think "Gee, it would be nice if it had real desktop parts and an upgradable video card. They want to know it's speed, it's memory, it's hard drive, how the screen looks, it's size, what software is available, and the price. That's what even an educated consumer looks for. And many are nowhere near even that level of sophistication.

Look, it's getting heated here, but let me take a step back and say that I do understand there is desire for this product among the Mac faithful. There have been some good points made as to needs, such as separate monitor, cheaper RAM and not having the cash for AMc PRo. I just don't think that the demand is big enough for Apple to release it in conjunction with their other products already in the matrix. Can you imagine Apple, king of "It Just Works" having a retail store with FOUR different desktop offerings and soon to be THREE different laptop lines? Can you imagine trying to explain the difference between the Mini, the xMac, the iMac and Mac Pro to your average consumer?

In the final analysis...it's about one question: Are there enough people to buy the product? That answer is no.

double post.

Well, if you want what you want, I have no problem with it. Honestly. But there are two things that annoy the shit out of me:

1. Telling me there is large demand for the product just because you want it.

2. Telling me your want is a need when it's not.

And I'm not just a naysayer...I'm taking issue with the whining and bitching and what not.


Well, I'm not confusing it..we're just using different words. You make a good point though. However, the bold paragraph includes the false logic that this forum is indicative of the average or most Mac users.

The bold paragraph:

Considering the number of thread such as this that have sprung up over the years, it appears obvious that many Mac users are unhappy with Apple's product offering of desktops. I submit this as evidence that Apple needs to offer something more in line with the desires of these consumers.

Sorry to disagree again, but this is not "logic" I have present here. It is evidence, and I so stated this fact. Evidence does not prove anything, it simply supports it.

What I have not seen yet is any evidence to support the assertion that Windows users are unhappy with their selection of mainly mid towers. If such evidence exists, then we can call this a draw. No one wins this argument. But so far, there has been no evidence that Windows computer makers are not providing a satisfactory product for all their customers.

Give the Window manufacturers credit for doing good marketing. I am weary of hearing the party line. "If enough customers wanted a mid tower, Apple would build it." Saying it over and over does not make it true.

Maybe in the future, we won't need Apple to tell us what we need.


This is part of an article from ZDNet
Will Apple miss the virtualization boom? http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=883&tag=nl.e540

[if Apple can run Windows, can a PC run OS X?]

There are hacks all over the Internet to describe how to install Mac OS X in a Parallels Desktop or VMware Fusion VM. (See this how-to, for instance http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/in.../Vmware_how_to). You can even Google to find pre-patched OS X virtual machines available as bit torrents. But illicit hacks are not the material of enterprise toolboxes.

One startup company, Moka5, has already virtualized Mac OS X to run on non-Apple hardware. (See MacWindows coverage Beta app virtualizes Mac OS X in Windows; first VM to support DirectX 9).
http://www.macwindows.com/Moka5_demos_OSX.html

That was very well put snoopy.

2 things.

A) I have seen many many 'where is the mac tower?' threads, on just about every mac related forum. People yearn for it. It is brought countlessly. I'd like to see how many threads it's made on AI ALONE... by different people.

B) I honestly don't believe there is any real evidence of windows users being unhappy with mid-towers. In fact I think there is more evidence to SUPPORT that windows users PREFER mid-towers. BTW I'm talking strictly desktops here, so don't even try and bring laptops into it. Every all in one that I've seen introduced in the windows world, has pretty much not done so well. Sure you can argue that the companies don't have Apple's innovation. BUT the difference here is, the other companies offer a choice that DO offer all in ones. All-in-one ORRRR Tower. Most people are going to choose the tower for many reasons (see my post above and add price to it).

Dude...one thing you'll learn about me is that I do not enjoy nor tolerate semantics. That's what you're taking issue with right now. I say "market" and you say "subgroup." I saw "logic" and you say "evidence."

But whatever: The point is this forum is not indicative of the majority of Mac users...and certainly not computer users in general. The "evidence" is worthless. So too would any survey of Windows users being "unhappy" with their midpro towers. That's a subjective measure. It reminds me of that line in the movie "Dave," where he takes issue with a government program that makes people feel good about a car they already bought.

What I'm saying is "reason it through." Wintel sells mostly towers. Therefore, people buy mostly towers. This has been the PC model for years and years. People think there are desktops and laptops and nothing else. The AIO doesn't work on that side. Why? This is speculation, but I think it's because the Wintel AIOs lack the advantages of the iMac AIO. Namely, Wintel does not have 1) Leading edge industrial design 2) The "cool" factor that coems with #1, 3) complete integration of hardware and software and 4) Mac OS X and it's suite of user friendly consumer software.

What I've not seen evidence of is a Wintel user walking into an Apple Store and not buying an Apple desktop because they don't see a midpro option. Once they realize what the iMac actually is, they like it. If they need more power, they'll buy a Mac pro. That's what I've seen.

I know I was very happy with my G3.

Seriously, you have the college professor syndrome. You make assumptions without actually talking to anyone outside your own homogeneous group and based solely own your own biases. I don't know why we don't just ignore you. All you do in discussions is troll anyone who is outside your definition of some kind of Mac purity. The only answer you will accept is for everyone to turn over their ability to think to Apple.

Sony has come out with some pretty cool looking AIOs. I don't think there's anything about OSX that makes it more suitable, or the only OS that is suitable, for an AIO design. IMO, the reason that AIOs haven't caught on for Windows is that if people want a small Desktop form factor, they buy a laptop (and also get portability you don't get with an AIO). If they want expandibility/upgradeability (and better bang/buck), they get a regular Tower.


Thats a total generalization. I for one, don't want an AIO like the iMac. I want an mid-priced tower. It's not that I want more power that an iMac, I want to add a second HD, internally. I may want to use the monitor I have. Maybe in a couple years I'll want to add a HD DVD burner. Why do I have to over-spend on a MacPro to get this capibility?

I think if Mr. Jobs really wanted people to switch to a Mac, offering a Mid Tower would be the perfect model to lure them over. Afterall, it's what we're used to and like.

I know we're on page 8 of this slugfest, but the simple fact is that Apple won't enter the Midtower market unless they have some 'angle' to it that makes an Apple tower look like it's worth $300. more than a Windows tower.

Those who advocate an addition to the Mac line need to come up with one compelling feature Apple could offer on a Midtower that wouldn't be easily duplicated on a garden-variety Windows tower.

Until that feature emerges, we're just going in circles here.

I don't think you mean that, exactly. I'm assuming you mean being picky about subtile differences in word usage. In this I agree with you. However, in my reply, I went out of the way to play down semantics. For example, we are talking about market segments, but I only used the word segment once, and even then put segment in parenthesis to down play it.

Yet in this discussion, we have some differences in meaning, which are important. Logic is a process by which we can prove something. Evidence is simply data by which we can support a theory. This is a very big difference. Also, regarding my use of the word subgroup, like the Mac or Windows subgroup, it was only to satisfy you if you happened to be picky about word usage. Since you're not, just ignore it.

Now, you say that any data about Mac and Windows users obtained from a forum or survey is worthless, a subjective measure. So be it if that is what you believe. Yet, in previous posts, you and others have said that if Mac users wanted a mid-tower, Apple would build it. For this statement, there is no evidence at all, just pure faith in how Apple operates.



And Apple sells mostly iMacs, therefore Mac users buy mostly iMacs. You have demonstrated nothing by your statement.



That is simply ridiculous, unless you have actually interviewed Wintel users who visit Apple stores. (And obviously, some do buy the iMac.) In contrast, using taking data from AI forums we are in effect getting interviews with many Mac users who want a mid-tower, or some such Mac. As expected we get those who like the iMac too. No one is saying we all must like the same thing, only that many of us want a different choice, one that is not currently available.

Hey, watch that 'college professor syndrome' stuff. I'm a college professor. However, you're probably right in a lot of instances. This is my fourth career: Military; Treasury agent; corporate controller; and ta da, a college professor. One thing I pride myself on is keeping as open a mind as possible.

That's something that some (not naming names) AI naysayers seem not to be able to do. They don't seem to be content unless they're dragging others down to their level. During the cold war, the military was continuously reminded that people in 'some' countries didn't have the "keep up with the Joneses" attitude that Americans have. To level the playing field, Americans (and many other people) pull themselves up by the bootstraps to that next level. Then we want our kids to be even better. That attitude is partially responsible for making this country as great as it is.

Our enemy(s) had an attitude that they have to bring their neighbors down to where they are to level the playing field.

This is my round about way of saying that the naysayers here operate on that same basis. Find any way to drag down others to their level. Your quote above is dead on. We have to ignore them. To do otherwise is to give them a stage to air their crap. As long as we recognize their existence, they'll take that stage.

Hell, here I go on and on talking like a college professor. My bad.

If someone needs a Raid setup, do they want or need two internal drives?
Also, someone wanted 4 Ram slots and you seemed to be ok with that and that's a want.
Wants and needs can't be separated easily. There are some things that people want badly enough that it borders on a need but that need will vary from person to person. I need matching displays but others can live with one glossy, one matte.

Whatever you call them, the reasons are simply given because they are reasons why we either don't own an iMac or don't like owning one. It's not about convincing you the reasons are valid, the reasons are valid enough for us that we would get an alternative.


You know why it is and you know that's not it.


Their desktop sales are lagging, profits are high because their products are overpriced and they make a lot of money in other products and the marketshare gain isn't due to desktop sales nor is it necessarily due to any of their computer products.



So what you're saying is that we have good reasons but your only reason is you don't think enough people will buy it. Given what we know about where the new buyers will come from (PC land) and that they own mid-range towers, I think we can safely say the demand will be high enough.


Quite easily.

Mac Mini (entry level) -> media center, PC switcher, tryout model
xMac (mid level) -> prosumer, gamer
iMac (mid level designer model) -> AIO niche people, people who like a clean work space
Mac Pro (high end) -> people who need the most raw power, high end pros who need a workstation not a desktop


It's not semantics if they have different meanings. You are trying to estimate a market based on logic i.e you are making up conclusions from your preconceptions, which is worthless. Snoopy was using the evidence that some Mac users are unhappy with Apple's lineup and PC users don't appear to be unhappy with towers.


You don't really know that though, it's an assumption you keep making. The other assumption you keep making is that we are basing our opinions on that. We are giving good reasons why people prefer towers and the people who have those opinions covers a range far broader than the mid-tower advocates on this forum.


They manage it with all their other products. What separates a Macbook Pro from Dell laptops which are $500 or so less for the same spec? Apple makes it worth more simply due to design and their OS. Where are all the beautiful mid-range PCs? They are still all big ugly beige boxes or funky alien designs that just look absolutely terrible. If Apple made one like that G5 cube, PC users would be all over it. Who cares if they run Windows on it? Apple is a hardware company.

The best way to get them to switch is to do it in steps. Offer a form factor they are used to with the expansion they are used to and give them the system they are used to. Then keep switching the parts gradually until in 5 years they are OS X fanatics with octo core tablets.

Marvin, fantastic post with very valid counter points. I agree with everything you said except this:


The PC industry has some fantastic cases, cases that are as good or better than apple's. I'd like to point out a few cases like Cooler Master's Cosmos, Silverstone's Temjin TJ09... I can name a few others.

Personally I used Cooler Master's Centurion 532 for my hack. I like it a lot and it came out very clean. A lot of these PCs look quite fantastic. I'm sure apple could out perform their cases with minimal effort.

Quote:
"The point is this forum is not indicative of the majority of Mac users."
I wonder what crystal ball he saw that in.

A congressman knows that when he receives a negative or positive letter from a constituent, that there are X number of people out there who feel the same way. That's how he keeps a finger on the pulse of the citizenry. He multiplies the number of letters by whatever factor he uses. There is no other way he can judge the mood of the people. Most people don't write their congressmen because they don't believe it will do any good.
Look at the number of threads and posts about the xMac. Multiply that number by X (?) and you'll find a huge number that feel the same way. They far outnumber the negative. The majority of Mac users don't know about this forum; use another one; or are too busy to post.
The AI posters of anti-xMax are very much minority. However, that minority still wants to rain on everyone else's parade. Please find some other way to get your rocks off.

Hmmm, let me think. Oh, I know...how about OSX?

That says it all !

I don't know, I checked those models out and they still seem to have lights and transparent plastic on them:



Plus I'm not sure they'll be available in retail packages like a consumer would likely buy. Certainly you get more options again though so if they are to your tastes then it's another place where Apple is lacking. I'm sure I've seen a couple of PC cases that I thought looked nice.

I've never liked the iMac though, I actually thought they were going to fix it going to a metal enclosure and then they bring out the big shiny black eyed thing.

So are you saying you managed to get OS X running on your PC box? What sort of spec is it and does everything work as you'd expect, graphics card etc? Also, can you give a price for how much it was to build so we can get an idea about the real price range a mid-tower Mac would be?


Exactly. This can be taken too far of course, it reminds me of the Family Guy episode when the FCC were dealing with a complaint:

"FCC Suit 1: Gentlemen, we got 20 calls about the David Hyde-Pierce incident. And as you know, one call equals a billion people, which means 20 billion people were offended by this. Needless to say, something must be done.
FCC Suit 2: Perhaps we should ask the chairman.
FCC Suit 1: Good idea. (to the chairman) Uh, sir, we're wondering what course of action you recommend regarding the Hyde-Pierce incident.
Cobra Commander (the chairman): You have to censor television, you fools!! Now, follow my orders!"

Damn Youtube keeps removing Fox's TV clips so I can't post the clip itself.

But yeah, it's perfectly reasonable to extrapolate stats and entirely unreasonable to assume that a handful of people here means that the market is so small as to be non-existant.

Even if you consider that 25% of Mini owners, 25% of iMac owners and 25% of Mac Pro owners might have preferred one, reasons being more power, separate display, lower cost/size respectively and that some portion of Windows PC users are waiting for one too then the market becomes substantial enough to warrant a product.

How about this?

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage....=1186003685992

If OSX was as compelling as we think it is then Apple would have larger market share regardless of AIO, tower, laptop, whatever.

Alas, no.

This argument cuts both ways. xMac proponents in the forums are very much the minority in comparison to the 600K/qtr desktop Mac buyers. The number of threads and posters is actually very small. It appears large because a very small minority is very vocal in tying the xMac to every damn topic they possibly can.

Arguably xMac proponents are raining on the parade of those that favor the current line up. Introduce an xMac at the price points discussed and you can write off the iMac as a viable product. Folks may think that's okay (and have said so repeatedly) given that "most users prefer a tower" but you can make the same argument about OSX itself. Most users prefer Windows. Therefore the extinction of a niche OS alternative is no more important than the extinction of the AIO alternative.

/shrug

Personally I'm no fan of the iMac but lets not attach some dubious ethical or moral high ground for the xMac. Success of the xMac will come at the expense of the iMac and its fans.

Your assertion that there are so many xMac supporters is dubious. Perhaps opponents are simply tired of the arguments and perhaps most folks aren't actual opponents as simply apathetic.

Meaning rain or shine, no one cares about your parade.

Those few that do care to rain on it are perhaps damn tired of the xMac topic being brought up in nearly every thread in the forum by a few zealot supporters. I would guess most folks that "oppose" the xMac simply feel that its not happening under Jobs and, all things being equal, Apple is far better off having Jobs over having an xMac.

Prior to buying a G4 tower about 5 years ago, I had never liked the Macs we had at work - mainly because I never gave them a chance. I didn't find OS 9 and earlier "intuitive". Even when OS X came along, we continued using the older OS. One day, in CompUSA, I saw the 22" acd and knew I had to have it. No, the salesman said, it doesn't work with a PC. Drooling all over the acd, I bought the Mac so I could have that gorgeous acd. A few weeks later, I would have used any ugly screen to keep on using that "gorgeous" OS X that didn't give me the "blue screen of death" almost every day. It just worked (where have I heard that before?). I'd never buy another PC. The point is: To know it is to love it. I've 'sold' the Mac to my daughers, their boyfriends, my ex-wife, two close friends and several people on the job. One of the guys at work was a dyed in the wool PC user and swore he'd never use a Mac. I got him to try one for a week. That was enough to convince him. Vinea, OS X is compelling to anyone who gives it a chance. I think Apples market share is going to snowball - especially, IF Apple puts out a !@#$%^&* mini tower.

You guys who have been using only the Mac in the past probably don't appreciate it as much as we switchers do. The changes have come in increments to you. To me, it was like coming out of a tunnel.

I've never seen something like the Mac Pro. Specially the interior.

For your "pleasure", here's the interior of one of the Mac Pro competitors: Vinea's famous Dell Precision 690 ($2000+)


And now one that would compete with a potential xMac, the Dell Dimension 9200 ($900+)


If anyone thinks there's no way to do better than that...

That's why most of Dell's sales are corporate/institutional.

I see a point in both computers. iMac for my folks, xMac for me. I believe both have a good sized market.

If an xMac at same price and slightly bigger margin/slightly less spent on components could totally dry up the corresponding iMac sales, then that would mean people prefer the xMac and are ready to make Apple even more money than they would with an iMac purchase. That hardly sounds bad for Apple. But frankly I think that's more hysteria than reality. "Oh noes they're taking away my iMacs!" The very nature of the pricing I'm talking about keeps iMac the best choice for most home use.

It probably has more to do with Government and Big Business' decision early on to go with the Windows platform.