A True Desktop Class Mac, or another Cube? - Page 9

A lot of those topics wouldn't need to be there in the first place if Apple made one though. Plus if nobody says anything then Apple would never know that their lineup isn't good enough.


I know, that's why I compared them. emig647 said they were cool looking cases and I looked them up and I don't really think they are. Although there are enclosures around that come close to Apple's designs, they are not mainstream so the xMac would sell on design if it really needed a reason.


I do too. I can see how the xMac *could* kill off the imac but I can see them co-existing. If it did die off then all it means is that it deserved to because that's the way the market is.

Actually, I'd settle for some actual THOUGHT among the midpro zealots. And yeah...ignore me...that's fine. Just stick your fingers in your ears and keep chanting "xMac, xMac, xMac" and maybe Apple will release one...whether you need it or not. Oh, and you know nothing about my "group." How could you?

Pot. Kettle. Black.



Agreed.


Well, that's also the reason Apple doesn't make a midpro, ironically enough.


No, it's a perception based on my personal experience.


That's a reasonable point. That said, why do you want to add a second internal drive? Why must it be internal? Why won't an external HD-DVD burner do? It'll be more portable and versatile that way (blu-ray, since HD-DVD is doomed ).


Apparently Apple disagrees. Apple has never been about copying the Windows model. So I think it's likely that Mr. Jobs disagrees too.


Thanks for the lesson, professor.


I believe that because it's true. Any statistician would agree with me. A poll taken here or even on every Mac enthusiast site would be statistically invalid.


You're right. There is no evidence. There is just...logic. Apple would not utterly ignore a major, profitable consumer demand for years on end. There is no incentive to do that.



Apple does not sell mostly iMacs. Apple is also one manufacturer. Wintel is a huge conglomerate of sorts. And they tell towers.


I'm merely sharing my perception. I've not labeled it as anything else. I'm also asking if others have seen something other than I have. So far, no takers. And one more time, champ: A poll on a Mac enthusiast site is not market research. Period.



If I understand it correctly, it would be a "want." That said, people that would need RAID generally are pro-level users anyway.


True, but I think most would agree it's a reasonable want. I didn't say wants were bad.


Wants and needs can be separated pretty easily in most cases.


I understand the reasons. I just think some of them are being misrepresented as true needs when they are really just preferences.


I don't have any idea what you mean by that.


That's inaccurate. Desktops sales are more stagnant than lagging. They're still selling reasonably well nonetheless.


Apparently their products aren't overpriced, because they're selling. Considered that? They do have high margins, it's true. However, Apple's prices are much lower than they used to be for a lot of products. Yet, they still keep making more money.


Uh, we're only talking about computer products, sir. We're not talking about iPods. I agree that their market share gain is not due to desktop sales, though that point is not actually all that significant because you claimed that Apple was "pushing away customers" or whatever the quote was. Clearly they're not....the customers are just buying laptops, which they feel meet their needs.


I think some of the reasons are good. And no, I don't think enough people will buy it. Your second statement appears to be reasonable, but it really is just a guess. There's no supporting evidence for it at all. And given...cough...what we know about Apple's previous product offerings (when they tried to be more "PC like", we can safely say there's a good chance the product will fail while cannibalizing Mac Pro sales.


That sounds all warm and fuzzy, but I've seen people in the Apple Store, haven't you? It wouldn't be that simple. "You mean I need a monitor for the first two, not the iMac, but for the Mac Pro?" "What's a PCI slot?.....Why doesn't the iMac have them? Do I need one? Or two? Why should I spend twice as much on the xMac as on the mini?....Why is the xMac almost as much as the iMac, but it doesn't include a monitor?...."

All of these questions have answers. But Apple has made things so that those questions never even have to asked in the first place. That's the ticket.


And his evidence was statistically worthless. Totally.


Oh come on. You can't be for real. I'll actually bet you $100 right now. Go out and talk to 20 people at the Apple Store and tell me that their opinions are in line with ours (in general) as Mac enthusiasts. I think you know you're full of shit on this one.


You are. Over and over again.


Fixed that for you.


Good...with ya there....


Yup...still on board....wait...hold on....what's this?




So the way to get people to switch to what Apple is all about is to.....change what Apple is all about?

It seems you're now engaging in a bit of mission creep.

First it was "we want this."

Then it was "we need this."

Then it was "lots of people want this!"

Now it's become "Apple needs to do this to get people to switch."

94% of the market appears to disagree. The presence or absence of a tower hasn't been proven to matter by anyone in this thread.

Yeah, I never understood the thought that people will switch once they try OS X -- I like OS X and all (more stable, prettier, etc.) -- but myself and most everyone I know live in their apps, not in their os. We work in our writing programs when we're writing scripts or prose, if we're editing we're in our video/film editing programs. When we record, we're in our music recording apps. I switch back and forth between operating systems depending on what's around machine-wide; it's about the apps, for me. And, in the case of Apple laptops, just plain sexier machines.

Whaaat?? So they can't sell one?




And what is your "personal experience"? Unless you've done some type of study, I would say the number of times a "build an X-Mac and we will buy it thread" comes up, and the number of people participate seems like pretty good evidence that there is a market.




I have enough junk on my desk as it is to not want to add peripheral drives and the tangle of wires that come with it. I thought the whole point of the iMac was to avoid this?? Right now I have two internal HDs and it's working out just snooky, though at some point I would like to add a portable for off-site backups. When I mentioned HD-DVD it was more in the generic sense, not literally. Just whichever HD format is the "standard" (or dual format) in a couple years. Portability in a DVD drive doesn't strike me as being necessary.




Didn't they used to make a tower that wasn't a "high-end" type server design? I think Apple has a great OS, but they're hardware decisions are just wierd. My only guess is they're afraid the xMac would cannibalize iMac sales. So? Charge enough so it wouldn't matter. It's not like the dollars are going to go to another company.




Remember, Apple gives us what we need, not what we want.




Why mostly towers? Why hasn't the Sony AIOs caught on better, or why haven't more manufacturers jumped in on the AIO market? Because towers work.




True, but you know by the way these threads go there are a lot more people out there that are in this camp.





Here's where I'm coming from, FWIW. I have a 7 year old Dell. It's a little slow, but gets by OK. The reason it's still getting the job done is I've replaced my CD-RW drive with a DVD-RW drive, replaced my 40GB HD with an 80 GB HD and moved the old one to my second internaldrive. I've added USB2 and Firewire cards. I also had my 19" Sony Trinitron monitor's power switch replaced for $100.

Now, to the "wants vs needs" point. I don't need a new computer at the moment, but I do want one. What I want is a mid-priced Apple tower that would allow me to do similar things down the line as new technology becomes available, or parts wear out. The iMac doesn't really fit the bill and the MacPro is overkill and over budget. Until Apple offers something that merges my wants/needs, they don't have a new "switcher" (from Windows) customer. I know, that's not a majority of people, but I'd guess there are enough people that feel as I do that it'd be worth it financially for Apple to at least try a mid-tower design. So what if that's the same package Windows comes in?




I think all the negative Vista press has held new PCs sales lower than they could be.




I think the Pros out there will still be buying them, and the people who (want a mid-tower)aren't, have had to settle for an iMac. They're the ones who would buy an xMac.




Those are the people who buy an iMac, nothing wrong with that at all. But if there were such a lack of middle ground between people who just want to plug in their computer and use it vs graphic Pros, why are there so many companies able to make money building PC mid towers? The gamer's market isn't the only reason. Why does Dell let people customize so much? Wouldn't it be cheaper for them to say "this is what we have"?




Not everybody that buys a Mac buys it through an Apple store, so to be fair, I think you'd also have to include Internet sales and maybe even Best Buy.

Agreed. This is so patently obvious it is hard to believe people refuse to accept it.

Question is, Apple also knows this, then why don't they offer a mid priced tower? Me, IMHO, I believe it is Apple's and Steve Job's firm belief that computers should be considered appliances that consumers don't ever need to modify, upgrade or in general do the things that the other 96% of the computer users do.

Except it appears that it is indeed enough to increase market share in laptops.

Question is, why not desktops?

and around and around it goes.

This argument seems to ignore the blogs about the hole in Apple's line up that received thousands of diggs. Yes, the number of threads is small compared to the 600,000 desktops sold, so what. The 600,000 desktops Apple sold pales in comparison to the total number sold.


What parade? Apple desktop sales are flat, have been flat for a long time.

One of Apple's claims, at least IMHO, that really stands out is that about half of all computer sales are to new buyers. They've made this claim for about two years. Desktop sales are flat, this is a fact, no? Then the conclusion is that long time Mac users are not buying Apple desktop computers. Either the millions of long time Mac users are completely switching to laptops or they are waiting for something that appeals to them.



Curious, I am a fan of the iMac, but truly believe Apple could offer both an AIO and mid priced tower and be successful. However, the AIO and its' ease of use and small footprint might mean it should be targeted at the less demanding user and/or the new user. This would necessitate a lower price, less cutting edge processors, graphics and whatnot. Forcing the more demanding users(ie: the mid priced tower crowd) to only the options of an iMac or Mac Pro is what spawns these threads.


Your assertions are just as dubious and can be refuted by the product matrix available to the other 96% of the buying public.


You can not make the assertion that there are only a few zealot supporters. A recent blog, which probably is unkown to the vast majority of the computer using public still generated over 4000 diggs. If just one unkown blogger can get 4000 diggs, it at least makes me wonder how many people do in fact have xMac lust.

Most longtime Apple users CAN wait a long time before upgrading. New OS releases on the Mac tend to breath new life into old machines instead of making them obsolete. That's going to change a little with Leopard as it looks like many g4s are excluded and others may struggle with Leopard. People will moan and groan but most will get an iMac or Mac Pro.

FWIW, Apple's current market share simply does allow it to offer machines in all market segments. For better or for worse, Apple has cast it's lot in AOIs in the mid level market.

There are two market segments that are not served well by Apple currently, IMO. The bargain basement level entry system and a enthusiast level system. I don't think Apple will ever try to cater to the bargain basement crowd. As market share increases then I think they will go after the enthusiast. Apple just isn't there yet.

Yes.

They offered the Cube. They sold in excess of 100,000 units upon its debut. 60,000 after that...and a measly 20k I think...to mop up the last of it.

Shame. Because if they'd dropped the price sooner aka the iPhone then they would have proven that their mid-tower/prosumer market does exist. It does. The pc market does...and sells plenty. Otherwise...why aren't they all out of business?

The iMac is just a slightly better and more lust worthy Mac Book Pro. Bigger screen and...uhm...it's a desktop. Oh. You can config' a faster cpu...and a bigger hd.

iMac or Laptop? You get iMac for a desktop. Laptop for portability.

Tower uber? Unlimited Power (Emperor voice.)

Eh. Mid-Tower? Don't need server class cpus...want maybe 2 hds, 4 gigs of ram and a gpu OF MY CHOICE. And erhm...obviously price is lower than 'uber-line...'..but...oh...Apple doesn't offer one. Why. Well, because it would cannibalize laptop, oops, iMac sales.

Say, wait a minute, doesn't the Mac Book (so affordable now...) cannib' the iMac? And the Macbook Pro cannib' the Mac Pro....and yes...poor iMac and Mac Pro suffer terrible desktop cannib' of their sales...so...yes. I guess Apple ought to just continue them and concentrate on laptops....

What? Ignore a good 50%-60% of desktop sales? Sure, why not.

Better still, why not start expandable computers at around £1700!)!))? HOW MUCH?

Tumble weeds.

Lemon Bon Bon.

Anticipating Penryn and his 'mid-tower' or an iMac with a decent GPU instead of the apologetic 2600 Pro.

They also offered the regular PowerMac G4. Most buyers went with that instead. In was faster, cheaper, and overall a better machine. It didn't fail because of price, it failed because the prosumer SFF market is pretty tiny. Most will take the large and practical towers.



It's a desktop only in the sense that it sets on a desk. The rest of it, save the hard drive, are laptop parts. The only thing stopping the Macbook Pro from having the x7900 is its ultra slim form factor.



Yeah, it's not like Apple has ever catered to those users. All there there has ever been is all in ones. Wait, I'm getting flash backs to five years back when the PowerMac was Apple's main desktop.


Yeah it's not like we other things to do with that money like pay the rent, pay the internet service bill, start saving so I can retire in 2045 or so, etc.

He said regular tower not workstation. Let's not make any pretense about what the Mac Pro is. It's a high end workstation not a consumer desktop and the iMac is not a desktop because it uses laptop components.

Mac Mini = consumer laptop without portability
iMac = laptop without portability
Macbook = consumer laptop
Macbook Pro = laptop
Mac Pro = workstation

Where is the desktop?


How many people would have said this about the smartphone market two years ago? Oh but now the iphone is the best thing since sliced bread.


But why are they *all* selling towers? If you take a step back and look at the overall picture, why is it that Apple is the only one pushing AIOs so hard? So much so they only have one such product to target the largest portion of the desktop market.


Yeah but people are saying that Apple's market share is going up so their products must be ok. What I'm saying is that if someone gets an iphone or ipod, that could easily encourage them into getting a Mac.


Ok that's a fair point but that still means their desktop lineup is unsatisfactory. For my home computer, if I'm going to upgrade from my Mini, this is what I'm going to be thinking:

I use workstations at work and they are too big for me at home and I don't need to put out the expense.
The new Mini is still not powerful enough.
The iMac has a built-in glossy screen, isn't portable and the GPU isn't great.
The Macbook has a glossy screen, GPU is not good enough but is portable (don't need portability though).
The Macbook Pro has a matte screen, good GPU and is portable (don't need portability though). However, I could almost get a Mac Pro for the same price as the low end model.

In summary, none of them are satisfactory but a mid-range desktop is.


Hmm, Apple used to sell an iMac with flowers on it, I don't think we should base current opinion on all the things they've done wrongly in the past. Apple are in a completely different ballpark now.


It's funny how you seem to be implying that mainly stupid people go for Macs. After all, most people already have towers so if this is as big a problem as you make out then they must all be smart enough not to have had any trouble and the people who have had trouble just buy a Mac.


I talked to 5 of them:

Betty, grandmother said: 'I'd buy an xMac because I can't lift an imac'
Dave, IT consultant said: 'Of course I'd buy an xMac, that's what I came in for and when they said they only sold iMacs for the mid-range, I fell over laughing'
Diane, receptionist said: 'I like changing my displays to match my toenails so it makes sense to get an xMac'
SDW2001, General PITA (sorry Major PITA, he got promoted recently) said: 'Sure I'd buy one, just don't tell anyone on AI 'cos I have a really long pointless argument going trying to convince people their needs are not valid needs relative to my own'
Steve Jobs, face on faceless corporation said: 'the xMac is the true Mac. The Mac cube, the Next Cube, the cube store. Apple are very much about the cube design and we hope to have one in store soon.'

read on for the proper answer.


I've met a lot of people over the past couple of years and they've all said the same things about Apple's hardware. My family and friends on top of that. It's quite naive to think that our opinions are based on this forum otherwise nobody's opinion has any value because it would mean your own opinion is based on this forum and since you only see a handful (80+ though so a big handful) of people who want this product then it's not enough for you. However since you are basing your opinion on this thread then it's meaningless.


But what exactly are Apple about and how does a mid-range tower change this any more than the low-end tower (the Mini) or the high-end tower (the Mac Pro)?


They don't *need* to do this (see I told you needs and wants could get mixed up) but it would help their crusade. If I can for a second compare the cult of Apple to a religion. If a religious person comes to your door and their religion doesn't have what you need, do you think that them jamming their foot in the door or spreading the word to other people to do the same is going to get you to convert?

OR

Would it be better if they were actually selling something that you wanted anyway? My point is that Apple shouldn't need a switch campaign at all. Apple's lineup is missing what people are wanting to buy and if Apple had what they want in a nice package at a reasonable price, think how much less persuasion they'd need.


Matter in what sense? Matter to Apple's marketshare, customer satisfaction? How can you prove those things any more than you could prove that people do or don't need to be loved? We *need* the love but there's no way we can prove it to you short of giving you a petition with 100 million signatures on it. And even then SDW2001 would say that it's not enough to justify a product and that the people who signed it didn't really need one, they are just deluded.

You can't prove what effect the absence of something has without comparing it to when it was there and doing so is comparing to a different generation of product and you can't say what the presence of it is with regard to Apple because they don't currently have it. What you can say is that the PC market has both and people are buying towers.


Has that point been answered yet? Why is it when the overwhelming majority of the computer population are given a choice between AIO and tower and the AIO is very close to spec/price/design to Apple's, they go for towers?


I agree, I think most people who would get the xMac are people looking at the Mac Pro and looking for something less than a workstation. The iMac is not satisfactory because it's a different product. You can't sit an iMac beside a Mac Pro and say they are meant for the same audience.


Yeah and yet still make far more sales. People who say that having too many options will confuse Apple Store customers are clearly wrong on this. If idiots can buy Dells in all their form factors and options then they can buy Macs with just one more product.


I think it did fail on price, you really said that yourself. They were selling a better, faster, cheaper machine than the original Cube so it can't have failed because the market wasn't there. Who would spend more for a worse deal?

Adding one more model shouldn't stress Apple too much.

FWIW, Apple has a larger market share than other manufactures that do offer a more extensive produt line, minus the AIO and Mac mini form factors.

Yeah but they don't make a profit or very little, like Gateway.

not interested in a smaller/mid-size desktop mac - happy with the current line up.

Where's your evidence that any manufacturer doesn't make a profit on computers sold in the >$799 range. This is precisely the range of computers that other OEMs make profit on in their unending attempt to make up for the razor thin profits on the low end computers. Even Micheal Dell admitted this in a quarterly statement.

That's all well and good for you. No one here is advocating Apple drop or discontinue any of their current line up. Many here and on other Mac centric boards do wish Apple would sell an additional desktop model that more closely serves the needs of the mid to upper end of the consumer markets.

I find it interesting that people are so against apple releasing a mid-tower.

I don't quite understand it. It doesn't mean taking away from the current line-up, just adding to it. So they wouldn't be losing anything.

You aren't in the group that is missing out. There are "prosumers" / "gamers" that need something more than an iMac, and the Mac Pro's specs / cost are too high. Why is it the end of the world is apple releases a mid-tower? It's not.

I think that computers in that price range can be profitable. Especially as Apple get larger market share and can sell larger volumes.

But Apple can't cover all market segments and maintain the high profitability they currently enjoy. That's all I'm saying.

Fair enough. We just disagree. And yes Apple recently has been very profitable and my AAPL stock been very good to me.

Oh yeah!

Of course they can be profitable, there are many companies making a very good profit off of them. One of the problems here is that I think a lot of Mac users think that budget machines (MATX), prosumer machines (ATX), and workstations (EATX) are all somehow the same.

I would not mind something in the iTV form factor, perhaps a little taller using a riser card to mount one or at most two PCI cards horizontally. Offer in in black or white, the first for component usage the second for desktop.

would actually be nice to have a machine that is reasonably priced that I could upgrade the graphics ability on it. Hell, if they offered the same methods some high end laptops use I would be happy

We don't need an iMac bigger than 15 inch. It would spoil its appeal.
Apple will never use Intel.
Apple will never enter the server market.
Apple will never support windows.
Apple will never enter the cheap-o market.
Apple will never do a phone.
What's the point of the iPod? Shouldn't they be concentrating on Macs?
Macs aren't for games...and 'never' were.
Macs are only for graphics. They're not office machines.
Apple can't compete with Office.
Apple won't make cheaper versions of the iPod/Mac. 'We' like being exclusive.
Apple won't chase marketshare.
We will never use all 'that' power.
What else can be added to an OS that isn't already there?

There isn't a 'mid-tower' market. *Nods. Sure. Nods*.

There isn't a market for smack talk either.

Feel free to add your own.

Lemon Bon Bon.

Vinea,
I don't understand your change in attitude about the xMac. You were seriously thinking about building one.
Have you changed your mind about the DIY? What happened to cause the 180?

Eh what? Nothing. Still going to but since I can't GET at the mini until Thanksgiving I haven't bought the parts yet.

I have considered just buying another mini but my wife gives me dirty looks when I start talking in that direction.

Let me clear this up...I think the xMac would be better than the iMac for me.

I don't think its necessarily better for Apple so I don't think they will offer one soon much as folks would like one.

We can get an 80% DIY solution. Whether what you want falls in the 20% or not depends on what you want.

Years ago there were numerous models like the Classic, LC, Centris, Quadra and Workgroup Server. The Classic was the AIO, the LC and Centris being basically Small Form Factor with only a single expansion slot and the Quadra models (there were several case forms) filled the Workstation slots. With the server at the top end. At various times there were also Mac II and Performa models being sold alongside these too. Even with these 6 of 7 desktop lines it wasn't too difficult to discern which model was for best you.

I believe that as the platform expands there is more than a good argument to offer a choice of form factors and designs.

The laptop market is certainly big enough for a third and four product line and I'm sure there's space for alternatively positioned desktop models too.

Yeah I used to have a Centris. I remember how easy it was just to flip off the lid and I could access the entire machine in 5 seconds. It takes me half an hour to put Ram in the new Mini and I feel like I'm going to break something every time I open it. A computer just shouldn't be designed like that.

The iMac has a panel which is nice but the hard drive isn't easy to get to - I can't think why they don't put these things in the base with a small fan. You could probably get two on top of each other or side by side down there.

That still wouldn't help the screen issue though.

It was said already but this isn't how things are supposed to be. We shouldn't want older hardware or PC hardware. Apple needs to start making their hardware designs functional instead of just aesthetically pleasing.

User serviceable components include Ram, hard drives, displays (by that I mean replacing an external one), PCI cards. By all means seal the motherboard in lead with an Apple logo on the outside but the rest needs to be easily accessed and easily replaceable.

Lemon Bon Bon

"640K ought to be enough for anybody." Bill Gates, 1981.

"Everything that can be invented has been invented."**

--Charles H. Duell, Commissioner, U.S. Office of Patents, 1899.

AND:

http://weewave.mer.utexas.edu/DPN_fi...ff/quotes.html

good one!

http://www.dailytech.com/Intel+Preps...rticle9070.htm

news for this week

hail hail xMac!!

QX9650
3.0 GHz
130W
12MB
$999

Q9950
2.83 GHz
95W
12MB
$530

Q9450
2.66 GHz
95W
12MB
$316

Q9300
2.50 GHz
95W
6MB
$266

That looks like it could be the one. A mid-tower quad line. A round hole 'Cubed'.

795-1495 Sort of range.

For the prices they charge? The Mac Pro can go 'all Octo'. Currently #1700-2600. Towers starting at 1,695. Ouch. Unreality.

Lemon Bon Bon

For the prices intel has dropped to, they can afford to go 8-core for the Mac Pro. Of course that widens the gap to something more like the grand canyon.

*Nods.

Ben. I agree. The Mac pro hasn't had an update in...well. Count how many GPUS have been released since the 7300GT. :I

And if Apple are going to add a 'sub-note skinny' laptop to their 'grid matrix' then why not a Mid-tower to the desktop mix?

Another point, there are PC AIOs...eg Sony Vaio, however the mid-tower market is much larger and sells waaay more. I can't understand why Apple aren't in it.

With sales of 2 million Macs pending? Surely, SURELY Apple will be able to expand it's matrix not just to 'skinny laptops' but to a mid-tower as well.

I'm more than convinced they can co-exist.

This aint PPC anymore. We DO have the chips from Intel to differentiate the market.

Quads - Mid Towers.
Octs - Workstation.
Duos - Laptops. Cheap entry.

The gap between the iMac and Mac pro is gapingly large. Why use expensive laptop chips and server chips and ignore the very reasonably priced Conroe chip? It could offer a very decent product for a decent price. 1,000-1,500 isn't chicken feed. Yet Apple don't have a tower in that range. It's nothing short of astonishing. And outside of the m/board and the xeon chips? There's little in the Mac Pro to justify such outrageous prices. Looks blankly.

I'd easily drop the display the 24 incher costs from an iMac and put that into a quad cpu and better gpu of a mid-tower.

I'm sure I'm not alone.

Lemon Bon Bon.

Look, ironically enough Apple is actually a very conservative company. They may seem like they're taking risks, but they're really acting within their market. What Apple (and the Mac community as a whole) is cared to do is to cater to users they don't currently have. They won't venture out into making different types of hardware then they have nor will they let anyone else do it. They have the best OS, but they restrict it to only one manufacturer and only niche hardware their small group will buy. They have the best, most successful music player and store combination, but the iPod is restricted to iTunes and vice versa. They have a great video triangle with the Mac, iPod, and iTV, but they are afraid to add PVR or movie rentals in fear that they might lose video sales on iTunes. The PVR functionality could be added quite easily and cheaply by acquiring Elgato. I see a company with all these great products, but are keeping them at the back of the store. I think they're scared to death of the open market.

I think you hit the nail on the head. I don't think Apple want's to have any device that's similar to anything else in it's catagory (i.e. Mid-Tower). They want a product that's sooo much cooler that a direct comparison to the competition will seem silly. I don't think they've figured out how to do that in the biggest market of all: The Mid-Tower. There are so many other companies making unusual designs that Apple's afraid they won't be able to come up with something to turn heads. Co'mon Steve, take a chance! Afterall, people are buying the hardware to run the software. Without OSX, Apple would just fade into the list of also-rans.

Not sure what you're comparing in this realm... laptops, desktops, servers, music players, phones... I'm going to assume you're talking strictly computers.

I have to say I still feel my macbook pro is far superior to all other PC laptops out there. As "cool" as some may look, they don't feel right, hardly use metal for an enclosure, and rarely are as thin. Just my opinion though. HOWEVER, everyone is starting to catch up fairly quickly, especially to the mac pro design. Cooler Master Cosmos anyone?