A True Desktop Class Mac, or another Cube? - Page 2

I'm not suggesting the thread is closed. Stop whining.


But how MANY people will actually buy one? That's the question. "Many" people don't want one at all. You want one. A bunch of computer geeks like us might want one. That's not gonna cut it, champ.


Point? Then keep what you have. Or buy a Mac Pro when it's time. A Mid pro tower might "work fine" but that doesn't mean Apple should make one.
According to whom?


See above.


My bias?. WTF? Your assertion that a mid pro would cut into mini sales is absurd. It's a totally different market. It's a totally different price segment. It would cut into iMac and Pro sales...period. Just because "some people" run Logic on a mini doesn't mean they would choose a mid pro over an iMac. You'd get the people that can't afford a mac pro and those nerds who think they need PCI slots.

No offense, but it's clear you should never go into marketing.


Ding ding ding! And let us not forget, a mid pro for $1200 plus a nice display is going to end up being a $2200 machine anyway with basically the same specs as the iMac....but more expandable. Dumb idea.


Well, I don't know that it's moot (correct word, btw). My problem is this statement:


I'm not sure I see his point here. So what if it sucks...it's upgradable? does he think he'll get a better card with a system that's half the price? Isn't the whole point to swap out the card anyway?

I'd think someone would take issue with iMac gaming performance. But even that will be more than enough for all but the hardest core frame rate freak gamers, with an ATi HD 2600 256MB card. With the C2D and that card, games are going to run well for a long time.

for ATI Radeon X1900 XT 512MB (2 x dual-link DVI) [Add $249] so you are paying $149 for a 7300 GT + $249 = $398 for a ATI Radeon X1900 XT 512MB with a EFI rom and the ram is rip off.
$299 for 1 gb of ram
OWC price $92
http://eshop.macsales.com/Search/Sea...TFBDIMM&sort=a

Then why are you "begging" us all to stop discussing a mini-tower? You say you "do not understand the demand for this product." Fine, I believe many of us believe there is a demand, and you are welcome to ignore this thread.



Where are YOU getting your marketing information? I believe the burden of proof is on you to show there is insufficient demand for a Mac mini-tower.

The rest of us only need to look at what sells from other computer makers. What I see at Best Buy is rows of towers, in all sizes and styles. Few Xeon class workstations, but lots of towers with desktop components.

To get a Mac tower in this popular price range, I must wait 3 or 4 years and buy a used Mac Pro.



You think it's absurd? Maybe you think folks should simply buy an iMac and dispose of their current LCD display? Do you have suggestions on what to do with the unused LCD display? Sell it on eBay? Donate it to charity? Make a movie of it hitting the pavement after falling from a 10 story building? Seems like a lot of extra effort just to have the dubious pleasure of buying an iMac.

If those of us with a good LCD display do not buy an iMac, we must choose between a Mac Pro and a Mac Mini. Guess which one we would pick most of the time? It's no contest, when money is a consideration.

Now, if there were a low-end tower, say $800 to $1800 price range, this is what many would buy. So, yes. Such a low-end tower would take sales from the Mac Mini, under present circumstances.

Why don't you tell us just how many people don't want one versus those that do want one since you seem to be in the know.

The G4 MINI cost less then intel one and had a video card with it's own ram and is better at games then what intel on board chips at that time where.

Why can't apple at least put a TurboCache / hypermemory card in the mini?

Because it's the same thing over and over. Yet, no one points out the obvious...it would be a dumb move for Apple and that it's likely not going to happen. While I don't have to post in every thread, there is a new one weekly. There are two right NOW. If nothing else it clutters up the board.


Uh...how about the fact that Apple hasn't made one despite about 5 years of whining? That's proof right there. And the burden of proof is on you. As the anti-Iraq war people love to say, one can't prove a negative. It's even more true in this case, because the product doesn't exist. Do you think that's how marketing works? do you think that if someone has an idea for a product, he goes to his superiors or colleagues and instead of showing demand, he tells them to prove that there ISN'T demand?


Which is exactly what Apple tries to avoid....being just like all the other manufacturers. And gee...look who's sales are kicking ass while others are tanking.


Then you need to make more money or buy the machine in your price range. Or you could consider saving for another 6 months to a year to come up with the extra $1,000.


That's why there is a Mac pro.


Buy a Mac pro


But a Mac pro. Buy a Mac pro. Oh, and if not...buy and iMac and...I DON'T CARE WHAT THEY DO WITH IT.


"dubious pleasure?" Do you even know what that word means?


You get what you pay for. Anyone that would even consider a mini doesn't really need a pro anyway.


First, it's not going to cost $800. The non-expandable mini is up to $700+ already. Now you want to add PCI slots, desktop components, a better graphics option, more RAM, more bays, etc. You also don't want to canabilize mini sales, as you point out. So you're looking at $1200-$1800.

Now, you're competing against the iMac and Mac Pro. The machine will likely hurt Mac Pro sales as it costs $1000 less. But the real issue is the price range....it's going to be up against the iMac. A consumer is going to look at both and scratch is head. The iMac will cost the same, include a great display, and lack only the PCI slots and bays. It's a no brainer...anyone except a very small target market will choose the iMac. And that small target market will also hurt the flagship Mac Pro.

So tell me again how it's a good move. The problem with Future Hardware and, well, most people in general... is they can't separate what they personally want from what would be likely or good business. It's the same with the HD-DVD discussion. The HD DVD zealots are grinning ear to ear and dancing in the streets over Paramount's recent HD-DVD exclusive announcement. But it's a stupid business decision because that company picked the format that's losing 3 to 1 because they basically got bought off to do so. Not quite the same situation, but a a good example.

I think this is the first sensible thing you said in your entire reply, to let's start here. It's true. We must consider the Mac Mini if we do not need a Mac Pro. However, this does not mean we are satisfied with the Mac Mini for our application. I for one will would prefer a lower cost tower. There is not such a Mac, so someday I will buy a Mac Pro that is used and within my budget. This purchase will not contribute to Apple's bottom line at all.

I find it amusing what you suggest I do about the situation.


Make more money? Very helpful advice. Please talk to my boss. Next you say to buy a machine in my price range. Yes! That's it -- as soon as Apple sells a Mac Mini Tower. Thanks for the show of support.

Now here is a real jewel. I ask for proof for your assertion that there is little or no demand for a lower-price tower. So, what do you reply?


Of course! Why didn't I see the obvious? The fact that Apple hasn't made a lower-priced tower is proof that there is no demand? Come on. Give us credit for having the brains to see the illogic of your statement.

I'd keep going, but this is grinding me down. If you don't like the thread, don't read it. Stick to the BD vs. HD-DVD discussion where you make a heck of a lot more sense. Sorry if I've been offensive. Really sorry, but damn it, you got me all worked up.

\

This has the logical error of assuming that the only choice in between a Mini and a Pro. This thread assumes this is not the case. But more to the point, this quote highlights the problem. People who consider the Mini but find it lacking have three choices.

1. The Mac Pro - as you said, they don't need it.
2. The iMac - not suitable for many people
3. A non-Mac

Take me for example. I don't work on my home computer. I surf, I read email, and I edit photos (strictly hobbyist stuff) I would also like to run Windows under Fusion or Parallels for those pesky sites that don't work on anything but Explorer, and for running some Windows-only software such as CombineZ.

I need more disk space than fits in the mini, and I want more memory. The iMac is almost a good fit, except for the fact that the screen does not fit my needs. I could go into details as to why the screen is a poor fit for me, but please just take my word on that.

The closest fit for me is the Mini, but I want a far bigger disk. Plugging an external disk via Firewire is (to me) an ugly abomination. From a marketing PoV this makes me spend less money on Apple products. In 9 years of being a Mac user, I'm only on my 2nd Mac. I keep waiting for Apple to release something that is a good fit for me, and I postpone purchase.

My first Mac was a B&W G3 tower. I wanted to buy an iMac, but that had only a 15" screen, and I wanted 17", and later a 19".

My second Mac was a G4 MDD tower. Again I wanted an iMac, but at the time, that also had only a 17" screen, while my monitor was at 19".

Now it's time to upgrade again. The iMac still has the wrong screen, but the current tower is incredibly overkill for my needs. A PC that sells for $800 in the US would cover my performance needs, but at Apple you can't get that computer even for $1200. You need to spring for the cheapest Mac Pro, and today, I'm not going to buy something that big.

If Apple had made the computers that fit my needs, I'd upgrade every three years, rather than five.

Strictly speaking, this is not true. Buying used Mac Pros, means that there is a resale value in Mac Pro, which makes them more attractive to buyers of new Mac Pros.

That's the same reasoning that makes companies care about the price of their stocks in the secondary market.

While I agree with what you say, it would still do Apple more good to sell a Mac Mini Tower and have the added revenue.

Keeping prices of used Macs high, however, could have some impact, if Mac Pro users would be inclined to upgrade hardware more frequently. Of the two, a Mini Tower would help Apple's bottom line the most, IMHO.

I agree, even though I would much rather have a better Mini - I don't need the expandability, just lots of disk space and lots of memory.

A little off topic, but how would people respond to having this as Apple's desktop lineup


All in Ones:

eMac
19 Widescreen Display with 1440x900 Resolution
(Yes, I can tell the difference between a 19 and 20 as I have both)
1.8ghz Core 2 Duo
1GB DDR2 Memory
160GB Hard drive
8x Dual Layer SuperDrive
Intel GMA X3100 Graphics Processor with 128MB shared memory

iMac
20 Glossy Widescreen Display with 1680x1050 Resolution
2.0ghz Core 2 Duo
1GB DDR2 Memory
250GB Hard drive
8x Dual Layer SuperDrive
128MB ATI Radeon HD 2400XT

iMac
20 Glossy Widescreen Display with 1680x1050 Resolution
2.4ghz Core 2 Duo
1GB DDR2 Memory
320GB Hard drive
8x Dual Layer SuperDrive
265MB ATI Radeon HD 2600Pro

iMac
20 Glossy Widescreen Display with 1900x1200 Resolution
2.4ghz Core 2 Duo
1GB DDR2 Memory
320GB Hard drive
8x Dual Layer SuperDrive
265MB ATI Radeon HD 2600Pro

iMac
20 Glossy Widescreen Display with 1900x1200 Resolution
2.8ghz Core 2 Extreme
2GB DDR2 Memory
500GB Hard drive
8x Dual Layer SuperDrive
265MB ATI Radeon HD 2600Pro

Small Form Factor Desktops:

Mac Mini Replacement (~8 x 8 x 2.5)
1.8ghz Core 2 Duo
1GB Memory
160GB Hard drive
8x Superdrive
Intel GMA X3100 Graphics Processor with 128MB shared memory

Mac Mini Replacement (~8 x 8 x 2.5)
2.0hz ghz Core 2 Duo
1GB Memory
250GB Hard drive
8x Superdrive
128MB ATI Radeon HD 2400XT

Mac Mini Replacement (~8 x 8 x 2.5)
2.4ghz Core 2 Duo
1GB memory
320GB Hard drive
8x SuperDrive
265MB ATI Radeon HD 2600Pro

Tower Desktop/ Workstations
Mac Pro Lite
2.66ghz Core 2 Duo
3.0ghz Core 2 Duo BTO
2.66ghz Core 2 Quad BTO
2GB DDR800 Memory (4 DIMMS 8GB Max)
320GB Hard drive (500GB, 750GB, 1TB BTO 2 Bays)
18x SATA Superdrive (2 Bays)
256MB Nvidia GeForce 8600GS
256MB Nvidia GeForce 8600GTS BTO
640MB Nvidia GeForce 8800GTS BTO

Mac Pro
2x 2.66ghz Quad Core Xeon
2x 2.0ghz Quad Core BTO
2x 3.0ghz Quad Core BTO
2GB DDR667 Memory (8 FB-DIMMS 16GB Max)
320GB Hard drive (500GB, 750GB, 1TB BTO 4 Bays)
18x SATA Superdrive (2 Bays)
256MB ATI FireGL V3600
512MB ATI FireGL V5600 BTO
1GB ATI FireGL 8600 BTO

Displays with iSight and Remote sensor:
20" $399
24" $699
30" $1599

I wasn't suggesting that Apple discontinue the Mini, if that is what you may be thinking. A mini tower could not sell as low in price as a mini, and it would not hurt to have the top mini and lowest tower overlap slightly, in price, IMHO.

with the price of ram now days most of the system should have 2gb base.

I'd buy both of these computers:

eMac - 17" or 19" widescreen, 2GHz Core 2 Duo, GMA X3100.

Minitower - 2GHz Core 2 Duo, GMA X3100 on motherboard, 3.5" optical drive bay, 2 internal 3.5" bays, four memory slots, 2 PCI Express slots, one of which full width.
BTO: 2.4GHz Core 2 Quad, Geforce 8600GTS, Geforce 8800GTS 640MB.

I think that's about as much configuration as necessary. You don't go so much faster than that C2Q with dualcores that it'd be a good idea to buy a high end dualcore. The three graphics options cover desktop work, occasional accelerated work/low resolution gaming, and modeling/hardcore accelerated stuff/high resolution gaming very well. The integrated graphics cost nickels, really drop the base model production cost and "starting from" cost by avoiding the inclusion of an extra card, and are silent whereas the cards will have active cooling.

In that case, I would go with one of the Minis, probably the middle or top model.

If you knuckleheads spend half the time making a hack to get OS X running on commodity boxes as you do dreaming about this (which won't happen), that hack would be mature by now, supported on dozens of chipsets.

And that's really the crux of he matter: you don't have enough money to buy a mac pro or an imac. So make the hack already.

People like you really sour the experience of owning a Mac. You also make us all look some kind of wacky extremist cult instead of the enlightened computer users Mac owners should be.

I don't need to "make the hack". If you look hard enough, you can find it on the Internet. If I download a hacked Mac OS X and also buy a shrink-wrapped Mac OS X, I don't think Apple could make a case against me. I don't think any EULA has ever been upheld by a court.

But never mind all that. We don't want a commodity box. We want an Apple box.

Perhaps, but you want commodity pricing. Commodity pricing can only come with commodity design.


Whatever. When Linus T wanted unix on his PC, he started working on Linux: great story. Linux was a cult for a while, but now it's not at all. It has changed the world, in fact. If you want something, you're going to do well for yourself if you make it happen. The worst-case scenario is that Apple releases the machine you want before you can finish the project, and you've found that you've learned a lot in the process.

Getting back to the point: so the hack is already out there. Now, you have the opportunity to build the enclosure that you want. Snag a micro ATX board and a riser card or two and start working. Based on the 3D mockups here, there's no shortage of ideas. The company XtremeMac started like this, and as far as I can tell, Axiotron/OWC is still selling the only mac tablet.

While this doesn't really interest me, it seems like it would be a fun project for someone (or some group of folks), and having spent the past few years designing electronic products, enclosures, and prototypes, I would be glad to offer advice to any adventurous souls.

Right...because the people that are clamoring for this product are "sensible." Jesus.


OK, then buy an iMac.


Good for you. Then buy the used Mac Pro. Let Apple fend for itself. The point is the SIZE of the market
Uh...don't bitch about a mythical product you don't actually need. How about that?
Buy an iMac, which includes a great display and is faster than the Mini. It also has great software included.
See above. The burden of proof is on YOU...to show that there IS a market. Try reading please. This is not how marketing works. The burden is on the person advocating such a product.
Don't you think if there was overwhelming demand Apple would release it? I mean think it through. Apple, like any other company, carefully plans it's introductions. They have products filling all the segments.


It's not just this thread. It's the utter myopia and stupidity of it all. It's the multitude of threads with you guys droning on about the midpro tower that's not coming, thinking all the while how stupid Apple is for now making one. And the real reason you want one? Because you're too poor to afford a Mac pro and your ego can't handle buying a used one or an iMac. Therefore Apple should meet your needs! I mean, what's wrong with them! Look at all these people that want the thing. Stupid Apple!

This is in response to SDW2001's latest rant.

You're saying WE aren't sensible? Get over yourself.

I don't want an iMac, I realize this bothers you for some reason but guess what, I don't care.

Are you selling a used MacPro for $1200-1500? No? What a surprise, get a better answer.

Mythical? until recently there has always been a headless, somewhat expandable Mac in the mid-range.

See above and while you're at it realize I also don't care how *great* the display is.

Burden of proof? Ok let's look at the Windows based PC market which has more suppliers, hmm not a whole lot of AIOs being sold. I'd have to say the Mac based PC market is missing a core product from it's line-up.

Apple is controlled by Steve Jobs who while he's had a few very good ideas also has some that aren't exactly in the same ballpark. Mac Cube w/ Powermac pricing anyone? So yes I'd have to say they would ignore market demands.

You claim we're the ones being myopic and we're being stupid for wanting something. Thank YOU for having an open mind. Maybe it isn't coming, maybe it is you never know w/ Apple (iPod, Mini, and iPhone to name a few).

Personally I've found your last few posts on this subject to be inflammatory and derogatory w/ nothing constructive being added. For someone w/ nearly 8k posts I'd expect more respect for your fellow forum users.

It's a very big market. How do we know? By using a reliable marketing tool, a test market -- more predictable than a poll or survey. What test market? Why, it's what's selling on the Window side. Apple doesn't even need to pay for these marketing results. This is what the rest of us are relying on, not on our personal opinions as you keep telling us.

So then, what are you relying on to tell us there is no market? You haven't' said what it is. Instead, you say the burden of proof is on us. Okay, we are giving you hard numbers. Just look at what is selling on the Window side. I'd like to see what you have to offer for your evidence now.

This is not new. I've referred to it before, but you chose to ignore it, and instead tell me I should buy an iMac.



Your statement is not proof of anything, and Apple just continues to ignore the kind of computer that best satisfies the prosumer market.

Seriously, what's wrong with getting an iMac. The following is a list why I think an xMac is not necessary:

1. iMac has built in quality stereo speakers/ whereas towers have low end mono
2. iMac avoids tower clutter
3. Ifyou already have an LCD, then use it as a secondary screen (I.e. Video editing, audio editing.)
4. No need to buy internal pci cards when external devices are available
5. No one really upgrades

Okay, so I own a toshiba satellite only because it is an upgradable laptop. In order for me to decently upgrade it I would have to spend roughly 700.00 dollars. It will never looklike new because of the material that it was made out of. So my options now is to upgrade my laptop or buy a new iMac. As a smart consumer I will buy a iMac.

Keep in mind that I am a multimedia prosumer that needs to do image/graphic editing, video editing, and audio editing.

Instead of spending money on aesthetically challenged displays, or cramming up a tower with unecessary peripherals or PCI card. I could neatly use just one FireWire cable to daisychain
and rack up all the external devices I need for audio/video, which avoids clutter.

Moot point if you're going external anyway. You're not actually using the internal speakers to do your audio editing, are you?
Or replaces one neat tower and screen with an iMac, a screen, four external boxes, four power cables and four FW cables.
Suppose I have two already? What if I have no more room on my desk? (Incidentally, I don't.) What if have use for exactly one 24" and no more? (Nope, can't sell the old display. Another desktop computer, a game console and a TV tuner need it to plug into.)
Okay, where's my external Geforce 8800GTS "graphics device"?

All you have succeeded in is listing why you are fine with an iMac. It doesn't automatically follow anyone else is.

I agree with the above points.

I can't speak for others, but there's some very big limitations to using an iMac. Some of these limitations are deal breakers. Just go to http://www.dpreview.com and look in the Mac forum. There's lots of people there who will tell you that a glossy screen (even a good one like on the 24" iMac) cannot be calibrated well enough for preparing photos for print.

Others would like two hard drives for backup. No can do on an iMac unless you use an external disk.

For me it's the screen:

1. I don't like the glossy screen. I'm not as picky as the people on dpreview, but I still don't like the colors
2. I don't like the reflections and glare from a glossy screen. Sticking an anti-glare stick-on kind of hurts the "beautifully integrated" property of the iMac
3. The screen points slightly upwards and is non-tiltable. I have a 3-year old that keeps coming and saying, "daddy, show me the picture!" She's way too short to see a screen standing on a desk and tilted upwards.
4. The screen is wide. I never watch movies on the computer, but I do read text and PDF files. I would much rather have a 4:3 aspect ratio. That means I can't get a screen from Apple

Just a few reasons why I don't want an iMac.

But I do, not because I exactly love the thing, but because there was no other option. It's fine for say, my 12-year old sister, but it really does not meet my needs at all


You're comparing the speakers on an iMac to the alert speaker on a tower and thinking its a valid point? 100% of tower users have 20, 2.1, 5.1, or 7.1 system.


Having owned towers I can tell you that is complete BS. It only applies to those who are perfectly happy to live with one hard drive (forgoing Time machine) and waiting forever when installing software or burning a disk using the slow as molasses notebook drive. If you're using an iMac and you're more prosumer minded, it creates desktop clutter.

The tower sits under my desk with only the display on my desk. The hard drives and optical drives are in the tower using the tower's power supply. With the iMac I'm going to need an external burner and an external drive drive both take space on my desk and surge protector, have visible cabling on my desk, are no where near as reliable as internal drives, and cost 2-3 times more as internal drives


You need an awfully big desk for two wide screen displays.


Where's the external device for e-SATA if it replaces USB2.0 and firewire as the external connection of choice? Right I'm supposed to help out Apple and magically come with with another $2000.


That's news to me. I must have not done that video card upgrade in my mother's PC or the countless RAM upgrades or the video card upgrade in my G3. My uncle must have not out that radeon x850 in his computer either. Please people stop confusing your own biases and Steve's reality distortion fields as sources of fact. It just makes us look ignorant.


You're comparing a large bulky laptop with a desktop? Completely different set of rules.


No you will by an iMac because it suites YOUR needs.


It's good you'll be happy with an iMac, but none of this makes you the ultimate authority on what all users should need.


No, like I said it moves the clutter to the top of the desk where it is visible instead of under my desk where it is not.

Uh, who's upset here? It has nothing to do with my getting over myself, whatever that's supposed to mean. Those supporting this product are not living in reality.


It doesn't bother me at all. But I am curious as to why you don't want one. It's much more sensible than clamoring for a non-existent product with the same capabilities and no display.


No, but this person is. http://cgi.ebay.com/Apple-Mac-Pro-Qu...QQcmdZViewItem

That's what you'd pay for the high end mythical tower, anyway.
Uh, no there hasn't. Try being more wrong next time.


That's your problem. Maybe you'll get lucky and Apple will release a machine that costs as much as an iMac, does the same thing exactly, and doesn't include a display. Happy buying.


Yeah, 'cause Apple has always tried to go after the beige box buying Windows market with the same kind of products. People buy them because that's what available. Do you see a good iMac alternative? There aren't many.


They also learn from their mistakes.


It's not that I think you're stupid exactly. It's the reasons WHY you want the product. You don't really have a need for it. Apple offers perfectly good alternatives, but you don't like them because of two reasons. 1) They're too expensive and 2) You don't like the image of the iMac. See, you're a POWER USER! You want EXPANDABILITY, like PCI SLOTS and....well, PCI SLOTS!


I'm not the one crying and pounding the computer desk because someone actually has the balls to point out that the product you're pining for isn't needed.


Right, 'cause it's ME that's in denial. Go back and look at the 57 threads all talking about the same thing over the past few years. Then perhaps you'll hange your tune.


I've already addressed that point. It doesn't hold water. People buy this kind of product on the Windows side because that is, in large measure, what's offered. There is no real iMac of the Windows world...not with the appeal it is, anyway.

Yes, I want hard numbers. Demonstrate there is a market.


Ding ding ding! We have a winner. This product is about image to you. You're a PROSUMER! Nothing else will do! Man, the advertising people have your number.

Let me tell you something: I'm about as much of a "prosumer" as there is. Yet I'm not clamoring for this product. Why? For one, my MBP does me just fine for anything I need to do. Everything. Edititing photos? check. Video? check. Audio recording? Check. E-mail/Internet/Games? Check, check and check. Documents? Check.

If I did need or want a desktop, I would likely buy the new iMac. It will do anything you need it to do unless you're a serious video/photo professional, as will the MBP. Anything. In fact, I'd wager it would work well for lighter use professionals as well. It would certainly be great for anything you and I need to do.

Now, if one needs more power. Say one is a serious photoshop user or video editor? Then one needs a Mac pro. One needs the ability to upgrade the graphics card, etc. Thats why there IS a Mac Pro.

The machine you're talking about would not be in the same league as the Mac Pro. It would be like an iMac. So what is the point? Now I hear you...you don't WANT an iMac. Perhaps you should examine the reasons why. Most people who say they don't want one actually feel that way due to what they think it says about them, even if they don't think about what other people may believe. It's personal to them. And if one does have hard reasons, like having a nice display he wants to use? Then save up and buy a used or new Mac Pro. It will last longer and will be even more expandable.


Totally agreed. Upgrading is highly questionable in most cases, unless you've spent 3K on the machine the first place. It's usually not worth it beyond RAM and HDD.

I see a difference between upgradable and expandable. I and many others want room to expand a computer, not upgrade it, which often includes a new CPU. I agree, it's usually not worth it.

Yet expansion slots allow for things like professional audio cards, like a 24-bit A/D converter, and more USB ports. Sure, we can put this stuff on the desk with cables and extra little boxes, but this is exactly what we want to avoid, and why there is a market for PCI-e slots. Also, a second HDD goes inside, and not on the desktop.

Well, I see that point. That said, if you're in that market, you really need a Mac Pro. Most people aren't using Pro Audio cards or A/D converters. They're using external sound cards with laptops.

One of the main issues here is that we have a lot of folks who actually want a Mac Pro, but can't afford one. So then it becomes "Apple is ignoring us." It's like saying BMW is ignoring the sub $20,000 market. Neither company is ignoring anybody. They're not responsible for someone not wanting to save the cash they need for the product they supposedly need.

Speaking of "need," I would like to know who specifically "needs" this mid pro tower, and why. I would like to know what needs people have that can't be met more than adequately with current Apple hardware offerings. Let's not limit it to desktops either...I'd like to know why the Mini, iMac, Mac Pro, MB and MBP won't be sufficient and/or possible. I'm not looking for hypotheticals like you've offered, either (no offense). I am curious about specific examples.

You bring up a point that can be refuted by your own, earlier, argument. You say people buy [expandable towers] on the Windows side, because that is what's offered. Well, in an earlier argument against me, you said, "Don't you think if there was overwhelming demand [for such a product] Apple would release it?"

So using your own argument: If there were overwhelming demand for an AIO, the makers of Windows computers would build it. QED (What is good for the goose is good for the gander, so they say.)

So stop side stepping the fact that consumer buying habits on the Windows side are indeed a valid indication of what they would buy on the Mac side. We are all computer users. Windows is just another platform.

So, you have had our proof. Where is yours? Stop telling us to demonstrate there is a market, and tell up how you are so sure there is none, or a market so small it is not worth considering.

i'd like to see an affordable tower, and an inexpensive beautiful looking "mac cube". something that looks more like it's on your desk for design rather than as a computer.

The biggest 'need' is lower cost, than a Mac Pro. Many people 'could' afford a Mac Pro, or save up for one, but they use their money more wisely. These same people don't buy an 18 wheeler if they need a pickup. I know, I do exaggerate. And the used market is an alternative, which doesn't help Apple's revenue stream.

The biggest 'want' is to eliminate desk clutter and put much into the computer case. I consider mine my audio workstation, even thought the Mac is not a workstation class computer. It does the work I need to do.

By the way, I just saw a movie where the audio was recorded on tape. How quickly technology changes. It was titled, I'll Be There.

^^^^

Nice post. Did vista barf on you before you finished?

People want to buy what fits their needs not just what the company wants to sell them.

I don't use an iMac because I want to pick and choose what monitor and video card I will use not Apples choice.

I don't need the power that a Mac pro has. I use Photoshop, but as an amateur photographer, and would rather spend some of the money that I would have to spend on a Mac Pro on a better camera, More RAM, and larger hard drive.

I have clients that a true pros and need the power of a Mac Pro or more.

My Ideal Mini tower would be as follows:

1 CPU
2 PCI slots (what ever is the fastest at the time)
4 RAM slots (capable of using 2GB modules)
2 Hard Drive bays
2 Optical drive bays
3 USB 2.0 connectors (1 in front for my camera)
1 head phone jack in Front
1 Firewire 400 jack
1 Firewire 800 jack
1 eSata jack

Just curious, what do you think is wrong with apples choice for the iMacs monitor/video card?