At the risk of beating the dead horse yet again...

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Will Apple introduce a Mid-Tower, ever??? I would like to give Apple a shot, and for the last three years have been hoping and patiently waiting they would release a mid-priced Tower to fit between the dead-end iMac and overkill, EXPENSIVE Pro. But am I going to have to break down and buy another PC when Windows 7 comes out to replace my 9 year old Dell? What the f$$k is up with Steve Jobs and his snubbing of all the other people out there like me who aren't high-end graphics people (with LOTS of $$$) who need a Pro, but don't think the iMac with it's limited expandability, laptop hardware and fixed screen are for them either. Come on Steve, you can make money selling something people here have said they want, even if it steals from the Pro and iMac who cares?
«13456712

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 224
    irelandireland Posts: 17,783member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aflaaak View Post


    Will Apple introduce a Mid-Tower, ever???



    What go you want to do with this computer? And no.
  • Reply 2 of 224
    aflaaakaflaaak Posts: 208member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Ireland View Post


    What go you want to do with this computer? And no.



    I would like to add a second HD, possibly upgrade the monitor at some point, add a TV tuner, add a second burner, (BR drive in a year or so), there is just no way to cleanly do these things with an iMac. I just don't understand why Apple is cutting off this market. What's your guess?
  • Reply 3 of 224
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aflaaak View Post


    I would like to add a second HD, possibly upgrade the monitor at some point, add a TV tuner, add a second burner, (BR drive in a year or so), there is just no way to cleanly do these things with an iMac. I just don't understand why Apple is cutting off this market. What's your guess?



    Because that market doesn't make any money. Upgradability might have been a purchasing factor ten years ago when component costs were so much less than that of a new computer, but the gap between those has narrowed and the overall cost of a machine has dropped tremendously. Let's look at all the components you listed -



    Add a second drive - Several USB 2.0 options. Also, why? There are NAS drives out that are cheap now and allow you to add server space to your network. Why couple it to a single machine if you don't have to?

    TV Tuner - there isn't an external one for OS X unless you can find a used El-Gato Eye TV. There are NO internal solutions. There are some USB Solutions that work with Windows.

    BR Drive - Logitec has a USB one that works with OS X but it is only for sale in Japan. There are several Windows friendly ones that use USB 2.0 and Firewire.

    Standard DVD Burner - Several USB 2.0 options

    Screen - Get a mini, you can have any screen you like (just buy the right adapter and save yourself a day of anger - trust me).



    Short of the screen, and non-availability, you can do everything you want with external solutions. I am sure Apple knows this and considered it and realized that probably the vast majority of people are more comfortable sticking a USB wire into the back of their iMac or Mini than they are cracking a case and adding a SATA drive.



    As for the stuff that you can get that runs on WIndows such as a BR Drive, bootcamp will let you boot into Windows when you want to use that stuff. I would think you could dual boot with parallels too and still have OS X running so you can use your regular Mac apps while using Windows apps to run the stuff that OS X doesn't run.
  • Reply 4 of 224
    addaboxaddabox Posts: 12,664member
    Gather 'round, kids, it's an Xmac thread!



    Back in my day, these went on for thousands of pages and brave men went mad defending their ancestral homelands.



    As I recall, these terrible battles were finally resolved with the Great Treaty of a While Back, which read: They Should, But They Won't.



    That was later amended by The Somewhat More Forceful Restating, which read: They Really, Really Should, Believe Us, We Feel Your Pain And Frustration And They Are Entirely Justified, But Honest, No Shit, They Never, Ever, Ever, Ever Will, So Probably Best To Be Bugged By Something Else.
  • Reply 5 of 224
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aflaaak View Post


    I just don't understand why Apple is cutting off this market. What's your guess?



    People like you!



    No I'm not being rude. Your first post suggests that you want to spend around $1500 dollars on a tower... and replace it in nine years time!



    Quote:

    Come on Steve, you can make money selling something people here have said they want



    Steve needs a new jet. Buy a Mac pro.
  • Reply 6 of 224
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Gather 'round, kids, it's an Xmac thread!



    Back in my day, these went on for thousands of pages and brave men went mad defending their ancestral homelands.



    As I recall, these terrible battles were finally resolved with the Great Treaty of a While Back, which read: They Should, But They Won't.



    That was later amended by The Somewhat More Forceful Restating, which read: They Really, Really Should, Believe Us, We Feel Your Pain And Frustration And They Are Entirely Justified, But Honest, No Shit, They Never, Ever, Ever, Ever Will, So Probably Best To Be Bugged By Something Else.



    Obviously my answer to his question was too beneficent. What I should have said was -



    You mid-tower clowns are all poverty-crying, bootcamp using, frustrated first-person shooter addicts. Shut up already.
  • Reply 7 of 224
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,833member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BigMcLargehuge View Post


    Obviously my answer to his question was too beneficent. What I should have said was -



    You mid-tower clowns are all poverty-crying, bootcamp using, frustrated first-person shooter addicts. Shut up already.



    Nonsense. A few years ago the xMac was a huge missed opportunity for Apple. Now though, the desktop market is dying so it probably wouldn't be worth it.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by addabox View Post


    Gather 'round, kids, it's an Xmac thread!



    Back in my day, these went on for thousands of pages and brave men went mad defending their ancestral homelands.



    As I recall, these terrible battles were finally resolved with the Great Treaty of a While Back, which read: They Should, But They Won't.



    That was later amended by The Somewhat More Forceful Restating, which read: They Really, Really Should, Believe Us, We Feel Your Pain And Frustration And They Are Entirely Justified, But Honest, No Shit, They Never, Ever, Ever, Ever Will, So Probably Best To Be Bugged By Something Else.



    Well said. This is the king of the xMac threads. I had a pretty good argument with Vinea in that one. Ah, when I had time to waste...



    To the OP: sorry, you're going to have to face it that the xMac will never happen. Try making yourself a hackintosh instead.
  • Reply 8 of 224
    For all the xMac naysayers-



    Why is it that Mac usage has only gone up a couple points. Still a ways to go to hit 10%, even in the US! Yet most people agree that OS X is superior to Windows and Mac hardware superior to any PC maker. Sure the higher cost of Macs is a factor, but the real reason is Apple won't sell you the computer you want.



    Believe it or not, there is a market for desktops- and I mean computers with desktop components, not laptop components in an iMac or Mini. Desktop components offer superior performance for much less cost. Isn't value for money one of consumers' biggest concerns?
  • Reply 9 of 224
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stonefree View Post


    For all the xMac naysayers-



    Why is it that Mac usage has only gone up a couple points. Still a ways to go to hit 10%, even in the US! Yet most people agree that OS X is superior to Windows and Mac hardware superior to any PC maker. Sure the higher cost of Macs is a factor, but the real reason is Apple won't sell you the computer you want.



    Believe it or not, there is a market for desktops- and I mean computers with desktop components, not laptop components in an iMac or Mini. Desktop components offer superior performance for much less cost. Isn't value for money one of consumers' biggest concerns?



    Really? And what does that "superior performance" get the average user? I mean the AVERAGE user, not a gamer, not someone who applies 200 photoshop filters, etc... I mean the people who would otherwise buy a desktop HP for 700 bucks at Best Buy. I have a 1.83 mini with 2 gigs RAM. All laptop parts.



    I like to think I'm an average user.



    I render quicktime movies from the family camcorder, burn CDs sometimes, surf the Internet, email, chat (not video), use a word processor, text editor, and spreadsheets, watch online videos, and do a little illustration in Painter. What is an X-mac going to get an average user?



    One less bounce in the dock from Mail? I only get one bounce on all but Rosetta-emulated programs. Exactly what superior performance is going to sway me to buy something bigger, noisier, and more expensive that contains desktop parts. Please, tell me.
  • Reply 10 of 224
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,833member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stonefree View Post


    Believe it or not, there is a market for desktops



    Indeed there is, but it's shrinking rapidly. Most consumers now buy laptops rather than desktops.



    Now, the main buyers of desktops are gamers and business. These guys are highly unlikely to switch to Mac due to, respectively: the poor availability of games for OS X, and the high cost (both direct and indirect) of replacement of Windows machines.
  • Reply 11 of 224
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,833member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BigMcLargehuge View Post


    Exactly what superior performance is going to sway me to buy something bigger, noisier, and more expensive that contains desktop parts. Please, tell me.



    The whole point of desktop components is that they're cheaper than laptop components, not more expensive. If the xMac existed, you could have got equal performance for less money, and Apple would have made the same profit.
  • Reply 12 of 224
    Quote:

    The whole point of desktop components is that they're cheaper than laptop components, not more expensive. If the xMac existed, you could have got equal performance for less money, and Apple would have made the same profit.



    Which bemuses me as to why they won't do it.



    Simple alu box. Throw in recent i7 type processor and cob in a mainstream gpu... Done.



    As opposed to screwing the pooch with the mini, iMac and Mac Pro.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 13 of 224
    Quote:

    Believe it or not, there is a market for desktops- and I mean computers with desktop components, not laptop components in an iMac or Mini. Desktop components offer superior performance for much less cost. Isn't value for money one of consumers' biggest concerns?



    It's ironic when Apple get's called in on making their computers cheaper how they always like to offer consumers 'more value' at the same price.



    Re-he-hee-eally, Apple?



    Ironic when you put lesser performing, more expensive parts in your consumer desktops and charge two to three times the price over a PC desktop... 'Value'. I like that one. How is it value to put a part in that peforms less well and costs twice as much? Or more? Disregarding the OS and a stylish 'boutique' case, how does that work, exactly?



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 14 of 224
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,754moderator
    I think Apple like to have free advertising. When someone uses an iMac, you know right away it's a Mac. With a Mac Pro or even a Mini, you can't tell because you can use whatever display you want.



    If Apple sell a Core i7 desktop machine that is affordable, people will say why should I buy a Core 2 Duo iMac that costs more when I can get a quad core and a cheap display for less? More people buying a higher value machine means more computers that aren't instantly recognizable as being Macs. This matters on TV shows and in films.



    I personally would love a mid-range machine but I'm almost past caring. Once we get mobile quad cores, it won't matter so I'm willing to wait it out. It will be 1-2 years before Intel go quad-core entirely and low-end integrated graphics will have 32-48 cores and there should be some OpenCL usage.



    Mobile Clarksfield is a good indication of where things will go and the fastest 2GHz model is only half the speed of the fastest desktop equivalent while using less than half the power. It's also about 3 times faster than the fastest Mini for multi-core tasks.
  • Reply 15 of 224
    irelandireland Posts: 17,783member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Indeed there is, but it's shrinking rapidly. Most consumers now buy laptops rather than desktops.





    Yes, that "switch" for want of a better term, has become extremely rapid. It's almost unbelievable.
  • Reply 16 of 224
    irelandireland Posts: 17,783member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    I think Apple like to have free advertising. When someone uses an iMac, you know right away it's a Mac. With a Mac Pro or even a Mini, you can't tell because you can use whatever display you want.



    Who doesn't like free publicity? That's not the reason for the iMac though. The reason is simplification. And it's a very cool machine.
  • Reply 17 of 224
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    Which bemuses me as to why they won't do it.



    Simple alu box. Throw in recent i7 type processor and cob in a mainstream gpu... Done.



    As opposed to screwing the pooch with the mini, iMac and Mac Pro.



    Lemon Bon Bon.



    You're describing the entry Mac Pro quad core with GT120. While it has the Xeon equivalent of the i7, it's the exact same cost as the non-xeon counterpart. Hence, they already make the xMac, it's just that no one is happy with the price.
  • Reply 18 of 224
    irelandireland Posts: 17,783member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by VirtualRain View Post


    You're describing the entry Mac Pro quad core with GT120. While it has the Xeon equivalent of the i7, it's the exact same cost as the non-xeon counterpart. Hence, they already make the xMac, it's just that no one is happy with the price.



    This does be true. Get a Mac Pro, get an iMac, get a mini or switch to a PC



    Or.... wait for Mac touch
  • Reply 19 of 224
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,833member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by VirtualRain View Post


    You're describing the entry Mac Pro quad core



    Not at all; there's much more to the Mac Pro than just the processor. It has two optical drive bays, four internal HDD bays, four PCI-E slots, I/O ports galore (including four Firewire 800 ports and two gigabit ethernet ports), and a mammoth power supply somewhere in the region of 1 kW). The xMac was envisioned as a much simpler machine - two HDD bays, one optical drive bay, 1 PCI-E slot (for the graphics card, no-one uses internal expansion cards any more), fewer I/O ports and a much less powerful PSU. All of that dramatically reduces the size of the case. There's a lot of savings to be made there.
  • Reply 20 of 224
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by stonefree View Post


    Believe it or not, there is a market for desktops- and I mean computers with desktop components,



    Sure... but how big is that market?
Sign In or Register to comment.