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

16781012

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 224
    Quote:

    There are many different views on what the xMac would be.



    So many? Gosh. I thought we were a shrinking market not worth selling Mac Pros into. I still can't figure out why Apple just doesn't can the Mac Pro and be done with it. After all, the new 27 inch iMac should do them, eh?



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 182 of 224
    Quote:

    reasonable



    And now Vinea, ladies and gents, is attempting to do what no sane lawyer can, and define the word 'reasonable.'



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 183 of 224
    Quote:

    Should, by some fluke, Apple market some form of xMac in the future, you'll have egg on your face. let the dreamers dream. You're pissing in the wind attacking their hopes. You're wasting your time.



    I've can get the scrambled egg ready to go. And boy, I'm a quick cook.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 184 of 224
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by fryke View Post


    80% of computer buyers do _not_ require a top-notch machine for "highend" games, highend graphics/video/sound editing. Those 80% could seriously work just fine on the earliest white MacBook with an 1.83 GHz CoreDuo or the same processor in a Mac mini (or iMac). If you look at the past few years of computers, they're basically _all_ "good enough" for the vast majority of users. THAT is why people are moving to smaller form factors. Even a MacBook Air's processor is certainly good enough for web browsing, E-Mail and office work. For smaller stuff, it even works great with Adobe CS 3 and 4.



    160gb is not good for any people who do video work / alot of CS3/CS4 work.



    also the small laptop hd at 5400 is also a letdown and the imac screen is not good for that work as well.
  • Reply 185 of 224
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joe The Dragon View Post


    160gb is not good for any people who do video work / alot of CS3/CS4 work.



    also the small laptop hd at 5400 is also a letdown and the imac screen is not good for that work as well.



    Anyone doing real video "work" or "CS3/CS4 work" is going to be using a SAN or other network storage for file storage. Most likely connected to a DAM system.
  • Reply 186 of 224
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Outsider View Post


    Anyone doing real video "work" or "CS3/CS4 work" is going to be using a SAN or other network storage for file storage. Most likely connected to a DAM system.



    how about the screen in the imacs now that is not that good for that kind of work.
  • Reply 187 of 224
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    So many? Gosh. I thought we were a shrinking market not worth selling Mac Pros into. I still can't figure out why Apple just doesn't can the Mac Pro and be done with it. After all, the new 27 inch iMac should do them, eh?



    Lemon Bon Bon.



    I would want to see the Mac Pro dropped as it should continue to be the highest performance Mac one can buy. It should get that performance by implementing multiple chips and other workstation like facilities such as ECC RAM, slots and other hardware features. It should be easy to bring the Mac Pro to 24 maybe more logical cores next year.



    To me XMac is a small desktop Mac with a single high performance desktop processor. It might have one slot, more importantly are bays for multiple storage modules. The GPU should be more powerful that the usually Apple fare. It doesn't have to be top of the line as far as GPUs go ( I don't like the heat ) but it doesn't need to be pokey.



    I just don't see the need to trash the Mac PRo it is a good machine for those that need it. What Apple doesn't have is a mid range desktop machine for use with external displays. This is something I'm convinced can be marketed right along side the Mac Pro.



    In any event Apple going all out with the new iMacs make such a machine less likely. Which of course leaves one with conflicted feelings. It is nice that the iMacs got an update they deserve but it is still frustrating that there isn't a reasonable desktop alternative.





    Dave
  • Reply 188 of 224
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joe The Dragon View Post


    how about the screen in the imacs now that is not that good for that kind of work.



    If not you need to LOOK. If you are trying to reference the glossy screen I'd have to suggest you don't know what you are talking about. Glossy gives far better color reproduction and sharpness. This from somebody with a matte screen MBP. A matte screen may have advantages but it is far from the last word in computer displays.



    Dave
  • Reply 189 of 224
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joe The Dragon View Post


    how about the screen in the imacs now that is not that good for that kind of work.



    Many people would argue it is perfect for that sort of work, especially work that will be presented digitally. I'm not saying the imac is a perfect replacement for a MP and a high quality LCD display but for those on a budget, the iMac is a fantastic value now with a great screen to boot.
  • Reply 190 of 224
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Outsider View Post


    Many people would argue it is perfect for that sort of work, especially work that will be presented digitally. I'm not saying the imac is a perfect replacement for a MP and a high quality LCD display but for those on a budget, the iMac is a fantastic value now with a great screen to boot.



    A better "value" is a PC
  • Reply 191 of 224
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aflaaak View Post


    A better "value" is a PC



    I guess... value PC with a value OS.
  • Reply 192 of 224
    piotpiot Posts: 1,346member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aflaaak View Post


    When I first posted the question, I was just hoping for a little insight on whether Apple was on the verge of coming out with something in the next few months .....



    .... But, I am pleasantly surprised to see that, at least on AI, I'm not alone. Which makes me very frustrated with Apple, and think SJ is more of a bigger, arrogant dork for not making a product that would have a market, .......



    And you got a little "insight". It seems that the insight you got wasn't what you wanted.



    I suspect that Steve Jobs and the team at Apple have much more bloody insight than you or anyone else on these boards. Calling people who don't agree with you "arrogant dorks" sheds a lot of light on your own thought processes.
  • Reply 193 of 224
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,753moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    Except that desktops are down across the board.



    "In the same period, laptop shipments?already higher than desktop shipments on the whole?grew 10% over last year. Desktops were entirely to blame, dropping by an astounding 23%. That's not decline?it's free fall.



    But hey, don't let reality bother you. It's just Apple with declining desktop sales all due to the "poor" value of the iMac.



    You must be forgetting that the iMac is included here. Apple's lineup sales are 76% laptops according to Apple. The Mini sells quite well but assume that the iMac even makes up 70% of all the desktop line, you are talking about 16% of overall sales are iMacs. This means even in Apple camp, laptops outsell the iMac by nearly 5:1.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    Which to be honest was poor waiting for the mobile i5/i7 releases and the mini an exceptional buy within the lineup until yesterday.



    Which is why a lot of folks held off buying new iMacs the last couple months waiting for this refresh. 2010 Q1 should see a nice uptick in iMac sales.



    I would agree with the fact that they are now much better value machines but even short of the update people would defend them as being good value vs other AIOs. At this present time, they compare very favorably with the competition. It's true that you can get quad cores cheaper but the 3GHz dual cores will rival a 2.66GHz Core 2 Quad and the lowest end displays are IPS. The Core i5 Vostro mini-tower from Dell with just a 24" CCFL display specced up to match the 27" iMac comes in at $1945 vs $1999 and it obviously has the smaller non-IPS screen and is much uglier.



    As to whether or not this will significantly change the sales vs laptops, I doubt it. All desktops including the iMac are down and they'll keep going down with minor spikes in uptake.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    I don't mind being honest either. Dream on.



    Whether or not they use Clarksfield is irrelevant. The laptops will eventually reach a point where there's no point in buying a static machine when you can get a computer that does all you need with portability as a bonus. What happens when Apple's cheapest Macbook has a 6-core chip and a GPU that rivals today's high end workstation GPU? They'll be selling a 60" iMac? Nope. They will fade to insignificance and Apple will drop them.



    The Apple TV will move to the cloud and will simply be a service, not a box. The Mini will live on now that it has secured its server status. The Mac Pro will remain as the ultimate personal supercomputer and will also be needed server-side. The laptops will make up the majority of sales but the iphone/ipod will become powerful enough to take over desktop functions for some people.



    In all this, the large mid-range desktop still doesn't make sense I agree. I don't think it will come back and I don't really care to see it come back. But a Core i5 Cube would make an awesome server box and would be preferable to a Mini server because it will handle virtualization tasks much better and be far more compact and affordable than the Mac Pro.
  • Reply 194 of 224
    Quote:

    I would want to see the Mac Pro dropped as it should continue to be the highest performance Mac one can buy. It should get that performance by implementing multiple chips and other workstation like facilities such as ECC RAM, slots and other hardware features. It should be easy to bring the Mac Pro to 24 maybe more logical cores next year.



    To me XMac is a small desktop Mac with a single high performance desktop processor. It might have one slot, more importantly are bays for multiple storage modules. The GPU should be more powerful that the usually Apple fare. It doesn't have to be top of the line as far as GPUs go ( I don't like the heat ) but it doesn't need to be pokey.



    I just don't see the need to trash the Mac PRo it is a good machine for those that need it. What Apple doesn't have is a mid range desktop machine for use with external displays. This is something I'm convinced can be marketed right along side the Mac Pro.



    In any event Apple going all out with the new iMacs make such a machine less likely. Which of course leaves one with conflicted feelings. It is nice that the iMacs got an update they deserve but it is still frustrating that there isn't a reasonable desktop alternative.



    Nicely summed up, Dave. I agree completely...(again.)



    The markets you've outlined are obvious to anyone who doesn't accept Steve's RDF since his rebuilding of Apple in the last 12 years. (And by the way, he's done a good job on it. Excellent in fact. But his uptopia isn't quite perfect... And sticking our fingers in our ears and going 'La, la, la...' isn't the answer. Apple will address the 'hole' in their line up re: netbook. It just won't be what we expect...) Similarly, there is a substantial 'hole' in their desktop line up. It's obvious. There must be people at Apple who think it's viable. The tower they do offer is wayyyyyy out of whack with the industry. Really. A quad core tower starting at £1900? Long stare. And similarly, the iMac...£1400 circa? For quad core? Which can be had for a grand less in PC land? *Shrugs. These are area Apple must improve in. Because, folks, it aint perfect. It's noteworthy that of the 3.o5 million Macs sold most were laptops. And that aint entirely down to an industry trend. Anyone looking from outside Apple land and Apple's PR sheet can/could see that.



    Erm. Yeah. They could drop the monitor on the 27 inch iMac. Make the i7 standard and offer better gpus. BOOM! We get a machine and a market the iMac simply doesn't address. If the iMac doesn't compete in the tower market logic dictates Apple doesn't have a solution for Tower buyers they're aiming at from the Switcher club. Not all switchers are going to want an iMac...no matter how attractive it is. They may want their OWN monitor and a CHOICE of components not the ones Apple 'funnels' them into. It's called 'choice' and it's something they're used to. I think that if the Mac Pro is on life support sales of 100K, a tower from £790-£1500 could easily triple 100K in sales to about 300K plus...to appeal to entrenched PC tower buyers who want that solution and aint going to shift until Apple offers it. They look at a quad tower starting at £1900 and doubt the sanity of it. That's £1400 more than they can build a quad core of similar performance for. The DIY PC tower market is huge. The tower market is huge. Look at the sheer volume of vendors offering that solution and look at their value prices. Apple doesn't have to go to single digit margins. But they could offer a premium alt' at each price bracket. We're not talking £395 Dell territory. I'm thinking £795 i5, with Ati 4850 to get started. Working upto a nice £1495 i7 tower with a heavy weight Ati/Nv card.



    You can't give people freedom, choice and then take it away. That's why Apple's desktop line doesn't do as well as it could. It's not just down to offering out of step components and excessive prices for those said out of date components. If Apple wants to drag even more switchers across and make the conversion line go near vertical...they need to offer a few things, a netbook alternative and a tower alternative and the iMac just isn't it.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 195 of 224
    Quote:

    Whether or not they use Clarksfield is irrelevant. The laptops will eventually reach a point where there's no point in buying a static machine when you can get a computer that does all you need with portability as a bonus. What happens when Apple's cheapest Macbook has a 6-core chip and a GPU that rivals today's high end workstation GPU? They'll be selling a 60" iMac? Nope. They will fade to insignificance and Apple will drop them.



    The Apple TV will move to the cloud and will simply be a service, not a box. The Mini will live on now that it has secured its server status. The Mac Pro will remain as the ultimate personal supercomputer and will also be needed server-side. The laptops will make up the majority of sales but the iphone/ipod will become powerful enough to take over desktop functions for some people.



    In all this, the large mid-range desktop still doesn't make sense I agree. I don't think it will come back and I don't really care to see it come back. But a Core i5 Cube would make an awesome server box and would be preferable to a Mini server because it will handle virtualization tasks much better and be far more compact and affordable than the Mac Pro.



    For many dinosaur tower fans like myself, this post is hard to take. But Marvin is quite correct. It's an inevitable future. A future that may even seal the iMac's fate as the tower has its head on the sacrificial stone.



    Still, in the meantime. Apple could switch and bait those stubborn switchers who want a tower/box/mid/cube/server/mini-server. Two models. i5/i7. Gpu? 4850/4870. I'm sure alot of tower huggers from PC land would be less stubborn with something like that. Apple have proven the iMac can use desktop components. This 'box' could. An Apple tv/server/mid-tower/gaming Apple 'pc'. They could stick their usual 30% mark-up on it...and rake in copious profit from their single LED line of monitor(!) and bob is yer binkle.



    Boom. I'd have a major league boner with that. And Marv' gets his 'box.'



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 196 of 224
    ie the tower isn't going to be dead tomorrow or in the new few years. And a powerful tower is always going to have its place.



    Apple could really grease the speed of bait and switch to those stubborn switchers.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 197 of 224
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    You must be forgetting that the iMac is included here. Apple's lineup sales are 76% laptops according to Apple. The Mini sells quite well but assume that the iMac even makes up 70% of all the desktop line, you are talking about 16% of overall sales are iMacs. This means even in Apple camp, laptops outsell the iMac by nearly 5:1.



    What you are missing is the mis balance between what the iMac was last year and what the laptops where. For the entire fisical year the iMac was totally outdated and basically an extremely bad value. At the same time the laptops went through an incredible update turning them into a fantastic value.

    Quote:

    I would agree with the fact that they are now much better value machines but even short of the update people would defend them as being good value vs other AIOs.



    I certainly wasn't one of those people defending the iMac. In fact for most of the year I advised people to hold off.

    Quote:

    At this present time, they compare very favorably with the competition. It's true that you can get quad cores cheaper but the 3GHz dual cores will rival a 2.66GHz Core 2 Quad



    You can't compare one generation of processor with another based on clock rate. I'm not sure why this hasn't sunk in yet. Even without Turbo Boost, the i7 at 2.66 GHz is a good match for the dual core machine. Look up some bench marks.

    Quote:

    and the lowest end displays are IPS. The Core i5 Vostro mini-tower from Dell with just a 24" CCFL display specced up to match the 27" iMac comes in at $1945 vs $1999 and it obviously has the smaller non-IPS screen and is much uglier.



    The new iMacs are a very good value and very reccomendable.

    Quote:

    As to whether or not this will significantly change the sales vs laptops, I doubt it.



    Actually I think Apple will have a hard time keeping the new iMacs instock. Many people have been holding off with purchases for such an update.

    Quote:

    All desktops including the iMac are down and they'll keep going down with minor spikes in uptake.



    I truly doubt that will be the case. What I see emerging is a different user model where life centers around a desktop with a tablet or iPhone for the portable needs. I know that my iPhone has replaced many of my portable needs. I'm actually expecting a downturn in laptop sales if a decent Tablet emerges.

    Quote:





    Whether or not they use Clarksfield is irrelevant. The laptops will eventually reach a point where there's no point in buying a static machine when you can get a computer that does all you need with portability as a bonus.



    I don't see that as a future reality. First I can see the need for laptops declining as people minimize the stuff they carry around.



    Plus you will never have to much powering a desktop. Software may have to catch up in spurts, but the end goal would be a desktop computer supporting real artificial intelligence (AI). We are a long way from having a two way conversation with our computers. Nor can todays computers support user agents to help you with whatever problems you are dealling with. Todays Operating Systems are very primitive with respect to user interaction.

    Quote:

    What happens when Apple's cheapest Macbook has a 6-core chip and a GPU that rivals today's high end workstation GPU?



    it is still a lowend computer!!!! So nothing really changes.

    Quote:

    They'll be selling a 60" iMac? Nope. They will fade to insignificance and Apple will drop them.



    Actually there might be a 60" iMac in the future as computers become more integrated with communications. With a decent voice recognition you could have a voice driven interface.

    Quote:



    The Apple TV will move to the cloud and will simply be a service, not a box.



    Even if your data is in a cloud you will need a box. Besides we are a very long way from having enough bandwidth to replace cable with streaming media.

    Quote:

    The Mini will live on now that it has secured its server status. The Mac Pro will remain as the ultimate personal supercomputer and will also be needed server-side.



    Didn't you earlier say desktops would be replaced with portables?

    Quote:

    The laptops will make up the majority of sales but the iphone/ipod will become powerful enough to take over desktop functions for some people.



    The iPhone won't replace desktops, in many cases it will replace laptops.

    Quote:

    In all this, the large mid-range desktop still doesn't make sense I agree. I don't think it will come back and I don't really care to see it come back. But a Core i5 Cube would make an awesome server box and would be preferable to a Mini server because it will handle virtualization tasks



    You just described a midrange Mac. You are extremely conflicted here.

    Quote:

    much better and be far more compact and affordable than the Mac Pro.



    I'm not sure you know what you are talking about. You start out saying there is no market for a midrange Mac and then finish up by describing an XMac. Can't have it both ways.





    Dave
  • Reply 198 of 224
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,753moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    You can't compare one generation of processor with another based on clock rate.



    I didn't, I said the 3GHz dual rivals a 2.66GHz Core 2 Quad, which is according to benchmarks.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    What I see emerging is a different user model where life centers around a desktop with a tablet or iPhone for the portable needs. I know that my iPhone has replaced many of my portable needs. I'm actually expecting a downturn in laptop sales if a decent Tablet emerges.



    The sales have a long way to shift back to desktops.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    the end goal would be a desktop computer supporting real artificial intelligence (AI).



    I think people get freaked out enough by technology, I just don't see that sort of thing gaining traction.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    it is still a lowend computer!!!! So nothing really changes.



    It depends on your comparison. It is low-end relative to the high-end but relative to what most people will need it to do, it is more than enough. Netbooks aren't quite there but they highlight the important point that once people's needs are met, it's just price that's left to compete on.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Didn't you earlier say desktops would be replaced with portables?



    Not server-side.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    The iPhone won't replace desktops, in many cases it will replace laptops.



    Laptops replace desktops. iPhone replaces laptops. Therefore iPhone replaces desktops eventually. As I say, it's about needs. One day you will simply sit your phone down and be able to interact with it on your 60" TV wirelessly.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    You just described a midrange Mac. You are extremely conflicted here.



    I'm not sure you know what you are talking about. You start out saying there is no market for a midrange Mac and then finish up by describing an XMac. Can't have it both ways.



    The Cloud will need server boxes. Apple has recognized this and modified the Mini. The iMac will never fit this role. For end users, laptops will erode desktop sales to the point where they are no longer profitable for a company to make and this includes the iMac. This means that all we get are laptops, phones and server boxes. Those server boxes can of course be used as desktops if desired.
  • Reply 199 of 224
    aflaaakaflaaak Posts: 208member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Outsider View Post


    I guess... value PC with a value OS.



    I can buy Windows and install it on any computer I want, including one I build, or even a Mac With OSX, the only option is to buy and over-priced computer with it, which it's married to forever.
  • Reply 200 of 224
    aflaaakaflaaak Posts: 208member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post


    If the iMac doesn't compete in the tower market logic dictates Apple doesn't have a solution for Tower buyers they're aiming at from the Switcher club. Not all switchers are going to want an iMac...no matter how attractive it is. They may want their OWN monitor and a CHOICE of components not the ones Apple 'funnels' them into. It's called 'choice' and it's something they're used to.

    You can't give people freedom, choice and then take it away. That's why Apple's desktop line doesn't do as well as it could. It's not just down to offering out of step components and excessive prices for those said out of date components. If Apple wants to drag even more switchers across and make the conversion line go near vertical...they need to offer a few things, a netbook alternative and a tower alternative and the iMac just isn't it.



    Lemon Bon Bon.



    Sadly, you hit the nail on the head for me.



    Yes, I like the fact that Macs aren't as susceptible to viruses as PCs, thought I wonder if their market share gets big enough as Stevie would want, more virus writers will take a hard look at OSX.



    Yes, I like the fact that Macs do things a little more intuitively. But for what I plan on doing with my computer, good third party software will do all that, and I don't know of much software that I can't get for a PC.



    But the whole idea of choice is the sticking point. With Apple, there are only three. A Mac Pro really isn't a choice (for may people) given it's price, and I don't need the portability of a Macbook Pro.



    That leaves the iMac, a seal-a-meal, all-in-one, dead end. I can't add anything without a UBS leash, I can't get a better or cheaper screen If I choose. I can't upgrade the GPU in a couple years, if I choose. If the screen developers a problem, I have to bring the whole thing into Apple. I can't hook up the computer part to another monitor if I choose without having TWO monitors taking up space on my desk.



    The more I think about this whole thing and read some of the comments from Apple diehards about how the desktop is dead and implying I an outdated moron for wanting one, the more of a turn-off the whole lack of choice is and turns me away form considering Apple. Just in time for Windows 7
Sign In or Register to comment.