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?
I want to have a seperate, easy, fast backup (maybe RAID) without an external box sitting on my desk
Quote:
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.
Exactly. I can put an internal TV tuner card in a tower
Quote:
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
Again, with the USB. I already have all the USB ports on my computer full and have to swap out a couple constanly since those devices don't like USB hubs.
Quote:
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).
Then I'm relegated to the lowest end computer Apple makes (or the "Steve needs another jet") Pro
Quote:
Short of the screen, and non-availability, you can do everything you want with external solutions.
and a whole nest of wires! Wasn't the point of the iMac to be clean and elegant in design? What's it look like with all those external devices and wires all over my desktop? My tower sits on the floor and all I really see is the front and part of the top. I sneed my desk top for other things.
Quote:
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.
A lot, I'm sure. But the last time I checked, Dell, Sony, HP, and everyone else that now makes an AIO hasn't abandoned the mid-tower market. There are still a lot of us who don't mind, and find it fun, to tinker a bit. If I had the time, I would build my own. But then there would be the little part of no way to install OS X.
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.
What makes you say that? Yes, a lot more people are buying laptops nowadays, but I bet it's because the price has come down for pretty fast machines, and the people who didn't have one decided to get one. I know I did, but still prefer the larger screen and "real" keyboard of my desktop. But I think once most of the people who wanted a laptop (or netbook) have one, sales will moderate. I still think that as Windows 7 gets released, you'll see desktop sales pick up again.
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?
Thank you, Stonefree. Nice to see some reasonable people here, along with Lemon Bon Bon. I don't mind paying more for OS X, but not the kind of money they're asking to put it in a Pro.
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 performs 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.
It's the old "Premium Product" marketing scheme. You charge above and beyond the actual extra cost to make the product "Premium" and create the alluring image of specialness, stick the price up there because everyone knows if it costs more, it must be better. Then, never, ever discount. That diminishes the whole image since Premium Products like Ferrari's are never discounted.
Despite the condescending tone of your post, I'll answer you.
The Mini is $600 for a puny 1 gig of RAM and a minuscule 120 GB hard drive. If it used desktop components, it could easily match the $800 model (2gig and 320 GB hard drive) and then some. Leopard runs poorly on only 1 gig of RAM so the average user would certainly see a benefit there. Plus, plenty of "average users" like lots of hard drive space, especially for video. Laptop hard drives are typically about 50% more expensive than a desktop drive with twice the storage. Sure, you can get an external hard drive, but USB drives are very slow (the average user would notice) and having a FW controller on a drive adds $50 to the cost and is still slower than eSATA. And since you'll probably want a backup, that's a second drive (taking up extra space, with extra cables and using an extra outlet) to add to the mix.
Plus there's nothing wrong with a bigger computer for desktops. My desktop sits on the floor out of the way of everything. I personally wouldn't want my computer on my desk, it would take up space. Plus small computers make easy theft targets, especially Macs, so security is a bonus too.
Who says the desktop has to be more expensive? Why not a $750-900 tower that exceeds the higher Mini's specs and includes a keyboard and multi-touch mouse?
Apple's "desktops are dead" mantra is a self-fulfilling prophecy. They have a poor offering of desktops (a nice AIO, a neglected starter model, and an incredibly expensive workstation) and trumpet the relative lack of sales as proof that nobody wants desktops.
I don't get the dismissive attitude to wards gamers either. Gamers are a big market and I'm sure a lot of them would love to own a Mac and set up a dual boot system just for their games.
For me personally, I use my PC (I have a Macbook as well) for music production (not an insignificant niche). A desktop is far better suited for this purpose and the Mac Pro is way overkill. I really wanted to buy a desktop Mac after the Intel switch but since no suitable model was offered I had to buy a PC. I'm sure plenty of others have their own unique reasons for why they want an xMac.
Thank you for a reasonable, well thought out reply and summing up my gripe. If Apple doesn't want my business because they just don't think what I want fits into their business model, let it be so. This and other forums are a place for frustrated consumers to whine a little, and I guess that's what I'm doing. The fact that people are responding (when this has been discussed so many times at length) proves that there is interest in a mid-tower. Apple could have much more of the Personal Computer market than they do if they would listen to customers. I did notice the new Nano sports an FM tuner, a thing many Apple zealots said would never, never happen. Guess I thought that meant they were listening.
Frankly I was a little surprised to see so many models of AIOs available from manufacturers other than Apple.
Why are they building them... and why are retailers offering them for sale?
You say that they just "don't sell" but you have nothing to back it up.
I just went to Fry's website. They list 7. And I have no clue why they are building them and suspect most will disappear from the market, except maybe Sony who seems to be moving toward integrating the computing experience with the television.
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot
I am not trying to prove that AIO's are more popular than towers... just that any PC user who owns one is more likely to be a potential iMac switcher... than an xMac switcher.
Does the fact that Frys also carries such a large amount of cheap (sub $600) PC towers mean nothing? Do you think that PC users who buy those machines are going to rush over to Apple if they release a $1000 or $1500 xMac?
Why would Apple offer only a $1000 - $1500 xMac? For consumer desktops they own the >$1000 market. I've read where Apple has ~ 91% of the >$1000 consumer market. This does not impress me as the high end consumer market is below $1000. To satisfy many in the professional market an xMac >$1000 makes sense, however, for the consumer market <$1000 would be the target, say between $600 - $800.
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot
They could if the potential market was large enough but you have shown little evidence that it is....
Only that Apple's market share for desktops is what ~ 10%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot
Brilliant!. So the market for the xMac consists largely of people who can either build their own xMac or who can convert any PC to an xMac.
No, you incorrectly extrapolated to a much larger market. The existence of a market for hackintosh shows that many people are willing to put up with the headaches and extra work to get one running and continually seek out online help to obtain drivers, software whatever to maintain their hackintosh. Most consumers are not willing to sustain such an effort, but the mere existence of this market (both the hackintosh and clone companies) shows interest in OS X but not Apple consumer desktops.
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot
So much so that they are buying notebooks, and now netbooks in droves.
Why bring up notebooks in a discussion of consumer desktops. Yes, notebooks are capturing market share, but desktops are not dead. Didn't I read somewhere that a very high % of consumers that own Apple computers own multiple computers, I'm guessing a high % of those are desktops. The desktop market is not dead and is still a multi-billion $ market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot
Much of the buying public, indeed most of them don't even know what slots are.
So what? I've never heard anyone, except Mac users in these discussions, complain that their computer had slots, ever. The controller chips can handle slots, the only expense is a few traces on the motherboard and a clip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot
In all these threads I have been waiting for someone to tell me how large this potential xMac market is. What's the number of consumer PC tower buyers? How many would likely switch? But it's always the same answer. Geeks, tinkerers, DIY hobbyists, upgraders... now you have added few hundred Psystar customers!
And hackintosh builders, and EFI purchasers and Open computer purchasers and all those consumers that forego buying Apple because their entry level consumer computer comes with out of date expensive laptop cpus, expensive laptop harddrives, no monitor, no keyboard and no mouse and costs $599.
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot
Not only do these people constitute a tiny part of the computer market but, on the PC side of things, their numbers also include a high percentage of people who would never buy a Mac.. of any flavour.
Apple will never know, because it would cost them virtually no R&D to offer a consumer tower in the $600 to $800 price range, but they refuse to even try, much to the dismay of consumers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by piot
A can never quite understand why Apple is so busy fleecing it's customers by selling over-priced Mac Pro's and under-specced iMacs that they are stupidly ignoring all the money that's alegedly sitting on the xMac table.
You confuse the argument. Apple is not fleecing the consumer (re: except maybe with the current Mac mini or @ least until it is updated). What Apple is doing is completely ignoring the largest segment of the buying public.
I don't know any numbers, but I'll bet Dell, Sony, HP, etc. still sell a lot more of their desktops than their AIOs.
Well I don't think Sony do. Not sure if they even make a tower anymore. (?)
As for Dell and HP... they are selling more notebooks than desktops. These companies also sell millions of desktop towers to the corporate IT 'tied into Windows' market. Apple doesn't have that luxury.
Even if Dell and HP's AIOs are not mega sellers.... each single one sold means one less potential xMac customer.
Aflaaak, I am not doubting your real need and desire for a mid range Mac tower. And I agree that there are a lots of people that would potentially buy one. Where I disagree is when xMaccers try and justify that need by claiming that Apple is missing out on a huge market.
As Mr H has already noted. Five years ago things were different. Now the average consumer/home/family are buying 5 or 6 hundred dollar laptops.... and even cheaper desktops. These things are so cheap that they simply get replaced and passed down the line.
I am not being a fanboi. I just think with the growth of the Mac and Apple's tight control of their margins and inventory they might just know a bit more about the computer business than everyone on this forum.
.... I just think with the growth of the Mac and Apple's tight control of their margins and inventory they might just know a bit more about the computer business than everyone on this forum.
No doubt they know more about it, as I'm sure they analyze it and buy reports on sales numbers.
However, it is well documented the internal arguments over consumer desktop design in which Steve Jobs prefers the AIO design and believes no consumer desktop should have slots, etc.
This may in fact be a philosophical decision on what Apple believes the consumer needs and not what many consumers desire.
Where I disagree is when xMaccers try and justify that need by claiming that Apple is missing out on a huge market.
It may not be a huge market either, just legitimate part of it
Quote:
As Mr H has already noted. Five years ago things were different. Now the average consumer/home/family are buying 5 or 6 hundred dollar laptops.... and even cheaper desktops. These things are so cheap that they simply get replaced and passed down the line.
I'm speculating that everyone's not going to have a cheap laptop as their only computer, more of an addition to.
Quote:
I am not being a fanboi. I just think with the growth of the Mac and Apple's tight control of their margins and inventory they might just know a bit more about the computer business than everyone on this forum.
I'm sure they do, but that doesn't mean there is room for new products. Look at them adding an FM tuner to the new Nano (just after I bought one for my wife!), after everyone said they wouldn't. I have read here on these forums many complaints of Apple's arrogant way of giving people what they think is best for them, not necessarily what people over and over are asking for. I know it's a business, and making money is numero uno, but the way they do it sometimes turns me off. Imagine their market share if they had licensed the Mac operating system years ago.
I get the impression that SJ and company read these threads, find out what the faithful want, and then decide NOT to make that particular item because, "The Mac Masses CAN'T tell US what to do."
I get the impression that SJ and company read these threads, find out what the faithful want, and then decide NOT to make that particular item because, "The Mac Masses CAN'T tell US what to do."
It may not be a huge market either, just legitimate part of it
No doubt it's a legitimate part of the market. Apple, however, obviously think it's not a very profitable part.
Quote:
I'm sure they do, but that doesn't mean there is room for new products. Look at them adding an FM tuner to the new Nano (just after I bought one for my wife!), after everyone said they wouldn't.
Adding a feature to an existing product is not the same as creating a new product. Perhaps Apple will add an FM tuner to the iMac. \
Quote:
I have read here on these forums many complaints of Apple's arrogant way of giving people what they think is best for them, not necessarily what people over and over are asking for.
Yes I have read all those complaints too. However months and years later.... Apple seems to just sell more and more of all the products that people were complaining about. " The iPod is going to be the next Cube".
I think that Apple (like most corporations) 'give people' what is best for Apple.
Quote:
Imagine their market share if they had licensed the Mac operating system years ago.
No doubt it's a legitimate part of the market. Apple, however, obviously think it's not a very profitable part.
Adding a feature to an existing product is not the same as creating a new product. Perhaps Apple will add an FM tuner to the iMac. \
Yes I have read all those complaints too. However months and years later.... Apple seems to just sell more and more of all the products that people were complaining about. " The iPod is going to be the next Cube".
I think that Apple (like most corporations) 'give people' what is best for Apple.
Whole different argument.
The comment about adding an FM tuner to the Nano was to point out that after a lot of customers asked for something, and after years of stonewalling, Apple finally gave customers what they asked for (and something most other mp3 players had). I was trying to draw a paralell to the idea that people are wishing for a Mid-Tower and Apple has surprised people and "given in" before and maybe, just maybe there was hope. I know it's a big jump from adding a cheap radio to a mp3 player to upsetting Apple's whole product lineup.
The fact that Apple just keeps selling more and more iMacs (albeit without an FM tuner ) doesn't mean they wouldn't be successful at selling mid-towers. You won't sell it if you don't make it!
Guess I have my answer. I knew it was wishful thinking, but it's been a while since I read anything on the subject and thought maybe things had changed since the global economic mess has changed the way some companies are doing business. Thanks for (most) of the replies.
A souped up mac mini will be nice. That is the closest you are going to get to a x-mac though. The idea of a tower computer people can mess around with is painful for support and drivers.
A souped up mac mini will be nice. That is the closest you are going to get to a x-mac though. The idea of a tower computer people can mess around with is painful for support and drivers.
Yeah, I don't think it has to be a customizable tower and here's why. Here is what the Shuttle Core i7 'cube' looks like:
It's almost the same width as a Mini and 3 times the height. It's not cube-shaped but you can see from the insides why that is - they have 2 PCI expansion slots. They also use 3.5" drives for hard drives and optical, which is why it's so tall.
Apple could make a Core i7 Cube with the same expansion as the Mini. The problem might come down to the graphics card but I'd be quite happy with a 1.6GHz quad Clarksfield up to 8GB Ram (4 slots) with a 9600M GT and a 9400M (64 graphics cores if Apple can use them together), priced at $999. Easy to open too so extra Ram can be installed.
Yeah, I don't think it has to be a customizable tower and here's why. Here is what the Shuttle Core i7 'cube' looks like:
Yep. And I bet it doesn't cost the 'bomb' that Apple's consumer desktops cost.
A PC quad is put together for just a few hundred quid these days.
I'd love to see the proper return of the Cube. The mini looks ok. But it should be a £195 'bite sized Mac.' No more. It's outrageously priced at £495. It's £300 overpriced and underspecced.
It really is very easy, Apple. Make the same width as Mini, stack it 3 times higher, put a decent low end Radeon 4850 in it. Put an i7 in it. Price at at £495 for the entry level...and ride those specs upto £995. And with the 'Light' port thing coming around the mountain...you'd have a single cable going into an Apple 24 inch LED display and not the morass of cables like you had with the Cube back in the day.
You'd have switchers swarming over Mac OS X like flies around...
It's not as if these desktop components cost alot. And if PC guys can sort the cooling out on these shuttles, it's a non-issue. Put a bit of Johnny Ive style on the same shuttle ala Mac Cube...and i'd be wak-ta-bating over it until I was blind. Plus. I'd actually buy one.
The whole tower, expandable debate is a little mute for me. I can't see Apple going for it. Despite their environment claims...they clearly want consumers to have a Mac for a few years and throw it away and get another.
Mind you. The only thing I want to upgrade on the tower is the gpu. But even that would be rendered mute if Apple put out an updated and decent spec as they became available.
It maybe a dead horse to Apple. But even at 40% of the worlds PC shipments, that's an awful lot of Cube/Tower sales Apple is missing out on.
Apple's current consumer desktop strategy is baffling to me.
Sure, I like the iMac's simplicity. I have one. I appreciate it's elegance and style. And in PC bootcamp mode, it has as good a framerate on Champions as a PC tower that cost twice as much.
However, that isn't the point.
Apple are using premium components and premium pricing on desktops. They could use faster, cheaper parts and still put them in a stylish Apple container AND pass those savings onto the consumer.
Sure, Apple are selling more computers than ever. But I'd guess/wager they'd sell way more if they wised up and stopped being laggardly on the upgrade cycle.
Apple has a £1400 premium over the 'entry' to quad core capability. That is shocking. (Whether that power if fully harnessed by the consumer/software is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Apple's consumer desktop specs are not competitive. And saying that an AIO or the Mac Pro can't be compared is also mute. That is what Apple puts out...that is where they've chosen, obtusely, to compete. And you go to their closest competitor and they're behind on gpu, cpu, ram usually and bundling the monitor.)
Comments
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?
I want to have a seperate, easy, fast backup (maybe RAID) without an external box sitting on my desk
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.
Exactly. I can put an internal TV tuner card in a tower
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
Again, with the USB.
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).
Then I'm relegated to the lowest end computer Apple makes (or the "Steve needs another jet") Pro
Short of the screen, and non-availability, you can do everything you want with external solutions.
and a whole nest of wires! Wasn't the point of the iMac to be clean and elegant in design? What's it look like with all those external devices and wires all over my desktop? My tower sits on the floor and all I really see is the front and part of the top. I sneed my desk top for other things.
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.
A lot, I'm sure. But the last time I checked, Dell, Sony, HP, and everyone else that now makes an AIO hasn't abandoned the mid-tower market. There are still a lot of us who don't mind, and find it fun, to tinker a bit. If I had the time, I would build my own. But then there would be the little part of no way to install OS X.
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.
When you assume, you make an Ass of you. Guess I should have figured this post bring out the "best" Apple Fanbois.
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.
What makes you say that? Yes, a lot more people are buying laptops nowadays, but I bet it's because the price has come down for pretty fast machines, and the people who didn't have one decided to get one. I know I did, but still prefer the larger screen and "real" keyboard of my desktop. But I think once most of the people who wanted a laptop (or netbook) have one, sales will moderate. I still think that as Windows 7 gets released, you'll see desktop sales pick up again.
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?
Thank you, Stonefree. Nice to see some reasonable people here, along with Lemon Bon Bon.
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 performs 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.
It's the old "Premium Product" marketing scheme. You charge above and beyond the actual extra cost to make the product "Premium" and create the alluring image of specialness, stick the price up there because everyone knows if it costs more, it must be better. Then, never, ever discount. That diminishes the whole image since Premium Products like Ferrari's are never discounted.
Sure... but how big is that market?
I don't know any numbers, but I'll bet Dell, Sony, HP, etc. still sell a lot more of their desktops than their AIOs.
Despite the condescending tone of your post, I'll answer you.
The Mini is $600 for a puny 1 gig of RAM and a minuscule 120 GB hard drive. If it used desktop components, it could easily match the $800 model (2gig and 320 GB hard drive) and then some. Leopard runs poorly on only 1 gig of RAM so the average user would certainly see a benefit there. Plus, plenty of "average users" like lots of hard drive space, especially for video. Laptop hard drives are typically about 50% more expensive than a desktop drive with twice the storage. Sure, you can get an external hard drive, but USB drives are very slow (the average user would notice) and having a FW controller on a drive adds $50 to the cost and is still slower than eSATA. And since you'll probably want a backup, that's a second drive (taking up extra space, with extra cables and using an extra outlet) to add to the mix.
Plus there's nothing wrong with a bigger computer for desktops. My desktop sits on the floor out of the way of everything. I personally wouldn't want my computer on my desk, it would take up space. Plus small computers make easy theft targets, especially Macs, so security is a bonus too.
Who says the desktop has to be more expensive? Why not a $750-900 tower that exceeds the higher Mini's specs and includes a keyboard and multi-touch mouse?
Apple's "desktops are dead" mantra is a self-fulfilling prophecy. They have a poor offering of desktops (a nice AIO, a neglected starter model, and an incredibly expensive workstation) and trumpet the relative lack of sales as proof that nobody wants desktops.
I don't get the dismissive attitude to wards gamers either. Gamers are a big market and I'm sure a lot of them would love to own a Mac and set up a dual boot system just for their games.
For me personally, I use my PC (I have a Macbook as well) for music production (not an insignificant niche). A desktop is far better suited for this purpose and the Mac Pro is way overkill. I really wanted to buy a desktop Mac after the Intel switch but since no suitable model was offered I had to buy a PC. I'm sure plenty of others have their own unique reasons for why they want an xMac.
Thank you for a reasonable, well thought out reply and summing up my gripe. If Apple doesn't want my business because they just don't think what I want fits into their business model, let it be so. This and other forums are a place for frustrated consumers to whine a little, and I guess that's what I'm doing. The fact that people are responding (when this has been discussed so many times at length) proves that there is interest in a mid-tower. Apple could have much more of the Personal Computer market than they do if they would listen to customers. I did notice the new Nano sports an FM tuner, a thing many Apple zealots said would never, never happen. Guess I thought that meant they were listening.
Frankly I was a little surprised to see so many models of AIOs available from manufacturers other than Apple.
Why are they building them... and why are retailers offering them for sale?
You say that they just "don't sell" but you have nothing to back it up.
I just went to Fry's website. They list 7. And I have no clue why they are building them and suspect most will disappear from the market, except maybe Sony who seems to be moving toward integrating the computing experience with the television.
I am not trying to prove that AIO's are more popular than towers... just that any PC user who owns one is more likely to be a potential iMac switcher... than an xMac switcher.
Does the fact that Frys also carries such a large amount of cheap (sub $600) PC towers mean nothing? Do you think that PC users who buy those machines are going to rush over to Apple if they release a $1000 or $1500 xMac?
Why would Apple offer only a $1000 - $1500 xMac? For consumer desktops they own the >$1000 market. I've read where Apple has ~ 91% of the >$1000 consumer market. This does not impress me as the high end consumer market is below $1000. To satisfy many in the professional market an xMac >$1000 makes sense, however, for the consumer market <$1000 would be the target, say between $600 - $800.
They could if the potential market was large enough but you have shown little evidence that it is....
Only that Apple's market share for desktops is what ~ 10%.
Brilliant!. So the market for the xMac consists largely of people who can either build their own xMac or who can convert any PC to an xMac.
No, you incorrectly extrapolated to a much larger market. The existence of a market for hackintosh shows that many people are willing to put up with the headaches and extra work to get one running and continually seek out online help to obtain drivers, software whatever to maintain their hackintosh. Most consumers are not willing to sustain such an effort, but the mere existence of this market (both the hackintosh and clone companies) shows interest in OS X but not Apple consumer desktops.
So much so that they are buying notebooks, and now netbooks in droves.
Why bring up notebooks in a discussion of consumer desktops. Yes, notebooks are capturing market share, but desktops are not dead. Didn't I read somewhere that a very high % of consumers that own Apple computers own multiple computers, I'm guessing a high % of those are desktops. The desktop market is not dead and is still a multi-billion $ market.
Much of the buying public, indeed most of them don't even know what slots are.
So what? I've never heard anyone, except Mac users in these discussions, complain that their computer had slots, ever. The controller chips can handle slots, the only expense is a few traces on the motherboard and a clip.
In all these threads I have been waiting for someone to tell me how large this potential xMac market is. What's the number of consumer PC tower buyers? How many would likely switch? But it's always the same answer. Geeks, tinkerers, DIY hobbyists, upgraders... now you have added few hundred Psystar customers!
And hackintosh builders, and EFI purchasers and Open computer purchasers and all those consumers that forego buying Apple because their entry level consumer computer comes with out of date expensive laptop cpus, expensive laptop harddrives, no monitor, no keyboard and no mouse and costs $599.
Not only do these people constitute a tiny part of the computer market but, on the PC side of things, their numbers also include a high percentage of people who would never buy a Mac.. of any flavour.
Apple will never know, because it would cost them virtually no R&D to offer a consumer tower in the $600 to $800 price range, but they refuse to even try, much to the dismay of consumers.
A can never quite understand why Apple is so busy fleecing it's customers by selling over-priced Mac Pro's and under-specced iMacs that they are stupidly ignoring all the money that's alegedly sitting on the xMac table.
You confuse the argument. Apple is not fleecing the consumer (re: except maybe with the current Mac mini or @ least until it is updated). What Apple is doing is completely ignoring the largest segment of the buying public.
I don't know any numbers, but I'll bet Dell, Sony, HP, etc. still sell a lot more of their desktops than their AIOs.
Well I don't think Sony do. Not sure if they even make a tower anymore. (?)
As for Dell and HP... they are selling more notebooks than desktops. These companies also sell millions of desktop towers to the corporate IT 'tied into Windows' market. Apple doesn't have that luxury.
Even if Dell and HP's AIOs are not mega sellers.... each single one sold means one less potential xMac customer.
Aflaaak, I am not doubting your real need and desire for a mid range Mac tower. And I agree that there are a lots of people that would potentially buy one. Where I disagree is when xMaccers try and justify that need by claiming that Apple is missing out on a huge market.
As Mr H has already noted. Five years ago things were different. Now the average consumer/home/family are buying 5 or 6 hundred dollar laptops.... and even cheaper desktops. These things are so cheap that they simply get replaced and passed down the line.
I am not being a fanboi. I just think with the growth of the Mac and Apple's tight control of their margins and inventory they might just know a bit more about the computer business than everyone on this forum.
...
.... I just think with the growth of the Mac and Apple's tight control of their margins and inventory they might just know a bit more about the computer business than everyone on this forum.
No doubt they know more about it, as I'm sure they analyze it and buy reports on sales numbers.
However, it is well documented the internal arguments over consumer desktop design in which Steve Jobs prefers the AIO design and believes no consumer desktop should have slots, etc.
This may in fact be a philosophical decision on what Apple believes the consumer needs and not what many consumers desire.
Where I disagree is when xMaccers try and justify that need by claiming that Apple is missing out on a huge market.
It may not be a huge market either, just legitimate part of it
As Mr H has already noted. Five years ago things were different. Now the average consumer/home/family are buying 5 or 6 hundred dollar laptops.... and even cheaper desktops. These things are so cheap that they simply get replaced and passed down the line.
I'm speculating that everyone's not going to have a cheap laptop as their only computer, more of an addition to.
I am not being a fanboi. I just think with the growth of the Mac and Apple's tight control of their margins and inventory they might just know a bit more about the computer business than everyone on this forum.
I'm sure they do, but that doesn't mean there is room for new products. Look at them adding an FM tuner to the new Nano (just after I bought one for my wife!), after everyone said they wouldn't. I have read here on these forums many complaints of Apple's arrogant way of giving people what they think is best for them, not necessarily what people over and over are asking for. I know it's a business, and making money is numero uno, but the way they do it sometimes turns me off. Imagine their market share if they had licensed the Mac operating system years ago.
I get the impression that SJ and company read these threads, find out what the faithful want, and then decide NOT to make that particular item because, "The Mac Masses CAN'T tell US what to do."
SJ is Apple's Daddy. He know best
It may not be a huge market either, just legitimate part of it
No doubt it's a legitimate part of the market. Apple, however, obviously think it's not a very profitable part.
I'm sure they do, but that doesn't mean there is room for new products. Look at them adding an FM tuner to the new Nano (just after I bought one for my wife!), after everyone said they wouldn't.
Adding a feature to an existing product is not the same as creating a new product. Perhaps Apple will add an FM tuner to the iMac.
I have read here on these forums many complaints of Apple's arrogant way of giving people what they think is best for them, not necessarily what people over and over are asking for.
Yes I have read all those complaints too. However months and years later.... Apple seems to just sell more and more of all the products that people were complaining about. " The iPod is going to be the next Cube".
I think that Apple (like most corporations) 'give people' what is best for Apple.
Imagine their market share if they had licensed the Mac operating system years ago.
Whole different argument.
No doubt it's a legitimate part of the market. Apple, however, obviously think it's not a very profitable part.
Adding a feature to an existing product is not the same as creating a new product. Perhaps Apple will add an FM tuner to the iMac.
Yes I have read all those complaints too. However months and years later.... Apple seems to just sell more and more of all the products that people were complaining about. " The iPod is going to be the next Cube".
I think that Apple (like most corporations) 'give people' what is best for Apple.
Whole different argument.
The comment about adding an FM tuner to the Nano was to point out that after a lot of customers asked for something, and after years of stonewalling, Apple finally gave customers what they asked for (and something most other mp3 players had). I was trying to draw a paralell to the idea that people are wishing for a Mid-Tower and Apple has surprised people and "given in" before and maybe, just maybe there was hope. I know it's a big jump from adding a cheap radio to a mp3 player to upsetting Apple's whole product lineup.
The fact that Apple just keeps selling more and more iMacs (albeit without an FM tuner
You won't sell it if you don't make it!
And if you don't think there's enough money in it, you won't make it.
Perhaps I'm wrong. Hope you get what you wish for.
A souped up mac mini will be nice. That is the closest you are going to get to a x-mac though. The idea of a tower computer people can mess around with is painful for support and drivers.
Yeah, I don't think it has to be a customizable tower and here's why. Here is what the Shuttle Core i7 'cube' looks like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U68dEGmkw9Y
It's almost the same width as a Mini and 3 times the height. It's not cube-shaped but you can see from the insides why that is - they have 2 PCI expansion slots. They also use 3.5" drives for hard drives and optical, which is why it's so tall.
Apple could make a Core i7 Cube with the same expansion as the Mini. The problem might come down to the graphics card but I'd be quite happy with a 1.6GHz quad Clarksfield up to 8GB Ram (4 slots) with a 9600M GT and a 9400M (64 graphics cores if Apple can use them together), priced at $999. Easy to open too so extra Ram can be installed.
Yeah, I don't think it has to be a customizable tower and here's why. Here is what the Shuttle Core i7 'cube' looks like:
Yep. And I bet it doesn't cost the 'bomb' that Apple's consumer desktops cost.
A PC quad is put together for just a few hundred quid these days.
I'd love to see the proper return of the Cube. The mini looks ok. But it should be a £195 'bite sized Mac.' No more. It's outrageously priced at £495. It's £300 overpriced and underspecced.
It really is very easy, Apple. Make the same width as Mini, stack it 3 times higher, put a decent low end Radeon 4850 in it. Put an i7 in it. Price at at £495 for the entry level...and ride those specs upto £995. And with the 'Light' port thing coming around the mountain...you'd have a single cable going into an Apple 24 inch LED display and not the morass of cables like you had with the Cube back in the day.
You'd have switchers swarming over Mac OS X like flies around...
It's not as if these desktop components cost alot. And if PC guys can sort the cooling out on these shuttles, it's a non-issue. Put a bit of Johnny Ive style on the same shuttle ala Mac Cube...and i'd be wak-ta-bating over it until I was blind. Plus. I'd actually buy one.
The whole tower, expandable debate is a little mute for me. I can't see Apple going for it. Despite their environment claims...they clearly want consumers to have a Mac for a few years and throw it away and get another.
Mind you. The only thing I want to upgrade on the tower is the gpu. But even that would be rendered mute if Apple put out an updated and decent spec as they became available.
It maybe a dead horse to Apple. But even at 40% of the worlds PC shipments, that's an awful lot of Cube/Tower sales Apple is missing out on.
Apple's current consumer desktop strategy is baffling to me.
Sure, I like the iMac's simplicity. I have one. I appreciate it's elegance and style. And in PC bootcamp mode, it has as good a framerate on Champions as a PC tower that cost twice as much.
However, that isn't the point.
Apple are using premium components and premium pricing on desktops. They could use faster, cheaper parts and still put them in a stylish Apple container AND pass those savings onto the consumer.
Sure, Apple are selling more computers than ever. But I'd guess/wager they'd sell way more if they wised up and stopped being laggardly on the upgrade cycle.
Apple has a £1400 premium over the 'entry' to quad core capability. That is shocking. (Whether that power if fully harnessed by the consumer/software is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Apple's consumer desktop specs are not competitive. And saying that an AIO or the Mac Pro can't be compared is also mute. That is what Apple puts out...that is where they've chosen, obtusely, to compete. And you go to their closest competitor and they're behind on gpu, cpu, ram usually and bundling the monitor.)
Lemon Bon Bon.