Why towers should be replaced w/ the cube
Bear with me here while I outline this idea to you all:
Apple's pro towers should be replaced with the original g4 cube design. Why? Simply because macs are unlike pc's (DUH!) and are not as upgradeable as they are. You cannot replace a motherboard in a apple computer with a better one because apple doesn't let third parties make apple products. (this also applies to a slew of other parts of a macintosh, im just using the motherboard as an example.) Apple only really lets you upgrade 4 components in your tower, one of which, they don't really intend for you to upgrade. They are as follows:
Memory
Hardrive
Graphics card
CPU
All of the above are upgradable in the cube and a huge tower case is not needed. So what towers can fit more hardrives and an extra media drive (CD-ROM, CD-RW, etc.) inside of them. Both these items are available to use externally in a firewire interface. With firewire 2 approaching, which will have a massive speed boost it is even more apparent that apple does not need to make towers anymore (unless they let the clones back.) Give me your thoughts. (I threw this post together fairly quickly so I'll clear up any mistakes I made if you point them out.)
Apple's pro towers should be replaced with the original g4 cube design. Why? Simply because macs are unlike pc's (DUH!) and are not as upgradeable as they are. You cannot replace a motherboard in a apple computer with a better one because apple doesn't let third parties make apple products. (this also applies to a slew of other parts of a macintosh, im just using the motherboard as an example.) Apple only really lets you upgrade 4 components in your tower, one of which, they don't really intend for you to upgrade. They are as follows:
Memory
Hardrive
Graphics card
CPU
All of the above are upgradable in the cube and a huge tower case is not needed. So what towers can fit more hardrives and an extra media drive (CD-ROM, CD-RW, etc.) inside of them. Both these items are available to use externally in a firewire interface. With firewire 2 approaching, which will have a massive speed boost it is even more apparent that apple does not need to make towers anymore (unless they let the clones back.) Give me your thoughts. (I threw this post together fairly quickly so I'll clear up any mistakes I made if you point them out.)
Comments
Single 867, 1 GHz, 1.25 GHz.
And cheep, too.
They won't, but they should.
Jet
[ 08-18-2002: Message edited by: Jet Powers ]</p>
<strong>Also, I refuse to get an i device because I want the freedom of what display I want to use! I can't use my 24" widescreen sony display with an i-mac now can i?
yeah the 1024X768 limit on the i comps is a real pain in the ass, esp on the iBook... thats why im making my bro get a 17" iMac..
if you are talking to me, what logic? the 17"has more pixels... of course i still cant use an ext display or opt to not pay for one when getting the computer to save $..... but i wasnt refuting his point, just pointing out that i agreed with him and a simmilar grievance i have....
I think the Cube is one of the coolest cases out there, but it just has too many flaws. With the eMac costing hundreds less than a similarly equipped iMac, perhaps the iMac will get a bit of a tweak and be more Cube-like, in principle anyway. Hopefully done right this time.
<strong>OOPS, i told you i was in a rush, i forgot about PCI cards... :eek: Hmm, but isnt almost everything that's used in a PCI port available externally as well? or am I wrong? If no, im sure apple could make it into an external device easily..............</strong><hr></blockquote>
Completely wrong
You can get external PCI chasis, but from how I read your post you are not reffering to that! Even if you are it would not be suitble
<img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
The new towers are really nice for expansion, but too much for me, and I'm a sys admin. I'm thinking of the size of Dell's small form factor desktops: good for the desk, a little upgradeable, monitor/video card of choice
It was a little 'too' small. Non standard graphic cards. What manufacturer is going to do that when its hard enough to get them to build graphic cards for the Mac as it is?
I'd like to see Apple bring back the Cube. But the iMac flat panel is occupying the ground it formerly had. And the iMac's design trumps it. The iMac has more ports. Includes a monitor...a faster G4 and superdrive and internal power supply.
I don't see the Cube occupying that 'middle' space. It failed before because it was priced too much for too little.
However.
As a headless prosumer Mac?
If it was made a little bigger. Ports place on back ala iMac Flat panel. If the power supply was internal...and sold for less than the price of an eMac? I think it would be a steal. An ideal 'Switch' machine.
If it was bigger you could upgrade the graphic card, the cpu etc much easily.
I think its commercial (but not critical failure...it must be pointed out...) failure will make Apple shy of re-introducing it.
The iMac flat panel addresses most of the short comings of the Cube at a better price and in a superior form factor.
If Apple would sell a sub-eMac computer...then the Cube would be the one for me. But Apple have problems making the eMac as cheap as it is. And the original G3 CRT iMac is still there.
I'd like to see Apple release a 'Dell' killer. A small box they could pile high and sell cheaply. I think the Cube concept would work. But only if Apple would market it with a view to the big picture.
Something, regarding hardware...Apple has a hard time doing. They seem to put profits first.
They have a historical record of doing so and it is one of the many reasons that had put them at 3% world wide market share in a still growing market.
They have to do more to get to 10%.
Unless they think they can get there with being BMW of the computer world except in this example...they offer far less for the money than the competition...less ram, poorer graphic card and slower cpu.
It'll be interesting to see where Apple are a year from now...switchers an' all.
Having said that...if you're asking if I'd like to see a bigger version of the cube's case replace the current outdated tower design? I'd say yes. The Cube's case rather than its capabilities is what made it sexy. They could merely create a Cube-esque case design for the G5 towers.
I wonder what Ives has up his sleeve?
Lemon Bon Bon
[ 08-18-2002: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
You have the different emacs and imacs all in the 1000-2000 price range and a powermac as well as the ibooks
If a cube is introduced then it could take away sales from imac or emac simply because it would have to cost a lot less then a powermac. i doubt apple is worried about losing powermac sales.
Killer, they sell a bazillion and still make more per machine than they do on any e/iMac, no monitor or custom embedded Mobo costs.
So,
Whatever PPC's are current.
1 SP daughtercard
1 AGP
2 PCI
2 Dimms
1 Optical
2 HDD bays
Standard I/O
about 2/3 the size of a PM.
They sell more. Dirt cheap. People look at price. Many Dells are well featured enough.
Apple have yet to slay their most sacred of cows. The true 'critical mass' market equation. Just when you think Apple may have got it...they back off...they don't go for the jugular.
Sure, they done the OS. Got a vision. Got cool design.
But...a mini tower would address a different market to the iMac flat or eMac. People who otherwise will not come over to Mac. Why? Apple towers too expensive. Prosumer machines with limited expandability.
Apple's market is too rigid.
What are they going to do when the average price of the computer is £750 and not just over a K?
There's a reason why Sun and Sgi have found their marketshare eroded.
Although Apple are in their own pocket universe...the fact that they had 10% plus and are now at 3-5% tells you something. ie they aren't immune, indirectly from what Dell are doing on price.
Do I want a world of Intel, MS and Dell? Er...no.
I sometimes wonder if Apple could partner with AOL and IBM to help them reach more people. To offset advertising...exposure...new markets. Many AOL people are PC people.
Apple must be awake to this stark reality. Dells have eroded Apple's Edu share. Obviously many graphic designers went with cheap PC boxes when Photoshop became available for the PC.
Apple seem to be somewhat aware that they've no choice now but to come out fighting. They're opening stores. Intensifying development on their OS (though it took them along time to release that they had an OS worth developing...) , producing great software (instead of depending on other co's to do it for them...), they're getting into new markets with Xserve, unix and java. Add to that the response with the Switchers campaign and cool design hardware. Apple are showing they could be up for a fight. Good.
But they're going to have to do a little better on price, specs and performance.
A mini-tower? Yes. A true workstation with quad processor? Yes. A sub-£500 headless Mac? Yes. 3 markets where Apple can gain more hooks for more fish.
Just my thoughts on a slow Sunday.
Lemon Bon Bon
[ 08-18-2002: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
Apple has already diverged quite significantly from this original idea and I suspect that they're weary of further cluttering the line.
[ 08-18-2002: Message edited by: Tom600 ]</p>
It was. However, look deeper into his words.
"He introduced his cut-down line which consisted of a consumer desktop, consumer laptop, pro desktop and pro laptop."
That was a start. It had clarity. But Apple's pricing...coupled with only a few varieties of each model with limited configurability and you're left with huge gaping sores Apple weren't addressing.
Eg. When Jobs first came back. Apple didn't have a sub K computer. Ridiculous. Not even when the iMac was first launched. Do you know the size of the sub-K market? Large enough that we had iMac Crt G3s that were intro'd into it. At one point, you could get 3 iMac G3 CRTs in Apple's range sub-K! That was a big improvement over their pre-Jobs business model.
Now? That space is occupied by the eMac.
There was a middle ground between the iMac and 'power'Mac. So Apple introduced the Cube. However. They were right in summising there was room between iMac and 'power'Mac. The Cube wasn't the answer. By the time you got a monitor, you had a machine with limited expandability and pricier than a 'power'Mac. Go figure.
With the 'Prosumer' iMac flat...they have successfully addressed the 'middle' market. Somewhat inadvertently. I'm sure this iMac was intended to replace the CRT G3s...except the flat panel prices were too steep. Will the iMac go the same route as the Cube? No. Because they are following the lead of the original iMac CRT G3 and driving prices downward after a rocky start and intro'd the eMac in the interim.
My point? There were more markets than the four quad grid. Which didn't, say, cover the X-serve market. Is there any law that says Apple can't enter new markets?
Is there a market for a cheap PC gamer geared tower that could address the needs of PC gamers that might fancy try a Mac? No. Could Apple make it? Yes. Overlap? Not necessarily. Apple aren't getting those tower sales at the moment. Why? Too expensive. Add in a 'k' tower (and it wasn't too long ago in the UK when towers hovered at £1,100 inc Vat...) and sales could gravitate to their former level. There are people who love the iMac. There are people who want a cheap tower but will wait until Apple deliver a better deal. I'm one of 'em.
"Apple has already diverged quite significantly from this original quad segment market idea and I suspect that they're weary of further cluttering the line."
iPod? Bets on that happening were? That aint in the original market grad.
So I don't think they're weary. If there's a distinct market relative to Apple's easy of use multimedia strengths? The iPod proves Apple will go there if it meets there hub vision.
Nothing stopping Apple from introducing a vPod to watch video on the move and take photos with. There's already a machine on the PC that can do that. Another market apple could own ala the iPod.
Apple can do somethings better than other people. If they can make a buck at it? They'll do it. iPod and X-serve prove that. They're software aquisitions prove that.
I think we'll see a workstation Mac, a multimedia portable 'pod' device. A PC tablet of some kind when Apple can do it right at the right price.
I'd like to see a 'K' tower and a sub £500 headless Mac.
They address different markets. Not everbody can afford to spend several thousand on a computer. These are distinct markets where Apple is losing customers.
The market products Apple now have are quite distinct.
Pre-Jobs. They weren't. Too many samey models unsure of which market they were aimed at.
Lemon Bon Bon
[ 08-18-2002: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>