Introducing the G5 Mini (?)

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 53
    pesipesi Posts: 424member
    remove space used for extra processor, 2nd hard drive, and the PCI slots, shorten the AGP slot to accept only 7" cards, keep the same airflow design, and this is certainly doable.



    i'm using an original emac right now. and it works fine for web work and some simple video/animation stuff.



    i'm in the market for something more powerful in the next 6-12 months (finances permitting), for some higher end video/dvd projects i have planned.



    i don't need PCI. maybe just one 7" slot for kicks. extra hard drives can be added through firewire.



    such a thing would be perfect for me.



    i'd have no dismay about buying a G5. with the smaller machine, i'd probably still spend the same total amount, just opt for a larger monitor.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 53
    escherescher Posts: 1,811member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BuonRotto

    I think Escher would go for any Apple product dubbed "mini" or "sub."



     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 53
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Ok, Pscates I know that one was pretty simple, shrink image, scale up logo and handles and bingo, but still, someone at Apple needs to give you a job, now. How does special assitant to Mr Ive sound? I figure between that and the stunning iBook widescreen mock-up Apple has 3 million units per year worth of sales sitting right there in the contents of your brain/illustrator files. I can honestly say that I'd own both in a second, and I am not lightly parted from my money.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 53
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Wrong Robust

    It mixes with a special liquid and becomes cooling goo.



    Given the fans I think it would be sprayed out the back in a fine yellow mist.



    Seriously, I think if Apple is humble enough the machine that should be kissed goodbye is the iMac, keep the eMac and sell the mini G5 in the market slot that the iMac presently occupies, perhaps offer some bundles with displays for the mass market. That fits well, but I don't expect it. \
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 53
    costiquecostique Posts: 1,084member
    I know many people using PCs (whatever the platform is) at home. So do you. A pop choice for a headless home personal computer needs no more than:

    1. Only 1 or 2 ('just in case') PCI slots.

    2. 2 hard drive bays, one of which is occupied with a factory-installed drive.

    3. 1 optical drive bay with an easy way to replace, say, a CD-RW with a superdrive. And a superdrive is overkill.

    4. 4 DDR SDRAM slots. 4 is enough to add more RAM at will without having to sell factory installed modules. And what home user needs more than 2GB of RAM?

    5. 1 FW 400, 1 FW 800 and 2 USB ports. If you use many peripherals, you have the money and can afford a USB hub or something like that.

    6. 10/100 Mb Ethernet. Do many home users have Gigabit switches?

    7. 56k modem. Those home users who don't buy $3k workstations often use dial-up.

    8. 1.2?1.5 GHz PPC970. Powerful while cool enough.

    9. 2-button mouse with a scrollwheel, damn-it. No switchers appreciate 1-button mice for $59.

    10. Price from $999 to $1200.



    These will fly off the shelves. Yes, it will very likely eat into PM and iMac sales, but will get Apple a larger user base. The more users, the more software they buy (OS, iApps, .Mac) and the more hardware they will upgrade in some 2 or 3 years. If I pay $129 per year for Mac OS alone, it equals to $260?$390 per computer lifetime. Not bad? Apple needs better market share desperately. Those stupid Wall Street guys wouldn't bash Apple every day if Apple had some 20% of the market.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 53
    akumulatorakumulator Posts: 1,111member
    I think a mini would be a great idea... as long as it was small enough to be like the cube. Maybe only one handle on top and none on the bottom. Smaller overall case limited to a single processor... and if it's small enough, nix the front ports all together.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 53
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by costique

    I know many people using PCs (whatever the platform is) at home. So do you. A pop choice for a headless home personal computer needs no more than:

    1. Only 1 or 2 ('just in case') PCI slots.

    2. 2 hard drive bays, one of which is occupied with a factory-installed drive.

    3. 1 optical drive bay with an easy way to replace, say, a CD-RW with a superdrive. And a superdrive is overkill.

    4. 4 DDR SDRAM slots. 4 is enough to add more RAM at will without having to sell factory installed modules. And what home user needs more than 2GB of RAM?

    5. 1 FW 400, 1 FW 800 and 2 USB ports. If you use many peripherals, you have the money and can afford a USB hub or something like that.

    6. 10/100 Mb Ethernet. Do many home users have Gigabit switches?

    7. 56k modem. Those home users who don't buy $3k workstations often use dial-up.

    8. 1.2?1.5 GHz PPC970. Powerful while cool enough.

    9. 2-button mouse with a scrollwheel, damn-it. No switchers appreciate 1-button mice for $59.

    10. Price from $999 to $1200.



    These will fly off the shelves.




    BINGO



    I want one... NOW



    THE ABSOLUTE SWITCHER MACHINE...



    maybe apple could pull a dell and offer 3rd party mice and keyboards JUST for this machine... it would go a long way to quell "macs can only use 1 button mice" concerns and the main mac market would still ship with "inferior" 1 button mice so developers would still code their interfaces with that in mind...



    this seems like such on obvious step especially now that the pricepoint became jacked so high... Not only will the low end tower be axed if the mini tower comes out, but that line will go all dual... the $2000-$4000 Price Point will be filled by the Meshintoshes $4000+ PP by the xServe and $1000-$2000PP by the mini Tower...



    if apple wants more volume, they need more lines to appeal to more people... period... iMac eMac Powermac MiniMac Xserve... they all have different markets... no reason why the MM's market should be ignored...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 53
    pscatespscates Posts: 5,847member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Akumulator

    ...and if it's small enough, nix the front ports all together.



    NO!!! The whole POINT of being a "digital hub" (and home users/consumers/newbies/digital camera owners, etc. digging it) is to make this stuff easy and accessible and convenient to get to!



    No matter WHAT, one USB, one FireWire and one headphone jack remain ON THE FRONT.



    Nobody likes fumbling around the back of the machine, looking for the port. I know because I do it every single stinking day at work.







    This is the age of iPods, digital cameras, camcorders and things like that. You make it easy for people to connect this stuff, and they'll appreciate it. Any platform touting itself as the end-all/be-all digital hub should do this, at the very least.



    Seems quite a no-brainer to me.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 53
    rickagrickag Posts: 1,626member
    Do you think it will be introduced @ MacWorld CreativePro??



    Wish it would, but just won't happen
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 53
    costiquecostique Posts: 1,084member
    rickag, judging from your signature, a mini-G5 is utterly impossible. By the way, it speaks for me, too.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 53
    it's a cool idea - just one problem.



    It's priced at $1299+, and the low-end G5 is $1999.



    What $700 dollar feature have you dropped so that it still makes a margin? A couple of slots? 100MHz chip speed? A combo instead of a superdrive? a fraction less aluminium? A couple less fans?



    In fact with a PCI-X slot and a radeon 9600, it looks more like the mid/range range spec rather than a G5 on the cheap.



    It's the spec people want at the price people want, shame its a price Apple can't afford (You can talk margin all you want, but if apple don't like low margin kit, they ain't making low margin kit!).
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 53
    gargar Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pscates

    Nobody likes fumbling around the back of the machine, looking for the port. I know because I do it every single stinking day at work.







    i do the same when i get home: attach screen, keyboard, cd-burner, wacom... well at least i have airport so i don't have to plug the ethernet in the back of my pb...

    btw, i hope apple solfs this problem with the next rev 15"pb, the same way they did it with the 17"pb ports on both sides.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 53
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by HoofHearted

    it's a cool idea - just one problem.



    It's priced at $1299+, and the low-end G5 is $1999.



    What $700 dollar feature have you dropped so that it still makes a margin? A couple of slots? 100MHz chip speed? A combo instead of a superdrive? a fraction less aluminium? A couple less fans?



    In fact with a PCI-X slot and a radeon 9600, it looks more like the mid/range range spec rather than a G5 on the cheap.



    It's the spec people want at the price people want, shame its a price Apple can't afford (You can talk margin all you want, but if apple don't like low margin kit, they ain't making low margin kit!).




    A G4 1.25 sells for that much now. This case would be cheaper to make, the CPU should be cheaper too.



    The mobo tech costs, I'm sure. But not that much more once supplies grow. It's not just a 700 USD feature dropped, it's a host of little things, plus TIME, and growing G5 supply.



    Think, cheaper case. Cheaper motherboard with less PCI slots, regular AGP 8X, cheaper power supply (doesn't need to power 3 PCI and 1 AGP-pro.) less fans, less RAM slots, and a slower CPU, and more consumer oriented Gfx card, and smaller HDD. Even today, that could add up to 300 USD easily. Delete Superdrive in favor of a Combo and gain another 150-200. That's already 500USD, just like that. So given TIME, say about 6-12 months, such a machine most certainly does fall into the realm of possibility.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 53
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by costique

    I know many people using PCs (whatever the platform is) at home. So do you. A pop choice for a headless home personal computer needs no more than:

    1. Only 1 or 2 ('just in case') PCI slots.

    2. 2 hard drive bays, one of which is occupied with a factory-installed drive.

    3. 1 optical drive bay with an easy way to replace, say, a CD-RW with a superdrive. And a superdrive is overkill.

    4. 4 DDR SDRAM slots. 4 is enough to add more RAM at will without having to sell factory installed modules. And what home user needs more than 2GB of RAM?

    5. 1 FW 400, 1 FW 800 and 2 USB ports. If you use many peripherals, you have the money and can afford a USB hub or something like that.

    6. 10/100 Mb Ethernet. Do many home users have Gigabit switches?

    7. 56k modem. Those home users who don't buy $3k workstations often use dial-up.

    8. 1.2?1.5 GHz PPC970. Powerful while cool enough.

    9. 2-button mouse with a scrollwheel, damn-it. No switchers appreciate 1-button mice for $59.

    10. Price from $999 to $1200.



    These will fly off the shelves. Yes, it will very likely eat into PM and iMac sales, but will get Apple a larger user base. The more users, the more software they buy (OS, iApps, .Mac) and the more hardware they will upgrade in some 2 or 3 years. If I pay $129 per year for Mac OS alone, it equals to $260?$390 per computer lifetime. Not bad? Apple needs better market share desperately. Those stupid Wall Street guys wouldn't bash Apple every day if Apple had some 20% of the market.




    That's a very good analysis but remember it would be cheaper to go with proven chipsets like the one in use with the G5 now. Just migrate the chipset to the new smaller motherboard so basically you can have the same advantages as the new G5 (RAM, GbEthernet) so the featureset of the Mini would aproximate the one of the Tower but with cut out features like the extra 4 DIMM slots and the PCI cutting that number to one slot. Make the inside easier to cool, maybe with 3 zones versus 4 (one for the drives, one shared zone of PCI, AGP, CPU and RAM, and the power supply zone).
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 53
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by HoofHearted

    it's a cool idea - just one problem.



    It's priced at $1299+, and the low-end G5 is $1999.



    What $700 dollar feature have you dropped so that it still makes a margin? A couple of slots? 100MHz chip speed? A combo instead of a superdrive? a fraction less aluminium? A couple less fans?



    In fact with a PCI-X slot and a radeon 9600, it looks more like the mid/range range spec rather than a G5 on the cheap.



    It's the spec people want at the price people want, shame its a price Apple can't afford (You can talk margin all you want, but if apple don't like low margin kit, they ain't making low margin kit!).




    Think ahead. By using the same chipset and CPU you get them cheaper (economies of scale) and by dumping the low end 1.6 and another line, say the iMac, you're making room for a machine with similar margins to the iMac. Apple charges $200 for the superDrive over the combo drive, otherwise the price of the low end G5 would be $1799. The beginning of 2004 would be an ideal time to lower prices all around and intro a machine like this.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 53
    junkyard dawgjunkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by pscates









    I'd keep the depth the same as the full sized tower, so it can accomodate a full sized video card. Looks nice other than that.



    This is an intriguing idea, but I don't think Apple will do it.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 53
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    I think they will, mebbe not that form, but they will. Steve loved the cube, he loved it so much he wanted you to sell you first born into slavery to get one, but he loved it -- a sort of iMac for pros when you think about it. Small, quiet, the artists mac that still allows for basic upgrades and a choice of displays.



    PS, I actually think it's deep enough. Looks to be about 2/3rds the depth. The G5 is 18.7", so the "mini" would just hug 12.2" or so, all but the very longest card would fit, could scale it up to 12.75x12.75 just to make sure, but it doesn't need to be as deep. The fan could be mounted differently, and a new baffle designed to direct air in the smaller case.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 53
    gilschgilsch Posts: 1,995member
    I'd go for it. The New Al Cube. That would be really sweet.

    That would probably just kill the iMac though.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 53
    ariari Posts: 126member
    I think the general idea is a good one. I don't particularly care for the "cheese grater" look on a machine this small, though. But Apple needs a lower-cost, somewhat-expandable, headless-CPU. Apple has learned from the numerous errors of the Cube and I doubt would fall victim to them again. If they build upon the numerous strengths of that product and address its shortcomings, they would have a winner, and one especially attractive to potential converts to the Macintosh. In fact, Apple should intend for this machine to help them gain market share by being generous with features and allowing for relatively-low profit margins on it.



    Perhaps from 1.6 GHz to 2.0 GHz G5s (all single processor, of course) priced from $1599 to $1999 including a 17" flat-panel display. It could be called the xMac or the ProMac.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 53
    whisperwhisper Posts: 735member
    What rule says it has to be a perfect cube? Why not just make it deep enough for a full size card and leave the rest alone?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.