Of course it is, but that doesn't mean that making things simpler equals to making things less, inferior or more limited.
Of course 2 x 250GB drives are better than 4 x 100GB drives, but as I already elaborated, most people don't start with 2 x 250GB, but increase their disksize, when they need it (because there's nothing more stupid than buying hardware in reserve at an early date, when you could as well buy it later, at a quarter the price.)
Thus, if you upgrade over time, you will eventually run into a situation, where you will be confronted with the problem I described in one of my previous posts and it just happens to be a fact that the 2 drive limitation makes it ten times more likely to run into that situation, than a 4 drive limitation (because after all, computers do have a certain average livespan in which you will buy additional harddrives. buying more than 2 harddrives in 2-3 years is far more likely than buying more than 4 in the same time, I think you'll agree on that).
The problem is not, that I'm against innovation. For example I am a great fan of the PowerMac G4 Cube design, although it's very unexpandable in terms of drives (replaceable only, actually). However, I never complained about that, because it was clear, that this machine was, although pretty, not for me.
However, the Powermac G5, sooner or later is going to be for me, and because there is no other option (except PCs, which is NOT an option), I will be forced to either give in, or wait. In my opinion, while innovation is a great thing, there are certain things that you simply have to keep.
For example, it might be interesting to switch from 110/220 volt PSUs to 24V PSUs. How would people react, if they had to buy a power adaptor first, when they could just plug it into the wall, one model earlier? Do you think they'd be happy? Sure it'd be easier to run the computer in a car then, but I hardly think that would be a sufficient reason to alienate all the customers who happen to use their computer at home.
I think it is abit about both simplicity and control ... and that brings about positives and negatives. Apple has loosened up (very minorly, but more than M$) its control over software. It has embraced standards and at least got Darwin out there. Both of course were born mostly of necessity...but they've tried.
However, Apple still wants control of hardware. It has helped push standards, especially I/O hardware tech, but it still reveres "control" as something sacred and as something necessary for sake of elegance and simplicity.
It is too bad there isn't brown box side to the Apple hardware distribution flow. A place where Apple gave a little help to people who wanted to try out their own designs, etc. It would not hurt sales or margins significantly if the business model and costs were managed well - "Join .Mac Geek Pack and get deals on old Yosemite cases!" It would take care of another cause of *nix folks complaints.
Apple could still control the system ROM and if there are driver problems, etc. the geeks are used to that anyway, they won't affect the general public's view of the sweet, stable beautiful machines that are splashed on Time covers.
I think you are right about the control. But i am not sure that is a bad thing. If they control the standards for the HW and the SW they will work together with relatively few problems.
I just fixed a couple of PC's for a corperate customer. IE was freezing in win2000. I got a headache reading all of the white papers. I had update the bios and update the video driver, directx and IE. I think I got it fixed. This is the thing that makes me real money and I hope MS makes more OS's and pc makers make more boxes. Job Security! But I do not want to deal with it personally. Yikes.
I am impressed with apple, because when apple says that it will work, it just does. When they adopt a standard they adopt it and stick to it. As apposed to MS who adopts a standard and they change it and make it propriatary i.e. Java.
Of course you are right NaplesX and I know exactly what you're talking about. However, what this thread is originally about, is the lack of drive expansion capabilities, and I'm quite sure that you will agree that adding more drives to a system has never caused any driver problems or any stuff like that, which you say Apple is avoiding by controlling the hardware.
We should carefully differentiate between these 2 kinds of control.
Personally, I think it's design run amok over function. It's obvious Ives and his design groop are all about cutting away unneccessary equipment and space, and therefore the user community has to suffer for some preconcieved idea of what is smallest, not what is best.
Christ, Apple went thru this with the original sea green el Caps, and instead of remembering the hue and cry about that machine, they chose conveniently to forget about what the user community wants (otherwise, why add the drive bays later?) again. It's not as if Apple doesn't know that people want more drive bays (that's why they added them in the quicksilver), it's just that they don't care. Design trumps function, and Ives is hearlded as a 'genius' for cobbling together a case made up of a screen door and sheet metal that is functionally inexpandable. Hooray.
You want to make lamp-shaped iMacs and nose cone shaped eMacs? Go for it, bubba. By and large, the expandaility requirments of consumer level products can be safely ignored, and you can make all the wacky-shaped plastic you like. Win design awards, fcuk the prom queen, whatever. But crippling the Powermac so you can have your oh-so-clever design is so ass backwards that I'd have fired him on the spot.
It almost seems a conspiracy, really, although to what end, I know not.
Clearly from your posts you don't understand my logic because you clearly don't understand the needs of the PRO user.
. . . . . .
Unfortunately, your lack of maturity in a professional atmosphere will hurt you much more than your lack of knowledge.
The logic on both sides of this debate is impeccable . (Step a foot back from the monitor and read out loud what you just posted. It doesn't make sense. Wouldn't you agree that every so called "pro" users need are different.)
Apple has a finacial interest in limiting the PM to two hard drives. They want to sell XServe Raids/XServes.
FW800 External RAIDS however are going down in price so the difference between internal and external will slowly go away. People have pointed out in other threads that external has many other useful qualities like portability. You can edit the same material on a Power Mac in the office and Power book at home.
It would take care of another cause of *nix folks complaints.
Don't confuse real unix hackers, who were moving to PowerBooks even before OS X in part because of the rock solid hardware, and whining slashdot weenies who want to build their own box mainly because that's what their pocket money will stretch to.
I think you got it wrong. I think apple and its staff are true innovators and they come up with innovative producs that rely on the design of the product to set it apart from the compettition. If mac did not worry so much about design. We would live in a beige box world
They clearly want to make a statement with every product release. I have an iMac and I must say it is an absolute work of art. There is no way in the world that it can be confused with any othet computer. When you consider haw many people have computers, the fact that every person that sees my iMac just says "wow what kind of computer is that?", is amasing.
To hear you guys complain about expandability baffles me. I think that you are missing the point and may never get it. The percentage of people that want to tinker with their brand new work of art/Apple and want to cram in as many peices of hardware that can possibly fit, is small, IMHO. I think I would have to call you guys compulsive tikerers.
By the way, I found sight that shows you how to put a G4 MB in a PC case and it will fit an abundance of drives and stuff. It actuall seems very cool and is not that expensive.
Personally, I think it's design run amok over function. It's obvious Ives and his design groop are all about cutting away unneccessary equipment and space, and therefore the user community has to suffer for some preconcieved idea of what is smallest, not what is best.
I'd like to know where you get the idea that Jon Ives is setting the system specs? I'm not going to claim that I know why Apple bumped the expansion capabilities of their towers downward (again), but I can state with some confidence that it wasn't because Ives thought the case would look intolerably ugly if it was 2 inches taller. It's his job to take a given set of hardware and airflow requirements and make it look pretty and fit together cleanly; I doubt that he'd lobby to remove a few bays from the top unless they posed a serious problem (and why would they?).
There was probably some other reason. Like, for example, Apple realizing that the cost of the new platform was high enough that they had to economize (think of the 1.6GHz model) and Steve insisted on SuperDrives everywhere (not the first time), so something else had to give to keep the cost of entry within a given price range. Sure, it's not that much extra, but it wouldn't take much extra to push the entry level price past the important $2000 barrier. Also, if few of the people who bought the MDDs used the extra bays, that makes them more attractive candidates for elimination if something has to go. Presumably, as before, they'll come back as the design matures, or the issue will be mooted by more prevalent external storage solutions. Or both.
I have to say, the recent "upgrade" of my work machine to XP was as easy as it was because I save all my work to a network drive. There was hardly anything to back up! Now if only XP hadn't gone and broken everything...but that's an off-topic rant. The point is that network storage is transparent, convenient, and increasingly prevalent in work environments. Over fast ethernet, file manipulation is not quite as fast as it is to the local drive, but it's plenty fast enough. I'm sure design and video shops slinging bits across Gb ethernet can scarcely tell remote storage from local in terms of performance. It's definitely worth the investment.
Apple has a finacial interest in limiting the PM to two hard drives. They want to sell XServe Raids/XServes.
That's two totally different markets there. one is a sub 100+$ market, the other is a 10'000+$ market. And I don't see prices drop by 1000% anytime soon.
NaplesX: You said yourself: you have an iMac, that already makes you a customer who needs a running system and nothing else. You obviously chose the iMac, because it fit your needs.
I have never owned an iMac, I've only owned PowerMacs, because I always needed the expandability of a PowerMac (that no other Mac model ever offered). Now Apple is moving the PowerMac down into the segment of non-expandable machines, and that is grieving me. We're two different kinds of Apple customers, I don't expect you to understand my needs and wants, but neither should you expect from me to buy into your "it's a non-issue" argumentation.
I've thought of another analogy:
Consider there is a company called "Pears".
Pears has been producing cars for the last 22 years.
Their top of the line car was always a car with at least 4 seats, a large trunk and a powerful motor. The entry level systems where more like harley davidsons, only one or 2 seats, stylish, powerful to less powerful engine.
Now, all of a sudden, Pears decides to introduce a new top of the line car, replacing the old ones. It has an even more powerful 8 cylinder engine, is stylish, but hasn't got a trunk and only 2 seats.
Of course all the people with a family, 3 kids, a wife and a dog or two are going to be angry, because they are now forced to choose between one of the following two options:
-Buy another car, in which you sit backwards, the steering wheel is mounted in the seat and you steer with your buttocks, but has enough seats and a trunk (a PC) or
-buy a trailer, put the dogs and kids in there and hope that the garage is still large enough to park etc etc. (external storage). With all the drawbacks that brings with it.
Do you now see, what Apple is doing here?
It's not impossible, but it's imprudent.
And those people suggesting to buy an external Xserve RAID are suggesting that the family father go buy a 400'000$ truck in order to be able to put the 2 kids and the dogs in there. Look at the perspective...
By the way, I found sight that shows you how to put a G4 MB in a PC case and it will fit an abundance of drives and stuff. It actuall seems very cool and is not that expensive. [/B]
OK, what is the site? I have seen several projects people have done posted on the web.
Look guys, please don't interprate the fact that peaple don't agree with this expansion equals usability thing, means we don't agree that it is a valad point. I am not sure that it is as big an issue it seems to be with you guys.
Here is another point of view:
Lets pretend you buy a new G5 today, you use it and find it totally functional except for the fact that you have two drives itching to stuff into it. Lets say that you find six month later that apple has indeed engineered better cooling system an opend the case for more expansion. I personally think that apple will not do this. You van turn around and sell you G5 on ebay or something and get close or as much for it as you paid and buy the newest model. You may be out of %10 or so.
Ebay changes the picture when it comes to this kind of stuff. It is kinda like renting equipment till you get what you need.
There is some kind of preconceived notion that if a computer does not have expansion bays it is not entirely usable. This way of thinking was created by microsoft. Remember when they released windows 95 everyone had to buy memory hard drives etc. Then with 98 the same thing and so on. This has caused people to assume that you will need to upgarde when an update of an OS is released. MS has become the author of perpetual upgrade and i see alot of people buying into it.
Reality dictates that a certain abitly to expand in necisary, of course. But I think that Apple has taken into account the whole resale market that exists. I saw an used Apple Cube that was selling for 1300 on ebay. Now that is resale value.
Everyone except Fran and buckeye are all idiots (including me), especially applenut.
SO there. Every good and hacked now? Stop with the personal insults.
Point 1: Very very few people really need a second optical drive.
Point 2: Apple likely found that so few actually used the second drive spot, that it was a waste of their time and their customers' money to include it: "Wow, all of 250 people are upset about this. Let's spend $10 million to suit them."
I'd like some empirical data on that, instead of some idea you pulled out of your ass.
If so many people were clammering for more expansion why would apple, who has such a small market share decide to remove what was could increase it.
Any thinking person would conclude what the previous poster "jccbin" did. To assume otherwise would be to assume apple has decided to stop making money and just give up.
If so many people were clammering for more expansion why would apple, who has such a small market share decide to remove what was could increase it.
Any thinking person would conclude what the previous poster "jccbin" did. To assume otherwise would be to assume apple has decided to stop making money and just give up.
No, a thinking person would conclude that Apple is not very good at designing expandable cases or simply chooses to do things in a way that is not very expandable. Look at the past history of crippled machines (such as the Blue and White) which Apple has foisted on an unsuspecting public.
No, a thinking person would conclude that Apple is not very good at designing expandable cases or simply chooses to do things in a way that is not very expandable. Look at the past history of crippled machines (such as the Blue and White) which Apple has foisted on an unsuspecting public.
Comments
Simpler is better.
Of course it is, but that doesn't mean that making things simpler equals to making things less, inferior or more limited.
Of course 2 x 250GB drives are better than 4 x 100GB drives, but as I already elaborated, most people don't start with 2 x 250GB, but increase their disksize, when they need it (because there's nothing more stupid than buying hardware in reserve at an early date, when you could as well buy it later, at a quarter the price.)
Thus, if you upgrade over time, you will eventually run into a situation, where you will be confronted with the problem I described in one of my previous posts and it just happens to be a fact that the 2 drive limitation makes it ten times more likely to run into that situation, than a 4 drive limitation (because after all, computers do have a certain average livespan in which you will buy additional harddrives. buying more than 2 harddrives in 2-3 years is far more likely than buying more than 4 in the same time, I think you'll agree on that).
The problem is not, that I'm against innovation. For example I am a great fan of the PowerMac G4 Cube design, although it's very unexpandable in terms of drives (replaceable only, actually). However, I never complained about that, because it was clear, that this machine was, although pretty, not for me.
However, the Powermac G5, sooner or later is going to be for me, and because there is no other option (except PCs, which is NOT an option), I will be forced to either give in, or wait. In my opinion, while innovation is a great thing, there are certain things that you simply have to keep.
For example, it might be interesting to switch from 110/220 volt PSUs to 24V PSUs. How would people react, if they had to buy a power adaptor first, when they could just plug it into the wall, one model earlier? Do you think they'd be happy? Sure it'd be easier to run the computer in a car then, but I hardly think that would be a sufficient reason to alienate all the customers who happen to use their computer at home.
I hope everyone understands the analogy.
G-News
However, Apple still wants control of hardware. It has helped push standards, especially I/O hardware tech, but it still reveres "control" as something sacred and as something necessary for sake of elegance and simplicity.
It is too bad there isn't brown box side to the Apple hardware distribution flow. A place where Apple gave a little help to people who wanted to try out their own designs, etc. It would not hurt sales or margins significantly if the business model and costs were managed well - "Join .Mac Geek Pack and get deals on old Yosemite cases!" It would take care of another cause of *nix folks complaints.
Apple could still control the system ROM and if there are driver problems, etc. the geeks are used to that anyway, they won't affect the general public's view of the sweet, stable beautiful machines that are splashed on Time covers.
I just fixed a couple of PC's for a corperate customer. IE was freezing in win2000. I got a headache reading all of the white papers. I had update the bios and update the video driver, directx and IE. I think I got it fixed. This is the thing that makes me real money and I hope MS makes more OS's and pc makers make more boxes. Job Security! But I do not want to deal with it personally. Yikes.
I am impressed with apple, because when apple says that it will work, it just does. When they adopt a standard they adopt it and stick to it. As apposed to MS who adopts a standard and they change it and make it propriatary i.e. Java.
We should carefully differentiate between these 2 kinds of control.
Christ, Apple went thru this with the original sea green el Caps, and instead of remembering the hue and cry about that machine, they chose conveniently to forget about what the user community wants (otherwise, why add the drive bays later?) again. It's not as if Apple doesn't know that people want more drive bays (that's why they added them in the quicksilver), it's just that they don't care. Design trumps function, and Ives is hearlded as a 'genius' for cobbling together a case made up of a screen door and sheet metal that is functionally inexpandable. Hooray.
You want to make lamp-shaped iMacs and nose cone shaped eMacs? Go for it, bubba. By and large, the expandaility requirments of consumer level products can be safely ignored, and you can make all the wacky-shaped plastic you like. Win design awards, fcuk the prom queen, whatever. But crippling the Powermac so you can have your oh-so-clever design is so ass backwards that I'd have fired him on the spot.
It almost seems a conspiracy, really, although to what end, I know not.
Originally posted by buckeye
Applenut,
Clearly from your posts you don't understand my logic because you clearly don't understand the needs of the PRO user.
. . . . . .
Unfortunately, your lack of maturity in a professional atmosphere will hurt you much more than your lack of knowledge.
The logic on both sides of this debate is impeccable .
Apple has a finacial interest in limiting the PM to two hard drives. They want to sell XServe Raids/XServes.
FW800 External RAIDS however are going down in price so the difference between internal and external will slowly go away. People have pointed out in other threads that external has many other useful qualities like portability. You can edit the same material on a Power Mac in the office and Power book at home.
Originally posted by MacGregor
It would take care of another cause of *nix folks complaints.
Don't confuse real unix hackers, who were moving to PowerBooks even before OS X in part because of the rock solid hardware, and whining slashdot weenies who want to build their own box mainly because that's what their pocket money will stretch to.
They clearly want to make a statement with every product release. I have an iMac and I must say it is an absolute work of art. There is no way in the world that it can be confused with any othet computer. When you consider haw many people have computers, the fact that every person that sees my iMac just says "wow what kind of computer is that?", is amasing.
To hear you guys complain about expandability baffles me. I think that you are missing the point and may never get it. The percentage of people that want to tinker with their brand new work of art/Apple and want to cram in as many peices of hardware that can possibly fit, is small, IMHO. I think I would have to call you guys compulsive tikerers.
By the way, I found sight that shows you how to put a G4 MB in a PC case and it will fit an abundance of drives and stuff. It actuall seems very cool and is not that expensive.
Originally posted by I, Fred
Personally, I think it's design run amok over function. It's obvious Ives and his design groop are all about cutting away unneccessary equipment and space, and therefore the user community has to suffer for some preconcieved idea of what is smallest, not what is best.
I'd like to know where you get the idea that Jon Ives is setting the system specs? I'm not going to claim that I know why Apple bumped the expansion capabilities of their towers downward (again), but I can state with some confidence that it wasn't because Ives thought the case would look intolerably ugly if it was 2 inches taller. It's his job to take a given set of hardware and airflow requirements and make it look pretty and fit together cleanly; I doubt that he'd lobby to remove a few bays from the top unless they posed a serious problem (and why would they?).
There was probably some other reason. Like, for example, Apple realizing that the cost of the new platform was high enough that they had to economize (think of the 1.6GHz model) and Steve insisted on SuperDrives everywhere (not the first time), so something else had to give to keep the cost of entry within a given price range. Sure, it's not that much extra, but it wouldn't take much extra to push the entry level price past the important $2000 barrier. Also, if few of the people who bought the MDDs used the extra bays, that makes them more attractive candidates for elimination if something has to go. Presumably, as before, they'll come back as the design matures, or the issue will be mooted by more prevalent external storage solutions. Or both.
I have to say, the recent "upgrade" of my work machine to XP was as easy as it was because I save all my work to a network drive. There was hardly anything to back up! Now if only XP hadn't gone and broken everything...but that's an off-topic rant. The point is that network storage is transparent, convenient, and increasingly prevalent in work environments. Over fast ethernet, file manipulation is not quite as fast as it is to the local drive, but it's plenty fast enough. I'm sure design and video shops slinging bits across Gb ethernet can scarcely tell remote storage from local in terms of performance. It's definitely worth the investment.
Originally posted by buckeye
Applenut,
Clearly from your posts you don't understand my logic because you clearly don't understand the needs of the PRO user.
Once you get into the REAL WORLD where you rely on your equipment to perform your job, you might begin to understand.
Unfortunately, your lack of maturity in a professional atmosphere will hurt you much more than your lack of knowledge.
a-nut is right: your an idiot, my condolences
Apple has a finacial interest in limiting the PM to two hard drives. They want to sell XServe Raids/XServes.
That's two totally different markets there. one is a sub 100+$ market, the other is a 10'000+$ market. And I don't see prices drop by 1000% anytime soon.
NaplesX: You said yourself: you have an iMac, that already makes you a customer who needs a running system and nothing else. You obviously chose the iMac, because it fit your needs.
I have never owned an iMac, I've only owned PowerMacs, because I always needed the expandability of a PowerMac (that no other Mac model ever offered). Now Apple is moving the PowerMac down into the segment of non-expandable machines, and that is grieving me. We're two different kinds of Apple customers, I don't expect you to understand my needs and wants, but neither should you expect from me to buy into your "it's a non-issue" argumentation.
I've thought of another analogy:
Consider there is a company called "Pears".
Pears has been producing cars for the last 22 years.
Their top of the line car was always a car with at least 4 seats, a large trunk and a powerful motor. The entry level systems where more like harley davidsons, only one or 2 seats, stylish, powerful to less powerful engine.
Now, all of a sudden, Pears decides to introduce a new top of the line car, replacing the old ones. It has an even more powerful 8 cylinder engine, is stylish, but hasn't got a trunk and only 2 seats.
Of course all the people with a family, 3 kids, a wife and a dog or two are going to be angry, because they are now forced to choose between one of the following two options:
-Buy another car, in which you sit backwards, the steering wheel is mounted in the seat and you steer with your buttocks, but has enough seats and a trunk (a PC) or
-buy a trailer, put the dogs and kids in there and hope that the garage is still large enough to park etc etc. (external storage). With all the drawbacks that brings with it.
Do you now see, what Apple is doing here?
It's not impossible, but it's imprudent.
And those people suggesting to buy an external Xserve RAID are suggesting that the family father go buy a 400'000$ truck in order to be able to put the 2 kids and the dogs in there. Look at the perspective...
G-News
Originally posted by NaplesX
By the way, I found sight that shows you how to put a G4 MB in a PC case and it will fit an abundance of drives and stuff. It actuall seems very cool and is not that expensive. [/B]
OK, what is the site? I have seen several projects people have done posted on the web.
Originally posted by RBR
OK, what is the site? I have seen several projects people have done posted on the web.
http://www.macopz.com/buildamac/
Look guys, please don't interprate the fact that peaple don't agree with this expansion equals usability thing, means we don't agree that it is a valad point. I am not sure that it is as big an issue it seems to be with you guys.
Here is another point of view:
Lets pretend you buy a new G5 today, you use it and find it totally functional except for the fact that you have two drives itching to stuff into it. Lets say that you find six month later that apple has indeed engineered better cooling system an opend the case for more expansion. I personally think that apple will not do this. You van turn around and sell you G5 on ebay or something and get close or as much for it as you paid and buy the newest model. You may be out of %10 or so.
Ebay changes the picture when it comes to this kind of stuff. It is kinda like renting equipment till you get what you need.
There is some kind of preconceived notion that if a computer does not have expansion bays it is not entirely usable. This way of thinking was created by microsoft. Remember when they released windows 95 everyone had to buy memory hard drives etc. Then with 98 the same thing and so on. This has caused people to assume that you will need to upgarde when an update of an OS is released. MS has become the author of perpetual upgrade and i see alot of people buying into it.
Reality dictates that a certain abitly to expand in necisary, of course. But I think that Apple has taken into account the whole resale market that exists. I saw an used Apple Cube that was selling for 1300 on ebay. Now that is resale value.
The G5 will be neither.
SO there. Every good and hacked now? Stop with the personal insults.
Point 1: Very very few people really need a second optical drive.
Point 2: Apple likely found that so few actually used the second drive spot, that it was a waste of their time and their customers' money to include it: "Wow, all of 250 people are upset about this. Let's spend $10 million to suit them."
I want a chocolate-flavored mouse.
Originally posted by G-News
I'd like some empirical data on that, instead of some idea you pulled out of your ass.
If so many people were clammering for more expansion why would apple, who has such a small market share decide to remove what was could increase it.
Any thinking person would conclude what the previous poster "jccbin" did. To assume otherwise would be to assume apple has decided to stop making money and just give up.
Originally posted by NaplesX
If so many people were clammering for more expansion why would apple, who has such a small market share decide to remove what was could increase it.
Any thinking person would conclude what the previous poster "jccbin" did. To assume otherwise would be to assume apple has decided to stop making money and just give up.
No, a thinking person would conclude that Apple is not very good at designing expandable cases or simply chooses to do things in a way that is not very expandable. Look at the past history of crippled machines (such as the Blue and White) which Apple has foisted on an unsuspecting public.
Originally posted by RBR
No, a thinking person would conclude that Apple is not very good at designing expandable cases or simply chooses to do things in a way that is not very expandable. Look at the past history of crippled machines (such as the Blue and White) which Apple has foisted on an unsuspecting public.
What I meant was a clear thinking person.