looks like nothing more than a shuttle XPC painted black and nicely spec'd. And, yes, it is what the consumer mac should be.
1 optical bay
2 HDD bays
1 PCI slot
1 AGP slot
1 CPU (on a daughtercard)
2-4 RAM slots
nice little front (TRAY) loading optical, your choice of LCD, CRT, or any combination of two. Priced from 799-1999. Lose the emac, keep the iMac for people who prefer AIO machines. Upgradeability v. a widescreen LCD, the consumer chooses -- what a novel concept, eh?
<strong>.....And, yes, it is what the consumer mac should be.
1 optical bay
2 HDD bays
1 PCI slot
1 AGP slot
1 CPU (on a daughtercard)
2-4 RAM slots
nice little front (TRAY) loading optical, your choice of LCD, CRT, or any combination of two. Priced from 799-1999. Lose the emac, keep the iMac for people who prefer AIO machines. Upgradeability v. a widescreen LCD, the consumer chooses -- what a novel concept, eh?
looks like nothing more than a shuttle XPC painted black and nicely spec'd. <hr></blockquote>
Well duh! !
I own a Shuttle XPC and am quite familiar with their products. Ditto with other HTPC/media PC too e.g. they are just well-spec'ed PCs. We just don't have the OS!
Rip the panel of the iMac and you have a cube! A cube in the shape of a half sphere. With a ADC port it would be pointless with a DVI it would hurt iMac sales. With a VGA output (cheap flat panels and the CRT) it would not only replace the eMac but also hurt the iMac.
The iMac is a resurected cube with a flatpanel attached to it so why make an other cube?
<strong>Rip the panel of the iMac and you have a cube! A cube in the shape of a half sphere. With a ADC port it would be pointless with a DVI it would hurt iMac sales. With a VGA output (cheap flat panels and the CRT) it would not only replace the eMac but also hurt the iMac.
The iMac is a resurected cube with a flatpanel attached to it so why make an other cube?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why make a Cube? Why make a Camaro, Firebird, and Trans Am? Especially if your making a Corvette? Consumers want options, and the Tower is too expensive to give the "low end" consumer options. And the AIO design only cators to part of the market, and is less relavent now that LCD monitors are comming down in price enough to compete with CRT's.
A low priced Cube would probably be a better "switch" computer than the FP iMac even with it's "limited" expandability it is more expandale than the iMac (at least you can add the full 1.5 GB of memory without taking it in to an "authorized technician", a big selling point with me), and they would have an even lower "advertised" price becouse they wouldnt have the overhead of the monitor...posibbly as low as $699, with a disclaimer at the bottom of the add "not including monitor." It would sell even better if they could get 1 PCI slot in with the AGP, but they would have to increase the size to accomidate that.
Bottom line, while the iMac is "thinking different," the lack of a comperably priced "headless" consumer model is anything but "thinking different," and limits the potential market share gains that Apple could get from the consumer.
While Apple is one of the few companies that sells a decent number of AIO computers, I really think that a great many of those sales come from mac-heads who just can't afford a powermac. IF Apple offered an affordable tower or headless and moderately expandable computer (again at a decent price unlike the cube) they would sell very well, possibly better than the iMac.
ANd that's really not a problem at all. A mini tower would be cheaper to make and update than an iMac and even if priced slightly lower it could carry a better margin thanks to a lack of LCD, arm, and custom enclosure/mobo/PSU.
<strong>While Apple is one of the few companies that sells a decent number of AIO computers, I really think that a great many of those sales come from mac-heads who just can't afford a powermac. IF Apple offered an affordable tower or headless and moderately expandable computer (again at a decent price unlike the cube) they would sell very well, possibly better than the iMac.
ANd that's really not a problem at all. A mini tower would be cheaper to make and update than an iMac and even if priced slightly lower it could carry a better margin thanks to a lack of LCD, arm, and custom enclosure/mobo/PSU.
There is the logic that would work, position the margine half way between the iMac and PM to make up for lost sales in both lines. Yes it might be more expensive than it could be, but it should still be less than the iMac.
Sometime back (around 6-8 months or so) there was a news item about a Rock group refusing to give apple permission to use a song in one of their advertisements. The product was mentioned as "Cube computer software". If my memory serves me right one of the Band members were quoted.
Could this be a mistake on their part and the Cube Computer software actually mean Cube computer?
My "guess" is that this means that the next generation Powermac would not be a tower design but be based on the highly acclaimed Cube Design.
iDunno, I have nothing against the industrial design of the towers, you really cannot hope for anything better in terms of a tower case. Though a long time ago, I posited that big and little cubes could be a good way to do professional and consumer desktops.
<strong>Sometime back (around 6-8 months or so) there was a news item about a Rock group refusing to give apple permission to use a song in one of their advertisements. The product was mentioned as "Cube computer software". If my memory serves me right one of the Band members were quoted.
Could this be a mistake on their part and the Cube Computer software actually mean Cube computer?
My "guess" is that this means that the next generation Powermac would not be a tower design but be based on the highly acclaimed Cube Design.
Any takers?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Does anyone remember the rucus raised when Apple reduced the number of PCI slots down to 3 + an AGP slot? I dont think Apple is ready to revisit the bad press that this move made in the pro-video market. The bottom line is that even with FireWire, there is a need for PCI cards for expansion, and the more the better for the Pro markets. For a consumer computer they can get away with limiting this a little, or in some market segments eleminate them altogether. They already have one that eleminates it in the iMac, now for broader market appeal the Apple needs a happy medium between the iMac and PowerMac where expansion is concerned. 1 AGP slot, and preferably one to two PCI slots would fit the bill.
The reasons that these are needed are that some people like the "idea" of expansion even if they never use it. Other people will look at the ability to adopt future technology as a major point in their decision to purchase a coomputer, yet cant afford to pay the price for a "Pro" computer for personal use. If you buy an iMac today, you are limited to the onboard audio, video, communications. PCI slots allow you to adopt this new technology as it comes out without buying a new computer. Apple is currently ignoring the needs of this consumer, thus limiting the effectiveness of its "switch" campaign as well as the potential market share gains that this could bring them.
Kill the iMac, bring back the cube at a nice low price to replace it. Apple would then sell more displays, and each time someone wanted to replace their old cube, they can do it cheaper because they dont have to buy a new display.
What if the new design is based on the cube, but manages to retain the expandability of the current tower design? The size of the cube would have to be bigger of course...
Apple already has 3 different destop designs.... the eMac, iMac and PowerMac. i doubt their going to clutter that line up anymore by adding in a cube, which cant be distinguished from any of the other desktops. The cube didnt work before for a reason...no one wanted it, no one could afford it. bringing it back at a cheaper price would hurt iMac sales. It WAS a cool looking computer, but hehe....i wouldnt buy it. id rather spend that money on a fully featured imac(with monitor) or a mid-range powermac. the market for that cube was so small that it failed.....big surprise.
And what the hell is a cube shaped powermac ? can u fathom the size of a tower if the decided to use a cube shape ? thats just stupid..... a cuboid, maybe. but a cube ? i doubt it.
All the R&D that went into the cube was put into the FP iMac. that money was not wsted.
And to those who want to do away with the iMac and replace it with a cube....lol...yeah...that would work... "We pationately believe that all-in-ones are the way to go"-Steve Jobs. And most of us agree with him.....because most ppl dont upgrade macs...they buy em...use em for 3-4 years and buy another one. this isnt a hot-rodded industry like that of a PC where you tweak-n-hack your system ever 2 months to try and stay on top of progress.
The Cube is gone....and we will only see it come back IF....the high end iMac's price goes below the low-end PowerMac's price...and that would make room for one MAYBE 2 cubes.
Apple already has 3 consumer desktops, and they're all AIO computers. AS it stands now they're making three times as many different models as they need to, tripling their costs, to sell basically the same genre of machine in three different ways. This is far more wasteful than having only two consumer machines. ONE A-I-O and one not in order to cover two differrent types of consumer, rather than forcing all consumers into one niche based on price.
The iMac CRT and eMac both have no good reason to exist. An iBook is a better proposition than an iMac CRT -- while both are underpowered, at 999, a portable mac with a crisp LCD makes a better computer than the gumdrop. The eMac is a stopgap at best. Two years ago, it would have been great, but now it's just late, and WILL disappear, edu or not, once LCD's reach a throw-away price. In fact, looking at the cost of components, there isn't any good reason why the FP iMacs can't reach down to 899 territory with a little HDD and optical swappage.
Now some will say, what about education? Firstly, the FP iMac can easily cover that territory by specifying a thicker glass overlay on the screen and providing a locked (non adjustable) arm. Or better yet...
A cube redux. Plenty of schools have perfectly good CRTs lying around. Those might liek to buy a computer with a detachable monitor to save some of their investment. You could sell such a machine for a lot less than an iMac FP and still make as much profit or more (thanks to simpler manufacturing). Who really cares if you canibalize iMac sales? You still get mac sales of similar or better profitability!
Have both models span the same range of prices. Then consumers will decide whether they prefer an AIO or some expansion and display flexibility. It's a win win situation. A cube redux (priced right) would not present any channel baggage at all, it is the eMac and the iMac CRT that represent unneccessary production costs.
I think that if Apple does away with the eMac and the CRT-imac, it would be nice to see the cube take it's place...... but the price range would have to be $799-to the price of a low-end iMac.
entry 'cube'
-867 Mhz G4
-40GB HD
-upto 1.5GB RAM
-Radeon 9000
$799
high-end 'cube'
-933 Mhz G4
-60GB HD
-upto 1.5GB
-Radeon 9000
$999
then come the iMacs....
low-end
867 Mhz...15"lcd, $1299, etc,etc....
that would definately position the cube as a desktop machine for owners of the old powermacs who do not need the built in display of the iMacs or cannot afford the pricy PowerMacs....
it would also be positioned and tweaked for games....and come with the soundSticks standard.
AND it would be great for schools who wont have to get rid of old monitors, and can use existing displays with the cubes.
The idea for the new cubes should be...existing first and second generation Powermac G4 owners and PowerMac G3 owners who want a new machine but not new displays, it would be great for schools, and i definately see it being a hit if positioned for that market.
I sorta agree, but I think the ideal cube replacement would pretty much overlap the iMac FP while stretching a bit lower at the low end, and having a better spec on the high-end.
That is,
Cube Redux would span a range between 799-1599 while iMac FP would span a range from 999-1899.
If you want a headless, low-cost computer, the Cube isn't it. The case is expensive and difficult to manufacture, and the machine is top-heavy, which makes it grossly unsuited for education (think about kids knocking it around). The square shape limits the size and heat dissipation that any expansion cards can have. The vertical disc drive sometimes has trouble spitting out discs, and it runs slower than a horizontally mounted drive. You have to tip the machine over to plug something in, which is my least favorite aspect of the Cube. Oh, and the power supply is external.
Mind you, I love my Cube. But it was not in any way designed for the low cost market. It was meant as a pro/executive machine. Bluntly, it was meant for Steve Jobs' own desk. If it comes back, it'll be as a midrange desktop. But there'll have to be a hook for it that there wasn't before.
Now, if you want a good low-cost, expandable form, look no further than the 6100/LC pizza box. It's low-slung and extremely stable, it can be used as a monitor stand, and it's deep enough to accommodate a full-size (12") AGP card, maybe a PCI card, and definitely the power supply. (Not that education would have much use for either sort of card, so the motherboard should have a graphics chipset onboard, with the AGP card a BTO option.) If you need to service it, pop the top off (or slide it out Xserve style, so that you don't have to move the monitor!) and there's everything laid out flat for immediate access. The shape is naturally unobtrusive, so it can get by with a relatively inexpensive case without looking like, say, a Dell. (Tangent: I think people here woefully underestimate how much Apple spends on cases. During the Bad Old Days, Apple spent $100 more per case than the clone makers, just to get the slightly nicer plastic with the bevelled edges. Look at their cases now!) And, of course, the optical drive is mounted horizontally, as nature intended.
Back on topic: As for a media center, I remain skeptical. Right now, there are two problems: Media components haven't standardized on digital signals over FireWire yet, and media companies are desperate to criminalize any attempt to handle (and manipulate) their digital media in any creative or unexpected way. If you look at what MS and Intel are trying to do to make the PC look harmless to Hollywood, it doesn't say much for the potential of any "media center" computer to allow the sort of creativity and flexibility that Macs are intended to facilitate.
Darn Cubes! I have two, one at home and one at the university. Only thing wrong with them is they look beautiful, do everything, and won't give me an excuse to replace them! I've already gone the max with Cinema displays ---Oh yes, that is the onl y thing wrong, can't run the HD Display on the standard video board, but that's hardly enough to justify changing is it?
I would love to believe that this kind of marvelous synergy would be seen again [just don't mention the power brick to any of us Cube-lovers, unless you are looking for a kick in the shins. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
But I don't see it happening. We've alread got a new cube in the new iMac, and now with the 17" there's nothing to call us out. I am afraid I own classics that will one day join my original 128K, 512K, IIci, and other marvelous machines on display.
Comments
I have a SFF (small form factor PC) too but not the OS. Hope MS will release that separately soon for those of us who want to set up a HTPC.
1 optical bay
2 HDD bays
1 PCI slot
1 AGP slot
1 CPU (on a daughtercard)
2-4 RAM slots
nice little front (TRAY) loading optical, your choice of LCD, CRT, or any combination of two. Priced from 799-1999. Lose the emac, keep the iMac for people who prefer AIO machines. Upgradeability v. a widescreen LCD, the consumer chooses -- what a novel concept, eh?
[ 12-10-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
<strong>.....And, yes, it is what the consumer mac should be.
1 optical bay
2 HDD bays
1 PCI slot
1 AGP slot
1 CPU (on a daughtercard)
2-4 RAM slots
nice little front (TRAY) loading optical, your choice of LCD, CRT, or any combination of two. Priced from 799-1999. Lose the emac, keep the iMac for people who prefer AIO machines. Upgradeability v. a widescreen LCD, the consumer chooses -- what a novel concept, eh?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
And my signiture is
looks like nothing more than a shuttle XPC painted black and nicely spec'd. <hr></blockquote>
Well duh! !
I own a Shuttle XPC and am quite familiar with their products. Ditto with other HTPC/media PC too e.g. they are just well-spec'ed PCs. We just don't have the OS!
The iMac is a resurected cube with a flatpanel attached to it so why make an other cube?
<strong>Rip the panel of the iMac and you have a cube! A cube in the shape of a half sphere. With a ADC port it would be pointless with a DVI it would hurt iMac sales. With a VGA output (cheap flat panels and the CRT) it would not only replace the eMac but also hurt the iMac.
The iMac is a resurected cube with a flatpanel attached to it so why make an other cube?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why make a Cube? Why make a Camaro, Firebird, and Trans Am? Especially if your making a Corvette? Consumers want options, and the Tower is too expensive to give the "low end" consumer options. And the AIO design only cators to part of the market, and is less relavent now that LCD monitors are comming down in price enough to compete with CRT's.
A low priced Cube would probably be a better "switch" computer than the FP iMac even with it's "limited" expandability it is more expandale than the iMac (at least you can add the full 1.5 GB of memory without taking it in to an "authorized technician", a big selling point with me), and they would have an even lower "advertised" price becouse they wouldnt have the overhead of the monitor...posibbly as low as $699, with a disclaimer at the bottom of the add "not including monitor." It would sell even better if they could get 1 PCI slot in with the AGP, but they would have to increase the size to accomidate that.
Bottom line, while the iMac is "thinking different," the lack of a comperably priced "headless" consumer model is anything but "thinking different," and limits the potential market share gains that Apple could get from the consumer.
[ 12-10-2002: Message edited by: JCG ]</p>
ANd that's really not a problem at all. A mini tower would be cheaper to make and update than an iMac and even if priced slightly lower it could carry a better margin thanks to a lack of LCD, arm, and custom enclosure/mobo/PSU.
[ 12-10-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
<strong>While Apple is one of the few companies that sells a decent number of AIO computers, I really think that a great many of those sales come from mac-heads who just can't afford a powermac. IF Apple offered an affordable tower or headless and moderately expandable computer (again at a decent price unlike the cube) they would sell very well, possibly better than the iMac.
ANd that's really not a problem at all. A mini tower would be cheaper to make and update than an iMac and even if priced slightly lower it could carry a better margin thanks to a lack of LCD, arm, and custom enclosure/mobo/PSU.
[ 12-10-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
There is the logic that would work, position the margine half way between the iMac and PM to make up for lost sales in both lines. Yes it might be more expensive than it could be, but it should still be less than the iMac.
Could this be a mistake on their part and the Cube Computer software actually mean Cube computer?
My "guess" is that this means that the next generation Powermac would not be a tower design but be based on the highly acclaimed Cube Design.
Any takers?
<strong>Sometime back (around 6-8 months or so) there was a news item about a Rock group refusing to give apple permission to use a song in one of their advertisements. The product was mentioned as "Cube computer software". If my memory serves me right one of the Band members were quoted.
Could this be a mistake on their part and the Cube Computer software actually mean Cube computer?
My "guess" is that this means that the next generation Powermac would not be a tower design but be based on the highly acclaimed Cube Design.
Any takers?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Does anyone remember the rucus raised when Apple reduced the number of PCI slots down to 3 + an AGP slot? I dont think Apple is ready to revisit the bad press that this move made in the pro-video market. The bottom line is that even with FireWire, there is a need for PCI cards for expansion, and the more the better for the Pro markets. For a consumer computer they can get away with limiting this a little, or in some market segments eleminate them altogether. They already have one that eleminates it in the iMac, now for broader market appeal the Apple needs a happy medium between the iMac and PowerMac where expansion is concerned. 1 AGP slot, and preferably one to two PCI slots would fit the bill.
The reasons that these are needed are that some people like the "idea" of expansion even if they never use it. Other people will look at the ability to adopt future technology as a major point in their decision to purchase a coomputer, yet cant afford to pay the price for a "Pro" computer for personal use. If you buy an iMac today, you are limited to the onboard audio, video, communications. PCI slots allow you to adopt this new technology as it comes out without buying a new computer. Apple is currently ignoring the needs of this consumer, thus limiting the effectiveness of its "switch" campaign as well as the potential market share gains that this could bring them.
[Edit:] ...Leading to increased sales.
[ 12-11-2002: Message edited by: T'hain Esh Kelch ]</p>
And what the hell is a cube shaped powermac ? can u fathom the size of a tower if the decided to use a cube shape ? thats just stupid..... a cuboid, maybe. but a cube ? i doubt it.
All the R&D that went into the cube was put into the FP iMac. that money was not wsted.
And to those who want to do away with the iMac and replace it with a cube....lol...yeah...that would work... "We pationately believe that all-in-ones are the way to go"-Steve Jobs. And most of us agree with him.....because most ppl dont upgrade macs...they buy em...use em for 3-4 years and buy another one. this isnt a hot-rodded industry like that of a PC where you tweak-n-hack your system ever 2 months to try and stay on top of progress.
The Cube is gone....and we will only see it come back IF....the high end iMac's price goes below the low-end PowerMac's price...and that would make room for one MAYBE 2 cubes.
The iMac CRT and eMac both have no good reason to exist. An iBook is a better proposition than an iMac CRT -- while both are underpowered, at 999, a portable mac with a crisp LCD makes a better computer than the gumdrop. The eMac is a stopgap at best. Two years ago, it would have been great, but now it's just late, and WILL disappear, edu or not, once LCD's reach a throw-away price. In fact, looking at the cost of components, there isn't any good reason why the FP iMacs can't reach down to 899 territory with a little HDD and optical swappage.
Now some will say, what about education? Firstly, the FP iMac can easily cover that territory by specifying a thicker glass overlay on the screen and providing a locked (non adjustable) arm. Or better yet...
A cube redux. Plenty of schools have perfectly good CRTs lying around. Those might liek to buy a computer with a detachable monitor to save some of their investment. You could sell such a machine for a lot less than an iMac FP and still make as much profit or more (thanks to simpler manufacturing). Who really cares if you canibalize iMac sales? You still get mac sales of similar or better profitability!
Have both models span the same range of prices. Then consumers will decide whether they prefer an AIO or some expansion and display flexibility. It's a win win situation. A cube redux (priced right) would not present any channel baggage at all, it is the eMac and the iMac CRT that represent unneccessary production costs.
entry 'cube'
-867 Mhz G4
-40GB HD
-upto 1.5GB RAM
-Radeon 9000
$799
high-end 'cube'
-933 Mhz G4
-60GB HD
-upto 1.5GB
-Radeon 9000
$999
then come the iMacs....
low-end
867 Mhz...15"lcd, $1299, etc,etc....
that would definately position the cube as a desktop machine for owners of the old powermacs who do not need the built in display of the iMacs or cannot afford the pricy PowerMacs....
it would also be positioned and tweaked for games....and come with the soundSticks standard.
AND it would be great for schools who wont have to get rid of old monitors, and can use existing displays with the cubes.
The idea for the new cubes should be...existing first and second generation Powermac G4 owners and PowerMac G3 owners who want a new machine but not new displays, it would be great for schools, and i definately see it being a hit if positioned for that market.
[ 12-11-2002: Message edited by: Hawkeye_a ]</p>
That is,
Cube Redux would span a range between 799-1599 while iMac FP would span a range from 999-1899.
[ 12-11-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
Mind you, I love my Cube. But it was not in any way designed for the low cost market. It was meant as a pro/executive machine. Bluntly, it was meant for Steve Jobs' own desk. If it comes back, it'll be as a midrange desktop. But there'll have to be a hook for it that there wasn't before.
Now, if you want a good low-cost, expandable form, look no further than the 6100/LC pizza box. It's low-slung and extremely stable, it can be used as a monitor stand, and it's deep enough to accommodate a full-size (12") AGP card, maybe a PCI card, and definitely the power supply. (Not that education would have much use for either sort of card, so the motherboard should have a graphics chipset onboard, with the AGP card a BTO option.) If you need to service it, pop the top off (or slide it out Xserve style, so that you don't have to move the monitor!) and there's everything laid out flat for immediate access. The shape is naturally unobtrusive, so it can get by with a relatively inexpensive case without looking like, say, a Dell. (Tangent: I think people here woefully underestimate how much Apple spends on cases. During the Bad Old Days, Apple spent $100 more per case than the clone makers, just to get the slightly nicer plastic with the bevelled edges. Look at their cases now!) And, of course, the optical drive is mounted horizontally, as nature intended.
Back on topic: As for a media center, I remain skeptical. Right now, there are two problems: Media components haven't standardized on digital signals over FireWire yet, and media companies are desperate to criminalize any attempt to handle (and manipulate) their digital media in any creative or unexpected way. If you look at what MS and Intel are trying to do to make the PC look harmless to Hollywood, it doesn't say much for the potential of any "media center" computer to allow the sort of creativity and flexibility that Macs are intended to facilitate.
[ 12-11-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
I would love to believe that this kind of marvelous synergy would be seen again [just don't mention the power brick to any of us Cube-lovers, unless you are looking for a kick in the shins. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
But I don't see it happening. We've alread got a new cube in the new iMac, and now with the 17" there's nothing to call us out. I am afraid I own classics that will one day join my original 128K, 512K, IIci, and other marvelous machines on display.
<strong>The iMac is a resurected cube with a flatpanel attached to it so why make an other cube?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, I have to agree with that! <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />