[[[my AMD PC is 6 years old and bits of it are nearly 10 years old.]]]
That's point number on. If you refer back to my earlier posts, you will see what I mean when I talk about return on investment... Look at all the $$ you spent over that time *upgrading* to get to the point where you are now. It's probably a lot more than you would spend for a completely new machine. Also consider the fact that computer "geeks" like us are slowly becoming the minority. MOST people who buy ANY computer today have more than enough power to do the things that they normally do from day to day. These people do not need *more* in the future. If they do, they simply buy a new machine because the ROI is better.
[[[A hermetically sealed desktop at the prices Apple charges is just too restrictive.]]]
*Sigh* Dude, try working on one, It's not hermetically sealed.
[[[For the price it ought to include as a minimum the same ability to EASILY swap-out or add internal drives, upgrade the video card and I/O and CPU. ]]]
Why?!?? We've been through this. I explained it. Amorph explained it... Take the foil hat off already, the aliens aren't trying to read your mind! Seriously though.. This isn't needed. The drives that come with most computers these days are MORE THAN ENOUGH for MOST people in that target market. On the other hand, If a larger drive is required, there are two routs that you or any user can take by the time you'd be actually needing a larger capacity unit; probably well past Apple's warrantee. They are:
- Open the model and swap out the drive itself and keep the nice tidy enclosure.
- Add an external FireWire drive and have the ability of swapping/adding/daisy-chaining other/more external drives and devices that allow for superior portability between different machines.
The point is, unless you collect TONS of games, MOST people don't need this vast amount of storage that YOU require. You seem to be projecting YOUR needs and desires onto the rest of the masses. I mean how many hard drives do you swap out during a 4 year period anyway? Give us a break... because you seem to be nitpicking and splitting hairs
As far as video cards... Again, MOST people never even consider this because what's available is more than adequate for their needs. By the time they even start to consider a new card (for whatever reason), it's likely that they will simply look at completely new systems anyway. Furthermore, Apple isn't aiming the iMac at the market you describe. If I didn't know better, I'd say you were a mega-gamer...
I/O and CPU... This is ridiculous. Again, I have to mention the poor ROI. Not to mention the fact that this course of action buys you very little time if any at all. Most of the people buying computers these days are the same people who are buying refrigerators, washing machines and TVs. These people aren't going to be futzing around with the unit unless it breaks or fails in some way.
[[[I can buy this future proofing ability in the most basic 500USD PC tower to say nothing of more expensive units which offer this same easy expansion and about 2X more real world speed ]]]
I got news for you ... what you are describing is NOT future-proffing at all. The return on investments over a given time interval need to be figured into the total cost of ownership. Future proof means not having a *need* to ever upgrade to something for some specific amount of time. In the case with any brand computer purchased today, people shouldn't have a need to upgrade for at least 5 to 6 years If it costs you extra on top of what you already spent then it isn't future proof... Again, it's a buzzword that's thrown around rather loosely these days.
[[[Apple can plan all the obsolescence it wants, but it isn't getting a desktop sale from me until it stops treating desktop costomers with utter contempt]]]
I'm not sure what your particular *needs* are, why don't you fill us all in, eh?
[[[Apple has to earn my money, they aren't, and as the long term decline suggests, they aren't earning a lot of peoples' money either. ]]]
I suppose you said the same about Compaq or any of the other dead PC manufacturers that are no longer with us... In the end people buy a new machine.
The more I read this thread, the more I notice how it morphed into a thread not about the iMac AIO, but rather a plea for Apple to design a dirt cheap tower. Why doesn't someone start a thread titled "A Dirt Cheap Mac Tower/Cube for Average Consumers", and' leave this one to the iMac AIO.
I spent very little upgrading it thanks. I bought a second HDD for it when for 150 and a new 17" monitor for 250 Canadian (about 400 in total actually upgrades, or 250USD.) I pulled the soundcard out of a fried P75 and bought a burner for it. Everything was much cheaper than adding drives externally, and the performance boost from P75 to AMD300 was substantial. Re-used the case, 3.5" floppy and RAM (back when RAM COST A DAMN LOT OF MONEY) It's cheaper, you can't argue different, I know what I spent compared to having to re-buy everything again.
If the warrantee is void upon my opening up of the case, that qualifies it as hermetically sealed. I've dirtied and any sniff of meddling from Apple will immediately void my warrantee. When a 30 dollar PCI card gives me I/O functionality I wouldn't otherwise have, that IS futureproofing at it's best. Apple might want me to buy a whole new machine to get an extra port but I'd rather spend the 30 bucks and happily use my machine for another 3-4 years or untill I decide I want a new machine.
Apple treats its desktop consumers with contempt, basically. It would do the same to it's laptop customers, but every maker pretty much faces the same constraints in that market.
[[[I spent very little upgrading it thanks. I bought a second HDD for it when for 150 and a new 17" monitor for 250 Canadian (about 400 in total actually upgrades, or 250USD.) I pulled the soundcard out of a fried P75 and bought a burner for it. Everything was much cheaper than adding drives externally, and the performance boost from P75 to AMD300 was substantial. Re-used the case, 3.5" floppy and RAM ]]]
Again, MOST people (the every day Joe's) aren't doing this. People don't want to open the case. Macs already come with a burner and decent sound for a PC. If people want the BEST sound, they buy dedicated products for the job. That's where home stereo systems come in... And as you know stereo systems can even get more expensive 4 Fully loaded Macs snd for what, when people can go to the local CostCo and pick up a nifty 75 dollar stereo that does the same job? Yet, there is still a market for top quality sound gear even though the difference in sound quality between the high-end and low end is negligible for MOST people. As far as better sound, why not just pipe it through the home stereo receiver? Use a break-out cable or wireless SoundLink unit if wires bug you or use a USB stereo link to avoid the inherently noisy quality that a lot of PC sound cards offer. After all, they are usually installed inside a computer case. The point is that there are BETTER options than a feeble attempt to *upgrade* the sound card to get higher sound quality, and unless you are into Pro-Audio, MOST users haven't the *need* for this level of sound, besides, you're not gonna get that with computer speakers and some crappy sound card with a flashy name.
[[[back when RAM COST A DAMN LOT OF MONEY) It's cheaper, you can't argue different]]]
No one is... RAM is the BEST upgrade anyone can do and the iMac allows this.
[[[If the warrantee is void upon my opening up of the case, that qualifies it as hermetically sealed. ]]]
Well, there isn't an UNLIMITED warrantee that says you can *never* open the case and I doubt that anyone would need to open it with in that time period anyway. After the warrantee you can open it to your heart's content... Again, Apple isn't the only one doing this, besides, the Warrantee lasts but so long. You can upgrade the hard drive if necessary, but highly unlikely for MOST people given their current size. For me most people like to have a shuttle-drive that they can take from computer to computer.
However, having access to the innards a MUST for Wintelon PCs where things might not work correctly because it's usually a complete mishmash of parts (think Frankenstein's monster) that even M$ can't guarantee that the components will work correctly together upon installation. In order to troubleshoot the thing while on the phone with tech support, Wintel users *need* to have that access, but then again, Apple's towers aren't void when they are opened, they allow user access and configuration. The iMac is exactly what it is.. and AIO. What you want is a TOWER not an iMac. Have you ever thought of that? PC AIOs are just like the iMac in this regard except they really suck.
\t
[[[I've dirtied and any sniff of meddling from Apple will immediately void my warrantee.]]]
Just like on any other AIO offered by other companies.
[[[When a 30 dollar PCI card gives me I/O functionality I wouldn't otherwise have, that IS futureproofing at it's best. ]]]
What about giving it to you with the machine the first time around? What I/O functionality does the iMac lack that it would require a PCI slot? How many of these slots would the iMac need before it becomes ridiculous to the point where you say "Gee, what I'm describing here is really a tower...not an AIO" ?\t
\t
[[[Apple treats its desktop consumers with contempt, basically. It would do the same to it's laptop customers, but every maker pretty much faces the same constraints in that market.]]]
<strong>That's point number on. If you refer back to my earlier posts,</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey Ed M, learn to quote... Sorry, but had to get it out of my skinn. Reason being that it's hard to read your posts. No hard feelings, ok Ed M? <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" />
Not picking on Apple's AIO specifically, just 'cause this is an Apple board, I hate ALL AIO's for the same reasons. IF iMacs cost about half as much as they do, then I wouldn't mind so much, but they don't and I do. Regardless of what peope are or aren't doing with PC towers, that's what they're buying, thatussually the most cost effective solution, that's what Apple ought to sell at a reasonable price.
Recently, analysts opined that QIII was the only killer app around the bend that might entice PC users to upgrade their machines. Now I know mac users are not gamers, that's a niche within a niche, but estimates put PC gamers at up to 30% of the desktop market, that's a big chunk of people who do BTO and upgrade parts. But no matter about them. People want upgradeability as a measure of security, even if they never use it. I want, will use it, and will come out saving literally hundreds in the long run because of it, just as I did with my first computer. Apple can take two roads, they can take the attitude that my savings mean fewer new box purchases over my buying life, which it might. Aleternatively, they can take the attitude that these are features I want and use and will sway me to purchase their offerings when I decide it's time for a new machine. If they take the latter I may buy a machine every 5-7 years instead of every 3. If they take the former I simply will not buy even one of their desktops. Period. Simple. They can sell me what I want, or they can sell me nothing, they aren't the only game in town, not by a long shot. As the number add up, there are a lot more people following exactly the same train of thought as I am, and very few, and every year comparatively less, following Jobs' mantra of "Lets get 'em buying disposable machines at workstation prices."
A platform with as little marketshare as the mac has to get a whole lot more attentive to customer wants in a hurry. Yes, Apple is bigger than many other companies doing well and smaller than some doing not so well, but they must support a platform on their own and unless that user-base grows as a percentage of the market it's just going to get harder for them to be even remotely price competitive.
I may sound like an idiot to you, but come wednesday will be the first day that I own an Apple computer and no APPL stock. I do what's best for me, not Apple. Draw whatever conclusions you want.
A platform with as little marketshare as the mac has to get a whole lot more attentive to customer wants in a hurry.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple designs their machines for their customers. To the extent that the word "design" applies to PC towers at all, they're designed for the biggest Wintel customers: OEMs and IT departments. End users are an afterthought.
If you think the iMac should be transformed into a corporate desktop that doesn't look too alien to Microsoft certified technicians, keep at it. If you think it should be aimed at consumers, you're welcome to imagine a design that is easier to set up and use than the iMac is. After all, hardly anyone buys a computer to upgrade it. They buy a computer to use it. Your own upgrading habits don't count, because they're the equivalent of buying a 6100/60 and finding a G3 upgrade for it. You're already so hopelessly far behind the curve that things like hardware warranties are long since expired, and replacement parts are dirt cheap because they're obsolete. If I wanted to go that route, I could go to university surplus and pick up a Life Savers iMac for $25 or so. Try upgrading your system with the bleeding-edge parts that your vaunted PC gamer would consider acceptable and then perhaps you'll see what Ed M. is talking about: Not upgrading a 6-year-old system to run like a 4-year-old system, but upgrading a system within the average upgrade cycle (3 years) to be current. Unless you expect Apple to release iMacs with the equivalent of a 300MHz AMD chip and an expandable chassis?
[[[Recently, analysts opined that QIII was the only killer app around the bend that might entice PC users to upgrade their machines. Now I know mac users are not gamers, that's a niche within a niche, but estimates put PC gamers at up to 30% of the desktop market, that's a big chunk of people who do BTO and upgrade parts]]]
A GAME?!?! LOL! Give me a break!
Those people should stick with console systems...Period. It's one of the reasons why a lot of PC people have hosed-up systems, they load them down with crap and God only knows what happens to that TRAIN WRECK known as the Windows Registry when things are installed and uninstalled. No wonder why you're preaching more and bigger hard drives; you need the frick'n storage for all those GAMES!...
Why not simply store various game categories onto hot-swappable external FireWire drives? Oh, that's right, M$ won't allow games or anything else to be *portable* thanks to that wonderful registry. Alas, even though you wouldn't be able to take that external hard drive loaded with games to a friends house and have it work on their system, you still can store a shit-load of 'em and use it on *your* system. Or is that a problem for Windows users too? I say this because other than games, everyone I know backs up their *data* on CDs and DVDs for archival purposes. And what would be easier than having a nice external FireWire drive to boot off of or to "re-image" the system if it gets hosed somehow? I think detachable components like hard disks are a great idea; they compliment the internal counterparts and they are portable at that
[[[People want upgradeability as a measure of security, even if they never use it.]]]
No, that's wrong. That's what SALESPEOPLE tell them. That's the myth that's been sold to them. Most people couldn't care less, but when they hear the salespeople telling them what *they* think the customer needs (in this case: "... and you can upgrade it." ) it causes the consumer (who doesn't know to much technical detail to begin with) to believe that they're better off erring on the side of caution and allow themselves to be sold on the "future upgrade" notion when it shouldn't even be a consideration at all unless they are in an advanced field where such options are needed, and these people aren't buying the dirt-cheap PCs either depending on their profession. Do you relay think they are designing Quake on those sub $1000.00 PCs that are "upgradeable"? Yeah, right ... lol
It's like this... What generally happens when someone (i.e., MOST people) feels that a machine has reached the end of its usefulness is that they will (at first) look to *upgrade* it. They usually find out in a hurry that it's going to cost more than if they simply decided to get a whole new system. That is, depending on the level of performance they expect from their upgrade. How much time will it *really* buy them? Not much and thus the ROI really starts to suck. If it's upgrading a *failing* system, it becomes even more applicable. With the "keep-it-alive" upgrade situation, it will generally cost more and more to keep it in working condition over time. Regardless of the components that are failing, the costs start to add up. Answer? ... just get a new system.
It's also worth mentioning that Apple's AIOs are easy enough to dismantle and work on if need be. It didn't hit me until I opened the iMac's case and realized that Apple probably expected some machines to come in for repairs, thus they designed it to be extremely EASY to repair and work on. They did a great job laying the innards out.
But getting back to the *myth* of upgradability that salespeople like to peddle,upgrading a computer is barely worth unless it's within the first 2 years of ownership. In the case of the iMac and MOST users, external components are readily available and they too can be taken to a new *future* machine if need be.. A printer can migrate, a FW hard disk can migrate, a USB component can migrate, a scanner ... the list goes on. The best thing to do when the machine is 2 years behind the current latest and greatest (this week) is to add memory. It's the BEST upgrade and provides the best ROI. But this can be tricky too depending on if you want to use the latest and greatest memory technology. If that's the case, then a new mobo and CPU are probably in order, but then the other components need to be taken into consideration and the time to configure and get it to work and it *still* hasn't bought you that much more time. MOST users are better off simply buying a completely new system. Besides, as stated earlier, these people aren't interested in futzing with their systems. They expect them to work and get 3 years out of them without having to open anything up! PERIOD! Apple knows this that's why everything is EXTERNAL on the iMac... If someone wants more hard drive they can plug it in themselves and *poof* they solved their dilemma and they are happy and they didn't have to open, dismantle, partition, reconfigure ANYTHING on the inside of the machine.
[[[They can sell me what I want, or they can sell me nothing, they aren't the only game in town, not by a long shot. ]]]
Then go buy a PC and forget about the Mac already. SHEESH!\t
Amorph has it *spot on* in his posts. -- what amazes me is that there are still people on this thread who just don't get the reasoning.
I realize what you're saying but I also realize that it doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Wherever end users may fit into the though process of PC builders, they do fit front and center into the buying patterns of home users.
Do I want a PC tower-like Mac? No. But I do want Apple to make an effort to nod in my general direction. An AGP slot, or PCI-express, or whatever is standard by the time they get around to building a headless consumer machine. A PPC daughtercard so that I have the option to upgrade my machine when the time comes, I may not, but I might when the price is right. An extra PCI slot, would be nice so that I could plug in whatever future standard emerges, but if I get a couple of firewire 1600 buses I'll be happy. Oh, and USB2.0, yes it's a bastard format, but thanks to poor promotion it's here in force and it's here to stay, might as well give it to us then, no point making us pay for your mistakes. Room for one oprical is OK, an empty slot for a second internal HDD would be gravy. Think cube/Shuttle HPC hybrid. Simple, upgradable, headless and affordable. If Apple really wanted to do something cool, they'd use a GFX card with HDTV out so that I can position my mac as a home A/V server. computer on TV display has sucked big ones until now, but a good (true) 1920x1080 display will show the UI quite well. The home computer may be headed there.
A cube is also ridiculously easy to set up and will only get easier as we run out of newbies. Eventually computers will be sold into a market of people that are born computer literate. Plugging and unplugging won't scare them in the least. I think Apple's claims about ease of use exaggerate the degree to which people really are intimidated, but then again there are people like my parents around. But my parents don't matter in the grand scheme of the computer market, they're old. People younger than us will dictate where the market goes, and they won't care if they have to plug or unplug something. People seem to think that I want Apple to build a boring 'mess of wires' box, but what I think is that they have to make a more honest effort to meet the market halfway, to mold their philosophies to make a more saleable product and in the process improve their offerings. You can't just be contemptuous of competing idiology, you have to accept that it also has considerable strengths of its own and try to make them part of your own repetoire without diluting your own unique strengths.
The original remark was that the iBook doesn't allow its optical to be hotswapped. Ditto for the iMac 'Lamp'.
The product cycling point(s) raised above as an explanation isn't good enough for me. If I want to swap my old CD-ROM and add a CD-RW/DVD-ROM combo drive or DVD-RW drive, I should be able to do that, no questions asked.
Hey Ed M, learn to quote... Sorry, but had to get it out of my skinn. Reason being that it's hard to read your posts. No hard feelings, ok Ed M? <img src="graemlins/cancer.gif" border="0" alt="[cancer]" /> </strong><hr></blockquote>
Thank you! I was going to say something also. Besides it being annoying reading all of his arguments with Matsu, his stupid quoting style is ridiculous.
No, that's wrong. That's what SALESPEOPLE tell them. That's the myth that's been sold to them. Most people couldn't care less, but when they hear the salespeople telling them what *they* think the customer needs (in this case: "... and you can upgrade it." ) it causes the consumer (who doesn't know to much technical detail to begin with) to believe that they're better off erring on the side of caution and allow themselves to be sold on the "future upgrade" notion when it shouldn't even be a consideration at all unless they are in an advanced field where such options are needed, and these people aren't buying the dirt-cheap PCs either depending on their profession. <hr></blockquote>
That might be true with some people, but I know I want to be able to upgrade my computer if I ever feel the need to. I got an iBook in 2001 because I wanted an LCD and at the time the iMacs still had CRTs. I would've loved to have gotten a tower because it's expandible, but the towers were out of my price range, and are still too expensive for what they have. Now I'm stuck with a slow processor, small hard drive and shitty graphics. I would've been in the same boat if I had an iMac (well the hard drive could always be upgraded). Would it really kill Apple to have a machine that's at least a little expandible and affordable?
Hmmm... people repeated ask for moderately upgradeable computers, they by a large margin buy more upgradable towers than any other kind of computer, could it be that they actually like knowing they can stretch the life of the machine? Nah, couldn't be, must be something else...
Yeah, Ed M, what's with the crazy quoting? Even my old quoting used speech marks for heaven sakes.
I'm a born again quoter (hell, I've had several private mails congratulating me on the new look ...obviously the new Bon Bon quoting system has deeply moved 'insider members...)
[quote] Now I'm stuck with a slow processor, small hard drive and shitty graphics. <hr></blockquote>
My point. The iMac2 I buy today would probably looked okay early last year. Specs wise. It's a year behind with the specs. And I can't go to Apple's store to up the GPU, CPU or motherboard. Ridiculous. Insane if you include the price
I don't want to be stuck with that kinda crap. Despite the 'in my own world of affluence where I can afford a new iMac2 each year so I don't care' style posts of certain Republican 'insider members...I guess I'm one of the poor huddled masses that, gee, I dunno, kinda wants to update his GPU, CPU, RAM, Motherboard beyond Apple's predefined limitations. Upgradability. Something every computer maker can offer bar Apple. Gee, guess Apple is innovating...y'know...leading the industry with built in obselecence. Nobody can touch them on that one. Where else can you spend more than a thousand smackers to get any kind of upgradability. (Memory not withstanding )
So. imac 2 design? Expandability? Upgradability? A bigger dome so we can FIT INDUSTRY STANDARD COMPONENTS IN IT?!?!?
HELLOOOOO APPLE!!! Like to sell a few more iMac2? Reboot the economy, built a cheaper entry level iMac2. Give the damn thing a proper price cut and can we have more than a £299 PC spec list on the iMac2...puhhhhhhhhhhleeeeeeeeeease if ya don't mind.
<strong>I realize what your saying but I also realize that it doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Wherever end users may fit into the though process of PC builders, they do fit front and center into the buying patterns of home users.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Home users do not currently have any choice, because towers are that much more attractive to the OEMs and their main customers.
If you were actually right, the iMac would have flopped utterly instead of saving the company. Cheaper beige towers were not saving the company. Apple's already tried that route.
[quote]<strong>Do I want a PC tower like Mac? No. But I do want Apple to make an effort to nod in my general direction.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's natural enough. The difference is whether you realize that something is what you want, or something which you think will do wonders for Apple's market share. The two can be quite radically different, as Steve discovered with the Cube.
[quote]<strong>A cube is also ridiculously easy to set up and will only get easier as we run out of newbies.</strong><hr></blockquote>
First of all, my Cube is more difficult to set up than it needs to be. Second of all, even if its particular quirks were addressed, it's still more difficult to set up than an iMac, and it loses points in usability: There's no answer for the iMac's ingenious arm.
Then, the issue is not (just) appealing to newbies, it's appealing to people who just want things to work. Most of the switcher bios I've linked to in these forums (volunteer postings, not Apple ads) have a common theme: Power users who got tired of fiddling with elaborate setups, and fell in love with iMacs or iBooks or PowerBooks that just work right out of the box, with no fuss.
Industrial design is not concerned with acclimating people to the expectation that a certain level of difficulty is required to accomplish something. It is concerned with eliminating the difficulty. This holds especially for any product which hopes to see heavy use in the consumer market: One reason why a lot of people only want a PC to do very basic things is that they've long since been dissuaded by poor design from trying anything more ambitious than embedding a picture in an email.
This sort of thing not only intimidates newbies, it frustrates veterans - needlessly, in almost all cases. And it intimidates people who've been trained by their experience with PCs not to try anything too ambitious.
[quote]<strong>You can't just be contemptuous of competing idiology, you have to accept that it also has considerable strengths of its own and try to make them part of your own repetoire without diluting your own unique strengths.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple is not showing contempt for any ideology they happen not to espouse. Disagreement is not contempt. Apple has to throw lots of real money and time into any espousal of a product design, so they don't have the luxury of indulging positions they disagree with unless there is a clear and palpable user demand. There was a clear and palpable user demand for more internal expandability in the PowerMacs, so Apple - Jobs' own preferences notwithstanding - has steadily improved the internal expandability and accessibility of the PowerMac. Over the same period of time, the iMac has become easier and easier to use. Draw your own conclusions.
Now, I'll grant that not a little of Apple's constant refinement of the AIO stems from Steve Jobs, the prophet of the PC-as-appliance, and the arch-nemesis of anything that requires fiddling or tinkering in order to work. I'll grant that some expansion options are left off for the sake of getting people to upgrade - and this holds for external, as well as internal, expansion, as anyone who's tried to use iDVD with a FW SuperDrive has discovered. Nevertheless, I contend that although there are certainly some people who'd like an internally expandable iMac, Apple can be fairly confident that their current design addresses the majority of its customers' needs. In the mean time, the RAM and the HDD are upgradable in the current models. The CPU isn't, but that's never stopped the upgrade manufacturers before.
Apple has to throw lots of real money and time into any espousal of a product design, so they don't have the luxury of indulging positions they disagree with unless there is a clear and palpable user demand.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Meh, you don't think the sheer numbers equate to clear and palpable demand?
In any event, as I rail against the AIO, I do indeed realize that for some it is the ideal machine. I believe that number to be just about equal to the current number of mac owners/buyers. It can't grow. When the bondi iMac came out it was comparatively a much stronger deal, the cheap towers were some of the worst, and never all that cheap.
Running two competing consumer desktops side by side wouldn't be so damn difficult considering they run 3 AIO designs vying for the same market. What they ought to do is plug the cracks more effectively with real choice, not three speciously positioned models. One AIO and one cube-redux (for lack of a better term) want more simplicity, a display, tres cool design, and less power/expansion? Choose the iMac. Want to reverse the formula? Choose the cube-redux. It's gotta be more cost effective than building 3 completely different AIO enclosures. with questionable positioning. Who in their right mind chooses an iMac CRT over an eMac?
Much of this could go away if they just got the tower down to a competitive price (and spec at a given price) but then most of Apple's desktop woes might disappear.
I'd love to make a home A/V server to compliment my laptop. Something with a TV tuner card, a couple of big fast HDD's and a superdrive, but the cost of doing this with a mac is insane. imac doesn't fit here. iMac doesn't fit for cash strapped schools with hundreds of re-usable CRTs, AIO's just don't fit everywhere and the idiotically high cost of the PM's keeps them from plugging that hole. That's OK, they don't need to put PM's in that place, we don't need ALL of their flexibility or expansion, but we do need some of their features.
I know that the tower has limits, but does Apple realize that the AIO also has limits?
<strong>I'm a born again quoter (hell, I've had several private mails congratulating me on the new look ...obviously the new Bon Bon quoting system has deeply moved 'insider members...)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Comments
That's point number on. If you refer back to my earlier posts, you will see what I mean when I talk about return on investment... Look at all the $$ you spent over that time *upgrading* to get to the point where you are now. It's probably a lot more than you would spend for a completely new machine. Also consider the fact that computer "geeks" like us are slowly becoming the minority. MOST people who buy ANY computer today have more than enough power to do the things that they normally do from day to day. These people do not need *more* in the future. If they do, they simply buy a new machine because the ROI is better.
[[[A hermetically sealed desktop at the prices Apple charges is just too restrictive.]]]
*Sigh* Dude, try working on one, It's not hermetically sealed.
[[[For the price it ought to include as a minimum the same ability to EASILY swap-out or add internal drives, upgrade the video card and I/O and CPU. ]]]
Why?!?? We've been through this. I explained it. Amorph explained it... Take the foil hat off already, the aliens aren't trying to read your mind! Seriously though.. This isn't needed. The drives that come with most computers these days are MORE THAN ENOUGH for MOST people in that target market. On the other hand, If a larger drive is required, there are two routs that you or any user can take by the time you'd be actually needing a larger capacity unit; probably well past Apple's warrantee. They are:
- Open the model and swap out the drive itself and keep the nice tidy enclosure.
- Add an external FireWire drive and have the ability of swapping/adding/daisy-chaining other/more external drives and devices that allow for superior portability between different machines.
The point is, unless you collect TONS of games, MOST people don't need this vast amount of storage that YOU require. You seem to be projecting YOUR needs and desires onto the rest of the masses. I mean how many hard drives do you swap out during a 4 year period anyway? Give us a break... because you seem to be nitpicking and splitting hairs
As far as video cards... Again, MOST people never even consider this because what's available is more than adequate for their needs. By the time they even start to consider a new card (for whatever reason), it's likely that they will simply look at completely new systems anyway. Furthermore, Apple isn't aiming the iMac at the market you describe. If I didn't know better, I'd say you were a mega-gamer...
I/O and CPU... This is ridiculous. Again, I have to mention the poor ROI. Not to mention the fact that this course of action buys you very little time if any at all. Most of the people buying computers these days are the same people who are buying refrigerators, washing machines and TVs. These people aren't going to be futzing around with the unit unless it breaks or fails in some way.
[[[I can buy this future proofing ability in the most basic 500USD PC tower to say nothing of more expensive units which offer this same easy expansion and about 2X more real world speed ]]]
I got news for you ... what you are describing is NOT future-proffing at all. The return on investments over a given time interval need to be figured into the total cost of ownership. Future proof means not having a *need* to ever upgrade to something for some specific amount of time. In the case with any brand computer purchased today, people shouldn't have a need to upgrade for at least 5 to 6 years If it costs you extra on top of what you already spent then it isn't future proof... Again, it's a buzzword that's thrown around rather loosely these days.
[[[Apple can plan all the obsolescence it wants, but it isn't getting a desktop sale from me until it stops treating desktop costomers with utter contempt]]]
I'm not sure what your particular *needs* are, why don't you fill us all in, eh?
[[[Apple has to earn my money, they aren't, and as the long term decline suggests, they aren't earning a lot of peoples' money either. ]]]
I suppose you said the same about Compaq or any of the other dead PC manufacturers that are no longer with us... In the end people buy a new machine.
The more I read this thread, the more I notice how it morphed into a thread not about the iMac AIO, but rather a plea for Apple to design a dirt cheap tower. Why doesn't someone start a thread titled "A Dirt Cheap Mac Tower/Cube for Average Consumers", and' leave this one to the iMac AIO.
--
Ed M.
If the warrantee is void upon my opening up of the case, that qualifies it as hermetically sealed. I've dirtied and any sniff of meddling from Apple will immediately void my warrantee. When a 30 dollar PCI card gives me I/O functionality I wouldn't otherwise have, that IS futureproofing at it's best. Apple might want me to buy a whole new machine to get an extra port but I'd rather spend the 30 bucks and happily use my machine for another 3-4 years or untill I decide I want a new machine.
Apple treats its desktop consumers with contempt, basically. It would do the same to it's laptop customers, but every maker pretty much faces the same constraints in that market.
Again, MOST people (the every day Joe's) aren't doing this. People don't want to open the case. Macs already come with a burner and decent sound for a PC. If people want the BEST sound, they buy dedicated products for the job. That's where home stereo systems come in... And as you know stereo systems can even get more expensive 4 Fully loaded Macs snd for what, when people can go to the local CostCo and pick up a nifty 75 dollar stereo that does the same job? Yet, there is still a market for top quality sound gear even though the difference in sound quality between the high-end and low end is negligible for MOST people. As far as better sound, why not just pipe it through the home stereo receiver? Use a break-out cable or wireless SoundLink unit if wires bug you or use a USB stereo link to avoid the inherently noisy quality that a lot of PC sound cards offer. After all, they are usually installed inside a computer case. The point is that there are BETTER options than a feeble attempt to *upgrade* the sound card to get higher sound quality, and unless you are into Pro-Audio, MOST users haven't the *need* for this level of sound, besides, you're not gonna get that with computer speakers and some crappy sound card with a flashy name.
[[[back when RAM COST A DAMN LOT OF MONEY) It's cheaper, you can't argue different]]]
No one is... RAM is the BEST upgrade anyone can do and the iMac allows this.
[[[If the warrantee is void upon my opening up of the case, that qualifies it as hermetically sealed. ]]]
Well, there isn't an UNLIMITED warrantee that says you can *never* open the case and I doubt that anyone would need to open it with in that time period anyway. After the warrantee you can open it to your heart's content... Again, Apple isn't the only one doing this, besides, the Warrantee lasts but so long. You can upgrade the hard drive if necessary, but highly unlikely for MOST people given their current size. For me most people like to have a shuttle-drive that they can take from computer to computer.
However, having access to the innards a MUST for Wintelon PCs where things might not work correctly because it's usually a complete mishmash of parts (think Frankenstein's monster) that even M$ can't guarantee that the components will work correctly together upon installation. In order to troubleshoot the thing while on the phone with tech support, Wintel users *need* to have that access, but then again, Apple's towers aren't void when they are opened, they allow user access and configuration. The iMac is exactly what it is.. and AIO. What you want is a TOWER not an iMac. Have you ever thought of that? PC AIOs are just like the iMac in this regard except they really suck.
\t
[[[I've dirtied and any sniff of meddling from Apple will immediately void my warrantee.]]]
Just like on any other AIO offered by other companies.
[[[When a 30 dollar PCI card gives me I/O functionality I wouldn't otherwise have, that IS futureproofing at it's best. ]]]
What about giving it to you with the machine the first time around? What I/O functionality does the iMac lack that it would require a PCI slot? How many of these slots would the iMac need before it becomes ridiculous to the point where you say "Gee, what I'm describing here is really a tower...not an AIO" ?\t
\t
[[[Apple treats its desktop consumers with contempt, basically. It would do the same to it's laptop customers, but every maker pretty much faces the same constraints in that market.]]]
And what constraints are those?
<strong>That's point number on. If you refer back to my earlier posts,</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hey Ed M, learn to quote...
Recently, analysts opined that QIII was the only killer app around the bend that might entice PC users to upgrade their machines. Now I know mac users are not gamers, that's a niche within a niche, but estimates put PC gamers at up to 30% of the desktop market, that's a big chunk of people who do BTO and upgrade parts. But no matter about them. People want upgradeability as a measure of security, even if they never use it. I want, will use it, and will come out saving literally hundreds in the long run because of it, just as I did with my first computer. Apple can take two roads, they can take the attitude that my savings mean fewer new box purchases over my buying life, which it might. Aleternatively, they can take the attitude that these are features I want and use and will sway me to purchase their offerings when I decide it's time for a new machine. If they take the latter I may buy a machine every 5-7 years instead of every 3. If they take the former I simply will not buy even one of their desktops. Period. Simple. They can sell me what I want, or they can sell me nothing, they aren't the only game in town, not by a long shot. As the number add up, there are a lot more people following exactly the same train of thought as I am, and very few, and every year comparatively less, following Jobs' mantra of "Lets get 'em buying disposable machines at workstation prices."
A platform with as little marketshare as the mac has to get a whole lot more attentive to customer wants in a hurry. Yes, Apple is bigger than many other companies doing well and smaller than some doing not so well, but they must support a platform on their own and unless that user-base grows as a percentage of the market it's just going to get harder for them to be even remotely price competitive.
I may sound like an idiot to you, but come wednesday will be the first day that I own an Apple computer and no APPL stock. I do what's best for me, not Apple. Draw whatever conclusions you want.
<strong>
A platform with as little marketshare as the mac has to get a whole lot more attentive to customer wants in a hurry.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple designs their machines for their customers. To the extent that the word "design" applies to PC towers at all, they're designed for the biggest Wintel customers: OEMs and IT departments. End users are an afterthought.
If you think the iMac should be transformed into a corporate desktop that doesn't look too alien to Microsoft certified technicians, keep at it. If you think it should be aimed at consumers, you're welcome to imagine a design that is easier to set up and use than the iMac is. After all, hardly anyone buys a computer to upgrade it. They buy a computer to use it. Your own upgrading habits don't count, because they're the equivalent of buying a 6100/60 and finding a G3 upgrade for it. You're already so hopelessly far behind the curve that things like hardware warranties are long since expired, and replacement parts are dirt cheap because they're obsolete. If I wanted to go that route, I could go to university surplus and pick up a Life Savers iMac for $25 or so. Try upgrading your system with the bleeding-edge parts that your vaunted PC gamer would consider acceptable and then perhaps you'll see what Ed M. is talking about: Not upgrading a 6-year-old system to run like a 4-year-old system, but upgrading a system within the average upgrade cycle (3 years) to be current. Unless you expect Apple to release iMacs with the equivalent of a 300MHz AMD chip and an expandable chassis?
[ 02-17-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
A GAME?!?! LOL! Give me a break!
Those people should stick with console systems...Period. It's one of the reasons why a lot of PC people have hosed-up systems, they load them down with crap and God only knows what happens to that TRAIN WRECK known as the Windows Registry when things are installed and uninstalled. No wonder why you're preaching more and bigger hard drives; you need the frick'n storage for all those GAMES!...
Why not simply store various game categories onto hot-swappable external FireWire drives? Oh, that's right, M$ won't allow games or anything else to be *portable* thanks to that wonderful registry. Alas, even though you wouldn't be able to take that external hard drive loaded with games to a friends house and have it work on their system, you still can store a shit-load of 'em and use it on *your* system. Or is that a problem for Windows users too? I say this because other than games, everyone I know backs up their *data* on CDs and DVDs for archival purposes. And what would be easier than having a nice external FireWire drive to boot off of or to "re-image" the system if it gets hosed somehow? I think detachable components like hard disks are a great idea; they compliment the internal counterparts and they are portable at that
[[[People want upgradeability as a measure of security, even if they never use it.]]]
No, that's wrong. That's what SALESPEOPLE tell them. That's the myth that's been sold to them. Most people couldn't care less, but when they hear the salespeople telling them what *they* think the customer needs (in this case: "... and you can upgrade it." ) it causes the consumer (who doesn't know to much technical detail to begin with) to believe that they're better off erring on the side of caution and allow themselves to be sold on the "future upgrade" notion when it shouldn't even be a consideration at all unless they are in an advanced field where such options are needed, and these people aren't buying the dirt-cheap PCs either depending on their profession. Do you relay think they are designing Quake on those sub $1000.00 PCs that are "upgradeable"? Yeah, right ... lol
It's like this... What generally happens when someone (i.e., MOST people) feels that a machine has reached the end of its usefulness is that they will (at first) look to *upgrade* it. They usually find out in a hurry that it's going to cost more than if they simply decided to get a whole new system. That is, depending on the level of performance they expect from their upgrade. How much time will it *really* buy them? Not much and thus the ROI really starts to suck. If it's upgrading a *failing* system, it becomes even more applicable. With the "keep-it-alive" upgrade situation, it will generally cost more and more to keep it in working condition over time. Regardless of the components that are failing, the costs start to add up. Answer? ... just get a new system.
It's also worth mentioning that Apple's AIOs are easy enough to dismantle and work on if need be. It didn't hit me until I opened the iMac's case and realized that Apple probably expected some machines to come in for repairs, thus they designed it to be extremely EASY to repair and work on. They did a great job laying the innards out.
But getting back to the *myth* of upgradability that salespeople like to peddle,upgrading a computer is barely worth unless it's within the first 2 years of ownership. In the case of the iMac and MOST users, external components are readily available and they too can be taken to a new *future* machine if need be.. A printer can migrate, a FW hard disk can migrate, a USB component can migrate, a scanner ... the list goes on. The best thing to do when the machine is 2 years behind the current latest and greatest (this week) is to add memory. It's the BEST upgrade and provides the best ROI. But this can be tricky too depending on if you want to use the latest and greatest memory technology. If that's the case, then a new mobo and CPU are probably in order, but then the other components need to be taken into consideration and the time to configure and get it to work and it *still* hasn't bought you that much more time. MOST users are better off simply buying a completely new system. Besides, as stated earlier, these people aren't interested in futzing with their systems. They expect them to work and get 3 years out of them without having to open anything up! PERIOD! Apple knows this that's why everything is EXTERNAL on the iMac... If someone wants more hard drive they can plug it in themselves and *poof* they solved their dilemma and they are happy and they didn't have to open, dismantle, partition, reconfigure ANYTHING on the inside of the machine.
[[[They can sell me what I want, or they can sell me nothing, they aren't the only game in town, not by a long shot. ]]]
Then go buy a PC and forget about the Mac already. SHEESH!\t
Amorph has it *spot on* in his posts. -- what amazes me is that there are still people on this thread who just don't get the reasoning.
--
Ed M.
Do I want a PC tower-like Mac? No. But I do want Apple to make an effort to nod in my general direction. An AGP slot, or PCI-express, or whatever is standard by the time they get around to building a headless consumer machine. A PPC daughtercard so that I have the option to upgrade my machine when the time comes, I may not, but I might when the price is right. An extra PCI slot, would be nice so that I could plug in whatever future standard emerges, but if I get a couple of firewire 1600 buses I'll be happy. Oh, and USB2.0, yes it's a bastard format, but thanks to poor promotion it's here in force and it's here to stay, might as well give it to us then, no point making us pay for your mistakes. Room for one oprical is OK, an empty slot for a second internal HDD would be gravy. Think cube/Shuttle HPC hybrid. Simple, upgradable, headless and affordable. If Apple really wanted to do something cool, they'd use a GFX card with HDTV out so that I can position my mac as a home A/V server. computer on TV display has sucked big ones until now, but a good (true) 1920x1080 display will show the UI quite well. The home computer may be headed there.
A cube is also ridiculously easy to set up and will only get easier as we run out of newbies. Eventually computers will be sold into a market of people that are born computer literate. Plugging and unplugging won't scare them in the least. I think Apple's claims about ease of use exaggerate the degree to which people really are intimidated, but then again there are people like my parents around. But my parents don't matter in the grand scheme of the computer market, they're old. People younger than us will dictate where the market goes, and they won't care if they have to plug or unplug something. People seem to think that I want Apple to build a boring 'mess of wires' box, but what I think is that they have to make a more honest effort to meet the market halfway, to mold their philosophies to make a more saleable product and in the process improve their offerings. You can't just be contemptuous of competing idiology, you have to accept that it also has considerable strengths of its own and try to make them part of your own repetoire without diluting your own unique strengths.
[ 02-18-2003: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
The product cycling point(s) raised above as an explanation isn't good enough for me. If I want to swap my old CD-ROM and add a CD-RW/DVD-ROM combo drive or DVD-RW drive, I should be able to do that, no questions asked.
It's truly pathetic to force options onto people!
<strong>
Hey Ed M, learn to quote...
Thank you! I was going to say something also. Besides it being annoying reading all of his arguments with Matsu, his stupid quoting style is ridiculous.
No, that's wrong. That's what SALESPEOPLE tell them. That's the myth that's been sold to them. Most people couldn't care less, but when they hear the salespeople telling them what *they* think the customer needs (in this case: "... and you can upgrade it." ) it causes the consumer (who doesn't know to much technical detail to begin with) to believe that they're better off erring on the side of caution and allow themselves to be sold on the "future upgrade" notion when it shouldn't even be a consideration at all unless they are in an advanced field where such options are needed, and these people aren't buying the dirt-cheap PCs either depending on their profession. <hr></blockquote>
That might be true with some people, but I know I want to be able to upgrade my computer if I ever feel the need to. I got an iBook in 2001 because I wanted an LCD and at the time the iMacs still had CRTs. I would've loved to have gotten a tower because it's expandible, but the towers were out of my price range, and are still too expensive for what they have. Now I'm stuck with a slow processor, small hard drive and shitty graphics. I would've been in the same boat if I had an iMac (well the hard drive could always be upgraded). Would it really kill Apple to have a machine that's at least a little expandible and affordable?
_ industrial offering? i just have no idea.
hahaha
<strong>hey, this is me, broadcasting my ignorance... but what does AIO stand for... i can't figure it out.. _ _ offering?
_ industrial offering? i just have no idea.
hahaha</strong><hr></blockquote>
All-in-one
I'm a born again quoter (hell, I've had several private mails congratulating me on the new look
[quote] Now I'm stuck with a slow processor, small hard drive and shitty graphics. <hr></blockquote>
My point. The iMac2 I buy today would probably looked okay early last year. Specs wise. It's a year behind with the specs. And I can't go to Apple's store to up the GPU, CPU or motherboard. Ridiculous. Insane if you include the price
I don't want to be stuck with that kinda crap. Despite the 'in my own world of affluence where I can afford a new iMac2 each year so I don't care' style posts of certain Republican
So. imac 2 design? Expandability? Upgradability? A bigger dome so we can FIT INDUSTRY STANDARD COMPONENTS IN IT?!?!?
HELLOOOOO APPLE!!! Like to sell a few more iMac2? Reboot the economy, built a cheaper entry level iMac2. Give the damn thing a proper price cut and can we have more than a £299 PC spec list on the iMac2...puhhhhhhhhhhleeeeeeeeeease if ya don't mind.
Lemon Bon Bon <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[ 02-18-2003: Message edited by: Lemon Bon Bon ]</p>
<strong>see, now i feel retarded! whooo!</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> it's not big deal
<strong>I realize what your saying but I also realize that it doesn't amount to a hill of beans. Wherever end users may fit into the though process of PC builders, they do fit front and center into the buying patterns of home users.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Home users do not currently have any choice, because towers are that much more attractive to the OEMs and their main customers.
If you were actually right, the iMac would have flopped utterly instead of saving the company. Cheaper beige towers were not saving the company. Apple's already tried that route.
[quote]<strong>Do I want a PC tower like Mac? No. But I do want Apple to make an effort to nod in my general direction.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's natural enough. The difference is whether you realize that something is what you want, or something which you think will do wonders for Apple's market share. The two can be quite radically different, as Steve discovered with the Cube.
[quote]<strong>A cube is also ridiculously easy to set up and will only get easier as we run out of newbies.</strong><hr></blockquote>
First of all, my Cube is more difficult to set up than it needs to be. Second of all, even if its particular quirks were addressed, it's still more difficult to set up than an iMac, and it loses points in usability: There's no answer for the iMac's ingenious arm.
Then, the issue is not (just) appealing to newbies, it's appealing to people who just want things to work. Most of the switcher bios I've linked to in these forums (volunteer postings, not Apple ads) have a common theme: Power users who got tired of fiddling with elaborate setups, and fell in love with iMacs or iBooks or PowerBooks that just work right out of the box, with no fuss.
Industrial design is not concerned with acclimating people to the expectation that a certain level of difficulty is required to accomplish something. It is concerned with eliminating the difficulty. This holds especially for any product which hopes to see heavy use in the consumer market: One reason why a lot of people only want a PC to do very basic things is that they've long since been dissuaded by poor design from trying anything more ambitious than embedding a picture in an email.
This sort of thing not only intimidates newbies, it frustrates veterans - needlessly, in almost all cases. And it intimidates people who've been trained by their experience with PCs not to try anything too ambitious.
[quote]<strong>You can't just be contemptuous of competing idiology, you have to accept that it also has considerable strengths of its own and try to make them part of your own repetoire without diluting your own unique strengths.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple is not showing contempt for any ideology they happen not to espouse. Disagreement is not contempt. Apple has to throw lots of real money and time into any espousal of a product design, so they don't have the luxury of indulging positions they disagree with unless there is a clear and palpable user demand. There was a clear and palpable user demand for more internal expandability in the PowerMacs, so Apple - Jobs' own preferences notwithstanding - has steadily improved the internal expandability and accessibility of the PowerMac. Over the same period of time, the iMac has become easier and easier to use. Draw your own conclusions.
Now, I'll grant that not a little of Apple's constant refinement of the AIO stems from Steve Jobs, the prophet of the PC-as-appliance, and the arch-nemesis of anything that requires fiddling or tinkering in order to work. I'll grant that some expansion options are left off for the sake of getting people to upgrade - and this holds for external, as well as internal, expansion, as anyone who's tried to use iDVD with a FW SuperDrive has discovered. Nevertheless, I contend that although there are certainly some people who'd like an internally expandable iMac, Apple can be fairly confident that their current design addresses the majority of its customers' needs. In the mean time, the RAM and the HDD are upgradable in the current models. The CPU isn't, but that's never stopped the upgrade manufacturers before.
[ 02-18-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
<strong>
Apple has to throw lots of real money and time into any espousal of a product design, so they don't have the luxury of indulging positions they disagree with unless there is a clear and palpable user demand.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Meh, you don't think the sheer numbers equate to clear and palpable demand?
In any event, as I rail against the AIO, I do indeed realize that for some it is the ideal machine. I believe that number to be just about equal to the current number of mac owners/buyers. It can't grow. When the bondi iMac came out it was comparatively a much stronger deal, the cheap towers were some of the worst, and never all that cheap.
Running two competing consumer desktops side by side wouldn't be so damn difficult considering they run 3 AIO designs vying for the same market. What they ought to do is plug the cracks more effectively with real choice, not three speciously positioned models. One AIO and one cube-redux (for lack of a better term) want more simplicity, a display, tres cool design, and less power/expansion? Choose the iMac. Want to reverse the formula? Choose the cube-redux. It's gotta be more cost effective than building 3 completely different AIO enclosures. with questionable positioning. Who in their right mind chooses an iMac CRT over an eMac?
Much of this could go away if they just got the tower down to a competitive price (and spec at a given price) but then most of Apple's desktop woes might disappear.
I'd love to make a home A/V server to compliment my laptop. Something with a TV tuner card, a couple of big fast HDD's and a superdrive, but the cost of doing this with a mac is insane. imac doesn't fit here. iMac doesn't fit for cash strapped schools with hundreds of re-usable CRTs, AIO's just don't fit everywhere and the idiotically high cost of the PM's keeps them from plugging that hole. That's OK, they don't need to put PM's in that place, we don't need ALL of their flexibility or expansion, but we do need some of their features.
I know that the tower has limits, but does Apple realize that the AIO also has limits?
<strong>I'm a born again quoter (hell, I've had several private mails congratulating me on the new look
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> LMAO <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />