With all due respect, what the heck are you looking for?
It sounds like you want an inexpensive expandable AIO. But before you go too far, think about product lines and how overlapping one, may kill the other.
BTW, the G4 towers may not be the latest, but they're still just as fast as the current iMacs.
G5 1.4Ghz
512MB RAM
1 AGP 8x Port
1 PCI-X Port
Pre-installed GeForce 5200
ComboDrive
$1199 (Even $1399 would be OK, but not optimal)
Pretty small form factor (at least a lot smaller than the G5), not quite as small as the cube, but smaller.
The cube was very much like this product. The problem was that it was way too over-engineered, and therefore way too expensive.
Apple just needs to offer "everybody" something.
It's not I that wants this kind of hardware (I'll get the slowest dual G5 possible when rev. B is released), but this is often the kind of machine people that gets PCs wants.
Oh, and btw. While the Powermacs are just as fast as the current iMacs, that's not exactly a good point, since the current iMacs are, in fact, slow (compared to everything else in competing markets).
Pretty small form factor (at least a lot smaller than the G5), not quite as small as the cube, but smaller.
The cube was very much like this product. The problem was that it was way too over-engineered, and therefore way too expensive.
Apple just needs to offer "everybody" something.
It's not I that wants this kind of hardware (I'll get the slowest dual G5 possible when rev. B is released), but this is often the kind of machine people that gets PCs wants.
Oh, and btw. While the Powermacs are just as fast as the current iMacs, that's not exactly a good point, since the current iMacs are, in fact, slow (compared to everything else in competing markets).
Your specs are fine but again, this will effectively kill the low end G5 tower sale (and all the margins that go along with it). Or else just make a mini-tower out of that low end 1.6 model and give it one slot.
But, I've always felt the AIO iMac was fine except for it's video capabilities. Apple cripples the video spanning which is why a majority of would be PC owners feel there's a need for PCI slots. The reality is most people who are in the iMac market, is quite well served with USB 2.0 and Firewire for expandability.
Not being a techie, I don't know if an upgradeable video card could be slid out of the existing iMac dome. Add to that a DVI connector and voila, you've got capabilites for an additional monitor.
As far as the speeds of the G4 PowerMacs vs. iMac, that is a good point since that's what we're talking about Macs and it's current lineup...not PC's. If you want a faster PC over a slower Mac, that's your choice.
The problems with current mac speeds are 'fine' compared to each other is that macs aren't just competing with macs. The competition is actually the big-ass the PC empire.
To get/conquer buyers from this empire, Apple needs something competitive, something to offer the buyers. Some might want the iMac as it is, AIO is fine for them, but most of the PC market is not AIO machines. Many do want something that they're familiar with. They look at the G5. Nice machine, they want one. Until they look at the price tag.
Then they look at the iMac. Nice machine. Ok (Or at least better) price tag. Then they look at the specs. Next door is a PC store, and they exit it carrying a machine that in their eyes offers the same as the G5, at an iMac price tag.
The machine that I proposed could possibly kill the low-end G5 line. Why? It's too slow. Give the low-end a dual, like in the good, old days (more accurate: One year ago). Keep PowerMacs, and this headless consumer machine separated by duals/singles. It's been argued for before all over the place.
There will always be overlap between the product lines, nothing you can do about that. But for a small company like Apple to expand, they need to expand their product lines too. They need to offer something.
Somebody choosing a fast PC over a slow mac isn't the choosers problem, it's Apples.
If I had ever seen a Cube in real life (I haven't), I doubt it would have made such a huge lasting impression. PC manufacturers turn out mini-PCs that look similar. Nothing upon nothing, though, looks like an iMac and ever can without landing its designers in the patent courts.
If you have never seen a cube in person, your missing out. No, I repeat, NO computer manufacture has ever or will ever turn out anything even close to as stunning as the G4 Cube is. If it was a PC, it would be louder than a 747, have a wussy graphics card, have no expandability (RAM or otherwise) have no firewire, and maybe 1 USB port. A Cube makes more than a lasting impression, it changes the way you think about computers. A FANLESS computer, with a top of the line (for its time) graphics card, 3 full size RAM slots, airport ready, Firewire, USB, and ethernet...all inside an 8 inch Cube. Think about that for a while. It is the most incredible computer ever made, hands down. If apple drops a G5 into one (although it would have to be a 90nm which would mean a min. of 6 months away) I would buy one in a second.
Zapchud, that's just silly. Most consumers dont "look at the G5...then the iMac, then decide on the PC" Most consumers don't look at any Macs at all. Why? Old myths still linger. Most consumers don't know OS X exists. Most consumers probably can't define "Operating System." Even if a consumer does look at OS X and the iMac line, it looks too foreign to them...it seems so much different than their box at home it's intimidating. My point? Apple will never gain much market share with these types of consumers regardless of whether or not they have a headless iMac. The market that does have growth potential for Apple are young, "well educated" consumers...the type people who blog, chat, generally like to tinker with their computer. For these types of consumers, the iMac and the iBook are perfect. All a cheap headless mac would do in the consumer space is take away display profits since the Apple core customers would save a few bucks by purchasing a third-party display. I think if there is a cheap headless mac, it should be sold to business, government, and education customers only. Apple's consumer market share will grow over time as more techies enter the mainstream and as the demand for portables increases. It is possible, though that iApps for windows might help strengthen market awareness about OS X and, at that point, make the headless mac available for consumer purchase.
All a cheap headless mac would do in the consumer space is take away display profits since the Apple core customers would save a few bucks by purchasing a third-party display.
That's right and I think that's one more reason why Apple canned the Cube. They were losing display sales. If Apple had wanted to they could have updated the Cube with better parts, enlarged it slightly, or found a less expansive way to build it. But they figured it wasn't worth it, and maybe thought better of having a consumer "tower". So they let it go, but not totally. It came back in the form of the iMac. Small, silent, in one package and includes the screen. As with the original iMacs the computer is built around the screen, where as the PowerMacs are built around the processor.
I think Apple should ditch the AIO. Firstly they should get rid of the emac or make it only education. Get rid of the G4 towers as well. Then bump the imac down to emac prices and reduce the number of models. Now introduce your cube or headless imac running a dual G4. Give it pci slots and price it low enough so as users can replace it every 2-3 years.
Comments
Originally posted by satchmo
With all due respect, what the heck are you looking for?
It sounds like you want an inexpensive expandable AIO. But before you go too far, think about product lines and how overlapping one, may kill the other.
BTW, the G4 towers may not be the latest, but they're still just as fast as the current iMacs.
G5 1.4Ghz
512MB RAM
1 AGP 8x Port
1 PCI-X Port
Pre-installed GeForce 5200
ComboDrive
$1199 (Even $1399 would be OK, but not optimal)
Pretty small form factor (at least a lot smaller than the G5), not quite as small as the cube, but smaller.
The cube was very much like this product. The problem was that it was way too over-engineered, and therefore way too expensive.
Apple just needs to offer "everybody" something.
It's not I that wants this kind of hardware (I'll get the slowest dual G5 possible when rev. B is released), but this is often the kind of machine people that gets PCs wants.
Oh, and btw. While the Powermacs are just as fast as the current iMacs, that's not exactly a good point, since the current iMacs are, in fact, slow (compared to everything else in competing markets).
Originally posted by Addison
When my IBM 970 powered PowerMac and 23" cinema display arrives I will leave these boards and get a life.
I really have nothing to add here. But I think it's time you changed your signature!
Originally posted by Zapchud
G5 1.4Ghz
512MB RAM
1 AGP 8x Port
1 PCI-X Port
Pre-installed GeForce 5200
ComboDrive
$1199 (Even $1399 would be OK, but not optimal)
Pretty small form factor (at least a lot smaller than the G5), not quite as small as the cube, but smaller.
The cube was very much like this product. The problem was that it was way too over-engineered, and therefore way too expensive.
Apple just needs to offer "everybody" something.
It's not I that wants this kind of hardware (I'll get the slowest dual G5 possible when rev. B is released), but this is often the kind of machine people that gets PCs wants.
Oh, and btw. While the Powermacs are just as fast as the current iMacs, that's not exactly a good point, since the current iMacs are, in fact, slow (compared to everything else in competing markets).
Your specs are fine but again, this will effectively kill the low end G5 tower sale (and all the margins that go along with it). Or else just make a mini-tower out of that low end 1.6 model and give it one slot.
But, I've always felt the AIO iMac was fine except for it's video capabilities. Apple cripples the video spanning which is why a majority of would be PC owners feel there's a need for PCI slots. The reality is most people who are in the iMac market, is quite well served with USB 2.0 and Firewire for expandability.
Not being a techie, I don't know if an upgradeable video card could be slid out of the existing iMac dome. Add to that a DVI connector and voila, you've got capabilites for an additional monitor.
As far as the speeds of the G4 PowerMacs vs. iMac, that is a good point since that's what we're talking about Macs and it's current lineup...not PC's. If you want a faster PC over a slower Mac, that's your choice.
To get/conquer buyers from this empire, Apple needs something competitive, something to offer the buyers. Some might want the iMac as it is, AIO is fine for them, but most of the PC market is not AIO machines. Many do want something that they're familiar with. They look at the G5. Nice machine, they want one. Until they look at the price tag.
Then they look at the iMac. Nice machine. Ok (Or at least better) price tag. Then they look at the specs. Next door is a PC store, and they exit it carrying a machine that in their eyes offers the same as the G5, at an iMac price tag.
The machine that I proposed could possibly kill the low-end G5 line. Why? It's too slow. Give the low-end a dual, like in the good, old days (more accurate: One year ago). Keep PowerMacs, and this headless consumer machine separated by duals/singles. It's been argued for before all over the place.
There will always be overlap between the product lines, nothing you can do about that. But for a small company like Apple to expand, they need to expand their product lines too. They need to offer something.
Somebody choosing a fast PC over a slow mac isn't the choosers problem, it's Apples.
Originally posted by SonOfSylvanus
If I had ever seen a Cube in real life (I haven't), I doubt it would have made such a huge lasting impression. PC manufacturers turn out mini-PCs that look similar. Nothing upon nothing, though, looks like an iMac and ever can without landing its designers in the patent courts.
Originally posted by Michael Wilkie
All a cheap headless mac would do in the consumer space is take away display profits since the Apple core customers would save a few bucks by purchasing a third-party display.
That's right and I think that's one more reason why Apple canned the Cube. They were losing display sales. If Apple had wanted to they could have updated the Cube with better parts, enlarged it slightly, or found a less expansive way to build it. But they figured it wasn't worth it, and maybe thought better of having a consumer "tower". So they let it go, but not totally. It came back in the form of the iMac. Small, silent, in one package and includes the screen. As with the original iMacs the computer is built around the screen, where as the PowerMacs are built around the processor.
Originally posted by DMBand0026
Well IMHO no, not that it wasn't an insanely great computer thought.