If the Cube came back...
at $799, would you buy it? Add a 15" LCD for $499 (hoping for a price drop) and you've got your LCD iMac for $1298. With combo drive. Would that be enough? To me, technically, it would be just about the same as what I would hope for in the new iMac. But for some reason, psychologically, it doesn't move me as much. Your thoughts?
Comments
Seems like an arrangement kinda like this, except thought out for more than 5 seconds like mine was
-S
The Cube is the most beautiful and revolutionary computer design ever produced. If there was ever a candidate for a remake this is it. The dual G4 mod shows that there is plenty of headroom in it's form factor. The R&D on it's design is done, and production issues have been worked out already. This baby is ready to be reborn, but as what? Wait, I'll answer that... "THE APPLE DIGITAL HUB"
Add TiVo capability and an HDTV tuner and the Cube becomes the missing link to the "Digital Lifestyle" Apple can not ignore TV as part of this convergence. Throw a G5 and a SuperDrive in it and sell it for $5000 bundled with a Cinema Display and I'll order mine the day it is announced.
</sarcasm>
-S
Although I wished from the beginning that they'd sell a separate cube with some PCI slots and a proprietary connection to the main Cube. Could be an elegant but professional system that way.
-S
LOL yeah... "Let's bring back the cube and make it more crack-filled and expensive than ever before!"
<hr></blockquote>
The new Cube will be for the people with the vision to understand it's significance and value, not for the whinners and naysayers that torpedoed the original for it's mold lines ("crack-filled"?)
keep your smurf Mac running 8.7 Spiffy, the Mac World will go forward without your help.
<strong>
The new Cube will be for the people with the vision to understand it's significance and value, not for the whinners and naysayers that torpedoed the original for it's mold lines ("crack-filled"?)
keep your smurf Mac running 8.7 Spiffy, the Mac World will go forward without your help.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's going too far. First of all, I run OS X on a TiBook and I'm about as power user as it gets.
Second, I was EXAGGERATING to prove a point - the original cube WAS expensive and because of that it didn't sell. I was a fan, actually, but in general people complained that it was sitting up in the PowerMac price range while not offering the same speed or expandability. Yes, it was an excellent value, a beautiful machine, but my point is that the market was too dense to understand how and why it was worth its initial cost and how amzing it was that Apple fit what it DID into such a small space.
Taking all that into account, I think it's absurd to suggest that Apple would release an even more expensive version of the Cube.
-S
Apple seems loathe to go down that road, though. Pity.
Personally, I simply adored the G4 Cube. As with many others, the only stumbling block to my actually buying one was the boneheaded asking price.
Cheers,
Mark.
Hell yeah! Except I would spend $500 on a larger CRT display and it would be a bitchin' system. This is what Apple should be doing...forget the iMac, it's a joke. So many people forego the iMac because of it's display size. Even a 15" LCD display is too small, people demand more, and they are accustomed to more.
But a sub-$1000 cube would be the final solution. Apple could package it with their own displays, or you could buy the cube and a good monitor separately.
Dig it, the new cube (assuming a G5 powermac):
G4 processor (Apollo), 1.0, 1.133, 1.266 GHz
CD-ROM, CD-RW, combo drive
1 full-sized AGP slot
1 FAN, so the GeForce 3 stays cool.
Of course, this cube would be much taller, so there's room for a full sized video card. In Making the cube taller and adding a fan, this will reduce Apple's cost because they don't have to miniaturize everything so much. Cooling is easier, and a real video card can be used. Furthermore, and this is vitally important:
The USB, Firewire, and Audio ports go on the OUTSIDE of the cube, in addition to some on the bottom. This way, the permanent connections are on the bottom, but the temporary connections go on the front, behind a little door. This way one doesn't have to man-handle the cube just to plug in a damn iPod.
So what about price? Here's a stab at it:
Display prices (if bought with cube):
17" LCD: 850
15" LCD: 450
Cube prices (alone/cube+15"LCD/cube+17"LCD)
1.00 GHz 999, 1449, 1849
CD-ROM
GeForce 2MX
128 MB RAM
30 GB HD
1.133 GHz 1299, 1749, 2149
CD-RW
GeForce 2MX
256 MB RAM
60 GB HD
1.266 GHz 1499, 1949, 2349
CD-RW, DVD-ROM
GeForce 2MX
256 MB RAM
80 GB HD
The very lowest end cube system w/ 15" LCD is priced at 1449, but of course if a person was smart they would just buy the 999 cube, and add a nice 17" CRT for 300, coming out at 1300 for a nice Mac system. So what about the iMac?
This would push the price of the high end iMac down to about 1200, which is exactly where it ought to be. With complete wintel systems going for 999, the iMac must come down in price. for the iMac lineup, this means:
799, 999, 1199
And this is where it's price ought to be.
What Apple would find is that this sort of cube would fly off the shelves. It offers consumers what they've wanted all along; a mac system midway between 1000 and 2000, with a good display. The current iMac is hurting Apple sales so much! People do not want a tiny display, and Apple offers no choice beyond a miserable 15" display on a Mac system for less than $2200 or so. This is outrageous and it must end.
That's going too far. First of all, I run OS X on a TiBook and I'm about as power user as it gets.
Second, I was EXAGGERATING to prove a point - the original cube WAS expensive and because of that it didn't sell. I was a fan, actually, but in general people complained that it was sitting up in the PowerMac price range while not offering the same speed or expandability. Yes, it was an excellent value, a beautiful machine, but my point is that the market was too dense to understand how and why it was worth its initial cost and how amzing it was that Apple fit what it DID into such a small space.
Taking all that into account, I think it's absurd to suggest that Apple would release an even more expensive version of the Cube.
<hr></blockquote>
OK, Spiffy my apologies, I too was proving a point with my Smurf G3 comment, it's just that I get discouraged with the Mac "Faithful" bitching and moaning about something revolutionary like the Cube or OSX. The fact that you are running OSX on a TiBook shows that you will spend $3K on something elegant and useful. You wouldn't spend the same on a Digital Hub that would be your file server, web firewall and broadband host, not to mention stream HDTV to your TiBook?
As for server stuff, I don't want a cube - I want Apple to come out with a rackmount. Talk about minimal R&D at this point...
-S
Sahra G3 iMac
G4 Cube
PowerMac G5
I'd love to see it come back, even somewhat retooled. Put in ONE PCI slot and keep the rest like it was (maybe now a Combo or Superdrive instead, of course
<strong>And, from a certain standpoint, if the G5 is ready this lineup could make some sense:
Sahra G3 iMac
G4 Cube
PowerMac G5</strong><hr></blockquote>
You know, I think this still misses the biggest problem with the cube. Pros did not want to buy the cube because it lacked expandability, consumers did not want it because it was too expensive without really adding big value over the iMac.
Here is what I think the lineup should be:
- Sahara G3 iCube starting at $699
Make the new iMac a "revolutionary" tablet computer. The detachable touch screen contains all of the guts and ports save for the optical drive. The desktop stand contains the optical drive, ethernet port, USB and Firewire for when the tablet is docked, and an airport base station built-in. You have a keyboard and mouse plugged into the desktop stand for normal desktop use, and InkWell handwriting recognition for use away from the desktop.Apollo G4 Flat Panel iMac starting at $1099
Power Macintosh G5 starting at $1599
This justifies a higher price for the iMac and creates the price/performace space that the cube was meant for all along. It belongs below, not above, the iMac.
Build a cube with simplicity as its goal. This way, when Joe Bob wants to upgrade his grandma's e-machine that already has a VGA monitor, he has the monitor- less iCube G3 or another e-machines box to choose from.
Easy choice.
<strong>
You know, I think this still misses the biggest problem with the cube. Pros did not want to buy the cube because it lacked expandability, consumers did not want it because it was too expensive without really adding big value over the iMac.</strong><hr></blockquote>
that is bullshit. pros didn't buy it not because of its "lack of expansion" but because you could get a better tower for the same price or less.
if the cube was priced below the towers pros would have eaten it up.
which btings up my question: What lack of expansion do you talk about?
up to a 120 GB HD now internal
upgradable processor
1.5 GB max of RAM
swappable graphic card slot compatible with radeon and geforce 2 mx and several other cards including a dual head by promax.
firewire, usb, ethernet, airport
I think expansion was the least of its worries.
oh no PCI slot. yea we all know that graphic artists require a PCI slot
<strong>
if the cube was priced below the towers pros would have eaten it up.
</strong>
<hr></blockquote>
So you thought that this was a good idea? Thanks for the complement, I think.
[quote]
<strong>
. . .
I think expansion was the least of its worries.
oh no PCI slot. yea we all know that graphic artists require a PCI slot
So what did you think of the proposal? Maybe I oversimplified the plight of the pros into "it lacked expandability," but the point was that the cube just did not fit between the iMac and the Power Macintosh. It was too expensive for everyone and yes, many pro users do like pci slots.
IMHO, the cube's second coming should be as Apple's monitor-less consumer machine. What say you about that applenut?
[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: A/UX ]</p>
i dearly want an iPod too, but i can't quite swing the price. eventually i'll end up with one though.
<strong>
So what did you think of the proposal?
IMHO, the cube's second coming should be as Apple's monitor-less consumer machine. What say you about that applenut?
by titling it "consumer machine" what would that sacrifice to make it "consumer".
what people fail to realize is that the cube at the end would have been a success if faster G4s were available. it's kind of hard to do much with the cube when the fastest processor that is available and will work is the 500Mhz G4. That's why Apple left it open for a return. with the new faster and cooler apollo Apple can ship a 1 Ghz cube for maybe 1300.
but to think it will be any lower is insane.
btw, name a reason why I would need a PCI slot if I used any of the following apps
Photoshop
Illustrator
DreamWeaver
FCP 3
Go Live
Free Hand
File Maker Pro
Office V.X
etc
not one need for a PCI slot there except if you are doing uncompressed analog video with FCP in which case you would be using a tower anyways