What about people who use 3D apps? They'd benefit from having "the latest wizz bang graphics cards". There are other uses for high end graphics cards than just games.
You're right, people that use 3D apps do need good video cards. But those people buy PowerMacs. So besides gamers who else needs the latest 3D cards?
Quote:
Besides, upgrading the video card in 18-24 months is a cheap way to avoid obsolescence. If you can't replace the card, you don't have that luxury.
Avoid obsolescence? How does having a new graphics card do that? Oh that's right you can't play Doom 5 without the latest ATI card. But I don't see how 99% of computer use is impacted by the graphics card at all.
Quote:
HOM, can you give me a reason why anyone buys Macs at all? You keep beating this drum about software, but it's rather plain to anyone willing to look that there's plenty of software for the Mac. No, it's not windows software. Who really cares? You can still get your work done with it, as many of us do on a daily basis. Name any type of software you need, and there's most likely a package written for the Mac that fills that need. Hell, in fact, much of it is the same titles available on Windows. I just don't see why this is such a big deal.
I couldn't agree more. There is all the software for Mac that a typical user would want or need. But the myths about Apple and Macs are very very rooted in the general computer public. These myths go much deeper then price/performance.
Quote:
You can't brush aside price/performance so easily, especially given how poorly G4s compare with cheap PCs. A lot of that is because of how processor intensive OS X is, but the exact reasons don't really matter. What matters is that a consumer can go into Fry's and check out a $1200 PC (with monitor) that is snappy and responsive, then test a $1800 iMac which has a half second lag in redrawing windows as they're resized. After that, the choice is easy, and the iMac loses. Software availability doesn't even enter into the equation.
I can brush it aside because for the vast majority of computer users the question is "Is this fast enough for what I am going to do?" That's why Intel is starting to go after the gaming market. The sales of their high end chips is down because for 90% of the market it makes no difference if they have a 2 or 3 GHz chip in their box. You're not really talking about window resizing are you? I have never ever heard anyone but a Mac geek complain about window resizing before. This is a phenomena that seems to have cropped up over night. All around the world there are thousands of geeks checking to see if their windows resize quick enough. I'm calling bull shit on that.
Quote:
You're suggesting that there's no overlap between what "cheap geeks" want and what the general public wants. That's just plain silly. Did it occur to you that maybe some of us have formed our opinions based on what our nontechnical friends have told us they want, in addition to our own wishes?
No I'm not suggesting that at all. What I am suggesting is that there is not a large enough market for a CSHB for Apple to make one. Almost all of the sales of a CSHB would come from within Apple's own customer base and it would cannibalize higher margin products that allow Apple to spend the money on stuff we all want like OSX. You may have formed your opinion by talking to your friends, that's fine, but I formed my opinion after having worked at an ARS for two years. After selling over 3000 Macs to switchers and Mac people alike. Every day I heard the same questions about compatibility and software. The only times I heard a request for a CSHB was from Mac geeks that weren't going to save for a little more and buy a PowerMac or didn't want an iMac because of the stigma associated with it.
%98 of computers sold do NOT run windows! Perhaps 98% of consumer computers do but overall the numbers are lower with shares by companies that make Unix computers(Sun, IBM etc) factoring in.
Quote:
What about people who use 3D apps? They'd benefit from having "the latest wizz bang graphics cards". There are other uses for high end graphics cards than just games.
Besides, upgrading the video card in 18-24 months is a cheap way to avoid obsolescence. If you can't replace the card, you don't have that luxury.
If I use 3D apps I'm going to want a Wildcat or Quadro level card with certified drivers. Not a game card.
Upgrading your card in 18 months will benefit your games. 2D performance has been static for years now. If you're not a gamer upgrading your video card means squat. As long as I can average 30 fps in the games I play i'm happy.
Now for Murchy's obligatory rant. It's really about the software. Apple can differentiate itself here by enabling apps that make Mac purchases necessary. Cross-Platform is not a boon to Apple in it's current positon.
%98 of computers sold do NOT run windows! Perhaps 98% of consumer computers do but overall the numbers are lower with shares by companies that make Unix computers(Sun, IBM etc) factoring in.
Fair enough, but I think we are talking about general consumers and not people that are buying big iron or specialty boxes.
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
If I use 3D apps I'm going to want a Wildcat or Quadro level card with certified drivers. Not a game card.
Upgrading your card in 18 months will benefit your games. 2D performance has been static for years now. If you're not a gamer upgrading your video card means squat. As long as I can average 30 fps in the games I play i'm happy.
Now for Murchy's obligatory rant. It's really about the software. Apple can differentiate itself here by enabling apps that make Mac purchases necessary. Cross-Platform is not a boon to Apple in it's current positon.
HERE HERE!!! Especially the comment about creating killer apps for the Mac. That's why Apple has been pushing the digital hub apps for so long now. I think the strategy makes sense, but it still needs another round of "OMG I can't believe they came up with that" features to really start kicking in.
Price/Performance is important. One sole reason. The majority of buyers may look at an Apple product, think it's great, but they look at the competition, the see higher clock speeds, bigger memory, faster processors etc.
According to the facts (I use that term loosely), buying a 'wintel' box means getting more for your money. That is the reason why macs don't fly off the shelves. Most buyers are not 'tech savvy' and therefore go with what they think is best, i.e. the fastest processor, the most RAM, the biggest hard drive and best screen.
Why else do you think Dell offers a PC for £800 with a 2.8Ghz P4, 256MB RAM, 120GB HD and 17" screen? It attracts buyers because they don't know enough about the products in the first place.
So besides gamers who else needs the latest 3D cards?
Anybody who uses quartz extreme? Also, don't assume that everybody who runs 3D apps has (or even needs) the latest and greatest hardware. It's not necessarily the case.
Quote:
Avoid obsolescence? How does having a new graphics card do that? Oh that's right you can't play Doom 5 without the latest ATI card. But I don't see how 99% of computer use is impacted by the graphics card at all.
When QE came out, those people who had machines with AGP slots could upgrade their video cards and get the benefits of it. Everybody else (who didn't have QE capable video) was screwed.
Quote:
I can brush it aside because for the vast majority of computer users the question is "Is this fast enough for what I am going to do?"
In that case, the vast majority of computer users would be satisfied with a $299 PC. Do you really think Apple can compete in that segment? Should they even try?
Quote:
You're not really talking about window resizing are you?
Yes, I am.
Quote:
I have never ever heard anyone but a Mac geek complain about window resizing before. This is a phenomena that seems to have cropped up over night.
People do, and it isn't. I've seen people in places like Fry's test out an iMac and snicker because the interface is so slow. Hell, they've probably got an old Pentium II or III system at home that runs circles around the iMac. Apple loses another sale.
Quote:
I'm calling bull shit on that.
Well, I don't know what to tell you, man. That's my experience.
Quote:
Almost all of the sales of a CSHB would come from within Apple's own customer base and it would cannibalize higher margin products that allow Apple to spend the money on stuff we all want like OSX.
How do you know a CSHB would be a lower margin product than an eMac or iMac? You're assuming a hell of a lot here. I honestly don't see why Apple can't make %30 on a CSHB with a 1.6GHz G5 costing $1300. Are they really that inept?
Quote:
After selling over 3000 Macs to switchers and Mac people alike. Every day I heard the same questions about compatibility and software.
And what were the reasons given by the people who didn't buy a Mac? Did the people simply not believe you when you told them about the software available for the Mac? Did it occur to you that the people who bought computers from you weren't concerned with price/performance as a primary motivation? What about all the people that didn't even bother to come in because they knew Apple's price/performance sucked? How do they figure into your experience? Has it occured to you that perhaps in that same period you could have sold 5000 Macs if Apple had machines with more competitive hardware? Have you talked with some of your colleagues who sell PCs and asked them what they tell people to steer them away from purchasing Macs? Do you think they tell them lies about software availability which could easily be disproved by a quick visit to apple.com, or do they talk about the G4 based Mac's horrible price/performance?
If I use 3D apps I'm going to want a Wildcat or Quadro level card with certified drivers. Not a game card.
Are either of those cards available for a mac yet? If not, what's their relevance to the current discussion?
Quote:
Upgrading your card in 18 months will benefit your games. 2D performance has been static for years now. If you're not a gamer upgrading your video card means squat. As long as I can average 30 fps in the games I play i'm happy.
Sorry, but I simply don't agree with that. Witness the lack of "professional" 3D cards for the mac, and yet programs like Maya and Lightwave do exist for it.
In the past couple of years, the high end video cards have lost their appeal to many 3D app users, because the "game" cards have gotten so good. Unless you're doing real high end stuff and pushing the hardware to it's limit, a "game" card for typical 3D apps is adequate. Besides, we're talking about a mid-level headless box here-- not a top end machine where spending $2k on a video card is justified.
That is correct. Many gaming graphics cards are now seen to be the cheaper professional 3d option. The latest generation is very powerful, in fact, professional cards have little to offer apart from their 3d app orientated drivers (which are more stable) and other hardware components which are mostly bolt ons to the highest end gaming graphics card. Many do not see the performance gained from from to the gaming cards to the professional cards good enough when taking the price into consideration.
You'll find most independant animators etc buy the highest end gaming cards, as the professional cards are too expensive for them to buy. It is mainly companies that buy the professional cards, not individual buyers, and so having the option of professional graphics cards would be more of a 'we have them too' than a sales booster.
There are a few other apps that benefit from 3D accelleration, as well. On the PC side, AutoCAD & ESRI's 3D Analyst are two examples that immediately come to mind. Depending on how complex the data is, a high end consumer 3D card may provide a significant boost in performance over what would be built in to the motherboard in an AIO. There are other apps, too, that have 3D modules that would benefit from a "game" card-- IDL & MathCAD type programs come to mind.
The use of these cards is not all limited to games and 3D content creation. There are a lot of other apps that would benefit as well.
[B]You're right, people that use 3D apps do need good video cards. But those people buy PowerMacs. So besides gamers who else needs the latest 3D cards?
Avoid obsolescence? How does having a new graphics card do that? Oh that's right you can't play Doom 5 without the latest ATI card. But I don't see how 99% of computer use is impacted by the graphics card at all.
...mmm, wow. No. I can see how much ignorance plays into your posts. Try running Quartz Extreme on a prev. Gen iMac. Won't work will it? I guess if you want to take advantage of all the performance OS X has to offer you'd have to have a newer gen. vid card, wouldn't ya? Do you open, move, and resize windows on a daily basis? Is manipulating an object on the monitor something you do more than 1% of the time?
Yeah, me too. Guess it would be nice if you could have just upgraded the video on that consumer machine. I guess you'll just have to drop another 15 bills to get soemthing that can run Quartz Extreme. Yay for Apple! Boo for the (former)customer!
Which brings me to another point. I know a guy who had 5 iMacs for his employees to do office work on. He wanted to be an "all Mac" office. Then, 3 out the 5 iMacs lost their ethernet ports. It was a common failing of his model iMac. The only solution to get them back on the net (no USB/Ethernet convertors were available for OS X or OS 9) was a full mobo replacement for $450. No, had it been a PC, he coulda fixed it for a generic $10 LAN card.
So, it came time to repalce the ol' iMacs and he replaced them with....PCs. Apple loses another one!
Why can't Apple build a simple Education/Business Mac. They don't need bleeding edge G5s. Just middle of the road performance, reasonable pricing, and easy servicability.
Is that asking too much? A huge market exists between that $799 price point and $1799 that Apple charges for the cheapest tower. In fact the largest % of the market exists in that price gap. Apple needs something to compete with PCs head on in that gap.
The new iMac was a failure. Take your lumps, learn, move on. Make a pretty mini tower and the world will be a better place, Stevie.
So, it came time to repalce the ol' iMacs and he replaced them with....PCs. Apple loses another one!
I'm curious. How was he able to switch over to PC so easily? He had to be running either a PC Server or had all the computers networked directly. This illustrates the danger of cross platform software. Hardware is the fishing pole and line but software is the "hook"
I agree on the expandability however. When ports go bad(and they do) you have to have a way of fixing it without incurring a $450 charge(shame on Apple)
The truth of it really is Apple is afraid. For every eMac they sell they're thinking "Why didn't that person buy a iMac or a Powermac?". While Dell focusing on lowering costs of production and selling the "Dell" Brand Apple obsesses over not just selling Apple but selling the profitable lines.
I propose that Apple endorses "Newcard" in the future
This is small enough to maintain small form factors and fast enough to run just about anything. Since it is based a bit on PCI-Express wouldn't it be nifty to upgrade video graphics with a ATI or Nvidia Newcard? That would cure alot of the issues buyers have about integrated systems.
PC Card technology adds expansion capabilities such as memory, mass storage, networking and wireless communications to computers and other communications and consumer electronics devices. Future expansion capabilities range from wireless communications, ultra wideband TV tuners, security card readers to optical compression/encryption and smart clocking.
Quote:
Applications that are expected to utilize NEWCARD include:
* Communications: wireless and wired
* Storage: rotating and solid state; optical and magnetic micro-drives
Apple may want to rethink the small "headless" form factor. With Newcard PCI Chassis will continue to become smaller and more efficient but keeping the same expandability. Obviously Apple likes integrated systems because they get the profit and revenue of the monitor as well but if they simply add the appropriate value to their monitors everything will be fine.
Isn't Dell starting to sell Home Electronics (besides their Whore Electronics of Computers) to the public? And, I believe that they are lower prices than average. Still, storing HDTV is even larger than DV because of all the lines of resolution, I believe, although I don't think storage could be a problem in all of this.
1080i HDTV content is right around 20 mbps, so figure an 80 GB HDD to hold <9 hours of HD content. Comcast is right now testing their HD-DVR/tuner box. I figure on upgrading to that as soon as they are available...should be an extra $10 a month.
...mmm, wow. No. I can see how much ignorance plays into your posts. Try running Quartz Extreme on a prev. Gen iMac. Won't work will it? I guess if you want to take advantage of all the performance OS X has to offer you'd have to have a newer gen. vid card, wouldn't ya? Do you open, move, and resize windows on a daily basis? Is manipulating an object on the monitor something you do more than 1% of the time?
Yeah, me too. Guess it would be nice if you could have just upgraded the video on that consumer machine. I guess you'll just have to drop another 15 bills to get soemthing that can run Quartz Extreme. Yay for Apple! Boo for the (former)customer!
Which brings me to another point. I know a guy who had 5 iMacs for his employees to do office work on. He wanted to be an "all Mac" office. Then, 3 out the 5 iMacs lost their ethernet ports. It was a common failing of his model iMac. The only solution to get them back on the net (no USB/Ethernet convertors were available for OS X or OS 9) was a full mobo replacement for $450. No, had it been a PC, he coulda fixed it for a generic $10 LAN card.
So, it came time to repalce the ol' iMacs and he replaced them with....PCs. Apple loses another one!
Why can't Apple build a simple Education/Business Mac. They don't need bleeding edge G5s. Just middle of the road performance, reasonable pricing, and easy servicability.
Is that asking too much? A huge market exists between that $799 price point and $1799 that Apple charges for the cheapest tower. In fact the largest % of the market exists in that price gap. Apple needs something to compete with PCs head on in that gap.
The new iMac was a failure. Take your lumps, learn, move on. Make a pretty mini tower and the world will be a better place, Stevie.
You are so full of yourself! If a G3 gumdrop has the horsepower for Education/Business, then QE is not the make or break item You're example is strictly anecdotal. "I know a guy that had a bunch of PC go balooey with the last seventeen viruses, and Wintel lost another one."
Go make up your own thread about beating down Apple because Apple doesn't produce the computer you want, and invite all your high school friends to join you. This thread is about MWSF rumors, not your pontificating on how dumb Apple is and how smart you are.
...I hate to be the one to break it to you, but computers are already commodity items. I use to sell Macs back in the days of Sculley/Spindler. Adjusted for inflation, Apple's entry level machine was damn close to 2g's. And that was for a 4 generation old 68000 chip (it'd be like selling the eMac with a 601 processor) in an AIO with a 9" B/W screen.
No, PCs are still not true commodity items. To be a commodity, the item should be maintenance free, cheap and replaceable on a whim. not even the WalMart $199 PC satisfies that, nor the eMachines of old that tied you to 3 years of dial-up.
Like it or not, PCs are becoming more closed. Dells don't adhere to true ATX standards. UTX is coming, but that might fork things even further. Even enthusiast motherboards have fewer and fewer PCI slots to accomodate things like hefty video cards that would occupy the adjacent slot to an AGP slot anyway.
Quote:
Apple needs to quit telling the consumer what they want and start giving them what they ask for.
The consumer is asking for a no-nonsense, low-maintenance box that they never have to open and comes with everything. They aren't specifically asking for a drab SFF cube-shaped Shuttle-esque Mac.
Quote:
Apple is getting ready to introduce a low cost iPod, going after the low end. Why? To get more people using their products and buying music from their store. The more people are using Apple products the greater the mindshare Apple gets. Mindshare is a precurser to marketshare.
iPods are commodity items. They are one piece. Everything you need comes in the box. When the iPod dies outside of the warranty period, you replace it instead of repairing it. The original iPod was the geek edition...*music and computer* geeks are going to have more music than anybody. Now Apple's bringing out the iPod for the masses. Would a SFF Mac be for the masses or do several Mac products already satisfy this segment? eMac, iMac, iBook, PowerBook?
Quote:
Someone hit me in the head with an Economics 101 text book, I'm flabbergasted.
You are so full of yourself! If a G3 gumdrop has the horsepower for Education/Business, then QE is not the make or break item You're example is strictly anecdotal. "I know a guy that had a bunch of PC go balooey with the last seventeen viruses, and Wintel lost another one."
Go make up your own thread about beating down Apple because Apple doesn't produce the computer you want, and invite all your high school friends to join you. This thread is about MWSF rumors, not your pontificating on how dumb Apple is and how smart you are.
....keep drinking the kool-aid. Your response to my posts leads me to believe that you have some emotional investment in your computer. Thats always bad for critcal thinking. The world is anecdotal, btw. Nothing is anything but perception. Get over it.
BTW, QE speeds up the UI. So any usage for any purpose benefits, especially the G3 users that already succesfully sued Apple for not "fully supporting their machines" due to AltiVec optimizations. I'm not sure there couldn't be another suit filed over QE.
I used the anecdote to expose a weakness in Apple's business practises. The whole reason many businesses and educational institutions shy away from desktop Macs is the AIO proprietary form factor vs. the ubiquitous commodity PC mini-tower. There is no reason for there not to be ONE FREAKING MAC that has space for two optical drives (unless you count the pevious generation MDD still for sale). We had to bitch for years over that one, then Apple took it away with the G5. I guess I'm just telling Apple how much smarter I am than they are again. Sorry.
Apple's laptops are more successful because ALL laptops share the same problem with proprietary hardware. Apple plays on a even footing in that market and they fare very well. If they can fare well in that market on even footing, why shouldn't they fare equally well in a Consumer Mini Tower market? Wouldn't you like to see the same growth in their desktop line as they have seen in their laptop line? They have 4 laptop form factors. 3 desktop form factors. There is room for one more desktop, a mini tower.
As a shareholder and end user such growth would benefit me in two ways. It would add more value to my stock and spur more investment from developers into the Mac software market.
I'm one of Apple's good customers. I most likely will never abandon them. But I also have several Linux/WIN2K/XP boxes sitting around too. And I know Apple isn't that far ahead of the game.
In fact, after getting my T3 I have become more aware of how Apple is falling behind in BlueTooth software. It is a shame that it is so simple to share a network connection over bluetooth on a PC, but impossible unless you want to dig into the CLI and start routing ports in Mac OS X. Hell, you can't even use a BT headset with a Mac yet.
Does me voicing my frustration over the lack of meaningful BT support make me a know-it-all Apple basher? Or am I just another frustrated Apple customer expressing his opinion? How does Apple know what its customers want if we don't voice our opinions?
So, sorry to bruise your ego by suggesting Apple build a consumer tower.
No, PCs are still not true commodity items. To be a commodity, the item should be maintenance free, cheap and replaceable on a whim.
iPods are commodity items. They are one piece. Everything you need comes in the box. When the iPod dies outside of the warranty period, you replace it instead of repairing it. The original iPod was the geek edition...*music and computer* geeks are going to have more music than anybody. Now Apple's bringing out the iPod for the masses. Would a SFF Mac be for the masses or do several Mac products already satisfy this segment? eMac, iMac, iBook, PowerBook?
Good idea.
...wait, hold on. A freaking $500 iPod is a commodity item, but a computer is not "replaceable on a whim" at $199.
...wait, hold on. A freaking $500 iPod is a commodity item, but a computer is not "replaceable on a whim" at $199.
MMmmmm. Ok.
Sorry, you make a poor argument.
Did you intentionally glaze over the rest of my post where I outline the fact that price is not the prime consideration for what is a commodity and what isn't?
The iPod is more of a commodity than the $199 WalMart PC, and thus more people are buying them. Also, the $500 iPod is merely the most expensive model. As I said, even as a commodity, the current iPod is the geek edition. How many of us have 40 GB of music? I have 15 GB and I already consider that quite a lot.
Did you intentionally glaze over the rest of my post where I outline the fact that price is not the prime consideration for what is a commodity and what isn't?
The iPod is more of a commodity than the $199 WalMart PC, and thus more people are buying them. Also, the $500 iPod is merely the most expensive model. As I said, even as a commodity, the current iPod is the geek edition. How many of us have 40 GB of music? I have 15 GB and I already consider that quite a lot.
...1) Maintenance Free. How is an iPod maintenance free? Ask the people filing the class action suit against Apple over batteries that need replacing how "tossable" an iPod should be for $299. And lets see, with my previous Gen iPod I had to upgrade the OS no less than 4 or 5 times. v1.3.1 is that last revision, I believe.
...2) Cheap. A $299 iPod is still what you can buy a new PC for. Thats the cheapest iPod they offer. I know, I've bought 2.
...3) Purchase on a whim. See above.
You STILL don't make a good argument.
And, there are a half dozen industry standard motherboard sizes. Extended ATX, ATX, Flex ATX, Micro ATX, Micro ITX. I think the new board you ae talking about is BTX being suggested by Intel with the BTX, microBTX, and picoBTX to repalce the ATX series. Regardless, those proprietary motherboards that Dell uses (made by the same companmy that makes Apple's) still offer PCI slots down to the $350 loss leaders. They still offer easily accessible chasis, and still offer industry standard HD cages, optical drive cages, etc.
If people want AIOs, then why don't super nifty machines like the Vaio W sell more? Its an awesome little machine and costs about the same as a mid-range iMac. Reason? The custoer PREFERS the mini-tower design.
The market speaks daily. Apple should be listening.
yeah really i mean a fridge is a commodity and they usually cost WAY more then $200
commodity != cheap
commodity = easy to use, don't usually have to troubleshoot, can be replaced easily without having to learn a complex system...
appliances and simple entertainment devices fall into these categories...
computers DO NOT (although they are getting close...)
the closest thing to a commodity PC would be a kiosk-type of computer that isn't usually terribly dynamic...
...no, a refridgerator is not a commodity item. Commodity does not mean "easy to use and maintenace free."
...no commodity == same products widely available competing soley on price.
That is what a commodity market is. Multiple vendors selling the same item and competing on price. Oil commodities. Grain commodities. Gold commodities. Rutabega commodities.
Jesus Christ, am I the only person here that picked up an economics book?
Comments
Originally posted by Gamblor
What about people who use 3D apps? They'd benefit from having "the latest wizz bang graphics cards". There are other uses for high end graphics cards than just games.
You're right, people that use 3D apps do need good video cards. But those people buy PowerMacs. So besides gamers who else needs the latest 3D cards?
Besides, upgrading the video card in 18-24 months is a cheap way to avoid obsolescence. If you can't replace the card, you don't have that luxury.
Avoid obsolescence? How does having a new graphics card do that? Oh that's right you can't play Doom 5 without the latest ATI card. But I don't see how 99% of computer use is impacted by the graphics card at all.
HOM, can you give me a reason why anyone buys Macs at all? You keep beating this drum about software, but it's rather plain to anyone willing to look that there's plenty of software for the Mac. No, it's not windows software. Who really cares? You can still get your work done with it, as many of us do on a daily basis. Name any type of software you need, and there's most likely a package written for the Mac that fills that need. Hell, in fact, much of it is the same titles available on Windows. I just don't see why this is such a big deal.
I couldn't agree more. There is all the software for Mac that a typical user would want or need. But the myths about Apple and Macs are very very rooted in the general computer public. These myths go much deeper then price/performance.
You can't brush aside price/performance so easily, especially given how poorly G4s compare with cheap PCs. A lot of that is because of how processor intensive OS X is, but the exact reasons don't really matter. What matters is that a consumer can go into Fry's and check out a $1200 PC (with monitor) that is snappy and responsive, then test a $1800 iMac which has a half second lag in redrawing windows as they're resized. After that, the choice is easy, and the iMac loses. Software availability doesn't even enter into the equation.
I can brush it aside because for the vast majority of computer users the question is "Is this fast enough for what I am going to do?" That's why Intel is starting to go after the gaming market. The sales of their high end chips is down because for 90% of the market it makes no difference if they have a 2 or 3 GHz chip in their box. You're not really talking about window resizing are you? I have never ever heard anyone but a Mac geek complain about window resizing before. This is a phenomena that seems to have cropped up over night. All around the world there are thousands of geeks checking to see if their windows resize quick enough. I'm calling bull shit on that.
You're suggesting that there's no overlap between what "cheap geeks" want and what the general public wants. That's just plain silly. Did it occur to you that maybe some of us have formed our opinions based on what our nontechnical friends have told us they want, in addition to our own wishes?
No I'm not suggesting that at all. What I am suggesting is that there is not a large enough market for a CSHB for Apple to make one. Almost all of the sales of a CSHB would come from within Apple's own customer base and it would cannibalize higher margin products that allow Apple to spend the money on stuff we all want like OSX. You may have formed your opinion by talking to your friends, that's fine, but I formed my opinion after having worked at an ARS for two years. After selling over 3000 Macs to switchers and Mac people alike. Every day I heard the same questions about compatibility and software. The only times I heard a request for a CSHB was from Mac geeks that weren't going to save for a little more and buy a PowerMac or didn't want an iMac because of the stigma associated with it.
%98 of computers sold do NOT run windows! Perhaps 98% of consumer computers do but overall the numbers are lower with shares by companies that make Unix computers(Sun, IBM etc) factoring in.
What about people who use 3D apps? They'd benefit from having "the latest wizz bang graphics cards". There are other uses for high end graphics cards than just games.
Besides, upgrading the video card in 18-24 months is a cheap way to avoid obsolescence. If you can't replace the card, you don't have that luxury.
If I use 3D apps I'm going to want a Wildcat or Quadro level card with certified drivers. Not a game card.
Upgrading your card in 18 months will benefit your games. 2D performance has been static for years now. If you're not a gamer upgrading your video card means squat. As long as I can average 30 fps in the games I play i'm happy.
Now for Murchy's obligatory rant. It's really about the software. Apple can differentiate itself here by enabling apps that make Mac purchases necessary. Cross-Platform is not a boon to Apple in it's current positon.
Originally posted by hmurchison
People let's stop quoting fallacious statistics.
%98 of computers sold do NOT run windows! Perhaps 98% of consumer computers do but overall the numbers are lower with shares by companies that make Unix computers(Sun, IBM etc) factoring in.
Fair enough, but I think we are talking about general consumers and not people that are buying big iron or specialty boxes.
Originally posted by hmurchison
If I use 3D apps I'm going to want a Wildcat or Quadro level card with certified drivers. Not a game card.
Upgrading your card in 18 months will benefit your games. 2D performance has been static for years now. If you're not a gamer upgrading your video card means squat. As long as I can average 30 fps in the games I play i'm happy.
Now for Murchy's obligatory rant. It's really about the software. Apple can differentiate itself here by enabling apps that make Mac purchases necessary. Cross-Platform is not a boon to Apple in it's current positon.
HERE HERE!!! Especially the comment about creating killer apps for the Mac. That's why Apple has been pushing the digital hub apps for so long now. I think the strategy makes sense, but it still needs another round of "OMG I can't believe they came up with that" features to really start kicking in.
According to the facts (I use that term loosely), buying a 'wintel' box means getting more for your money. That is the reason why macs don't fly off the shelves. Most buyers are not 'tech savvy' and therefore go with what they think is best, i.e. the fastest processor, the most RAM, the biggest hard drive and best screen.
Why else do you think Dell offers a PC for £800 with a 2.8Ghz P4, 256MB RAM, 120GB HD and 17" screen? It attracts buyers because they don't know enough about the products in the first place.
So besides gamers who else needs the latest 3D cards?
Anybody who uses quartz extreme? Also, don't assume that everybody who runs 3D apps has (or even needs) the latest and greatest hardware. It's not necessarily the case.
Avoid obsolescence? How does having a new graphics card do that? Oh that's right you can't play Doom 5 without the latest ATI card. But I don't see how 99% of computer use is impacted by the graphics card at all.
When QE came out, those people who had machines with AGP slots could upgrade their video cards and get the benefits of it. Everybody else (who didn't have QE capable video) was screwed.
I can brush it aside because for the vast majority of computer users the question is "Is this fast enough for what I am going to do?"
In that case, the vast majority of computer users would be satisfied with a $299 PC. Do you really think Apple can compete in that segment? Should they even try?
You're not really talking about window resizing are you?
Yes, I am.
I have never ever heard anyone but a Mac geek complain about window resizing before. This is a phenomena that seems to have cropped up over night.
People do, and it isn't. I've seen people in places like Fry's test out an iMac and snicker because the interface is so slow. Hell, they've probably got an old Pentium II or III system at home that runs circles around the iMac. Apple loses another sale.
I'm calling bull shit on that.
Well, I don't know what to tell you, man. That's my experience.
Almost all of the sales of a CSHB would come from within Apple's own customer base and it would cannibalize higher margin products that allow Apple to spend the money on stuff we all want like OSX.
How do you know a CSHB would be a lower margin product than an eMac or iMac? You're assuming a hell of a lot here. I honestly don't see why Apple can't make %30 on a CSHB with a 1.6GHz G5 costing $1300. Are they really that inept?
After selling over 3000 Macs to switchers and Mac people alike. Every day I heard the same questions about compatibility and software.
And what were the reasons given by the people who didn't buy a Mac? Did the people simply not believe you when you told them about the software available for the Mac? Did it occur to you that the people who bought computers from you weren't concerned with price/performance as a primary motivation? What about all the people that didn't even bother to come in because they knew Apple's price/performance sucked? How do they figure into your experience? Has it occured to you that perhaps in that same period you could have sold 5000 Macs if Apple had machines with more competitive hardware? Have you talked with some of your colleagues who sell PCs and asked them what they tell people to steer them away from purchasing Macs? Do you think they tell them lies about software availability which could easily be disproved by a quick visit to apple.com, or do they talk about the G4 based Mac's horrible price/performance?
If I use 3D apps I'm going to want a Wildcat or Quadro level card with certified drivers. Not a game card.
Are either of those cards available for a mac yet? If not, what's their relevance to the current discussion?
Upgrading your card in 18 months will benefit your games. 2D performance has been static for years now. If you're not a gamer upgrading your video card means squat. As long as I can average 30 fps in the games I play i'm happy.
Sorry, but I simply don't agree with that. Witness the lack of "professional" 3D cards for the mac, and yet programs like Maya and Lightwave do exist for it.
In the past couple of years, the high end video cards have lost their appeal to many 3D app users, because the "game" cards have gotten so good. Unless you're doing real high end stuff and pushing the hardware to it's limit, a "game" card for typical 3D apps is adequate. Besides, we're talking about a mid-level headless box here-- not a top end machine where spending $2k on a video card is justified.
You'll find most independant animators etc buy the highest end gaming cards, as the professional cards are too expensive for them to buy. It is mainly companies that buy the professional cards, not individual buyers, and so having the option of professional graphics cards would be more of a 'we have them too' than a sales booster.
The use of these cards is not all limited to games and 3D content creation. There are a lot of other apps that would benefit as well.
Originally posted by HOM
[B]You're right, people that use 3D apps do need good video cards. But those people buy PowerMacs. So besides gamers who else needs the latest 3D cards?
Avoid obsolescence? How does having a new graphics card do that? Oh that's right you can't play Doom 5 without the latest ATI card. But I don't see how 99% of computer use is impacted by the graphics card at all.
...mmm, wow. No. I can see how much ignorance plays into your posts. Try running Quartz Extreme on a prev. Gen iMac. Won't work will it? I guess if you want to take advantage of all the performance OS X has to offer you'd have to have a newer gen. vid card, wouldn't ya? Do you open, move, and resize windows on a daily basis? Is manipulating an object on the monitor something you do more than 1% of the time?
Yeah, me too. Guess it would be nice if you could have just upgraded the video on that consumer machine. I guess you'll just have to drop another 15 bills to get soemthing that can run Quartz Extreme. Yay for Apple! Boo for the (former)customer!
Which brings me to another point. I know a guy who had 5 iMacs for his employees to do office work on. He wanted to be an "all Mac" office. Then, 3 out the 5 iMacs lost their ethernet ports. It was a common failing of his model iMac. The only solution to get them back on the net (no USB/Ethernet convertors were available for OS X or OS 9) was a full mobo replacement for $450. No, had it been a PC, he coulda fixed it for a generic $10 LAN card.
So, it came time to repalce the ol' iMacs and he replaced them with....PCs. Apple loses another one!
Why can't Apple build a simple Education/Business Mac. They don't need bleeding edge G5s. Just middle of the road performance, reasonable pricing, and easy servicability.
Is that asking too much? A huge market exists between that $799 price point and $1799 that Apple charges for the cheapest tower. In fact the largest % of the market exists in that price gap. Apple needs something to compete with PCs head on in that gap.
The new iMac was a failure. Take your lumps, learn, move on. Make a pretty mini tower and the world will be a better place, Stevie.
So, it came time to repalce the ol' iMacs and he replaced them with....PCs. Apple loses another one!
I'm curious. How was he able to switch over to PC so easily? He had to be running either a PC Server or had all the computers networked directly. This illustrates the danger of cross platform software. Hardware is the fishing pole and line but software is the "hook"
I agree on the expandability however. When ports go bad(and they do) you have to have a way of fixing it without incurring a $450 charge(shame on Apple)
The truth of it really is Apple is afraid. For every eMac they sell they're thinking "Why didn't that person buy a iMac or a Powermac?". While Dell focusing on lowering costs of production and selling the "Dell" Brand Apple obsesses over not just selling Apple but selling the profitable lines.
I propose that Apple endorses "Newcard" in the future
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0302/03...cianewcard.asp
This is small enough to maintain small form factors and fast enough to run just about anything. Since it is based a bit on PCI-Express wouldn't it be nifty to upgrade video graphics with a ATI or Nvidia Newcard? That would cure alot of the issues buyers have about integrated systems.
http://www.pcmcia.org/newcard.htm
PC Card technology adds expansion capabilities such as memory, mass storage, networking and wireless communications to computers and other communications and consumer electronics devices. Future expansion capabilities range from wireless communications, ultra wideband TV tuners, security card readers to optical compression/encryption and smart clocking.
Applications that are expected to utilize NEWCARD include:
* Communications: wireless and wired
* Storage: rotating and solid state; optical and magnetic micro-drives
* I/O connectivity: legacy ports, IEEE 1394, SCSI ports
* Security: smart cards and identity sensors
* Adapters: consumer flash memory cards, external drives
Apple may want to rethink the small "headless" form factor. With Newcard PCI Chassis will continue to become smaller and more efficient but keeping the same expandability. Obviously Apple likes integrated systems because they get the profit and revenue of the monitor as well but if they simply add the appropriate value to their monitors everything will be fine.
Originally posted by Nebagakid
Isn't Dell starting to sell Home Electronics (besides their Whore Electronics of Computers) to the public? And, I believe that they are lower prices than average. Still, storing HDTV is even larger than DV because of all the lines of resolution, I believe, although I don't think storage could be a problem in all of this.
1080i HDTV content is right around 20 mbps, so figure an 80 GB HDD to hold <9 hours of HD content. Comcast is right now testing their HD-DVR/tuner box. I figure on upgrading to that as soon as they are available...should be an extra $10 a month.
Originally posted by mooseman
...mmm, wow. No. I can see how much ignorance plays into your posts. Try running Quartz Extreme on a prev. Gen iMac. Won't work will it? I guess if you want to take advantage of all the performance OS X has to offer you'd have to have a newer gen. vid card, wouldn't ya? Do you open, move, and resize windows on a daily basis? Is manipulating an object on the monitor something you do more than 1% of the time?
Yeah, me too. Guess it would be nice if you could have just upgraded the video on that consumer machine. I guess you'll just have to drop another 15 bills to get soemthing that can run Quartz Extreme. Yay for Apple! Boo for the (former)customer!
Which brings me to another point. I know a guy who had 5 iMacs for his employees to do office work on. He wanted to be an "all Mac" office. Then, 3 out the 5 iMacs lost their ethernet ports. It was a common failing of his model iMac. The only solution to get them back on the net (no USB/Ethernet convertors were available for OS X or OS 9) was a full mobo replacement for $450. No, had it been a PC, he coulda fixed it for a generic $10 LAN card.
So, it came time to repalce the ol' iMacs and he replaced them with....PCs. Apple loses another one!
Why can't Apple build a simple Education/Business Mac. They don't need bleeding edge G5s. Just middle of the road performance, reasonable pricing, and easy servicability.
Is that asking too much? A huge market exists between that $799 price point and $1799 that Apple charges for the cheapest tower. In fact the largest % of the market exists in that price gap. Apple needs something to compete with PCs head on in that gap.
The new iMac was a failure. Take your lumps, learn, move on. Make a pretty mini tower and the world will be a better place, Stevie.
You are so full of yourself! If a G3 gumdrop has the horsepower for Education/Business, then QE is not the make or break item
Go make up your own thread about beating down Apple because Apple doesn't produce the computer you want, and invite all your high school friends to join you. This thread is about MWSF rumors, not your pontificating on how dumb Apple is and how smart you are.
Originally posted by mooseman
...I hate to be the one to break it to you, but computers are already commodity items. I use to sell Macs back in the days of Sculley/Spindler. Adjusted for inflation, Apple's entry level machine was damn close to 2g's. And that was for a 4 generation old 68000 chip (it'd be like selling the eMac with a 601 processor) in an AIO with a 9" B/W screen.
No, PCs are still not true commodity items. To be a commodity, the item should be maintenance free, cheap and replaceable on a whim. not even the WalMart $199 PC satisfies that, nor the eMachines of old that tied you to 3 years of dial-up.
Like it or not, PCs are becoming more closed. Dells don't adhere to true ATX standards. UTX is coming, but that might fork things even further. Even enthusiast motherboards have fewer and fewer PCI slots to accomodate things like hefty video cards that would occupy the adjacent slot to an AGP slot anyway.
Apple needs to quit telling the consumer what they want and start giving them what they ask for.
The consumer is asking for a no-nonsense, low-maintenance box that they never have to open and comes with everything. They aren't specifically asking for a drab SFF cube-shaped Shuttle-esque Mac.
Apple is getting ready to introduce a low cost iPod, going after the low end. Why? To get more people using their products and buying music from their store. The more people are using Apple products the greater the mindshare Apple gets. Mindshare is a precurser to marketshare.
iPods are commodity items. They are one piece. Everything you need comes in the box. When the iPod dies outside of the warranty period, you replace it instead of repairing it. The original iPod was the geek edition...*music and computer* geeks are going to have more music than anybody. Now Apple's bringing out the iPod for the masses. Would a SFF Mac be for the masses or do several Mac products already satisfy this segment? eMac, iMac, iBook, PowerBook?
Someone hit me in the head with an Economics 101 text book, I'm flabbergasted.
Good idea.
Originally posted by jwdawso
You are so full of yourself! If a G3 gumdrop has the horsepower for Education/Business, then QE is not the make or break item
Go make up your own thread about beating down Apple because Apple doesn't produce the computer you want, and invite all your high school friends to join you. This thread is about MWSF rumors, not your pontificating on how dumb Apple is and how smart you are.
....keep drinking the kool-aid. Your response to my posts leads me to believe that you have some emotional investment in your computer. Thats always bad for critcal thinking. The world is anecdotal, btw. Nothing is anything but perception. Get over it.
BTW, QE speeds up the UI. So any usage for any purpose benefits, especially the G3 users that already succesfully sued Apple for not "fully supporting their machines" due to AltiVec optimizations. I'm not sure there couldn't be another suit filed over QE.
I used the anecdote to expose a weakness in Apple's business practises. The whole reason many businesses and educational institutions shy away from desktop Macs is the AIO proprietary form factor vs. the ubiquitous commodity PC mini-tower. There is no reason for there not to be ONE FREAKING MAC that has space for two optical drives (unless you count the pevious generation MDD still for sale). We had to bitch for years over that one, then Apple took it away with the G5. I guess I'm just telling Apple how much smarter I am than they are again. Sorry.
Apple's laptops are more successful because ALL laptops share the same problem with proprietary hardware. Apple plays on a even footing in that market and they fare very well. If they can fare well in that market on even footing, why shouldn't they fare equally well in a Consumer Mini Tower market? Wouldn't you like to see the same growth in their desktop line as they have seen in their laptop line? They have 4 laptop form factors. 3 desktop form factors. There is room for one more desktop, a mini tower.
As a shareholder and end user such growth would benefit me in two ways. It would add more value to my stock and spur more investment from developers into the Mac software market.
I'm one of Apple's good customers. I most likely will never abandon them. But I also have several Linux/WIN2K/XP boxes sitting around too. And I know Apple isn't that far ahead of the game.
In fact, after getting my T3 I have become more aware of how Apple is falling behind in BlueTooth software. It is a shame that it is so simple to share a network connection over bluetooth on a PC, but impossible unless you want to dig into the CLI and start routing ports in Mac OS X. Hell, you can't even use a BT headset with a Mac yet.
Does me voicing my frustration over the lack of meaningful BT support make me a know-it-all Apple basher? Or am I just another frustrated Apple customer expressing his opinion? How does Apple know what its customers want if we don't voice our opinions?
So, sorry to bruise your ego by suggesting Apple build a consumer tower.
Originally posted by Eugene
No, PCs are still not true commodity items. To be a commodity, the item should be maintenance free, cheap and replaceable on a whim.
iPods are commodity items. They are one piece. Everything you need comes in the box. When the iPod dies outside of the warranty period, you replace it instead of repairing it. The original iPod was the geek edition...*music and computer* geeks are going to have more music than anybody. Now Apple's bringing out the iPod for the masses. Would a SFF Mac be for the masses or do several Mac products already satisfy this segment? eMac, iMac, iBook, PowerBook?
Good idea.
...wait, hold on. A freaking $500 iPod is a commodity item, but a computer is not "replaceable on a whim" at $199.
MMmmmm. Ok.
Sorry, you make a poor argument.
Originally posted by mooseman
...wait, hold on. A freaking $500 iPod is a commodity item, but a computer is not "replaceable on a whim" at $199.
MMmmmm. Ok.
Sorry, you make a poor argument.
Did you intentionally glaze over the rest of my post where I outline the fact that price is not the prime consideration for what is a commodity and what isn't?
The iPod is more of a commodity than the $199 WalMart PC, and thus more people are buying them. Also, the $500 iPod is merely the most expensive model. As I said, even as a commodity, the current iPod is the geek edition. How many of us have 40 GB of music? I have 15 GB and I already consider that quite a lot.
commodity != cheap
commodity = easy to use, don't usually have to troubleshoot, can be replaced easily without having to learn a complex system...
appliances and simple entertainment devices fall into these categories...
computers DO NOT (although they are getting close...)
the closest thing to a commodity PC would be a kiosk-type of computer that isn't usually terribly dynamic...
Originally posted by Eugene
Did you intentionally glaze over the rest of my post where I outline the fact that price is not the prime consideration for what is a commodity and what isn't?
The iPod is more of a commodity than the $199 WalMart PC, and thus more people are buying them. Also, the $500 iPod is merely the most expensive model. As I said, even as a commodity, the current iPod is the geek edition. How many of us have 40 GB of music? I have 15 GB and I already consider that quite a lot.
...1) Maintenance Free. How is an iPod maintenance free? Ask the people filing the class action suit against Apple over batteries that need replacing how "tossable" an iPod should be for $299. And lets see, with my previous Gen iPod I had to upgrade the OS no less than 4 or 5 times. v1.3.1 is that last revision, I believe.
...2) Cheap. A $299 iPod is still what you can buy a new PC for. Thats the cheapest iPod they offer. I know, I've bought 2.
...3) Purchase on a whim. See above.
You STILL don't make a good argument.
And, there are a half dozen industry standard motherboard sizes. Extended ATX, ATX, Flex ATX, Micro ATX, Micro ITX. I think the new board you ae talking about is BTX being suggested by Intel with the BTX, microBTX, and picoBTX to repalce the ATX series. Regardless, those proprietary motherboards that Dell uses (made by the same companmy that makes Apple's) still offer PCI slots down to the $350 loss leaders. They still offer easily accessible chasis, and still offer industry standard HD cages, optical drive cages, etc.
If people want AIOs, then why don't super nifty machines like the Vaio W sell more? Its an awesome little machine and costs about the same as a mid-range iMac. Reason? The custoer PREFERS the mini-tower design.
The market speaks daily. Apple should be listening.
Originally posted by Paul
yeah really i mean a fridge is a commodity and they usually cost WAY more then $200
commodity != cheap
commodity = easy to use, don't usually have to troubleshoot, can be replaced easily without having to learn a complex system...
appliances and simple entertainment devices fall into these categories...
computers DO NOT (although they are getting close...)
the closest thing to a commodity PC would be a kiosk-type of computer that isn't usually terribly dynamic...
...no, a refridgerator is not a commodity item. Commodity does not mean "easy to use and maintenace free."
...no commodity == same products widely available competing soley on price.
That is what a commodity market is. Multiple vendors selling the same item and competing on price. Oil commodities. Grain commodities. Gold commodities. Rutabega commodities.
Jesus Christ, am I the only person here that picked up an economics book?