Headless Mac?

24

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 74
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,464member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by iDave

    This would be a step in the right direction. This rumored new single processor Power Mac would still be too big, too expandable and too expensive. What is needed is a "consumer" headless for about $1000.



    The problem is no one cares about the consumer anymore. Most companies are getting their "business to business" connections shored up. The consumer is somewhat of an afterthought now.



    Apple doesn't really need a $999 headless computer. If you already have a monitor then a $1499 Powermac isn't that much of a stretch provided its expandability is as good as the rest of the towers.



    This changing dynamic of the industry is kind of interesting to watch...the key today is the small biz sector and how quickly it's going to grow. Consumers are second fiddle.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 74
    eric_zeric_z Posts: 175member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by emig647

    Only difference between this mac and the dual 1.8 is lack of a cpu... which IMO is worth about 100 bucks.



    AFAIK it should be about the same price as a low/mid range Freescale 7447A, that would put it at about $200.



    Well slightly over that actually, but 200 is such a nice and even number.



    </nitpick>
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 74
    chipzchipz Posts: 100member
    The idea of a headless Mac like tgis is good, but...

    The projected unit seems to be very close to the iMac minus the display. Granted, it has features of the PM but it is scaled back to a single processor which people may equate with the iMac. All in all, I think it will be perceived as an iMac minus the display.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 74
    Quote:

    Originally posted by emig647

    Splitting hairs at that point aren't we?



    We do need another mac I guess. Just hope we don't open old wounds by trying to create another cube. That design had too many problems. If they can come out with a nice little mini tower... I guess that would be cool. Single 2.0ghz g5 minitower... 4gb ram. NVidia 6600.




    Not quite...6800 GT and Radeon 9800 XT (both with 256 Meg). Looks good considering the previous general pausity of vid cards for macs.



    Pity about the low rent FSB...why not leave it at 900Mhz?



    The price is reasonable but nothing special...whats the target market for this Pmac? People who want an iMac but also want choice of video card? You've got to be kidding
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 74
    telomartelomar Posts: 1,804member
    People who want expandability or choice over their display, or both.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 74
    moazammoazam Posts: 136member
    It's out. On Apple.com.



    -M
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 74
    buccibucci Posts: 100member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by a j stev

    Pity about the low rent FSB...why not leave it at 900Mhz?

    [/B]



    Valid point. Maybe it's clocked lower in an attempt to reduce the amount of fans inside the tower? Maybe when someone actually gets one they can say yay or nay.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 74
    The point I am trying to make about Apple displays is that they need not cater exclusively to the market they do now. Maybe a 15'' monitor is too small to be Apple's style, but something at 17'' for around $600 would be a start. I'm not saying they need to compete at the lowest end level, but at least a mid-range level would be nice. You can pick up one of these new Power Macs for $1349 with the education discount. However, you add the cheapest apple display and all of a sudden you're paying huge prices again. I realize there are 3rd party options and if I were buying a Power Mac, that's the route I'd have to go, unfortuneately. However, I've stared at Apple displays before and they are stunning indeed. I just don't see why the 20'' needs to be the entry level model. I'd be willing to pay a premium to have an Apple display over the others, b/c I know Apple makes excellent (and attractive) displays, but I can't pay the premium they charge now.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 74
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BRussell

    Doesn't go far enough though. The thing is still $1499, and the cheapest Apple Display is $1299.



    Don't but the Apple monitor. Isn't that the advantage of a headless comsumer or "prosumer" Mac? Otherwise, why not buy an iMac? Why is everyone so hung up on a headless Mac is they're just going to partner it with a new Apple monitor anyway? Is there some sort of mistaken perception that headless = more expandable?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 74
    yevgenyyevgeny Posts: 1,148member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BuonRotto

    Don't but the Apple monitor. Isn't that the advantage of a headless comsumer or "prosumer" Mac? Otherwise, why not buy an iMac? Why is everyone so hung up on a headless Mac is they're just going to partner it with a new Apple monitor anyway? Is there some sort of mistaken perception that headless = more expandable?



    No, Headless Mac fans just want a the performance of a dual 1.8 GHz machine with a 17 inch monitor for $999. Also they don't want a video card so that they can go out and but the latest and greatest.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 74
    I think the single 1.8 released today squashes any chance the neo 9,1 machine was a small headless.



    There is no room for a headless between the powermacs and the imacs now. shaving off 200mhz, the PCI slots and a drive bay does not create a $500 discount on a $1500 machine. removing ram slots or soldering ram on the mobo or crippling it in any other way does not save money. heck, the 1.8 SP can be had for $1400 sans superdrive. Would you give up the expandibility for $200? I think the ghost can officially be given up.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 74
    The new box is appreciated, but spec-wise, as a headless iMac for the same price, it's the answer to a question nobody asked.



    Beef the graphics and RAM up, then you're really in the neighborhood. Until Apple reshapes their pricing structure, they're always going to be two steps off.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 74
    synpsynp Posts: 248member
    I have to agree with TofuTodd. This has the same specs as the $1499 iMac, except for a faster superdrive, and no screen. You really can get an good 17" screen just for giving up on the PCI slots. The pricing is a little off.



    This only makes sense if you intend to get a screen that's vastly different from what Apple offers in the iMac. That is, either a super-cheap or old monitor (like my 19" CRT) or a higher-end monitor like a 23" or 30" LCD.



    Let's take my next computer as an example. I will get a new computer next year (around September) My 19" CRT is almost 5 years old now, so it's probably time to replace.



    Option #1 is to buy a 20" iMac. That sets me back $1900.



    Option #2 is to buy this thing, plus a 20" monitor. That's $1500 + about $1000. You can get a 20" monitor for less than $600, but I assume they'll be pretty bad at under $1000.



    It looks like the iMac is more cost-efficient. still, I like my monitors to last 5-6 years - my 19" CRT is by no means outdated. However, it makes no sense to keep a computer for that long. That is why people are saying that we need a headless iMac. I don't need expandability, and 2GB is more than what I need. Even the 80GB hard drive is plenty. But I would like to be able to buy a better computer three years later without buying a new screen.



    Given that, I don't think the headless should cost $500 (iMac minus screen), but $1000 (price of two iMacs minus that of one screen)



    I will probably buy an iMac, but I will feel that I was making a compromise, just like when I bought a PM without intending to use the PCI slots. In the PC world, I could get a computer that fits my needs. Apple is counting on the fact that I'm a Mac zealot. They shouldn't.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 74
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,464member
    Quote:

    Apple is counting on the fact that I'm a Mac zealot. They shouldn't.



    I doubt it. Apple is simply doing what's best for themselves and a majority of their consumers. While a large number of people keep their existing monitors and equally large number will replace the whole system reaping the rewards of techology improvements for the whole system.



    The headless mac at $999 is merely a geeks wet dream. Perhaps that dream becomes reality but it won't be anytime soon IMO.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 74
    satchmosatchmo Posts: 2,699member
    Hey, it's a start.

    I wouldn't be surprised to see a complete line of single processor G5 PowerMacs down the road (if this one proves to be somewhat popular).



    It not inconceivable to have 1.6, 1.8, and 2.0 models priced at $1,099,$1,299, and $1,499 respectively (albeit probably at the least 6-9 months away).
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 74
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,455member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    The headless mac at $999 is merely a geeks wet dream. Perhaps that dream becomes reality but it won't be anytime soon IMO.



    Exactly... Couldn't have said it better myself.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 74
    99% of the PC market is headless, and they've managed to somehow survive with their meager little market share.



    Providing real options wouldn't be the worst thing in the world for Apple. The 4-product matrix is antiquated at this point.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 74
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    PowerMac towers are headless.



    The issue is merely one of price, pure and simple.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 74
    idaveidave Posts: 1,283member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    PowerMac towers are headless.



    The issue is merely one of price, pure and simple.




    No, I'm really put off by the huge size of the Power Mac monster. If the same thing was in a much smaller case, I'd consider it at this price, although without the extra slots and bay, I'd expect it to be cheaper.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 74
    allanallan Posts: 26member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Telomar

    People who want expandability or choice over their display, or both.



    That's why I like the the new PowerMac over the iMac. My major concern with the iMac was the video card, this allows me the opportunity to get a better video card, as well as better upgradability down the road.



    However, I agree that the Cinema Displays are a major hurdle that need to be dealt with.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.