It does however have an AGP slot, PCI slots and an extra drive bay. These are all things the iMac doesn't have and for those people who have been clamoring for a cheaper expandable Mac, I think it's pretty nice.
So, it has stuff the iMac doesn't have. And no. It doesn't come with a monitor. (I wish Mac towers did, at least a mega-cheap 17 inch alu option...)
£1049 is much better than £1400. That's a £350 saving. You lose the extra cpu and a bit of bus speed. Sniff. Okay.
The single 1.6 G5 was about, what? £1500-1600 when it first came out?
For Apple, this is a nice step forwards. It's not earth-shattering. But it is significant. They're admitting there is a pool of at least 20,000 'Cube' sector buyers that don't want or need the top end PowerMac. Or a dual Mac. And saving almost 400 pounds? What's that? Almost $700-800?
I still think Apple UK can get sharper on prices. We're paying more than America and Europe for our iTunes music tracks. (Why? I have no idea.) Same for the Powertower, eMac and iMac. I think Apple UK can get these prices lower.
ie iMac at £919? What a stupid price. Better at £895, no?
Single 1.8 gig Tower? £1045? Better at £995, eh?
eMac at £545? Loads better at £495?!
Personally, I'd love to see Apple do a headless eMac. But perhaps it is unlikely to happen. Apple have said they won't go into the sub-$800 computer market. But they said that a while back and then dropped the price of the eMac. So it looks like the eMac is our only hope for a really low-cost Mac. And though CRT are going the way of the dinos I can only think a G5 based eMac will stay 17 CRT or go with a 12 or 14 or 15 inch LCD to keep prices the same. Yeah, they could can the eMac and add a 15 inch LCD iMac...I suppose. The eMac looks like it's here to stay in one form or another.
Apple have said their money/efforts are better invested in the iPod right now. What this means for a future headless Mac we can guess at. The 1.8 gig Tower goes some way to addressing that. But either they drop the price further and add a 1.6 gig Tower for £895 or they make a headless eMac cube box or mini-tower. Simple white enamel box would look quite sexy and could have a 1.6 G5 and an AGP slot for £695-895. I'd be happy.
Maybe if Apple gets sales of all cpus in excess of 1 million then they'll think about broadening the mix.
It's interesting that Apple said they felt there wasn't 'an aweful lot of money to be made there' with a sub $800 computer. They might be right.
So, it's clear marketshare is not a primary concern and in the same breath they're not refuting the halo effect bring PC and non-Mac owners to the fold as a 45/50% turnover rate suggests at their stores.
...but what's really interesting last quarter, in the absence of the iMac and a reasonably priced Tower(!) Apple found eMac sales of over 170,000. More than Tower and X-Serve sales combined.
Who says there is no demand for a cheap Mac? (And yes, weren't they speaking b*************S!)
So Apple knows there is demand for 'cheap-ER' product (thought it doesn't have to be the 'cheap-EST'!)
It looks like sucking-donkey b**** sales of PowerMacs (as low as the G4 debacle! Though, due in part to IBM's ability to deliver the only NEW speed grade ie the 2.5!) has forced Apple to reconsider the 'Sky high prices are only for immortals with 'pro' level wages. Though how they get to a figure of £1400 and decide it's for 'pros' I'll never know. Especially when you can get a top level PC specced out from MESH computers.co.uk with Raid, 3.8 gig Athlon, 2 gigs of ram and the kitchen sink for only a hundred quid more. So, pros are buying cheaper tower hardware that can do the job for much less...obviously. And Mac tower fans guess what? Don't want the dual 1.8 or 2 giggers that have been on the market for almost 1 and a half years. ie? The last update was underwhelming and sales, in part reflect this. We wanted the 3 gig. Psychalogical hurdle to put us right there with Intel. IBM blew it. BIG TIME. We're still over a gig behind...
Can Apple go just a bit further. The desktop market seems to be a real problem area for them. But, it's loads better now the G5 iMacs have arrived along with a 'low end' tower.
Misc ramblings now over. I hope that the halo effect and the dynamism of the iPod product and marketing division spills over to the Mac marketing division which bears the hallmarks of entrenched thinking. Althought the hardware has never looked this good, been this fast or this cheap.
A good cpu update early 2005 will help justify prices that bit more.
One reason I don't think there are many (or no) upgrades for the MDD machines is because they already have some of the fastest G4 processors. there's not much market yet, they tend to focus on the Sawtooth, Quicksilver models for now. I fully expect to see MDD upgrades in the future. But only after there are 1.6+ G4s. Most MDD Macs are dual processor also so you have to have a pretty compelling upgrade at a reasonable price. i don't think Sonnet or the others can do that yet.
I know the lack of an iMac for sale for about 2 months had a significant impact on Apple's unit sales, but does anyone here think that the iMac, eMac and now the low end single processor 1.8GHz towers will gain Apple any marketshare. Or will Apple just continue treading water in the 2.0% marketshare range?
It's very frustrating. My choice boils down to an AIO iMac or low end tower priced the same. Sacrifice a 17" LCD, which I don't want, for PCI slots and an AGP slot, both at $1499. It doesn't seem like a fair trade in my humble opinion.
It's not. The low-end tower should be a little cheaper.
As for market share, I don't think much will change until Apple has a compelling $999 computer.
What's sad, I must be pathetic, because when I do eventually buy, I'll probably end up buying the low-end tower and pay the extra pound of flesh. The low-end tower probably has the worst price performance of any machine right now, except maybe the current eMacs.
I've said the following in other topics like this and I think it's true. Apple loves the AIO concept and the only time they've offered a headless consumer was the Cube and it was an untenable product. It was neat but ahead of its time and a deadend. I'm sure Apple learned a lot from it that went into the FP iMac and the G5 iMac. But why invest so much time and money in the AOL concept to give it up now? Jobs/Apple loves the "concept" computer for consumers. Even if Apple offered a headless they would need to put it into a "concept" cute package that would force some kind of trade off in terms of price or tech specs. Jobs has a certain feeling about tech and what consumers want or should want and he goes with that. They lucked out with the iPod and I'm sure hope to force the industry to follow them. Their desktop concepts may be out of step with the industry but they clearly don't care. We'd all love a lower priced and smaller tower but I've seen nothing to indicate Apple will produce it in a meaningful way. The current SP 1.8 is not it headless "iMac". The only way Apple would produce a headless consumer tower is if they were forced into it and needed to make cheap boxes to stay alive. Either that or Jobs leaves and his successor has a different view of them.
It's not. It's on a daughtercard like the old 1.6 and 1.8 single processor models.
Has anyone been able to confirm this yet? Some sites have reported that the CPU is soldered directly to the mobo, while others say it's on a daughtercard. As a potential buyer this is important to me, as it could mean extended life (thru CPU upgrades) for the the system.
Also, any word if the single G5 unit is any quieter than it's higher powered bretheren? One would think that a single CPU system would require less cooling than a dual, and hence be somewhat quieter.
Forgive me if these questions are lame, but I'm a newcomer and I don't know much about things Mac. Thanks!
Also, any word if the single G5 unit is any quieter than it's higher powered bretheren? One would think that a single CPU system would require less cooling than a dual, and hence be somewhat quieter.
The nine fans of the more powerful models are still there, but you'd have to assume they would come on less with only a single processor to cool. I'm curious to hear/read a review of the new beast.
Yeah well, for people with SP 867MHz , it's not too bad. I'm just saying it's possible and where there's a will, there's a way. Technically G5 upgrades will be more versatile. You put out a 3.5GHz module and it can service the single processor systems AND the duals (you just buy 2 of them).
Comments
pictures of the new mobo circulated already in april.
It does however have an AGP slot, PCI slots and an extra drive bay. These are all things the iMac doesn't have and for those people who have been clamoring for a cheaper expandable Mac, I think it's pretty nice.
So, it has stuff the iMac doesn't have. And no. It doesn't come with a monitor. (I wish Mac towers did, at least a mega-cheap 17 inch alu option...)
£1049 is much better than £1400. That's a £350 saving. You lose the extra cpu and a bit of bus speed. Sniff. Okay.
The single 1.6 G5 was about, what? £1500-1600 when it first came out?
For Apple, this is a nice step forwards. It's not earth-shattering. But it is significant. They're admitting there is a pool of at least 20,000 'Cube' sector buyers that don't want or need the top end PowerMac. Or a dual Mac. And saving almost 400 pounds? What's that? Almost $700-800?
I still think Apple UK can get sharper on prices. We're paying more than America and Europe for our iTunes music tracks. (Why? I have no idea.) Same for the Powertower, eMac and iMac. I think Apple UK can get these prices lower.
ie iMac at £919? What a stupid price. Better at £895, no?
Single 1.8 gig Tower? £1045? Better at £995, eh?
eMac at £545? Loads better at £495?!
Personally, I'd love to see Apple do a headless eMac. But perhaps it is unlikely to happen. Apple have said they won't go into the sub-$800 computer market. But they said that a while back and then dropped the price of the eMac. So it looks like the eMac is our only hope for a really low-cost Mac. And though CRT are going the way of the dinos I can only think a G5 based eMac will stay 17 CRT or go with a 12 or 14 or 15 inch LCD to keep prices the same. Yeah, they could can the eMac and add a 15 inch LCD iMac...I suppose. The eMac looks like it's here to stay in one form or another.
Apple have said their money/efforts are better invested in the iPod right now. What this means for a future headless Mac we can guess at. The 1.8 gig Tower goes some way to addressing that. But either they drop the price further and add a 1.6 gig Tower for £895 or they make a headless eMac cube box or mini-tower. Simple white enamel box would look quite sexy and could have a 1.6 G5 and an AGP slot for £695-895. I'd be happy.
Maybe if Apple gets sales of all cpus in excess of 1 million then they'll think about broadening the mix.
Lemon Bon Bon
So, it's clear marketshare is not a primary concern and in the same breath they're not refuting the halo effect bring PC and non-Mac owners to the fold as a 45/50% turnover rate suggests at their stores.
...but what's really interesting last quarter, in the absence of the iMac and a reasonably priced Tower(!) Apple found eMac sales of over 170,000. More than Tower and X-Serve sales combined.
Who says there is no demand for a cheap Mac? (And yes, weren't they speaking b*************S!)
So Apple knows there is demand for 'cheap-ER' product (thought it doesn't have to be the 'cheap-EST'!)
It looks like sucking-donkey b**** sales of PowerMacs (as low as the G4 debacle! Though, due in part to IBM's ability to deliver the only NEW speed grade ie the 2.5!) has forced Apple to reconsider the 'Sky high prices are only for immortals with 'pro' level wages. Though how they get to a figure of £1400 and decide it's for 'pros' I'll never know. Especially when you can get a top level PC specced out from MESH computers.co.uk with Raid, 3.8 gig Athlon, 2 gigs of ram and the kitchen sink for only a hundred quid more. So, pros are buying cheaper tower hardware that can do the job for much less...obviously. And Mac tower fans guess what? Don't want the dual 1.8 or 2 giggers that have been on the market for almost 1 and a half years. ie? The last update was underwhelming and sales, in part reflect this. We wanted the 3 gig. Psychalogical hurdle to put us right there with Intel. IBM blew it. BIG TIME. We're still over a gig behind...
Can Apple go just a bit further. The desktop market seems to be a real problem area for them. But, it's loads better now the G5 iMacs have arrived along with a 'low end' tower.
Misc ramblings now over. I hope that the halo effect and the dynamism of the iPod product and marketing division spills over to the Mac marketing division which bears the hallmarks of entrenched thinking. Althought the hardware has never looked this good, been this fast or this cheap.
A good cpu update early 2005 will help justify prices that bit more.
Lemon Bon Bon
Originally posted by Outsider
One reason I don't think there are many (or no) upgrades for the MDD machines is because they already have some of the fastest G4 processors. there's not much market yet, they tend to focus on the Sawtooth, Quicksilver models for now. I fully expect to see MDD upgrades in the future. But only after there are 1.6+ G4s. Most MDD Macs are dual processor also so you have to have a pretty compelling upgrade at a reasonable price. i don't think Sonnet or the others can do that yet.
GigaDesigns just released a MDD upgrade BTW.
Originally posted by Outsider
GigaDesigns just released a MDD upgrade BTW.
Yah that goes up to a whole 1.42ghz
I know the lack of an iMac for sale for about 2 months had a significant impact on Apple's unit sales, but does anyone here think that the iMac, eMac and now the low end single processor 1.8GHz towers will gain Apple any marketshare. Or will Apple just continue treading water in the 2.0% marketshare range?
It's very frustrating. My choice boils down to an AIO iMac or low end tower priced the same. Sacrifice a 17" LCD, which I don't want, for PCI slots and an AGP slot, both at $1499. It doesn't seem like a fair trade in my humble opinion.
Originally posted by rickag
It doesn't seem like a fair trade in my humble opinion.
It's not. The low-end tower should be a little cheaper.
As for market share, I don't think much will change until Apple has a compelling $999 computer.
Originally posted by iDave
As for market share, I don't think much will change until Apple has a compelling $999 computer.
yeah, and don't force people to buy one of the worst monitors on the market with it :X
350:1 contrast ratio on a 20" screen? can you even GET a monitor that bad for PC?
Originally posted by iDave
It's not. The low-end tower should be a little cheaper.
As for market share, I don't think much will change until Apple has a compelling $999 computer.
What's sad, I must be pathetic, because when I do eventually buy, I'll probably end up buying the low-end tower and pay the extra pound of flesh. The low-end tower probably has the worst price performance of any machine right now, except maybe the current eMacs.
Originally posted by Outsider
It's not. It's on a daughtercard like the old 1.6 and 1.8 single processor models.
Has anyone been able to confirm this yet? Some sites have reported that the CPU is soldered directly to the mobo, while others say it's on a daughtercard. As a potential buyer this is important to me, as it could mean extended life (thru CPU upgrades) for the the system.
Also, any word if the single G5 unit is any quieter than it's higher powered bretheren? One would think that a single CPU system would require less cooling than a dual, and hence be somewhat quieter.
Forgive me if these questions are lame, but I'm a newcomer and I don't know much about things Mac. Thanks!
Originally posted by evilboz
Also, any word if the single G5 unit is any quieter than it's higher powered bretheren? One would think that a single CPU system would require less cooling than a dual, and hence be somewhat quieter.
The nine fans of the more powerful models are still there, but you'd have to assume they would come on less with only a single processor to cool. I'm curious to hear/read a review of the new beast.
Originally posted by emig647
Yah that goes up to a whole 1.42ghz
Yeah well, for people with SP 867MHz , it's not too bad. I'm just saying it's possible and where there's a will, there's a way. Technically G5 upgrades will be more versatile. You put out a 3.5GHz module and it can service the single processor systems AND the duals (you just buy 2 of them).