On further thought, I believe Apple should keep the Mini in the $400-$700 range.
Then, starting at $999, Apple should introduce a "Mini Tower," with less HD space, fewer PCIe slots, a single real video card slot, and just all around cheapen it up a bit. It would still have a small amount of exapandability, but it would run Yonah dual cores while the pro towers would run with woodcrest or whatever that new quad core CPU is from Intel.
This way, Apple pushes the pro towers into the 2000+ range, and gives them mondo expandability, kick ass audio and video options, and extreme power.
So Apple's desktop CPU unit lineup is like this:
$499 Mini Yonah single core
$699 Mini Yonah dual core
$999 Mini Tower Yonah dual core
$1499 Mini Tower Yonah dual core
$1199 iMac 17" Yonah dual core
$1499 iMac 20" Yonah dual core
$1999 iMac 23" Yonah dual core
$1999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X1 4 cores total
$2499 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
$2999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
With the extra towers, it would do Apple good to revise its display lineup to give higher quality displays at lower cost. Provide bundle incentives to get buyers into mini/display buys.
Would this cannibalize iMac sales? Perhaps, but it is a better solution, IMO. People like towers. They are expandable, and people feel like they can tinker with them and upgrade the CPU when it gets old (note that most people who say they will do this never actually do it, but it's still a selling point). Additionally, many peope have displays they are satisfied with and just want a new computer - or perhaps they only have money for a computer and will buy a display later.
This is what the buyer gets with the mini tower - expandability, and choice of display. Performance will be as good or slightly better than the iMac.
Edited by onlooker ~ Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
the pro towers would run with woodcrest or whatever that new quad core CPU is from Intel.
This way, Apple pushes the pro towers into the 2000+ range, and gives them mondo expandability, kick ass audio and video options, and extreme power.
So Apple's desktop CPU unit lineup is like this:
$1999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X1 4 cores total
$2499 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
$2999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
From my understanding the Woodcrest isn't supposed to have quad cores this soon. The Quad cores will be about a year out, or at least not the first woodcrests which is what should go into the Macintosh Pro in the latter part of the 2nd quarter. WWDC time.
[Edited Again]
Quote:
Originally posted in a geek.com news article
A lower-voltage version of Woodcrest is due out later this year, with
Whitefield, a quad-core version of Woodcrest, to follow later. [UPDATE 1/10/2006 12 P.M. EST: Whitefield (not Woodcrest) was recently canceled, with Tigerton set as its replacement. Intel has not released any details about what features Tigerton will have--though it is expected in 2007 with better communications and quad-core power.
Anyone see the current G4 mini as good insurance against the death of G4s and classic over the short run? With a DVForge lift they fit beautifully under my Cube and out perform it AND can run a 23" Cinema HD. Actually, I just thought the mini under the G4^3 would allow me to have both the 22" Cinema and the 23" going at the same time out of the same space on two different macs!
Just remembered this is Future not Current Hardware thread!
Apple won't do a mini tower. It may drive us insane, but they won't.
And I think they're on to something, actually. My last Mac purchase (2001) was a big old honkin QS tower. Why? Because I wanted the expandability and upgradeability. I had a 9GB SCSI drive that I wanted to use (Boot disk, select backups), and I had plans of upgrading the video card every year or so. Since then, I've also added USB 2.0 and another USB 1.1 card.
Well, what's the verdict? Well, shortly after getting my tower, I quit my job and went back to school. With a vastly reduced income, whim purchases of video cards was not an option (particularly since the card was good enough for all my gaming needs...not spectacular, but adequate for StarCraft, Quake 3, WarCraft3, Diablo2, and Civ3). And once I started making money again, I decided that I'm not enough of a gamer to do the video-card upgrade thing. Additionally, you can only upgrade so many times before the system requirements for the mobo outstrip your tower's specs. Or games require not only a faster card, but also a faster processor. (The only game I really want to play now is World of WarCraft; I could upgrade my card, but the game also requires a faster processor than I have, so it would be useless.) So I have my original GeForce2MX sitting in there, as it has since the beginning.
My SCSI drive died about 4 months after I got my tower, and FW drives are cheaper. So while the card is still in there, it has sat idle since early 2002.
I added the USB 1.1 card simply because I came across one for free, not because I needed it. And I added USB 2.0 because of my new iPod. But since I loaded my 33GB of music over my 1.1 bus (FYI, it took about 16 hours...before I had the 2.0 card) it really was superfluous.
I can now totally sympathize with Apple's strategy with the iMac and mini...except in one aspect. I think it is stupid to force the mini to use smaller and more expensive drives. (And if they expand the case to fit a 3.5 drive, they could squeeze in another memory slot.)
So, if the next mini has the following, I'll buy it. Probably two (meaning 2 LCD screens as well).
Hardware H264 decoding
A decent (128MB) video card
The ability to output video to HDMI (probably an extra purchase, one of the ~$20 dongles)
3.5 inch drive
I would also like the following:
2 memory slots
Front facing power button
1 frontside USB 2.0 port
1 frontside FW400 port (I could dream about FW800, but won't)
If they don't come out with this in three months. I'll wait until next spring. But by that time, I'll expect the mini to add a Blu-Ray Drive to the mix.
I'm skeptical, so I hope my tower lasts until 2007. \
I think that by the time they convert the Power Mac to the "Mac Pro" or whatever they name it, They will be using a processor bigger and badder than anything they are using currently. Apple made big steps to optimize OS X to use 64 bit processing, so I think that they will probably go with a 64 bit chip...
Comments
Then, starting at $999, Apple should introduce a "Mini Tower," with less HD space, fewer PCIe slots, a single real video card slot, and just all around cheapen it up a bit. It would still have a small amount of exapandability, but it would run Yonah dual cores while the pro towers would run with woodcrest or whatever that new quad core CPU is from Intel.
This way, Apple pushes the pro towers into the 2000+ range, and gives them mondo expandability, kick ass audio and video options, and extreme power.
So Apple's desktop CPU unit lineup is like this:
$499 Mini Yonah single core
$699 Mini Yonah dual core
$999 Mini Tower Yonah dual core
$1499 Mini Tower Yonah dual core
$1199 iMac 17" Yonah dual core
$1499 iMac 20" Yonah dual core
$1999 iMac 23" Yonah dual core
$1999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X1 4 cores total
$2499 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
$2999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
With the extra towers, it would do Apple good to revise its display lineup to give higher quality displays at lower cost. Provide bundle incentives to get buyers into mini/display buys.
Would this cannibalize iMac sales? Perhaps, but it is a better solution, IMO. People like towers. They are expandable, and people feel like they can tinker with them and upgrade the CPU when it gets old (note that most people who say they will do this never actually do it, but it's still a selling point). Additionally, many peope have displays they are satisfied with and just want a new computer - or perhaps they only have money for a computer and will buy a display later.
This is what the buyer gets with the mini tower - expandability, and choice of display. Performance will be as good or slightly better than the iMac.
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
Would this cannibalize iMac sales?
dont you think it's generally much easier making profit by selling cpu&monitor bundles than all-in-ones?
So Apple's desktop CPU unit lineup is like this:
$499 Mini Yonah single core
$699 Mini Yonah dual core
$999 Mini Tower Yonah dual core
$1499 Mini Tower Yonah dual core
$1199 iMac 17" Yonah dual core
$1499 iMac 20" Yonah dual core
$1999 iMac 23" Yonah dual core
$1999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X1 4 cores total
$2499 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
$2999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
i like this spec and idea, nice product line
in addition to it, we should add
17"/19" Cinema Display
20/21" Cinema Display
23/24" Cinema Display
30"/32" Cinema Display
17"/19" will be nice one for budget users who may want to use it with Mac Mini, added two size so that able to choose according to the prices
Edited by onlooker ~ Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
the pro towers would run with woodcrest or whatever that new quad core CPU is from Intel.
This way, Apple pushes the pro towers into the 2000+ range, and gives them mondo expandability, kick ass audio and video options, and extreme power.
So Apple's desktop CPU unit lineup is like this:
$1999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X1 4 cores total
$2499 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
$2999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
From my understanding the Woodcrest isn't supposed to have quad cores this soon. The Quad cores will be about a year out, or at least not the first woodcrests which is what should go into the Macintosh Pro in the latter part of the 2nd quarter. WWDC time.
[Edited Again]
Originally posted in a geek.com news article
A lower-voltage version of Woodcrest is due out later this year, with
Whitefield, a quad-core version of Woodcrest, to follow later. [UPDATE 1/10/2006 12 P.M. EST: Whitefield (not Woodcrest) was recently canceled, with Tigerton set as its replacement. Intel has not released any details about what features Tigerton will have--though it is expected in 2007 with better communications and quad-core power.
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
$2999 Power Tower Woodcrest quad core X2 8 cores total
Woodcrest is the DP version of Conroe.
The quad core Tigerton is expected to be released in H2 2007. And you are talking about the price of the CPUs alone, aren't you?
Originally posted by shanmugam
i like this spec and idea, nice product line
in addition to it, we shold add
17"/19" Cinema Display
20/21" Cinema Display
23/24" Cinema Display
30"/32" Cinema Display
17"/19" will be nice one for budget users who may want to use it with Mac Mini, added two size so that able to choose according to the prices
That'd be sick but I think that's too many models, I think All the displays should keep the same look but change sizes.
Like this:
19" Widescreen Cinema Display $599
21" Widescreen Cinema Display HD $799 or $899
24" Widescreen Cinema Display HD $1299
30" Widescreen Cinema Display HD $2399
36" Widescreen Cinema Display HD $2799
With the 24-36 inchers being also able to be used as HDTVs.
THAT'D be perfect in my opinion. And competitive to todays sizes.
And I think they're on to something, actually. My last Mac purchase (2001) was a big old honkin QS tower. Why? Because I wanted the expandability and upgradeability. I had a 9GB SCSI drive that I wanted to use (Boot disk, select backups), and I had plans of upgrading the video card every year or so. Since then, I've also added USB 2.0 and another USB 1.1 card.
Well, what's the verdict? Well, shortly after getting my tower, I quit my job and went back to school. With a vastly reduced income, whim purchases of video cards was not an option (particularly since the card was good enough for all my gaming needs...not spectacular, but adequate for StarCraft, Quake 3, WarCraft3, Diablo2, and Civ3). And once I started making money again, I decided that I'm not enough of a gamer to do the video-card upgrade thing. Additionally, you can only upgrade so many times before the system requirements for the mobo outstrip your tower's specs. Or games require not only a faster card, but also a faster processor. (The only game I really want to play now is World of WarCraft; I could upgrade my card, but the game also requires a faster processor than I have, so it would be useless.) So I have my original GeForce2MX sitting in there, as it has since the beginning.
My SCSI drive died about 4 months after I got my tower, and FW drives are cheaper. So while the card is still in there, it has sat idle since early 2002.
I added the USB 1.1 card simply because I came across one for free, not because I needed it. And I added USB 2.0 because of my new iPod. But since I loaded my 33GB of music over my 1.1 bus (FYI, it took about 16 hours...before I had the 2.0 card) it really was superfluous.
I can now totally sympathize with Apple's strategy with the iMac and mini...except in one aspect. I think it is stupid to force the mini to use smaller and more expensive drives. (And if they expand the case to fit a 3.5 drive, they could squeeze in another memory slot.)
So, if the next mini has the following, I'll buy it. Probably two (meaning 2 LCD screens as well).
Hardware H264 decoding
A decent (128MB) video card
The ability to output video to HDMI (probably an extra purchase, one of the ~$20 dongles)
3.5 inch drive
I would also like the following:
2 memory slots
Front facing power button
1 frontside USB 2.0 port
1 frontside FW400 port (I could dream about FW800, but won't)
If they don't come out with this in three months. I'll wait until next spring. But by that time, I'll expect the mini to add a Blu-Ray Drive to the mix.
I'm skeptical, so I hope my tower lasts until 2007.
Originally posted by DCQ
So, if the next mini has the following, I'll buy it.
Hardware H264 decoding
A decent (128MB) video card
3.5 inch drive
2 memory slots
there you go mr.jobs, the secret recipe to world domination.
now chop-chop!
But I want Mr. Junkyard Dawg's ideas too.
good that they are not considering Pentium M at all
indeed APPLE going with Latest & Greatest Technologies from Intel
Core Solo details
------------------
Intel® Core? Duo processor T1300 65 nm 2MB L2
2.16 GHz 667 MHz 27W
Wow, that is great to be in iBook and Mac Mini (even though it is solo)
http://www.intel.com/products/proces...info_table.pdf
somehow these two link still shows
Core Solo @ 1.66 Ghz
Originally posted by aplnub
That would be nice but I would take the 1.66 GHz dual core 15W chip for longer battery life in an iBook.
i guess that will be expensive (lower power CPUs)
we might see that in Mac Book Mini/Nano (sub note book & higher price)
Originally posted by shanmugam
i guess that will be expensive (lower power CPUs)
we might see that in Mac Book Mini/Nano (sub note book & higher price)
One could only hope...
I am wishing for a subnotebook with OSX loaded.
Originally posted by NordicMan
So what size is your hoped for subnotebook?
I really don't know.
Smaller than the 12"...
Maybe a 10" widescreen with no optical drive... I could handle one smaller...
That would be sweet...