An $800 - $900 "complete mac system" would steal sales from their better products... snip...
Well lets face it Apple would NEVER make a POS 'complete experience' not while Steve is at the helm anyway. When Steve has his say over something it usually demands (what he thinks is) the best and the day he thinks an el-cheap-o 15" analog lcd with a refresh rate you could see except for the fact that the brightness is so low the refresh rate doesn't really matter thrown together with some less than adequate CPU and GPU... Yea now that sounds like something Steve would sign off on...
Maybe I'm wrong but part of me feels Steve didn't have an easy time moving the mini from 'a real GPU' to the onboard GPU and who knows maybe it was some kinda deal they made with Intel for some political reason or another.
Well some of you might as well face it that Apple is probably not going to backtrack down the processor evolutionary chain when intel is going to be releasing new processors in abundance, and lowering processor prices on existing ones shortly. Apple started with the core processor line, and that line has already seen a speed increase, and price drop between the announcement, and the release of the iMac, and Apple adjusted accordingly.
If anything merom, woodcrest, and conroe could spur a change, and this generation of core processors could go into an adjusted line up, and possibly a machine similar to what your looking for. I will guarantee nothing.
Apple is also in a transitional stage not only between PPC, and intel, but their color scheme, and appearance are due for a change shortly. Apple will probably have a new look for their new OS, processor, and their sudden ability to play with windows. I am anticipating a few new products to add some flash to the Apple lineup, and again change the way we use our products later in 2006-2007.
I also don't expect Apple to use older cpu designs. That just doesn't make sense. Intel has too many new products coming out for Apple to choose something old.
I'm not sure if we'll see it this year, but I expect some major new case designs as well. These were just to comfort the base users they already have.
Obviously what is in an iMac today will be different a year from now and that will probably be true for several of their products. Today intel's dual core pent d is probably the best value cpu they have. I know this is debatable. A year from now it could be ICD. But to offer a value setup now, I think Apple could make a decent system with a dual core pent d. Ars has a piece on systems and they use an AMD sempron in their budget setup. A dual core pent d would easily outperform this. If Apple needs to fill holes in their product lineup, why wait a year for the entire core cpus to be out? Why not do it now and as cpus are released asn prices on existing cpus drop you swap them out.
I said an $800 - $900 POS would steal sales from the iMac. and at the end of the post I concluded that we did not need a POS for people to complain about, and tarnish Apples image. I did not say the mini steals sales from the iMac, and so on. That's your sudden logic. The mini and the iMac are priced far enough apart to separate them from each others market. And the PM is it's own beast. Nothing touches it, and we ( I ) love it that way.
The 800-900 system wouldn't need to be a POS, the general complaint everyone makes is the need for a headless imac. A headless iMac would not be a POS and would automatically be cheaper by not having to include a monitor.
Like I said before:
Quote:
Originally posted by ecking
If it was just a regular shaped pc tower that way it would have the upgradability that people THINK they need but with nice apple styling switchers would appreciate that.
Obviously to accomidate that the product line would need to change a bit (the mini would have to cheaper like 699 MAX) but it could fit.
I'm talking:
1.66GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Trayloading SuperDrive
128MB ATI Graphics
AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth
In a tower for $999 but with nice apple case design.
That would kill switchers, most don't want more than a basic computer and get confused or afriad of different sizes or everything built in.
Redesigning the product line to this would be better:
Mac Mini 1.5 Solo - $499
Mac Mini 1.66 Duo - $699
Mac Lite 1.66 Duo - $999
Mac Lite 1.83 Duo - $1499
iMac HD 2.00 Duo- $1299
iMac HD 2.16 Duo - $1699
Mac Pro Dual Something - $1999
Mac Pro Dual Something - $2499
Mac Pro Quad Something - $3299
That covers all their bases and only adds 2 machines.
Then the monitors:
19" Cinema Display - $599
21" Cinema Display HD - $899
24" Cinema Display HD - $1199
30" Cinema Display HD - $2399
Then the Laptops:
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.5 Solo - $899
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.66 Duo - $1099
MacBook - 13.3" ATI 128MB 1.66 Duo - $1499
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 128MB 2.00 Duo - $1999
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 256MB 2.16 Duo - $2499
MacBook Pro - 17" ATI 256MB 2.33 Duo - $2999
If Apple did that, I think they'd have a flawless product line.
But I don't see them being that great.
I don't think that would canabalize anyone machine because the imac still offers a lot for less than the price of a Mac Lite plus a monitor.
And no professionals would opt for the lite vs pro so that's of no concern.
This takes into account the processor price drops
Which allows the mini to take 100 bucks off each one.
The 800-900 system wouldn't need to be a POS, the general complaint everyone makes is the need for a headless imac. A headless iMac would not be a POS and would automatically be cheaper by not having to include a monitor.
Like I said before:
Redesigning the product line to this would be better:
Mac Mini 1.5 Solo - $499
Mac Mini 1.66 Duo - $699
Mac Lite 1.66 Duo - $999
Mac Lite 1.83 Duo - $1599
iMac HD 2.00 Duo- $1299
iMac HD 2.16 Duo - $1699
Mac Pro Dual Something - $1999
Mac Pro Dual Something - $2499
Mac Pro Quad Something - $3299
That covers all their bases and only adds 2 machines.
Then the monitors:
19" Cinema Display - $599
21" Cinema Display HD - $899
24" Cinema Display HD - $1199
30" Cinema Display HD - $2399
Then the Laptops:
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.5 Solo - $899
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.66 Duo - $1099
MacBook - 133" ATI 128MB 1.66 Duo - $1499
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 128MB 2.00 Duo - $1999
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 256MB 2.16 Duo - $2499
MacBook Pro - 17" ATI 256MB 2.33 Duo - $2999
If Apple did that, I think they'd have a flawless product line.
But I don't see them being that great.
I don't think that would canabalize anyone machine because the imac still offers a lot for less than the price of a Mac Lite plus a monitor.
And no professionals would opt for the lite vs pro so that's of no concern.
This takes into account the processor price drops
Which allows the mini to take 100 bucks off each one.
Goddamn I wish I chose their product offerings.
Overall I like your thinking. I would change the specs on the Mac Lite as the $1599 version is actually inferior to an iMac yet costs more without a monitor. This is where a different CPU would be helpful as its hard to have so many products built around 2 cpus. Overall though, I like your attempt to fill in the holes.
Overall I like your thinking. I would change the specs on the Mac Lite as the $1599 version is actually inferior to an iMac yet costs more without a monitor. This is where a different CPU would be helpful as its hard to have so many products built around 2 cpus. Overall though, I like your attempt to fill in the holes.
Thanks I went back and reduced the price of the Mac Lite.
Me personally I have no problem with different CPUs but like others said I don't think apple would do it.
I don't really think it's a bad idea I just don't think it's too likely.
I know I'm a bit late to the party but, IF apple is looking to increase market share and IF they are trying to get them from windows users, they don't have enough product offerings IMO. Many PC users are used to going to Dell or Gateway website and being able to configure a system to their needs and tastes. Right now apple doesn't give many of them enough options. I'm not sure the best way to fill the gaps, but there needs to be a configurable system between iMac and Powermac. With the switch to intel this is easily possible. Why not look at Pent Ds to fill this need? I know that they are not the best technology available but it is familiar to many pc users and intel is aggressively dropping prices. A pent d 820 is now $165. I think Apple is boxing themselves in unnecessarily by only using intel's core chips. I wouldn't buy it but that's me. It may be appropriate for others.
I'd personally like to be able to buy my BTO Powermac without RAM, drives, and GPU, and then buy them all for 25% on Newegg.
[B]My 15-20% market share comment was nothing more than to show you guys that it's not gonna happen. I'm glad you all figured it out.
BS. You said it, and when you were told that it's unrealistic for Apple to get even 10%, let alone 15-20% with what they offer, you "changed" that to "show them" that it's "not gonna happen".
Quote:
Apple's never gonna reach 20% market share (at least not in the next 10 years)...so it's totally unnecessary to cater to a very select few people that would like to have very specific hardware in their machine.
How do you know it's "a very select few people"? Done any research? Care to back it up?
Quote:
Complain, cry, whine all you want...it's not gonna happen.
I bet you were one of those that said the same thing about Intel. Boot Camp. Integrated Graphics.
The 800-900 system wouldn't need to be a POS, the general complaint everyone makes is the need for a headless imac. A headless iMac would not be a POS and would automatically be cheaper by not having to include a monitor.
Like I said before:
Redesigning the product line to this would be better:
Mac Mini 1.5 Solo - $499
Mac Mini 1.66 Duo - $699
Mac Lite 1.66 Duo - $999
Mac Lite 1.83 Duo - $1499
iMac HD 2.00 Duo- $1299
iMac HD 2.16 Duo - $1699
Mac Pro Dual Something - $1999
Mac Pro Dual Something - $2499
Mac Pro Quad Something - $3299
That covers all their bases and only adds 2 machines.
Then the monitors:
19" Cinema Display - $599
21" Cinema Display HD - $899
24" Cinema Display HD - $1199
30" Cinema Display HD - $2399
Then the Laptops:
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.5 Solo - $899
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.66 Duo - $1099
MacBook - 13.3" ATI 128MB 1.66 Duo - $1499
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 128MB 2.00 Duo - $1999
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 256MB 2.16 Duo - $2499
MacBook Pro - 17" ATI 256MB 2.33 Duo - $2999
If Apple did that, I think they'd have a flawless product line.
But I don't see them being that great.
I don't think that would canabalize anyone machine because the imac still offers a lot for less than the price of a Mac Lite plus a monitor.
And no professionals would opt for the lite vs pro so that's of no concern.
This takes into account the processor price drops
Which allows the mini to take 100 bucks off each one.
Goddamn I wish I chose their product offerings.
I don't have a problem with that. Maybe some different details, but pretty much the same.
The MacLite should be the iMac minus the screen, plus PCIe slot and one extra HD bay. The more parts the different lines have in common the less number of support chips etc does Apple have to support in the OS.
When I bought the G4 spring of 2000 for anyone that wanted to be able to play games you had to buy a tower. The iMac at the time had a crippled ATI 128 with 8 MB RAM. Had something like the 7500, that is a compact box with 2 HD bays and 3 slots that would have been plenty.
There is no point in Apple using PentiumD (sson to be replaced) The new generation CPUs are coming out in a timely manner there is no need for desperate stopgap "Yikes" models.
They also need to keep focused remember whent they had overlappning lines of the "II" series, the Classic series the "LC" series, the "Performa" series, the "Quadra" series and the "Centris". To further the confusion some computers appeard with different names but identical features in differnet series. In 1994 the Powermac added a seventh line up of macintoshes.
With only 3 model ranges we are far from that mess now, and we better stay far from 7 also in the future
?We continue to be very happy in our progress in the Intel transition,? said Oppenheimer, who said that the transition would be completed by year?s-end.
Well that confirms the new MacTower Pro will be out this year.
And if the Apple CFO is willing to go solidly on the record in April, it means the computer is likely scheduled to be unveiled long before December.
For those who were wondering whether Apple would wait for Adobe and Microsoft to catch up before unveiling the Pro Macs, the wondering is over, and the answer is no.
Who exactly was wondering? I think Apple already stated many times that the transition would be complete before the end of the year. I think we all new we would see it at, or before WWDC.
In the MacBook Pro - adding 128 VRAM and 160MHz should cost more than a brand new Athlon64 3500+ and 7800GTX?
More? Spec'ing out such a laptop from Alienware quickly brings you over $3000. Well over, with a dual-core Athlon. And these just barely qualify as "portable". Anyway, ecking's scheme is just the present MBP lineup. For an extra $500 over the $1999 mdoel you get an increment on everything: +160 MHz CPU speed, +128 MB VRAM, +512 MB RAM, +20 GB HD. Seems realistic to expect the same after a speed bump, with the 17" at a higher price point.
Off topic, but I honestly have no idea how Apple is delivering the MBP at these prices. When you include all their goodies (same RAM and HD, non-IG, BT, DVD burner, wireless), other manufacturers seem to be in the $2500-$3500 range; even with the same CoreDuos. And that for thick and heavy bricks. Gold bricks, I guess.
Actually, Apple has only officially quoted its original timeline of switching "by the end of 2007."
Of course, many of us knew they were well ahead of schedule.
But AFAIK, this is the first time an Apple official has acknowledged that everything will be switched over before the end of 2006.
I thought spectators started to presume it when the MacBook Pro was released, but Apple said it when they announced the Mini. I must have been mistaken.
Comments
Originally posted by onlooker
An $800 - $900 "complete mac system" would steal sales from their better products... snip...
Well lets face it Apple would NEVER make a POS 'complete experience' not while Steve is at the helm anyway. When Steve has his say over something it usually demands (what he thinks is) the best and the day he thinks an el-cheap-o 15" analog lcd with a refresh rate you could see except for the fact that the brightness is so low the refresh rate doesn't really matter thrown together with some less than adequate CPU and GPU... Yea now that sounds like something Steve would sign off on...
Maybe I'm wrong but part of me feels Steve didn't have an easy time moving the mini from 'a real GPU' to the onboard GPU and who knows maybe it was some kinda deal they made with Intel for some political reason or another.
Dave
If anything merom, woodcrest, and conroe could spur a change, and this generation of core processors could go into an adjusted line up, and possibly a machine similar to what your looking for. I will guarantee nothing.
Apple is also in a transitional stage not only between PPC, and intel, but their color scheme, and appearance are due for a change shortly. Apple will probably have a new look for their new OS, processor, and their sudden ability to play with windows. I am anticipating a few new products to add some flash to the Apple lineup, and again change the way we use our products later in 2006-2007.
I'm not sure if we'll see it this year, but I expect some major new case designs as well. These were just to comfort the base users they already have.
Originally posted by onlooker
I said an $800 - $900 POS would steal sales from the iMac. and at the end of the post I concluded that we did not need a POS for people to complain about, and tarnish Apples image. I did not say the mini steals sales from the iMac, and so on. That's your sudden logic. The mini and the iMac are priced far enough apart to separate them from each others market. And the PM is it's own beast. Nothing touches it, and we ( I ) love it that way.
The 800-900 system wouldn't need to be a POS, the general complaint everyone makes is the need for a headless imac. A headless iMac would not be a POS and would automatically be cheaper by not having to include a monitor.
Like I said before:
Originally posted by ecking
If it was just a regular shaped pc tower that way it would have the upgradability that people THINK they need but with nice apple styling switchers would appreciate that.
Obviously to accomidate that the product line would need to change a bit (the mini would have to cheaper like 699 MAX) but it could fit.
I'm talking:
1.66GHz Intel Core Duo
512MB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Trayloading SuperDrive
128MB ATI Graphics
AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth
In a tower for $999 but with nice apple case design.
That would kill switchers, most don't want more than a basic computer and get confused or afriad of different sizes or everything built in.
Redesigning the product line to this would be better:
Mac Mini 1.5 Solo - $499
Mac Mini 1.66 Duo - $699
Mac Lite 1.66 Duo - $999
Mac Lite 1.83 Duo - $1499
iMac HD 2.00 Duo- $1299
iMac HD 2.16 Duo - $1699
Mac Pro Dual Something - $1999
Mac Pro Dual Something - $2499
Mac Pro Quad Something - $3299
That covers all their bases and only adds 2 machines.
Then the monitors:
19" Cinema Display - $599
21" Cinema Display HD - $899
24" Cinema Display HD - $1199
30" Cinema Display HD - $2399
Then the Laptops:
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.5 Solo - $899
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.66 Duo - $1099
MacBook - 13.3" ATI 128MB 1.66 Duo - $1499
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 128MB 2.00 Duo - $1999
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 256MB 2.16 Duo - $2499
MacBook Pro - 17" ATI 256MB 2.33 Duo - $2999
If Apple did that, I think they'd have a flawless product line.
But I don't see them being that great.
I don't think that would canabalize anyone machine because the imac still offers a lot for less than the price of a Mac Lite plus a monitor.
And no professionals would opt for the lite vs pro so that's of no concern.
This takes into account the processor price drops
Which allows the mini to take 100 bucks off each one.
Goddamn I wish I chose their product offerings.
Originally posted by ecking
The 800-900 system wouldn't need to be a POS, the general complaint everyone makes is the need for a headless imac. A headless iMac would not be a POS and would automatically be cheaper by not having to include a monitor.
Like I said before:
Redesigning the product line to this would be better:
Mac Mini 1.5 Solo - $499
Mac Mini 1.66 Duo - $699
Mac Lite 1.66 Duo - $999
Mac Lite 1.83 Duo - $1599
iMac HD 2.00 Duo- $1299
iMac HD 2.16 Duo - $1699
Mac Pro Dual Something - $1999
Mac Pro Dual Something - $2499
Mac Pro Quad Something - $3299
That covers all their bases and only adds 2 machines.
Then the monitors:
19" Cinema Display - $599
21" Cinema Display HD - $899
24" Cinema Display HD - $1199
30" Cinema Display HD - $2399
Then the Laptops:
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.5 Solo - $899
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.66 Duo - $1099
MacBook - 133" ATI 128MB 1.66 Duo - $1499
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 128MB 2.00 Duo - $1999
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 256MB 2.16 Duo - $2499
MacBook Pro - 17" ATI 256MB 2.33 Duo - $2999
If Apple did that, I think they'd have a flawless product line.
But I don't see them being that great.
I don't think that would canabalize anyone machine because the imac still offers a lot for less than the price of a Mac Lite plus a monitor.
And no professionals would opt for the lite vs pro so that's of no concern.
This takes into account the processor price drops
Which allows the mini to take 100 bucks off each one.
Goddamn I wish I chose their product offerings.
Overall I like your thinking. I would change the specs on the Mac Lite as the $1599 version is actually inferior to an iMac yet costs more without a monitor. This is where a different CPU would be helpful as its hard to have so many products built around 2 cpus. Overall though, I like your attempt to fill in the holes.
Originally posted by backtomac
Overall I like your thinking. I would change the specs on the Mac Lite as the $1599 version is actually inferior to an iMac yet costs more without a monitor. This is where a different CPU would be helpful as its hard to have so many products built around 2 cpus. Overall though, I like your attempt to fill in the holes.
Thanks I went back and reduced the price of the Mac Lite.
Me personally I have no problem with different CPUs but like others said I don't think apple would do it.
I don't really think it's a bad idea I just don't think it's too likely.
Originally posted by ecking
Thanks I went back and reduced the price of the Mac Lite.
Me personally I have no problem with different CPUs but like others said I don't think apple would do it.
I don't really think it's a bad idea I just don't think it's too likely.
Well I've never said they will do it because I know it's very unlikely. I still think they should do it though.
Originally posted by ecking
Then the Laptops:
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.5 Solo - $899
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.66 Duo - $1099
MacBook - 13.3" ATI 128MB 1.66 Duo - $1499
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 128MB 2.00 Duo - $1999
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 256MB 2.16 Duo - $2499
MacBook Pro - 17" ATI 256MB 2.33 Duo - $2999
If Apple did that, I think they'd have a flawless product line.
In the MacBook- A marginal VRAM upgrade to a virtually obselete card should cost $400?
In the MacBook Pro - adding 128 VRAM and 160MHz should cost more than a brand new Athlon64 3500+ and 7800GTX?
Originally posted by backtomac
I know I'm a bit late to the party but, IF apple is looking to increase market share and IF they are trying to get them from windows users, they don't have enough product offerings IMO. Many PC users are used to going to Dell or Gateway website and being able to configure a system to their needs and tastes. Right now apple doesn't give many of them enough options. I'm not sure the best way to fill the gaps, but there needs to be a configurable system between iMac and Powermac. With the switch to intel this is easily possible. Why not look at Pent Ds to fill this need? I know that they are not the best technology available but it is familiar to many pc users and intel is aggressively dropping prices. A pent d 820 is now $165. I think Apple is boxing themselves in unnecessarily by only using intel's core chips. I wouldn't buy it but that's me. It may be appropriate for others.
I'd personally like to be able to buy my BTO Powermac without RAM, drives, and GPU, and then buy them all for 25% on Newegg.
Originally posted by Placebo
I'd personally like to be able to buy my BTO Powermac without RAM, drives, and GPU, and then buy them all for 25% on Newegg.
That's probably as likely as a headless mac running on a pent d.
Originally posted by Placebo
In the MacBook- A marginal VRAM upgrade to a virtually obselete card should cost $400?
In the MacBook Pro - adding 128 VRAM and 160MHz should cost more than a brand new Athlon64 3500+ and 7800GTX?
You call going from intel integrated 64mb to ati x1600 128mb marginal?
Wow, tell that to all the imac and mbp owners.
Second, I priced the high end mbp the same as the 12" pb which is what it would replace.
No one would complain about that. It's what they want. Essentially a plastic 13.3" mbp. So what they loose a combined 340mhz.
If you want to knock the price down of the 17" mbp to 2899, fine, that's what the old one cost and falls right in line.
I didn't really make my pricing scheme up, I used apple as the example.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
[B]My 15-20% market share comment was nothing more than to show you guys that it's not gonna happen. I'm glad you all figured it out.
BS. You said it, and when you were told that it's unrealistic for Apple to get even 10%, let alone 15-20% with what they offer, you "changed" that to "show them" that it's "not gonna happen".
Apple's never gonna reach 20% market share (at least not in the next 10 years)...so it's totally unnecessary to cater to a very select few people that would like to have very specific hardware in their machine.
How do you know it's "a very select few people"? Done any research? Care to back it up?
Complain, cry, whine all you want...it's not gonna happen.
I bet you were one of those that said the same thing about Intel. Boot Camp. Integrated Graphics.
Yeah. Good track record.
Originally posted by ecking
The 800-900 system wouldn't need to be a POS, the general complaint everyone makes is the need for a headless imac. A headless iMac would not be a POS and would automatically be cheaper by not having to include a monitor.
Like I said before:
Redesigning the product line to this would be better:
Mac Mini 1.5 Solo - $499
Mac Mini 1.66 Duo - $699
Mac Lite 1.66 Duo - $999
Mac Lite 1.83 Duo - $1499
iMac HD 2.00 Duo- $1299
iMac HD 2.16 Duo - $1699
Mac Pro Dual Something - $1999
Mac Pro Dual Something - $2499
Mac Pro Quad Something - $3299
That covers all their bases and only adds 2 machines.
Then the monitors:
19" Cinema Display - $599
21" Cinema Display HD - $899
24" Cinema Display HD - $1199
30" Cinema Display HD - $2399
Then the Laptops:
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.5 Solo - $899
MacBook - 13.3" IG 1.66 Duo - $1099
MacBook - 13.3" ATI 128MB 1.66 Duo - $1499
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 128MB 2.00 Duo - $1999
MacBook Pro - 15.4" ATI 256MB 2.16 Duo - $2499
MacBook Pro - 17" ATI 256MB 2.33 Duo - $2999
If Apple did that, I think they'd have a flawless product line.
But I don't see them being that great.
I don't think that would canabalize anyone machine because the imac still offers a lot for less than the price of a Mac Lite plus a monitor.
And no professionals would opt for the lite vs pro so that's of no concern.
This takes into account the processor price drops
Which allows the mini to take 100 bucks off each one.
Goddamn I wish I chose their product offerings.
I don't have a problem with that. Maybe some different details, but pretty much the same.
When I bought the G4 spring of 2000 for anyone that wanted to be able to play games you had to buy a tower. The iMac at the time had a crippled ATI 128 with 8 MB RAM. Had something like the 7500, that is a compact box with 2 HD bays and 3 slots that would have been plenty.
There is no point in Apple using PentiumD (sson to be replaced) The new generation CPUs are coming out in a timely manner there is no need for desperate stopgap "Yikes" models.
They also need to keep focused remember whent they had overlappning lines of the "II" series, the Classic series the "LC" series, the "Performa" series, the "Quadra" series and the "Centris". To further the confusion some computers appeard with different names but identical features in differnet series. In 1994 the Powermac added a seventh line up of macintoshes.
With only 3 model ranges we are far from that mess now, and we better stay far from 7 also in the future
Originally posted by Apple CFO Peter Oppenheimer
?We continue to be very happy in our progress in the Intel transition,? said Oppenheimer, who said that the transition would be completed by year?s-end.
Well that confirms the new MacTower Pro will be out this year.
And if the Apple CFO is willing to go solidly on the record in April, it means the computer is likely scheduled to be unveiled long before December.
For those who were wondering whether Apple would wait for Adobe and Microsoft to catch up before unveiling the Pro Macs, the wondering is over, and the answer is no.
Of course, many of us knew they were well ahead of schedule.
But AFAIK, this is the first time an Apple official has acknowledged that everything will be switched over before the end of 2006.
Originally posted by Placebo
In the MacBook Pro - adding 128 VRAM and 160MHz should cost more than a brand new Athlon64 3500+ and 7800GTX?
More? Spec'ing out such a laptop from Alienware quickly brings you over $3000. Well over, with a dual-core Athlon. And these just barely qualify as "portable". Anyway, ecking's scheme is just the present MBP lineup. For an extra $500 over the $1999 mdoel you get an increment on everything: +160 MHz CPU speed, +128 MB VRAM, +512 MB RAM, +20 GB HD. Seems realistic to expect the same after a speed bump, with the 17" at a higher price point.
Off topic, but I honestly have no idea how Apple is delivering the MBP at these prices. When you include all their goodies (same RAM and HD, non-IG, BT, DVD burner, wireless), other manufacturers seem to be in the $2500-$3500 range; even with the same CoreDuos. And that for thick and heavy bricks. Gold bricks, I guess.
Originally posted by Frank777
Actually, Apple has only officially quoted its original timeline of switching "by the end of 2007."
Of course, many of us knew they were well ahead of schedule.
But AFAIK, this is the first time an Apple official has acknowledged that everything will be switched over before the end of 2006.
I thought spectators started to presume it when the MacBook Pro was released, but Apple said it when they announced the Mini. I must have been mistaken.