This subject comes up on Mac sites because Mac sites are filled with computer enthusiasts.
A low cost expandable headless Mac isn't going to increase Marketshare. Apple has copious amounts of data and that data is likely going to show that no matter what you do for a desktop it's not going to affect much sales change because PEOPLE WANT LAPTOPS.
The people that want desktops generally have an ideal selection of specs they want. If an AIO meets those specs then they will generally have no apprehension towards buying it. Once I told potential iMac purchasers that they weren't locked out of better monitor choices they were more at ease.
I really think the days of a big roomy box with loud fans is coming to an end. Workstations will always exist but then again people who need workstations aren't really complaining vociferously about price.
#1) I have yet to figure out the acronym AIO so I'm feeling in the dark on that.
#2) "PEOPLE WANT LAPTOPS".. I am in the minority on that one. I still like my PowerMacs. I would buy an Apple tablet that had a swivel screen that doubled as a Laptop, but I like the PowerMacs. I agree though that the laptop seems to be the more popular computer at present. Personally I like the added performance, and speed of the workstation.
A slightly larger computer with a similar Mac mini form factor with 3.5 HDD, 4 GB of RAM, replaceable GPU, and an extra expansion slot for $1250. That's not too much to ask for.
Quote:
Apple has copious amounts of data and that data is likely going to show that no matter what you do for a desktop it's not going to affect much sales change because PEOPLE WANT LAPTOPS.
Its true the laptop market is growing faster than the desktop market. I'm sure more people have desktops and laptops than people who only have laptops. The laptop can't replace everything about a desktop.
Quote:
You have no choice in eschewing a monitor with an iMac purchase but you do indeed have the choice to add another.
Yes this is wonderful if monitor spanning fits into your workflow. If someone only needs one monitor and wants something other than the monitor offered on the iMac my money says they would choose a different computer.
A slightly larger computer with a similar Mac mini form factor with 3.5 HDD, 4 GB of RAM, replaceable GPU, and an extra expansion slot for $1250. That's not too much to ask for.
Its true the laptop market is growing faster than the desktop market. I'm sure more people have desktops and laptops than people who only have laptops. The laptop can't replace everything about a desktop.
Yes this is wonderful if monitor spanning fits into your workflow. If someone only needs one monitor and wants something other than the monitor offered on the iMac my money says they would choose a different computer.
Apple isn't like Dell, trying to please every customer segment.
The problem here is that Apple, esp. with Jobs in charge, is not in the business of giving certain groups of people what they want.
There is a philosophy that exists at Apple about what they will sell, and why.
for whatever reason, there is a catagory of product that they simply won't bother with.
this goes back to the statement I wrote about earlier with Jobs refusing to make 6 slot Powermacs because it was "only" 5% of their customers ? $1.1 billion dollars of business at the time. Much more than 5% in terms of dollars, even though is was only 5% of their customers asking for it. The most profitable 5% too.
So what does that say about these products that we would like to see?
Jobs refusing to make 6 slot Powermacs because it was "only" 5% of their customers
How many of that 5% have never bought PowerMacs at all because of two less slots?
In my business PowerMacs are everywhere. If it weren't for the Windows only software PC's would probably be even less common. Boot Camp will take care of this though.
Any way, another way to look at it.
The future Intel PowerMacs on the high end needs to be far different in functionality than the current PowerMacs. Most people won't need SLI, Crossfire, dual optical bays, 16 GB of RAM, or multiple expansion slots. Nor will most be able to pay the high price tag.
But at the same time the Mac mini or iMac don't totally fulfill the functionality of the current PowerMac. There needs to be something between.
A small tower with one expansion port would lower the price of entry for individuals or small shops who want to use Final Cut Studio and Black Magic Decklink I/O cards or AJA Kona cards. That would be a really sweet set up. The same with Pro Tools and Logic with digital audio I/O. These are two significant markets for Apple.
Further down the market chain into an area Apple has shown some interest. A small tower with a replaceable GPU and one expansion port would create a market that would allow Elgato, Miglia, and anyone else to make and sell PCI cards instead of only external boxes. Functionally outside of the PowerMac this would make for a much better Media Center and Gaming machine than anything thing else Apple offers. Form wise this would be smaller than the PowerMac.
A small tower with one expansion port would lower the price of entry for individuals or small shops who want to use Final Cut Studio and Black Magic Decklink I/O cards or AJA Kona cards. That would be a really sweet set up. The same with Pro Tools and Logic with digital audio I/O. These are two significant markets for Apple.
Exactly!
A lot of people in the audio/video business looked at the XServes (powerful, 2 PCI slots, 2/3 internal drives...) but it was/is too expensive and LOUD!
People who think that everything in PCI format as an equivalent in USB or Firewire can't understand. Like the difference between ProTools TDM/HD (PCI/PCI Express) and ProTools LE (USB/Firewire): those are two very different worlds!!!
Expectations from the audio Pros I know are bigger PowerMacs (+6 slots) for their main station AND smaller PowerMacs (2 slots) for alternate/regular stations. Currently, PowerMacs are in between: too big/expensive for a regular station and not enough expansions for a main station (have to buy external slots enclosures).
With the Intel switch Apple has/will have access to a lot of different processors in terms of power and price, and if Apple wants to have more market share they need to address different needs/clients, people who use to buy Macs will still buy Macs, but the others will need to feel save in buying a new computer (having what they want, not only what Apple marketing wants to sell).
If Apple has right now around 4% of the worldwide PC market share, that means (roughly) that 2% of the PCs sold are iBooks/PowerBooks and 2% are desktop Macs, let say 1% iMacs, and .5% Mac minis and another .5% for PowerMacs (more or less, nobody knows the exact numbers except Apple). Apple may be able to rise a little all the numbers (for the current lines), I hope they'll do, but they also could release new lines (like another in-between desktop Mac) that will bring new customers/more switchers.
They can't play the 'we need to protect our iMac line' game anymore if they want to have more market share, they need to provide what is going to sell for the markets they are in and for the markets they want to conquer. They don't have to become Dell but they need to expand their offerings.
Again, I think that for the 1st time in Apple history, they will have access to different processors, for different types of computers with many different price points: they could cover all the needs of computer users and some...
You make a decent argument at the end mjteix, but I think it's too soon to just blow the horn, and come running in from all sides. For once I believe Apple had the right idea with the iMac being their consumer desktop. I think improving the lines they currently have without stepping on the toes of their existing products is a best cautious first step to test the waters. As long as it's an ambitious step, and users get the idea that they are truly playing for real it would give a better indication of what will be needed in the future.
Sure we all think we know Apple is going to be a huge hit with the addition, and advancements of intel, and Boot-Camp, but we are in an economic rescission, and if we were not, and this were towards the end of the first Bush administration (first bush as in the father) I would say yes, go for it, but I think from a shareholders POV, and inventory management POV I would prefer to proceed with caution, and take the appropriate steps on improving what they currently have, and see what else, or more the users are asking for, and seeking from them afterwards that will give them a better indication of what to provide for the next wave. Like you said. Intel is going to have a lot of cool stuff for them in relatively sort time. They really don't need, or can afford to get ahead of them self's at such a critical time. Remember. Slow and steady wins the race.
How many of that 5% have never bought PowerMacs at all because of two less slots?
In my business PowerMacs are everywhere. If it weren't for the Windows only software PC's would probably be even less common. Boot Camp will take care of this though.
Any way, another way to look at it.
The future Intel PowerMacs on the high end needs to be far different in functionality than the current PowerMacs. Most people won't need SLI, Crossfire, dual optical bays, 16 GB of RAM, or multiple expansion slots. Nor will most be able to pay the high price tag.
But at the same time the Mac mini or iMac don't totally fulfill the functionality of the current PowerMac. There needs to be something between.
A small tower with one expansion port would lower the price of entry for individuals or small shops who want to use Final Cut Studio and Black Magic Decklink I/O cards or AJA Kona cards. That would be a really sweet set up. The same with Pro Tools and Logic with digital audio I/O. These are two significant markets for Apple.
Further down the market chain into an area Apple has shown some interest. A small tower with a replaceable GPU and one expansion port would create a market that would allow Elgato, Miglia, and anyone else to make and sell PCI cards instead of only external boxes. Functionally outside of the PowerMac this would make for a much better Media Center and Gaming machine than anything thing else Apple offers. Form wise this would be smaller than the PowerMac.
You would be surprised why video editing is as popular on Windows as it is.
One big reason is that in the late '90's as the big Mac's (ugh!) dropped their slots, certain video editing platforms that were out required at least three slots just for those boards. that left no room for anything else. These companies didn't make their solutions available to Mac users. The companies that had less hardware to put into the machine were fine. But some high end solutions were simply not available. That's one of the reasons we were seeing chassis being sold that plugged into the computer, and gave us more slots. But they were clumsy, and expensive. Even Avid needed one for a while.
And some people simply wouldn't buy a machine that didn't have 6 slots.
It's not that Mac users wouldn't buy the machine. People and companies that were starting up would look at what was useful to them. If a solution that they wanted wasn't available on the Mac, well, then they would use PC's.
Most pro's and businesses don't really care what machine they use, as long as it does what they need.
EDIT:
I just remembered one problem I had. One Targa board I used took up two slots, there were two boards. That took three slots. But, I also had a Digidesign audio board, and a raid SCSI board. That was five slots right there.
When Jobs killed those machines, that type of solution was no longer available.
To me, a lot of the arguments for Apple to build a smaller PowerMac can be re-phrased as, "Apple should delete all that stuff that I don't need in the PowerMacs, redesign the case to something small and spiffy, and sell it to me for a really low price." For example, mjteix argues for a computer with 2 fewer PCI slots and 4 fewer memory slots than a PowerMac. No CPU is mentioned--and at this time it's impossible to be clear about which processor will go in which Mac when--but starting from a PowerMac, how much would be saved by these 2 economies? Enough to make a difference to any significant number of users? That is, as TenoBell pointed out earlier, are there enough people who will buy computers from other manufacturers if Apple doesn't make such a computer? If 60% of the prospective buyers of this computer buy the next higher Apple and 20% buy the next lower Apple, Apple will make more than if they designed a middle grade computer.
I am skeptical that Apple could make a $1000 tower that would sell well, as melgross wrote earlier. Guessing the costs... Starting from a $1300 iMac, deleting the screen ($150), the iSight, the keyboard, the mouse, Airport, and Bluetooth ($150, for $300 total), gives a $1000 computer, and there's more potential savings if you would like to put the components into a beige box. (You could also get to these numbers by going up from the Mini.) I don't know how to guess the costs of adding back just the essential things: memory slots, expansion slots, and maybe FW800. This is probably a $1200 or $1300 computer, and it has a low-end processor.
To me, a lot of the arguments for Apple to build a smaller PowerMac can be re-phrased as, "Apple should delete all that stuff that I don't need in the PowerMacs, redesign the case to something small and spiffy, and sell it to me for a really low price." For example, mjteix argues for a computer with 2 fewer PCI slots and 4 fewer memory slots than a PowerMac. No CPU is mentioned--and at this time it's impossible to be clear about which processor will go in which Mac when--but starting from a PowerMac, how much would be saved by these 2 economies? Enough to make a difference to any significant number of users? That is, as TenoBell pointed out earlier, are there enough people who will buy computers from other manufacturers if Apple doesn't make such a computer? If 60% of the prospective buyers of this computer buy the next higher Apple and 20% buy the next lower Apple, Apple will make more than if they designed a middle grade computer.
I am skeptical that Apple could make a $1000 tower that would sell well, as melgross wrote earlier. Guessing the costs... Starting from a $1300 iMac, deleting the screen ($150), the iSight, the keyboard, the mouse, Airport, and Bluetooth ($150, for $300 total), gives a $1000 computer, and there's more potential savings if you would like to put the components into a beige box. (You could also get to these numbers by going up from the Mini.) I don't know how to guess the costs of adding back just the essential things: memory slots, expansion slots, and maybe FW800. This is probably a $1200 or $1300 computer, and it has a low-end processor.
You wouldn't have to eliminate all of that stuff.
Don't forget that Apple had a single cpu tower G5 for $1,500. Just making the changes I suggested would have brought that down to $999. This didn't have anything to do with the iMac. And, it would have kept a shorter aluminum case. I did some costing at the time.
Of course, this was shortly after the G5's first came out.
A lot of people in the audio/video business looked at the XServes (powerful, 2 PCI slots, 2/3 internal drives...) but it was/is too expensive and LOUD!
People who think that everything in PCI format as an equivalent in USB or Firewire can't understand. Like the difference between ProTools TDM/HD (PCI/PCI Express) and ProTools LE (USB/Firewire): those are two very different worlds!!!
Expectations from the audio Pros I know are bigger PowerMacs (+6 slots) for their main station AND smaller PowerMacs (2 slots) for alternate/regular stations. Currently, PowerMacs are in between: too big/expensive for a regular station and not enough expansions for a main station (have to buy external slots enclosures).
With the Intel switch Apple has/will have access to a lot of different processors in terms of power and price, and if Apple wants to have more market share they need to address different needs/clients, people who use to buy Macs will still buy Macs, but the others will need to feel save in buying a new computer (having what they want, not only what Apple marketing wants to sell).
If Apple has right now around 4% of the worldwide PC market share, that means (roughly) that 2% of the PCs sold are iBooks/PowerBooks and 2% are desktop Macs, let say 1% iMacs, and .5% Mac minis and another .5% for PowerMacs (more or less, nobody knows the exact numbers except Apple). Apple may be able to rise a little all the numbers (for the current lines), I hope they'll do, but they also could release new lines (like another in-between desktop Mac) that will bring new customers/more switchers.
They can't play the 'we need to protect our iMac line' game anymore if they want to have more market share, they need to provide what is going to sell for the markets they are in and for the markets they want to conquer. They don't have to become Dell but they need to expand their offerings.
Again, I think that for the 1st time in Apple history, they will have access to different processors, for different types of computers with many different price points: they could cover all the needs of computer users and some...
Apple has a bit over 2.5% of the world market right now. They have a bit over 4% of the US market, which is a little more than 33% of the total.
Don't forget that Apple had a single cpu tower G5 for $1,500. Just making the changes I suggested would have brought that down to $999. This didn't have anything to do with the iMac. And, it would have kept a shorter aluminum case. I did some costing at the time.
Of course, this was shortly after the G5's first came out.
I believe that that was a 4-memory slot computer with a 1.8 GHz G5. Perhaps it had PCI slots instead of PCI-x?? $500 in savings--1/3 of the cost of the computer--would come from deleting 2 PCI slots, smaller power supply, fewer fans, and a lower style case. I expect that this would satisfy some of the small-tower advocates, but there would be more who wanted something slightly different, 2xG5 or a 2.5 GHz G5 and only a slot for the graphics card, or something.
I believe that that was a 4-memory slot computer with a 1.8 GHz G5. Perhaps it had PCI slots instead of PCI-x?? $500 in savings--1/3 of the cost of the computer--would come from deleting 2 PCI slots, smaller power supply, fewer fans, and a lower style case. I expect that this would satisfy some of the small-tower advocates, but there would be more who wanted something slightly different, 2xG5 or a 2.5 GHz G5 and only a slot for the graphics card, or something.
It didn't need to lose 2 slots. It needed to lose the 3 1/2" of mobo that was occupied by the second cpu and cooling system.
Yes, it had 4 memory slots, and PCI slots. Fine for the person who needed a less expensive machine. That was the point.
A dual G5 machine would be the same sixe. No way to really do much there. Removing two slots would just reduce the mobo by 1 1/2", not enough to make much difference in the overall machine. With just a graphics slot, no one would buy it. Itwould be back to the cube. But, even that had one unused slot in addition to the graphics slot.
It didn't need to lose 2 slots. It needed to lose the 3 1/2" of mobo that was occupied by the second cpu and cooling system.
Yes, it had 4 memory slots, and PCI slots. Fine for the person who needed a less expensive machine. That was the point.
A dual G5 machine would be the same sixe. No way to really do much there. Removing two slots would just reduce the mobo by 1 1/2", not enough to make much difference in the overall machine. With just a graphics slot, no one would buy it. Itwould be back to the cube. But, even that had one unused slot in addition to the graphics slot.
That, and cutting two slots does not cut any cost.
Another thing is that the Single Processor Socket PowerMac isn't something that was discontinued. It's probably just on hiatus again. Apple usually brings one back towards the end of a cycle. It was never a one time thing. They've been doing that for like 5 years.
That, and cutting two slots does not cut any cost.
Another thing is that the Single Processor Socket PowerMac isn't something that was discontinued. It's probably just on hiatus again. Apple usually brings one back towards the end of a cycle. It was never a one time thing. They've been doing that for like 5 years.
Now they are doing it with one dual core chip instead of two.
All I can say is that I passed up on the Quad because the new tower is so close. I just hope it's worth the wait.
I am one of those guys who need more options than the mini can offer but needs less options than are available in the PowerMacs. And I am always dreading for this or that. But guess what I am no market for Apple to desinge a computer to my needs. Maybe there are 1% of Mac owners/buyers with similar needs as I have - multiply that with 2,5% marketshare; now you know that Apple will do squat to cater me. I don't like it, but I have to come over it.
The funny thing for Apple is they will sell now 2 computers, not only one. I will now turn down my expectations, so I can work with a mini. In 12 to 16 month from now I will buy a PowerMac, although it will incorporate options that I don't need.
ah yes, the never ending "expansion slots" argument...
I think we could all agree on that perhaps selling a proMac with an expandability option for more slots would be a good idea. Perhaps 2 could be built in and then you could buy some sort of add on for 4 more.
Two (including the graphics card) seems enough for most people seeing as how a single graphics card can power two monitors and there are lots of firewire and USB options. People that absolutely need 6 could get the add-on.
The new tower has probably already been designed.
Do any of the Intel boards support something like this? What about AMD? The answer may get us back to the original point of this thread.
Do any of the Intel boards support something like this?
support what, six slots?
the new intel-powermacs will probably (?) use a chipset with the ich8 southbridge.
i dont know much about that one, but ich7 found in for example the 975x chipset got support for one 16x-lane pci-e or two 8x-lane, six 1x-lane pci-e and six 'regular' pci slots.
(and you'll get a free tpm too, no extra cost!)
i dont think the ich8 will be much worse...
edit: now (after writing all that) i think i get what you're asking.
i guess you could 'route' some of the pci-e lanes in some kind of extension cable to a break-out slot-box, but i dont think it'll be pretty...
offering two sizes to begin with would probably save apple a lot of headache...
I am one of those guys who need more options than the mini can offer but needs less options than are available in the PowerMacs. And I am always dreading for this or that. But guess what I am no market for Apple to desinge a computer to my needs. Maybe there are 1% of Mac owners/buyers with similar needs as I have - multiply that with 2,5% marketshare; now you know that Apple will do squat to cater me. I don't like it, but I have to come over it.
The funny thing for Apple is they will sell now 2 computers, not only one. I will now turn down my expectations, so I can work with a mini. In 12 to 16 month from now I will buy a PowerMac, although it will incorporate options that I don't need.
Two questions.
1) Is there a PC that has exactly the expansion space that you need. What is it, and why?
2) Is it a cost issue that keeps you looking at the Mini instead of the iMac?
Because if your looking for less than an iMac, but more than a mini, That space will probably never be filled by Apple.
ah yes, the never ending "expansion slots" argument...
I think we could all agree on that perhaps selling a proMac with an expandability option for more slots would be a good idea. Perhaps 2 could be built in and then you could buy some sort of add on for 4 more.
Two (including the graphics card) seems enough for most people seeing as how a single graphics card can power two monitors and there are lots of firewire and USB options. People that absolutely need 6 could get the add-on.
The new tower has probably already been designed.
Do any of the Intel boards support something like this? What about AMD? The answer may get us back to the original point of this thread.
This is the expansion chassis I mentioned before. But, Apple won't offer one. It's likely that this is being offered somewhere, if it can be done on a serial bus at all.
Comments
A low cost expandable headless Mac isn't going to increase Marketshare. Apple has copious amounts of data and that data is likely going to show that no matter what you do for a desktop it's not going to affect much sales change because PEOPLE WANT LAPTOPS.
The people that want desktops generally have an ideal selection of specs they want. If an AIO meets those specs then they will generally have no apprehension towards buying it. Once I told potential iMac purchasers that they weren't locked out of better monitor choices they were more at ease.
I really think the days of a big roomy box with loud fans is coming to an end. Workstations will always exist but then again people who need workstations aren't really complaining vociferously about price.
#1) I have yet to figure out the acronym AIO so I'm feeling in the dark on that.
#2) "PEOPLE WANT LAPTOPS".. I am in the minority on that one. I still like my PowerMacs. I would buy an Apple tablet that had a swivel screen that doubled as a Laptop, but I like the PowerMacs. I agree though that the laptop seems to be the more popular computer at present. Personally I like the added performance, and speed of the workstation.
[edit] All In One - got it. Duh!
Apple has copious amounts of data and that data is likely going to show that no matter what you do for a desktop it's not going to affect much sales change because PEOPLE WANT LAPTOPS.
Its true the laptop market is growing faster than the desktop market. I'm sure more people have desktops and laptops than people who only have laptops. The laptop can't replace everything about a desktop.
You have no choice in eschewing a monitor with an iMac purchase but you do indeed have the choice to add another.
Yes this is wonderful if monitor spanning fits into your workflow. If someone only needs one monitor and wants something other than the monitor offered on the iMac my money says they would choose a different computer.
Originally posted by TenoBell
A slightly larger computer with a similar Mac mini form factor with 3.5 HDD, 4 GB of RAM, replaceable GPU, and an extra expansion slot for $1250. That's not too much to ask for.
Its true the laptop market is growing faster than the desktop market. I'm sure more people have desktops and laptops than people who only have laptops. The laptop can't replace everything about a desktop.
Yes this is wonderful if monitor spanning fits into your workflow. If someone only needs one monitor and wants something other than the monitor offered on the iMac my money says they would choose a different computer.
Apple isn't like Dell, trying to please every customer segment.
The problem here is that Apple, esp. with Jobs in charge, is not in the business of giving certain groups of people what they want.
There is a philosophy that exists at Apple about what they will sell, and why.
for whatever reason, there is a catagory of product that they simply won't bother with.
this goes back to the statement I wrote about earlier with Jobs refusing to make 6 slot Powermacs because it was "only" 5% of their customers ? $1.1 billion dollars of business at the time. Much more than 5% in terms of dollars, even though is was only 5% of their customers asking for it. The most profitable 5% too.
So what does that say about these products that we would like to see?
Jobs refusing to make 6 slot Powermacs because it was "only" 5% of their customers
How many of that 5% have never bought PowerMacs at all because of two less slots?
In my business PowerMacs are everywhere. If it weren't for the Windows only software PC's would probably be even less common. Boot Camp will take care of this though.
Any way, another way to look at it.
The future Intel PowerMacs on the high end needs to be far different in functionality than the current PowerMacs. Most people won't need SLI, Crossfire, dual optical bays, 16 GB of RAM, or multiple expansion slots. Nor will most be able to pay the high price tag.
But at the same time the Mac mini or iMac don't totally fulfill the functionality of the current PowerMac. There needs to be something between.
A small tower with one expansion port would lower the price of entry for individuals or small shops who want to use Final Cut Studio and Black Magic Decklink I/O cards or AJA Kona cards. That would be a really sweet set up. The same with Pro Tools and Logic with digital audio I/O. These are two significant markets for Apple.
Further down the market chain into an area Apple has shown some interest. A small tower with a replaceable GPU and one expansion port would create a market that would allow Elgato, Miglia, and anyone else to make and sell PCI cards instead of only external boxes. Functionally outside of the PowerMac this would make for a much better Media Center and Gaming machine than anything thing else Apple offers. Form wise this would be smaller than the PowerMac.
Originally posted by TenoBell
A small tower with one expansion port would lower the price of entry for individuals or small shops who want to use Final Cut Studio and Black Magic Decklink I/O cards or AJA Kona cards. That would be a really sweet set up. The same with Pro Tools and Logic with digital audio I/O. These are two significant markets for Apple.
Exactly!
A lot of people in the audio/video business looked at the XServes (powerful, 2 PCI slots, 2/3 internal drives...) but it was/is too expensive and LOUD!
People who think that everything in PCI format as an equivalent in USB or Firewire can't understand. Like the difference between ProTools TDM/HD (PCI/PCI Express) and ProTools LE (USB/Firewire): those are two very different worlds!!!
Expectations from the audio Pros I know are bigger PowerMacs (+6 slots) for their main station AND smaller PowerMacs (2 slots) for alternate/regular stations. Currently, PowerMacs are in between: too big/expensive for a regular station and not enough expansions for a main station (have to buy external slots enclosures).
With the Intel switch Apple has/will have access to a lot of different processors in terms of power and price, and if Apple wants to have more market share they need to address different needs/clients, people who use to buy Macs will still buy Macs, but the others will need to feel save in buying a new computer (having what they want, not only what Apple marketing wants to sell).
If Apple has right now around 4% of the worldwide PC market share, that means (roughly) that 2% of the PCs sold are iBooks/PowerBooks and 2% are desktop Macs, let say 1% iMacs, and .5% Mac minis and another .5% for PowerMacs (more or less, nobody knows the exact numbers except Apple). Apple may be able to rise a little all the numbers (for the current lines), I hope they'll do, but they also could release new lines (like another in-between desktop Mac) that will bring new customers/more switchers.
They can't play the 'we need to protect our iMac line' game anymore if they want to have more market share, they need to provide what is going to sell for the markets they are in and for the markets they want to conquer. They don't have to become Dell but they need to expand their offerings.
Again, I think that for the 1st time in Apple history, they will have access to different processors, for different types of computers with many different price points: they could cover all the needs of computer users and some...
Sure we all think we know Apple is going to be a huge hit with the addition, and advancements of intel, and Boot-Camp, but we are in an economic rescission, and if we were not, and this were towards the end of the first Bush administration (first bush as in the father) I would say yes, go for it, but I think from a shareholders POV, and inventory management POV I would prefer to proceed with caution, and take the appropriate steps on improving what they currently have, and see what else, or more the users are asking for, and seeking from them afterwards that will give them a better indication of what to provide for the next wave. Like you said. Intel is going to have a lot of cool stuff for them in relatively sort time. They really don't need, or can afford to get ahead of them self's at such a critical time. Remember. Slow and steady wins the race.
Originally posted by TenoBell
How many of that 5% have never bought PowerMacs at all because of two less slots?
In my business PowerMacs are everywhere. If it weren't for the Windows only software PC's would probably be even less common. Boot Camp will take care of this though.
Any way, another way to look at it.
The future Intel PowerMacs on the high end needs to be far different in functionality than the current PowerMacs. Most people won't need SLI, Crossfire, dual optical bays, 16 GB of RAM, or multiple expansion slots. Nor will most be able to pay the high price tag.
But at the same time the Mac mini or iMac don't totally fulfill the functionality of the current PowerMac. There needs to be something between.
A small tower with one expansion port would lower the price of entry for individuals or small shops who want to use Final Cut Studio and Black Magic Decklink I/O cards or AJA Kona cards. That would be a really sweet set up. The same with Pro Tools and Logic with digital audio I/O. These are two significant markets for Apple.
Further down the market chain into an area Apple has shown some interest. A small tower with a replaceable GPU and one expansion port would create a market that would allow Elgato, Miglia, and anyone else to make and sell PCI cards instead of only external boxes. Functionally outside of the PowerMac this would make for a much better Media Center and Gaming machine than anything thing else Apple offers. Form wise this would be smaller than the PowerMac.
You would be surprised why video editing is as popular on Windows as it is.
One big reason is that in the late '90's as the big Mac's (ugh!) dropped their slots, certain video editing platforms that were out required at least three slots just for those boards. that left no room for anything else. These companies didn't make their solutions available to Mac users. The companies that had less hardware to put into the machine were fine. But some high end solutions were simply not available. That's one of the reasons we were seeing chassis being sold that plugged into the computer, and gave us more slots. But they were clumsy, and expensive. Even Avid needed one for a while.
And some people simply wouldn't buy a machine that didn't have 6 slots.
It's not that Mac users wouldn't buy the machine. People and companies that were starting up would look at what was useful to them. If a solution that they wanted wasn't available on the Mac, well, then they would use PC's.
Most pro's and businesses don't really care what machine they use, as long as it does what they need.
EDIT:
I just remembered one problem I had. One Targa board I used took up two slots, there were two boards. That took three slots. But, I also had a Digidesign audio board, and a raid SCSI board. That was five slots right there.
When Jobs killed those machines, that type of solution was no longer available.
I am skeptical that Apple could make a $1000 tower that would sell well, as melgross wrote earlier. Guessing the costs... Starting from a $1300 iMac, deleting the screen ($150), the iSight, the keyboard, the mouse, Airport, and Bluetooth ($150, for $300 total), gives a $1000 computer, and there's more potential savings if you would like to put the components into a beige box. (You could also get to these numbers by going up from the Mini.) I don't know how to guess the costs of adding back just the essential things: memory slots, expansion slots, and maybe FW800. This is probably a $1200 or $1300 computer, and it has a low-end processor.
Originally posted by dh87
To me, a lot of the arguments for Apple to build a smaller PowerMac can be re-phrased as, "Apple should delete all that stuff that I don't need in the PowerMacs, redesign the case to something small and spiffy, and sell it to me for a really low price." For example, mjteix argues for a computer with 2 fewer PCI slots and 4 fewer memory slots than a PowerMac. No CPU is mentioned--and at this time it's impossible to be clear about which processor will go in which Mac when--but starting from a PowerMac, how much would be saved by these 2 economies? Enough to make a difference to any significant number of users? That is, as TenoBell pointed out earlier, are there enough people who will buy computers from other manufacturers if Apple doesn't make such a computer? If 60% of the prospective buyers of this computer buy the next higher Apple and 20% buy the next lower Apple, Apple will make more than if they designed a middle grade computer.
I am skeptical that Apple could make a $1000 tower that would sell well, as melgross wrote earlier. Guessing the costs... Starting from a $1300 iMac, deleting the screen ($150), the iSight, the keyboard, the mouse, Airport, and Bluetooth ($150, for $300 total), gives a $1000 computer, and there's more potential savings if you would like to put the components into a beige box. (You could also get to these numbers by going up from the Mini.) I don't know how to guess the costs of adding back just the essential things: memory slots, expansion slots, and maybe FW800. This is probably a $1200 or $1300 computer, and it has a low-end processor.
You wouldn't have to eliminate all of that stuff.
Don't forget that Apple had a single cpu tower G5 for $1,500. Just making the changes I suggested would have brought that down to $999. This didn't have anything to do with the iMac. And, it would have kept a shorter aluminum case. I did some costing at the time.
Of course, this was shortly after the G5's first came out.
Originally posted by mjteix
Exactly!
A lot of people in the audio/video business looked at the XServes (powerful, 2 PCI slots, 2/3 internal drives...) but it was/is too expensive and LOUD!
People who think that everything in PCI format as an equivalent in USB or Firewire can't understand. Like the difference between ProTools TDM/HD (PCI/PCI Express) and ProTools LE (USB/Firewire): those are two very different worlds!!!
Expectations from the audio Pros I know are bigger PowerMacs (+6 slots) for their main station AND smaller PowerMacs (2 slots) for alternate/regular stations. Currently, PowerMacs are in between: too big/expensive for a regular station and not enough expansions for a main station (have to buy external slots enclosures).
With the Intel switch Apple has/will have access to a lot of different processors in terms of power and price, and if Apple wants to have more market share they need to address different needs/clients, people who use to buy Macs will still buy Macs, but the others will need to feel save in buying a new computer (having what they want, not only what Apple marketing wants to sell).
If Apple has right now around 4% of the worldwide PC market share, that means (roughly) that 2% of the PCs sold are iBooks/PowerBooks and 2% are desktop Macs, let say 1% iMacs, and .5% Mac minis and another .5% for PowerMacs (more or less, nobody knows the exact numbers except Apple). Apple may be able to rise a little all the numbers (for the current lines), I hope they'll do, but they also could release new lines (like another in-between desktop Mac) that will bring new customers/more switchers.
They can't play the 'we need to protect our iMac line' game anymore if they want to have more market share, they need to provide what is going to sell for the markets they are in and for the markets they want to conquer. They don't have to become Dell but they need to expand their offerings.
Again, I think that for the 1st time in Apple history, they will have access to different processors, for different types of computers with many different price points: they could cover all the needs of computer users and some...
Apple has a bit over 2.5% of the world market right now. They have a bit over 4% of the US market, which is a little more than 33% of the total.
Originally posted by melgross
You wouldn't have to eliminate all of that stuff.
Don't forget that Apple had a single cpu tower G5 for $1,500. Just making the changes I suggested would have brought that down to $999. This didn't have anything to do with the iMac. And, it would have kept a shorter aluminum case. I did some costing at the time.
Of course, this was shortly after the G5's first came out.
I believe that that was a 4-memory slot computer with a 1.8 GHz G5. Perhaps it had PCI slots instead of PCI-x?? $500 in savings--1/3 of the cost of the computer--would come from deleting 2 PCI slots, smaller power supply, fewer fans, and a lower style case. I expect that this would satisfy some of the small-tower advocates, but there would be more who wanted something slightly different, 2xG5 or a 2.5 GHz G5 and only a slot for the graphics card, or something.
Originally posted by dh87
I believe that that was a 4-memory slot computer with a 1.8 GHz G5. Perhaps it had PCI slots instead of PCI-x?? $500 in savings--1/3 of the cost of the computer--would come from deleting 2 PCI slots, smaller power supply, fewer fans, and a lower style case. I expect that this would satisfy some of the small-tower advocates, but there would be more who wanted something slightly different, 2xG5 or a 2.5 GHz G5 and only a slot for the graphics card, or something.
It didn't need to lose 2 slots. It needed to lose the 3 1/2" of mobo that was occupied by the second cpu and cooling system.
Yes, it had 4 memory slots, and PCI slots. Fine for the person who needed a less expensive machine. That was the point.
A dual G5 machine would be the same sixe. No way to really do much there. Removing two slots would just reduce the mobo by 1 1/2", not enough to make much difference in the overall machine. With just a graphics slot, no one would buy it. Itwould be back to the cube. But, even that had one unused slot in addition to the graphics slot.
Originally posted by melgross
It didn't need to lose 2 slots. It needed to lose the 3 1/2" of mobo that was occupied by the second cpu and cooling system.
Yes, it had 4 memory slots, and PCI slots. Fine for the person who needed a less expensive machine. That was the point.
A dual G5 machine would be the same sixe. No way to really do much there. Removing two slots would just reduce the mobo by 1 1/2", not enough to make much difference in the overall machine. With just a graphics slot, no one would buy it. Itwould be back to the cube. But, even that had one unused slot in addition to the graphics slot.
That, and cutting two slots does not cut any cost.
Another thing is that the Single Processor Socket PowerMac isn't something that was discontinued. It's probably just on hiatus again. Apple usually brings one back towards the end of a cycle. It was never a one time thing. They've been doing that for like 5 years.
Originally posted by onlooker
That, and cutting two slots does not cut any cost.
Another thing is that the Single Processor Socket PowerMac isn't something that was discontinued. It's probably just on hiatus again. Apple usually brings one back towards the end of a cycle. It was never a one time thing. They've been doing that for like 5 years.
Now they are doing it with one dual core chip instead of two.
All I can say is that I passed up on the Quad because the new tower is so close. I just hope it's worth the wait.
The funny thing for Apple is they will sell now 2 computers, not only one. I will now turn down my expectations, so I can work with a mini. In 12 to 16 month from now I will buy a PowerMac, although it will incorporate options that I don't need.
I think we could all agree on that perhaps selling a proMac with an expandability option for more slots would be a good idea. Perhaps 2 could be built in and then you could buy some sort of add on for 4 more.
Two (including the graphics card) seems enough for most people seeing as how a single graphics card can power two monitors and there are lots of firewire and USB options. People that absolutely need 6 could get the add-on.
The new tower has probably already been designed.
Do any of the Intel boards support something like this? What about AMD? The answer may get us back to the original point of this thread.
Originally posted by wwwork
Do any of the Intel boards support something like this?
support what, six slots?
the new intel-powermacs will probably (?) use a chipset with the ich8 southbridge.
i dont know much about that one, but ich7 found in for example the 975x chipset got support for one 16x-lane pci-e or two 8x-lane, six 1x-lane pci-e and six 'regular' pci slots.
(and you'll get a free tpm too, no extra cost!)
i dont think the ich8 will be much worse...
edit: now (after writing all that) i think i get what you're asking.
i guess you could 'route' some of the pci-e lanes in some kind of extension cable to a break-out slot-box, but i dont think it'll be pretty...
offering two sizes to begin with would probably save apple a lot of headache...
Originally posted by copeland
I am one of those guys who need more options than the mini can offer but needs less options than are available in the PowerMacs. And I am always dreading for this or that. But guess what I am no market for Apple to desinge a computer to my needs. Maybe there are 1% of Mac owners/buyers with similar needs as I have - multiply that with 2,5% marketshare; now you know that Apple will do squat to cater me. I don't like it, but I have to come over it.
The funny thing for Apple is they will sell now 2 computers, not only one. I will now turn down my expectations, so I can work with a mini. In 12 to 16 month from now I will buy a PowerMac, although it will incorporate options that I don't need.
Two questions.
1) Is there a PC that has exactly the expansion space that you need. What is it, and why?
2) Is it a cost issue that keeps you looking at the Mini instead of the iMac?
Because if your looking for less than an iMac, but more than a mini, That space will probably never be filled by Apple.
Originally posted by wwwork
ah yes, the never ending "expansion slots" argument...
I think we could all agree on that perhaps selling a proMac with an expandability option for more slots would be a good idea. Perhaps 2 could be built in and then you could buy some sort of add on for 4 more.
Two (including the graphics card) seems enough for most people seeing as how a single graphics card can power two monitors and there are lots of firewire and USB options. People that absolutely need 6 could get the add-on.
The new tower has probably already been designed.
Do any of the Intel boards support something like this? What about AMD? The answer may get us back to the original point of this thread.
This is the expansion chassis I mentioned before. But, Apple won't offer one. It's likely that this is being offered somewhere, if it can be done on a serial bus at all.