Ouch...nobody's gonna buy a products from a lineup with those price tags.
2x2.33 for 2700?
2x2.67 for 3500? sheeesh.
2x2.33 costs Apple at most $1000.
2x2.67 costs Apple at most $1350.
With the other components, these things wouldn't be cost Apple more than $2000 and $2350 at *most*.
The markup would be ridiculous. Nobody would buy these machines. Remember that Apple now competes with other PC manufacturers.
I think these prices are fine. For the last 10 years, the average good prosumer machine has been around $2500, from the first PPC's until the current Dells. And I mean PROsumer machines.
The problem is that I don't WANT to have multiple firewire drives hooked up to my computer.
So buy a Mac Pro and not a small form factor computer. The point is for the most common expansion needs the mini has enough connectivity to do so with the exception of the vid card (and perhaps better sound).
Quote:
I want a box that has everything in it. In fact I would also like the option to have a 10 in one card reader in the main unit as well. This is something that makes everything so convenient on PCs.
At work I have a crappy dell workstation that has a card reader, dual burners, and a 5 drive <B>hardware</B> RAID5 storage array in addition to the C: drive.
I don't consider my Dell workstation to be "crappy". The OS, not so hot, but as hardware that sits below my desk I could give a rats ass what it looks like since I have up to 4 machines and a KVM at times. You want "clean" park everything somewhere hidden.
Quote:
My work system gets around 300 MB/s as opposed to firewire 800's theoretical 100MB/s transfer rate. Of course I could get a fiberchannel card and hook up an X-Serve RAID, but that's ridiculously expensive and unnecessary. The Dell system was around $3500, but that included the 6 250GB drives and the RAID card.
If 2 HD bays with 1.5 TB of local storage is a limiting factor you probably want a NAS, SAN or XServe RAID anyway. A $500 fiberchannel card and a $12K 7TB server wont be beyond the budget of folks buying multiple $3.5K workstations. Dropping the 5 internal drives should partly offset the cost of the fiberchannel card.
I suspect more than just 2 HD bays in a Mac Pro though. 5 seems doubtful.
Vinea
PS a 10 in 1 card reader in the PC is less useful than a 10 in 1 reader built into the display IMHO. My PC sits below my desk. My monitor is on my desk.
PS a 10 in 1 card reader in the PC is less useful than a 10 in 1 reader built into the display IMHO. My PC sits below my desk. My monitor is on my desk.
That's an excellent point. Apple cinema displays ought to consider this functionality. Especially given their price. The iMac would be better with this built into the side IMO.
That's an excellent point. Apple cinema displays ought to consider this functionality. Especially given their price. The iMac would be better with this built into the side IMO.
At least an SD slot since about 90% of cameras sold use it.
So buy a Mac Pro and not a small form factor computer. The point is for the most common expansion needs the mini has enough connectivity to do so with the exception of the vid card (and perhaps better sound).
Ah, the tried and true "accept external drives or spend insane amount of money" excuse. Most are going to choose option C, a PC.
OMFG. "Cloverton" is a quad-core chip due early 2007 which is drop-in compatible with Woodcrest sockets... Imagine Getting the two-socket Mac Pro, and one is able to change it out with two Clovertons. OCTO-CORE. 8 CORES...1!!!11!!
I believe we will see an ALL QUAD CORE lineup for the Mac Pro.2x2GHz starting at $2200
2x2.33GHz starting at $2700
2x2.67GHz starting at $3500 2x3GHz will be offered as a BTO option for $500.
Not a bad lineup, but...
Based on chip prices I don't know that they can deliver at those price points, especially at the low end.
And $1999 is already on the high side for a base tower. Apple REALLY needs to have an expandable box at $1499 or preferably less. I'd only be OK with the above lineup if they also added a dual core Conroe mini tower at a lower price point.
Quote:
Originally posted by kim kap sol
I haven't forgotten anything. Let me repeat for you...Apple is up against Dell and other computer manufacturers now.
Apple can get the 2.66 chips for 650 each...1300...plus board and 1GB RAM: 500...plus video card: 200...plus everything else: 400. 2400*1.25=3000
3500/2400 = 1.46!!! Are you going to pay that much premium?
So what is Dell charging for quad cores of woodcrest at that speed? Looking at their site, their server boxes with dual-dual woodcrest range from 5000-6500. Just adding a second processor costs $449-1149. Assuming Dell is getting the 2.66's for 650, they have the exact same 46% markup.
I don't think anyone else got that memo, especially the vendors or the customers.
Market share statistics sure did. Laptops have been on the rise in the recent years, due to lowered costs, but also due to the decreased need for internal expandability.
If Apple deliberately leaves the second socket off of the low-end or midrange model's logic board - preventing a later upgrade of adding a matching processor or putting in two brand new processors - that's going to look bad.
Apple will definitely have two sockets in the high end. If they leave off the second socket on the low end it would only be because they're going with conroe, which requires a different socket and doesn't support multiple cpu's.
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
Wireless and Bluetooth are worth $100?
What "many other included items"?
On the high end, they went to dual core. That's worth $100 to me.
Quote:
Originally posted by BenRoethig
Apple could easily release a Macbook with a Celeron-M 430 and a 40gb hard drive for that price if they wanted to. Hell, I'd buy it to replace my iBook G3.
But it would require a completely different mobo, and one for a processor that's on the way out. In a tower, multiple mobos are a piece of cake, but in a laptop design is way more cumbersome due to size, weight and cooling issues.
Quote:
Originally posted by krispie
Apple competes with Windows PC manufacturers no more, or less, than it did before. We can, IMO, neglect the small number of people that would buy an Apple computer but use Windows as the primary OS.
True. But now direct comparisons of hardware are possible. Apple can no longer use a different chipset as an excuse for pricing.
Quote:
Originally posted by sunilraman
And they do weird stupid stuff like soldering CPUs on some models for who knows what reason.
They only solder on the laptops. And the reason is because it saves space, nothing weird or stupid about that.
Quote:
Originally posted by Chucker
A PowerPC Mac mini was a great value. An Intel mac mini is a great value.
The intel version is a MUCH better value. Regardless of how much either cost apple to build, the user gets MUCH more for the money with the intel version (particularly the core duo). We're talking about a machine that competes with G5 towers on some benchmarks.
But it would require a completely different mobo, and one for a processor that's on the way out. In a tower, multiple mobos are a piece of cake, but in a laptop design is way more cumbersome due to size, weight and cooling issues.
The 400 seres AKA Yonah with less cache was just released it uses the came motherboard as its brothers the Core Solo/Duo.
Comments
Originally posted by ZachPruckowski
G5s were apparently not cheap either. I don't expect much of a price hike, if any.
That is what we thought for the MacBook, but it came in more expensive.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Ouch...nobody's gonna buy a products from a lineup with those price tags.
2x2.33 for 2700?
2x2.67 for 3500? sheeesh.
2x2.33 costs Apple at most $1000.
2x2.67 costs Apple at most $1350.
With the other components, these things wouldn't be cost Apple more than $2000 and $2350 at *most*.
The markup would be ridiculous. Nobody would buy these machines. Remember that Apple now competes with other PC manufacturers.
I think these prices are fine. For the last 10 years, the average good prosumer machine has been around $2500, from the first PPC's until the current Dells. And I mean PROsumer machines.
Originally posted by MacGregor
That is what we thought for the MacBook, but it came in more expensive.
Ehm, some people don't want to be associated with the "we" you're referring at.
I thought the consensus on FH was that there would be a MacBook price hike to $1,099.
Originally posted by laurence13
The problem is that I don't WANT to have multiple firewire drives hooked up to my computer.
So buy a Mac Pro and not a small form factor computer. The point is for the most common expansion needs the mini has enough connectivity to do so with the exception of the vid card (and perhaps better sound).
I want a box that has everything in it. In fact I would also like the option to have a 10 in one card reader in the main unit as well. This is something that makes everything so convenient on PCs.
At work I have a crappy dell workstation that has a card reader, dual burners, and a 5 drive <B>hardware</B> RAID5 storage array in addition to the C: drive.
I don't consider my Dell workstation to be "crappy". The OS, not so hot, but as hardware that sits below my desk I could give a rats ass what it looks like since I have up to 4 machines and a KVM at times. You want "clean" park everything somewhere hidden.
My work system gets around 300 MB/s as opposed to firewire 800's theoretical 100MB/s transfer rate. Of course I could get a fiberchannel card and hook up an X-Serve RAID, but that's ridiculously expensive and unnecessary. The Dell system was around $3500, but that included the 6 250GB drives and the RAID card.
If 2 HD bays with 1.5 TB of local storage is a limiting factor you probably want a NAS, SAN or XServe RAID anyway. A $500 fiberchannel card and a $12K 7TB server wont be beyond the budget of folks buying multiple $3.5K workstations. Dropping the 5 internal drives should partly offset the cost of the fiberchannel card.
I suspect more than just 2 HD bays in a Mac Pro though. 5 seems doubtful.
Vinea
PS a 10 in 1 card reader in the PC is less useful than a 10 in 1 reader built into the display IMHO. My PC sits below my desk. My monitor is on my desk.
linky
Originally posted by vinea
PS a 10 in 1 card reader in the PC is less useful than a 10 in 1 reader built into the display IMHO. My PC sits below my desk. My monitor is on my desk.
That's an excellent point. Apple cinema displays ought to consider this functionality. Especially given their price. The iMac would be better with this built into the side IMO.
Originally posted by backtomac
That's an excellent point. Apple cinema displays ought to consider this functionality. Especially given their price. The iMac would be better with this built into the side IMO.
At least an SD slot since about 90% of cameras sold use it.
Originally posted by vinea
So buy a Mac Pro and not a small form factor computer. The point is for the most common expansion needs the mini has enough connectivity to do so with the exception of the vid card (and perhaps better sound).
Ah, the tried and true "accept external drives or spend insane amount of money" excuse. Most are going to choose option C, a PC.
Originally posted by BenRoethig
Ah, the tried and true "accept external drives or spend insane amount of money" excuse. Most are going to choose option C, a PC.
Internal expansion is on the way out, both in terms of vendor support and customer usage.
There's a long article about woodcrest on anandtech, for those who also like to read...
linky
OMFG. "Cloverton" is a quad-core chip due early 2007 which is drop-in compatible with Woodcrest sockets... Imagine Getting the two-socket Mac Pro, and one is able to change it out with two Clovertons. OCTO-CORE. 8 CORES...1!!!11!!
Originally posted by Chucker
Internal expansion is on the way out, both in terms of vendor support and customer usage.
Eh, I guess you're wrong, really.
Originally posted by mwswami
I believe we will see an ALL QUAD CORE lineup for the Mac Pro.2x2GHz starting at $2200
2x2.33GHz starting at $2700
2x2.67GHz starting at $3500
2x3GHz will be offered as a BTO option for $500.
Not a bad lineup, but...
Based on chip prices I don't know that they can deliver at those price points, especially at the low end.
And $1999 is already on the high side for a base tower. Apple REALLY needs to have an expandable box at $1499 or preferably less. I'd only be OK with the above lineup if they also added a dual core Conroe mini tower at a lower price point.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
I haven't forgotten anything. Let me repeat for you...Apple is up against Dell and other computer manufacturers now.
Apple can get the 2.66 chips for 650 each...1300...plus board and 1GB RAM: 500...plus video card: 200...plus everything else: 400. 2400*1.25=3000
3500/2400 = 1.46!!! Are you going to pay that much premium?
So what is Dell charging for quad cores of woodcrest at that speed? Looking at their site, their server boxes with dual-dual woodcrest range from 5000-6500. Just adding a second processor costs $449-1149. Assuming Dell is getting the 2.66's for 650, they have the exact same 46% markup.
Originally posted by Chucker
Internal expansion is on the way out, both in terms of vendor support and customer usage.
I don't think anyone else got that memo, especially the vendors or the customers.
Originally posted by BenRoethig
I don't think anyone else got that memo, especially the vendors or the customers.
Market share statistics sure did. Laptops have been on the rise in the recent years, due to lowered costs, but also due to the decreased need for internal expandability.
Originally posted by boots
If Apple deliberately leaves the second socket off of the low-end or midrange model's logic board - preventing a later upgrade of adding a matching processor or putting in two brand new processors - that's going to look bad.
Apple will definitely have two sockets in the high end. If they leave off the second socket on the low end it would only be because they're going with conroe, which requires a different socket and doesn't support multiple cpu's.
Originally posted by Chucker
Wireless and Bluetooth are worth $100?
What "many other included items"?
On the high end, they went to dual core. That's worth $100 to me.
Originally posted by BenRoethig
Apple could easily release a Macbook with a Celeron-M 430 and a 40gb hard drive for that price if they wanted to. Hell, I'd buy it to replace my iBook G3.
But it would require a completely different mobo, and one for a processor that's on the way out. In a tower, multiple mobos are a piece of cake, but in a laptop design is way more cumbersome due to size, weight and cooling issues.
Originally posted by krispie
Apple competes with Windows PC manufacturers no more, or less, than it did before. We can, IMO, neglect the small number of people that would buy an Apple computer but use Windows as the primary OS.
True. But now direct comparisons of hardware are possible. Apple can no longer use a different chipset as an excuse for pricing.
Originally posted by sunilraman
And they do weird stupid stuff like soldering CPUs on some models for who knows what reason.
They only solder on the laptops. And the reason is because it saves space, nothing weird or stupid about that.
Originally posted by Chucker
A PowerPC Mac mini was a great value. An Intel mac mini is a great value.
The intel version is a MUCH better value. Regardless of how much either cost apple to build, the user gets MUCH more for the money with the intel version (particularly the core duo). We're talking about a machine that competes with G5 towers on some benchmarks.
Originally posted by minderbinder
On the high end, they went to dual core. That's worth $100 to me.
The $100 change we were discussing is for the low-end, which is single-core.
Originally posted by minderbinder
But it would require a completely different mobo, and one for a processor that's on the way out. In a tower, multiple mobos are a piece of cake, but in a laptop design is way more cumbersome due to size, weight and cooling issues.
The 400 seres AKA Yonah with less cache was just released it uses the came motherboard as its brothers the Core Solo/Duo.
Originally posted by BenRoethig
The 400 seres AKA Yonah with less cache was just released it uses the came motherboard as its brothers the Core Solo/Duo.
Hopefully, Apple still won't succumb to that.