Isn't it time for a plain old Macintosh again?

1282931333483

Comments

  • Reply 601 of 1657
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CharlesS


    Just make it so that the mini-tower + airport card + bluetooth card + iSight + monitor ends up costing slightly more than the iMac, and the iMac becomes a better deal monetarily speaking, at least (the "+ monitor" part need not be a bargain-basement Dell monitor, either - a customer who goes around bargain-shopping for a monitor is, let's face it, not an iMac customer).



    Also, making it just a bit harder to add things like AirPort and Bluetooth (you have to go through BTO instead of it already being standard on the machine) will give just that extra bit of appeal to the iMac for the "simple and hassle-free" crowd, which is where the iMac really shines.



    Another thing I'd probably do to the iMac is to see if the lowering cost of LCD panels would make it possible to sell the low-end iMac with a 20" at close to the current price, and put a 23" in the high-end model. Right now the 17" iMac seems really unattractive to me - if you're going to be locked into a monitor, it should be a really good monitor, and 17" panels are getting rather commonplace now. The iMac's really well-suited to be an "entertainment center" sort of machine, which you can watch movies on and do the other stuff you can do with Front Row, and the bigger screen you can have for that, the better.



    The other thing Apple needs to do is market things like Front Row more. People love this kind of stuff, and lots don't know the iMac can do it. I shouldn't have this sort of conversation with a new Mac owner:



    Me: By the way, let me show you something you can do with your Mac. Did your box have a remote control thing in it?



    New Mac Owner: Yeah it did, I was wondering what that was for.





    Well, I'd agree with that. That's the whole reason to introduce this thing.



    For consumers, I'd scrap the idea of a minitower in favor of an evolved Mac Mini of sorts with entry level dedicated graphics and a desktop 3.5" hard drive. Include a HDMI adaptor for set top use. For dimension, I have a DVD player that would perfect in size: 2" H x 8-3/4 Wx 10" D. That should take care of both the home theater crowd and the BYOM consumer crowd in one swoop.



    That being said, I still want my Conroe Mac Pro.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 602 of 1657
    imacfanimacfan Posts: 444member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig


    For consumers, I'd scrap the idea of a minitower in favor of an evolved Mac Mini of sorts with entry level dedicated graphics and a desktop 3.5" hard drive. Include a HDMI adaptor for set top use. For dimension, I have a DVD player that would perfect in size: 2" H x 8-3/4 Wx 10" D. That should take care of both the home theater crowd and the BYOM consumer crowd in one swoop.



    That being said, I still want my Conroe Mac Pro.





    If that was the current Mac Mini, I'd be using one now. As it is, Apple may get a huge amount of money for a Mac Pro, but that is 50/50 at most. They may not get anything for a while...



    David
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 603 of 1657
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig


    That being said, I still want my Conroe Mac Pro.






    The Mac Pro case is larger and more costly than it needs to be, as someone pointed out earlier. A mini tower would be more attractive to those who want just a single dual-core CPU and no more than two internal HDDs. I believe a mini tower would appeal to more switchers too, those who are accustom to having a Windows mini tower.



    (Did you notice the comment on the Register today that Dell might be raising prices pretty soon?)
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 604 of 1657
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snoopy


    The Mac Pro case is larger and more costly than it needs to be, as someone pointed out earlier. A mini tower would be more attractive to those who want just a single dual-core CPU and no more than two internal HDDs. I believe a mini tower would appeal to more switchers too, those who are accustom to having a Windows mini tower.



    (Did you notice the comment on the Register today that Dell might be raising prices pretty soon?)



    This is Apple we're talking about. They'd tweak a mini tower until it was really cool looking, but pretty much useless as a mini-tower. They can't do practical. The computer I described above is as close as you'd get from Jobs, Ives, & Co. Besides, I like the dual space concept.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 605 of 1657
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig


    This is Apple we're talking about. . . They can't do practical.




    I think the Mac Pro is practical.





    Quote:

    Besides, I like the dual space concept.




    Dual Space Concept?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 606 of 1657
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig


    Not only should they start heavily pushing the iApps and Front Row, they should purchase Elgato to complete them.





    El gato???? The cat?????
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 607 of 1657
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snoopy


    The Mac Pro case is larger and more costly than it needs to be, as someone pointed out earlier. A mini tower would be more attractive to those who want just a single dual-core CPU and no more than two internal HDDs. I believe a mini tower would appeal to more switchers too, those who are accustom to having a Windows mini tower.



    (Did you notice the comment on the Register today that Dell might be raising prices pretty soon?)



    Aesthetics argument. De gustabus non est disputandum. Personally I REALLY REALLY like a huge solid case. I think the Mac Pro case is freeking awesome.... except that I live in a 200 sq ft apartment... and have no place for it. But then, my current tower case probably wieghs around 40 lbs just by itself.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 608 of 1657
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snoopy


    The Mac Pro case is larger and more costly than it needs to be, as someone pointed out earlier. A mini tower would be more attractive to those who want just a single dual-core CPU and no more than two internal HDDs. I believe a mini tower would appeal to more switchers too, those who are accustom to having a Windows mini tower.



    (Did you notice the comment on the Register today that Dell might be raising prices pretty soon?)



    Hmmmm... BTO options for processors... Conroe... AND Yonah??? THAT would be rather interesting, ne?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 609 of 1657
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Celemourn


    Aesthetics argument. De gustabus non est disputandum. Personally I REALLY REALLY like a huge solid case. I think the Mac Pro case is freeking awesome.... except that I live in a 200 sq ft apartment... and have no place for it. But then, my current tower case probably wieghs around 40 lbs just by itself.





    Maybe Apple could offer the Mac Pro with just one Xeon, for those like you who like the case, or need more than two HDDs? I don't think they would sell many. A Mac mini tower is just a much better solution for the majority.



    Regarding your other replay, why not offer a different processor too if it makes a significant difference in price? The only caveat I see is that it must not require a different motherboard and chip set, or if it did, there would need to be a large demand for both models. Otherwise the engineering cost of a second board would exceed any profit from extra sales.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 610 of 1657
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snoopy


    Maybe Apple could offer the Mac Pro with just one Xeon, for those like you who like the case, or need more than two HDDs? I don't think they would sell many. A Mac mini tower is just a much better solution for the majority.



    Regarding your other replay, why not offer a different processor too if it makes a significant difference in price? The only caveat I see is that it must not require a different motherboard and chip set, or if it did, there would need to be a large demand for both models. Otherwise the engineering cost of a second board would exceed any profit from extra sales.



    Oh heck no, I'd never buy a single processor MacPro. If I'm gonna go desktop (which I inevitably will, since I learned after buying the Wallstreet PBG3 that it is STUPID to get a laptop for my only computer. Stupid for ME, mind you, no necessarily for you) it's gonna be the most ungodly ripped, beastly machine I can afford. $1700.. erm... $2400 is easy to afford for that kind of performance!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 611 of 1657
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snoopy


    Maybe Apple could offer the Mac Pro with just one Xeon, for those like you who like the case, or need more than two HDDs? .



    Xeon requires the expensive 5000x motherboard and FB-DIMMs. While such a computer would be pretty comparable to its Conroe brethren, it'd be close to $500 more expensive.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 612 of 1657
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Celemourn


    Oh heck no, I'd never buy a single processor MacPro. If I'm gonna go desktop (which I inevitably will, since I learned after buying the Wallstreet PBG3 that it is STUPID to get a laptop for my only computer. Stupid for ME, mind you, no necessarily for you) it's gonna be the most ungodly ripped, beastly machine I can afford. $1700.. erm... $2400 is easy to afford for that kind of performance!



    Mac Pro isn't a desktop, it's a workstation.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 613 of 1657
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Celemourn


    El gato???? The cat?????



    Elgato systems aka eyeTV.



    http://www.elgato.com/
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 614 of 1657
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig


    Mac Pro isn't a desktop, it's a workstation.



    pardon my poor choice of words. I meant non portable vs portable, ie, desktop vs laptop. lumping iMac, MacPro, MacMini, hMac all togeather in one catagory.





    BUT... Computer is as Computer does.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 615 of 1657
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Quote:

    For consumers, I'd scrap the idea of a minitower in favor of an evolved Mac Mini of sorts with entry level dedicated graphics and a desktop 3.5" hard drive. Include a HDMI adaptor for set top use.



    Why do consumers need dedicated graphics? 80% of the PC market gets along with integrated graphics fine. No matter which dedicated card Apple put in it gamers will complain that their is a better one.



    The point of the mini tower should be to have Conroe, 3.5 inch HDD, GPU choices, one open PCI-e slot.



    Quote:

    This is Apple we're talking about. They'd tweak a mini tower until it was really cool looking, but pretty much useless as a mini-tower.



    All they would need to do is bring back The Cube with Conroe. That was a great computer.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 616 of 1657
    kukitokukito Posts: 113member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig


    Mac Pro isn't a desktop, it's a workstation.



    Not according to Apple.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 617 of 1657
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell


    Why do consumers need dedicated graphics? 80% of the PC market gets along with integrated graphics fine.





    ????!?!!?? Maybe I live under a rock, but are you nuts? Integrated graphics are the worst thing to happen to computers since windows! That's probably the number 2 way to minimize the longevity of a computer system, with number 1 being to not allow the owner to upgrade the RAM. YUCK! I hate toasters! well, sometimes...



    Or I could have my head up my butt.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 618 of 1657
    charlesscharless Posts: 301member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Chucker


    You specifically said to make it harder than in the iMac. That goes completely counter to the very purpose.



    And right after that, I said: "(you have to go through BTO instead of it already being standard on the machine)"



    I realize this may seem like somewhat of a radical concept on here, but sometimes it would help to read the post you're replying to.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 619 of 1657
    charlesscharless Posts: 301member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Celemourn


    ????!?!!?? Maybe I live under a rock, but are you nuts? Integrated graphics are the worst thing to happen to computers since windows! That's probably the number 2 way to minimize the longevity of a computer system, with number 1 being to not allow the owner to upgrade the RAM. YUCK! I hate toasters! well, sometimes...



    Integrated graphics would be no problem at all if there were an open PCI-E slot to put a better graphics card in. It only sucks when you are stuck with it for the entire life of the machine.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 620 of 1657
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by CharlesS


    Integrated graphics would be no problem at all if there were an open PCI-E slot to put a better graphics card in. It only sucks when you are stuck with it for the entire life of the machine.



    ok. that works. Then you get the benefit of a low initial cost, and also of being able to upgrade later. good way to do it.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.