Is there a Mac Cube on the way?

124»

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 76
    Is it just me, or does the design/materials of the mini, mac pro, and those cubes look an awful lot like an Ikea wastebasket? I mean, if you take the logo off of those cube photos...
  • Reply 62 of 76
    auroraaurora Posts: 1,142member
    Cube was one of the best looking machines Apple ever produced but they killed it with pricing and like apple allways does with its products they put it up against another Mac. PowerMac. At the moment Apple has a gigantic hole in the line up. $600 Mini vs $2500 Powermac and then to expect people to throw away their monitors so they can get into the evergrowing Chin of iMac is kind of stupid. If you look at other PC makers there are a lot of machines in the $700 - $1500 price range and Apple has nothing. The world has billions of just fine 17",19" and up monitors but when they come to Apple..... Apple needs a machine starting at $1000 a mini consumer tower if you will. Missing this point so they can play iMac games will make sure they remain a fringe player. Or Apple could make a slightly larger Mini that has something better then its worst in class semi gpu called the GMA950. To make a long story short I have had two mini's and the one with the ati 9200 in it looked better, had better colors reflections etc then the cheapo gma 950. GMA 950 is nothing more then a handicap to try to move people into iMacs. The marketing spinmaster from Apple who dreamed this up should be forced to work 15 hour days in China making pods.
  • Reply 63 of 76
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Aurora




    . . . At the moment Apple has a gigantic hole in the line up. $600 Mini vs $2500 Powermac and then to expect people to throw away their monitors so they can get into the evergrowing Chin of iMac is kind of stupid. If you look at other PC makers there are a lot of machines in the $700 - $1500 price range and Apple has nothing. . .




    Apple has both the Mini and the iMac for those who want a simple, buy and play computer. The only really expandable Mac is the Mac Pro, which is fine for the pros who need such performance. So my vote would be for a mini tower-like Mac, not a Cube-like Mac for an in-between model.



    The market should be great for a mini tower. There are pros who don't need such high-end performance as the Mac Pro, and many others who want one two. What are your thoughts on business? This is the area that most of us overlook, and it is a large market. What kind of computer does business want? If Apple can make something that pleases business, high-end home users, and lower-end pro users, they will have a winner for sure.



    BTW, some here advocate putting a cheaper single chip in the Mac Pro and selling it for less. I disagree. I believe the Mac Pro name needs to mean real power, not simply good performance. I think this is why it is only available in dual chip models too. Also, it's too big for the average person or business, and has cost that are hard to eliminate. Apple would be better off designing a less costly chassis from scratch IMHO.
  • Reply 64 of 76
    aegisdesignaegisdesign Posts: 2,914member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snoopy


    The market should be great for a mini tower. There are pros who don't need such high-end performance as the Mac Pro, and many others who want one two. What are your thoughts on business? This is the area that most of us overlook, and it is a large market. What kind of computer does business want? If Apple can make something that pleases business, high-end home users, and lower-end pro users, they will have a winner for sure.



    I'm a pro. I work with pros. My clients are all businesses. We all use iMacs and Apple laptops. I don't know anyone with a MacPro or PowerMac G5 even. There's nothing wrong with the iMac for professional work and businesses. The whole idea that somehow an iMac isn't suitable for business or pro use is plainly silly to many people who currently do just fine with an iMac and don't want big ugly boxes or mix and match PC kit.



    I've clients that use eMacs as their standard office machine. It works for them. Cheap and totally overkill for their uses in fact.



    The iMac now runs up as far as a dual 2.33Ghz 24" screen. That's, to be truthful, more than twice the machine I need to do my job as a web designer and programmer. I'd have to keep a slow machine around just to make sure I wasn't being overoptimistic in my code and expecting too much from average computers.
  • Reply 65 of 76
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aegisdesign


    I'm a pro. I work with pros. My clients are all businesses. We all use iMacs and Apple laptops. I don't know anyone with a MacPro or PowerMac G5 even. There's nothing wrong with the iMac for professional work and businesses. The whole idea that somehow an iMac isn't suitable for business or pro use is plainly silly to many people who currently do just fine with an iMac and don't want big ugly boxes or mix and match PC kit.



    I've clients that use eMacs as their standard office machine. It works for them. Cheap and totally overkill for their uses in fact.



    The iMac now runs up as far as a dual 2.33Ghz 24" screen. That's, to be truthful, more than twice the machine I need to do my job as a web designer and programmer. I'd have to keep a slow machine around just to make sure I wasn't being overoptimistic in my code and expecting too much from average computers.



    All these arguments are true however if it don't sell millions (or at least in similar numbers to the MacBooks) it's not what people want.
  • Reply 66 of 76
    snoopysnoopy Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aegisdesign




    I'm a pro. I work with pros. My clients are all businesses. We all use iMacs and Apple laptops. I don't know anyone with a MacPro or PowerMac G5 even. There's nothing wrong with the iMac for professional work and businesses. . .




    You are quite right of course. The iMac works well enough for those who can be satisfied with an all-in-one computer. I think Mac users tend to accept an AIO more so than others, likely because of tradition. The earlist iMacs were a great comeback for the Mac platform, and Mac users have grown to accept them, even prefer them. So it's not easy for Mac users to see things like the other 90% of the market, those who do not typically buy AIOs.



    I too think the iMac is an excellent choice for business, for use in a conspicuous area such as receptionist, where it is able to impress customers. Yet business does not typically buy Macs yet. It doesn't matter whether or not the Mac can do the job. If the IT staff does not like AIOs, the business will not buy them. Apple needs to address what business wants, not what Apple thinks business should have. Some exceptions in the purchase of Macs is the Graphics art department or web design. IT folks tend to give them what they want to keep them satisfied.



    So I'm not putting down your argument. It's just that most computer buyers do not agree and they control the purse strings. Does Apple want to sell computers or are they out to change the world? A company can seldom do both unless it has a killer new product. If Apple finds a replacement for the computer, the way Ford found a replacement for the horse and buggy, then they can change the world. Until then, Apple needs a mini tower.
  • Reply 67 of 76
    aegisdesignaegisdesign Posts: 2,914member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snoopy


    You are quite right of course. The iMac works well enough for those who can be satisfied with an all-in-one computer.



    Which IMHO, these days is 90% of computer buyers. More than half of computer buyers buy laptops now and those aren't any more expandable than an AIO. Less so often.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snoopy


    I think Mac users tend to accept an AIO more so than others, likely because of tradition. The earlist iMacs were a great comeback for the Mac platform, and Mac users have grown to accept them, even prefer them. So it's not easy for Mac users to see things like the other 90% of the market, those who do not typically buy AIOs.



    I'm a Mac user and I hope you don't mean me by that. I've 20 years in the computer industry and I've used everything from a 3B2 to a Xerox Star, to a PC to an IBM 370 mainframe in a business setting. I'm a Mac user but I can also see what people actually need not what they think they need and today, the business and home PC as it stands is largely an empty box of air used to house just a motherboard with no cards in it. Everything has moved to the motherboard including even graphics. So what's stopping them ditching all that wasted space and using an iMac or Mini instead? Just as many people do that with a laptop.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by snoopy


    I too think the iMac is an excellent choice for business, for use in a conspicuous area such as receptionist, where it is able to impress customers. Yet business does not typically buy Macs yet. It doesn't matter whether or not the Mac can do the job. If the IT staff does not like AIOs, the business will not buy them. Apple needs to address what business wants, not what Apple thinks business should have. Some exceptions in the purchase of Macs is the Graphics art department or web design. IT folks tend to give them what they want to keep them satisfied.



    So I'm not putting down your argument. It's just that most computer buyers do not agree and they control the purse strings. Does Apple want to sell computers or are they out to change the world? A company can seldom do both unless it has a killer new product. If Apple finds a replacement for the computer, the way Ford found a replacement for the horse and buggy, then they can change the world. Until then, Apple needs a mini tower.



    90%+ of the market don't go for iMacs because they are not Windows PCs, not because they are AIOs. I don't think that really matters although there is some irrational fear that something that pretty is a toy perhaps or the screen will blow and then you can't use your computer - an argument you never see against laptops.



    I've yet to work in a company where PCs weren't bought as a full complete package often in bulk so a computer being an AIO is as stupid an argument as it being a laptop.



    However, businesses, in general, want Windows or at least are stuck with it. IT departments know Windows. Accountants know Windows. There's a whole bunch of supply chain stages that only know Windows. Often a whole company has an infrastructure predicated on everything running Windows. That is gradually changing.



    In the 80s we used to say 'Nobody got fired for buying IBM'. In the 90s it was Microsoft.



    If Apple want to sell more Macs, then a mid tower will probably increase sales but then again so would shipping Windows preinstalled on their Macs into businesses. Probably more so. I really hope however they have more style than stooping that low. I think Apple are on a slow burn gaining traction gradually their way rather than going all out for cash now.



    Apple need to concentrate on Windows compatibility, getting important Windows developers to create Mac solutions and where that's not happening creating much better in house solutions with strong Mac style that any IT Manager won't think they're stepping out of line on. That is how Microsoft beat IBM in the 90s in the small enterprise market.



    Personally, I'd like to see Apple back more and more open source and web based business solutions. I don't think they can 'do a Microsoft' on Microsoft by themselves. So far the OSX Server stuff in Leopard is looking like a step in the right direction.
  • Reply 68 of 76
    aegisdesignaegisdesign Posts: 2,914member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by OfficerDigby


    All these arguments are true however if it don't sell millions (or at least in similar numbers to the MacBooks) it's not what people want.



    Apple sells roughly equal numbers of desktops and laptops. And proportionally pretty similar to the rest of the PC market desktop/laptop split. It's obviously not the unpopular product you think it is.
  • Reply 69 of 76
    All this is true for businesses and 95%+ of home users--yes, and all-in-one will be more then perfect. However, there is a definite market of prosumers between those home and business users and the pros who want quad Xeons in their boxes.



    The following groups of people do not fit well into Apple's current lineup:



    Can't afford a Mac Pro and want an upgradable graphics card

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with upgradeable GPU)



    Can't afford a Mac Pro and want an upgradable graphics card already have a display

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with upgradeable GPU)



    Can't afford a Mac Pro and already have a 30" display (unlikely to be sure, but possible)

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with built-in GPU)



    Can't afford a Mac Pro and don't want to/can't replace PCI cards with external versions

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with at least 1 PCI slot)



    Want some nebulous form of expandability in the hypothetical future

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with lots of expansion options)





    I actually do agree with you that AIOs are perfect for probably 90% of the market, but the Mac Mini and Mac Pro don't do a great job of covering the remaining 10%.

    Example: I bought my G5 three years ago. I was not a "pro" at the time and was mocked for my decision to buy such an unnecessarily powerful machine. However, my needs have since changed, and the ability to upgrade the GPU as well as the capacity to add more then 4GB of memory have allowed me to continue using my current machine. This is a godsend, as the apps I use (Maya and Photoshop) are not yet universal and run slower than tolerable for me on Apple's Intel-based hardware. I have also since acquired a 24" display to complement my now-old 17" display. The powerful GPU I installed keeps graphics-bound things running tolerably fast. I have not used my alternate HDD bay or installed any extra PCI cards.



    Lessons learned from the experience:

    1. High upgradability can help you weather unexpected lifestyle, hardware, or software changes more easily than a less upgradable machine would

    2. Not all people with upgradability needs require monstrous amounts of it--just enough is good.



    Even though AIOs currently satisfy the needs of 95%+ of people, they might not in the future, and this is why people buy upgradeable machines. It's perceived as future-proofing a large investment.



    Many people are comfortable with the idea of buying an AIO, secure enough in their knowledge of computer hardware and software to realize that it will most likely suit them well for years to come. Many people do not have this knowledge or are uncomfortable with the idea of "forced obsolescence." Apple does not currently cater well to these people.



    Yes, AIOs are fine for most. But not for all, and it's the rest who complain.
  • Reply 70 of 76
    mrtotesmrtotes Posts: 760member
    I had a dream last night that Apple released one called the BeOne.



    Bizarre! I can only assume my brain contracted the Be OS history and this spoof in to a dream I was gutted to wake from.



    And yes I know I'm a serious geek for dreaming about this. Usually I only remember dreams with little blonde chicks in them ;-|
  • Reply 71 of 76
    benroethigbenroethig Posts: 2,782member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Sladuuch


    All this is true for businesses and 95%+ of home users--yes, and all-in-one will be more then perfect. However, there is a definite market of prosumers between those home and business users and the pros who want quad Xeons in their boxes.



    The following groups of people do not fit well into Apple's current lineup:



    Can't afford a Mac Pro and want an upgradable graphics card

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with upgradeable GPU)



    Can't afford a Mac Pro and want an upgradable graphics card already have a display

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with upgradeable GPU)



    Can't afford a Mac Pro and already have a 30" display (unlikely to be sure, but possible)

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with built-in GPU)



    Can't afford a Mac Pro and don't want to/can't replace PCI cards with external versions

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with at least 1 PCI slot)



    Want some nebulous form of expandability in the hypothetical future

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with lots of expansion options)





    I actually do agree with you that AIOs are perfect for probably 90% of the market, but the Mac Mini and Mac Pro don't do a great job of covering the remaining 10%.

    Example: I bought my G5 three years ago. I was not a "pro" at the time and was mocked for my decision to buy such an unnecessarily powerful machine. However, my needs have since changed, and the ability to upgrade the GPU as well as the capacity to add more then 4GB of memory have allowed me to continue using my current machine. This is a godsend, as the apps I use (Maya and Photoshop) are not yet universal and run slower than tolerable for me on Apple's Intel-based hardware. I have also since acquired a 24" display to complement my now-old 17" display. The powerful GPU I installed keeps graphics-bound things running tolerably fast. I have not used my alternate HDD bay or installed any extra PCI cards.



    Lessons learned from the experience:

    1. High upgradability can help you weather unexpected lifestyle, hardware, or software changes more easily than a less upgradable machine would

    2. Not all people with upgradability needs require monstrous amounts of it--just enough is good.



    Even though AIOs currently satisfy the needs of 95%+ of people, they might not in the future, and this is why people buy upgradeable machines. It's perceived as future-proofing a large investment.



    Many people are comfortable with the idea of buying an AIO, secure enough in their knowledge of computer hardware and software to realize that it will most likely suit them well for years to come. Many people do not have this knowledge or are uncomfortable with the idea of "forced obsolescence." Apple does not currently cater well to these people.



    Yes, AIOs are fine for most. But not for all, and it's the rest who complain.



    Can't afford a Mac Pro, are not willing to live with a slower notebook drive but don't want to pay $130 for an external drive.

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with at least one full size 5.25" optical drive)



    Can't afford a Mac Pro and would prefer not to have an army of external devices cluttering your desk.

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower)
  • Reply 72 of 76
    Can't afford a Mac Pro, allready own a G4 Mac Mini and a Cinema Display and want to upgrade.

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower)
  • Reply 73 of 76
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig


    Can't afford a Mac Pro, are not willing to live with a slower notebook drive but don't want to pay $130 for an external drive.

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower with at least one full size 5.25" optical drive)



    Can't afford a Mac Pro and would prefer not to have an army of external devices cluttering your desk.

    (Could be satisfied by Cube/tower)



    Buy a mini and one of these...



    http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10476



    Total cost - about what a cube/tower would cost. Total deskspace used - less than a cube/tower.
  • Reply 74 of 76
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aegisdesign


    Buy a mini and one of these...



    http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10476



    Total cost - about what a cube/tower would cost. Total deskspace used - less than a cube/tower.



    boo.



    I want a Mac Cube with a Core 2 Duo.



    Might settle for a 20 inch iMac.



    Rather have a Mac Cube.



    Not buying another Mac Mini nor am i buying that Lacie thing.



  • Reply 75 of 76
    Can a Mac Mini use desktop conroe CPUs up to 2.6ghz? Can a mini be had with mid to high dedicated graphics? Can a Mini make up for the slowdown from using an external drive? Can a Mac Mini be upgraded to 4GB of RAM and without an Apple certified technician? No, no, no, and no. Someone shouldn't have to make concessions just to get a more usuable operating system.
  • Reply 76 of 76
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig


    Can a Mini make up for the slowdown from using an external drive?



    While I agree with the rest, generally an external drive isn't going to slow you down.
Sign In or Register to comment.