Mr. H is calling the final result a "laptop", he's correctly stating that the components are parts originally designed for a notebook (e.g.: CPU, RAM, HDD, optical drive). You can't not argue that these components were not designed to function within the small form factor and low power consumption of a notebook computer.
The imac has a desktop hard drive in it, although other things in there are "laptop" components, the Hard Drive is most definately a normal desktop hard drive. I can back that up if any smart a#$#$@es want to debate with me on that! Show me a laptop hard drive that has a capacity of 250 gigs or even 500 gigs!
The imac has a desktop hard drive in it, although other things in there are "laptop" components, the Hard Drive is most definately a normal desktop hard drive.
Indeed, the HDD is a standard desktop HDD. In fact, if you go back and read post #89, you'll see I'm well aware of this fact.
But, this whole "Merom is a 'laptop' CPU", "no it isn't", "yes it is" thing started because you claimed that the iMac had no laptop parts, and I responded with a list of components that it uses that are aimed for use predominantly in laptops.
Whilst the Mac Mini is pretty much a laptop minus screen, keyboard and trackpad, I'll grant you that the iMac is more of a laptop/desktop half-way house.
It might have been a novelty. But it is one that is catching on in both the Windows, and Linux worlds. There are now at least two Windows models, and Linux users are using those as well.
A half dozen models two years after the introduction of the original mini sounds like a weak trend to me. The mini isn't the first of the very small form factor computers, the best it did was raise awareness of the possibility, but it hasn't gone very far. If it weren't an Apple, I think it would have been forgotten and shelved like the little iPaq, Corel Netwinder, DEC Multia and anything else I've forgotten.
Quote:
We're back to the question of what one needs. Most home users need no more than what is in that box, or can be added to it. The fact is that few home users play graphically intensive computer games. Other than for that, the machine is must fine. I use one by my audio/video equipment to digitize my lp's. It's perfect for that.
I'm not contesting that it isn't a useful computer, I had one for a few months and it did work fairly well. The novelty form factor exacts a financial cost that the general market doesn't seem to be accepting, particularly given the near-stagnant growth of Apple's desktops when compared to other maker's desktop lines.
Quote:
This is not intended for uses where a more powerful machine is really needed. I know a couple of people who stick the machine into their backpack, and bring it to where they are going to need it.
That second line sounds like a use for a notebook. I can see a mini as an HTPC or in some various integration / hobby projects, I do intend to eventually buy one for something like that, but I myself must acknowledge that's not a big market.
Quote:
I don't know who restricted the discussion to that form factor. As if anyone here could possibly hope to wield that kind of power here.
Restricted may have been a strong word. The problem is that I don't think the typical buyer is going to compare like-for-like, particularly when there are only a very small number of comparable models and those are hard to find, so they are going to be compared against the towers, rightly or wrongly.
[QUOTE=JeffDM;1030961]A half dozen models two years after the introduction of the original mini sounds like a weak trend to me. The mini isn't the first of the very small form factor computers, the best it did was raise awareness of the possibility, but it hasn't gone very far. If it weren't an Apple, I think it would have been forgotten and shelved like the little iPaq, Corel Netwinder, DEC Multia and anything else I've forgotten.[quote]
A growing popularity for a case form factor doesn't have to mean it's taking over the market. After all, how many times have you and others proclaimed at how popular the Mac is becoming. With all of its models, it still only has a 5% marketshare here, and it's been around for 23 years. These have been here for a year or so, outside of the Mini itself.
It took laptops 15 years to become the phenom thay are now.
The point I was making is that there is a market for that form factor. At a time when desktop machines are rapidly losing ground to laptops, a new desktop form factor that has begun growing in, popularity is of note.
Quote:
I'm not contesting that it isn't a useful computer, I had one for a few months and it did work fairly well. The novelty form factor exacts a financial cost that the general market doesn't seem to be accepting, particularly given the near-stagnant growth of Apple's desktops when compared to other maker's desktop lines.
It's only a novelty when there is only one model out there. Once more companies begin making, and selling them, it is no longer a novelty. It is a new product catagory. Just like the "novelty", iMac.
Quote:
That second line sounds like a use for a notebook. I can see a mini as an HTPC or in some various integration / hobby projects, I do intend to eventually buy one for something like that, but I myself must acknowledge that's not a big market.
You might remember my idea for an Apple audeo/viseo computer system built around the Mini, with modular stackable units for other functions.
Home theater is very mainstream now. If Apple can get positioned there, it could lead to very large sales. They seem to be trying, but I'm not sure they really understand that market. I hope they will.
Quote:
Restricted may have been a strong word. The problem is that I don't think the typical buyer is going to compare like-for-like, particularly when there are only a very small number of comparable models and those are hard to find, so they are going to be compared against the towers, rightly or wrongly.
They'll be compared to whatever is around, that the comsumer can see. For better or worse.
Again, Apple, break out these numbers like everyone else does. They shouldn't be so afraid. The companies such as NPD, figure out the numbers pretty well anyway.
All this Laptop vs Desktop stuff is a bit silly. Yes, all of Apples machines are primarily laptop parts besides the Mac Pro which is mostly workstation parts. It would be nice if Apple made a machine that at its core was designed to be a desktop. The processor, chipset, and video in the iMac was designed to be used for laptops... we could have some much better performing Macs for a similar price, if they just made a model that wasn't so ultra small for the desktop.
All this Laptop vs Desktop stuff is a bit silly. Yes, all of Apples machines are primarily laptop parts besides the Mac Pro which is mostly workstation parts. It would be nice if Apple made a machine that at its core was designed to be a desktop. The processor, chipset, and video in the iMac was designed to be used for laptops... we could have some much better performing Macs for a similar price, if they just made a model that wasn't so ultra small for the desktop.
I thought we already resolved this.
The MINI uses several laptop parts, the iMac doesn't, except for the cpu, and DVD.
The MINI uses several laptop parts, the iMac doesn't, except for the cpu, and DVD.
Well...the CPU IS the heart of the machine. But hey, I don't expect a Conroe box except perhaps as a cheaper Mac Pro which is less likely since the Woodcrests will mostly become the cheap Mac Pros and the top will take Clovertons.
Well...the CPU IS the heart of the machine. But hey, I don't expect a Conroe box except perhaps as a cheaper Mac Pro which is less likely since the Woodcrests will mostly become the cheap Mac Pros and the top will take Clovertons.
Vinea
The cpu, was originally intended just for that, yes.
But, some of the discussion has revolved about the idea that the Mini and the iMac as well, are both primarily laptops in a desktop case. The Mini is much closer to that.
The cpu, was originally intended just for that, yes.
But, some of the discussion has revolved about the idea that the Mini and the iMac as well, are both primarily laptops in a desktop case. The Mini is much closer to that.
Yes, I'm agreeing with you. My comment was really if the CPU is a mobile part then the chipsets are likely mobile as well. The other parts of the iMac is kinda secondary at that point as the performace will be gated by mobile heart.
The iMac is for all intents and purposes a very unmobile desktop replacement laptop. Works pretty well as a desktop replacement too...almost all the folks that I know that has one has given up their desktops. Crappy as laptop though.
Dell reported 4% increase in desktop unit sales...and 3% decline in desktop revenues in their Q1 powerpoints.
Laptop sales were up like gangbusters (30+%...I want to say 36% but whatever it was they were larger than Apple's gains).
Um, someone remind me why desktops are where its at again? Then again Dell is struggling vs HP but sheesh them aint happy numbers.
The growth is in notebooks, for HP at least, the volume probaby has yet to match desktops. I can't find 1Q07 info for HP yet, but 4Q06: Desktops were up 6% in volume, flat in revenue, notebook units up 42%, revenue 24% up. Desktops comprise of 47% of sales revenue, notebooks, 43%. Presumably, unit sales of desktops is considerably higher than notebooks because of the cost difference.
It looks like the average sell price for the computer industry is quickly approaching the price of Apple's cheapest computer, basically meaning if you buy an Apple, you almost certainly paid more than the average person did buying theirs:
The growth is in notebooks, for HP at least, the volume probaby has yet to match desktops. I can't find 1Q07 info for HP yet, but 4Q06: Desktops were up 6% in volume, flat in revenue, notebook units up 42%, revenue 24% up. Desktops comprise of 47% of sales revenue, notebooks, 43%. Presumably, unit sales of desktops is considerably higher than notebooks because of the cost difference.
It looks like the average sell price for the computer industry is quickly approaching the price of Apple's cheapest computer, basically meaning if you buy an Apple, you almost certainly paid more than the average person did buying theirs:
Yes, what did the other analyst call it? This qtr was "revenue compressed".
These are not happy numbers for the pro-desktop side.
Jetissoning even minor volume discounts for an additional half million laptop parts used in the iMac and mini isn't worth shipping more desktops for less money when you've got numbers like 31% margin and average unit price of $1500.
Dell and HP don't need tricks to get higher volumes than Apple for mobile parts since they move so many laptops already and have higher growth number than Apple does in the notebook arena.
Looking at Dells 4% gain in desktops, HPs 6% gain in desktops.
Subtract from that the large enterprise sales and only look at common consumer sales, the same market that Apple mostly caters. Are those slim gains still there?
Another way to look at it is subtract Dell and HP sub $1000 desktops. Looking only at desktops over $1000 which are likely the machines that actually make the profit. Are those slim gains still there?
Yes, I'm agreeing with you. My comment was really if the CPU is a mobile part then the chipsets are likely mobile as well. The other parts of the iMac is kinda secondary at that point as the performace will be gated by mobile heart.
The iMac is for all intents and purposes a very unmobile desktop replacement laptop. Works pretty well as a desktop replacement too...almost all the folks that I know that has one has given up their desktops. Crappy as laptop though.
Vinea
Yes, the chipset would have to go with the cpu. I always assume we know that, as there isn't an alternative for these chips.
Jetissoning even minor volume discounts for an additional half million laptop parts used in the iMac and mini isn't worth shipping more desktops for less money when you've got numbers like 31% margin and average unit price of $1500.
That bolsters the claims that Apple is being insular.
BTW: The profit Apple made on their typical product is about 14%. The rest of that 31% is money they made from other investments using their pile of cash.
Comments
.... read his post as a an analogical comparative, not a definitive label ..... I've used Mr. H's analogy many times
Hey hey hey.... watch your language, sir!
PS: Your post is actually quite nicely done.
Mr. H is calling the final result a "laptop", he's correctly stating that the components are parts originally designed for a notebook (e.g.: CPU, RAM, HDD, optical drive). You can't not argue that these components were not designed to function within the small form factor and low power consumption of a notebook computer.
The imac has a desktop hard drive in it, although other things in there are "laptop" components, the Hard Drive is most definately a normal desktop hard drive. I can back that up if any smart a#$#$@es want to debate with me on that! Show me a laptop hard drive that has a capacity of 250 gigs or even 500 gigs!
The imac has a desktop hard drive in it, although other things in there are "laptop" components, the Hard Drive is most definately a normal desktop hard drive.
Indeed, the HDD is a standard desktop HDD. In fact, if you go back and read post #89, you'll see I'm well aware of this fact.
But, this whole "Merom is a 'laptop' CPU", "no it isn't", "yes it is" thing started because you claimed that the iMac had no laptop parts, and I responded with a list of components that it uses that are aimed for use predominantly in laptops.
Whilst the Mac Mini is pretty much a laptop minus screen, keyboard and trackpad, I'll grant you that the iMac is more of a laptop/desktop half-way house.
It might have been a novelty. But it is one that is catching on in both the Windows, and Linux worlds. There are now at least two Windows models, and Linux users are using those as well.
A half dozen models two years after the introduction of the original mini sounds like a weak trend to me. The mini isn't the first of the very small form factor computers, the best it did was raise awareness of the possibility, but it hasn't gone very far. If it weren't an Apple, I think it would have been forgotten and shelved like the little iPaq, Corel Netwinder, DEC Multia and anything else I've forgotten.
We're back to the question of what one needs. Most home users need no more than what is in that box, or can be added to it. The fact is that few home users play graphically intensive computer games. Other than for that, the machine is must fine. I use one by my audio/video equipment to digitize my lp's. It's perfect for that.
I'm not contesting that it isn't a useful computer, I had one for a few months and it did work fairly well. The novelty form factor exacts a financial cost that the general market doesn't seem to be accepting, particularly given the near-stagnant growth of Apple's desktops when compared to other maker's desktop lines.
This is not intended for uses where a more powerful machine is really needed. I know a couple of people who stick the machine into their backpack, and bring it to where they are going to need it.
That second line sounds like a use for a notebook. I can see a mini as an HTPC or in some various integration / hobby projects, I do intend to eventually buy one for something like that, but I myself must acknowledge that's not a big market.
I don't know who restricted the discussion to that form factor. As if anyone here could possibly hope to wield that kind of power here.
Restricted may have been a strong word. The problem is that I don't think the typical buyer is going to compare like-for-like, particularly when there are only a very small number of comparable models and those are hard to find, so they are going to be compared against the towers, rightly or wrongly.
A growing popularity for a case form factor doesn't have to mean it's taking over the market. After all, how many times have you and others proclaimed at how popular the Mac is becoming. With all of its models, it still only has a 5% marketshare here, and it's been around for 23 years. These have been here for a year or so, outside of the Mini itself.
It took laptops 15 years to become the phenom thay are now.
The point I was making is that there is a market for that form factor. At a time when desktop machines are rapidly losing ground to laptops, a new desktop form factor that has begun growing in, popularity is of note.
I'm not contesting that it isn't a useful computer, I had one for a few months and it did work fairly well. The novelty form factor exacts a financial cost that the general market doesn't seem to be accepting, particularly given the near-stagnant growth of Apple's desktops when compared to other maker's desktop lines.
It's only a novelty when there is only one model out there. Once more companies begin making, and selling them, it is no longer a novelty. It is a new product catagory. Just like the "novelty", iMac.
That second line sounds like a use for a notebook. I can see a mini as an HTPC or in some various integration / hobby projects, I do intend to eventually buy one for something like that, but I myself must acknowledge that's not a big market.
You might remember my idea for an Apple audeo/viseo computer system built around the Mini, with modular stackable units for other functions.
Home theater is very mainstream now. If Apple can get positioned there, it could lead to very large sales. They seem to be trying, but I'm not sure they really understand that market. I hope they will.
Restricted may have been a strong word. The problem is that I don't think the typical buyer is going to compare like-for-like, particularly when there are only a very small number of comparable models and those are hard to find, so they are going to be compared against the towers, rightly or wrongly.
They'll be compared to whatever is around, that the comsumer can see. For better or worse.
Again, Apple, break out these numbers like everyone else does. They shouldn't be so afraid. The companies such as NPD, figure out the numbers pretty well anyway.
All this Laptop vs Desktop stuff is a bit silly. Yes, all of Apples machines are primarily laptop parts besides the Mac Pro which is mostly workstation parts. It would be nice if Apple made a machine that at its core was designed to be a desktop. The processor, chipset, and video in the iMac was designed to be used for laptops... we could have some much better performing Macs for a similar price, if they just made a model that wasn't so ultra small for the desktop.
I thought we already resolved this.
The MINI uses several laptop parts, the iMac doesn't, except for the cpu, and DVD.
I thought we already resolved this.
The MINI uses several laptop parts, the iMac doesn't, except for the cpu, and DVD.
Well...the CPU IS the heart of the machine. But hey, I don't expect a Conroe box except perhaps as a cheaper Mac Pro which is less likely since the Woodcrests will mostly become the cheap Mac Pros and the top will take Clovertons.
Vinea
Well...the CPU IS the heart of the machine. But hey, I don't expect a Conroe box except perhaps as a cheaper Mac Pro which is less likely since the Woodcrests will mostly become the cheap Mac Pros and the top will take Clovertons.
Vinea
The cpu, was originally intended just for that, yes.
But, some of the discussion has revolved about the idea that the Mini and the iMac as well, are both primarily laptops in a desktop case. The Mini is much closer to that.
particularly given the near-stagnant growth of Apple's desktops when compared to other maker's desktop lines.
Can we get some numbers to support this?
Can we get some numbers to support this?
Dell reported 4% increase in desktop unit sales...and 3% decline in desktop revenues in their Q1 powerpoints.
Laptop sales were up like gangbusters (30+%...I want to say 36% but whatever it was they were larger than Apple's gains).
Um, someone remind me why desktops are where its at again? Then again Dell is struggling vs HP but sheesh them aint happy numbers.
Vinea
The cpu, was originally intended just for that, yes.
But, some of the discussion has revolved about the idea that the Mini and the iMac as well, are both primarily laptops in a desktop case. The Mini is much closer to that.
Yes, I'm agreeing with you. My comment was really if the CPU is a mobile part then the chipsets are likely mobile as well. The other parts of the iMac is kinda secondary at that point as the performace will be gated by mobile heart.
The iMac is for all intents and purposes a very unmobile desktop replacement laptop. Works pretty well as a desktop replacement too...almost all the folks that I know that has one has given up their desktops. Crappy as laptop though.
Vinea
Dell reported 4% increase in desktop unit sales...and 3% decline in desktop revenues in their Q1 powerpoints.
Laptop sales were up like gangbusters (30+%...I want to say 36% but whatever it was they were larger than Apple's gains).
Um, someone remind me why desktops are where its at again? Then again Dell is struggling vs HP but sheesh them aint happy numbers.
The growth is in notebooks, for HP at least, the volume probaby has yet to match desktops. I can't find 1Q07 info for HP yet, but 4Q06: Desktops were up 6% in volume, flat in revenue, notebook units up 42%, revenue 24% up. Desktops comprise of 47% of sales revenue, notebooks, 43%. Presumably, unit sales of desktops is considerably higher than notebooks because of the cost difference.
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_...esentation.pdf
It looks like the average sell price for the computer industry is quickly approaching the price of Apple's cheapest computer, basically meaning if you buy an Apple, you almost certainly paid more than the average person did buying theirs:
http://news.com.com/Dells+dilemma--i...3-5926477.html
The growth is in notebooks, for HP at least, the volume probaby has yet to match desktops. I can't find 1Q07 info for HP yet, but 4Q06: Desktops were up 6% in volume, flat in revenue, notebook units up 42%, revenue 24% up. Desktops comprise of 47% of sales revenue, notebooks, 43%. Presumably, unit sales of desktops is considerably higher than notebooks because of the cost difference.
http://media.corporate-ir.net/media_...esentation.pdf
It looks like the average sell price for the computer industry is quickly approaching the price of Apple's cheapest computer, basically meaning if you buy an Apple, you almost certainly paid more than the average person did buying theirs:
http://news.com.com/Dells+dilemma--i...3-5926477.html
Yes, what did the other analyst call it? This qtr was "revenue compressed".
These are not happy numbers for the pro-desktop side.
Jetissoning even minor volume discounts for an additional half million laptop parts used in the iMac and mini isn't worth shipping more desktops for less money when you've got numbers like 31% margin and average unit price of $1500.
Dell and HP don't need tricks to get higher volumes than Apple for mobile parts since they move so many laptops already and have higher growth number than Apple does in the notebook arena.
Vinea
Subtract from that the large enterprise sales and only look at common consumer sales, the same market that Apple mostly caters. Are those slim gains still there?
Another way to look at it is subtract Dell and HP sub $1000 desktops. Looking only at desktops over $1000 which are likely the machines that actually make the profit. Are those slim gains still there?
Yes, I'm agreeing with you. My comment was really if the CPU is a mobile part then the chipsets are likely mobile as well. The other parts of the iMac is kinda secondary at that point as the performace will be gated by mobile heart.
The iMac is for all intents and purposes a very unmobile desktop replacement laptop. Works pretty well as a desktop replacement too...almost all the folks that I know that has one has given up their desktops. Crappy as laptop though.
Vinea
Yes, the chipset would have to go with the cpu. I always assume we know that, as there isn't an alternative for these chips.
Yes, the chipset would have to go with the cpu. I always assume we know that, as there isn't an alternative for these chips.
I thought someone was using the non-mobile GMA X3000 in one of the Merom based boxes that was floating around. Perhaps I was mistaken.
Vinea
I thought someone was using the non-mobile GMA X3000 in one of the Merom based boxes that was floating around. Perhaps I was mistaken.
Vinea
That's in the Q965/Q963 Express chipset.
Jetissoning even minor volume discounts for an additional half million laptop parts used in the iMac and mini isn't worth shipping more desktops for less money when you've got numbers like 31% margin and average unit price of $1500.
That bolsters the claims that Apple is being insular.
BTW: The profit Apple made on their typical product is about 14%. The rest of that 31% is money they made from other investments using their pile of cash.