Mac Pro Minitower next year!

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Since the Mac Mini has apparently received its last refresh and the 17" iMac is no more there's a big hole to fill in Apple's desktop line. If a new minitower is part of the Mac Pro line then it seems it will be introduced at the same time as Mac Pros next year. It may be that "it's an All-in-One world" this year but we all know that what Apple isn't interested in today doesn't mean forever.
«13456710

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 184
    davegeedavegee Posts: 2,765member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maddan View Post


    .... there's a big hole to fill in Apple's desktop line......



    OMG NAFWNAHIT!































    Not

    Another

    Fucing

    We

    Need

    A

    Headless

    iMac

    Thread



    WE KNOW WE DO WE KNOW WE DO APPLE SIMPLY DOESN'T GIVE A CRAP!



    Dave
  • Reply 2 of 184
    maddanmaddan Posts: 75member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DaveGee View Post


    OMG NAFWNAHIT!



    Not

    Another

    Fucing

    We

    Need

    A

    Headless

    iMac

    Thread



    WE KNOW WE DO WE KNOW WE DO APPLE SIMPLY DOESN'T GIVE A CRAP!



    Dave



    Who said anything about a headless iMac? I said it would be part of the Mac Pro line.
  • Reply 3 of 184
    l33r0yl33r0y Posts: 94member
    Mini tower = headless, no?
  • Reply 4 of 184
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,080member
    Null.
  • Reply 5 of 184
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,698member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slewis View Post


    Apple has no plans to ship junk



    Apart from the overpriced and underperforming iMacs, you mean?
  • Reply 6 of 184
    vineavinea Posts: 5,585member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Apart from the overpriced and underperforming iMacs, you mean?



    But they are best in category...for AIOs.



    Vinea
  • Reply 7 of 184
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,698member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by vinea View Post


    But they are best in category...for AIOs.



    Yup, but that's not exactly hard, is it? And it doesn't stop them being overpriced, underperforming or from having poor flexibility when compared to the "junk" (mini towers) that Apple's competitors are selling.
  • Reply 8 of 184
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,209moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Apart from the overpriced and underperforming iMacs you mean?



    Apart from the overpriced, ugly and underperforming iMacs with the crappy displays, you mean?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by slewis


    You're out of luck then. Apple has no plans to ship junk, midtowers qualify because they are a common and overused design from Apple's competitors.



    Why does it have to be a common design? The cube isn't a common design.



    Also, if you take the same parts Apple ship in either the iMac, Mini or Macbook Pro then they are not any more 'junk' than Apple already sell. They of course wouldn't use expensive laptop parts though but good quality desktop parts.
  • Reply 9 of 184
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,698member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post






    Marvin, please don't put words in my mouth. I don't think that the new iMac is ugly. Also, glossy isn't a good choice for a display, but I'm not sure I'd call the iMac display crappy - it uses (presumably still, it used to) decent 8 bit panels.



    I'd appreciate it if you could edit your post in order to quote me correctly.
  • Reply 10 of 184
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,209moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Mavin, please don't put words in my mouth. I don't think that the new iMac is ugly. Also, glossy isn't a good choice for a display, but I'm not sure I'd call the iMac display crappy - it uses (presumably still, it used to) decent 8 bit panels.



    I'd appreciate it if you could edit your post in order to quote me correctly.



    I told Mavin to change it so that it looks more how he intended.



    Am I the only one who notices the red/green sparkling on the iMac displays?
  • Reply 11 of 184
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,698member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    I told Mavin to change it so that it looks more how he intended.



    Thanks. Oops, sorry for spelling your name wrong, has been corrected now.
  • Reply 12 of 184
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Thanks. Oops, sorry for spelling your name wrong, has been corrected now.



    when will the mac pro get a better video card?
  • Reply 13 of 184
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,698member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Joe_the_dragon View Post


    when will the mac pro get a better video card?



    Er, your guess is as good as mine? It is long overdue, but Apple obviously thinks it's not that important.



    That's another argument for lower-priced towers. Currently, the only Mac that PCIe GPUs can go into are the Mac Pros, which sell about 100,000 a quarter (probably fewer). So where is the incentive for ATI and Nvidia to make Mac (aka EFI in this case) compatible cards?
  • Reply 14 of 184
    slewisslewis Posts: 2,080member
    Null.
  • Reply 15 of 184
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slewis View Post


    Apart from overpriced and underperforming AIO 24", 2.4 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo (with a BTO for the 2.8 Ghz Intel Core 2 Extreme), up to 4 Gigs of RAM, 320 GB (up to 1 Terabyte), draft-n, Bluetooth 2 EDR, Gigabit Ethernet, ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO graphics processor, Firewire 800, with a built in iSight and iLife 08 included with a brilliant keyboard to boot for less than it used to cost iMac? Yep that's the one.







    The Cube failed and Apple doesn't repeat designs once they're dead. The Mac Mini is a wonderful design because it's a small box of computer joy and Apple has a gallery of creative uses for it here listed where it says "Big Ideas". The iMac is a wonderful design because it's like a laptop... only it has the added benefits of not needing portability so it's design is larger than that of a laptop. Midtowers are just like any other and there is very little room for innovation in the design field there.



    Sebastian



    the mini needs a better video card
  • Reply 16 of 184
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,698member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slewis View Post


    Apart from overpriced and underperforming AIO 24", 2.4 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo (with a BTO for the 2.8 Ghz Intel Core 2 Extreme), up to 4 Gigs of RAM, 320 GB (up to 1 Terabyte), draft-n, Bluetooth 2 EDR, Gigabit Ethernet, ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO graphics processor, Firewire 800, with a built in iSight and iLife 08 included with a brilliant keyboard to boot for less than it used to cost iMac? Yep that's the one.



    The Model you quoted is $1799



    A Dell Inspiron 530 with more or less the same specs as the iMac:
    • 2.33 GHz Core 2 Duo processor and 1333 MHz FSB

    • 1 GB RAM

    • 320 GB HDD

    • 128 MB Nvidia GeForce 8300GS

    • 16 x DVD burner

    • 24" monitor

    is $1339, hence the iMac is overpriced for the power it delivers.





    A Dell XPS410 the same price (near as damn it; $1830) as the iMac has:
    • 2.4 GHz Quad Core processor and 1066 MHz FSB (much more powerful CPU)

    • 2 GB RAM (twice the RAM)

    • 320 GB HDD (same HDD)

    • 256 MB Nvidia GeForce 8600GT (Much faster GPU)

    • 16 x DVD burner (twice the speed DVD burner)

    • 24" monitor (same monitor)

    Hence the iMac is underpowered for the price.



    Let me pre-empt some responses here: yes, I know this a hardware-only comparison, and that form-factor has not been taken into account. Let me make it clear: I don't think that Apple are "ripping off" customers: the software and the form-factor (if that's what floats your boat) combine to make the iMacs worth what Apple charge for them.



    However, the comparison above is to drive home the point: what about all those users who don't care for the AIO design? Who don't see the point of compromising a non-portable desktop computer just to make it that bit smaller? Who appreciate a bit of flexibility in their computer? Who want a bit more oomph? Who already have a monitor that they don't wish to replace? What they see is an overpriced or underpowered computer and that Apple do not offer anything that they want. So they stick to the Windows platform.



    Apple's massive increase in laptop shipments proves that if they offer the hardware that current Windows users want, people will start to switch in droves. It's happening on the laptop side, but not the desktop side. Whilst OS X is attractive over Windows, it's not good enough to make people abandon the hardware that they want. So until Apple offers a version of the most popular desktop form factor, their desktop shipments will not increase to the extent that their laptop shipments have.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Slewis View Post


    The Cube failed



    The Cube failed because it was overpriced, not because it had an undesirable form-factor. Apple should have put a G3 in it and priced it less than the G4 towers of the time.
  • Reply 17 of 184
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mr. H View Post


    Er, your guess is as good as mine? It is long overdue, but Apple obviously thinks it's not that important.



    That's another argument for lower-priced towers. Currently, the only Mac that PCIe GPUs can go into are the Mac Pros, which sell about 100,000 a quarter (probably fewer). So where is the incentive for ATI and Nvidia to make Mac (aka EFI in this case) compatible cards?



    I don't think your sales #'s are correct, and I think it's way too far low. But at any rate, I know oodles of people that were waiting for the Mac Pro to go intel dual core, just like me, and passed because Apple still didn't address workstation level graphics concerns, and they didn't offer the top performing graphics cards. It's a slap in the face to your user base when you know they are there and you ignore them. I have not bought a PowerMac (Mac Pro) since the G4, and I know a ton of people just like me that keep getting a slap in face from Apple. If their Mac Pro sales are down it's not because there isn't a market for Mac pro's, it's because they don't make a Mac Pro that can stand toe to toe with other the top of the line Machines. I know so many Alienware, BOXX, and BYO builders that are old school Mac users that get so disappointed and seriously pissed off after every new Mac Pro release. It's tragic that Apple abandoned us, and we still wait to see what is coming down the pipe. My 9600 was the best computer you could get when it came out hands down. My G4 looked like the best possible computer available when it came out, then I decided to skip a few Mac's because they looked not so great, and eventually I had to buy a top of the line Alienware, that was smokin' BTW. I thought intel would take Apple into an era where graphics cards would be interchangeable with PC's, and Apple could have easily went with that rout, but instead it's a second class workstation in the pro world. Everything else on that dual core machine was fine, but they still loused up the graphics options. They have no idea how big of a deal that is. How big of a deal is it to Apple to have the option there? Not as big as it is to users that base any Mac buy off of what is and isn't available on their platform. Apple looses face every time they release another Mac Pro. It's not only the people that wait to buy their disappointing Mac Pro's either. It's everybody. The word of mouth over dissatisfaction is a kick in the balls to them every time.



    End of Rant.
  • Reply 18 of 184
    petermacpetermac Posts: 115member
    The name suggests what it should have, starting with a quad core CPU, BTO graphics cards, 8 Gb RAM, RAID drives built in. Sure it would be 15 lbs heavier, but thats what the desk does, holds it up to my eyes for me!

    Pete
  • Reply 19 of 184
    @homenow@homenow Posts: 998member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Maddan View Post


    Since the Mac Mini has apparently received its last refresh ....



    I think that you are assuming too much, the Mini got about the same level of upgrade that it has had since the Intel version was released. Not much fan fare and it could have been better but it was enough to breath some life into the product. I don't think that this is a sign that the Mini will be discontinued, in fact it points to it being around for at least the next 8-12 months.



    As for the iMac, Apple will probably have a 20" out at the $999 price range in the next 12 months as the price of the LCD panels continues to drop and they recoup the initial design costs of the new model. It would not surprise me if it was released early next year but I would be more comfortable with a guess of next summer for a new lower end model.



    To the Mini-tower, I think that the above is a better bet given Apple's history since Steve came back to the company than the release of a product which would tempt pro's from buying the high end Towers, and the 24" iMac is probably a better buy for most pro's than a low end tower would be. I used to be with you all the way, but the iMac is a great design and most of the "upgrades" that people think they would use they never get around to adding, at least to a pro machine and if they needed the extra power they are more likely to get a higher end tower to start with anyway. The iMac could have more umph! for the buck, but Apple would not put that in a Mini-Tower anyway so I think that we are stuck with two good products that cover most of the needs of their customers if not their desires.
  • Reply 20 of 184
    aflaaakaflaaak Posts: 208member
    Quote:

    The iMac is a wonderful design because it's like a laptop... only it has the added benefits of not needing portability so it's design is larger than that of a laptop. Midtowers are just like any other and there is very little room for innovation in the design field there.



    Because the iMac's design is like a laptop that makes it "wonderful"? Why?? Since when is the screen on an iMac more of a place to make a style statement than on a regular ACD? It ain't any bigger except for the chin.



    What's the real difference between looking at a 24" iMac's screen and a 24" ACD being fed by a MacPro? Besides the "chin" that some people hate, there are a bunch of freaking wires coming out of the sides for people to connect their peripherals like extra HD, extra DVD drive, TV tuner, printer, media card reader, Airport. That's "wonderful"?



    I know for placing the computer in limited space areas the iMac makes sense, but there are some of us who think a more "wonderful" design would be to keep all the unsightly tangle of wires and peripheral drives inside a nicely designed tower. If Apple wants a palate for cool new design ideas, the tower itself gives them waaay space to express their "Apple-ness" than just a screen.



    Why is it that just because all other PC companies use towers ('cept maybe Toshiba) that's necessarily a bad thing? To say the iMac design is the only possible "wonderful" way to design a computer is just retarded (no offence meant to mentally handicapped people). Besides, I actually think Sony does a pretty damn cool job on their AIOs too.
Sign In or Register to comment.