Apple says one thing, sometimes does another. I can think of the Mac mini as a prime example. At an analysts conference call Apple reps said in the fall of 2004 they had no interest in the sub $799 computer space. Lo and behold, a few months later in January at MacWorld '05, along comes the $499 Mac mini. Another example would be Steve saying that he didn't think movies on the iPod would be such a good idea. And along comes a video-based iPod.
Sony executives are way more fun since they diss products they have out already.
I'd love to see evidence that Apple is knowingly and actively preventing themselves from instantaneously doubling quarterly sales of computers.
OK, I'll modify my statement.
What did you expect? There are millions of consumers currently buying towers, many may like to change to MacOS X. These threads will never go away, ever. Happy now
And those buying trends will also show you those wallets are handing out as little as possible to get a garbage machine on the cheap. That's hardly a convincing argument.
Who said anything about gargage? Are you trying to change the topic?
You can laugh at the AIO world outlook all you want, but that's exactly where things are heading. The iMac simply leverages this trend to make a simple elegant desktop machine.
No one is laughing at AIO. You've completely missed the point. And, absolutely not, the desktop market is not moving to AIO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinkerer
It seems to me that Apple is operating under the belief that we're rapidly approaching a point at which there will be little need to upgrade your computers internals. It's certainly been something that people's wallets have voted for, and market research backs this up with the ever increasing growth of portables.
The industry has been rapidly reaching that point for, oh wait, no, it's not. Technology is progressing more rapidly as time goes on, not less. And there's that built in monitor thing too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinkerer
Apple would rather get on board with next years trends than hitch their wagon to last year's. And this bleeds over into their desktop offerings. They simply don't see the low end desktop box market as one worth getting into, and they have proven that for how long now?
Who said anything about the low end market. And no, AIO will not be the predominant form factor sold next year, that is of course you include all manufacturers other than Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinkerer
Look at it this way: we all know Apple could make a sexy offering in this space. So why don't they? The options are as follows:
a) They don't feel it fits in with their long-term strategy.
b) They don't see as large a demand for these computers as some of you do (and given that they still can't break 2M CPU sales in a quarter, I tend to believe them)
c) It's doable, but not within the margins they want.
d) They know it'd sell well, they know it'd be profitable even within their margins, they just don't make them because Steve doesn't want to.
Steve might not want them, but Steve isn't an idiot... and if he were really that obstructive, you'd hear about a lot more internal conflict than you do now, which is pretty much none.
a) Well duh, that's why this topic rears its' ugly head continually.
b)Maybe they haven't broken the 2 million mark because they don't offer an xMac. Laptops seem to sell very well, why you ask, well maybe it's because there are millions of consumers ready to switch and see the desktop line-up differently than you do.
c)Without numbers this is conjecture, but my and many others conjecture that it is doable.
d)insert Steve Jobs quote from the media event here.
"Steve might not want them" = the correct answer, or haven't you heard of the Woz?
And there's no reason portables can't be injected into a discussion about desktops, since within a decade they will utterly dominate them in sales. If AIOs are such a bad idea and people inherently want desktop machines they can upgrade themselves, how does one resolve this dichotomy?
Bottom line: Portables are still an emerging market, and they will only continue to eat desktop sales alive, AIOs or not. Apple doesn't feel like jumping into a market in decline unless it can offer something different; like an AIO you don't have to worry about effing around with. Short of that, they prefer to focus their manpower and R&D on where computing is going. Not where it's been or even where it's at right now.
Apple doesn't prevent you from seeking out another manufacturer that would better suit your needs. I don't think even Steve Jobs himself would tell you Apple makes the perfect computer for everyone. If Apple is so bad to you, move on.
Unfortunately, that is exactly the message.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tinkerer
Plus, there's no need to use your MBP in closed lid mode. Just get yourself an iMac! See, they DO offer you a choice!!!
Great, settle for a solution. That's what I do. I do it because I like OS X. Windows users might have the same feelings. Many current owners of mid range
Apple towers aren't pleased with the situation and are showing frustration.
Note: Think back. When Apple announced the switch to Intel. What form factor did they supply developers?
Then you've concluded that OS X alone is enough reason for you to continue to operate within the Apple paradigm. They did not conclude this for you, nor did they prevent you from coming to some other conclusion.
So, this topic will continue to be posted on Apple centric boards, over and over and over again.
And I don't think you in any way represent a large problem for Apple, as a corporation, with your buying decisions. You represent a smaller segment of users than AIO consumers do. If you didn't Apple would be selling you your mini tower and I'd be upset about the lack of AIO offerings.
A smaller segment of users than AIO, I require numbers here, because if my modest observation skills are correct, your statement is wrong.
d)insert Steve Jobs quote from the media event here.
"Steve might not want them" = the correct answer, or haven't you heard of the Woz?
I have a feeling that since Apple did a mini-tower, i.e. the Cube, and it was an overpriced dismal failure, Steve Jobs' pride is hurt and he just won't try again.
The rumors at the time were that Jobs was a cube fanatic, having done a cube at NeXT, and that the Mac Cube was his baby. So when the public wouldn't buy it, he said "ok then, that's all for the headless Mac." Perhaps it was only pressure from the board that convinced him to allow the Mac mini.
If the Cube had been more reasonably priced, I have little doubt it would have been a success. But what do I know? I wanted one badly but couldn't justify the price, when comparing it to a Power Mac.
Laptops seem to sell very well, why you ask, well maybe it's because there are millions of consumers ready to switch and see the desktop line-up differently than you do.
That's right, in fact, I know a few people who own PC desktops but go for Mac laptops. The laptops are very well made and competitively priced - in other words, Apple are giving people what they want in the laptop segment.
Now if someone buys a Mac laptop, why would they get an iMac, when it's basically another laptop without the portability, albeit a bit cheaper? In fact, the new Macbook Pros are possibly still faster than the new iMacs with the exception of the Core 2 Extreme model.
While we debate why Apple hasn't done anything with the Mac Pros in over a year, is seemingly ignoring the cries for headless towers, left the MacBook Pros in a 4-year-old enclosure with the June update, ponder the whereabouts of a rumored 12-inch PowerBook replacement, and on and on, I was wondering how many of you think the tail might be wagging the dog? Could it be that the reason we have not seen those "off the charts" Macs Steve spoke about is simply because they are not Tiger worthy? What do you think? Will there be an influx of amazing hardware for "mere mortals" as soon as Leopard's released including this sought after Mac Tower?
My suspicion is that the "off the charts" Macs are the iMac.
Your joking right? Have you seen the comparative specs vs. the last one? The improvements are fractions of a second - not many seconds, and definitely not off any chart. They not only are they on the same chart, they are barley any different.
Your joking right? Have you seen the comparative specs vs. the last one? The improvements are fractions of a second - not many seconds, and definitely not off any chart. They not only are they on the same chart, they are barley any different.
There is zero doubt in my mind that the new iMac was one machine that Steve was thinking about when he said that they had "off the charts" Macs in the pipeline. Whether there are others he was thinking of too, remains to be seen.
My suspicion is that the "off the charts" Macs are the iMac.
Well then, that's depressing! I look at the new iMac as a stop-gap release for the holiday season, much like the iSight iMac G5 was back in the fall of 2005. I was thinking the "off the charts" Jobs was referring to is the ultra-thin notebook they are rumored to be working on.
Again, I see no reason Apple — with access to an arsenal of desktop Intel chips — is not going to use them in a wide-ranging tower line of Macs. I think the iMac will still have its place.
Again, I see no reason Apple ? with access to an arsenal of desktop Intel chips ? is not going to use them in a wide-ranging tower line of Macs. I think the iMac will still have its place.
Agreed, a wide ranging line of Mac Pros starting at about $1299, going up to the current high end would certainly make sense to us. Not sure it makes sense to Apple though.
Agreed, a wide ranging line of Mac Pros starting at about $1299, going up to the current high end would certainly make sense to us. Not sure it makes sense to Apple though.
Personally I think they need to add a semi-pro slim tower design, in addition to the Mac Pro, to give users more choice. The sheer size of the Mac Pro is just not for everyone, me excluded of course, but I do understand the thinking. It is a huge case and obviously not for everyone.
Personally I think they need to add a semi-pro slim tower design, in addition to the Mac Pro, to give users more choice. The sheer size of the Mac Pro is just not for everyone, me excluded of course, but I do understand the thinking. It is a huge case and obviously not for everyone.
I hope and expect that the huge G5 tower case will be replaced soon. It was designed for cooling very hot G5s and I don't think such a big case is needed anymore. I don't really know though; perhaps the octo-core Macs still need eleventy billion fans. If that's so, then maybe we're stuck with the Mac Pro case as is.
I love the current Mac Pro case, but I do now that it's time for a refresh. I do hope they keep the size the same though. Maybe that's why they need the semi-Pro design. For people like yourself. Maybe you don't need the room. The Mac Pro case is no bigger than an Alienware, or BOXX workstation. The room is there for additional hardware like drives, video card's ect. etc...
Comments
Apple says one thing, sometimes does another. I can think of the Mac mini as a prime example. At an analysts conference call Apple reps said in the fall of 2004 they had no interest in the sub $799 computer space. Lo and behold, a few months later in January at MacWorld '05, along comes the $499 Mac mini. Another example would be Steve saying that he didn't think movies on the iPod would be such a good idea. And along comes a video-based iPod.
Sony executives are way more fun since they diss products they have out already.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Source?
I'd love to see evidence that Apple is knowingly and actively preventing themselves from instantaneously doubling quarterly sales of computers.
OK, I'll modify my statement.
What did you expect? There are millions of consumers currently buying towers, many may like to change to MacOS X. These threads will never go away, ever. Happy now
Who said anything about doubling market share?
And those buying trends will also show you those wallets are handing out as little as possible to get a garbage machine on the cheap. That's hardly a convincing argument.
Who said anything about gargage? Are you trying to change the topic?
You can laugh at the AIO world outlook all you want, but that's exactly where things are heading. The iMac simply leverages this trend to make a simple elegant desktop machine.
No one is laughing at AIO. You've completely missed the point. And, absolutely not, the desktop market is not moving to AIO.
It seems to me that Apple is operating under the belief that we're rapidly approaching a point at which there will be little need to upgrade your computers internals. It's certainly been something that people's wallets have voted for, and market research backs this up with the ever increasing growth of portables.
The industry has been rapidly reaching that point for, oh wait, no, it's not. Technology is progressing more rapidly as time goes on, not less. And there's that built in monitor thing too.
Apple would rather get on board with next years trends than hitch their wagon to last year's. And this bleeds over into their desktop offerings. They simply don't see the low end desktop box market as one worth getting into, and they have proven that for how long now?
Who said anything about the low end market. And no, AIO will not be the predominant form factor sold next year, that is of course you include all manufacturers other than Apple.
Look at it this way: we all know Apple could make a sexy offering in this space. So why don't they? The options are as follows:
a) They don't feel it fits in with their long-term strategy.
b) They don't see as large a demand for these computers as some of you do (and given that they still can't break 2M CPU sales in a quarter, I tend to believe them)
c) It's doable, but not within the margins they want.
d) They know it'd sell well, they know it'd be profitable even within their margins, they just don't make them because Steve doesn't want to.
Steve might not want them, but Steve isn't an idiot... and if he were really that obstructive, you'd hear about a lot more internal conflict than you do now, which is pretty much none.
a) Well duh, that's why this topic rears its' ugly head continually.
b)Maybe they haven't broken the 2 million mark because they don't offer an xMac. Laptops seem to sell very well, why you ask, well maybe it's because there are millions of consumers ready to switch and see the desktop line-up differently than you do.
c)Without numbers this is conjecture, but my and many others conjecture that it is doable.
d)insert Steve Jobs quote from the media event here.
"Steve might not want them" = the correct answer, or haven't you heard of the Woz?
And there's no reason portables can't be injected into a discussion about desktops, since within a decade they will utterly dominate them in sales. If AIOs are such a bad idea and people inherently want desktop machines they can upgrade themselves, how does one resolve this dichotomy?
Bottom line: Portables are still an emerging market, and they will only continue to eat desktop sales alive, AIOs or not. Apple doesn't feel like jumping into a market in decline unless it can offer something different; like an AIO you don't have to worry about effing around with. Short of that, they prefer to focus their manpower and R&D on where computing is going. Not where it's been or even where it's at right now.
So what. Desktop sales are still going up.
And nobody will ever make a computer that caters to everyone's needs.
So while those problems admittedly exist, Apple sees them as less problematic than entering into the mini tower competition.
Until such a day as they decide otherwise, that's just how it's going to be.
And this topic will continue to be brought up relentlessly. Why?
Apple doesn't prevent you from seeking out another manufacturer that would better suit your needs. I don't think even Steve Jobs himself would tell you Apple makes the perfect computer for everyone. If Apple is so bad to you, move on.
Unfortunately, that is exactly the message.
Plus, there's no need to use your MBP in closed lid mode. Just get yourself an iMac! See, they DO offer you a choice!!!
Great, settle for a solution. That's what I do. I do it because I like OS X. Windows users might have the same feelings. Many current owners of mid range
Apple towers aren't pleased with the situation and are showing frustration.
Note: Think back. When Apple announced the switch to Intel. What form factor did they supply developers?
Then you've concluded that OS X alone is enough reason for you to continue to operate within the Apple paradigm. They did not conclude this for you, nor did they prevent you from coming to some other conclusion.
So, this topic will continue to be posted on Apple centric boards, over and over and over again.
And I don't think you in any way represent a large problem for Apple, as a corporation, with your buying decisions. You represent a smaller segment of users than AIO consumers do. If you didn't Apple would be selling you your mini tower and I'd be upset about the lack of AIO offerings.
A smaller segment of users than AIO, I require numbers here, because if my modest observation skills are correct, your statement is wrong.
Oh, and by the way It's not either or.
d)insert Steve Jobs quote from the media event here.
"Steve might not want them" = the correct answer, or haven't you heard of the Woz?
I have a feeling that since Apple did a mini-tower, i.e. the Cube, and it was an overpriced dismal failure, Steve Jobs' pride is hurt and he just won't try again.
The rumors at the time were that Jobs was a cube fanatic, having done a cube at NeXT, and that the Mac Cube was his baby. So when the public wouldn't buy it, he said "ok then, that's all for the headless Mac." Perhaps it was only pressure from the board that convinced him to allow the Mac mini.
If the Cube had been more reasonably priced, I have little doubt it would have been a success. But what do I know? I wanted one badly but couldn't justify the price, when comparing it to a Power Mac.
Laptops seem to sell very well, why you ask, well maybe it's because there are millions of consumers ready to switch and see the desktop line-up differently than you do.
That's right, in fact, I know a few people who own PC desktops but go for Mac laptops. The laptops are very well made and competitively priced - in other words, Apple are giving people what they want in the laptop segment.
Now if someone buys a Mac laptop, why would they get an iMac, when it's basically another laptop without the portability, albeit a bit cheaper? In fact, the new Macbook Pros are possibly still faster than the new iMacs with the exception of the Core 2 Extreme model.
Could it be that the reason we have not seen those "off the charts" Macs Steve spoke about is simply because they are not Tiger worthy?
My suspicion is that the "off the charts" Macs are the iMac.
My suspicion is that the "off the charts" Macs are the iMac.
Your joking right? Have you seen the comparative specs vs. the last one? The improvements are fractions of a second - not many seconds, and definitely not off any chart. They not only are they on the same chart, they are barley any different.
Your joking right? Have you seen the comparative specs vs. the last one? The improvements are fractions of a second - not many seconds, and definitely not off any chart. They not only are they on the same chart, they are barley any different.
There is zero doubt in my mind that the new iMac was one machine that Steve was thinking about when he said that they had "off the charts" Macs in the pipeline. Whether there are others he was thinking of too, remains to be seen.
My suspicion is that the "off the charts" Macs are the iMac.
Well then, that's depressing! I look at the new iMac as a stop-gap release for the holiday season, much like the iSight iMac G5 was back in the fall of 2005. I was thinking the "off the charts" Jobs was referring to is the ultra-thin notebook they are rumored to be working on.
Again, I see no reason Apple — with access to an arsenal of desktop Intel chips — is not going to use them in a wide-ranging tower line of Macs. I think the iMac will still have its place.
Again, I see no reason Apple ? with access to an arsenal of desktop Intel chips ? is not going to use them in a wide-ranging tower line of Macs. I think the iMac will still have its place.
Agreed, a wide ranging line of Mac Pros starting at about $1299, going up to the current high end would certainly make sense to us. Not sure it makes sense to Apple though.
Agreed, a wide ranging line of Mac Pros starting at about $1299, going up to the current high end would certainly make sense to us. Not sure it makes sense to Apple though.
Personally I think they need to add a semi-pro slim tower design, in addition to the Mac Pro, to give users more choice. The sheer size of the Mac Pro is just not for everyone, me excluded of course, but I do understand the thinking. It is a huge case and obviously not for everyone.
Personally I think they need to add a semi-pro slim tower design, in addition to the Mac Pro, to give users more choice. The sheer size of the Mac Pro is just not for everyone, me excluded of course, but I do understand the thinking. It is a huge case and obviously not for everyone.
I hope and expect that the huge G5 tower case will be replaced soon. It was designed for cooling very hot G5s and I don't think such a big case is needed anymore. I don't really know though; perhaps the octo-core Macs still need eleventy billion fans.