Will Never Happen!

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdotdubz View Post


    So you want a Mac Mini then, inside a Mac Pro case?

    Or how about a MBP in a Mac Pro case?



    What do you want, it doesn't make sense, just like producing an xMac.



    I thought I was pretty clear. The xMac is a desktop Mac, something that Apple doesn't offer. I don't want notebook hardware like the Mac mini/iMac/MacBook/MacBook Pro, and I don't want server hardware like the Mac Pro. I want desktop hardware. (You do realize that other than the Mac Pro, all other Macs are running off notebook hardware, which has performance compromises and costs more than standard desktop hardware, right?)



    I'll try to use an analogy that hopefully you'll understand - right now, Apple offers two desktops: Mac mini and Mac Pro. It's like an automaker offering a Smart ForTwo and a BMW M5 and arguing that for most people, a 2-seater with a 3-cylinder engine will be enough for what they need most of the time, but if they need more, then we have this 5-seat, 10-cylinder beast here for 3X the price. That's not selection. There's a whole market in-between that Apple is ignoring, and the iMac, as an AIO, is not an acceptable alternative.



    All the xMac should be is more powerful and more customizable than a Mac mini but not over the top like a Mac Pro running on inexpensive desktop hardware opposed to notebook or server hardware. I really don't know how that simple a concept doesn't make sense to you.
  • Reply 42 of 67
    eckingecking Posts: 1,588member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdotdubz View Post




    2) A headless xMac. An Apple consumer-focused Mid-Tower. In a way a cheaper Mac Pro, just not Pro. What would it really be? A Dell box designed and branded by Apple. I know tons of you out there wish you could throw in a better graphics cars into a Mac Mini, or have just one expansion slot and the same people think the Mac Pro is too expensive and over-kill. Thats not what macs are really for, however. They are not for the Tim Allen build-it-yourself types and make it look like a Honda Civic complete with glowing cables and 10 non-working USB/Firewire/SD card reader ports on a PCI slot. Macs area an eco-sytem, and while I do believe Apple will include better graphics cards, they might also include small room for expansion down the road. However, we will never see an xMac.



    BLASPHEMY!!



    xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac! xMac!
  • Reply 43 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RexTraverse View Post


    I thought I was pretty clear. The xMac is a desktop Mac, something that Apple doesn't offer. I don't want notebook hardware like the Mac mini/iMac/MacBook/MacBook Pro, and I don't want server hardware like the Mac Pro. I want desktop hardware. (You do realize that other than the Mac Pro, all other Macs are running off notebook hardware, which has performance compromises and costs more than standard desktop hardware, right?)



    I'll try to use an analogy that hopefully you'll understand - right now, Apple offers two desktops: Mac mini and Mac Pro. It's like an automaker offering a Smart ForTwo and a BMW M5 and arguing that for most people, a 2-seater with a 3-cylinder engine will be enough for what they need most of the time, but if they need more, then we have this 5-seat, 10-cylinder beast here for 3X the price. That's not selection. There's a whole market in-between that Apple is ignoring, and the iMac, as an AIO, is not an acceptable alternative.



    All the xMac should be is more powerful and more customizable than a Mac mini but not over the top like a Mac Pro running on inexpensive desktop hardware opposed to notebook or server hardware. I really don't know how that simple a concept doesn't make sense to you.



    I understand you, but I just don't think it makes sense. The hardware in everything in the Mac line minus the Pro runs circles around everyday PCs, unless you start comparing them to the Voodoo & Alienwares, which some say are still POS anyways.



    So a Mini with expandability wouldn't be enough?
  • Reply 44 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdotdubz View Post


    I understand you, but I just don't think it makes sense. The hardware in everything in the Mac line minus the Pro runs circles around everyday PCs, unless you start comparing them to the Voodoo & Alienwares, which some say are still POS anyways.



    So a Mini with expandability wouldn't be enough?



    My argument is they don't run circles. At best, they can keep up with PCs. Really... what are you comparing the Mac mini against? The iMac? Against other mini-form PCs like the Asus Nova and AIOs like the Gateway One? or comparing against similarly priced Desktop Mini-towers with actual GPUs, higher speed/capacity HDDs, and desktop processors? (This isn't a knock on either mini or iMac, because they perform very well for what they are and against similar competition)



    Also, to address the idea of offering an expandable Mac mini... they would have to totally revamp the size of the mini shell and the thing wouldn't be very mini anymore, which is part of the mini's appeal. Similarly, a stripped down Mac Pro was tried back in the PPC Power Mac days, and the market (while it has changed since then with the number of switchers) overwhelmingly rejected it because the desktop Mac market wasn't looking for a stripped down professional Mac. To reuse the car analogy, if you're in the market for a V6 midsize sedan (a la Honda Accord) and Bentley offered you a stripped down Bentley Continental with zero power features (windows/locks), a Chinese built 4-banger, sticky vinyl seats, zero soundproofing, no A/C, no audio system, and the dash from a Kia Spectra for the same price, would you still choose the Bentley?



    Okay... by your own admission, there are a lot of us Mac owners who want an xMac and the fact that this issue won't go away from both current and prospective Mac owners, especially now after the Intel switch, seems to indicate that there are enough of us to make this product sell reasonably well. The argument that a mini-tower design is the antithesis of Apple style and design fails because they've demonstrated with the Power Mac and Mac Pro that they are capable of building expandable towers to the Apple aesthetic. Apple's historically high profit margins would more likely be padded than hurt by this product because, as a machine that is using desktop components, they could price a similarly spec'd xMac at iMac price points and not have to include a built in LCD or use pricier notebook components. So what exactly about an xMac doesn't make sense to you?
  • Reply 45 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RexTraverse View Post


    comparing against similarly priced Desktop Mini-towers with actual GPUs, higher speed/capacity HDDs, and desktop processors? (This isn't a knock on either mini or iMac, because they perform very well for what they are and against similar competition)




    I think Mac Mini holds its own against lots of the competition until you start getting high-end like Dell XPS, Voodoo, etc.



    The Mini would still be mini if you stuck in perhaps two PCI-Express slots and left some wiggle room for whatever HDD a user wants to use. All it would really need is a dedicated GPU beyond that. So, why build a Mini-Tower. What exactly would you be doing to an xMac, please let me know because I am curious.



    I myself don't even use PCI, it seems outdated, unless for pro use. Everything I ever need to get done can be done by USB 2.0 or Firewire, and I use my Macs for some dedicated stuff (Audio, Vid, Graph Design) with external hardware.



    I built my own PC workstation once with everything you can think of inside it. To be honest, it was overpriced, sucked, and constantly broke down. Not to mention I never used half the stuff (like 10 USB ports and 4 Firewire ports, Multi-card reader). I got an iMac to replace it and still have half my ports available and tons of power to boot!



    As for needing expandability, I just got a Macbook Air, and even its SINGLE USB port is more than enough for what I sometimes do on the road with it (video editing, recording). Granted, maybe two ports on the MBA would be nice, however for that, I could just get a USB splitter.



    xMac would be way, way, way too niche. All the Pros could use Pros, cause they need the overkill...everyone else can just use a Mini or iMac. There are plenty of sites and forums dedicated to user modding the crap out of their Minis. Even if your not a Tim Allen modder yourself, you can easily just pick up EyeTV and it plugs in through USB through the back. Most Audio/Vid Pro equip runs on USB/Firewire.



    So once again, and i'm not doing this to insult your intelligence, what would you do specifically with an xMac? \
  • Reply 46 of 67
    There is no wiggle room in a Mini right now, so I'm not certain how you come to the conclusion that the form factor would remain and they could squeeze two PCIe slots.



    Also, the performance gains from using PCIe and SATA connections versus USB or Firewire are obvious. PCIe has a max bandwidth of 8GB/s, SATA 3Gb/s vs. 480Mb/s for USB 2.0 and 800Mb/s for FireWire 800.



    I've also already explained why I want an xMac - performance to value and to have a clean workspace. I'm not a huge power user, I game with Boot Camp and I do moderate (non-profesisonal) video/photo editing and video encoding - things that are possible on other Macs, but could easily benefit from additional performance and bandwidth. My biggest attraction is getting everything internal. Like I mentioned, I already have 2 externals (500GB and 1TB) and I'll be getting another 1TB soon. They're daisy chained through FireWire 400 and it is a bottleneck on my system. I've also got a FireWave surround adapter via FireWire. This is a lot of stuff I'd rather not have splayed all over my desk, as they are now. More importantly, also as previously mentioned, I have a Lenovo ThinkPad and a MBP and both of these I have connected to a central monitor on my desk. Beyond the non-internally-expandable nature of the iMac, I don't believe I can connect external devices to use the iMac display, which immediately makes it a non-contender for me (along with the fact that iMacs displays are all glossy. I can't stand glossy displays)



    Realize that your needs are not the same as other peoples needs. Just because the MBA's single USB port is more than enough for you doesn't mean the same applies to me or others. I've got my USB hub and I've got my Firewire daisy chain. Total, I have 7 external accessories connected to my MBP by either FireWire or USB, all but one (keyboard) that would no longer be external with an xMac/Mac Pro.



    Also, the argument that one can mod a Mini to perform better ignores the fact that I would likely invalidate the warranty. Not likely on a xMac installing an internal HDD or adding a PCIe card.



    The argument for an xMac is it's performance to value. I'm not saying someone can't make do with an iMac or a Mac mini and then cover their desks with external accessories all requiring their own power plugs and severely limiting the performance of these external accessories because of bandwidth issues, but that doesn't reduce the argument for xMac.



    I will also add that I've built my fair share of computers in the past. The MacBook Pro is the first computer I've owned I didn't build myself. Please don't take this the wrong way, because I have enormous respect for build-it-yourselfers but if you were having the stability problems with the system, had so many features you didn't use, and you feel it was overpriced, that's kind of your own fault. (The system didn't build itself and it certainly didn't force you to buy something you weren't going to use) My last rig was a Clawhammer on an Asus K8V board, also had the works and I built it for ~$800 when a comparable system from the retail guys would easily have been twice that and Alienware/Voodoo easily over $2K. System is solid, stable and still works great. Waiting to buy a Mac desktop to replace it and probably turn it into a Linux box.



    EDIT: Let me just add that I'm not looking to convince you or anyone else to buy an xMac or that the xMac fits someone elses needs. I'm only presenting this argument as an explanation of why I want an xMac and why the Mac mini, iMac, and Mac Pro are less than satisfactory alternatives. I also recognize the fact that the chances of Apple releasing an xMac are slim and that likely, I'll just have to pony up for a Mac Pro or switch back to Windows (although not likely) to get a desktop machine that meets my needs.



    EDIT 2: MacBook Air is niche. Mac mini is niche. Apple TV is niche. Apple's never had a problem approaching niche markets. By your own admission, there are "tons" of us xMac folks. If there are so many of us willing to buy, how does that make it niche? (also worth noting, given the number of switchers, that this supposed "niche" is the biggest market in desktop PC space.)
  • Reply 47 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RexTraverse View Post


    There is no wiggle room in a Mini right now, so I'm not certain how you come to the conclusion that the form factor would remain and they could squeeze two PCIe slots.



    Also, the performance gains from using PCIe and SATA connections versus USB or Firewire are obvious. PCIe has a max bandwidth of 8GB/s, SATA 3Gb/s vs. 480Mb/s for USB 2.0 and 800Mb/s for FireWire 800.



    I've also already explained why I want an xMac - performance to value and to have a clean workspace. I'm not a huge power user, I game with Boot Camp and I do moderate (non-profesisonal) video/photo editing and video encoding - things that are possible on other Macs, but could easily benefit from additional performance and bandwidth. My biggest attraction is getting everything internal. Like I mentioned, I already have 2 externals (500GB and 1TB) and I'll be getting another 1TB soon. They're daisy chained through FireWire 400 and it is a bottleneck on my system. I've also got a FireWave surround adapter via FireWire. This is a lot of stuff I'd rather not have splayed all over my desk, as they are now. More importantly, also as previously mentioned, I have a Lenovo ThinkPad and a MBP and both of these I have connected to a central monitor on my desk. Beyond the non-internally-expandable nature of the iMac, I don't believe I can connect external devices to use the iMac display, which immediately makes it a non-contender for me (along with the fact that iMacs displays are all glossy. I can't stand glossy displays)



    Realize that your needs are not the same as other peoples needs. Just because the MBA's single USB port is more than enough for you doesn't mean the same applies to me or others. I've got my USB hub and I've got my Firewire daisy chain. Total, I have 7 external accessories connected to my MBP by either FireWire or USB, all but one (keyboard) that would no longer be external with an xMac/Mac Pro.



    Also, the argument that one can mod a Mini to perform better ignores the fact that I would likely invalidate the warranty. Not likely on a xMac installing an internal HDD or adding a PCIe card.



    The argument for an xMac is it's performance to value. I'm not saying someone can't make do with an iMac or a Mac mini and then cover their desks with external accessories all requiring their own power plugs and severely limiting the performance of these external accessories because of bandwidth issues, but that doesn't reduce the argument for xMac.



    I will also add that I've built my fair share of computers in the past. The MacBook Pro is the first computer I've owned I didn't build myself. Please don't take this the wrong way, because I have enormous respect for build-it-yourselfers but if you were having the stability problems with the system, had so many features you didn't use, and you feel it was overpriced, that's kind of your own fault. (The system didn't build itself and it certainly didn't force you to buy something you weren't going to use) My last rig was a Clawhammer on an Asus K8V board, also had the works and I built it for ~$800 when a comparable system from the retail guys would easily have been twice that and Alienware/Voodoo easily over $2K. System is solid, stable and still works great. Waiting to buy a Mac desktop to replace it and probably turn it into a Linux box.



    EDIT: Let me just add that I'm not looking to convince you or anyone else to buy an xMac or that the xMac fits someone elses needs. I'm only presenting this argument as an explanation of why I want an xMac and why the Mac mini, iMac, and Mac Pro are less than satisfactory alternatives. I also recognize the fact that the chances of Apple releasing an xMac are slim and that likely, I'll just have to pony up for a Mac Pro or switch back to Windows (although not likely) to get a desktop machine that meets my needs.



    EDIT 2: MacBook Air is niche. Mac mini is niche. Apple TV is niche. Apple's never had a problem approaching niche markets. By your own admission, there are "tons" of us xMac folks. If there are so many of us willing to buy, how does that make it niche? (also worth noting, given the number of switchers, that this supposed "niche" is the biggest market in desktop PC space.)



    I meant tons (of xMac supporters) on this forum...and probably a few more scattered at some other Apple rumor sites. So thats like what, a few dozen people?



    So basically you want a bunch of ports (which could be delivered via a PCI slot), a larger/faster HDD, better graphics (which could be delivered via another PCI slot).... or gaming, etc...



    I can see your argument, but I really don't think Apple will ever make a "gaming PC" or Desktop Class Mac below the Pro. If Apple wants to do games, it will probably do a console or add gaming to Front Row/AppleTV. For all other modding and customizing, its gonna be Mac Pro.



    I get what your saying, but I just don't see it really. Unless Apple makes another Cube, but makes it more kick ass like a Pro, smaller like a Mini, and cheaper like an iMac. Would that satisfy you? A semi-pro cube?







  • Reply 48 of 67
    Take the Mac mini. Now, double its volume- either by adding an inch to each dimension or by turning it into a cube.



    That would make enough room for a desktop-class processor (cheaper and faster than the laptop chip they use now), a desktop-class hard drive (cheaper and bigger than the current 2.5" disk), and a real 3D graphics chip (with an IGP in the base model). That would keep the cost and margins on the product the same.



    I think that expandability, in the form of PCIe slots, is a bit much too ask for. But I'd be happy with the machine I just described. Anyone else?
  • Reply 49 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdotdubz View Post


    I can see your argument



    That, my friend, is all I ask.
  • Reply 50 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdotdubz View Post


    I understand you, but I just don't think it makes sense. The hardware in everything in the Mac line minus the Pro runs circles around everyday PCs, unless you start comparing them to the Voodoo & Alienwares, which some say are still POS anyways.



    So a Mini with expandability wouldn't be enough?



    This is the second time in as many weeks that I am going to ask this question in these forums.



    ARE YOU ON CRACK?

    I agree that the Mac is a better product and that it utilizes it's system resources better than anything running Windows, but do you really think that there is not a desktop out there that is the same price as the iMac and with nearly double the system specs? The base model iMac comes with a crappy 128MB video card! Not to mention the fact that many hardcore PC users build their own machines! Granted the hand-in-glove experience of using a Mac is something completely foreign to PC users, but you cannot argue that there is a GIANT gap between the desktops that Apple offers. And this is NOT the case in their notebook line. With the mobile line the ratio of what you pay to what you get in the machine is much closer! In fact, some specs overlap! The Black Macbook has the same clock speed as the base model Macbook Pro, AND IT HAS A LARGER HARD DRIVE!



    There is a GIANT gap between the desktops that Apple needs to fill. I know many PC users that would buy a Mac if they could buy a tower that they could upgrade that did not cost $3,000!
  • Reply 51 of 67
    rickagrickag Posts: 1,626member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdotdubz View Post


    ...

    xMac would be way, way, way too niche. All the Pros could use Pros, cause they need the overkill...everyone else can just use a Mini or iMac. There are plenty of sites and forums dedicated to user modding the crap out of their Minis. Even if your not a Tim Allen modder yourself, you can easily just pick up EyeTV and it plugs in through USB through the back. Most Audio/Vid Pro equip runs on USB/Firewire.



    So once again, and i'm not doing this to insult your intelligence, what would you do specifically with an xMac? \



    I believe you have it backwards. The iMac and the Mac mini are the niche markets for desktops. If you doubt this take a trip through any retail store other than Apple's and see what form factor dominates - by a lot dominates.



    The Mac Pro uses workstation cps and ram. Not even all Pros need that. Most consumers, if not all don't need workstation parts. Just because you don't need PCI or more ports doesn't mean that other consumers don't.



    What I and most people would do with an xMac is be able to buy computers when needed without the extra built in monitor. When eSata becomes dominant, if not already, insert a PCI card and upgrade to eSata. When USB 3 becomes available or Firewire 1600(if ever), buy a card and upgrade. This is pretty simple stuff, meander down the aisles @ Fry's or Best Buy or store of your choice and look at the PCI cards available, or check them out online, their numbers are seemingly infinite in both uses and manufacturers.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RexTraverse


    ...

    Let me just add that I'm not looking to convince you or anyone else to buy an xMac or that the xMac fits someone elses needs. I'm only presenting this argument as an explanation of why I want an xMac and why the Mac mini, iMac, and Mac Pro are less than satisfactory alternatives.



    You're not alone, by any stretch of the imagination. Hence, these discussion continue to crop up here and almost every Mac centric website. People can pass this off as just the complaining of a few geeks, but it isn't and it won't be in the future.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdotdubz


    ...

    I meant tons (of xMac supporters) on this forum...and probably a few more scattered at some other Apple rumor sites. So thats like what, a few dozen people?



    How many? Who knows, but your sarcastic response of a few dozen people holds no water and is in fact insulting.



    Apparently, you haven't seen the threads here and on other websites that linked to diggs on this very topic that resulted in a matter of days in thousands of positive diggs for an xMac. And these were from articles from virtually unknown bloggers.
  • Reply 52 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by rickag View Post


    I believe you have it backwards. The iMac and the Mac mini are the niche markets for desktops. If you doubt this take a trip through any retail store other than Apple's and see what form factor dominates - by a lot dominates.



    The Mac Pro uses workstation cps and ram. Not even all Pros need that. Most consumers, if not all don't need workstation parts. Just because you don't need PCI or more ports doesn't mean that other consumers don't.



    What I and most people would do with an xMac is be able to buy computers when needed without the extra built in monitor. When eSata becomes dominant, if not already, insert a PCI card and upgrade to eSata. When USB 3 becomes available or Firewire 1600(if ever), buy a card and upgrade. This is pretty simple stuff, meander down the aisles @ Fry's or Best Buy or store of your choice and look at the PCI cards available, or check them out online, their numbers are seemingly infinite in both uses and manufacturers.



    You're not alone, by any stretch of the imagination. Hence, these discussion continue to crop up here and almost every Mac centric website. People can pass this off as just the complaining of a few geeks, but it isn't and it won't be in the future.



    How many? Who knows, but your sarcastic response of a few dozen people holds no water and is in fact insulting.



    Apparently, you haven't seen the threads here and on other websites that linked to diggs on this very topic that resulted in a matter of days in thousands of positive diggs for an xMac. And these were from articles from virtually unknown bloggers.



    I'm sure Apple has done its homework. If the xMac would truly be more of a product with a wider audience, I'm sure Apple would sell it in a heart beat. If they could sell more xMacs than iMacs, I'm sure we would have seen them years ago. But they won't, because people want iMacs, not xMacs. xMac is far more niche, thats why Apple doesn't do it. People want simplicity, all in one, easy.



    In fact, i'm sick of the word niche, it should be banned from usage in these boards entirely. Everyone calls everything Apple does niche. iPod nano, niche. MBA, niche. MBP, niche. iMac, niche. Its sickening. \



    I would say the average person buys a new computer every 2-3 years. Whats the point of holding onto an aging computer and adding a PCI card, when you can dump it and get the latest and greatest with all things standard.



    If you think any of that is insulting, than good. Whip out the pitchforks and torches!



    Maybe you should run Apple for a day, or should I say run it into the ground in a day.
  • Reply 53 of 67
    1. Or Apple doesn't do it because of their ego. Maybe they're worried about xMac being so successful that it will eat away at sales of it's signature iMac, especially given that they've mocked the mini-tower design in the past, and they know that by not introducing the xMac they can play their other cards (primarily OSX) to goad their customers (unhappily) into spending the same or more money on a computer that doesn't fit their needs as well. You must be incredibly naïve to think that Apple consumers are just so different and out-of-touch from all other computer users that there isn't any significant demand in the community for the world's most popular style of computer case.



    2. That's an incredibly arrogant and hypocritical for you to stand on your soapbox and criticize others using the word niche when you were the first one in this thread to bring it up. If it sickens you so much, then you stop using it. This is a discussion about the Macintosh computer line which, by any stretch, is a niche product, albeit one that is growing. Spend your time in iPod discussion threads and guaranteed you'll avoid hearing that terrible niche word.



    3. I would say that's incredibly optimistic. I kept the computer I built for college for over 5 years and it suited all of my needs very well. At a minimum, I would keep a computer for 3 years and I'd say I'm pretty tech savvy. For casual users or especially in businesses, I've seen computers stick around well past 5 years. Keep in mind computer components are designed to last for around 10 years, and not everyone needs or wants the latest and greatest. The idea that we should throw away the old and just keep buying new stuff seems incredibly wasteful, especially for a high ticket item like a computer, and only backs up my argument that an xMac, over time, may not necessarily have the latest and greatest but with regular updates can keep up modestly well to put off buying a brand new computer and save the end user money. Like rickag said, if eSATA/USB 3.0/Firewire 1600 hit it off next year, you can just throw away your iMac and MBA, spend another $4000 and buy a brand new iMac and MBA with the new features or you could get a eSATA PCIe card for $50, throw it into an xMac/Mac Pro case, and have all the benefits of that technology for a fraction of the cost. And given the economy, I think it's more irresponsible to expect consumers to keep buying big ticket iMacs and MacBook Airs every 2 years like you expect.



    And that "run Apple into the ground" is exactly the kind of rude, arrogant and insulting types of comments you continue to make in this thread.
  • Reply 54 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RexTraverse View Post


    1. Or Apple doesn't do it because of their ego. Maybe they're worried about xMac being so successful that it will eat away at sales of it's signature iMac, especially given that they've mocked the mini-tower design in the past, and they know that by not introducing the xMac they can play their other cards (primarily OSX) to goad their customers (unhappily) into spending the same or more money on a computer that doesn't fit their needs as well. You must be incredibly naïve to think that Apple consumers are just so different and out-of-touch from all other computer users that there isn't any significant demand in the community for the world's most popular style of computer case.



    2. That's an incredibly arrogant and hypocritical for you to stand on your soapbox and criticize others using the word niche when you were the first one in this thread to bring it up. If it sickens you so much, then you stop using it. This is a discussion about the Macintosh computer line which, by any stretch, is a niche product, albeit one that is growing. Spend your time in iPod discussion threads and guaranteed you'll avoid hearing that terrible niche word.



    3. I would say that's incredibly optimistic. I kept the computer I built for college for over 5 years and it suited all of my needs very well. At a minimum, I would keep a computer for 3 years and I'd say I'm pretty tech savvy. For casual users or especially in businesses, I've seen computers stick around well past 5 years. Keep in mind computer components are designed to last for around 10 years, and not everyone needs or wants the latest and greatest. The idea that we should throw away the old and just keep buying new stuff seems incredibly wasteful, especially for a high ticket item like a computer, and only backs up my argument that an xMac, over time, may not necessarily have the latest and greatest but with regular updates can keep up modestly well to put off buying a brand new computer and save the end user money. Like rickag said, if eSATA/USB 3.0/Firewire 1600 hit it off next year, you can just throw away your iMac and MBA, spend another $4000 and buy a brand new iMac and MBA with the new features or you could get a eSATA PCIe card for $50, throw it into an xMac/Mac Pro case, and have all the benefits of that technology for a fraction of the cost. And given the economy, I think it's more irresponsible to expect consumers to keep buying big ticket iMacs and MacBook Airs every 2 years like you expect.



    And that "run Apple into the ground" is exactly the kind of rude, arrogant and insulting types of comments you continue to make in this thread.



    Your right, but who in their right mind would buy a computer to throw it away a year later. Just b/c something comes out, that doesn't make your computer obsolete that moment. Like you said, computers can survive for years for the average user.



    I would rather wait for a computer to come out with all the features that I want as opposed to constantly tweaking it and throwing money at it to keep up with the tech-joneses. But that just me.



    But seriously, why would I throw away my MBA & iMac just for USB 3.0? USB 2.0 ain't no slowpoke...and as for 3.0, I would rather wait 'til it becomes the standard in future Macs.



    I guess thats my argument to why Apple does not, and probably won't make an xMac: The average user wants simplicity and all-in-one, thus the success of the iMac.



    Computers are like cars when viewed by people, nobody really wants to mess with it under the hood unless they know whats goin on in there.



    If you think about it, people treat their Macs like cars. And Apple sells and markets their products much like a luxury auto makes does with its products.



    I could see a gaming Mac however, kind of xMac-ish. All is not lost.



    But to say that it would eat iMac market share, or be more sucessful would be absolutely & completely crazy. It would be nice in the line-up, but in no way a top seller or anything close to the iconic iMac. And yes, the iMac is iconic.
  • Reply 55 of 67
    So no one would buy new computers every year but, according to you, the average consumer replaces their computer every 2-3 years. There seems to be a logical disconnect with that statement there.



    And you still haven't addressed how the mini-tower, the most popular style of computer in the world, would fail as a Mac. No one is expecting the xMac to be the next iMac - it won't happen because, as you say and most would agree, iMac is an icon and flagship product for Apple. But xMac could still sell very well.



    You return to the car analogy, fine. We're not talking about overclocking the CPU or anything like that, analogous to messing with the engine. More like replacing the head unit and adding a subwoofer (expansion cards and additional hard drives) which isn't difficult. And we want to be able to swap out parts as they wear out, not just sell the whole thing. Compare the LCD screen on an iMac to the tires of a car or a timing belt. When the timing belt wears out or the tread wears thin on your tires, you can replace them and keep the car for a long while after. The iMac is like a car with irreplacable tires or timing belt. Doesn't matter that the rest of the car works fine, you gotta trash the whole thing.
  • Reply 56 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by RexTraverse View Post


    So no one would buy new computers every year but, according to you, the average consumer replaces their computer every 2-3 years. There seems to be a logical disconnect with that statement there.



    And you still haven't addressed how the mini-tower, the most popular style of computer in the world, would fail as a Mac. No one is expecting the xMac to be the next iMac - it won't happen because, as you say and most would agree, iMac is an icon and flagship product for Apple. But xMac could still sell very well.



    You return to the car analogy, fine. We're not talking about overclocking the CPU or anything like that, analogous to messing with the engine. More like replacing the head unit and adding a subwoofer (expansion cards and additional hard drives) which isn't difficult. And we want to be able to swap out parts as they wear out, not just sell the whole thing. Compare the LCD screen on an iMac to the tires of a car or a timing belt. When the timing belt wears out or the tread wears thin on your tires, you can replace them and keep the car for a long while after. The iMac is like a car with irreplacable tires or timing belt. Doesn't matter that the rest of the car works fine, you gotta trash the whole thing.



    It might sell, but not more than an iMac! I'm starting to warm up the idea of an xMac. I kind of see the hole in the line-up...but then again Macs are all about being different (in a better way), so perhaps Apple leaves this whole there deliberately, just like they don't make sub $500 POS computers for the bottom-feeding "eMachines" market.



    I wouldn't mind seeing it, but I'm not really sure if I would see it happen.
  • Reply 57 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdotdubz View Post


    3) Death of the Mac Mini. Mac Mini is here to stay, forever, unless it is replaced by another product line that expands the idea of the Mini, like a Mac Nano. Mac Mini is actually a great tool to bait switchers, and over time, we will see better Minis perhaps for even cheaper prices! Mac Minis were never meant to compete with bottom-feeder sub $400 PCs like Dell or eMachines and never will. Maybe Apple might offer cheaper Mac Mini solution to the education markets (a la eMac), but that would be education only.



    No one likes the Mini and one is really buying the Mini and it dead and I bet when the MB and MBP are updated it will be EOL'D and a Mac with no keyboard or mouse or screen I would spend $500 more on the iMac (but the price of the Mac Mini should be the one for the iMac)
  • Reply 58 of 67
    sequitursequitur Posts: 1,901member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacBookAir77 View Post


    No one likes the Mini and one is really buying the Mini and it dead and I bet when the MB and MBP are updated it will be EOL'D and a Mac with no keyboard or mouse or screen I would spend $500 more on the iMac (but the price of the Mac Mini should be the one for the iMac)



    Your reasoning is very hard to follow.



    Mr. H.

    Explain to this guy about how punctuation makes it easier to understand convoluted thought. Well, maybe not.
  • Reply 59 of 67
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sequitur View Post


    Your reasoning is very hard to follow.



    Mr. H.

    Explain to this guy about how punctuation makes it easier to understand convoluted thought. Well, maybe not.



    ditto.
  • Reply 60 of 67
    rickagrickag Posts: 1,626member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mdotdubz View Post


    I'm sure Apple has done its homework. If the xMac would truly be more of a product with a wider audience, I'm sure Apple would sell it in a heart beat. If they could sell more xMacs than iMacs, I'm sure we would have seen them years ago. But they won't, because people want iMacs, not xMacs. xMac is far more niche, thats why Apple doesn't do it. People want simplicity, all in one, easy.



    In fact, i'm sick of the word niche, it should be banned from usage in these boards entirely. Everyone calls everything Apple does niche. iPod nano, niche. MBA, niche. MBP, niche. iMac, niche. Its sickening. \



    I would say the average person buys a new computer every 2-3 years. Whats the point of holding onto an aging computer and adding a PCI card, when you can dump it and get the latest and greatest with all things standard.



    If you think any of that is insulting, than good. Whip out the pitchforks and torches!



    Maybe you should run Apple for a day, or should I say run it into the ground in a day.



    In past threads I have posted quotes from Steve Jobs and other Apple executives that address Apple's philosophy concerning AIO. Based on some of these quotes it might be inferred that Apple believes computers for consumers should be treated as appliances. Trouble is, a computer may be rapidly outdated by software and/or hardware improvements, washing machines, stoves, refrigerators aren't.



    Who said the iPod nano or Macbook Pro targets niche markets? Both of these target mainstream markets and sell well and in high quantities.



    If an AIO desktop computer isn't a niche market, then explain why it is such a small part of the overall desktop market. You are wrong.



    Small light portables that sacrifice performance are a niche market, usually designed for the less demanding business travelers that do not need more power. The Macbook Air takes this to the extreme, hence the term niche market applies.



    The point of holding onto computers with the addition of PCI cards is to extend the useful life of a very expensive piece of equipment. Just ask all the purchasers of iMacs(re: with USB 1.0/Firewire) within say 3 months of Apple dropping Firewire from iPods. In addition, when certain technologies become legacy a couple of things can happen. Older parts may become unavailable or may actually increase in cost. Case in point was SCSI. My old computer used SCSI for harddrives, if not for PCI slots in the 7500 I bought, it would have been expensive to obtain external drives, except in my case I bought a USB/Firewire PCI card and was good to go.



    You seem to have a problem with the term "niche". It is not a bad thing to target niche markets. In Apple's case they have done so quite successfully. But don't confuse the desires of many consumers that would prefer an xMac type computer over those products that Apple produces that do indeed target niche markets.



    Not once have I said the iMac, Mac mini or any computer Apple offers is a bad computer. Actually, for their intended markets and built in technology they are quite good values, if that's what you want. These threads only indicate that there are people, not just a couple of dozen that desire a more flexible and appropriate computer for their needs.



    These discussions have gone on for a long time and will continue to go on for just that reason, there are a significant consumers that do indeed desire an xMac or xMac like computer.
Sign In or Register to comment.