I'd move the power button and front ports because they're going to be very hard to reach when floor mounted. Other than that it look very good.
And the power supply to the top. There are sound engineering reasons why you put it at the top whenever possible. That mockup looks nice but there seems to be some engineering issues with it.
The HDDs bays don't look to have enough space for airflow. An engineer would need to make sure that 4 15,000RPM drives could chug away in their 24/7 without heat issues.
As for the specs, I'd like a single optical bay, place for 4 sticks of RAM, one desktop-grade Core CPU, and 2 HDDs and 2 card slots, in a space no bigger than 3 stacked Mac Minis. Pretty much the G4 Cube without the wasted, open space at the bottom.
The HDDs bays don't look to have enough space for airflow. An engineer would need to make sure that 4 15,000RPM drives could chug away in their 24/7 without heat issues.
This wouldn't be a machine with four HDD's, but two. And 15,000 drives wouldn't be appropriate for such a machine. 10,000 drives use a lot less power, and put out much less heat, and are fast enough. Faster drives are also too small.
Quote:
As for the specs, I'd like a single optical bay, place for 4 sticks of RAM, one desktop-grade Core CPU, and 2 HDDs and 2 card slots, in a space no bigger than 3 stacked Mac Minis. Pretty much the G4 Cube without the wasted, open space at the bottom.
My design is that, except it can't be done in that space.
I tried. I really did, but space needed prohibits it.
Psystar osx 2.66 with video, wireless g only and firewire upgrades. $894.99. No keyboard, no mouse, no monitor, no webcam, no mic, no ilife, no bluetooth, no speakers, no N wireless, no all-in-one design, smaller harddrive.
True Apple iMac 20" 2.66 $1,499 * Worth every penny of the $505 difference.*
Do you recall this Mini someone designed. It was in several threads last year. I love it. I drool over it. I dream about it. I want it. Please Apple, make this a reality.
Then we won't have to concern ourselves about clones. Don't drive some of us to crappy clones.
I don't know the dimensions of this mockup, but I assume it's half or less the size of a MacPro or about 4 times the size of a Mini.
That's a lot bigger than 4x the mini. It's more than twice as deep and a lot more than 4x as tall.
Exactly where is the power supply anyway? It doesn't look that much smaller than a Mac Pro is, it looks like most of the Mac Pro parts are there, rearranged a bit and missing a power supply.
And the power supply to the top. There are sound engineering reasons why you put it at the top whenever possible. That mockup looks nice but there seems to be some engineering issues with it.
The HDDs bays don't look to have enough space for airflow. An engineer would need to make sure that 4 15,000RPM drives could chug away in their 24/7 without heat issues.
I don't see the point in putting 15k drives in what's supposedly a "consumer" computer. That would restrict you to SCSI or SAS drives, making it a workstation or server. Apple already makes that kind of a machine.
I don't see the point in putting 15k drives in what's supposedly a "consumer" computer. That would restrict you to SCSI or SAS drives, making it a workstation or server. Apple already makes that kind of a machine.
You'd be surprised by the PC enthusiast scene - If you're a big gamer, everything matters.
Spending a $1000+ on an extreme edition of a CPU is nothing for some folks.
You'd be surprised by the PC enthusiast scene - If you're a big gamer, everything matters.
Spending a $1000+ on an extreme edition of a CPU is nothing for some folks.
I won't deny there are some out there. But I don't think the lack of a mid-range tower is a problem for that kind of person, wouldn't they just go for a Mac Pro anyway?
And 15,000 drives wouldn't be appropriate for such a machine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
I don't see the point in putting 15k drives in what's supposedly a "consumer" computer.
I don't see a point either, but if the drives have the appropriate dimensions and connectors, a good engineer would need to take into the consideration the potential heat of a maxed out system. I've never seen a computer case limit the speed HDD that it could accept, so I imagine that all were deemed acceptable.
That's a lot bigger than 4x the mini. It's more than twice as deep and a lot more than 4x as tall.
Exactly where is the power supply anyway? It doesn't look that much smaller than a Mac Pro is, it looks like most of the Mac Pro parts are there, rearranged a bit and missing a power supply.
This has the same shape as the one I did, but it's really much bigger.
I assume the power supply is at the back, at the bottom, behind what looks to be the memory boards.
You could do that, of course, but it isn't recommended.
That's a first for me. I've never heard Apple say anything remotely like "Please do not use your Mac Pro to its fullest potential in order to maximize productivity. It is not recommended." Seems a rather non-Apple thing to say.
That's a first for me. I've never heard Apple say anything remotely like "Please do not use your Mac Pro to its fullest potential in order to maximize productivity. It is not recommended." Seems a rather non-Apple thing to say.
No no. It's not recommended to use several programs when rendering. glitches to the render, can, and sometimes do, occur.
In general, it's fine. I run several programs all the time, even on older machines with more than one core.
That's a first for me. I've never heard Apple say anything remotely like "Please do not use your Mac Pro to its fullest potential in order to maximize productivity. It is not recommended." Seems a rather non-Apple thing to say.
A lot of Final Cut UIs seem to be programmed assuming that it's the only thing you're trying to do on a computer, like a hold-over from OS 9. At least with Final Cut Express (3, 3.5 and 4), I can't even use the computer for writing notes while playing a preview, losing focus to another app halts playback, even if you have plenty of spare computer performance.
those extreme gamers shouldn't mind paying for a Mac Pro then.
For an "extreme gamer" that is hardware obsessed to such a degree that they are buying 15krpm HD's, surely Mac Pro is out of the question due to the degree it is graphics-capped.
I don't see a point either, but if the drives have the appropriate dimensions and connectors, a good engineer would need to take into the consideration the potential heat of a maxed out system. I've never seen a computer case limit the speed HDD that it could accept, so I imagine that all were deemed acceptable.
I'm not sure if it's the case maker's place to say that. It's up to the assembler to determine suitability of a part for the task. Back when I was doing that sort of thing, there weren't even instructions for the case that I remember, just a case and a hardware package.
The people that actually know what they're doing when putting together a computer should know better than to simply assume "if it fits, it must be appropriate". I have a few Compaq workstations that even have labels that say that a certain fan kit should be installed if using 10k or faster drives in the optical bays. The drive cage behind the optical bays are adequately spaced and cooled for 15k drives.
I'm not sure if it's the case maker's place to say that. It's up to the assembler to determine suitability of a part for the task. Back when I was doing that sort of thing, there weren't even instructions for the case that I remember, just a case and a hardware package.
The people that actually know what they're doing when putting together a computer should know better than to simply assume "if it fits, it must be appropriate". I have a few Compaq workstations that even have labels that say that a certain fan kit should be installed if using 10k or faster drives in the optical bays. The drive cage behind the optical bays are adequately spaced and cooled for 15k drives.
So some manufacturers do have provisions for faster drives.
PS: I didn't mean to imply standalone cases, I was referring specifically to Apple engineers when they are designing the case (and the internals) for their machines.
For an "extreme gamer" that is hardware obsessed to such a degree that they are buying 15krpm HD's, surely Mac Pro is out of the question due to the degree it is graphics-capped.
A Radeon HD 3870 will be coming to the Mac Pro sometime soon, supposedly by the end of May, according to ATI.
That's a very good card. It will run on Macs and PCs.
So some manufacturers do have provisions for faster drives.
PS: I didn't mean to imply standalone cases, I was referring specifically to Apple engineers when they are designing the case (and the internals) for their machines.
The cooling is one thing, and the power supply is the other.
What market is this machine supposed to be aimed at? If it is to come in at a decent price, compromise must be expected. What wattage should the power supply deliver?
Realistically! Remember that it must assume the memory slots will be filled, as well as the fastest graphics card, and full power for the other slot as well. then there is the optical drive, which sues fair power when writing.
Also Apple supplies a stereo amp on the mobo.
I figure no more than 250 watts. That may even be a bit much, given the size.
First of all, the article you linked was about consumer sales, not overall sales. Last time I've checked, the consumer sales represent about 30% of the computer sales. So what happens in the consumer segment doesn't make it a trend in the global market.
Unfortunately it doesn't show the raw data from NPD. Such is the limits of a single article.
Because I'm lazy I'm not going to look for another and just use its numbers.
55% increase in desktop sales for Apple.
Quote:
Second, last time I've cheched the iMac represented about 30% of the Mac sales. That means that in a market were Apple has 6.6% market share (the US), the iMac represents about 2% of the computers sold, and in a market were Apple has less than 4% market share (worldwide), the iMac represents about 1% of the computers sold.
But it doesn't matter when we're talking about whether AIO share is increasing or decreasing.
Quote:
For each iMac sold, there are about 23 (50% of 93% / 2) PC towers sold in the US and about 48 (50% of 96%) PC towers sold worldwide. Apple is NOT "selling more AIOs than they do towers".
Well it's a good thing I NEVER MADE THAT STATEMENT.
The question was whether there was data that suggests that AIOs are gaining share at the expense of towers. This is a different metric.
Since we are all making assumptions, I will say thet the iMac is cannibalizing sales from the Mac mini (limited/outdated) and the Mac Pro (too expensive).
Except that neither the mini or pro ever moved much volume anyway. And Apple can't be gaining desktop share faster than the rest of the market by cannibalizing it's own product line. So your assumption has a zero chance of being true.
But again, if the industry is increasing desktop sales at a 12% rate (from Gartner) but Apple is increasing desktop sales at 55% then given the large % that iMac represents in their desktop line then it is safe to say that AIOs are increasing market share at the expense of other computer types. Since we ALSO know that laptop share is increasing at the expense of desktops that leaves the only conclusion is that by whatever miniscule amount the statement that AIOs are increasing market share over towers is true.
It is unfortunate that Gartner did not break things down into desktop vs laptop sales. If the desktop sales declined 5% overall as indicated in the other article then it is certain that AIOs have improved thier position vis a vis towers.
Note that does not equate to "Apple sells more AIOs than others sell towers" but that AIOs may now be 1.1% of the desktop market where it was 1% before.
And did they move their entire operation away from towers? No.
And that wasn't the point. The question is whether AIOs are gaining in popularity (as reflected in market share) vs towers.
Evidently Dell believes there is a market, likely a growing one, that they wish to address by adding an AIO to their product line.
The certainly wouldn't do so for something that is of very marginal potential.
Quote:
How's that treating them? I know you like to pass Sony off as a "premium" PC maker, but when it came to desktops they were making the same low end MicroATX crap as HP, Gateway, and Dell. They just charged more for it. Sony is a laptop maker with some moves into home entertainment center computer. That' their niche. They operate in something called any open market where different companies are Able to fill different requirements.
Probably pretty good. AIOs have better margins than their desktop counterparts and better Average Sale Prices (ASPs).
For a tower you simply can't sell at a premium and Sony, with their VAIO line offered lifestyle integration software (typically tied to other sony products) in much the same way Apple does with iLife. Many VAIOs came with TV tuners and a media bent different from the HPs and Dells of the period. So yes, they were premium machines with Sony styling (something you like, or not).
Note that Toshiba had withdrawn from the desktop market long ago as well. It is #5 worldwide and in the US. Apple has NEVER needed to cater to the tower market to do well given Toshiba has consistently been ahead of it. If Apple did nothing but laptops and Mac Pros it probably would still see growth...although they'd likely have to change up their laptop line a bit.
So AIOs are prefectly viable desktops that are gaining in popularity to the point where Apple has some competition in that market space where before it was largely alone.
Comments
I'd move the power button and front ports because they're going to be very hard to reach when floor mounted. Other than that it look very good.
And the power supply to the top. There are sound engineering reasons why you put it at the top whenever possible. That mockup looks nice but there seems to be some engineering issues with it.
The HDDs bays don't look to have enough space for airflow. An engineer would need to make sure that 4 15,000RPM drives could chug away in their 24/7 without heat issues.
As for the specs, I'd like a single optical bay, place for 4 sticks of RAM, one desktop-grade Core CPU, and 2 HDDs and 2 card slots, in a space no bigger than 3 stacked Mac Minis. Pretty much the G4 Cube without the wasted, open space at the bottom.
The HDDs bays don't look to have enough space for airflow. An engineer would need to make sure that 4 15,000RPM drives could chug away in their 24/7 without heat issues.
This wouldn't be a machine with four HDD's, but two. And 15,000 drives wouldn't be appropriate for such a machine. 10,000 drives use a lot less power, and put out much less heat, and are fast enough. Faster drives are also too small.
As for the specs, I'd like a single optical bay, place for 4 sticks of RAM, one desktop-grade Core CPU, and 2 HDDs and 2 card slots, in a space no bigger than 3 stacked Mac Minis. Pretty much the G4 Cube without the wasted, open space at the bottom.
My design is that, except it can't be done in that space.
I tried. I really did, but space needed prohibits it.
Compare Price and Features - The real story
Psystar osx 2.66 with video, wireless g only and firewire upgrades. $894.99. No keyboard, no mouse, no monitor, no webcam, no mic, no ilife, no bluetooth, no speakers, no N wireless, no all-in-one design, smaller harddrive.
True Apple iMac 20" 2.66 $1,499 * Worth every penny of the $505 difference.*
Do you recall this Mini someone designed. It was in several threads last year. I love it. I drool over it. I dream about it. I want it. Please Apple, make this a reality.
Then we won't have to concern ourselves about clones. Don't drive some of us to crappy clones.
I don't know the dimensions of this mockup, but I assume it's half or less the size of a MacPro or about 4 times the size of a Mini.
That's a lot bigger than 4x the mini. It's more than twice as deep and a lot more than 4x as tall.
Exactly where is the power supply anyway? It doesn't look that much smaller than a Mac Pro is, it looks like most of the Mac Pro parts are there, rearranged a bit and missing a power supply.
And the power supply to the top. There are sound engineering reasons why you put it at the top whenever possible. That mockup looks nice but there seems to be some engineering issues with it.
The HDDs bays don't look to have enough space for airflow. An engineer would need to make sure that 4 15,000RPM drives could chug away in their 24/7 without heat issues.
I don't see the point in putting 15k drives in what's supposedly a "consumer" computer. That would restrict you to SCSI or SAS drives, making it a workstation or server. Apple already makes that kind of a machine.
I don't see the point in putting 15k drives in what's supposedly a "consumer" computer. That would restrict you to SCSI or SAS drives, making it a workstation or server. Apple already makes that kind of a machine.
You'd be surprised by the PC enthusiast scene - If you're a big gamer, everything matters.
Spending a $1000+ on an extreme edition of a CPU is nothing for some folks.
You'd be surprised by the PC enthusiast scene - If you're a big gamer, everything matters.
Spending a $1000+ on an extreme edition of a CPU is nothing for some folks.
I won't deny there are some out there. But I don't think the lack of a mid-range tower is a problem for that kind of person, wouldn't they just go for a Mac Pro anyway?
And 15,000 drives wouldn't be appropriate for such a machine.
I don't see the point in putting 15k drives in what's supposedly a "consumer" computer.
I don't see a point either, but if the drives have the appropriate dimensions and connectors, a good engineer would need to take into the consideration the potential heat of a maxed out system. I've never seen a computer case limit the speed HDD that it could accept, so I imagine that all were deemed acceptable.
That's a lot bigger than 4x the mini. It's more than twice as deep and a lot more than 4x as tall.
Exactly where is the power supply anyway? It doesn't look that much smaller than a Mac Pro is, it looks like most of the Mac Pro parts are there, rearranged a bit and missing a power supply.
This has the same shape as the one I did, but it's really much bigger.
I assume the power supply is at the back, at the bottom, behind what looks to be the memory boards.
You'd be surprised by the PC enthusiast scene - If you're a big gamer, everything matters.
Spending a $1000+ on an extreme edition of a CPU is nothing for some folks.
those extreme gamers shouldn't mind paying for a Mac Pro then.
Actually they don't. Alienware was all about gamers, as was VooDoo, and other small manufacturers that made expensive gaming machines.
You could do that, of course, but it isn't recommended.
That's a first for me. I've never heard Apple say anything remotely like "Please do not use your Mac Pro to its fullest potential in order to maximize productivity. It is not recommended." Seems a rather non-Apple thing to say.
That's a first for me. I've never heard Apple say anything remotely like "Please do not use your Mac Pro to its fullest potential in order to maximize productivity. It is not recommended." Seems a rather non-Apple thing to say.
No no. It's not recommended to use several programs when rendering. glitches to the render, can, and sometimes do, occur.
In general, it's fine. I run several programs all the time, even on older machines with more than one core.
That's a first for me. I've never heard Apple say anything remotely like "Please do not use your Mac Pro to its fullest potential in order to maximize productivity. It is not recommended." Seems a rather non-Apple thing to say.
A lot of Final Cut UIs seem to be programmed assuming that it's the only thing you're trying to do on a computer, like a hold-over from OS 9. At least with Final Cut Express (3, 3.5 and 4), I can't even use the computer for writing notes while playing a preview, losing focus to another app halts playback, even if you have plenty of spare computer performance.
those extreme gamers shouldn't mind paying for a Mac Pro then.
For an "extreme gamer" that is hardware obsessed to such a degree that they are buying 15krpm HD's, surely Mac Pro is out of the question due to the degree it is graphics-capped.
I don't see a point either, but if the drives have the appropriate dimensions and connectors, a good engineer would need to take into the consideration the potential heat of a maxed out system. I've never seen a computer case limit the speed HDD that it could accept, so I imagine that all were deemed acceptable.
I'm not sure if it's the case maker's place to say that. It's up to the assembler to determine suitability of a part for the task. Back when I was doing that sort of thing, there weren't even instructions for the case that I remember, just a case and a hardware package.
The people that actually know what they're doing when putting together a computer should know better than to simply assume "if it fits, it must be appropriate". I have a few Compaq workstations that even have labels that say that a certain fan kit should be installed if using 10k or faster drives in the optical bays. The drive cage behind the optical bays are adequately spaced and cooled for 15k drives.
I'm not sure if it's the case maker's place to say that. It's up to the assembler to determine suitability of a part for the task. Back when I was doing that sort of thing, there weren't even instructions for the case that I remember, just a case and a hardware package.
The people that actually know what they're doing when putting together a computer should know better than to simply assume "if it fits, it must be appropriate". I have a few Compaq workstations that even have labels that say that a certain fan kit should be installed if using 10k or faster drives in the optical bays. The drive cage behind the optical bays are adequately spaced and cooled for 15k drives.
So some manufacturers do have provisions for faster drives.
PS: I didn't mean to imply standalone cases, I was referring specifically to Apple engineers when they are designing the case (and the internals) for their machines.
For an "extreme gamer" that is hardware obsessed to such a degree that they are buying 15krpm HD's, surely Mac Pro is out of the question due to the degree it is graphics-capped.
A Radeon HD 3870 will be coming to the Mac Pro sometime soon, supposedly by the end of May, according to ATI.
That's a very good card. It will run on Macs and PCs.
It should help.
So some manufacturers do have provisions for faster drives.
PS: I didn't mean to imply standalone cases, I was referring specifically to Apple engineers when they are designing the case (and the internals) for their machines.
The cooling is one thing, and the power supply is the other.
What market is this machine supposed to be aimed at? If it is to come in at a decent price, compromise must be expected. What wattage should the power supply deliver?
Realistically! Remember that it must assume the memory slots will be filled, as well as the fastest graphics card, and full power for the other slot as well. then there is the optical drive, which sues fair power when writing.
Also Apple supplies a stereo amp on the mobo.
I figure no more than 250 watts. That may even be a bit much, given the size.
First of all, the article you linked was about consumer sales, not overall sales. Last time I've checked, the consumer sales represent about 30% of the computer sales. So what happens in the consumer segment doesn't make it a trend in the global market.
Unfortunately it doesn't show the raw data from NPD. Such is the limits of a single article.
Because I'm lazy I'm not going to look for another and just use its numbers.
55% increase in desktop sales for Apple.
Second, last time I've cheched the iMac represented about 30% of the Mac sales. That means that in a market were Apple has 6.6% market share (the US), the iMac represents about 2% of the computers sold, and in a market were Apple has less than 4% market share (worldwide), the iMac represents about 1% of the computers sold.
But it doesn't matter when we're talking about whether AIO share is increasing or decreasing.
For each iMac sold, there are about 23 (50% of 93% / 2) PC towers sold in the US and about 48 (50% of 96%) PC towers sold worldwide. Apple is NOT "selling more AIOs than they do towers".
Well it's a good thing I NEVER MADE THAT STATEMENT.
The question was whether there was data that suggests that AIOs are gaining share at the expense of towers. This is a different metric.
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=648619
Since we are all making assumptions, I will say thet the iMac is cannibalizing sales from the Mac mini (limited/outdated) and the Mac Pro (too expensive).
Except that neither the mini or pro ever moved much volume anyway. And Apple can't be gaining desktop share faster than the rest of the market by cannibalizing it's own product line. So your assumption has a zero chance of being true.
But again, if the industry is increasing desktop sales at a 12% rate (from Gartner) but Apple is increasing desktop sales at 55% then given the large % that iMac represents in their desktop line then it is safe to say that AIOs are increasing market share at the expense of other computer types. Since we ALSO know that laptop share is increasing at the expense of desktops that leaves the only conclusion is that by whatever miniscule amount the statement that AIOs are increasing market share over towers is true.
It is unfortunate that Gartner did not break things down into desktop vs laptop sales. If the desktop sales declined 5% overall as indicated in the other article then it is certain that AIOs have improved thier position vis a vis towers.
Note that does not equate to "Apple sells more AIOs than others sell towers" but that AIOs may now be 1.1% of the desktop market where it was 1% before.
That's ALL the data indicates.
And did they move their entire operation away from towers? No.
And that wasn't the point. The question is whether AIOs are gaining in popularity (as reflected in market share) vs towers.
Evidently Dell believes there is a market, likely a growing one, that they wish to address by adding an AIO to their product line.
The certainly wouldn't do so for something that is of very marginal potential.
How's that treating them? I know you like to pass Sony off as a "premium" PC maker, but when it came to desktops they were making the same low end MicroATX crap as HP, Gateway, and Dell. They just charged more for it. Sony is a laptop maker with some moves into home entertainment center computer. That' their niche. They operate in something called any open market where different companies are Able to fill different requirements.
Probably pretty good. AIOs have better margins than their desktop counterparts and better Average Sale Prices (ASPs).
For a tower you simply can't sell at a premium and Sony, with their VAIO line offered lifestyle integration software (typically tied to other sony products) in much the same way Apple does with iLife. Many VAIOs came with TV tuners and a media bent different from the HPs and Dells of the period. So yes, they were premium machines with Sony styling (something you like, or not).
Note that Toshiba had withdrawn from the desktop market long ago as well. It is #5 worldwide and in the US. Apple has NEVER needed to cater to the tower market to do well given Toshiba has consistently been ahead of it. If Apple did nothing but laptops and Mac Pros it probably would still see growth...although they'd likely have to change up their laptop line a bit.
So AIOs are prefectly viable desktops that are gaining in popularity to the point where Apple has some competition in that market space where before it was largely alone.