I used XP for years and an app crash hardly ever caused a total crash. Have you ever used Windows?
XP is, in theory, is easier to crash than Vista or 7. It is simple matter of design.
However, number of XP crashes I have seen is getting lower and lower as the time pass by; is it due to XP patches, or new versions of apps playing more by the rules, I don't know - but it seems definitely less common for applications to crash XP today, compared to early days. \
Vista is rock solid. Short of faulty hardware or really crappy driver (very uncommon nowadays), crashing Vista really requires an effort.
Being smart enough to run a Windows computer without getting a virus is too much to ask of a typical user. I have been running Windows for years without viruses as well, but you and I aren't your typical computer buyer. The fact is that Vista is certainly an improvement on security, but if you are a typical Windows user that means either getting a poor free anti-virus solution or paying upwards of $60/year for anti-virus protection.
OS X's ties to Apple's hardware are the only major disadvantage to owning a Mac. Nobody's forcing anyone to get one, but unfortunately Apple is the only real competitor to Microsoft's OS on a consumer level. The reality is that it doesn't really matter what hardware you get, it's all made by contracted chinese factories no matter which brand you buy.
I would hardly call tying Mac OS X to Apple hardware as a disadvantage of owning a Mac. If you own a Mac you will able to run Mac OS X and if you wanted to Windows or Linux on the same Apple box. What I think you are trying to say is that Mac OS X is disadvantaged by not being able run on any old PC hardware.
The point is that the Mac platform is more than just the software, the hardware is designed to work with the software and vs versa. This is why the Mac offers a better user experience to users. If you just take the bits you want you will end up with a compromised solution. Also how on earth could you expect Apple to certify it's OS capable of running on Joe Bloggs computer. Microsoft tries to do this and the user experience is not pleasant. Many PCs are sold with inferior hardware which is substandard and prone to failure. You can blatantly see this in the poor viewing viewing angles and washed out colours on your supermarket laptop display.
I know and you made my point. When people say macs are over priced and bring up the mac pro, most compare a dell and point out that the mac is cheaper and it is.
What users are really trying to say is that there is no mid range or desktop Mac that's not an iMac and that the Mac Pro is designed to have higher margins when Apple could have built a 8 Core non server processor and used regular ram. By building it the way they did, they keep price comparisons on par with pcs. What's really needed is to benchmark a hackntosh 8 core i7 machine against a mac pro. This will tell the real story as desktops rarely break down. This the low price for apple care. The desktops dell sells in that price range are not geared toward the consume, they, and all other of makers have mid range, high end, ie not the top of the line yet powerful, desktops wheras apple does not. Even their iMac, if you consider it a desktop, runs on mobile parts. Frankly, I bet if apple released a i7 8 core machine for $1100, you would never hear about over priced anymore. Maybe once in a while on the mac book pros, but not nearly as much as we hear now.
Microsoft's entire ad campaign seems very short-sighted to me. It's like McDonald's offering 99¢ hamburgers. Sure, more people will be attracted to 99¢ hamburgers in a recession, when they feel a need to watch every dollar, but it's not because they really prefer to eat cheap hamburgers. When the crunch is over and people start feeling better about their economic circumstances, they'll want something better. How is Microsoft's "ours are cheaper!" campaign going to look in 6-12 months, when people starting thinking more about what they really want?
In 6 or 12 months, no one is going to remember present ads.
I have worked at the director level and am really BLESSED, LUCKY and blessed some more (thank you God), now enjoy scoring for feature films and tv. I also have several sample CDs out for garage band and Sonys Acid program I worked for the same company for years and even worked in business affairs. Care to talk about contracts, licensing, synch and master legal matters? LOL
My first job was retail though then I worked for a bank before college and then the entertainment business. If you google my name you would see many hits and movie credits. I am tempted to have you call me but consider myself blessed to be working when I see others struggle.
Really, I am a fun guy so PM me and I will tell you who I am.
I've been ranting at Apple ever since the days of the G4 and the so called portable recording studio when at the time, the Athlon was pouncing it. It was my dual computer certs and EE background that made me tech savvy and I always saw through the bogus Apple marketing and at the time, Intel's bogus benchmarks.
I knew all about FPU benchmarks and what that meant to audio/video plug ins for years. I worked in avid media bays back when the G3 machines took 1/2 an hour to render 10 minutes worth of work. My yahoo account was created in 1997. I can post a message on the yahoo stock market board where you can see 1997 if you like.
I then became an overclocker and gaming enthusiast, becoming a member of mad onion before this forum existed. I then became friends with the founder if The Inquirer, Mike Magee, UK, and learned all about inside secrets years before links to his site were posted here.
I then got frustated when the number one software sampler of the time was PC only, it was called, gigastudio, so you know what I did? I became a beta tester for the company that had the product and though never released, I have one of the few working mac versions.
I am actaully a fun and lovable guy but enjoy a good, honest rant, as much as the next guy and I still think macs are over priced and under powered but the OS is one of the best, is it trouble free? No, not when you work on it all day it's not.
Have a good day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2
Now, you finally make sense to me.
You used to work for Apple as a genius and got fired (for your obvious bad attitude and poor interpersonal skills), and thus are a bitter, ex-Apple employee with an axe to grind.
Now, the fact that you totally rage-out every day about every little detail of everything related to Apple makes perfect sense. Nothing Apple can ever do will fix the hurt when they fired you eh?
LOL!
PS - Don't bother arguing you weren't fired. I have ten years retail experience and 15 as a computer tech. A guy with your attitude would be fired in a week tops no matter what his technical skills.
Your kidding right? I hope so. Saying there is no market for a machine that doesn't tie you down with a glossy display made up of mobile parts versus a machine that is NOT made up of server parts has no demand??? Where have you been since the liquid cooled dual G5's?
Or are you intentionally adding flame bait to the thread. There are many audio/video proSumers that would love these machines but don't want to blow $3000 grand on a Mac Pro. I have worked in the software (music) business and the marketshare makes the pro market look enimic. The bedroom, bands, prosumer project studios and camcorder crowd is 10s of thousands more than the pro markets. This is where comapnies like cakewalk, steinberg, ableton make their millions. In facts, the audio crowd was livid when firewire was dropped from the MacBook and still are.
Check out audio video forums. They scream for midrange and the i7 is close to xeon chips but apple wants the higher margins. DAW users know a lot about fpu, gpu, CPU more than most.
Surely you jest. In addition, many predict the bedroom director/editors to be the next wave of entertainment, replacing television programming as we now know it
Your kidding right? I hope so. Saying there is no market for a machine...
Absolutes are never good thing, so how about... "The market for a mid-range headless Mac solution is not large enough and, by extension, not profitable enough for Apple to care about at this time"
Your kidding right? I hope so. Saying there is no market for a machine that doesn't tie you down with a glossy display made up of mobile parts versus a machine that is NOT made up of server parts has no demand??? Where have you been since the liquid cooled dual G5's?
Or are you intentionally adding flame bait to the thread. There are many audio/video proSumers that would love these machines but don't want to blow $3000 grand on a Mac Pro. I have worked in the software (music) business and the marketshare makes the pro market look enimic. The bedroom, bands, prosumer project studios and camcorder crowd is 10s of thousands more than the pro markets. This is where comapnies like cakewalk, steinberg, ableton make their millions. In facts, the audio crowd was livid when firewire was dropped from the MacBook and still are.
Check out audio video forums. They scream for midrange and the i7 is close to xeon chips but apple wants the higher margins. DAW users know a lot about fpu, gpu, CPU more than most.
Surely you jest. In addition, many predict the bedroom director/editors to be the next wave of entertainment, replacing television programming as we now know it
I'm actually serious. For an Apple machine to be viable it requires sales volume and clear differentiation from other products in Apple's range. While such a machine 'may' sell in some volume Apple have highly likely done their research and found wouldn't be viable and is too close to other Apple products. Contrary to common believe, less choose is better, since it make's it easer for buyer to make a clear choice.
Ultimately this product would probably fall into the same category as the old and unsuccessful Centris range, 'stuck' between the consumer Performa and pro Quadra ranges.
Lets just have a quick look at the options that Apple currently offers for a Prosumer desktop:
The iMac is clearly the target prosumer desktop. These are high end computers with great displays, are easily capable of mixing tracks and video editing. Take 24 inch model stating at $1,499.00, deck one out and it will cost you around $2,199.00
The MacPro is a workstation class machine, you are right it's a Pro machine, it's like medium format digital camera, it's a serous computer which you need to justify the expense. However starting at $2,499 new, or look at the referb store and get a MacPro with two 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors for $2,399.00 - that's still a great machine, It's by no means out of reach of prosumer's.
Now for a possible quad core desktop, target price $1,500 - $2,000, ok, for this price we could get an iMac which comes with a 24inch display, further the iMac's dual cores are clocked higher and probably be more beneficial the user than the 4 cores. Spend a bit more and you have yourself a MacPro which with it's Xeon processors and architecture will you last longer.
Absolutes are never good thing, so how about... "The market for a mid-range headless Mac solution is not large enough and, by extension, not profitable enough for Apple to care about at this time"
This. It's really the most logical, obvious answer, and I'm quite sure it's the one Apple board members are familiar with.
The current lineup of Macs have been selling very, very well since 2006. And now we're seeing a significant shift toward notebooks. No real reason for a mid-range headless Mac when the average user who is part of Apple's market is looking for a notebook of some kind.
Desktops as we know them today are on the way out. And there's only so much you can fit into a Mini at this point. The headless Mini is the real desktop form-factor of the future. The Mac Pro is a different story. But that beast won't be immune to miniaturization, either. Large (and thin) disaplys are the name of the game, not large towers and cases.
The iMac will continue to sell because of its all-in-one convenience, but there's no way it will ever compete with Apple's notebook lineup anymore. Those days are gone.
In 6 or 12 months, no one is going to remember present ads.
Not only that, but even people here might not remember them specifically, as every time an article like this comes out, it gets filled with page after page of the same mindless bs, and this will all just blend into one fuzzy memory.
Seriously, I keep reading the same exact thing over and over with people repeating system specs and pricing, or talking about the operating systems, or what consumers "want." Doesn't anyone get tired of it?
Or they got pissed of with years of Apple making fun of them.
I can see how annoying that might feel for MS - like having a mosquito buzzing around your ears, each time with just a bit different frequency
I wouldn't call it being pissed. It's business.
Are you saying that Apple is so insignificant that MS would consider them a mosquito? In OS marketshare sure, but in value as a company, and surely the other PC vendors (where Apple actually competes head to head) they take most of the profitable market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikon133
But Apple keep saying my PCs are crashing and getting viruses all the time. Ooooh, they must be right!
My aunt just called me up yesterday. She is having BSOD on her notebook periodically. Her machine also takes 10 minutes to boot up with Kaspersey running and it's dog slow. This was not the case when she first got it.
Not only that, but even people here might not remember them specifically, as every time an article like this comes out, it gets filled with page after page of the same mindless bs, and this will all just blend into one fuzzy memory.
Seriously, I keep reading the same exact thing over and over with people repeating system specs and pricing, or talking about the operating systems, or what consumers "want." Doesn't anyone get tired of it?
It gets repetitive after a while, but this is an Apple fansite. All fansites/entusiast sites are like this, whether it's about Macs, Harleys, or whatever brand of TV.
Not only that, but even people here might not remember them specifically, as every time an article like this comes out, it gets filled with page after page of the same mindless bs, and this will all just blend into one fuzzy memory.
Seriously, I keep reading the same exact thing over and over with people repeating system specs and pricing, or talking about the operating systems, or what consumers "want." Doesn't anyone get tired of it?
Don't forget the posts where we complain about what others are complaining about. It's a never ending cycle.
Seriously, I keep reading the same exact thing over and over with people repeating system specs and pricing, or talking about the operating systems, or what consumers "want." Doesn't anyone get tired of it?
Yes and then some. Solipism is very good at it; in fact he' s perfected it. Anything that Apple doesn't produce presently - he states the public doesn't want it. Then once Apple releases it, he backtracks and states that's not what he' s meant, Apple does it better, and on and on , etc , etc. Calls people "complainers"- note his above post.
Don't forget the posts where we complain about what others are complaining about. It's a never ending cycle.
Sorry for complaining. I skimmed through this entire thread and found no new information or insight being offered on the subject and felt as thought it was rather insane that this discussion repeats its self so often around here lol.
But seeing as how I haven't added anything myself, I'm not exactly helping the situation. I'll shut up now
But see, the problem is apple positions the products in a way that it seems like just a little more money you can have the product you need until the next thing you know, you went way over budget. They leave out little things that makes the apple that more special
Now with regard to market research, they would have found that 10s of thousands of audio users were furious the FireWire got dumped and it was not about size but more about a better gpu and not wanting pro users to buy the low end. They would have also found that all the new iLife trainees had FireWire camcorders so IMHO they did not do their research or rather, they did but they want the end user to pay up if they want these missing features.
With regard to i7 it's just a matter if turning in the ecc switch and using non ecc memory. This drops the price quite a bit and the benchmarks are the same with some important benchmarks faster dye to non ecc and less communication between the CPU child making it faster. There are hundereds and hundereds if music forums, and video, and it's a known fact the prosumer market drives audio video hardware and these same users would love a mid range machine as this allows them to upgrade ram easy, choose a better graphic card, add PCI audioboricessibg cards, add special video digitizing cards, things you can't do with an iMac yet theses special audioncards can be had fir $300 dollars or so. A very differnt market than you mac pro AJAcard user base. The market is there but apple refuses nitvdue to lack of demand but due to forcing the end user to buy the top of the line when this said user wouldn't benifit from the server xeons, in fact, on some benchmarks, the xeon has features useless to the prosumer. I actually heard from the mouths of sales and marketing from Sony and Stienbeeg were theybsais the prosumer carries their company. They even went on to say that off the record, pirating doesn't hurt them but helps them as their software and loops are being promoted.
My .03 cents.
Peace.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stashman
I'm actually serious. For an Apple machine to be viable it requires sales volume and clear differentiation from other products in Apple's range. While such a machine 'may' sell in some volume Apple have highly likely done their research and found wouldn't be viable and is too close to other Apple products. Contrary to common believe, less choose is better, since it make's it easer for buyer to make a clear choice.
Ultimately this product would probably fall into the same category as the old and unsuccessful Centris range, 'stuck' between the consumer Performa and pro Quadra ranges.
Lets just have a quick look at the options that Apple currently offers for a Prosumer desktop:
The iMac is clearly the target prosumer desktop. These are high end computers with great displays, are easily capable of mixing tracks and video editing. Take 24 inch model stating at $1,499.00, deck one out and it will cost you around $2,199.00
The MacPro is a workstation class machine, you are right it's a Pro machine, it's like medium format digital camera, it's a serous computer which you need to justify the expense. However starting at $2,499 new, or look at the referb store and get a MacPro with two 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors for $2,399.00 - that's still a great machine, It's by no means out of reach of prosumer's.
Now for a possible quad core desktop, target price $1,500 - $2,000, ok, for this price we could get an iMac which comes with a 24inch display, further the iMac's dual cores are clocked higher and probably be more beneficial the user than the 4 cores. Spend a bit more and you have yourself a MacPro which with it's Xeon processors and architecture will you last longer.
Are you saying that Apple is so insignificant that MS would consider them a mosquito? In OS marketshare sure, but in value as a company, and surely the other PC vendors (where Apple actually competes head to head) they take most of the profitable market.
My aunt just called me up yesterday. She is having BSOD on her notebook periodically. Her machine also takes 10 minutes to boot up with Kaspersey running and it's dog slow. This was not the case when she first got it.
Correct.
Apple is an industry leader. Market share in terms of premium products is always lower, but Apple owns the market share at the Premium end - well over 70% of it. And the overall share at the Premium end is a lot smaller. It's a pyramid and we're looking at the the top or near the top. So people with enough disposable income or otherwise enogh to spend comfortably on a Mac of some sort (and the ability to actually deliver on their own tastes) are choosing Macs. This of course makes MS/PC-ware not only look cheaper, but consigns their image to bargain-bin status. Not good. And the MS ads are doing a wonderful job of reinforcing this message. I'm not sure who would want to associate themselves with it, apart from those who simply have no choice. Lauren, Giampaolo, and all those examples of consumers WANT Macs. They simply aren't in a position to afford them. It seems MS inadvertently delivers this message along with the "we're cheaper" message. Perhaps there's really no divorcing one from the other, anyway. You decide.
MS can only dream of owning the most coveted portion of the market - the high-margin, higher-income end. This end of the market not only presents less pressure in terms of production, but it also tends to esatblish product image and exclusivity - something to be coveted. And it helps keep you honest in terms of quality and fit-and-finish. Nothing but the best for this end of the market. This tip of the market pyramid can singlehandedly push your product into "must-have" status.
MS is to varying degrees locked out of this end.
Apple is the most significant tech player of our time. With the market share they have (kept exclusive and "Premium-oriented"), Apple now has more cash on hand than Microsoft. With a fraction of the production. Apple doesn't do high volume Macs and OS X. They don't want to, nor should they. That will only dilute product image and eventually, quality. MS only wishes it could pull off the kind of margins Apple can. But the average peson looks at an MS/PC product and the last thing they think of is tasteful, functional beauty.
MS' recent ads are simply meant to increase sales at any cost - mostly of PC's which come with Windows installed anyway. All this really does in the long run is just slag on MS and the other PC manufacturers. It effectively kills any chance they have of pushing further into the Premium end. But this is what happens when you scrape from the bottom.
PM me with number. Will call her and see if I can help her out.
Peace
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I wouldn't call it being pissed. It's business.
Are you saying that Apple is so insignificant that MS would consider them a mosquito? In OS marketshare sure, but in value as a company, and surely the other PC vendors (where Apple actually competes head to head) they take most of the profitable market.
My aunt just called me up yesterday. She is having BSOD on her notebook periodically. Her machine also takes 10 minutes to boot up with Kaspersey running and it's dog slow. This was not the case when she first got it.
Comments
I used XP for years and an app crash hardly ever caused a total crash. Have you ever used Windows?
XP is, in theory, is easier to crash than Vista or 7. It is simple matter of design.
However, number of XP crashes I have seen is getting lower and lower as the time pass by; is it due to XP patches, or new versions of apps playing more by the rules, I don't know - but it seems definitely less common for applications to crash XP today, compared to early days.
Vista is rock solid. Short of faulty hardware or really crappy driver (very uncommon nowadays), crashing Vista really requires an effort.
Being smart enough to run a Windows computer without getting a virus is too much to ask of a typical user. I have been running Windows for years without viruses as well, but you and I aren't your typical computer buyer. The fact is that Vista is certainly an improvement on security, but if you are a typical Windows user that means either getting a poor free anti-virus solution or paying upwards of $60/year for anti-virus protection.
OS X's ties to Apple's hardware are the only major disadvantage to owning a Mac. Nobody's forcing anyone to get one, but unfortunately Apple is the only real competitor to Microsoft's OS on a consumer level. The reality is that it doesn't really matter what hardware you get, it's all made by contracted chinese factories no matter which brand you buy.
I would hardly call tying Mac OS X to Apple hardware as a disadvantage of owning a Mac. If you own a Mac you will able to run Mac OS X and if you wanted to Windows or Linux on the same Apple box. What I think you are trying to say is that Mac OS X is disadvantaged by not being able run on any old PC hardware.
The point is that the Mac platform is more than just the software, the hardware is designed to work with the software and vs versa. This is why the Mac offers a better user experience to users. If you just take the bits you want you will end up with a compromised solution. Also how on earth could you expect Apple to certify it's OS capable of running on Joe Bloggs computer. Microsoft tries to do this and the user experience is not pleasant. Many PCs are sold with inferior hardware which is substandard and prone to failure. You can blatantly see this in the poor viewing viewing angles and washed out colours on your supermarket laptop display.
I know and you made my point. When people say macs are over priced and bring up the mac pro, most compare a dell and point out that the mac is cheaper and it is.
What users are really trying to say is that there is no mid range or desktop Mac that's not an iMac and that the Mac Pro is designed to have higher margins when Apple could have built a 8 Core non server processor and used regular ram. By building it the way they did, they keep price comparisons on par with pcs. What's really needed is to benchmark a hackntosh 8 core i7 machine against a mac pro. This will tell the real story as desktops rarely break down. This the low price for apple care. The desktops dell sells in that price range are not geared toward the consume, they, and all other of makers have mid range, high end, ie not the top of the line yet powerful, desktops wheras apple does not. Even their iMac, if you consider it a desktop, runs on mobile parts. Frankly, I bet if apple released a i7 8 core machine for $1100, you would never hear about over priced anymore. Maybe once in a while on the mac book pros, but not nearly as much as we hear now.
Peace.
There is clearly no market for these machines
You can't beat a good anecdote.
Microsoft's entire ad campaign seems very short-sighted to me. It's like McDonald's offering 99¢ hamburgers. Sure, more people will be attracted to 99¢ hamburgers in a recession, when they feel a need to watch every dollar, but it's not because they really prefer to eat cheap hamburgers. When the crunch is over and people start feeling better about their economic circumstances, they'll want something better. How is Microsoft's "ours are cheaper!" campaign going to look in 6-12 months, when people starting thinking more about what they really want?
In 6 or 12 months, no one is going to remember present ads.
I have worked at the director level and am really BLESSED, LUCKY and blessed some more (thank you God), now enjoy scoring for feature films and tv. I also have several sample CDs out for garage band and Sonys Acid program I worked for the same company for years and even worked in business affairs. Care to talk about contracts, licensing, synch and master legal matters? LOL
My first job was retail though then I worked for a bank before college and then the entertainment business. If you google my name you would see many hits and movie credits. I am tempted to have you call me but consider myself blessed to be working when I see others struggle.
Really, I am a fun guy so PM me and I will tell you who I am.
I've been ranting at Apple ever since the days of the G4 and the so called portable recording studio when at the time, the Athlon was pouncing it. It was my dual computer certs and EE background that made me tech savvy and I always saw through the bogus Apple marketing and at the time, Intel's bogus benchmarks.
I knew all about FPU benchmarks and what that meant to audio/video plug ins for years. I worked in avid media bays back when the G3 machines took 1/2 an hour to render 10 minutes worth of work. My yahoo account was created in 1997. I can post a message on the yahoo stock market board where you can see 1997 if you like.
I then became an overclocker and gaming enthusiast, becoming a member of mad onion before this forum existed. I then became friends with the founder if The Inquirer, Mike Magee, UK, and learned all about inside secrets years before links to his site were posted here.
I then got frustated when the number one software sampler of the time was PC only, it was called, gigastudio, so you know what I did? I became a beta tester for the company that had the product and though never released, I have one of the few working mac versions.
I am actaully a fun and lovable guy but enjoy a good, honest rant, as much as the next guy and I still think macs are over priced and under powered but the OS is one of the best, is it trouble free? No, not when you work on it all day it's not.
Have a good day.
Now, you finally make sense to me.
You used to work for Apple as a genius and got fired (for your obvious bad attitude and poor interpersonal skills), and thus are a bitter, ex-Apple employee with an axe to grind.
Now, the fact that you totally rage-out every day about every little detail of everything related to Apple makes perfect sense. Nothing Apple can ever do will fix the hurt when they fired you eh?
LOL!
PS - Don't bother arguing you weren't fired. I have ten years retail experience and 15 as a computer tech. A guy with your attitude would be fired in a week tops no matter what his technical skills.
There is clearly no market for these machines
Your kidding right? I hope so. Saying there is no market for a machine that doesn't tie you down with a glossy display made up of mobile parts versus a machine that is NOT made up of server parts has no demand??? Where have you been since the liquid cooled dual G5's?
Or are you intentionally adding flame bait to the thread. There are many audio/video proSumers that would love these machines but don't want to blow $3000 grand on a Mac Pro. I have worked in the software (music) business and the marketshare makes the pro market look enimic. The bedroom, bands, prosumer project studios and camcorder crowd is 10s of thousands more than the pro markets. This is where comapnies like cakewalk, steinberg, ableton make their millions. In facts, the audio crowd was livid when firewire was dropped from the MacBook and still are.
Check out audio video forums. They scream for midrange and the i7 is close to xeon chips but apple wants the higher margins. DAW users know a lot about fpu, gpu, CPU more than most.
Surely you jest. In addition, many predict the bedroom director/editors to be the next wave of entertainment, replacing television programming as we now know it
Your kidding right? I hope so. Saying there is no market for a machine...
Absolutes are never good thing, so how about... "The market for a mid-range headless Mac solution is not large enough and, by extension, not profitable enough for Apple to care about at this time"
Your kidding right? I hope so. Saying there is no market for a machine that doesn't tie you down with a glossy display made up of mobile parts versus a machine that is NOT made up of server parts has no demand??? Where have you been since the liquid cooled dual G5's?
Or are you intentionally adding flame bait to the thread. There are many audio/video proSumers that would love these machines but don't want to blow $3000 grand on a Mac Pro. I have worked in the software (music) business and the marketshare makes the pro market look enimic. The bedroom, bands, prosumer project studios and camcorder crowd is 10s of thousands more than the pro markets. This is where comapnies like cakewalk, steinberg, ableton make their millions. In facts, the audio crowd was livid when firewire was dropped from the MacBook and still are.
Check out audio video forums. They scream for midrange and the i7 is close to xeon chips but apple wants the higher margins. DAW users know a lot about fpu, gpu, CPU more than most.
Surely you jest. In addition, many predict the bedroom director/editors to be the next wave of entertainment, replacing television programming as we now know it
I'm actually serious. For an Apple machine to be viable it requires sales volume and clear differentiation from other products in Apple's range. While such a machine 'may' sell in some volume Apple have highly likely done their research and found wouldn't be viable and is too close to other Apple products. Contrary to common believe, less choose is better, since it make's it easer for buyer to make a clear choice.
Ultimately this product would probably fall into the same category as the old and unsuccessful Centris range, 'stuck' between the consumer Performa and pro Quadra ranges.
Lets just have a quick look at the options that Apple currently offers for a Prosumer desktop:
The iMac is clearly the target prosumer desktop. These are high end computers with great displays, are easily capable of mixing tracks and video editing. Take 24 inch model stating at $1,499.00, deck one out and it will cost you around $2,199.00
The MacPro is a workstation class machine, you are right it's a Pro machine, it's like medium format digital camera, it's a serous computer which you need to justify the expense. However starting at $2,499 new, or look at the referb store and get a MacPro with two 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors for $2,399.00 - that's still a great machine, It's by no means out of reach of prosumer's.
Now for a possible quad core desktop, target price $1,500 - $2,000, ok, for this price we could get an iMac which comes with a 24inch display, further the iMac's dual cores are clocked higher and probably be more beneficial the user than the 4 cores. Spend a bit more and you have yourself a MacPro which with it's Xeon processors and architecture will you last longer.
Absolutes are never good thing, so how about... "The market for a mid-range headless Mac solution is not large enough and, by extension, not profitable enough for Apple to care about at this time"
This. It's really the most logical, obvious answer, and I'm quite sure it's the one Apple board members are familiar with.
The current lineup of Macs have been selling very, very well since 2006. And now we're seeing a significant shift toward notebooks. No real reason for a mid-range headless Mac when the average user who is part of Apple's market is looking for a notebook of some kind.
Desktops as we know them today are on the way out. And there's only so much you can fit into a Mini at this point. The headless Mini is the real desktop form-factor of the future. The Mac Pro is a different story. But that beast won't be immune to miniaturization, either. Large (and thin) disaplys are the name of the game, not large towers and cases.
The iMac will continue to sell because of its all-in-one convenience, but there's no way it will ever compete with Apple's notebook lineup anymore. Those days are gone.
In 6 or 12 months, no one is going to remember present ads.
Not only that, but even people here might not remember them specifically, as every time an article like this comes out, it gets filled with page after page of the same mindless bs, and this will all just blend into one fuzzy memory.
Seriously, I keep reading the same exact thing over and over with people repeating system specs and pricing, or talking about the operating systems, or what consumers "want." Doesn't anyone get tired of it?
Or they got pissed of with years of Apple making fun of them.
I can see how annoying that might feel for MS - like having a mosquito buzzing around your ears, each time with just a bit different frequency
I wouldn't call it being pissed. It's business.
Are you saying that Apple is so insignificant that MS would consider them a mosquito? In OS marketshare sure, but in value as a company, and surely the other PC vendors (where Apple actually competes head to head) they take most of the profitable market.
But Apple keep saying my PCs are crashing and getting viruses all the time. Ooooh, they must be right!
My aunt just called me up yesterday. She is having BSOD on her notebook periodically. Her machine also takes 10 minutes to boot up with Kaspersey running and it's dog slow. This was not the case when she first got it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7pkM6NFlfE
Not only that, but even people here might not remember them specifically, as every time an article like this comes out, it gets filled with page after page of the same mindless bs, and this will all just blend into one fuzzy memory.
Seriously, I keep reading the same exact thing over and over with people repeating system specs and pricing, or talking about the operating systems, or what consumers "want." Doesn't anyone get tired of it?
It gets repetitive after a while, but this is an Apple fansite. All fansites/entusiast sites are like this, whether it's about Macs, Harleys, or whatever brand of TV.
Not only that, but even people here might not remember them specifically, as every time an article like this comes out, it gets filled with page after page of the same mindless bs, and this will all just blend into one fuzzy memory.
Seriously, I keep reading the same exact thing over and over with people repeating system specs and pricing, or talking about the operating systems, or what consumers "want." Doesn't anyone get tired of it?
Don't forget the posts where we complain about what others are complaining about.
Seriously, I keep reading the same exact thing over and over with people repeating system specs and pricing, or talking about the operating systems, or what consumers "want." Doesn't anyone get tired of it?
Yes and then some. Solipism is very good at it; in fact he' s perfected it. Anything that Apple doesn't produce presently - he states the public doesn't want it. Then once Apple releases it, he backtracks and states that's not what he' s meant, Apple does it better, and on and on , etc , etc. Calls people "complainers"- note his above post.
Quite pathetic actually.
However- on OS issues- he's one of the best.
Don't forget the posts where we complain about what others are complaining about.
Sorry for complaining. I skimmed through this entire thread and found no new information or insight being offered on the subject and felt as thought it was rather insane that this discussion repeats its self so often around here lol.
But seeing as how I haven't added anything myself, I'm not exactly helping the situation. I'll shut up now
Now with regard to market research, they would have found that 10s of thousands of audio users were furious the FireWire got dumped and it was not about size but more about a better gpu and not wanting pro users to buy the low end. They would have also found that all the new iLife trainees had FireWire camcorders so IMHO they did not do their research or rather, they did but they want the end user to pay up if they want these missing features.
With regard to i7 it's just a matter if turning in the ecc switch and using non ecc memory. This drops the price quite a bit and the benchmarks are the same with some important benchmarks faster dye to non ecc and less communication between the CPU child making it faster. There are hundereds and hundereds if music forums, and video, and it's a known fact the prosumer market drives audio video hardware and these same users would love a mid range machine as this allows them to upgrade ram easy, choose a better graphic card, add PCI audioboricessibg cards, add special video digitizing cards, things you can't do with an iMac yet theses special audioncards can be had fir $300 dollars or so. A very differnt market than you mac pro AJAcard user base. The market is there but apple refuses nitvdue to lack of demand but due to forcing the end user to buy the top of the line when this said user wouldn't benifit from the server xeons, in fact, on some benchmarks, the xeon has features useless to the prosumer. I actually heard from the mouths of sales and marketing from Sony and Stienbeeg were theybsais the prosumer carries their company. They even went on to say that off the record, pirating doesn't hurt them but helps them as their software and loops are being promoted.
My .03 cents.
Peace.
I'm actually serious. For an Apple machine to be viable it requires sales volume and clear differentiation from other products in Apple's range. While such a machine 'may' sell in some volume Apple have highly likely done their research and found wouldn't be viable and is too close to other Apple products. Contrary to common believe, less choose is better, since it make's it easer for buyer to make a clear choice.
Ultimately this product would probably fall into the same category as the old and unsuccessful Centris range, 'stuck' between the consumer Performa and pro Quadra ranges.
Lets just have a quick look at the options that Apple currently offers for a Prosumer desktop:
The iMac is clearly the target prosumer desktop. These are high end computers with great displays, are easily capable of mixing tracks and video editing. Take 24 inch model stating at $1,499.00, deck one out and it will cost you around $2,199.00
The MacPro is a workstation class machine, you are right it's a Pro machine, it's like medium format digital camera, it's a serous computer which you need to justify the expense. However starting at $2,499 new, or look at the referb store and get a MacPro with two 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors for $2,399.00 - that's still a great machine, It's by no means out of reach of prosumer's.
Now for a possible quad core desktop, target price $1,500 - $2,000, ok, for this price we could get an iMac which comes with a 24inch display, further the iMac's dual cores are clocked higher and probably be more beneficial the user than the 4 cores. Spend a bit more and you have yourself a MacPro which with it's Xeon processors and architecture will you last longer.
I wouldn't call it being pissed. It's business.
Are you saying that Apple is so insignificant that MS would consider them a mosquito? In OS marketshare sure, but in value as a company, and surely the other PC vendors (where Apple actually competes head to head) they take most of the profitable market.
My aunt just called me up yesterday. She is having BSOD on her notebook periodically. Her machine also takes 10 minutes to boot up with Kaspersey running and it's dog slow. This was not the case when she first got it.
Correct.
Apple is an industry leader. Market share in terms of premium products is always lower, but Apple owns the market share at the Premium end - well over 70% of it. And the overall share at the Premium end is a lot smaller. It's a pyramid and we're looking at the the top or near the top. So people with enough disposable income or otherwise enogh to spend comfortably on a Mac of some sort (and the ability to actually deliver on their own tastes) are choosing Macs. This of course makes MS/PC-ware not only look cheaper, but consigns their image to bargain-bin status. Not good. And the MS ads are doing a wonderful job of reinforcing this message. I'm not sure who would want to associate themselves with it, apart from those who simply have no choice. Lauren, Giampaolo, and all those examples of consumers WANT Macs. They simply aren't in a position to afford them. It seems MS inadvertently delivers this message along with the "we're cheaper" message. Perhaps there's really no divorcing one from the other, anyway. You decide.
MS can only dream of owning the most coveted portion of the market - the high-margin, higher-income end. This end of the market not only presents less pressure in terms of production, but it also tends to esatblish product image and exclusivity - something to be coveted. And it helps keep you honest in terms of quality and fit-and-finish. Nothing but the best for this end of the market. This tip of the market pyramid can singlehandedly push your product into "must-have" status.
MS is to varying degrees locked out of this end.
Apple is the most significant tech player of our time. With the market share they have (kept exclusive and "Premium-oriented"), Apple now has more cash on hand than Microsoft. With a fraction of the production. Apple doesn't do high volume Macs and OS X. They don't want to, nor should they. That will only dilute product image and eventually, quality. MS only wishes it could pull off the kind of margins Apple can. But the average peson looks at an MS/PC product and the last thing they think of is tasteful, functional beauty.
MS' recent ads are simply meant to increase sales at any cost - mostly of PC's which come with Windows installed anyway. All this really does in the long run is just slag on MS and the other PC manufacturers. It effectively kills any chance they have of pushing further into the Premium end. But this is what happens when you scrape from the bottom.
Peace
I wouldn't call it being pissed. It's business.
Are you saying that Apple is so insignificant that MS would consider them a mosquito? In OS marketshare sure, but in value as a company, and surely the other PC vendors (where Apple actually competes head to head) they take most of the profitable market.
My aunt just called me up yesterday. She is having BSOD on her notebook periodically. Her machine also takes 10 minutes to boot up with Kaspersey running and it's dog slow. This was not the case when she first got it.