All new Macs should come with CD-RW/DVD-RW Drives standard
I think at this point in time, all Macintosh computers should come standard with a DVD-RW/CD-RW drive (Superdrive). There is no reason for even the lowest end computer to come w/o the capability to burn CDs and DVDs.
Almost ALL new PC's come with a DVD-RW drive. Even the cheap ones.
I never buy a new PC, but I continually upgrade components and every few years do a major upgrade (MB+CPU+RAM).
With that being said, I've only had DVD-Burner for maybe 6 months, which is unusual, most ppl with PCs have had them for years.
Mac users should have the same DEFAULT/STANDARD equipment by now.
We shouldn't have to pay an extra $150+ for a dvd-r over cd-r unit on an iMac or Mini.
What does everyone else think? Please discuss.
Andrew
eMac 1.0GHz G4 Combo Drive
iBook 500MHz G3 24xCD-ROM
Almost ALL new PC's come with a DVD-RW drive. Even the cheap ones.
I never buy a new PC, but I continually upgrade components and every few years do a major upgrade (MB+CPU+RAM).
With that being said, I've only had DVD-Burner for maybe 6 months, which is unusual, most ppl with PCs have had them for years.
Mac users should have the same DEFAULT/STANDARD equipment by now.
We shouldn't have to pay an extra $150+ for a dvd-r over cd-r unit on an iMac or Mini.
What does everyone else think? Please discuss.
Andrew
eMac 1.0GHz G4 Combo Drive
iBook 500MHz G3 24xCD-ROM
Comments
I think at this point in time, all Macintosh computers should come standard with a DVD-RW/CD-RW drive (Superdrive). There is no reason for even the lowest end computer to come w/o the capability to burn CDs and DVDs.
Almost ALL new PC's come with a DVD-RW drive. Even the cheap ones.
I never buy a new PC, but I continually upgrade components and every few years do a major upgrade (MB+CPU+RAM).
With that being said, I've only had DVD-Burner for maybe 6 months, which is unusual, most ppl with PCs have had them for years.
Mac users should have the same DEFAULT/STANDARD equipment by now.
We shouldn't have to pay an extra $150+ for a dvd-r over cd-r unit on an iMac or Mini.
What does everyone else think? Please discuss.
Andrew
eMac 1.0GHz G4 Combo Drive
iBook 500MHz G3 24xCD-ROM
slot loading drivers cost more then 5 1/2 ones.
Could you clarify on that? Did you mean "Slot Loading Optical Drives cost more than tray-loading drives"?
If so, that's usually true, yes. I have two slot loading drives in my pc's. One CD-ROM from Pioneer and one DVD-ROM from Pioneer. They cost 20$ more than the Tray-load versions.
As far as I know, the new iMacs are ALL slot-loading, whether it be a Combo Drive or a Superdrive, so I don't see your point there.
All eMacs are tray loading.
iMac 350SL + are slot loading, no exceptions.
iMac G4 700-1.42GHz are all tray loading.
Minis are slots.
Anyone else?
slot loading drivers cost more then 5 1/2 ones.
when i try convert one PC guy he simply replied DVDROM??? (on the low end iMac) and i could not explain more ...
Apple should stop
1. Using DVDROMs
2. Asking for more than the retail prices of the HDD, RAM for the upgrades
3.
at any point in time, i wish i could pay additional $100 to $300 for Apple preimum, not for every HDD or RAM or any other parts/upgrades ...
MacBooks are selling well because they are better in hardware as well as software when compared to simililary configured PC. I am not complaining about all the Macs only the low end macs where all the scrippled hardware still exists ... and they are doing it for so many years ... so sad indeed ...
All the large quantity orders and its cost effectiveness should go to customer as well (not just only with apple) ...
well, i wish
when i try convert one PC guy he simply replied DVDROM?
The thing is, any potential switcher will always be the most critical of Apple's products and anything that seems way off is going to be an immediate deterrent. The prices are firstly more than what people expect to pay for a computer simply because Apple are using only the newer hardware. To then be met with crappy hardware choices e.g GMA graphics, low capacity drives, no DVD burners, is a big turn off. I also think Apple need to seriously address this problem.
The drives especially given that Apple keep pushing the fact Macs can make home movies easily. How can you make a home movie without a DVD burner?
I've said it before but it's worth saying again. The Mac Minis highlight the issue quite clearly. Thw high end one is $200 more than the low end. For that you get a 1.83 GHz chip, which costs the same as the 1.66 GHz one (Apple should be using 1.83 GHz and 2 GHz). You get 20GB HD space and a DVD burner. So you're paying $200 for 20GB and DVD burning!
The iMacs aren't much better value compared to PCs. You can buy a Core 2 Conroe for under £500 now with the same or better GPU then the iMac and then you can get a 20" display for £200-300. So that's just £800 compared to £1119.
One big problem I see is that Apple's prices just never seem to come down no matter how long we wait for product updates. Even if they dropped by £50 now and again. They did that once with the G4 Mini and it just felt like they were making some sort of effort. Apple are still pushing their G4 powerbooks at crazy prices at the Apple refurb store.
it is time we (apple fanboys) should demand best hardware from Apple with intel switch now ...
Macs for everyone with good hardware and great software ...
Low End Mac Mini ($599)
Low End iMac ($999)
Low End MacBook ($1099)
In each instance, you're talking about spending an additional $200 on a Mac to get a faster processor, a SuperDrive, as well as possibly more RAM and a larger hard drive.
Not everyone needs a SuperDrive and I guarantee you that if Apple did *not* have these lower priced Macs with Combo Drives, people would be complaining about the lack of choices in getting a lower end, cheap Mac.
Can't please all of the people all of the time.
Both of these products are due an update in the not too distant future though, so I think by the end of the year, we'll see an old SuperDrive line-up (maybe with the exception of an eduction model).
You guys are making a mountain out of a mole hill. Looking at Apple's lineup, the following computers don't have SuperDrives:
Low End Mac Mini ($599)
Low End iMac ($999)
Low End MacBook ($1099)
In each instance, you're talking about spending an additional $200 on a Mac to get a faster processor, a SuperDrive, as well as possibly more RAM and a larger hard drive.
Not everyone needs a SuperDrive and I guarantee you that if Apple did *not* have these lower priced Macs with Combo Drives, people would be complaining about the lack of choices in getting a lower end, cheap Mac.
Can't please all of the people all of the time.
$999 computers does not have a DVD Writer? when we can find DVD-R media 100 packs for $10 or $20, DVD writers are really handy
i love apple, but not in this matter
it does not matter, whether some one uses super drives are not, for these prices, dvd writer is expected...
$999 and $1099 are NOT low prices IMHO and these cannot be called cheap ...
That would mean that the cheapest Mac you could buy would be the $799, 1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo Mac Mini with 512 MB of RAM, 80 GB Hard Drive, Intel GMA 950 Graphics, and a SuperDrive. The cheapest Mac laptop you could buy would then be the $1299, 2.0 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo MacBook (White) with 1 GB of RAM, 80 GB Hard Drive, Intel GMA 950 Graphics, 13.3" display, and a SuperDrive. The cheapest iMac you could buy would then be the $1199, 2.0 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo iMac with 17" display, 1 GB of RAM, 160 GB Hard Drive, ATi Radeon X1600 Graphics Card, and a SuperDrive.
Other than giving up the very low end Mac market which is currently the bare bones Mac Mini with a Core Duo processor (as opposed to a Core 2 Duo), 512 MB of RAM (generally considered the bare minimum), a 60 GB Hard Drive (again, bare minimum), integrated graphics (bare minimum), and a Combo Drive (once again, bare minimum).
I think people need to realize that the 3 systems that Apple still sells without a SuperDrive are low end machines aimed at those who are looking for a cheap computer that can do word processing, browse the web, send email, sends instant messaging, and *maybe* play some music or watch a movie.
These 3 systems are not aimed at people who want to do a lot of Photoshop editing, play games with intense graphics, etc. These are the types of computers that I would advise my parents to buy. If they wanted a laptop, the low end MacBook would be perfect for them. If they wanted a desktop, they could get by with the Mac Mini and a new display or the iMac. Either one would be great for them.
Also remember that the Mac Mini and iMac lines are just about due for a refresh, so maybe you will get your wish and see the SuperDrives across those lines, but I still think that there is a sizeable part of the market that just wants/needs Macs without a lot of extras like DVD burners.
I have to still use my PC, which was recently agressively updated, just read my signature for the specs. My eMac is mainly as a secondary web browser, subject of interest and learning. I got it to get into the Mac world, try some things and see if I would enjoy it. I do, but I'm very dissapointed there is no DVD-RW.
Also, another thing to mention about Apple parts being expensive:
1. Apple products NEVER drop in price on the Apple Store, even if 1-2yrs old
2. Apple products like the Keyboard or Mouse are SO expensive. $40.00+ *Canadian* for a Keyboard and there is only ONE Apple keyboard choice? I used to buy a new keyboard every year for my PCs and give away or move the old one to another computer. 10$ each! Perfectly fine keyboards, typing on one of those 10$ Mitsumi ZW 104key win95 keyboards. It's not stiff, and doesn't look really dirty after using for a year.
Don't get me wrong, I really do love macs, and I would love to get a new one, but right now they're too expensive and the various things mentioned in this thread about not putting sertain levels of hardware in the machines standard keeps me from upgrading my mac.
Every Mac should have the average going amount of RAM (1gb+), HDD (160+), Optical (16xDVD-RW/48xCD-RW), 17" WS-LCD, 3 button optical/laser scrolling mouse.
What CAN be optional is the CPU. Current hardware on an iMac is 1.8ghz, 2.16ghz, 2.4ghz, etc. You should be able to have a wider choice of CPUS and that should make the price difference. Then you can have upgrades to RAM, HDD, LCD, etc.
Those upgrades should not be so expensive, either. Moving from a 160gb HDD to a 250GB HDD should only cost 30$. A new 250GB HDD is 100$ or less for a PC and I just ordered a new 500GB Seagate SATAII 3GB/S 7200.10 Barraccuda hard drive for my PC and it is going to be 199+tx (Canadian -14% tx). So an upgrade from 160gb (80$) to a 500gb (200$) should only be 100-125$.
Cheers.
Andrew
What CAN be optional is the CPU. Current hardware on an iMac is 1.8ghz, 2.16ghz, 2.4ghz, etc. You should be able to have a wider choice of CPUS and that should make the price difference. Then you can have upgrades to RAM, HDD, LCD, etc.
Those upgrades should not be so expensive, either. Moving from a 160gb HDD to a 250GB HDD should only cost 30$. A new 250GB HDD is 100$ or less for a PC and I just ordered a new 500GB Seagate SATAII 3GB/S 7200.10 Barraccuda hard drive for my PC and it is going to be 199+tx (Canadian -14% tx). So an upgrade from 160gb (80$) to a 500gb (200$) should only be 100-125$.
Cheers.
Andrew
apple needs to have more choice like a mid-range head less mac and they need to stop force you to get bigger screen i-mac if you what a faster cpu , better video, or a bigger hd.
apple needs to have more choice like a mid-range head less mac and they need to stop force you to get bigger screen i-mac if you what a faster cpu , better video, or a bigger hd.
People begged for a machine like this for a long time and Apple finally released it in the form of the Power Mac G4 Cube. It had a very good CPU, upgradeable graphics card slot, and allowed for more RAM and a larger hard drive. But while it was a good machine, it still wasn't *good enough* for most people. Like I said in my first post, you can't please all of the people all of the time.
Many people complained that the Cube was overpriced and not a good value compared to the iMacs and Power Mac G4s at the time. They also complained that Apple had not allowed for more expansion and that the machine was therefore 'crippled' to be a lower end Mac. Apple eventually realized that there wasn't a market for a midrage Mac like the Cube and discontinued it and they turned their efforts to making a low end Mac like what we see with the Mac Mini today.
In the end, what people really want is whatever the current Power Mac tower is with nearly all of it's features and expandability at half the price of whatever the low end Power Mac tower is and they want to call it 'a mid-range headless Mac'. Sorry folks, but that's just not going to happen.
People begged for a machine like this for a long time and Apple finally released it in the form of the Power Mac G4 Cube. It had a very good CPU, upgradeable graphics card slot, and allowed for more RAM and a larger hard drive. But while it was a good machine, it still wasn't *good enough* for most people. Like I said in my first post, you can't please all of the people all of the time.
Many people complained that the Cube was overpriced and not a good value compared to the iMacs and Power Mac G4s at the time. They also complained that Apple had not allowed for more expansion and that the machine was therefore 'crippled' to be a lower end Mac. Apple eventually realized that there wasn't a market for a midrage Mac like the Cube and discontinued it and they turned their efforts to making a low end Mac like what we see with the Mac Mini today.
In the end, what people really want is whatever the current Power Mac tower is with nearly all of it's features and expandability at half the price of whatever the low end Power Mac tower is and they want to call it 'a mid-range headless Mac'. Sorry folks, but that's just not going to happen.
You've succinctly summed up almost everything I've said in such threads.
I suspect you will be promptly flamed.
Many people complained that the Cube was overpriced and not a good value compared to the iMacs and Power Mac G4s at the time. They also complained that Apple had not allowed for more expansion and that the machine was therefore 'crippled' to be a lower end Mac. Apple eventually realized that there wasn't a market for a midrage Mac like the Cube and discontinued it and they turned their efforts to making a low end Mac like what we see with the Mac Mini today.
In the end, what people really want is whatever the current Power Mac tower is with nearly all of it's features and expandability at half the price of whatever the low end Power Mac tower is and they want to call it 'a mid-range headless Mac'. Sorry folks, but that's just not going to happen.
No, what people want is a mid-range headless Mac that is reasonably well priced and can have the necessary parts upgraded. You already said that the G4 cube did not meet those requirements. You can't say that if a product fails because it doesn't satisfy its target audience that the target audience doesn't exist.
Nearly every PC owner has a mid range tower so the market is certainly there and they will stick with their PCs until Apple offer what they want.
http://www.sonystyle.com/is-bin/20IN...b&Dept=tvvideo
Here is an excerpt of the unit's description:
"High definition meets high performance in the VAIO® VGN-AR390E notebook. With the ability to handle Blu-ray Disc® media, it unlocks the keys to multimedia nirvana. Watch, burn and edit true 1080i HD video content and burn 25 times more data than on regular DVD media. It features a gorgeous cutting-edge design and widescreen workspace that are matched by a suite of multimedia features that you?d typically find in a movie studio, like HDMI? output and NTSC and ATSC TV tuners that let you watch and record TV. Whether you?re working or playing, the blazing fast Intel® Core? 2 Duo processor enables high-speed editing and rendering. Then screen it Hollywood-style on a stunning 17" WUXGA (1920x1200) widescreen display5. And your lifestyle is as editable as your videos, thanks to the built-in 802.11 a/b/g wireless LAN4 technology. Windows Vista? Home Premium Edition included."
Can we hope that Apple will follow suit?
People begged for a machine like this for a long time and Apple finally released it in the form of the Power Mac G4 Cube. It had a very good CPU, upgradeable graphics card slot, and allowed for more RAM and a larger hard drive. But while it was a good machine, it still wasn't *good enough* for most people. Like I said in my first post, you can't please all of the people all of the time.
Many people complained that the Cube was overpriced and not a good value compared to the iMacs and Power Mac G4s at the time. They also complained that Apple had not allowed for more expansion and that the machine was therefore 'crippled' to be a lower end Mac. Apple eventually realized that there wasn't a market for a midrage Mac like the Cube and discontinued it and they turned their efforts to making a low end Mac like what we see with the Mac Mini today.
In the end, what people really want is whatever the current Power Mac tower is with nearly all of it's features and expandability at half the price of whatever the low end Power Mac tower is and they want to call it 'a mid-range headless Mac'. Sorry folks, but that's just not going to happen.
No. Apple could have, for example, a machine that was bigger than the mini, with desktop parts (which would mean better performance and lower price), that cost about $1,000, and it would please many people.
That is most certainly not "whatever the current Power Mac tower is with nearly all of it's features and expandability at half the price"--it could have Conroe (which is significantly cheaper and cooler than two Xeons), the cheapest GeForce 8 Series card (for example), a 160GB 7200rpm hard drive, and a Superdrive, most of which would be cheaper than laptop parts, and much cheaper than a Mac Pro in a much smaller (and cheaper) case. (Of course all of this could be changed BTO, which would be an additional benefit)
This is not at all comparable to the Cube, as
1. it was very expensive for what it offered, and price is an important issue, particularly for those interested in this, who otherwise would just get a Mac Pro
2. Apple was not in the position it is now--many more people would consider it than considered the Cube
3. technology is completely different today to seven years ago, so this Mac would have a a low-end processor (which the G4 was not back then), etc. The product would be in a completely diferent position to the 2000 equivalent, and would deliver much better performance for a much lower relative price
(Don't want to hijack the thread in the name of midrange Mac discussion, but your argument is not valid as a discussion-stopper)
yeah, apple should be ashamed about including CDRW-DVDROM . . .
This is silly.
I just went to the Dell website and checked out a common home PC. A CD-RW/DVD-ROM costs extra. It is not standard on the Dell I looked at. The standard is simply a DVD-ROM, which can't even burn a CD-R. So Apple provided a better optical drive than Dell.
are you comparing the $599, $999 or $1099 machine ...
common guys DVD writer is not a big thing, it is common usuage is day to day work...
if some one downloads a movie for $9.99 then need to store in dvd for backup, that simple as that ... (do not comeup with some excuses like external dvd and so on)
it looks like lots of apple stock holders here than apple fan boys
i am apple fanboy myself, but i will not close eyes and say nothing in progress in the world
That Dell is probably like 399$. You can't get anything from Apple for 399 except an iPod, but that is not a Personal Computer System.
Cheapest from Apple is 679$ Canadian w/o keyboard, mouse or monitor. Mac mini isn't a cheap alternative. the 1099$ CND 17" iMac would be the cheaper way out. Mac Mini:
679 Computer
179 17" LCD Monitor
40 Keybaord
60 Mouse
120 Ext. DVD-BURNER *cause the low-end Mini doesn't have one
--------
1078
So it's basically the same amount.
This is silly.
I just went to the Dell website and checked out a common home PC. A CD-RW/DVD-ROM costs extra. It is not standard on the Dell I looked at. The standard is simply a DVD-ROM, which can't even burn a CD-R. So Apple provided a better optical drive than Dell.
Cheers.
Andrew
I said Apple should be ashamed NOT DELL... which means i do not care about what is the offer in Dell ...
are you comparing the $599, $999 or $1099 machine ...
common guys DVD writer is not a big thing, it is common usuage is day to day work...
if some one downloads a movie for $9.99 then need to store in dvd for backup, that simple as that ... (do not comeup with some excuses like external dvd and so on)
it looks like lots of apple stock holders here than apple fan boys
i am apple fanboy myself, but i will not close eyes and say nothing in progress in the world