I don't mean all that stuff that Alienware has on their site, but the stuff that has been industry standard for 3, 4 years that Apple still doesn't have. Like 2x full speed 16x PCI-E lanes, and better graphics card options. That's all I can think of. I am so far behind because Apple has been so far behind for so long I don't even know what technologies the industry, and consumers are all hyped about any more.
2x 16x PC-E isn't standard. In fact it's rare. Standard is 2x 8x. The slots allow 16x cards to fit, but they only work as 8x slots when two are being used. 2x 16x is rare.
The number of video cards, is, as I keep saying, not Apple's responsibility. They only supply them because Apple doesn't sell enough machines to get the interest of the card makers. I don't expect Apple to have a full line, though it would be nice.
The reason I say this is that Apple recently reduced the size of its MacBook Pro power adapter. Maybe Apple engineered a smaller 85W power adapter for the small 13" MBP notebook because the original one for the MBP was rather large and bulky. The original MBP 85W power adapter wouldn't fit well with a svelte compact thin and light like the supposed 13" MacBook thin.
This is a false argument and out of place in reference to Apple. It is patently obvious there are many manufacturers of computers of all types that run Windows. There is only one company that produces computers that run Mac OS X. So yes, melgross is correct in this assertion. No way Apple can exist as a laptop computer company and remain in the computer industry, unless of course they license their operating system to other OEMs.
It is a false argument to show that one company that sells nothing but laptops* has higher worldwide share than Apple to show that Apple could still increase market share to take Top 5 standing in worldwide share (which it is NOT today) with nothing but a very strong laptop line?
What are you smoking? Toshiba moved 2.3M units. They aren't exiting the computer industry but posted 54% growth.
That Apple is the only maker of OSX machines is immaterial and its not like the iMac simply ISN'T a laptop in a very strange and immobile form factor. The only real desktop machine that Apple has is the Mac Pro.
If they decided to make the iMac semi-mobile like the Dell XPS M2010 (counted as a laptop by Dell) I doubt it would sell any less if it were done more elegantly by Ives.
Vinea
* pretty sure this is the case. Recall reading that Toshiba had abandoned the desktop market. Certainly true in the US.
It is a false argument to show that one company that sells nothing but laptops* has higher worldwide share than Apple to show that Apple could still increase market share to take Top 5 standing in worldwide share (which it is NOT today) with nothing but a very strong laptop line?
What are you smoking? Toshiba moved 2.3M units. They aren't exiting the computer industry but posted 54% growth.
That Apple is the only maker of OSX machines is immaterial and its not like the iMac simply ISN'T a laptop in a very strange and immobile form factor. The only real desktop machine that Apple has is the Mac Pro.
If they decided to make the iMac semi-mobile like the Dell XPS M2010 (counted as a laptop by Dell) I doubt it would sell any less if it were done more elegantly by Ives.
Vinea
* pretty sure this is the case. Recall reading that Toshiba had abandoned the desktop market. Certainly true in the US.
Actually, it is relevant. Toshiba is selling within the Windows market. Therefore people who want a Windows laptop can go to Toshiba, which has always made very good laptops. They can always leave Toshiba if next time, Toshiba doesn't have something up to snuff.
But, Toshiba, unlike Apple, doesn't compete in the areas that Apple competes in. That's the photo, publishing, graphics, video, architectural, scientific, etc. businesses. They sell laptops mostly to business. Toshiba is also a giant company for which computers play but a small part. Not so for Apple.
Most of the machines in those areas that Apple does compete in are desktops, and workstations.
If Apple gives that up, because of attention to laptop sales, they give up some of the more profitable, and high profile, parts of their computer business.
If Apple expects those who need higher performance machines, or those with greater ergonomic quality in the office, they need desktops.
If those parts of the business die, then you can forget about their laptop business as well. The laptop business is to a great degree, a reflection of the businesses before mentioned.
Actually, it is relevant. Toshiba is selling within the Windows market. Therefore people who want a Windows laptop can go to Toshiba, which has always made very good laptops. They can always leave Toshiba if next time, Toshiba doesn't have something up to snuff.
But, Toshiba, unlike Apple, doesn't compete in the areas that Apple competes in. That's the photo, publishing, graphics, video, architectural, scientific, etc. businesses. They sell laptops mostly to business. Toshiba is also a giant company for which computers play but a small part. Not so for Apple.
So tell me what can an iMac do that a Mac Book Pro can't do?
You can have a viable Apple computer line up with nothing but laptops, workstations and servers.
Quote:
Most of the machines in those areas that Apple does compete in are desktops, and workstations.
Assume we keep the Mac Pro, xServe, aTV and current notebook lines.
iMac and Mini completely gone but replaced by:
iHome NAS/iTunes server based on the aTV motherboard
11" ultraportable MBP
20" desktop replacement MBP
iDock for the MB/MBP that allows for 2x24" ACD or a single 30" ACD and has 2 SATA bays. Drives available when docked or via wireless connection.
Are you saying these machines can't do EVERYTHING the iMac can do and better? Are you saying the line up is weaker?
Because I think not with the ultraportable and NAS/iTunes server.
Quote:
If Apple gives that up, because of attention to laptop sales, they give up some of the more profitable, and high profile, parts of their computer business.
Mmm...I would say their margins are similar between iMac and MBP. I dunno the iMac is higher profile than the MB/MBP lines.
I would say that the 20" desktop replacement and 11" ultraportable done right would be premiere products and very high profile.
Quote:
If Apple expects those who need higher performance machines, or those with greater ergonomic quality in the office, they need desktops.
Ergonomic quality? There's zero ergonomic difference between my MBP and MP as I use the same keyboard and monitor for both.
Higher performance I grant for the Mac Pro but less so for the iMac.
Quote:
If those parts of the business die, then you can forget about their laptop business as well. The laptop business is to a great degree, a reflection of the businesses before mentioned.
Apple can't live off Mac Book sales.
Not if you limit it to the current line up, no. And why would those parts of the business die?
But only one real addition is required. The dock. With the dock with 15" MBP can do anything that an iMac can do. Possibly better if you want to add a single PCIe slot to the dock.
The 20" desktop replacement would be a really nice to have to fill out the top end prosumer. Replace the X1800 in the M2010 with a better GeForce GPU and add the 2.8Ghz X7900 as a BTO option and it fills any need below the Mac Pro.
The NAS/iTunes server would go nicely with the aTV and a MB or MBP for a total home solution sans desktop. iDock in the den with the iHome NAS/iTunes Server. aTV works just fine when all the notebooks are out of the house. Mom, Dad and the kids with the MB and MBPs have mobile computing around the house or docked as needed for larger dual montiors and bluetooth keyboard and mouse.
Heh. I think your intuition is way off here. You seriously believe that Apple will not hold a launch event ever again until they have another iPhone-like new-segment product on their hands?
I said single product.
If apple has at least 2 - 3 cool products to show sure, they can go crazy, but to bring them there to go: "and now iMac!" It's pretty lame and will generate "cool, what else?" To which apple will again say "and now iMac!" Before realizing they heard them the first time.
You yourself went onto mention your desire for multiple product intros that day, justifying my position.
If that's true then the journalists are gonna groan just as much if not more than they did at the Hi-Fi event. I really hope apple learned their lesson and doens't invite a bunch of people to come and stand around one product unless it's iPhone level revolutionary.
No matter how nice or strong the new imac is, wthout something crazy like a replacable GPU(maybe not even then), the imac just isn't enough to warrant a press event all to itself.
Count me in for a new Mac Cube with replacable GPU. I will buy one if it happens, but it will never happen. Count me in for the apple home server thing someone else mentioned. I will buy one if it happens, but it will never happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecking
I said single product.
If apple has at least 2 - 3 cool products to show sure, they can go crazy, but to bring them there to go: "and now iMac!" It's pretty lame and will generate "cool, what else?" To which apple will again say "and now iMac!" Before realizing they heard them the first time.
You yourself went onto mention your desire for multiple product intros that day, justifying my position.
In my scenario, if they show an iMac and demo iLife and iWork, that's still one product the press gets to stand around. Even without iLife and iWork, it will be a successful press event if the iMac is interesting enough.
ecking your way off. Apple has had two products that have changed the way the world looks at something in their entire history:
? 1 The Macintosh,
? 2 The iPod.
The iPhone has yet to qualify.
If Apple waited for another industry changing idea before holding an event we would never see shit.
Apple holds these product events now because it became clockwork with their product cycles, and people started holding off on buying until MacWorld, NAAB, and WWDC. Now when a product is ready they announce it; it's that simple. If the press wants to cover an Apple product they will, if they don't, they don't have to come but the invitation is there.
Once again please read properly:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecking
If that's true then the journalists are gonna groan just as much if not more than they did at the Hi-Fi event. I really hope apple learned their lesson and doens't invite a bunch of people to come and stand around one product unless it's iPhone level revolutionary.
I don't know why you guys can't see that but damnit I understand the need for these events infact I love them, the lack of them is why I haven't been posting as much lately.
Now I'm gonna bold this so it is clear:
I was merely pointing out that introing ONE product would be a huge let down to the journalists. Everyone here, including myself has theorized the imac's debut and I'm positive that if that was ALL that happened, most people, espcially the journalists would groan. Unless that product was something that blew people's minds it wouldn't be enough, I mean look at all the people that thought MWSF, and WWDC weren't enough to whet their appetites. After a year of nothing but spec bumps and new chipsets the imac alone can bring EVERYONE the mac salvation they so desire? Come on. They need to intro multiple products together, instead of going "I bring you...the iMac! See you in 2 months to talk about the macbook! And after that maybe iLife or something!" Unless it was brand spanking new product (one that mattered - sorry Hi Fi) or something game changing, one product is not enough of a sensation to warrant what is essentially apple's first mac hardware event in a year.
The reason I say this is that Apple recently reduced the size of its MacBook Pro power adapter. Maybe Apple engineered a smaller 85W power adapter for the small 13" MBP notebook because the original one for the MBP was rather large and bulky. The original MBP 85W power adapter wouldn't fit well with a svelte compact thin and light like the supposed 13" MacBook thin.
In my scenario, if they show an iMac and demo iLife and iWork, that's still one product the press gets to stand around. Even without iLife and iWork, it will be a successful press event if the iMac is interesting enough.
iMac, iLife and iWork are three separate products, even if they're installed only on said iMac.
And the second part is a big IF. What is considered interesting? To some that just giving in an aluminum enclosure, to some it's touchscreens (unrealistic I know), to some the keyboard itself may do it for them. But the point I'm trying to make is that is a lot of expectation to put on only the iMac after people flew/drove all the way there.
No, they aren't. There are vast numbers of desktop machines in every educational facility, business office, and governmental office as well. They arte not going to be replaced with laptops
At some point, which might be closer than you think, the percentage of swing towards laptops will slow, then stop.
The reason why Apple has a greater ratio of laptop to desktop sales than most other companies isn't because there is just a swing to laptops, but also because Apple's desktop lines aren't as desirable.
It's easy to say, as Jobs did a year or two back, that it's the year of the portable, if your desktops simply aren't selling.
I'm right there with ya buddy, apple's desktop offerings are lacking, and are kind of senseless. I see on other sites people with mbps next to imacs and I kind of laugh in my head when they post their specs because 9 times out of 10 they're basically bought the same thing twice.
If apple had some kind of decent desktop strategy I'd own more than my mbp right now (I do have my old mini still but that's on my tv now).
Apple essentailly has 3 computers right now: The macbook, the macbook pro, and the mac pro.
Everything else is simply a variation on one of those. And wadaya know? Those are their bestsellers! Apple needs some kind of clear purpose that will make desktops something worth caring about again.
2x 16x PC-E isn't standard. In fact it's rare. Standard is 2x 8x. The slots allow 16x cards to fit, but they only work as 8x slots when two are being used. 2x 16x is rare.
The number of video cards, is, as I keep saying, not Apple's responsibility. They only supply them because Apple doesn't sell enough machines to get the interest of the card makers. I don't expect Apple to have a full line, though it would be nice.
It's not rare in workstations. But nevertheless if they allowed both BIOS, and EFI in leopard we would have more of the choices that we don't have now. A user would see that they had the option to buy a GeForce 8800 Ultra, or a GeForce 7950x2 and have one card drop in SLI if they so desired. If they had the ability to drive two 16X lanes they could use real SLI. Just knowing it's there if you want it is a big deal when buying anything.
It's not rare in workstations. But nevertheless if they allowed both BIOS, and EFI in leopard we would have more of the choices that we don't have now. A user would see that they had the option to buy a GeForce 8800 Ultra, or a GeForce 7950x2 and have one card drop in SLI if they so desired. If they had the ability to drive two 16X lanes they could use real SLI. Just knowing it's there if you want it is a big deal when buying anything.
only one x16 lane is intel crappy exon chip set and BIOS cards have no video in the boot screens in a EFI mac.
And the haveing the only system with desktop cards use FB-DIMMs is bad for gaming. The I-macs have laptop parts and laptop based video cards + If new ones are smaller that will keep high end video cards out.
only one x16 lane is intel crappy exon chip set and BIOS cards have no video in the boot screens in a EFI mac.
And the haveing the only system with desktop cards use FB-DIMMs is bad for gaming. The I-macs have laptop parts and laptop based video cards + If new ones are smaller that will keep high end video cards out.
It's not the Xeon chip with the limitation, it is a component of the motherboard which determines this.. one which Intel does supply that supports enough PCIe lanes is not used by Apple. The video cards in the current iMac are not mobility cards -- neither the x1600 or 7600GT used are mobile variants. The CPU is, and that is a problem.
On a more personal note, you've been here for a long enough time to know better than to call a Xeon crappy or to call an iMac an I-mac.. is this something of an act? Apple has never been in the gaming market to compete with Windows FPS; so using FB-DIMM while sacrificing 5% of your FPS is not an issue for Apple. Let's try to be more serious about Apple's strategy.
The chipset used in the Mac Pro allows something like 42 PCIe lanes, so Apple could in theory have dual x16 if they wanted to. Instead, they have the (pretty freaking awesome) lane-switching thing that basically lets you have a x16, an x8, and 2 x4s. Mac Pros also spend PCIe lanes on Airport, Bluetooth, and Firewire.
Joe_the_Dragon, I don't know why you haven't figured this out in the last 12-14 months when people here have been explaining it to you patiently: the Mac Pro is a workstation, not a gaming computer. It uses workstation parts like Xeons and FB-DIMMs because it's designed for workstation tasks. Specifically, FB-DIMMs offer massive bandwidth improvements (they're quad channel after all) and capacity improvements (8+ DIMM slots instead of 4 DIMM slots) And the PCIe is set-up the way it's set up because aside from the GPU, most workstations use cards that require on x8 or x4 connections, like Fibre Channel cards or RAID cards. That way, instead of being able to have a GPU and 1 Fibre Channel card, the Mac Pro can have a GPU, FC card, and 1-2 RAID cards.
BIOS cards have no video in the boot screen on Macs because EFI can have its own device drivers, whereas BIOS is more limited. EFI also supports a shell, whereas BIOS is again more limited. The only thin BIOS has EFI beat on is GPU support, and when you get down to it, video card manufacturers are supposedly going to start supporting EFI as well this generation or next.
The only "laptop part" the iMac uses is the processor. Actually, seeing as Intel sells a 800 MHz FSB desktop line with models at iMac speeds, the only "laptop" thing about the iMac is the socket, not the processor. You're complaining about the arrangement of the pins in the socket. The GPU in all the iMac models is a desktop GPU. They use x1600s and GeForce 7300s and 7600s, which are mid-range to mid-low desktop parts. There's no evidence that Mobility Radeons or Geforce Go cards are used. Or is your logic that any card that doesn't end in -800 or -900 a laptop card?
And size isn't going to be much of a factor for iMac video cards. They'll still be able to fit a GF 8600 or 8400 pretty easily in there. In fact, BFG has a 8600 GTS with a single-slot fan. Not a bad card for a consumer machine.
So tell me what can an iMac do that a Mac Book Pro can't do?
It doesn't have to be an imac as long as it isn't a portable.
The last thing I, and many others apparently want on our desks are laptops with bigger monitors plugged in, and desktop keyboards.
Is that what you have in your work environment?
Quote:
You can have a viable Apple computer line up with nothing but laptops, workstations and servers.
Your saying so doesn't make it so. There will be about 100 million desktops sold this year. Why is that? Every person and organization could have bought laptops instead, but they didn't.
Quote:
Assume we keep the Mac Pro, xServe, aTV and current notebook lines.
iMac and Mini completely gone but replaced by:
iHome NAS/iTunes server based on the aTV motherboard
11" ultraportable MBP
20" desktop replacement MBP
iDock for the MB/MBP that allows for 2x24" ACD or a single 30" ACD and has 2 SATA bays. Drives available when docked or via wireless connection.
I still wouldn't want a 20" MBP. I want a 22", or 24", or a 30". What now? You have, again, to go buy that extra monitor.
And you assume that people like portable keyboards. Many people don't.
Again, I'm not saying it must be an iMac. For all I care, Apple could just keep the 24" in the line for general purchase, and sell the 20" to schools.
Sure, get rid of the Mini. But replace them with something else, such as that mini tower.
Quote:
Are you saying these machines can't do EVERYTHING the iMac can do and better? Are you saying the line up is weaker?
Because I think not with the ultraportable and NAS/iTunes server.
I agree that your combo would do everything. But, my above comments show where I don't think it would go down big with the large desktop buying groups. I know you disagree.
Quote:
Mmm...I would say their margins are similar between iMac and MBP. I dunno the iMac is higher profile than the MB/MBP lines.
I would say that the 20" desktop replacement and 11" ultraportable done right would be premiere products and very high profile.
I'm not talking about margins, or at least I didn't mean to.
What I meant was that without the desktops in the line, and at the time we were discussing this earlier, I assumed that you were also classifying the Mac Pro in that catagory, there wouldn't be much "pull' toward the laptops without the high profile businesses.
Without them, high end software development would come to an abrupt halt.
since you are excluding the workstations from that equation, the situation would be a bit different, but not totally.
Quote:
Ergonomic quality? There's zero ergonomic difference between my MBP and MP as I use the same keyboard and monitor for both.
You misunderstood me. I'm talking about between desktop machines and laptops, not MB's and MBP's. Though people do say that the MBP keyboard is better, as are the screens.
See, and you DO need to buy an extra (as apart from what comes with the laptop) monitor and keyboard. Extra room and expense.
Quote:
Higher performance I grant for the Mac Pro but less so for the iMac.
True, less so for the iMac.
Quote:
Not if you limit it to the current line up, no. And why would those parts of the business die?
They would die for the reasons I gave. Apple simply can't continue a successful professional business with just the power and sophistication of laptops. There are things they do well, but there are things they aren't suited for.
Quote:
But only one real addition is required. The dock. With the dock with 15" MBP can do anything that an iMac can do. Possibly better if you want to add a single PCIe slot to the dock.
A dock would help. But, for most, it isn't a suitable replacement. They haven't proven themselves to be wildly popular. Apple had them. Few bought them.
Quote:
The 20" desktop replacement would be a really nice to have to fill out the top end prosumer. Replace the X1800 in the M2010 with a better GeForce GPU and add the 2.8Ghz X7900 as a BTO option and it fills any need below the Mac Pro.
I really don't understand why you would think that that would really be suitable as a replacement. It seems to be very clumsy to me. I know few people who would want to lug it around. And if it's going to permanently replace a desktop model, then there's no purpose to it at all.
Quote:
The NAS/iTunes server would go nicely with the aTV and a MB or MBP for a total home solution sans desktop. iDock in the den with the iHome NAS/iTunes Server. aTV works just fine when all the notebooks are out of the house. Mom, Dad and the kids with the MB and MBPs have mobile computing around the house or docked as needed for larger dual montiors and bluetooth keyboard and mouse.
Vinea
A NAS server can be, and is, used with desktop networks as well. I'm thinking of getting one myself for our network.
Vinea, this is a matter of viewpoints. The only way we'll see who is correct, is to wait five years and come back to it.
Comments
I don't mean all that stuff that Alienware has on their site, but the stuff that has been industry standard for 3, 4 years that Apple still doesn't have. Like 2x full speed 16x PCI-E lanes, and better graphics card options. That's all I can think of. I am so far behind because Apple has been so far behind for so long I don't even know what technologies the industry, and consumers are all hyped about any more.
2x 16x PC-E isn't standard. In fact it's rare. Standard is 2x 8x. The slots allow 16x cards to fit, but they only work as 8x slots when two are being used. 2x 16x is rare.
The number of video cards, is, as I keep saying, not Apple's responsibility. They only supply them because Apple doesn't sell enough machines to get the interest of the card makers. I don't expect Apple to have a full line, though it would be nice.
The reason I say this is that Apple recently reduced the size of its MacBook Pro power adapter. Maybe Apple engineered a smaller 85W power adapter for the small 13" MBP notebook because the original one for the MBP was rather large and bulky. The original MBP 85W power adapter wouldn't fit well with a svelte compact thin and light like the supposed 13" MacBook thin.
Whadda ya think?
This is a false argument and out of place in reference to Apple. It is patently obvious there are many manufacturers of computers of all types that run Windows. There is only one company that produces computers that run Mac OS X. So yes, melgross is correct in this assertion. No way Apple can exist as a laptop computer company and remain in the computer industry, unless of course they license their operating system to other OEMs.
It is a false argument to show that one company that sells nothing but laptops* has higher worldwide share than Apple to show that Apple could still increase market share to take Top 5 standing in worldwide share (which it is NOT today) with nothing but a very strong laptop line?
What are you smoking? Toshiba moved 2.3M units. They aren't exiting the computer industry but posted 54% growth.
That Apple is the only maker of OSX machines is immaterial and its not like the iMac simply ISN'T a laptop in a very strange and immobile form factor. The only real desktop machine that Apple has is the Mac Pro.
If they decided to make the iMac semi-mobile like the Dell XPS M2010 (counted as a laptop by Dell) I doubt it would sell any less if it were done more elegantly by Ives.
Vinea
* pretty sure this is the case. Recall reading that Toshiba had abandoned the desktop market. Certainly true in the US.
It is a false argument to show that one company that sells nothing but laptops* has higher worldwide share than Apple to show that Apple could still increase market share to take Top 5 standing in worldwide share (which it is NOT today) with nothing but a very strong laptop line?
What are you smoking? Toshiba moved 2.3M units. They aren't exiting the computer industry but posted 54% growth.
That Apple is the only maker of OSX machines is immaterial and its not like the iMac simply ISN'T a laptop in a very strange and immobile form factor. The only real desktop machine that Apple has is the Mac Pro.
If they decided to make the iMac semi-mobile like the Dell XPS M2010 (counted as a laptop by Dell) I doubt it would sell any less if it were done more elegantly by Ives.
Vinea
* pretty sure this is the case. Recall reading that Toshiba had abandoned the desktop market. Certainly true in the US.
Actually, it is relevant. Toshiba is selling within the Windows market. Therefore people who want a Windows laptop can go to Toshiba, which has always made very good laptops. They can always leave Toshiba if next time, Toshiba doesn't have something up to snuff.
But, Toshiba, unlike Apple, doesn't compete in the areas that Apple competes in. That's the photo, publishing, graphics, video, architectural, scientific, etc. businesses. They sell laptops mostly to business. Toshiba is also a giant company for which computers play but a small part. Not so for Apple.
Most of the machines in those areas that Apple does compete in are desktops, and workstations.
If Apple gives that up, because of attention to laptop sales, they give up some of the more profitable, and high profile, parts of their computer business.
If Apple expects those who need higher performance machines, or those with greater ergonomic quality in the office, they need desktops.
If those parts of the business die, then you can forget about their laptop business as well. The laptop business is to a great degree, a reflection of the businesses before mentioned.
Apple can't live off Mac Book sales.
Actually, it is relevant. Toshiba is selling within the Windows market. Therefore people who want a Windows laptop can go to Toshiba, which has always made very good laptops. They can always leave Toshiba if next time, Toshiba doesn't have something up to snuff.
But, Toshiba, unlike Apple, doesn't compete in the areas that Apple competes in. That's the photo, publishing, graphics, video, architectural, scientific, etc. businesses. They sell laptops mostly to business. Toshiba is also a giant company for which computers play but a small part. Not so for Apple.
So tell me what can an iMac do that a Mac Book Pro can't do?
You can have a viable Apple computer line up with nothing but laptops, workstations and servers.
Most of the machines in those areas that Apple does compete in are desktops, and workstations.
Assume we keep the Mac Pro, xServe, aTV and current notebook lines.
iMac and Mini completely gone but replaced by:
iHome NAS/iTunes server based on the aTV motherboard
11" ultraportable MBP
20" desktop replacement MBP
iDock for the MB/MBP that allows for 2x24" ACD or a single 30" ACD and has 2 SATA bays. Drives available when docked or via wireless connection.
Are you saying these machines can't do EVERYTHING the iMac can do and better? Are you saying the line up is weaker?
Because I think not with the ultraportable and NAS/iTunes server.
If Apple gives that up, because of attention to laptop sales, they give up some of the more profitable, and high profile, parts of their computer business.
Mmm...I would say their margins are similar between iMac and MBP. I dunno the iMac is higher profile than the MB/MBP lines.
I would say that the 20" desktop replacement and 11" ultraportable done right would be premiere products and very high profile.
If Apple expects those who need higher performance machines, or those with greater ergonomic quality in the office, they need desktops.
Ergonomic quality? There's zero ergonomic difference between my MBP and MP as I use the same keyboard and monitor for both.
Higher performance I grant for the Mac Pro but less so for the iMac.
If those parts of the business die, then you can forget about their laptop business as well. The laptop business is to a great degree, a reflection of the businesses before mentioned.
Apple can't live off Mac Book sales.
Not if you limit it to the current line up, no. And why would those parts of the business die?
But only one real addition is required. The dock. With the dock with 15" MBP can do anything that an iMac can do. Possibly better if you want to add a single PCIe slot to the dock.
The 20" desktop replacement would be a really nice to have to fill out the top end prosumer. Replace the X1800 in the M2010 with a better GeForce GPU and add the 2.8Ghz X7900 as a BTO option and it fills any need below the Mac Pro.
The NAS/iTunes server would go nicely with the aTV and a MB or MBP for a total home solution sans desktop. iDock in the den with the iHome NAS/iTunes Server. aTV works just fine when all the notebooks are out of the house. Mom, Dad and the kids with the MB and MBPs have mobile computing around the house or docked as needed for larger dual montiors and bluetooth keyboard and mouse.
Vinea
~Vita ineo vita accommodo homo niteo homo occasus, nisi congrego unus.
what in hell...
translate for me..
i'm buying that new iMac no matter what..
Heh. I think your intuition is way off here. You seriously believe that Apple will not hold a launch event ever again until they have another iPhone-like new-segment product on their hands?
I said single product.
If apple has at least 2 - 3 cool products to show sure, they can go crazy, but to bring them there to go: "and now iMac!" It's pretty lame and will generate "cool, what else?" To which apple will again say "and now iMac!" Before realizing they heard them the first time.
You yourself went onto mention your desire for multiple product intros that day, justifying my position.
If that's true then the journalists are gonna groan just as much if not more than they did at the Hi-Fi event. I really hope apple learned their lesson and doens't invite a bunch of people to come and stand around one product unless it's iPhone level revolutionary.
No matter how nice or strong the new imac is, wthout something crazy like a replacable GPU(maybe not even then), the imac just isn't enough to warrant a press event all to itself.
Count me in for a new Mac Cube with replacable GPU. I will buy one if it happens, but it will never happen. Count me in for the apple home server thing someone else mentioned. I will buy one if it happens, but it will never happen.
I said single product.
If apple has at least 2 - 3 cool products to show sure, they can go crazy, but to bring them there to go: "and now iMac!" It's pretty lame and will generate "cool, what else?" To which apple will again say "and now iMac!" Before realizing they heard them the first time.
You yourself went onto mention your desire for multiple product intros that day, justifying my position.
In my scenario, if they show an iMac and demo iLife and iWork, that's still one product the press gets to stand around. Even without iLife and iWork, it will be a successful press event if the iMac is interesting enough.
ecking your way off. Apple has had two products that have changed the way the world looks at something in their entire history:
? 1 The Macintosh,
? 2 The iPod.
The iPhone has yet to qualify.
If Apple waited for another industry changing idea before holding an event we would never see shit.
Apple holds these product events now because it became clockwork with their product cycles, and people started holding off on buying until MacWorld, NAAB, and WWDC. Now when a product is ready they announce it; it's that simple. If the press wants to cover an Apple product they will, if they don't, they don't have to come but the invitation is there.
Once again please read properly:
If that's true then the journalists are gonna groan just as much if not more than they did at the Hi-Fi event. I really hope apple learned their lesson and doens't invite a bunch of people to come and stand around one product unless it's iPhone level revolutionary.
I don't know why you guys can't see that but damnit I understand the need for these events infact I love them, the lack of them is why I haven't been posting as much lately.
Now I'm gonna bold this so it is clear:
I was merely pointing out that introing ONE product would be a huge let down to the journalists. Everyone here, including myself has theorized the imac's debut and I'm positive that if that was ALL that happened, most people, espcially the journalists would groan. Unless that product was something that blew people's minds it wouldn't be enough, I mean look at all the people that thought MWSF, and WWDC weren't enough to whet their appetites. After a year of nothing but spec bumps and new chipsets the imac alone can bring EVERYONE the mac salvation they so desire? Come on. They need to intro multiple products together, instead of going "I bring you...the iMac! See you in 2 months to talk about the macbook! And after that maybe iLife or something!" Unless it was brand spanking new product (one that mattered - sorry Hi Fi) or something game changing, one product is not enough of a sensation to warrant what is essentially apple's first mac hardware event in a year.
One more thing = 13" MacBook "thin"?
The reason I say this is that Apple recently reduced the size of its MacBook Pro power adapter. Maybe Apple engineered a smaller 85W power adapter for the small 13" MBP notebook because the original one for the MBP was rather large and bulky. The original MBP 85W power adapter wouldn't fit well with a svelte compact thin and light like the supposed 13" MacBook thin.
Whadda ya think?
Nice reasoning.
In my scenario, if they show an iMac and demo iLife and iWork, that's still one product the press gets to stand around. Even without iLife and iWork, it will be a successful press event if the iMac is interesting enough.
iMac, iLife and iWork are three separate products, even if they're installed only on said iMac.
And the second part is a big IF. What is considered interesting? To some that just giving in an aluminum enclosure, to some it's touchscreens (unrealistic I know), to some the keyboard itself may do it for them. But the point I'm trying to make is that is a lot of expectation to put on only the iMac after people flew/drove all the way there.
No, they aren't. There are vast numbers of desktop machines in every educational facility, business office, and governmental office as well. They arte not going to be replaced with laptops
At some point, which might be closer than you think, the percentage of swing towards laptops will slow, then stop.
The reason why Apple has a greater ratio of laptop to desktop sales than most other companies isn't because there is just a swing to laptops, but also because Apple's desktop lines aren't as desirable.
It's easy to say, as Jobs did a year or two back, that it's the year of the portable, if your desktops simply aren't selling.
I'm right there with ya buddy, apple's desktop offerings are lacking, and are kind of senseless. I see on other sites people with mbps next to imacs and I kind of laugh in my head when they post their specs because 9 times out of 10 they're basically bought the same thing twice.
If apple had some kind of decent desktop strategy I'd own more than my mbp right now (I do have my old mini still but that's on my tv now).
Apple essentailly has 3 computers right now: The macbook, the macbook pro, and the mac pro.
Everything else is simply a variation on one of those. And wadaya know? Those are their bestsellers! Apple needs some kind of clear purpose that will make desktops something worth caring about again.
2x 16x PC-E isn't standard. In fact it's rare. Standard is 2x 8x. The slots allow 16x cards to fit, but they only work as 8x slots when two are being used. 2x 16x is rare.
The number of video cards, is, as I keep saying, not Apple's responsibility. They only supply them because Apple doesn't sell enough machines to get the interest of the card makers. I don't expect Apple to have a full line, though it would be nice.
It's not rare in workstations. But nevertheless if they allowed both BIOS, and EFI in leopard we would have more of the choices that we don't have now. A user would see that they had the option to buy a GeForce 8800 Ultra, or a GeForce 7950x2 and have one card drop in SLI if they so desired. If they had the ability to drive two 16X lanes they could use real SLI. Just knowing it's there if you want it is a big deal when buying anything.
It's not rare in workstations. But nevertheless if they allowed both BIOS, and EFI in leopard we would have more of the choices that we don't have now. A user would see that they had the option to buy a GeForce 8800 Ultra, or a GeForce 7950x2 and have one card drop in SLI if they so desired. If they had the ability to drive two 16X lanes they could use real SLI. Just knowing it's there if you want it is a big deal when buying anything.
only one x16 lane is intel crappy exon chip set and BIOS cards have no video in the boot screens in a EFI mac.
And the haveing the only system with desktop cards use FB-DIMMs is bad for gaming. The I-macs have laptop parts and laptop based video cards + If new ones are smaller that will keep high end video cards out.
I would buy every one of the items you listed.
only one x16 lane is intel crappy exon chip set and BIOS cards have no video in the boot screens in a EFI mac.
And the haveing the only system with desktop cards use FB-DIMMs is bad for gaming. The I-macs have laptop parts and laptop based video cards + If new ones are smaller that will keep high end video cards out.
It's not the Xeon chip with the limitation, it is a component of the motherboard which determines this.. one which Intel does supply that supports enough PCIe lanes is not used by Apple. The video cards in the current iMac are not mobility cards -- neither the x1600 or 7600GT used are mobile variants. The CPU is, and that is a problem.
On a more personal note, you've been here for a long enough time to know better than to call a Xeon crappy or to call an iMac an I-mac.. is this something of an act? Apple has never been in the gaming market to compete with Windows FPS; so using FB-DIMM while sacrificing 5% of your FPS is not an issue for Apple. Let's try to be more serious about Apple's strategy.
In anycase, yay for Tuesday!
Joe_the_Dragon, I don't know why you haven't figured this out in the last 12-14 months when people here have been explaining it to you patiently: the Mac Pro is a workstation, not a gaming computer. It uses workstation parts like Xeons and FB-DIMMs because it's designed for workstation tasks. Specifically, FB-DIMMs offer massive bandwidth improvements (they're quad channel after all) and capacity improvements (8+ DIMM slots instead of 4 DIMM slots) And the PCIe is set-up the way it's set up because aside from the GPU, most workstations use cards that require on x8 or x4 connections, like Fibre Channel cards or RAID cards. That way, instead of being able to have a GPU and 1 Fibre Channel card, the Mac Pro can have a GPU, FC card, and 1-2 RAID cards.
BIOS cards have no video in the boot screen on Macs because EFI can have its own device drivers, whereas BIOS is more limited. EFI also supports a shell, whereas BIOS is again more limited. The only thin BIOS has EFI beat on is GPU support, and when you get down to it, video card manufacturers are supposedly going to start supporting EFI as well this generation or next.
The only "laptop part" the iMac uses is the processor. Actually, seeing as Intel sells a 800 MHz FSB desktop line with models at iMac speeds, the only "laptop" thing about the iMac is the socket, not the processor. You're complaining about the arrangement of the pins in the socket. The GPU in all the iMac models is a desktop GPU. They use x1600s and GeForce 7300s and 7600s, which are mid-range to mid-low desktop parts. There's no evidence that Mobility Radeons or Geforce Go cards are used. Or is your logic that any card that doesn't end in -800 or -900 a laptop card?
And size isn't going to be much of a factor for iMac video cards. They'll still be able to fit a GF 8600 or 8400 pretty easily in there. In fact, BFG has a 8600 GTS with a single-slot fan. Not a bad card for a consumer machine.
So tell me what can an iMac do that a Mac Book Pro can't do?
It doesn't have to be an imac as long as it isn't a portable.
The last thing I, and many others apparently want on our desks are laptops with bigger monitors plugged in, and desktop keyboards.
Is that what you have in your work environment?
You can have a viable Apple computer line up with nothing but laptops, workstations and servers.
Your saying so doesn't make it so. There will be about 100 million desktops sold this year. Why is that? Every person and organization could have bought laptops instead, but they didn't.
Assume we keep the Mac Pro, xServe, aTV and current notebook lines.
iMac and Mini completely gone but replaced by:
iHome NAS/iTunes server based on the aTV motherboard
11" ultraportable MBP
20" desktop replacement MBP
iDock for the MB/MBP that allows for 2x24" ACD or a single 30" ACD and has 2 SATA bays. Drives available when docked or via wireless connection.
I still wouldn't want a 20" MBP. I want a 22", or 24", or a 30". What now? You have, again, to go buy that extra monitor.
And you assume that people like portable keyboards. Many people don't.
Again, I'm not saying it must be an iMac. For all I care, Apple could just keep the 24" in the line for general purchase, and sell the 20" to schools.
Sure, get rid of the Mini. But replace them with something else, such as that mini tower.
Are you saying these machines can't do EVERYTHING the iMac can do and better? Are you saying the line up is weaker?
Because I think not with the ultraportable and NAS/iTunes server.
I agree that your combo would do everything. But, my above comments show where I don't think it would go down big with the large desktop buying groups. I know you disagree.
Mmm...I would say their margins are similar between iMac and MBP. I dunno the iMac is higher profile than the MB/MBP lines.
I would say that the 20" desktop replacement and 11" ultraportable done right would be premiere products and very high profile.
I'm not talking about margins, or at least I didn't mean to.
What I meant was that without the desktops in the line, and at the time we were discussing this earlier, I assumed that you were also classifying the Mac Pro in that catagory, there wouldn't be much "pull' toward the laptops without the high profile businesses.
Without them, high end software development would come to an abrupt halt.
since you are excluding the workstations from that equation, the situation would be a bit different, but not totally.
Ergonomic quality? There's zero ergonomic difference between my MBP and MP as I use the same keyboard and monitor for both.
You misunderstood me. I'm talking about between desktop machines and laptops, not MB's and MBP's. Though people do say that the MBP keyboard is better, as are the screens.
See, and you DO need to buy an extra (as apart from what comes with the laptop) monitor and keyboard. Extra room and expense.
Higher performance I grant for the Mac Pro but less so for the iMac.
True, less so for the iMac.
Not if you limit it to the current line up, no. And why would those parts of the business die?
They would die for the reasons I gave. Apple simply can't continue a successful professional business with just the power and sophistication of laptops. There are things they do well, but there are things they aren't suited for.
But only one real addition is required. The dock. With the dock with 15" MBP can do anything that an iMac can do. Possibly better if you want to add a single PCIe slot to the dock.
A dock would help. But, for most, it isn't a suitable replacement. They haven't proven themselves to be wildly popular. Apple had them. Few bought them.
The 20" desktop replacement would be a really nice to have to fill out the top end prosumer. Replace the X1800 in the M2010 with a better GeForce GPU and add the 2.8Ghz X7900 as a BTO option and it fills any need below the Mac Pro.
I really don't understand why you would think that that would really be suitable as a replacement. It seems to be very clumsy to me. I know few people who would want to lug it around. And if it's going to permanently replace a desktop model, then there's no purpose to it at all.
The NAS/iTunes server would go nicely with the aTV and a MB or MBP for a total home solution sans desktop. iDock in the den with the iHome NAS/iTunes Server. aTV works just fine when all the notebooks are out of the house. Mom, Dad and the kids with the MB and MBPs have mobile computing around the house or docked as needed for larger dual montiors and bluetooth keyboard and mouse.
Vinea
A NAS server can be, and is, used with desktop networks as well. I'm thinking of getting one myself for our network.
Vinea, this is a matter of viewpoints. The only way we'll see who is correct, is to wait five years and come back to it.
I suspect we'll have our boxing gloves on again.