Dunno about the grate, but I could definetely see it looking like his mockup, but with the light aluminum metal sides & handles, and a black-backed glass center.
I see nothing wrong with the present case. As an efficient design to remove heat from the unit, it reflects what many workstations and servers have as front and rear panels. I don't see what they can do to make it better. Changing the colors a bit to designate a "new" model would be nice, but wouldn't do anything to improve the design, which has been called one of the best computer cases ever made.
I suppose they could rearrange the inside a bit more this time so as to give us an additional front storage bay, but I don't see them wanting to do that.
What I've wanted for some time was for the four drives to be accessible from the outside of the side of the case in a "hot mount" configuration.
As much as I've read about how great an xMac would be my personal
experience selling computers to consumers has corroborated a few things.
1. Mac users don't upgrade extensively. We've never had off the shelf motherboards, GPU and more. The typical Mac user buys more RAM or storage and that's it.
2. xMac loses Apple monitor sales. Let's face I've seen as many Dell monitors displaying OS X as an Apple Cinema Display. xMac simply means Apple loses revenue which offsets any mythical gain.
3. Consumers tend to replace systems. Consumers tend to want the CPU and the display to be new. People will put up with older technology and budget to replace both the computer and display. Seen it a thousand times.
We enthusiasts see things differently but in fact we are the niche as are our desires.
As much as I've read about how great an xMac would be my personal
experience selling computers to consumers has corroborated a few things.
1. Mac users don't upgrade extensively. We've never had off the shelf motherboards, GPU and more. The typical Mac user buys more RAM or storage and that's it.
I don't agree that's a problem. Only a very small percentage of PC owners upgrade either. It's a myth to think otherwise.
People often buy something because of what they THINK they will do with it, rather than what they actually will do with it. Many people who think they will upgrade their machines never do. The most they do is to add some more RAM, and possibly another HDD. Only a small number percentagewise ever upgrades the graphics card.
Quote:
2. xMac loses Apple monitor sales. Let's face I've seen as many Dell monitors displaying OS X as an Apple Cinema Display. xMac simply means Apple loses revenue which offsets any mythical gain.
That's only because Apple has no inexpensive monitors. If Apple were to make a relatively inexpensive xMac, then it would behoove them to also make a relatively inexpensive line of monitors, at least one or two. That would gain them monitor sales, rather than to lose them as they do now.
Quote:
3. Consumers tend to replace systems. Consumers tend to want the CPU and the display to be new. People will put up with older technology and budget to replace both the computer and display. Seen it a thousand times.
Some consumers do, some don't.
But, more importantly, I've read more than a few articles over the past two or three years in places like Computerworld and Infoworld, where in interviews about Macs in the workplace, where they said that companies don't want all-in-ones. They want to have separate monitors and computers, and that was holding back Macs in the enterprise, almost as much as anything else.
Quote:
We enthusiasts see things differently but in fact we are the niche as are our desires.
Normally, I'd agree with that, as you know. I usually find that people on forums are way off base when compared to the average person, or business.
But this is one area in which I think people on the forums are right about it.
In the PC world, they've been selling all-in-ones long before Apple started selling its more modern iMacs. But sales have been dismal.
Most consumers buy what they're familiar with, which is some form of tower, because almost everyone else has that. They have it at work as well. More technically adept people, as I said before like to think they are going to do upgrades, and some of them do, but the point is not that they do, but that, again, as I said, that they think they will.
It's like cameras. Over they years I've gotten a very large number of people asking me what they should buy (because of my business). Very often they want a Canon or Nikon because of the very wide selection of lenses. Of course, almost none of those people would ever buy anything other than the usual selection, but it didn't matter. Somehow, the thought that they were available was enough to sway their decision.
I see nothing wrong with the present case. As an efficient design to remove heat from the unit, it reflects what many workstations and servers have as front and rear panels. I don't see what they can do to make it better. Changing the colors a bit to designate a "new" model would be nice, but wouldn't do anything to improve the design, which has been called one of the best computer cases ever made.
I suppose they could rearrange the inside a bit more this time so as to give us an additional front storage bay, but I don't see them wanting to do that.
What I've wanted for some time was for the four drives to be accessible from the outside of the side of the case in a "hot mount" configuration.
Since you asked how could it be improved, then what about a filtering system so the internal parts of the Mac Pro don't get so dusty so easily? From what I've read on these forums, the Mac Pro needs something to keep dust from piling up on the internal parts.
Since you asked how could it be improved, then what about a filtering system so the internal parts of the Mac Pro don't get so dusty so easily? From what I've read on these forums, the Mac Pro needs something to keep dust from piling up on the internal parts.
That wouldn't require a case redesign, just a moving around of the interior, which Apple has done already.
I don't know of any computer that doesn't get dusty inside. The ones with filters get clogged up, and overheat, unless the user pays a lot of attention to that filter, which interestingly enough, on most machines that have them, are not replaceable! Filters cut the airflow by a good amount without even getting dirty. Server rooms have air conditioning with filtered air entering the room that takes care of this problem for them.
A certain amount of dust inside a machine isn't a problem. For that, companies make special vacuums. Once in a while, open the case, and give it a quick vacuuming, and that will solve any problem. It's less work and mess than cleaning filters, and in the long run, less expensive than buying replaceable ones. Any small vacuum will do.
A certain amount of dust inside a machine isn't a problem. For that, companies make special vacuums. Once in a while, open the case, and give it a quick vacuuming, and that will solve any problem. It's less work and mess than cleaning filters, and in the long run, less expensive than buying replaceable ones. Any small vacuum will do.
I don't know if any small vacuum will do, don't they have a risk of building up static charge if it isn't built for this job?
I don't know if any small vacuum will do, don't they have a risk of building up static charge if it isn't built for this job?
I've never had a problem. The computer is grounded, and thats what matters. The specialty vacuums are rarely grounded. Their claim to fame is that they're small, and come with accessories that allow probing into the recesses of the machine more easily.
That wouldn't require a case redesign, just a moving around of the interior, which Apple has done already.
I don't know of any computer that doesn't get dusty inside. The ones with filters get clogged up, and overheat, unless the user pays a lot of attention to that filter, which interestingly enough, on most machines that have them, are not replaceable! Filters cut the airflow by a good amount without even getting dirty. Server rooms have air conditioning with filtered air entering the room that takes care of this problem for them.
A certain amount of dust inside a machine isn't a problem. For that, companies make special vacuums. Once in a while, open the case, and give it a quick vacuuming, and that will solve any problem. It's less work and mess than cleaning filters, and in the long run, less expensive than buying replaceable ones. Any small vacuum will do.
They all get some dust inside, but some more than others. I put in a larger HD in my G4 466 DA a little over a year ago. That was the first and only time I have ever cleaned it and it didn't have much dust on the inside after almost 7 years. And the fan runs about 18 hours a day and I do have a normal amount of dust in my house. So I still feel that is something that Apple needs to improve upon in the Mac Pro.
They all get some dust inside, but some more than others. I put in a larger HD in my G4 466 DA a little over a year ago. That was the first and only time I have ever cleaned it and it didn't have much dust on the inside after almost 7 years. And the fan runs about 18 hours a day and I do have a normal amount of dust in my house. So I still feel that is something that Apple needs to improve upon in the Mac Pro.
Going back to my 950, I've seen all of my Macs get plenty of dust inside. I've cleaned all of them once avery three months or so. I see PC's get just as dusty.
My dual 2GHz G5 PowerMac doesn't get any dirtier than any of the others, and it uses the same case. I haven't seen any Mac Pro's that are dirtier either. The internal fans always get lots of dust on them and have to be vacuumed.
Most of the dust is at the bottom of the cases, out of the way, except for the dust on the fans. While the mobo and cards get a fine dust, it's not much, and I usually leave it alone.
more importantly, I've read more than a few articles over the past two or three years in places like Computerworld and Infoworld, where in interviews about Macs in the workplace, where they said that companies don't want all-in-ones. They want to have separate monitors and computers, and that was holding back Macs in the enterprise, almost as much as anything else.
Most consumers buy what they're familiar with, which is some form of tower, because almost everyone else has that. They have it at work as well. More technically adept people, as I said before like to think they are going to do upgrades, and some of them do, but the point is not that they do, but that, again, as I said, that they think they will.
I think the idea of upgrades on a headless machine wrt internals is less important than the display upgrade for consumers and businesses alike. I don't think people buy headless machines because they think they will want to upgrade the internals of the machine but rather the display or easily replace it if it breaks.
The iMac screen looks expensive and it costs about half the price of the machine to replace it outside of warranty. When a consumer separates a PC box, the display, the peripherals into parts, it's easy to weigh up the cost of ownership as they can break it down into worst case scenarios. The worst case scenario of fixing even an iMac isight is uncertain at the point of purchase.
I personally couldn't care less about the CPU and GPU these days in terms of upgrades. It's just not worth it to consider upgrading them so those parts can be sealed up. Everything else however I want to be able to replace myself: Ram, HD, display. In the case of the aluminium iMac, 1 out of 3 is not good enough.
To be perfectly honest, if Apple made their displays (and hard drives) as easy to replace as the hard drives in the Macbook and they were inexpensive as well as with a matte option, I'd be completely sold on the AIO design.
Essentially, if you could unclip the front bezel of the iMac display and simply pull out the display part, buy another from Apple for a reasonable price and drop another in, it would be fine. I feel the same way about the laptops, if they could find a way to allow consumers to just unclip the display from the laptop and buy the display along with the top shell for a reasonable price.
They can't do this for a reasonable price though because they use IPS panels in some models so once you get that, you're stuck with having to pay for an IPS display if your one breaks.
As much as I've read about how great an xMac would be my personal
experience selling computers to consumers has corroborated a few things.
1. Mac users don't upgrade extensively. We've never had off the shelf motherboards, GPU and more. The typical Mac user buys more RAM or storage and that's it.
People may not upgrade extensively but a xMac gives them more choice at the time of sale.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison
Melgross
2. xMac loses Apple monitor sales. Let's face I've seen as many Dell monitors displaying OS X as an Apple Cinema Display. xMac simply means Apple loses revenue which offsets any mythical gain.
More sales = more software buys over time also ACD are very high priced as they are now.
3. Consumers tend to replace systems. Consumers tend to want the CPU and the display to be new. People will put up with older technology and budget to replace both the computer and display. Seen it a thousand times.
[/QUOTE]
People tend to want to pass down / reuse a old displays and THEY DON'T want to BE LOCKED in a poor one and / or a over or under sized one in a AIO.
People tend to want to pass down / reuse a old displays and THEY DON'T want to BE LOCKED in a poor one and / or a over or under sized one in a AIO.
If being locked into a configuration was such an issue for most people then notebooks wouldn't be so popular and gaining popularity each year. PC tinkering just doesn't interest the majority. If it interests you and you want to run Mac OS X there is OSx86 and EFiX available.
If being locked into a configuration was such an issue for most people then notebooks wouldn't be so popular and gaining popularity each year. PC tinkering just doesn't interest the majority. If it interests you and you want to run Mac OS X there is OSx86 and EFiX available.
I think notebooks are so popular because people like the idea of carrying it with them. That idea seems to bypass having an upgradable machine at home. But when many people do get a machine at home, they want a bigger monitor, and something that they THINK they will want to keep current.
I think the idea of upgrades on a headless machine wrt internals is less important than the display upgrade for consumers and businesses alike. I don't think people buy headless machines because they think they will want to upgrade the internals of the machine but rather the display or easily replace it if it breaks.
Exactly right. I have a 19" LCD that I bough six years ago and still use. It's on its second computer. I bought a 24" display last year, and I intend to use it until its backlight craps out.
There is nothing novel about AIO machines, we've had them since 1984. Speaking as an iMac G5 owner, I've come to realize that the AIO gives you the restrictions of a laptop with none of the portability benefits. I propose the greenMac initiative:
Mac micro tower with a PCIe slot for graphics. This computer will have a high TCO because of upgrade modules you can purchase later on. The case comes off with a latch on the bottom similar to the unibody MacBooks. There you have easy access to the RAM slots, the cpu/cooler module, and the hard drive sled. You never actually see the logic board, everything is engineered to be drop in replaced. Only the CPU would be Apple specific since it will come with it's own engineered cooler permanently attached.
I know, it's highly unlikely. But i would like to see Apple abandon it's current approach of "we want people to upgrade their whole computer". It's not an environmentally sound approach, especially when people are getting rid of perfectly good monitors with their AIO.
I meant to add that Apple's short sighted approach are doing them well now but their good fortune won't last forever. They can't be of the mindset that they should continue doing what their doing indefinitely because it's working now. Their strategy will evolve one way or another.
Here's a good article to check out. It looks like notebooks will be blessed the 4th quarter of this year.
But haven't we known this for half a year now, if not longer? That the really yummy mobile CPUs will arrive Q4 2009?
Basically you will literally get twice the performance for the same price at the same battery life.
And this is just a dual core running 4 threads. Imagine if Intel releases a mobile quad-core with 8 threads? That'll be 4x as much CPU power as the currently fastest MacBook Pro...
Or in other words, it's just a bad time to buy a laptop that you intend to use for 3+ years.
1 1/2 years from now any current MacBook Pro will feel like a G3 PowerBook today...
But haven't we known this for half a year now, if not longer? That the really yummy mobile CPUs will arrive Q4 2009?
Basically you will literally get twice the performance for the same price at the same battery life.
And this is just a dual core running 4 threads. Imagine if Intel releases a mobile quad-core with 8 threads? That'll be 4x as much CPU power as the currently fastest MacBook Pro...
Or in other words, it's just a bad time to buy a laptop that you intend to use for 3+ years.
1 1/2 years from now any current MacBook Pro will feel like a G3 PowerBook today...
A bit off topic, but that's why I refuse to buy an iMac with a dual core processor now.
Its analogous to buying a pentium 4 machine 3 years ago.
There is nothing novel about AIO machines, we've had them since 1984. Speaking as an iMac G5 owner, I've come to realize that the AIO gives you the restrictions of a laptop with none of the portability benefits.
Heh.
I like the iMac. Soft spot in me wants one. But not if they can't include i7 and a decent gpu. It's a design quandry. I don't mind the iMac if it offers me a decent cpu and gpu but Apple are making it so thin it removes that possibility? Maybe a 28 inch version may find ways around that. But more annoying is that fact that Apple doesn't offer the i7 and desktop class gpu in ANY alternative. The iMac is to desktops what the MBA is to laptops. Gorgeous. Target market. Ticks boxes. But it in no way covers the broad spectrum of prices points and needs of consumers that it pretends to. Maybe artists and gamers are the 15% Apple don't want to tend with a mid-tower. And there is no doubt an updated iMac will sell. I'd rather they just can the computer behind the monitor and stick a nice cube next to it. Argument over.
Re: Mac Pro. Melgross. I'm getting worried. I'm actually agreeing with much of what you saying. Or maybe you're using gentler mood music in light of frazzled nerves around here re: the lack of desktop updates. (I've got nervous ticks I've been waiting that long...huddles in cradle position and rocks...) Sure. Apple are Apple. And we know their good bits. But accutely aware of their bad bits. And the desktop range, from mini to iMac to Mac Pro...without so much as memory, hd or gpu updates in the last year is poor. Pfft. That's where they get their bad rep' from. A PC user friend of mine takes me to Apple's shop page on the web...and I can't defend or explain the lack of gpu updates or lack of i7 option or mid-tower option or why the mini is 2 years out of date. I shuffle uncomfortably and go, 'YEs but...we have the X...m'boy...' Can't use the OS to defend poor out of date specs. Bad argument. The wrong argument.
I'd like a slightly new skin on the design. Black and silver to match the monitors. Functionaly, I don't think they can better, re: cooling and access to components. Inside or out. But I do wish for 'less bland' styling. It's missing some kind of visual dynamic. Having said that. It always looks gorgeous in person and is kind of 'timeless'. We'll see, I guess.
I DO wish they'd at least offer a range of 3 models below the 'Workstation' models using Xeons but offer the i7 desktop. It would allow another class of user to join the 'tower' part. Gamers. Graphic artists. Hard up PC owners outraged by the 'too much power, too much price' nature of the Mac Pro. That may be a cheaper option than designing a new 'mid-tower' case. Just drop in i7 cpu and motherboard and cut the damn price. We then have desktop for £1000-£1500 Mac Pro i7 and the Mac Pro Xeon above that. I guess we'd see who'd win in the iMac / Mac Tower face off. Personally, I think the people like Aunty Gladice that like the simplicity of the iMac will still buy it...and PC switchers and graphic artists would see a nice Mac Pro i7 at a fair price and get that.
But...Apple doesn't 'get that'. I guess. Anyone remember how much the G3 tower were?
Comments
Dunno about the grate, but I could definetely see it looking like his mockup, but with the light aluminum metal sides & handles, and a black-backed glass center.
I see nothing wrong with the present case. As an efficient design to remove heat from the unit, it reflects what many workstations and servers have as front and rear panels. I don't see what they can do to make it better. Changing the colors a bit to designate a "new" model would be nice, but wouldn't do anything to improve the design, which has been called one of the best computer cases ever made.
I suppose they could rearrange the inside a bit more this time so as to give us an additional front storage bay, but I don't see them wanting to do that.
What I've wanted for some time was for the four drives to be accessible from the outside of the side of the case in a "hot mount" configuration.
As much as I've read about how great an xMac would be my personal
experience selling computers to consumers has corroborated a few things.
1. Mac users don't upgrade extensively. We've never had off the shelf motherboards, GPU and more. The typical Mac user buys more RAM or storage and that's it.
2. xMac loses Apple monitor sales. Let's face I've seen as many Dell monitors displaying OS X as an Apple Cinema Display. xMac simply means Apple loses revenue which offsets any mythical gain.
3. Consumers tend to replace systems. Consumers tend to want the CPU and the display to be new. People will put up with older technology and budget to replace both the computer and display. Seen it a thousand times.
We enthusiasts see things differently but in fact we are the niche as are our desires.
Melgross
As much as I've read about how great an xMac would be my personal
experience selling computers to consumers has corroborated a few things.
1. Mac users don't upgrade extensively. We've never had off the shelf motherboards, GPU and more. The typical Mac user buys more RAM or storage and that's it.
I don't agree that's a problem. Only a very small percentage of PC owners upgrade either. It's a myth to think otherwise.
People often buy something because of what they THINK they will do with it, rather than what they actually will do with it. Many people who think they will upgrade their machines never do. The most they do is to add some more RAM, and possibly another HDD. Only a small number percentagewise ever upgrades the graphics card.
2. xMac loses Apple monitor sales. Let's face I've seen as many Dell monitors displaying OS X as an Apple Cinema Display. xMac simply means Apple loses revenue which offsets any mythical gain.
That's only because Apple has no inexpensive monitors. If Apple were to make a relatively inexpensive xMac, then it would behoove them to also make a relatively inexpensive line of monitors, at least one or two. That would gain them monitor sales, rather than to lose them as they do now.
3. Consumers tend to replace systems. Consumers tend to want the CPU and the display to be new. People will put up with older technology and budget to replace both the computer and display. Seen it a thousand times.
Some consumers do, some don't.
But, more importantly, I've read more than a few articles over the past two or three years in places like Computerworld and Infoworld, where in interviews about Macs in the workplace, where they said that companies don't want all-in-ones. They want to have separate monitors and computers, and that was holding back Macs in the enterprise, almost as much as anything else.
We enthusiasts see things differently but in fact we are the niche as are our desires.
Normally, I'd agree with that, as you know. I usually find that people on forums are way off base when compared to the average person, or business.
But this is one area in which I think people on the forums are right about it.
In the PC world, they've been selling all-in-ones long before Apple started selling its more modern iMacs. But sales have been dismal.
Most consumers buy what they're familiar with, which is some form of tower, because almost everyone else has that. They have it at work as well. More technically adept people, as I said before like to think they are going to do upgrades, and some of them do, but the point is not that they do, but that, again, as I said, that they think they will.
It's like cameras. Over they years I've gotten a very large number of people asking me what they should buy (because of my business). Very often they want a Canon or Nikon because of the very wide selection of lenses. Of course, almost none of those people would ever buy anything other than the usual selection, but it didn't matter. Somehow, the thought that they were available was enough to sway their decision.
I see nothing wrong with the present case. As an efficient design to remove heat from the unit, it reflects what many workstations and servers have as front and rear panels. I don't see what they can do to make it better. Changing the colors a bit to designate a "new" model would be nice, but wouldn't do anything to improve the design, which has been called one of the best computer cases ever made.
I suppose they could rearrange the inside a bit more this time so as to give us an additional front storage bay, but I don't see them wanting to do that.
What I've wanted for some time was for the four drives to be accessible from the outside of the side of the case in a "hot mount" configuration.
Since you asked how could it be improved, then what about a filtering system so the internal parts of the Mac Pro don't get so dusty so easily? From what I've read on these forums, the Mac Pro needs something to keep dust from piling up on the internal parts.
Since you asked how could it be improved, then what about a filtering system so the internal parts of the Mac Pro don't get so dusty so easily? From what I've read on these forums, the Mac Pro needs something to keep dust from piling up on the internal parts.
That wouldn't require a case redesign, just a moving around of the interior, which Apple has done already.
I don't know of any computer that doesn't get dusty inside. The ones with filters get clogged up, and overheat, unless the user pays a lot of attention to that filter, which interestingly enough, on most machines that have them, are not replaceable! Filters cut the airflow by a good amount without even getting dirty. Server rooms have air conditioning with filtered air entering the room that takes care of this problem for them.
A certain amount of dust inside a machine isn't a problem. For that, companies make special vacuums. Once in a while, open the case, and give it a quick vacuuming, and that will solve any problem. It's less work and mess than cleaning filters, and in the long run, less expensive than buying replaceable ones. Any small vacuum will do.
A certain amount of dust inside a machine isn't a problem. For that, companies make special vacuums. Once in a while, open the case, and give it a quick vacuuming, and that will solve any problem. It's less work and mess than cleaning filters, and in the long run, less expensive than buying replaceable ones. Any small vacuum will do.
I don't know if any small vacuum will do, don't they have a risk of building up static charge if it isn't built for this job?
I don't know if any small vacuum will do, don't they have a risk of building up static charge if it isn't built for this job?
I've never had a problem. The computer is grounded, and thats what matters. The specialty vacuums are rarely grounded. Their claim to fame is that they're small, and come with accessories that allow probing into the recesses of the machine more easily.
That wouldn't require a case redesign, just a moving around of the interior, which Apple has done already.
I don't know of any computer that doesn't get dusty inside. The ones with filters get clogged up, and overheat, unless the user pays a lot of attention to that filter, which interestingly enough, on most machines that have them, are not replaceable! Filters cut the airflow by a good amount without even getting dirty. Server rooms have air conditioning with filtered air entering the room that takes care of this problem for them.
A certain amount of dust inside a machine isn't a problem. For that, companies make special vacuums. Once in a while, open the case, and give it a quick vacuuming, and that will solve any problem. It's less work and mess than cleaning filters, and in the long run, less expensive than buying replaceable ones. Any small vacuum will do.
They all get some dust inside, but some more than others. I put in a larger HD in my G4 466 DA a little over a year ago. That was the first and only time I have ever cleaned it and it didn't have much dust on the inside after almost 7 years. And the fan runs about 18 hours a day and I do have a normal amount of dust in my house. So I still feel that is something that Apple needs to improve upon in the Mac Pro.
They all get some dust inside, but some more than others. I put in a larger HD in my G4 466 DA a little over a year ago. That was the first and only time I have ever cleaned it and it didn't have much dust on the inside after almost 7 years. And the fan runs about 18 hours a day and I do have a normal amount of dust in my house. So I still feel that is something that Apple needs to improve upon in the Mac Pro.
Going back to my 950, I've seen all of my Macs get plenty of dust inside. I've cleaned all of them once avery three months or so. I see PC's get just as dusty.
My dual 2GHz G5 PowerMac doesn't get any dirtier than any of the others, and it uses the same case. I haven't seen any Mac Pro's that are dirtier either. The internal fans always get lots of dust on them and have to be vacuumed.
Most of the dust is at the bottom of the cases, out of the way, except for the dust on the fans. While the mobo and cards get a fine dust, it's not much, and I usually leave it alone.
more importantly, I've read more than a few articles over the past two or three years in places like Computerworld and Infoworld, where in interviews about Macs in the workplace, where they said that companies don't want all-in-ones. They want to have separate monitors and computers, and that was holding back Macs in the enterprise, almost as much as anything else.
Most consumers buy what they're familiar with, which is some form of tower, because almost everyone else has that. They have it at work as well. More technically adept people, as I said before like to think they are going to do upgrades, and some of them do, but the point is not that they do, but that, again, as I said, that they think they will.
I think the idea of upgrades on a headless machine wrt internals is less important than the display upgrade for consumers and businesses alike. I don't think people buy headless machines because they think they will want to upgrade the internals of the machine but rather the display or easily replace it if it breaks.
The iMac screen looks expensive and it costs about half the price of the machine to replace it outside of warranty. When a consumer separates a PC box, the display, the peripherals into parts, it's easy to weigh up the cost of ownership as they can break it down into worst case scenarios. The worst case scenario of fixing even an iMac isight is uncertain at the point of purchase.
I personally couldn't care less about the CPU and GPU these days in terms of upgrades. It's just not worth it to consider upgrading them so those parts can be sealed up. Everything else however I want to be able to replace myself: Ram, HD, display. In the case of the aluminium iMac, 1 out of 3 is not good enough.
To be perfectly honest, if Apple made their displays (and hard drives) as easy to replace as the hard drives in the Macbook and they were inexpensive as well as with a matte option, I'd be completely sold on the AIO design.
Essentially, if you could unclip the front bezel of the iMac display and simply pull out the display part, buy another from Apple for a reasonable price and drop another in, it would be fine. I feel the same way about the laptops, if they could find a way to allow consumers to just unclip the display from the laptop and buy the display along with the top shell for a reasonable price.
They can't do this for a reasonable price though because they use IPS panels in some models so once you get that, you're stuck with having to pay for an IPS display if your one breaks.
Melgross
As much as I've read about how great an xMac would be my personal
experience selling computers to consumers has corroborated a few things.
1. Mac users don't upgrade extensively. We've never had off the shelf motherboards, GPU and more. The typical Mac user buys more RAM or storage and that's it.
People may not upgrade extensively but a xMac gives them more choice at the time of sale.
Melgross
2. xMac loses Apple monitor sales. Let's face I've seen as many Dell monitors displaying OS X as an Apple Cinema Display. xMac simply means Apple loses revenue which offsets any mythical gain.
More sales = more software buys over time also ACD are very high priced as they are now.
3. Consumers tend to replace systems. Consumers tend to want the CPU and the display to be new. People will put up with older technology and budget to replace both the computer and display. Seen it a thousand times.
[/QUOTE]
People tend to want to pass down / reuse a old displays and THEY DON'T want to BE LOCKED in a poor one and / or a over or under sized one in a AIO.
People tend to want to pass down / reuse a old displays and THEY DON'T want to BE LOCKED in a poor one and / or a over or under sized one in a AIO.
If being locked into a configuration was such an issue for most people then notebooks wouldn't be so popular and gaining popularity each year. PC tinkering just doesn't interest the majority. If it interests you and you want to run Mac OS X there is OSx86 and EFiX available.
If being locked into a configuration was such an issue for most people then notebooks wouldn't be so popular and gaining popularity each year. PC tinkering just doesn't interest the majority. If it interests you and you want to run Mac OS X there is OSx86 and EFiX available.
I think notebooks are so popular because people like the idea of carrying it with them. That idea seems to bypass having an upgradable machine at home. But when many people do get a machine at home, they want a bigger monitor, and something that they THINK they will want to keep current.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=3513&p=1
I think the idea of upgrades on a headless machine wrt internals is less important than the display upgrade for consumers and businesses alike. I don't think people buy headless machines because they think they will want to upgrade the internals of the machine but rather the display or easily replace it if it breaks.
Exactly right. I have a 19" LCD that I bough six years ago and still use. It's on its second computer. I bought a 24" display last year, and I intend to use it until its backlight craps out.
All-in-one? No thanks.
Mac micro tower with a PCIe slot for graphics. This computer will have a high TCO because of upgrade modules you can purchase later on. The case comes off with a latch on the bottom similar to the unibody MacBooks. There you have easy access to the RAM slots, the cpu/cooler module, and the hard drive sled. You never actually see the logic board, everything is engineered to be drop in replaced. Only the CPU would be Apple specific since it will come with it's own engineered cooler permanently attached.
I know, it's highly unlikely. But i would like to see Apple abandon it's current approach of "we want people to upgrade their whole computer". It's not an environmentally sound approach, especially when people are getting rid of perfectly good monitors with their AIO.
Here's a good article to check out. It looks like notebooks will be blessed the 4th quarter of this year.
But haven't we known this for half a year now, if not longer? That the really yummy mobile CPUs will arrive Q4 2009?
Basically you will literally get twice the performance for the same price at the same battery life.
And this is just a dual core running 4 threads. Imagine if Intel releases a mobile quad-core with 8 threads? That'll be 4x as much CPU power as the currently fastest MacBook Pro...
Or in other words, it's just a bad time to buy a laptop that you intend to use for 3+ years.
1 1/2 years from now any current MacBook Pro will feel like a G3 PowerBook today...
But haven't we known this for half a year now, if not longer? That the really yummy mobile CPUs will arrive Q4 2009?
Basically you will literally get twice the performance for the same price at the same battery life.
And this is just a dual core running 4 threads. Imagine if Intel releases a mobile quad-core with 8 threads? That'll be 4x as much CPU power as the currently fastest MacBook Pro...
Or in other words, it's just a bad time to buy a laptop that you intend to use for 3+ years.
1 1/2 years from now any current MacBook Pro will feel like a G3 PowerBook today...
A bit off topic, but that's why I refuse to buy an iMac with a dual core processor now.
Its analogous to buying a pentium 4 machine 3 years ago.
There is nothing novel about AIO machines, we've had them since 1984. Speaking as an iMac G5 owner, I've come to realize that the AIO gives you the restrictions of a laptop with none of the portability benefits.
Heh.
I like the iMac. Soft spot in me wants one. But not if they can't include i7 and a decent gpu. It's a design quandry. I don't mind the iMac if it offers me a decent cpu and gpu but Apple are making it so thin it removes that possibility? Maybe a 28 inch version may find ways around that. But more annoying is that fact that Apple doesn't offer the i7 and desktop class gpu in ANY alternative. The iMac is to desktops what the MBA is to laptops. Gorgeous. Target market. Ticks boxes. But it in no way covers the broad spectrum of prices points and needs of consumers that it pretends to. Maybe artists and gamers are the 15% Apple don't want to tend with a mid-tower. And there is no doubt an updated iMac will sell. I'd rather they just can the computer behind the monitor and stick a nice cube next to it. Argument over.
Re: Mac Pro. Melgross. I'm getting worried. I'm actually agreeing with much of what you saying. Or maybe you're using gentler mood music in light of frazzled nerves around here re: the lack of desktop updates. (I've got nervous ticks I've been waiting that long...huddles in cradle position and rocks...) Sure. Apple are Apple. And we know their good bits. But accutely aware of their bad bits. And the desktop range, from mini to iMac to Mac Pro...without so much as memory, hd or gpu updates in the last year is poor. Pfft. That's where they get their bad rep' from. A PC user friend of mine takes me to Apple's shop page on the web...and I can't defend or explain the lack of gpu updates or lack of i7 option or mid-tower option or why the mini is 2 years out of date. I shuffle uncomfortably and go, 'YEs but...we have the X...m'boy...' Can't use the OS to defend poor out of date specs. Bad argument. The wrong argument.
I'd like a slightly new skin on the design. Black and silver to match the monitors. Functionaly, I don't think they can better, re: cooling and access to components. Inside or out. But I do wish for 'less bland' styling. It's missing some kind of visual dynamic. Having said that. It always looks gorgeous in person and is kind of 'timeless'. We'll see, I guess.
I DO wish they'd at least offer a range of 3 models below the 'Workstation' models using Xeons but offer the i7 desktop. It would allow another class of user to join the 'tower' part. Gamers. Graphic artists. Hard up PC owners outraged by the 'too much power, too much price' nature of the Mac Pro. That may be a cheaper option than designing a new 'mid-tower' case. Just drop in i7 cpu and motherboard and cut the damn price. We then have desktop for £1000-£1500 Mac Pro i7 and the Mac Pro Xeon above that. I guess we'd see who'd win in the iMac / Mac Tower face off. Personally, I think the people like Aunty Gladice that like the simplicity of the iMac will still buy it...and PC switchers and graphic artists would see a nice Mac Pro i7 at a fair price and get that.
But...Apple doesn't 'get that'. I guess. Anyone remember how much the G3 tower were?
Lemon Bon Bon.