I'm going to go on record as speculating that one of the new features is an external multi-touch trackpad instead of the Mighty Mouse. In my experience, the MacBook (Pro/Air) trackpad is superior to any mouse. This is in stark contrast to any PC laptop, where the first thing I do is plug in a mouse. Perhaps it might even be an external keyboard with a multi-touch trackpad included.
There's no other explanation for why Apple hasn't touched the Mighty Mouse in years, despite the problem with the trackball getting jammed requiring manual cleaning.
Second. My iMac is only 2 years old, and I don't plan to replace it any time soon. But I have the same problem with the Mighty Mouse trackball not scrolling in the downward direction; no amount of cleaning helps anymore. I rather not replace the mouse at $69. I would immediately buy an external keyboard with a trackpad.
Second. My iMac is only 2 years old, and I don't plan to replace it any time soon. But I have the same problem with the Mighty Mouse trackball not scrolling in the downward direction; no amount of cleaning helps anymore. I rather not replace the mouse at $69. I would immediately buy an external keyboard with a trackpad.
You can replace the mouse with another mouse. A simple Logitech mouse should run you $15. If you don't need the side scrolling, it works very well.
This non-story reminds me of the comedy sketch that Mark & Lard used to do on Radio 1 in the afternoon - 'vague news'.
'Somebody may have said that it may or may not be cloudy somewhere later on'.
Aw yess! Of all the places to see a Mark & Lard reference!!!
Blu-ray must be one of the things, with the Bag of Hurt reference. No clue what the other might be though. SD card slot is probable, to go along with the MBP, maybe a bigger screen than 24"
Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that there are ways for those of us with mature vision to still use Macs.
I have a 24" iMac and use it as a giant magnifying glass that can speak synthesized English (if necessary). Besides lowering the resolution, you can use Universal Access to set up Zoom; white-on-black instead black-on-white (toggle with Control-Option-Command-8). Also, you could fall back on the alternative UI known as VoiceOver that is an integral part of Mac OS X.
I'm guessing a fullsize PCI-slot with a special made carriage or special made cartridges that allows you to easily pop in an extra graphics card for gaming (for a total of two) or a sound card / processing card for studio professionals etc.
Apples investment with OpenCL and GrandCentral and their latest MBP with two GPUs kinda points to that they're looking to stuff their Macs with more and specialized PUs in order to create a competitive and differentiated hardware platform. It should happend sometime, maybe now..
My interest in iMac is real thin so these are wild ass Guesses but for starters how about a custom Apple video encoder/decoder chip? The possibly from the PA Semi team.
That would appeal to video pros and even consumers. The appeal to pros is why I think it would be Apple custom other wise you could just use the GPU. What I would expect is encoding capabilities beyound what consumer chips offer. Of course Apple could go to Nvidia and have them tailor a GPU chip to this usage.
The leads into a second possibility, that is that they add a GPU chip to the motherboard specifically to support OpenCL. Doing so on it's mainstream desktop machine would put the rest of the x86 world on the defensive and make iMac really stand out. It needn't be a super fast OpenCL accelerator either, just the fact that it is standard equipment and a new baseline for developers ought to stimulate sales and more importantly OpenCL development. In the end a second GPU chip that is not the video chip would be a huge step forward.
Professional audio in ports. This would be my third thought or hardware possibility. Regular XLR recepticals would be just dandy if connected to high quality analog in.
Drive bays! Probably should have listed this first. IMac needs to be serviceable and it needs "drive" bays. Where drive bays could be PCI Express slots for SSD on PC cards. Apple needs to address the reality that peoples storage needs grow over time and the reality that drives belong inside the machine.
It would appear I unintendedly played with words. Of course, I meant to say that the next iMac would "Make or break" Apple, but I stand by what I wrote and it is just possible that the next iMac will put the brakes on the rise of Apple.
Regarding your numbers, Apple's world computer market share is only 4%. And if laptops, including netbooks (not made by Apple), sold more than desktops, there is still 40% or 45% of desktops, and less only if you include servers and workstations.
Apple is the computer company which doesn't sell any desktop computer because it is comfortable (and high on pot?) with a 4% computer world market share.
P.S.: While we disagree, you can be polite. Try it, it won't hurt.
I wonder what it would be. I don't think TVs would do anything that appear like lowering frame rates. I don't recall anything that would look like that, and I use a full HD projector for watching Blu-Rays.
Some LCD's would do it, something to do with 24p from memory
Apple can make the mini a real machine or midrange tower or matte iMac but won't why? Then they lose all their high end overpriced macpros to graphic artists. Sure you can argue a similar spec Dell machine cost more but a mac pro i7 non server CPU and non ecc ram would be half the price and get the job done.
Apple has stopped caterting to us creative folks and they are all about thenipod and iPhone
Time for apple to start catering to the huge pro and even larger semi pro audio/video and gaming crowd and let us pick our own displays, ram, and expansion cards.
I would like to see the iMac with express slots and a quad or 8 core i7 machine mid range tower. Time to stop price hoarding. I remember apple selling a $75 graphic card for $350. Terrible. And the mighty mouse should have a 3 year warranty at that price. More times then not, the ball stops scrolling down after one year. Very bad build quality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ouragan
It would appear I unintendedly played with words. Of course, I meant to say that the next iMac would "Make or break" Apple, but I stand by what I wrote and it is just possible that the next iMac will put the brakes on the rise of Apple.
Regarding your numbers, Apple's world computer market share is only 4%. And if laptops, including netbooks (not made by Apple), sold more than desktops, there is still 40% or 45% of desktops, and less only if you include servers and workstations.
Apple is the computer company which doesn't sell any desktop computer because it is comfortable (and high on pot?) with a 4% computer world market share.
P.S.: While we disagree, you can be polite. Try it, it won't hurt.
but I stand by what I wrote and it is just possible that the next iMac will put the brakes on the rise of Apple.
Slowing the Mac's growth is not the same as "sinking it for good"
Quote:
Regarding your numbers, Apple's world computer market share is only 4%. And if laptops, including netbooks (not made by Apple), sold more than desktops, there is still 40% or 45% of desktops, and less only if you include servers and workstations.
Absolutely! But taking the notebook market out of the equation is only half the story.
Of the remainder (maybe 28% now?) How many of those desktops are priced at around $ 600.00 or less? Time and time again Apple have repeated that they are not interested in this market. Unscientific. I know, but over on the Best Buy web site half of the PC towers fall into that price range.
So now your 40% is closer to maybe 15%. That's consumer/pro-sumer/small biz desktop PCs.
How many of those are AIOs? All the major PC OEMs sell them. Sony only sells AIOs. Lenovo has a larger range of AIOs than towers.
How many of that 15% are high end towers and gaming rigs that compete with the Mac Pro?
How many of that 15% are dinky little desktops that compete with the Mac Mini?
You may disagree with my figures (I am only making an educated guess) and there is definitely still a market for an upgradable consumer tower. But that market could be closer to 10% than 45%.
Notebooks and Netbooks are growing. AIOs are growing (probably). the Desktop tower market is shrinking.
Quote:
Apple is the computer company which doesn't sell any desktop computer because it is comfortable (and high on pot?) with a 4% computer world market share.
Feel free to disregard my laborious figures but try and answer one last question.
Why does Apple refuse to make this elusive XMac?
Is it because Apple are jerks and they are high on pot?
Or is it because they just don't see enough money in it?
I wonder what it would be. I don't think TVs would do anything that appear like lowering frame rates. I don't recall anything that would look like that, and I use a full HD projector for watching Blu-Rays.
I suppose it could have been the model of HDTV. As I understand it, TV manufacturers have boosted the refresh rate on TVs to help solve this visual artifact problem.
...for semi-pro video busy is the difficulty encountered when trying to go "tapeless."
The file needs to be converted first--very slow. Sort of negates many of the benefits of tapeless I think Steve Job has complained about cam companies not going tapeless fast enough.
Maybe the "complelling feature for "semi-professional audio/video crowd" is a hardware-based (fast) conversion?
...for semi-pro video busy is the difficulty encountered when trying to go "tapeless."
The file needs to be converted first--very slow. Sort of negates many of the benefits of tapeless I think Steve Job has complained about cam companies not going tapeless fast enough.
Maybe the "complelling feature for "semi-professional audio/video crowd" is a hardware-based (fast) conversion?
Conversion isn't required for all tapeless formats. Final Cut Pro supports the P2 and XDCAM formats natively. It's quite refreshing really, you can just copy it over and start using it right away.
Apple can make the mini a real machine or midrange tower or matte iMac but won't why? Then they lose all their high end overpriced macpros to graphic artists. Sure you can argue a similar spec Dell machine cost more but a mac pro i7 non server CPU and non ecc ram would be half the price and get the job done.
Apple has stopped caterting to us creative folks and they are all about thenipod and iPhone
Time for apple to start catering to the huge pro and even larger semi pro audio/video and gaming crowd and let us pick our own displays, ram, and expansion cards.
I would like to see the iMac with express slots and a quad or 8 core i7 machine mid range tower. Time to stop price hoarding. I remember apple selling a $75 graphic card for $350. Terrible. And the mighty mouse should have a 3 year warranty at that price. More times then not, the ball stops scrolling down after one year. Very bad build quality.
Overpriced? How soon we forget. My G4 dual 500mhz tower ended up costing me more than double the cost of a Mac Pro tower today and my current Mac, a previous-gen Mini with a lone gig of RAM runs circles around that old top-of-the-line tower.
There is no reason for the step down from the Mac Pro to be considered a significant threat to that machine. It could be a more powerful alternative to the current Mini featuring far fewer expansion options than the Mac Pro. But I don't see such a machine as an alternative for pro use on the cheap but rather a machine for those of us who are not pros but would like a little more power for uses like HD video rendering for personal use.
Desktop sales are in decline and Apple is trying to keep things simple. But I don't think it's fair to claim Apple has abandoned its pro customers. I would argue that for a pro, looking at it historically, the price for a capable, pro-grade Mac is much lower now than it has ever been.
Also, I don't know that Apple's decision to go laptop components for the Mini is necessarily a fatal misstep. Laptop components are getting progressively more powerful and soon enough we may have a Mini with enough horsepower to do some very demanding work, including HD video rendering. When that happens, I think Apple will have all the bases covered, despite its decision to go laptop pieces in their consumer-grade desktops.
Feel free to disregard my laborious figures but try and answer one last question.
Why does Apple refuse to make this elusive XMac?
Is it because Apple are jerks and they are high on pot?
Or is it because they just don't see enough money in it?
Ok that was three questions.
I'll give it a try. The iMac has always been an all-in-one computer aimed at students, home users, professionnals and small companies. When the iMac morphed into the current LCD monitor form factor, Apple placed the logic board behind the screen and adopted a slower, cooler, portable CPU for 2 reasons:
a) to save money by placing one large order for portable CPUs used in both MacBooks and iMacs;
b) to reduce the heat produced by the CPU and allow for thinner, quieter iMacs with reduced or no added ventilation.
The iMac could be thicker behind the screen to provide enough space for a better ventilation which would allow Apple to use cheaper, faster, hotter desktop components not only for the CPU, but also the graphic card and the RAM.
Decision making at Apple has always been a problem with Steve Jobs second guessing everything and everyone, insisting that he is the inventor of everything made by Apple. Under such a tyrany, most companies go from being competitive and innovative to being out of touch with reality and slow to respond to new competitive challenges.
With the illness of Steve Jobs which meant continuous exams, surgeries, secrecy and, finally, a 6 month leave of absence, Apple has just become more irrelevant as its competitors created better and better computers at an ever cheaper price. Netbooks are just one example. Blu-Ray and quad-core CPUs are another example.
What is wrong with higher prices and higher profit margins? Most people prefer a good deal when they can find one. Windows computers are 40% cheaper than Macs. If you are a school board, are you going to pay 40% more for classroom computers? If you are a company, are you going to pay 40% more for 200 or 2,000 computers? The answer is a resounding NO!
When you compare features like Blu-Ray drives, quad-core desktop CPUs, user repleacable desktop graphic cards, iMacs just don't cut it.
And what is wrong with buyers choosing a brand new desktop tower with a Blu-Ray drive, a quad-core desktop CPU, a larger hard drive, 4 GB of RAM standard, a faster desktop graphic card, Windows 7 and a 40% lower price than a slower, dual core mobile CPU iMac?
A 4% world market share would be half of the problem it is for Apple if Macs used a standard operating system (Windows) with applications written in a standard computer language, i.e. C++, instead of a specific Objective C language which is not used by most programmers.
An ever smaller world market share, persistent higher prices, higher profit margins, poor features reflecting last year's technology all conspire towards one inevitable conclusion: Apple is fast becoming irrelevant for most people, a boutique company with niche products which are overpriced and underwhelming. The problem has taken years to mature, but accelerated with the health problems of Steve Jobs.
Squeezing the lemon for every last drop just doesn't make sense anymore. Ignoring competitors and belittling Windows won't bring buyers back to Apple.
Why not a desktop XMac or iMac?
Steve Jobs is the problem. Some people say that he is delusional, others believe that he is just a tyrant. Could he be just wrong? Stubborn and slowing down Apple?
For background info on Steve Jobs, see the Fortune Magazine editorial:
P.S.: Sorry for the long answer which shows only one thing: it doesn't make any business sense for Apple to sell no desktop computer, no desktop tower.
Comments
I'm going to go on record as speculating that one of the new features is an external multi-touch trackpad instead of the Mighty Mouse. In my experience, the MacBook (Pro/Air) trackpad is superior to any mouse. This is in stark contrast to any PC laptop, where the first thing I do is plug in a mouse. Perhaps it might even be an external keyboard with a multi-touch trackpad included.
There's no other explanation for why Apple hasn't touched the Mighty Mouse in years, despite the problem with the trackball getting jammed requiring manual cleaning.
Second. My iMac is only 2 years old, and I don't plan to replace it any time soon. But I have the same problem with the Mighty Mouse trackball not scrolling in the downward direction; no amount of cleaning helps anymore. I rather not replace the mouse at $69. I would immediately buy an external keyboard with a trackpad.
Second. My iMac is only 2 years old, and I don't plan to replace it any time soon. But I have the same problem with the Mighty Mouse trackball not scrolling in the downward direction; no amount of cleaning helps anymore. I rather not replace the mouse at $69. I would immediately buy an external keyboard with a trackpad.
You can replace the mouse with another mouse. A simple Logitech mouse should run you $15. If you don't need the side scrolling, it works very well.
This non-story reminds me of the comedy sketch that Mark & Lard used to do on Radio 1 in the afternoon - 'vague news'.
'Somebody may have said that it may or may not be cloudy somewhere later on'.
Aw yess! Of all the places to see a Mark & Lard reference!!!
Blu-ray must be one of the things, with the Bag of Hurt reference. No clue what the other might be though. SD card slot is probable, to go along with the MBP, maybe a bigger screen than 24"
Anyway, I just wanted to let you know that there are ways for those of us with mature vision to still use Macs.
I have a 24" iMac and use it as a giant magnifying glass that can speak synthesized English (if necessary). Besides lowering the resolution, you can use Universal Access to set up Zoom; white-on-black instead black-on-white (toggle with Control-Option-Command-8). Also, you could fall back on the alternative UI known as VoiceOver that is an integral part of Mac OS X.
You can replace the mouse with another mouse. A simple Logitech mouse should run you $15. If you don't need the side scrolling, it works very well.
I've considered that option and might just do it. Thanks for recommendation.
Apples investment with OpenCL and GrandCentral and their latest MBP with two GPUs kinda points to that they're looking to stuff their Macs with more and specialized PUs in order to create a competitive and differentiated hardware platform. It should happend sometime, maybe now..
That would appeal to video pros and even consumers. The appeal to pros is why I think it would be Apple custom other wise you could just use the GPU. What I would expect is encoding capabilities beyound what consumer chips offer. Of course Apple could go to Nvidia and have them tailor a GPU chip to this usage.
The leads into a second possibility, that is that they add a GPU chip to the motherboard specifically to support OpenCL. Doing so on it's mainstream desktop machine would put the rest of the x86 world on the defensive and make iMac really stand out. It needn't be a super fast OpenCL accelerator either, just the fact that it is standard equipment and a new baseline for developers ought to stimulate sales and more importantly OpenCL development. In the end a second GPU chip that is not the video chip would be a huge step forward.
Professional audio in ports. This would be my third thought or hardware possibility. Regular XLR recepticals would be just dandy if connected to high quality analog in.
Drive bays! Probably should have listed this first. IMac needs to be serviceable and it needs "drive" bays. Where drive bays could be PCI Express slots for SSD on PC cards. Apple needs to address the reality that peoples storage needs grow over time and the reality that drives belong inside the machine.
Dave
No, it won't, and the word is "break".
It would appear I unintendedly played with words. Of course, I meant to say that the next iMac would "Make or break" Apple, but I stand by what I wrote and it is just possible that the next iMac will put the brakes on the rise of Apple.
Regarding your numbers, Apple's world computer market share is only 4%. And if laptops, including netbooks (not made by Apple), sold more than desktops, there is still 40% or 45% of desktops, and less only if you include servers and workstations.
Apple is the computer company which doesn't sell any desktop computer because it is comfortable (and high on pot?) with a 4% computer world market share.
P.S.: While we disagree, you can be polite. Try it, it won't hurt.
I wonder what it would be. I don't think TVs would do anything that appear like lowering frame rates. I don't recall anything that would look like that, and I use a full HD projector for watching Blu-Rays.
Some LCD's would do it, something to do with 24p from memory
Apple has stopped caterting to us creative folks and they are all about thenipod and iPhone
Time for apple to start catering to the huge pro and even larger semi pro audio/video and gaming crowd and let us pick our own displays, ram, and expansion cards.
I would like to see the iMac with express slots and a quad or 8 core i7 machine mid range tower. Time to stop price hoarding. I remember apple selling a $75 graphic card for $350. Terrible. And the mighty mouse should have a 3 year warranty at that price. More times then not, the ball stops scrolling down after one year. Very bad build quality.
It would appear I unintendedly played with words. Of course, I meant to say that the next iMac would "Make or break" Apple, but I stand by what I wrote and it is just possible that the next iMac will put the brakes on the rise of Apple.
Regarding your numbers, Apple's world computer market share is only 4%. And if laptops, including netbooks (not made by Apple), sold more than desktops, there is still 40% or 45% of desktops, and less only if you include servers and workstations.
Apple is the computer company which doesn't sell any desktop computer because it is comfortable (and high on pot?) with a 4% computer world market share.
P.S.: While we disagree, you can be polite. Try it, it won't hurt.
comparatif simulation taux pret auto - taux pret auto differe selon la prise en compte ... calculent automatiquement le taux pour un prêt automobile donne.comparatif simulation taux pret auto
but I stand by what I wrote and it is just possible that the next iMac will put the brakes on the rise of Apple.
Slowing the Mac's growth is not the same as "sinking it for good"
Regarding your numbers, Apple's world computer market share is only 4%. And if laptops, including netbooks (not made by Apple), sold more than desktops, there is still 40% or 45% of desktops, and less only if you include servers and workstations.
Absolutely! But taking the notebook market out of the equation is only half the story.
Out of your "45%", how many of those desktops are going to Microsoft entrenched IT departments? (And Dell has just announced yet another AIO targeting that market http://www.tomshardware.com/news/dell-vostro-all-in-one)
Of the remainder (maybe 28% now?) How many of those desktops are priced at around $ 600.00 or less? Time and time again Apple have repeated that they are not interested in this market. Unscientific. I know, but over on the Best Buy web site half of the PC towers fall into that price range.
So now your 40% is closer to maybe 15%. That's consumer/pro-sumer/small biz desktop PCs.
How many of those are AIOs? All the major PC OEMs sell them. Sony only sells AIOs. Lenovo has a larger range of AIOs than towers.
How many of that 15% are high end towers and gaming rigs that compete with the Mac Pro?
How many of that 15% are dinky little desktops that compete with the Mac Mini?
You may disagree with my figures (I am only making an educated guess) and there is definitely still a market for an upgradable consumer tower. But that market could be closer to 10% than 45%.
Notebooks and Netbooks are growing. AIOs are growing (probably). the Desktop tower market is shrinking.
Apple is the computer company which doesn't sell any desktop computer because it is comfortable (and high on pot?) with a 4% computer world market share.
Feel free to disregard my laborious figures but try and answer one last question.
Why does Apple refuse to make this elusive XMac?
Is it because Apple are jerks and they are high on pot?
Or is it because they just don't see enough money in it?
Ok that was three questions.
How is adding BR to the iMac a 'compelling' new feature? To the Pro line, I can understand.
After all, the Final Cut market will eat it up. But who edits wedding videos and wedding photos on a glossy iMac?
And it's really unlike Apple to add BR to the iMac line first.
High end features go to the Pro line first, then the consumer line.
So is AI saying that the Mac Pro will be bumped prior to the new iMac?
Yeah... this was a worthwhile article!
Jim
I wonder what it would be. I don't think TVs would do anything that appear like lowering frame rates. I don't recall anything that would look like that, and I use a full HD projector for watching Blu-Rays.
I suppose it could have been the model of HDTV. As I understand it, TV manufacturers have boosted the refresh rate on TVs to help solve this visual artifact problem.
The file needs to be converted first--very slow. Sort of negates many of the benefits of tapeless I think Steve Job has complained about cam companies not going tapeless fast enough.
Maybe the "complelling feature for "semi-professional audio/video crowd" is a hardware-based (fast) conversion?
--Darin
...for semi-pro video busy is the difficulty encountered when trying to go "tapeless."
The file needs to be converted first--very slow. Sort of negates many of the benefits of tapeless I think Steve Job has complained about cam companies not going tapeless fast enough.
Maybe the "complelling feature for "semi-professional audio/video crowd" is a hardware-based (fast) conversion?
Conversion isn't required for all tapeless formats. Final Cut Pro supports the P2 and XDCAM formats natively. It's quite refreshing really, you can just copy it over and start using it right away.
Apple can make the mini a real machine or midrange tower or matte iMac but won't why? Then they lose all their high end overpriced macpros to graphic artists. Sure you can argue a similar spec Dell machine cost more but a mac pro i7 non server CPU and non ecc ram would be half the price and get the job done.
Apple has stopped caterting to us creative folks and they are all about thenipod and iPhone
Time for apple to start catering to the huge pro and even larger semi pro audio/video and gaming crowd and let us pick our own displays, ram, and expansion cards.
I would like to see the iMac with express slots and a quad or 8 core i7 machine mid range tower. Time to stop price hoarding. I remember apple selling a $75 graphic card for $350. Terrible. And the mighty mouse should have a 3 year warranty at that price. More times then not, the ball stops scrolling down after one year. Very bad build quality.
Overpriced? How soon we forget. My G4 dual 500mhz tower ended up costing me more than double the cost of a Mac Pro tower today and my current Mac, a previous-gen Mini with a lone gig of RAM runs circles around that old top-of-the-line tower.
There is no reason for the step down from the Mac Pro to be considered a significant threat to that machine. It could be a more powerful alternative to the current Mini featuring far fewer expansion options than the Mac Pro. But I don't see such a machine as an alternative for pro use on the cheap but rather a machine for those of us who are not pros but would like a little more power for uses like HD video rendering for personal use.
Desktop sales are in decline and Apple is trying to keep things simple. But I don't think it's fair to claim Apple has abandoned its pro customers. I would argue that for a pro, looking at it historically, the price for a capable, pro-grade Mac is much lower now than it has ever been.
Also, I don't know that Apple's decision to go laptop components for the Mini is necessarily a fatal misstep. Laptop components are getting progressively more powerful and soon enough we may have a Mini with enough horsepower to do some very demanding work, including HD video rendering. When that happens, I think Apple will have all the bases covered, despite its decision to go laptop pieces in their consumer-grade desktops.
Feel free to disregard my laborious figures but try and answer one last question.
Why does Apple refuse to make this elusive XMac?
Is it because Apple are jerks and they are high on pot?
Or is it because they just don't see enough money in it?
Ok that was three questions.
I'll give it a try. The iMac has always been an all-in-one computer aimed at students, home users, professionnals and small companies. When the iMac morphed into the current LCD monitor form factor, Apple placed the logic board behind the screen and adopted a slower, cooler, portable CPU for 2 reasons:
a) to save money by placing one large order for portable CPUs used in both MacBooks and iMacs;
b) to reduce the heat produced by the CPU and allow for thinner, quieter iMacs with reduced or no added ventilation.
The iMac could be thicker behind the screen to provide enough space for a better ventilation which would allow Apple to use cheaper, faster, hotter desktop components not only for the CPU, but also the graphic card and the RAM.
Decision making at Apple has always been a problem with Steve Jobs second guessing everything and everyone, insisting that he is the inventor of everything made by Apple. Under such a tyrany, most companies go from being competitive and innovative to being out of touch with reality and slow to respond to new competitive challenges.
With the illness of Steve Jobs which meant continuous exams, surgeries, secrecy and, finally, a 6 month leave of absence, Apple has just become more irrelevant as its competitors created better and better computers at an ever cheaper price. Netbooks are just one example. Blu-Ray and quad-core CPUs are another example.
What is wrong with higher prices and higher profit margins? Most people prefer a good deal when they can find one. Windows computers are 40% cheaper than Macs. If you are a school board, are you going to pay 40% more for classroom computers? If you are a company, are you going to pay 40% more for 200 or 2,000 computers? The answer is a resounding NO!
When you compare features like Blu-Ray drives, quad-core desktop CPUs, user repleacable desktop graphic cards, iMacs just don't cut it.
And what is wrong with buyers choosing a brand new desktop tower with a Blu-Ray drive, a quad-core desktop CPU, a larger hard drive, 4 GB of RAM standard, a faster desktop graphic card, Windows 7 and a 40% lower price than a slower, dual core mobile CPU iMac?
A 4% world market share would be half of the problem it is for Apple if Macs used a standard operating system (Windows) with applications written in a standard computer language, i.e. C++, instead of a specific Objective C language which is not used by most programmers.
An ever smaller world market share, persistent higher prices, higher profit margins, poor features reflecting last year's technology all conspire towards one inevitable conclusion: Apple is fast becoming irrelevant for most people, a boutique company with niche products which are overpriced and underwhelming. The problem has taken years to mature, but accelerated with the health problems of Steve Jobs.
Squeezing the lemon for every last drop just doesn't make sense anymore. Ignoring competitors and belittling Windows won't bring buyers back to Apple.
Why not a desktop XMac or iMac?
Steve Jobs is the problem. Some people say that he is delusional, others believe that he is just a tyrant. Could he be just wrong? Stubborn and slowing down Apple?
For background info on Steve Jobs, see the Fortune Magazine editorial:
The trouble with Steve Jobs @ http://money.cnn.com/2008/03/02/news...tune/index.htm
P.S.: Sorry for the long answer which shows only one thing: it doesn't make any business sense for Apple to sell no desktop computer, no desktop tower.