iMacs are designed using mobile technology to provide tidy all in one home and SOHO client users, similarly laptops are for the man/woman in a suitcase transportable client use, and tablets have more recently come along to fulfil the anywhere viewer case sinario akin to large touchy smartphones, all supplying the end user with endless hours of App sapped engaged interaction with the online experience.
Imacs and even laptops can facilitate a considerable amount of daily professional use but when it comes to producing professional creative works they all have severe limitations by virtue of the level of technology employed inside them that even includes TB and no amount of fooling yourself is going to change that, they are what they are and however elegant only fulfil the purpose and limitation of their design as a client using the existing architectural infrastructure software available at the time and at the right price.
When it comes to Professional computers the requirements are driven forward by advancement in technology and programming to fulfil creative endeavour and this pushes the frontiers of advancement of which to date Apple had an elegant significant lead in.
However times change and even the great Intel dispite its latest offering the new high-end Sandy Bridge-E 3960X is now looking down the barrel of a shotgun simply because its inherited antiquated '86 beomoth of a dinosaur technology and is facing meltdown as it pushes closer to the increasing cost limitations of furthering its floored design and Ivy bridge may well be its nemesis.
Put simply its CISC architecture is too complicated to negotiate change and even AMD can't bulldoze its way out of that one.
Acorn RISC Machines (StrongARM) aka Advanced RISC Machines aka ARM have been designing processors for decades and licence 95% of the mobile phone and TV Video and settopbox industrtries now they are growing up and developing workstation class high efficiency quad hexa and octo core parralel computing RISC processors ARMv8 A15 64bit that will soon by 2012 start to challenge the whole '86 computer industry as they first move into the Laptop market and already the server market and now the traditionally Zeon held professional workstation market.
I personally think Intel would do well to reserect its Xscale ARM holding taking advantage its 3D-trigate production development technology and produce the next generation of 64bit multicore ARM RISC Processors thinking vertically rather than laterally..
Since Intel had a falling out with nVidea Apple made the mistake of following suit not one of the best of Steve Jobs decisions now nVidea have integrated Tegra3 multicore ARM SOC CPUs with their Quadro/Gforce GPUs to produce the next generation of advanced Maximus multicore powered 3D graphics workstations just announced.
as you can see ARM multicore processors will way outstrip even Nahelem Ivybridge '86 processors and ontop of HP( the worlds biggest producer of computers) using ARM cores in their next generation server farms, these guys don't do stupid btw!
If Apple has visions of continuing their loss leader flagship MacPro workstation they must adopt muticore ARM processor scalability across their entire range because when Microsoft pull out their very nicely shaping up Windows8 scalable for up to 190 ARMcored computers from ARMSOCs for Phones to Tablets to desktop systems, right up to ARM/GPU workstations and the Server market then Apple will have lost the battle.
Perhaps Apple forsaw the ARM/ '86 war coming and decided to opt out, I wouldn't blame themit would mean developing a whole new pro machine design and re-writing MacOS for ARM and porting apps again, but I would have proffered them to have taken up the gauntlet and been a pioneer its not as if they couldn't afford it, maybe they might??? maybe they would have but Steve Jobbs isn't at the helm anymore.
next year 2012 will be the next computer industry generational shift year to watch.
btw, I am an independent engineer and don't work for these guys also had a soft spot for my studio MacPro for many years so would like to see a combined profesional iOS/MacOS succeed a while longer.
My minimum entry point for xMac would be Desktop CPU, 1 PCI slot for a graphics card, easily upgradeable RAM and at least room for dual 3.5" HDs (I would also like Blu Ray but not likely). If limited to just the one PCI for graphics (and obviously only 1 desktop CPU) it likely wouldn't eat to many Pro sales. Build it like that and take some steps to make the Entry level Pro more affordable as well and they could have a reasonable destkop lineup.
Just curious: how much use would Blu Ray get if it were on your computer?
HP( the worlds biggest producer of computers) using ARM cores in their next generation server farms, these guys don't do stupid!
HP not doing stupid?
That has to be the highlight of your misinformed post. Have you paid any attention at all to HP in the last several years?
ARM has no serious part in a Mac Pro discussion. Any decent engineer should realize that you can't compare chips specialized for different niches (High end workstation and Phones) and draw a meaningful comparison on power usage.
If you started to building ARM chips for high performance, you would need new powerful FPUs, longer and more complex pipelines, hefty caches, hefty IO, robust memory interfaces. They would end up just as power hungry and large. Because the instruction set is the smallest part of what is going on in the difference in power usage.
So many people are spouting off "ARM = Magic" nonsense without thinking, that is getting annoying.
Just curious: how much use would Blu Ray get if it were on your computer?
Much the same as now. Maybe a coouple usese/month. My current PC has Blu Ray and I have it on a desk in my living room and it is also used as an HTPC connected to my TV.
It is the only Blu-Ray/DVD player that I have for watching physical disks.
Apple needs a 'balls to the wall' product that sets the standard for what a no-compromise system should be. They can afford it, they should do it, they would be foolish to not define the status quo. If it wasn't for the release of Final Cut Pro and the Mac Pro then Apple's computers would still be considered toys. I love my monster truck Mac Pro, please don't make me go PC.
. In the 3D applications world, Apple is still a second rate citizen.
Apple is unlikely to ever become the norm there. I actually cannot think of a single advantage to OSX in that area or a single application that runs better than it does on Windows. I still don't actually like Windows, but I haven't spent that much time on it in about a decade.
There's been a lot of talk about how Thunderbolt allows users to buy a Mac and hook up tons of high speed storage. That's true and for those who don't need a lot of processing power or RAM it might be a good choice, but it doesn't really do much for Apple. Instead of selling a $2500 computer they sell a $1500 computer or maybe just an $800 computer and a $50 cable. Worst case scenario they lose the sale completely.
We attribute the "no visible wires" thing to Steve Jobs, but might be a Jonathan Ive thing as much as a Steve thing. Nothing goes against that aesthetic like a big external drive unit sitting there with a bunch of wires sticking out of it. The Mac Pro allows users to hide multiple drives inside the computer itself.
I cannot see any point in the future when high end users will stop demanding more CPU, GPU and RAM than fits in an iMac. Obviously Apple is free to stop selling computers to them, but slapping a new motherboard into a case every time Intel revs its server offerings seems like a low cost way of keeping those people using OS X and buying Apple software.
I cannot see any point in the future when high end users will stop demanding more CPU, GPU and RAM than fits in an iMac. Obviously Apple is free to stop selling computers to them, but slapping a new motherboard into a case every time Intel revs its server offerings seems like a low cost way of keeping those people using OS X and buying Apple software.
Exactly. It's a simple proposition and easily accomplished. Apple would be foolish to let this small but significant area of the business slide, for the many reasons mentioned in this thread.
Exactly. It's a simple proposition and easily accomplished. Apple would be foolish to let this small but significant area of the business slide, for the many reasons mentioned in this thread.
If Apple isn't going to put in the effort to innovate then what is the point. Apple has shown that there is more to computer design than Intels latest CPU with the laptops. The desktop seems to be missing the pull out the stops design efforts seen in the laptops. Maybe it wasn't on purpose but the desktop hardware has regressed to the point of looking pretty pathetic.
So in reality the slide as already happened now Apple needs to get out of the ditch and back on the road.
That is complete nonsense. Who makes nicer desktop hardware?
The Mini is about it for a modern design from Apple. That model is so castrated that many can't even consider it for mainstream usage. This is especially the case when most of Apples laptops out perform the Mini.
So Apple has one marginal computer for the desk top. The competition has a whole array of products that users can choose from. Thus my statement; Apples desktop line up is pathetic.
I only read the first 3 pages and the last page so maybe someone mentioned it somewhere in the middle... what about an iMac Pro? add a "pro" category to the iMac line... one that incorporates some desktop/workstation hardware in place of mobile/laptop cpu architecture. it would solve the issue of wanting more than an iMac. Hardest issue is the idea of an expansion slot. How could you put that in an iMac case without enlarging it (depth) significantly and cooling with a true video card and hotter CPU might then become an issue. But it could be done, give then proper R&D @ Cupertino.
I only read the first 3 pages and the last page so maybe someone mentioned it somewhere in the middle... what about an iMac Pro? add a "pro" category to the iMac line... one that incorporates some desktop/workstation hardware in place of mobile/laptop cpu architecture. it would solve the issue of wanting more than an iMac. Hardest issue is the idea of an expansion slot. How could you put that in an iMac case without enlarging it (depth) significantly and cooling with a true video card and hotter CPU might then become an issue. But it could be done, give then proper R&D @ Cupertino.
To incorporate what you are suggesting, they would have to essentially rethink the whole design. It's not all laptop hardware. It uses a laptop gpu which is actually constructed from underclocked desktop parts. Basically it's a gpu designed for laptops that is too power hungry to get any kind of reasonable battery life. The cpus are desktop cpus that stop just before the extreme units on the 27" model. Expansion slot is too much design work. It would have to be something like mini PCI so it wouldn't take the cards people would want to use anyway and there's no guarantee of quick manufacturer support.
That line is designed around aesthetics and limited storage needs. When you start having to add drive enclosures and a bunch of different peripherals to it just to obtain the functionality of another model, the minimalist design concept is rendered pointless anyway.
The Mini is about it for a modern design from Apple. That model is so castrated that many can't even consider it for mainstream usage. This is especially the case when most of Apples laptops out perform the Mini.
So Apple has one marginal computer for the desk top. The competition has a whole array of products that users can choose from. Thus my statement; Apples desktop line up is pathetic.
Many of us would like an xMac, but just because it doesn't exist, doesn't mean you need to overreact and disparage the whole lineup.
The Mini isn't the whole desktop line. There are iMacs and Pro... Plenty of performance there.
Price performance isn't great, but they are all pretty much the best looking, best built desktops. Calling them pathetic is just a tad hyperbolic.
Many of us would like an xMac, but just because it doesn't exist, doesn't mean you need to overreact and disparage the whole lineup.
The Mini isn't the whole desktop line. There are iMacs and Pro... Plenty of performance there.
Price performance isn't great, but they are all pretty much the best looking, best built desktops. Calling them pathetic is just a tad hyperbolic.
The mac pro is frustrating. The case internals are quite nice but I still wish we could better hard drive cooling. The cooling system in general is an area where they could have put in further work. People buy these machines for power and stability. If you routinely run the laptops, mini, or imac at high loads they all run quite hot. I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with the mac pro line. I really really need to update.
Many of us would like an xMac, but just because it doesn't exist, doesn't mean you need to overreact and disparage the whole lineup.
If the line up is pathetic, saying so isn't over reacting. The desktop line is seen as a joke in comparison to the laptop lineup.
Quote:
The Mini isn't the whole desktop line. There are iMacs and Pro... Plenty of performance there.
I don't even consider the iMac to be part of the desktop line up. More importantly many will not even consider an all in one. As to the Pro, I've said before it is a fine machine for those that need it but it is a stretch to call that big box a desktop machine. More importantly the Pro will not sell to people simply looking for an expandable Mac that is midrange in performance.
Quote:
Price performance isn't great, but they are all pretty much the best looking, best built desktops. Calling them pathetic is just a tad hyperbolic.
In my view the desktop line up is the Mini. Not a bad machine but by no means a line up.
In my view the desktop line up is the Mini. Not a bad machine but by no means a line up.
Sure if you only see the mini, that would be a pretty weak lineup. But reality doesn't conform to your narrow view.
The iMacs are clearly desktop machines, what else would they be? They are probably the most quintessential desktop on the planet. Since they have built in screens, they pretty much have to be on your desktop.
I also don't see where the Mac Pro is that large. It is within about a quarter inch of my Antec Solo Mini Tower.
So in your definition a Desktop machine is only some kind of box without a screen, but smaller than a Mini-tower?? How narrow can you be?
It isn't that terrible in size. Part of it is the juxtaposition provided by the alternatives available at the Apple store. Quite a number of things have hurt sales, and the price tag has probably made a number of users question how much they actually need. Beyond the users that can fit everything they need on a single laptop hard drive, the Apple minimalist design concept starts to falter via an exponential increase in accessories and peripherals required. In my opinion at such a high starting price point, the single socket machine needs better specs to really differentiate it from the imac. Seeing it come with less stock ram than the imacs or macbook pros is just a sign of negligence that feeds the rumors of Apple killing the line.
By the way Corsair > Antec
I still have an old G5 around. If I did build my own custom PC, I'd be tempted to use the case. There are probably better cases, but they would cost more than the selling price of an old G5.
It isn't that terrible in size. Part of it is the juxtaposition provided by the alternatives available at the Apple store. Quite a number of things have hurt sales, and the price tag has probably made a number of users question how much they actually need. Beyond the users that can fit everything they need on a single laptop hard drive, the Apple minimalist design concept starts to falter via an exponential increase in accessories and peripherals required. In my opinion at such a high starting price point, the single socket machine needs better specs to really differentiate it from the imac. Seeing it come with less stock ram than the imacs or macbook pros is just a sign of negligence that feeds the rumors of Apple killing the line.
By the way Corsair > Antec
I still have an old G5 around. If I did build my own custom PC, I'd be tempted to use the case. There are probably better cases, but they would cost more than the selling price of an old G5.
I am not saying Apple is free of criticism. I think I was clear that I would like a much less expensive Pro and I really don't like AiO computers and the Mini is like a laptop without batteries. But I do think it is extreme to call them pathetic, or to claim that the iMac/Pro don't even count as desktops.
I still think Apples have the best looking, best built desktops and like Apple I prefer quiet to absolute cooling performance.
On cases, I didn't even know Corsair made cases 4 years ago when I built mine. Did they?
But reading reviews recently of Solo II Corsair came up as better in some respects, but Antec was still a quieter case and that was my goal. I have zero regrets on the Solo.
In fact I find the Corsairs on the gaudy side with windows and stuff. If choosing today I would likely get another Solo or a Cooler Master Silencio, none of the Corsairs appeal. I prefer simple, clean and quiet.
I am not saying Apple is free of criticism. I think I was clear that I would like a much less expensive Pro and I really don't like AiO computers and the Mini is like a laptop without batteries. But I do think it is extreme to call them pathetic, or to claim that the iMac/Pro don't even count as desktops.
I still think Apples have the best looking, best built desktops and like Apple I prefer quiet to absolute cooling performance.
On cases, I didn't even know Corsair made cases 4 years ago when I built mine. Did they?
But reading reviews recently of Solo II Corsair came up as better in some respects, but Antec was still a quieter case and that was my goal. I have zero regrets on the Solo.
In fact I find the Corsairs on the gaudy side with windows and stuff. If choosing today I would likely get another Solo or a Cooler Master Silencio, none of the Corsairs appeal. I prefer simple, clean and quiet.
I was just having a little fun with the Corsair thing. They probably do nowhere near the volume of Antec, but they try to make nice products. Doesn't apple still use Corsair power supplies?
I'm probably a bit irritable with Apple lately, but they do an excellent job of predicting what will appeal to the largest possible number of users. The problem is if your needs fall even just a bit outside of the Apple design paradigm, you're confronted with a mess of cables, adapters, dongles, additional hardware, etc. to make something really simple work, when it wouldn't have been a big deal in the past. You can't use something like eSATA on a macbook pro given the lack of an express slot these days, but thunderbolt has a limited range of products (and the Promise enclosure is noisy). That's just one example. It may get superior speed, but it's more expensive, and it does mean buying and testing new peripherals.
Comments
iMacs are designed using mobile technology to provide tidy all in one home and SOHO client users, similarly laptops are for the man/woman in a suitcase transportable client use, and tablets have more recently come along to fulfil the anywhere viewer case sinario akin to large touchy smartphones, all supplying the end user with endless hours of App sapped engaged interaction with the online experience.
Imacs and even laptops can facilitate a considerable amount of daily professional use but when it comes to producing professional creative works they all have severe limitations by virtue of the level of technology employed inside them that even includes TB and no amount of fooling yourself is going to change that, they are what they are and however elegant only fulfil the purpose and limitation of their design as a client using the existing architectural infrastructure software available at the time and at the right price.
When it comes to Professional computers the requirements are driven forward by advancement in technology and programming to fulfil creative endeavour and this pushes the frontiers of advancement of which to date Apple had an elegant significant lead in.
However times change and even the great Intel dispite its latest offering the new high-end Sandy Bridge-E 3960X is now looking down the barrel of a shotgun simply because its inherited antiquated '86 beomoth of a dinosaur technology and is facing meltdown as it pushes closer to the increasing cost limitations of furthering its floored design and Ivy bridge may well be its nemesis.
Put simply its CISC architecture is too complicated to negotiate change and even AMD can't bulldoze its way out of that one.
Acorn RISC Machines (StrongARM) aka Advanced RISC Machines aka ARM have been designing processors for decades and licence 95% of the mobile phone and TV Video and settopbox industrtries now they are growing up and developing workstation class high efficiency quad hexa and octo core parralel computing RISC processors ARMv8 A15 64bit that will soon by 2012 start to challenge the whole '86 computer industry as they first move into the Laptop market and already the server market and now the traditionally Zeon held professional workstation market.
I personally think Intel would do well to reserect its Xscale ARM holding taking advantage its 3D-trigate production development technology and produce the next generation of 64bit multicore ARM RISC Processors thinking vertically rather than laterally..
Since Intel had a falling out with nVidea Apple made the mistake of following suit not one of the best of Steve Jobs decisions now nVidea have integrated Tegra3 multicore ARM SOC CPUs with their Quadro/Gforce GPUs to produce the next generation of advanced Maximus multicore powered 3D graphics workstations just announced.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/maximus.html
as you can see ARM multicore processors will way outstrip even Nahelem Ivybridge '86 processors and ontop of HP( the worlds biggest producer of computers) using ARM cores in their next generation server farms, these guys don't do stupid btw!
If Apple has visions of continuing their loss leader flagship MacPro workstation they must adopt muticore ARM processor scalability across their entire range because when Microsoft pull out their very nicely shaping up Windows8 scalable for up to 190 ARMcored computers from ARMSOCs for Phones to Tablets to desktop systems, right up to ARM/GPU workstations and the Server market then Apple will have lost the battle.
Perhaps Apple forsaw the ARM/ '86 war coming and decided to opt out, I wouldn't blame themit would mean developing a whole new pro machine design and re-writing MacOS for ARM and porting apps again, but I would have proffered them to have taken up the gauntlet and been a pioneer its not as if they couldn't afford it, maybe they might??? maybe they would have but Steve Jobbs isn't at the helm anymore.
next year 2012 will be the next computer industry generational shift year to watch.
btw, I am an independent engineer and don't work for these guys also had a soft spot for my studio MacPro for many years so would like to see a combined profesional iOS/MacOS succeed a while longer.
If you wonder what Professionals do with such workstations check this out http://www.nvidia.com/object/wetadigital_avatar.html
My minimum entry point for xMac would be Desktop CPU, 1 PCI slot for a graphics card, easily upgradeable RAM and at least room for dual 3.5" HDs (I would also like Blu Ray but not likely). If limited to just the one PCI for graphics (and obviously only 1 desktop CPU) it likely wouldn't eat to many Pro sales. Build it like that and take some steps to make the Entry level Pro more affordable as well and they could have a reasonable destkop lineup.
Just curious: how much use would Blu Ray get if it were on your computer?
HP( the worlds biggest producer of computers) using ARM cores in their next generation server farms, these guys don't do stupid!
HP not doing stupid?
That has to be the highlight of your misinformed post. Have you paid any attention at all to HP in the last several years?
ARM has no serious part in a Mac Pro discussion. Any decent engineer should realize that you can't compare chips specialized for different niches (High end workstation and Phones) and draw a meaningful comparison on power usage.
If you started to building ARM chips for high performance, you would need new powerful FPUs, longer and more complex pipelines, hefty caches, hefty IO, robust memory interfaces. They would end up just as power hungry and large. Because the instruction set is the smallest part of what is going on in the difference in power usage.
So many people are spouting off "ARM = Magic" nonsense without thinking, that is getting annoying.
Just curious: how much use would Blu Ray get if it were on your computer?
Much the same as now. Maybe a coouple usese/month. My current PC has Blu Ray and I have it on a desk in my living room and it is also used as an HTPC connected to my TV.
It is the only Blu-Ray/DVD player that I have for watching physical disks.
Apple needs a 'balls to the wall' product that sets the standard for what a no-compromise system should be. They can afford it, they should do it, they would be foolish to not define the status quo. If it wasn't for the release of Final Cut Pro and the Mac Pro then Apple's computers would still be considered toys. I love my monster truck Mac Pro, please don't make me go PC.
. In the 3D applications world, Apple is still a second rate citizen.
Apple is unlikely to ever become the norm there. I actually cannot think of a single advantage to OSX in that area or a single application that runs better than it does on Windows. I still don't actually like Windows, but I haven't spent that much time on it in about a decade.
We attribute the "no visible wires" thing to Steve Jobs, but might be a Jonathan Ive thing as much as a Steve thing. Nothing goes against that aesthetic like a big external drive unit sitting there with a bunch of wires sticking out of it. The Mac Pro allows users to hide multiple drives inside the computer itself.
I cannot see any point in the future when high end users will stop demanding more CPU, GPU and RAM than fits in an iMac. Obviously Apple is free to stop selling computers to them, but slapping a new motherboard into a case every time Intel revs its server offerings seems like a low cost way of keeping those people using OS X and buying Apple software.
I cannot see any point in the future when high end users will stop demanding more CPU, GPU and RAM than fits in an iMac. Obviously Apple is free to stop selling computers to them, but slapping a new motherboard into a case every time Intel revs its server offerings seems like a low cost way of keeping those people using OS X and buying Apple software.
Exactly. It's a simple proposition and easily accomplished. Apple would be foolish to let this small but significant area of the business slide, for the many reasons mentioned in this thread.
Exactly. It's a simple proposition and easily accomplished. Apple would be foolish to let this small but significant area of the business slide, for the many reasons mentioned in this thread.
If Apple isn't going to put in the effort to innovate then what is the point. Apple has shown that there is more to computer design than Intels latest CPU with the laptops. The desktop seems to be missing the pull out the stops design efforts seen in the laptops. Maybe it wasn't on purpose but the desktop hardware has regressed to the point of looking pretty pathetic.
So in reality the slide as already happened now Apple needs to get out of the ditch and back on the road.
I Maybe it wasn't on purpose but the desktop hardware has regressed to the point of looking pretty pathetic.
That is complete nonsense. Who makes nicer desktop hardware?
That is complete nonsense. Who makes nicer desktop hardware?
The Mini is about it for a modern design from Apple. That model is so castrated that many can't even consider it for mainstream usage. This is especially the case when most of Apples laptops out perform the Mini.
So Apple has one marginal computer for the desk top. The competition has a whole array of products that users can choose from. Thus my statement; Apples desktop line up is pathetic.
I only read the first 3 pages and the last page so maybe someone mentioned it somewhere in the middle... what about an iMac Pro? add a "pro" category to the iMac line... one that incorporates some desktop/workstation hardware in place of mobile/laptop cpu architecture. it would solve the issue of wanting more than an iMac. Hardest issue is the idea of an expansion slot. How could you put that in an iMac case without enlarging it (depth) significantly and cooling with a true video card and hotter CPU might then become an issue. But it could be done, give then proper R&D @ Cupertino.
To incorporate what you are suggesting, they would have to essentially rethink the whole design. It's not all laptop hardware. It uses a laptop gpu which is actually constructed from underclocked desktop parts. Basically it's a gpu designed for laptops that is too power hungry to get any kind of reasonable battery life. The cpus are desktop cpus that stop just before the extreme units on the 27" model. Expansion slot is too much design work. It would have to be something like mini PCI so it wouldn't take the cards people would want to use anyway and there's no guarantee of quick manufacturer support.
That line is designed around aesthetics and limited storage needs. When you start having to add drive enclosures and a bunch of different peripherals to it just to obtain the functionality of another model, the minimalist design concept is rendered pointless anyway.
The Mini is about it for a modern design from Apple. That model is so castrated that many can't even consider it for mainstream usage. This is especially the case when most of Apples laptops out perform the Mini.
So Apple has one marginal computer for the desk top. The competition has a whole array of products that users can choose from. Thus my statement; Apples desktop line up is pathetic.
Many of us would like an xMac, but just because it doesn't exist, doesn't mean you need to overreact and disparage the whole lineup.
The Mini isn't the whole desktop line. There are iMacs and Pro... Plenty of performance there.
Price performance isn't great, but they are all pretty much the best looking, best built desktops. Calling them pathetic is just a tad hyperbolic.
Many of us would like an xMac, but just because it doesn't exist, doesn't mean you need to overreact and disparage the whole lineup.
The Mini isn't the whole desktop line. There are iMacs and Pro... Plenty of performance there.
Price performance isn't great, but they are all pretty much the best looking, best built desktops. Calling them pathetic is just a tad hyperbolic.
The mac pro is frustrating. The case internals are quite nice but I still wish we could better hard drive cooling. The cooling system in general is an area where they could have put in further work. People buy these machines for power and stability. If you routinely run the laptops, mini, or imac at high loads they all run quite hot. I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with the mac pro line. I really really need to update.
Many of us would like an xMac, but just because it doesn't exist, doesn't mean you need to overreact and disparage the whole lineup.
If the line up is pathetic, saying so isn't over reacting. The desktop line is seen as a joke in comparison to the laptop lineup.
The Mini isn't the whole desktop line. There are iMacs and Pro... Plenty of performance there.
I don't even consider the iMac to be part of the desktop line up. More importantly many will not even consider an all in one. As to the Pro, I've said before it is a fine machine for those that need it but it is a stretch to call that big box a desktop machine. More importantly the Pro will not sell to people simply looking for an expandable Mac that is midrange in performance.
Price performance isn't great, but they are all pretty much the best looking, best built desktops. Calling them pathetic is just a tad hyperbolic.
In my view the desktop line up is the Mini. Not a bad machine but by no means a line up.
In my view the desktop line up is the Mini. Not a bad machine but by no means a line up.
Sure if you only see the mini, that would be a pretty weak lineup. But reality doesn't conform to your narrow view.
The iMacs are clearly desktop machines, what else would they be? They are probably the most quintessential desktop on the planet. Since they have built in screens, they pretty much have to be on your desktop.
I also don't see where the Mac Pro is that large. It is within about a quarter inch of my Antec Solo Mini Tower.
http://www.amazon.com/Antec-LifeStyl.../dp/B000FTTNIQ
So in your definition a Desktop machine is only some kind of box without a screen, but smaller than a Mini-tower?? How narrow can you be?
I also don't see where the Mac Pro is that large. It is within about a quarter inch of my Antec Solo Mini Tower.
http://www.amazon.com/Antec-LifeStyl.../dp/B000FTTNIQ
So in your definition a Desktop machine is only some kind of box without a screen, but smaller than a Mini-tower?? How narrow can you be?
It isn't that terrible in size. Part of it is the juxtaposition provided by the alternatives available at the Apple store. Quite a number of things have hurt sales, and the price tag has probably made a number of users question how much they actually need. Beyond the users that can fit everything they need on a single laptop hard drive, the Apple minimalist design concept starts to falter via an exponential increase in accessories and peripherals required. In my opinion at such a high starting price point, the single socket machine needs better specs to really differentiate it from the imac. Seeing it come with less stock ram than the imacs or macbook pros is just a sign of negligence that feeds the rumors of Apple killing the line.
By the way Corsair > Antec
I still have an old G5 around. If I did build my own custom PC, I'd be tempted to use the case. There are probably better cases, but they would cost more than the selling price of an old G5.
It isn't that terrible in size. Part of it is the juxtaposition provided by the alternatives available at the Apple store. Quite a number of things have hurt sales, and the price tag has probably made a number of users question how much they actually need. Beyond the users that can fit everything they need on a single laptop hard drive, the Apple minimalist design concept starts to falter via an exponential increase in accessories and peripherals required. In my opinion at such a high starting price point, the single socket machine needs better specs to really differentiate it from the imac. Seeing it come with less stock ram than the imacs or macbook pros is just a sign of negligence that feeds the rumors of Apple killing the line.
By the way Corsair > Antec
I still have an old G5 around. If I did build my own custom PC, I'd be tempted to use the case. There are probably better cases, but they would cost more than the selling price of an old G5.
I am not saying Apple is free of criticism. I think I was clear that I would like a much less expensive Pro and I really don't like AiO computers and the Mini is like a laptop without batteries. But I do think it is extreme to call them pathetic, or to claim that the iMac/Pro don't even count as desktops.
I still think Apples have the best looking, best built desktops and like Apple I prefer quiet to absolute cooling performance.
On cases, I didn't even know Corsair made cases 4 years ago when I built mine. Did they?
But reading reviews recently of Solo II Corsair came up as better in some respects, but Antec was still a quieter case and that was my goal. I have zero regrets on the Solo.
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/chassi...olo-ii/?page=4
In fact I find the Corsairs on the gaudy side with windows and stuff. If choosing today I would likely get another Solo or a Cooler Master Silencio, none of the Corsairs appeal. I prefer simple, clean and quiet.
I am not saying Apple is free of criticism. I think I was clear that I would like a much less expensive Pro and I really don't like AiO computers and the Mini is like a laptop without batteries. But I do think it is extreme to call them pathetic, or to claim that the iMac/Pro don't even count as desktops.
I still think Apples have the best looking, best built desktops and like Apple I prefer quiet to absolute cooling performance.
On cases, I didn't even know Corsair made cases 4 years ago when I built mine. Did they?
But reading reviews recently of Solo II Corsair came up as better in some respects, but Antec was still a quieter case and that was my goal. I have zero regrets on the Solo.
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/chassi...olo-ii/?page=4
In fact I find the Corsairs on the gaudy side with windows and stuff. If choosing today I would likely get another Solo or a Cooler Master Silencio, none of the Corsairs appeal. I prefer simple, clean and quiet.
I was just having a little fun with the Corsair thing. They probably do nowhere near the volume of Antec, but they try to make nice products. Doesn't apple still use Corsair power supplies?
I'm probably a bit irritable with Apple lately, but they do an excellent job of predicting what will appeal to the largest possible number of users. The problem is if your needs fall even just a bit outside of the Apple design paradigm, you're confronted with a mess of cables, adapters, dongles, additional hardware, etc. to make something really simple work, when it wouldn't have been a big deal in the past. You can't use something like eSATA on a macbook pro given the lack of an express slot these days, but thunderbolt has a limited range of products (and the Promise enclosure is noisy). That's just one example. It may get superior speed, but it's more expensive, and it does mean buying and testing new peripherals.