That was my immediate reaction. What the heck is out there representing the other 66% ... iMac clones made by Dell et al I assume. More original innovation from the PC world eh?
If you actually click the link to the Bloomberg article, you would have your answer: Lenovo is #2 in all-in-one sales, mostly to the Chinese market and HP is #3. Along with Apple, the three companies cover 76% of the all-in-one PC sales.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
I feel the Mac Pro line should be thought of in the same way the F1 is to production cars. Perhaps not profitable, certainly not mainstream but an R&D and prestige center.
Prestige yes, R&D no. Note that many automobile manufacturers have dabbled with bankruptcy. For the auto industry, F1 is not pushing innovation. It's electric cars and hybrids, particularly econoboxes.
For Apple, innovation is being led by the iPhone, not the Mac Pro.
The camera manufacturers figured this out about 15-20 years ago: the consumer-driven point-and-shoot cameras was where all the action was and they focused on that to push technology farther while they left their high-end SLR bodies languishing for years between updates. This strategy moved from film-based cameras to today's digital cameras, but the focus is clear: the consumer market drives innovation because it moves faster.
Exactly my reaction. iMac is Apple's flagship (non portable) machine, and its supposed dominance in the AIO space is often pointed out as a reason why they don't need a competitive tower machine (as well as the rumors about killing the Mac Pro). I'm surprised anyone else even comes close.
If you actually click the link to the Bloomberg article, you would have your answer: Lenovo is #2 in all-in-one sales, mostly to the Chinese market and HP is #3. Along with Apple, the three companies cover 76% of the all-in-one PC sales.
Prestige yes, R&D no. Note that many automobile manufacturers have dabbled with bankruptcy. For the auto industry, F1 is not pushing innovation. It's electric cars and hybrids, particularly econoboxes.
For Apple, innovation is being led by the iPhone.
The camera manufacturers figured this out about 15-20 years ago: the consumer-driven point-and-shoot cameras was where all the action was and they focused on that to push technology farther while they left their high-end SLR bodies languishing for years between updates. This strategy moved from film-based cameras to today's digital cameras, but the focus is clear: the consumer market drives innovation because it moves faster.
I didn't need to look really, my point was more about the copying Apple again syndrome and lack of original thinking in the PC world rather than who the usual suspects are that are doing it in that particular example.
Off topic but continuing your point ... I'd love to see the likes of Tesla, BMW and Mercedes start an new F1 category ... all electric cars. That torque is something to behold!
Which gives me another thought ... For the US (where F1 seems to not be too closely followed sadly) how to get the red necks into green technology ... all electric cars driving round and round in a circle with country music blasting might do the trick ... Chevy Volt NASCAR!
That only addresses about half the reflections according to people who have tried to do retrofits. The panel is still glossy.
I still consider getting a museum acrylic replacement glass and applying the film to the panel, but that is going to end up costing over $500 and only addressing 75% of the problem. I could buy two more 27" iMacs, but will hold my breath until it isn't a mirror.
Off topic but continuing your point ... I'd love to see the likes of Tesla, BMW and Mercedes start an new F1 category ... all electric cars. That torque is something to behold!
The actual racing might be exciting but the four-hour pit stops would be a drag.
Getting back to the topic at hand, I wonder what Apple's share of the all-in-one profits are? 80%? 90%?
I have a 24" iMac and I think it's an excellent machine. The only change I would want to the iMac line would be able to have a user-replaceable hard drive (It will never happen). Although I keep most of my files backed up to an external hard drive, I like the idea of being able to replace the internal drive from time to time. However, my main issue is that if the machine breaks (from some other failure) and I need it repaired, Apple will just keep that drive and read whatever is on it before I get a chance to wipe it. That's something I'm not entirely comfortable with. There's no porn or anything on it, but personal information that I don't want known. I suppose I could boot up another computer and wipe the drive from that if the broken computer allows it, so that's always a possibility.
I'd always been used to having drive sleds and moving around drives to my heart's content. The iMac makes it just too difficult to do that. I'd have to buy suction cups and pull the front off and it's really a pain. I honestly believe Apple is accomodating most users by building the iMac the way they are, and I'm probably one of the few that prefers easily removable hard drives. And that's right, I remember on the newer iMacs they made it so you can't even use any drive, but some Apple special replacement drive with the proper sensor connectors. That's the way it is with Apple and I just have to live with it.
The actual racing might be exciting but the four-hour pit stops would be a drag.
Getting back to the topic at hand, I wonder what Apple's share of the all-in-one profits are? 80%? 90%?
I would suspect the profits for Apple are damn good ... and what is the profit in the AIO clones? <5% most likely.
btw The pit stops would be exactly why it would be a good idea ... it would drive the technology to make those stops only seconds either by new technology to charge infinitely faster or to come up with hot swap changes ...
I think the term anti-glare should be used instead. Glossy panels have shown their benefits and I like the easy to clean glass, the only issue is reflection. Apple has a patent for circularly polarised display panels so they can experiment with polarising filters to cut glare and other manufacturers have products to eliminate glare too:
All devices are going this way so they have to come up with something to fix it.
They'd still need to make the storage accessible before I'd consider an iMac but if they put 3 x 2.5" trays beside the RAM, it would be far more compelling as you could very easily buy a 128GB SSD + 2 x 1TB 2.5" in RAID-0, 1 or have one for backups. Plus, they aren't blowing all the computer heat over the drives like they do now.
Right now, I think the iMacs are great value machines. Years ago they were limited to dual core chips when PC desktops had quads and the low-end iMacs had TN panels at one point. I do feel 27" is too big and 21.5" too small. 24" is a good middle ground and can still have higher than 2k resolution e.g 2275 x 1280. This would make their Cinema display a bit cheaper too and they'd only use one panel throughout their entire lineup. But whatever happens, the technology is just going to keep coming down in price and there's no reason for them to make a larger than 27" iMac.
33% surprises me. I would have thought it was more like 80%. Not too long ago the iMac was basically the only credible AIO in the game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
That was my immediate reaction. What the heck is out there representing the other 66% ... iMac clones made by Dell et al I assume. More original innovation from the PC world eh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacksons
I am actually surprised the number is not much, much higher. 33% actually seems low to me.
Does no one look at the Best Buy Ads anymore? I still do just for grins. Every week they advertise either a $400 AIO gateway, or a $500 HP or Dell or so. Those sell because they are cheap. No different than a free Android.
If they compare AIOs over $1,000- it would be decimating. iMacs still start at $1,199. Thats not chump change for the general public. What people don't realize, is you can grab a 2007 Aluminum iMac for $400-$500 on Craigslist and have a better computer than the POS cheap Windows ones. Just picked my dad up a 24" 2.8ghz 2008 for $600. Magic Mouse, Box and everything included. Can't beat that.
I feel the Mac Pro line should be thought of in the same way the F1 is to production cars. Perhaps not profitable, certainly not mainstream but an R&D and prestige center.
That would be cool. But to an extent, Apple is already sort of the prestige center of the whole industry. They release a *reference* model that incorporates the latest tech that everyone else is not ready to adopt, and the masses follow when they succeed.
A MacBook Pro i7 plus an Apple monitor sitting waiting on your desk is a pretty sweet combo ... mobility by just yanking out the monitor connection and a work station when at your desk. As a long time Mac Pro user I find this a great compromise now I have scaled down.
MBP i7 ... Who would have predicted such computing power in a laptop? It just makes you think, we might not be far from having the same computing power in a phone.
A MacBook Pro i7 plus an Apple monitor sitting waiting on your desk is a pretty sweet combo ... mobility by just yanking out the monitor connection and a work station when at your desk. As a long time Mac Pro user I find this a great compromise now I have scaled down.
A portable is an uneccessary expense for me, not to mention more of an 'all in one' than the iMac is, so it's a nonstarter. My iPhone/iPad can handle my mobile tasks.
I scaled down from my awesome Quicksilver G4 to a Mac mini (2009). While I like the mini's footprint, its lack of power dissapoints. I got over iMacs in the 90's. I regretted that decision shortly after purchasing it due to its lack of upgradability/expandability. I replaced the iMac with the G4, which was everything while it was supported. When I ebay the Mini this year, I'm back in the market for a Mac Pro.
Bring the Mac Pro prices down to iMac prices and watch how quickly the iMac numbers drop.
Other vendors sell all in ones, if they were so great they would out sell their towers, but they don't. Its the pricing not that customers actually prefer an all in one with limited expandability.
Tower form factor with multiple external displays and desktop parts (CPU, GPU etc...) wins hands down.
I'm curious why you don't like the all-in-one format. I see some shortcomings...
Maybe it's me, I don't see the iMac and Mac Pro as alternatives of each other. Perhaps Mac Mini + Cinema Display v. iMac
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aizmov
A headless iMac would be nice. Putting everything all together seems to be wasteful when it comes to desktops. The Mac Pro with its Xeon processor is an overkill.
There is the QUAD-core i7 Mac Mini server, perhaps that's closer in performance to the iMacs.
Unfortunately it doesn't have the discrete graphics of the high end non-server Mac Mini.
It was intelligent of Apple to recognise that few PC buyers actually make use of expansion slots within their desktops, especially now when ethernet and even graphics are integrated into the motherboard.
I'd be surprised if Apple discontinues the Mac Pro - I think it'll leave too many people who work in high end video and other computational tasks in the lurch, unless Apple has conceded that market to Windows/Linux, but then, why spend time developing Final Cut X?
The all in one concept doesn't appeal to me but I am impressed with just how the iMac has evolved - I've not seen any other company make an all in one as beautiful and slim as the current iMacs.
A MacBook Pro i7 plus an Apple monitor sitting waiting on your desk is a pretty sweet combo ... mobility by just yanking out the monitor connection and a work station when at your desk. As a long time Mac Pro user I find this a great compromise now I have scaled down.
Do you do any gaming on it by chance? I am looking to upgrade my old PC, and am strongly considering either a MB Pro or an iMac. Would love the portability obviously, but just not sure if an MB Pro would be beefy enough to handle some moderate gaming (not Crysis or anything).
Playing with numbers again. Although it looks quite impressive, 33% for all in one sales is merely a blip for the entire operating system/hardware market share. With Apple having a mere 5% share, it's quite obvious that Apple has not gained any ground since the inception of the iMat and Pro lines. These numerical breakdowns are just laughable. Specially the reaction from users taking this as a win or gain for Apple.
Comments
That was my immediate reaction. What the heck is out there representing the other 66% ... iMac clones made by Dell et al I assume. More original innovation from the PC world eh?
If you actually click the link to the Bloomberg article, you would have your answer: Lenovo is #2 in all-in-one sales, mostly to the Chinese market and HP is #3. Along with Apple, the three companies cover 76% of the all-in-one PC sales.
I feel the Mac Pro line should be thought of in the same way the F1 is to production cars. Perhaps not profitable, certainly not mainstream but an R&D and prestige center.
Prestige yes, R&D no. Note that many automobile manufacturers have dabbled with bankruptcy. For the auto industry, F1 is not pushing innovation. It's electric cars and hybrids, particularly econoboxes.
For Apple, innovation is being led by the iPhone, not the Mac Pro.
The camera manufacturers figured this out about 15-20 years ago: the consumer-driven point-and-shoot cameras was where all the action was and they focused on that to push technology farther while they left their high-end SLR bodies languishing for years between updates. This strategy moved from film-based cameras to today's digital cameras, but the focus is clear: the consumer market drives innovation because it moves faster.
Anyone else surprised that the number is so low?
Exactly my reaction. iMac is Apple's flagship (non portable) machine, and its supposed dominance in the AIO space is often pointed out as a reason why they don't need a competitive tower machine (as well as the rumors about killing the Mac Pro). I'm surprised anyone else even comes close.
So where's my xMac?
There's no competition is this space. The iMac is it. 5 years out I no longer see Apple making a Mac Pro.
I am actually surprised the number is not much, much higher. 33% actually seems low to me.
If you actually click the link to the Bloomberg article, you would have your answer: Lenovo is #2 in all-in-one sales, mostly to the Chinese market and HP is #3. Along with Apple, the three companies cover 76% of the all-in-one PC sales.
Prestige yes, R&D no. Note that many automobile manufacturers have dabbled with bankruptcy. For the auto industry, F1 is not pushing innovation. It's electric cars and hybrids, particularly econoboxes.
For Apple, innovation is being led by the iPhone.
The camera manufacturers figured this out about 15-20 years ago: the consumer-driven point-and-shoot cameras was where all the action was and they focused on that to push technology farther while they left their high-end SLR bodies languishing for years between updates. This strategy moved from film-based cameras to today's digital cameras, but the focus is clear: the consumer market drives innovation because it moves faster.
I didn't need to look really, my point was more about the copying Apple again syndrome and lack of original thinking in the PC world rather than who the usual suspects are that are doing it in that particular example.
Off topic but continuing your point ... I'd love to see the likes of Tesla, BMW and Mercedes start an new F1 category ... all electric cars. That torque is something to behold!
Which gives me another thought ... For the US (where F1 seems to not be too closely followed sadly) how to get the red necks into green technology ... all electric cars driving round and round in a circle with country music blasting might do the trick ... Chevy Volt NASCAR!
Remove the glass and there's your matte screen.
That only addresses about half the reflections according to people who have tried to do retrofits. The panel is still glossy.
I still consider getting a museum acrylic replacement glass and applying the film to the panel, but that is going to end up costing over $500 and only addressing 75% of the problem. I could buy two more 27" iMacs, but will hold my breath until it isn't a mirror.
BTW, if you remove the glass it really is ugly.
Off topic but continuing your point ... I'd love to see the likes of Tesla, BMW and Mercedes start an new F1 category ... all electric cars. That torque is something to behold!
The actual racing might be exciting but the four-hour pit stops would be a drag.
Getting back to the topic at hand, I wonder what Apple's share of the all-in-one profits are? 80%? 90%?
I'd always been used to having drive sleds and moving around drives to my heart's content. The iMac makes it just too difficult to do that. I'd have to buy suction cups and pull the front off and it's really a pain. I honestly believe Apple is accomodating most users by building the iMac the way they are, and I'm probably one of the few that prefers easily removable hard drives. And that's right, I remember on the newer iMacs they made it so you can't even use any drive, but some Apple special replacement drive with the proper sensor connectors. That's the way it is with Apple and I just have to live with it.
The actual racing might be exciting but the four-hour pit stops would be a drag.
Getting back to the topic at hand, I wonder what Apple's share of the all-in-one profits are? 80%? 90%?
I would suspect the profits for Apple are damn good ... and what is the profit in the AIO clones? <5% most likely.
btw The pit stops would be exactly why it would be a good idea ... it would drive the technology to make those stops only seconds either by new technology to charge infinitely faster or to come up with hot swap changes ...
Matte screen, please !!
I think the term anti-glare should be used instead. Glossy panels have shown their benefits and I like the easy to clean glass, the only issue is reflection. Apple has a patent for circularly polarised display panels so they can experiment with polarising filters to cut glare and other manufacturers have products to eliminate glare too:
http://techon.nikkeibp.co.jp/english...111028/199970/
All devices are going this way so they have to come up with something to fix it.
They'd still need to make the storage accessible before I'd consider an iMac but if they put 3 x 2.5" trays beside the RAM, it would be far more compelling as you could very easily buy a 128GB SSD + 2 x 1TB 2.5" in RAID-0, 1 or have one for backups. Plus, they aren't blowing all the computer heat over the drives like they do now.
Right now, I think the iMacs are great value machines. Years ago they were limited to dual core chips when PC desktops had quads and the low-end iMacs had TN panels at one point. I do feel 27" is too big and 21.5" too small. 24" is a good middle ground and can still have higher than 2k resolution e.g 2275 x 1280. This would make their Cinema display a bit cheaper too and they'd only use one panel throughout their entire lineup. But whatever happens, the technology is just going to keep coming down in price and there's no reason for them to make a larger than 27" iMac.
33% surprises me. I would have thought it was more like 80%. Not too long ago the iMac was basically the only credible AIO in the game.
That was my immediate reaction. What the heck is out there representing the other 66% ... iMac clones made by Dell et al I assume. More original innovation from the PC world eh?
I am actually surprised the number is not much, much higher. 33% actually seems low to me.
Does no one look at the Best Buy Ads anymore? I still do just for grins. Every week they advertise either a $400 AIO gateway, or a $500 HP or Dell or so. Those sell because they are cheap. No different than a free Android.
If they compare AIOs over $1,000- it would be decimating. iMacs still start at $1,199. Thats not chump change for the general public. What people don't realize, is you can grab a 2007 Aluminum iMac for $400-$500 on Craigslist and have a better computer than the POS cheap Windows ones. Just picked my dad up a 24" 2.8ghz 2008 for $600. Magic Mouse, Box and everything included. Can't beat that.
I feel the Mac Pro line should be thought of in the same way the F1 is to production cars. Perhaps not profitable, certainly not mainstream but an R&D and prestige center.
That would be cool. But to an extent, Apple is already sort of the prestige center of the whole industry. They release a *reference* model that incorporates the latest tech that everyone else is not ready to adopt, and the masses follow when they succeed.
A MacBook Pro i7 plus an Apple monitor sitting waiting on your desk is a pretty sweet combo ... mobility by just yanking out the monitor connection and a work station when at your desk. As a long time Mac Pro user I find this a great compromise now I have scaled down.
MBP i7 ... Who would have predicted such computing power in a laptop? It just makes you think, we might not be far from having the same computing power in a phone.
A MacBook Pro i7 plus an Apple monitor sitting waiting on your desk is a pretty sweet combo ... mobility by just yanking out the monitor connection and a work station when at your desk. As a long time Mac Pro user I find this a great compromise now I have scaled down.
A portable is an uneccessary expense for me, not to mention more of an 'all in one' than the iMac is, so it's a nonstarter. My iPhone/iPad can handle my mobile tasks.
I scaled down from my awesome Quicksilver G4 to a Mac mini (2009). While I like the mini's footprint, its lack of power dissapoints. I got over iMacs in the 90's. I regretted that decision shortly after purchasing it due to its lack of upgradability/expandability. I replaced the iMac with the G4, which was everything while it was supported. When I ebay the Mini this year, I'm back in the market for a Mac Pro.
Other vendors sell all in ones, if they were so great they would out sell their towers, but they don't. Its the pricing not that customers actually prefer an all in one with limited expandability.
Tower form factor with multiple external displays and desktop parts (CPU, GPU etc...) wins hands down.
Perhaps Mac Mini + Cinema Display v. iMac, but even that's a stretch.
I agree. The Mac Mini's internals are essentially laptop parts vs desktop components.
Bring the Mac Pro prices down to iMac prices and watch how quickly the iMac numbers drop.
So? not at all, then.
I'm curious why you don't like the all-in-one format. I see some shortcomings...
Maybe it's me, I don't see the iMac and Mac Pro as alternatives of each other. Perhaps Mac Mini + Cinema Display v. iMac
A headless iMac would be nice. Putting everything all together seems to be wasteful when it comes to desktops. The Mac Pro with its Xeon processor is an overkill.
There is the QUAD-core i7 Mac Mini server, perhaps that's closer in performance to the iMacs.
Unfortunately it doesn't have the discrete graphics of the high end non-server Mac Mini.
It was intelligent of Apple to recognise that few PC buyers actually make use of expansion slots within their desktops, especially now when ethernet and even graphics are integrated into the motherboard.
I'd be surprised if Apple discontinues the Mac Pro - I think it'll leave too many people who work in high end video and other computational tasks in the lurch, unless Apple has conceded that market to Windows/Linux, but then, why spend time developing Final Cut X?
The all in one concept doesn't appeal to me but I am impressed with just how the iMac has evolved - I've not seen any other company make an all in one as beautiful and slim as the current iMacs.
A MacBook Pro i7 plus an Apple monitor sitting waiting on your desk is a pretty sweet combo ... mobility by just yanking out the monitor connection and a work station when at your desk. As a long time Mac Pro user I find this a great compromise now I have scaled down.
Do you do any gaming on it by chance? I am looking to upgrade my old PC, and am strongly considering either a MB Pro or an iMac. Would love the portability obviously, but just not sure if an MB Pro would be beefy enough to handle some moderate gaming (not Crysis or anything).