The average user isn't swapping out their HDD even with a tower...we aren't average.
The average user also isn't purchasing a maxed 27" imac or anything in the $2k+ range. The average user doesn't apply to much of the hardware being discussed in this thread.
The average user isn't swapping out their HDD even with a tower...we aren't average.
I wouldn't be surprised to find the percentage of Mac Pro users swapping or installing new drives is rather significant. Maybe in the range of 75%. The reason many people buy these machines is to process very large swaths of data.
The average user also isn't purchasing a maxed 27" imac or anything in the $2k+ range. The average user doesn't apply to much of the hardware being discussed in this thread.
He didn't say maxed...just home user. I would guess even with the 27" model that home users outnumber pro users.
It would be nice if the HDD wasn't buried behind the screen but for most home users it probably doesn't matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
I wouldn't be surprised to find the percentage of Mac Pro users swapping or installing new drives is rather significant. Maybe in the range of 75%. The reason many people buy these machines is to process very large swaths of data.
Sure...but you can still access large swaths of data via TB. Just slower.
I will agree with you JYD however I will also say that the main problem right now is that the Apple SSD is a SATA II (unless they have upgraded to SATA III recently and quietly) so paying $500 for old technology is absurd. I agree that a hard drive upgrade should be easy and that yes it is a design decision though I suppose Apple figures "You have have ease of access to the hard drive or you can have a cool looking computer though not both." Add to the fact that on the top of the line iMac, it is an extra $100 to double the graphics memory. If you choose to upgrade the processor, that's another $200. For a total of $2,799 + tax and shipping.
Good point, I'd almost forgotten about the SATA II. Strange how Apple leads the industery on some things like TB, but on SATA controllers they're years behind. I guess their reasoning is that it doesn't matter for the spindle drives that are standard on most of the lineup.
He didn't say maxed...just home user. I would guess even with the 27" model that home users outnumber pro users.
It would be nice if the HDD wasn't buried behind the screen but for most home users it probably doesn't matter.
Sure...but you can still access large swaths of data via TB. Just slower.
"for most users...it doesn't matter" "just slower"
The point is that we want Apple to make the best products in the industry. If their computers are slower and full of design flaws that don't matter to "most users" that makes them average computers, which unacceptable when OS X forces us to use Apple computers. If Apple is going to limit choices, then the remaining choices must be exceptional choices, not all show and no go desktop ornaments.
He didn't say maxed...just home user. I would guess even with the 27" model that home users outnumber pro users.
It would be nice if the HDD wasn't buried behind the screen but for most home users it probably doesn't matter.
Sure...but you can still access large swaths of data via TB. Just slower.
You need to quote things correctly. You said average. Now you are saying home user. Some users play the newest games at high settings on an imac. Are they considered average? Typically when I see "average" on here, it refers to those who don't need much beyond email and facebook. Regarding hard drive swap outs, most people don't think they need it until they get a repair quote from Apple on what they may assume is an easy fix. In many cases, it probably was on previous computers that they owned. I'm saying it doesn't drive purchasing priorities all the time. It just makes people mad when it comes to repair bills.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg
Good point, I'd almost forgotten about the SATA II. Strange how Apple leads the industery on some things like TB, but on SATA controllers they're years behind. I guess their reasoning is that it doesn't matter for the spindle drives that are standard on most of the lineup.
You're editorializing it here when you say "lead". They essentially beta tested it by adding their connector. Unfortunately this doesn't mean its long term health will be there. if sales are based around the "average" computer user, will that user pay $50 for a cable and peripherals at their current price points? Pricing isn't likely to just fall off a cliff anytime soon. For much of 2011, it was nearly impossible to even get a proper SDK. I wonder how much time it ate up doing R&D for thunderbolt peripherals.
The problem is not so much people clamoring for a new Mac Pro as wondering if there will even be a new one. If Apple would let people know at least that, there would be less anxiety.
You need to quote things correctly. You said average. Now you are saying home user.
Really? You're dinging me on this? He used both terms "average" and "home". The point is whether they are average, home or even pro, I bet most folks have not messed around with upgrading drives. Given that the Mac Pro exists then the iMac, being the way it is, is not that big a deal to me.
Quote:
Some users play the newest games at high settings on an imac. Are they considered average?
No, those people are frustrated.
Quote:
Typically when I see "average" on here, it refers to those who don't need much beyond email and facebook.
Those folks are very happy. With their iPads.
Quote:
Regarding hard drive swap outs, most people don't think they need it until they get a repair quote from Apple on what they may assume is an easy fix. In many cases, it probably was on previous computers that they owned. I'm saying it doesn't drive purchasing priorities all the time. It just makes people mad when it comes to repair bills.
Applecare + Time Machine. If you are uncomfortable with the risk of repair costs then Applecare is the route. A bit pricey but most Apple customers aren't all THAT price conscious.
Really? You're dinging me on this? He used both terms "average" and "home". The point is whether they are average, home or even pro, I bet most folks have not messed around with upgrading drives. Given that the Mac Pro exists then the iMac, being the way it is, is not that big a deal to me.
No, those people are frustrated.
Those folks are very happy. With their iPads.
Applecare + Time Machine. If you are uncomfortable with the risk of repair costs then Applecare is the route. A bit pricey but most Apple customers aren't all THAT price conscious.
This is roughly the response I expected, buy the extended warranty. Applecare is still just another extended warranty. The upside is that they are thorough. I stand by my point. The "average" user isn't spending that much on a computer. Most of the hardware being discussed already ruled out average.
This is roughly the response I expected, buy the extended warranty. Applecare is still just another extended warranty. The upside is that they are thorough. I stand by my point. The "average" user isn't spending that much on a computer. Most of the hardware being discussed already ruled out average.
You have yet to show most people either upgrade or fix their own computers or even upgrade/replace hard drives. Average users are buying iMacs even though they are far more expensive than a Dell or HP tower. So inaccessible drives appear to have little impact on the average/home/etc user.
Pros can either a) afford the Mac Pro b) afford Applecare or c) are supported by IT staff. Whether to get a high end iMac vs a Mac Pro vs a PC workstation vs MBP is simply another business decision.
Pros with a single point of failure (Mac Pro, iMac, monitor, RAID, whatever) probably haven't learned the hard way that a backup tool chain, even if it's just their old MBP or a Mini, is worth the investment.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
The average user isn't swapping out their HDD even with a tower...we aren't average.
The average user also isn't purchasing a maxed 27" imac or anything in the $2k+ range. The average user doesn't apply to much of the hardware being discussed in this thread.
I wouldn't be surprised to find the percentage of Mac Pro users swapping or installing new drives is rather significant. Maybe in the range of 75%. The reason many people buy these machines is to process very large swaths of data.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm
The average user also isn't purchasing a maxed 27" imac or anything in the $2k+ range. The average user doesn't apply to much of the hardware being discussed in this thread.
He didn't say maxed...just home user. I would guess even with the 27" model that home users outnumber pro users.
It would be nice if the HDD wasn't buried behind the screen but for most home users it probably doesn't matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
I wouldn't be surprised to find the percentage of Mac Pro users swapping or installing new drives is rather significant. Maybe in the range of 75%. The reason many people buy these machines is to process very large swaths of data.
Sure...but you can still access large swaths of data via TB. Just slower.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter
I will agree with you JYD however I will also say that the main problem right now is that the Apple SSD is a SATA II (unless they have upgraded to SATA III recently and quietly) so paying $500 for old technology is absurd. I agree that a hard drive upgrade should be easy and that yes it is a design decision though I suppose Apple figures "You have have ease of access to the hard drive or you can have a cool looking computer though not both." Add to the fact that on the top of the line iMac, it is an extra $100 to double the graphics memory. If you choose to upgrade the processor, that's another $200. For a total of $2,799 + tax and shipping.
Good point, I'd almost forgotten about the SATA II. Strange how Apple leads the industery on some things like TB, but on SATA controllers they're years behind. I guess their reasoning is that it doesn't matter for the spindle drives that are standard on most of the lineup.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
He didn't say maxed...just home user. I would guess even with the 27" model that home users outnumber pro users.
It would be nice if the HDD wasn't buried behind the screen but for most home users it probably doesn't matter.
Sure...but you can still access large swaths of data via TB. Just slower.
"for most users...it doesn't matter" "just slower"
The point is that we want Apple to make the best products in the industry. If their computers are slower and full of design flaws that don't matter to "most users" that makes them average computers, which unacceptable when OS X forces us to use Apple computers. If Apple is going to limit choices, then the remaining choices must be exceptional choices, not all show and no go desktop ornaments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
He didn't say maxed...just home user. I would guess even with the 27" model that home users outnumber pro users.
It would be nice if the HDD wasn't buried behind the screen but for most home users it probably doesn't matter.
Sure...but you can still access large swaths of data via TB. Just slower.
You need to quote things correctly. You said average. Now you are saying home user. Some users play the newest games at high settings on an imac. Are they considered average? Typically when I see "average" on here, it refers to those who don't need much beyond email and facebook. Regarding hard drive swap outs, most people don't think they need it until they get a repair quote from Apple on what they may assume is an easy fix. In many cases, it probably was on previous computers that they owned. I'm saying it doesn't drive purchasing priorities all the time. It just makes people mad when it comes to repair bills.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg
Good point, I'd almost forgotten about the SATA II. Strange how Apple leads the industery on some things like TB, but on SATA controllers they're years behind. I guess their reasoning is that it doesn't matter for the spindle drives that are standard on most of the lineup.
You're editorializing it here when you say "lead". They essentially beta tested it by adding their connector. Unfortunately this doesn't mean its long term health will be there. if sales are based around the "average" computer user, will that user pay $50 for a cable and peripherals at their current price points? Pricing isn't likely to just fall off a cliff anytime soon. For much of 2011, it was nearly impossible to even get a proper SDK. I wonder how much time it ate up doing R&D for thunderbolt peripherals.
The problem is not so much people clamoring for a new Mac Pro as wondering if there will even be a new one. If Apple would let people know at least that, there would be less anxiety.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm
You need to quote things correctly. You said average. Now you are saying home user.
Really? You're dinging me on this? He used both terms "average" and "home". The point is whether they are average, home or even pro, I bet most folks have not messed around with upgrading drives. Given that the Mac Pro exists then the iMac, being the way it is, is not that big a deal to me.
Quote:
Some users play the newest games at high settings on an imac. Are they considered average?
No, those people are frustrated.
Quote:
Typically when I see "average" on here, it refers to those who don't need much beyond email and facebook.
Those folks are very happy. With their iPads.
Quote:
Regarding hard drive swap outs, most people don't think they need it until they get a repair quote from Apple on what they may assume is an easy fix. In many cases, it probably was on previous computers that they owned. I'm saying it doesn't drive purchasing priorities all the time. It just makes people mad when it comes to repair bills.
Applecare + Time Machine. If you are uncomfortable with the risk of repair costs then Applecare is the route. A bit pricey but most Apple customers aren't all THAT price conscious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht
Really? You're dinging me on this? He used both terms "average" and "home". The point is whether they are average, home or even pro, I bet most folks have not messed around with upgrading drives. Given that the Mac Pro exists then the iMac, being the way it is, is not that big a deal to me.
No, those people are frustrated.
Those folks are very happy. With their iPads.
Applecare + Time Machine. If you are uncomfortable with the risk of repair costs then Applecare is the route. A bit pricey but most Apple customers aren't all THAT price conscious.
This is roughly the response I expected, buy the extended warranty. Applecare is still just another extended warranty. The upside is that they are thorough. I stand by my point. The "average" user isn't spending that much on a computer. Most of the hardware being discussed already ruled out average.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm
This is roughly the response I expected, buy the extended warranty. Applecare is still just another extended warranty. The upside is that they are thorough. I stand by my point. The "average" user isn't spending that much on a computer. Most of the hardware being discussed already ruled out average.
You have yet to show most people either upgrade or fix their own computers or even upgrade/replace hard drives. Average users are buying iMacs even though they are far more expensive than a Dell or HP tower. So inaccessible drives appear to have little impact on the average/home/etc user.
Pros can either a) afford the Mac Pro b) afford Applecare or c) are supported by IT staff. Whether to get a high end iMac vs a Mac Pro vs a PC workstation vs MBP is simply another business decision.
Pros with a single point of failure (Mac Pro, iMac, monitor, RAID, whatever) probably haven't learned the hard way that a backup tool chain, even if it's just their old MBP or a Mini, is worth the investment.