<strong>Apple sells just the motherboard online(providing pointers to where to get the rest of the parts, and possibly some kind of assembly guide for certain "preferred configurations"). Customers buy their own case, RAM, video, audio, etc. Apple sets aside a few people to work with the OpenDarwin and GNUStep people on source code compatibility, then releases Darwin/GNUStep binaries for certain key OS X apps, like Mail, either free or at low prices. Of course, if we can get source code compatibility, then these apps could also run on x86 Darwin.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Several problems:
First, if you play around with Apple's BTO offerings you'll notice that it's impossible to configure a machine that doesn't have all the necessary bits. This is absolutely intentional on Apple's part, and it's something they've done for as long as I can remember. The last thing they want is for someone - anyone - to pull a Mac out of the box and have it not work because they left off a critical component. The out-of-box experience you describe is just about the worst case imaginable.
Then, you have hardware support problems - especially, cheap RAM, devices and PCI cards that render the system unstable and introduce hardware conflicts.
GNUStep is not happening mostly because, except for the crucial gcc, Apple is holding GNU at arm's length. If there's an alternative offered under a different license, Apple prefers it when possible. (There's also the minor detail that it's a dated and incomplete knock-off of an old technology of theirs).
Branding. Steve and Jon Ives probably lie awake nights imagining someone pointing to a hideous, generic ATX case with wires coming out all over the place running a bailing-wire-and-duct-tape GUI and saying it's a Mac. Remember that "whole widget" thing? Apple really is serious about that. Really.
Cheap PCs use ATX motherboards and ship in tower cases for the convenience of the box maker, not the consumer. BTO is really easy for the manufacturer when there have slots and bays to stick cards and drives into, and both motherboards and cases are commoditized and easy for the manufacturer to purchase because they're ATX. That's why, if you look at the low-end Sony offerings, every PCI slot is stuffed full. The slots aren't there for your use. They're there for Sony's. Any benefit in terms of aftermarket upgradability is unintentional, and increasingly unwanted (mostly, but not entirely, because of pressure from Microsoft and Intel).
Oh, I'm a big "whole widget" believer. I was just throwing out the idea as something Apple could do, but quietly, without sticking their logo on the side. That's why I said ship it with Darwin, rather than Mac OS X. The upside to this that I can see, is that an interest in build-it-yourself machines running Darwin could lead to the creation of drivers for high end hardware, as well as the low end of the spectrum.
Then, you have hardware support problems - especially, cheap RAM, devices and PCI cards that render the system unstable and introduce hardware conflicts.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
How is haing problems with these things impossible today? I buy a new PowerMac it has 3 slots for cheap RAM, 2 open ATA positions for cheapie IDE drives, and 4 slots for cheapie PCI cards.
How is haing problems with these things impossible today? I buy a new PowerMac it has 3 slots for cheap RAM, 2 open ATA positions for cheapie IDE drives, and 4 slots for cheapie PCI cards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The idea being that the users buying Powermacs are intelligent enough to troubleshoot bad RAM, HDs, etc. You definately don't have to trouble-shoot a know-nothing with a new iMac that got a "great deal" on a new HD online....because that would void the warranty. Whole widget is the idea that out of the box, Apple certifies that everything, be it hardware, OS, or software, works together. No other manufacturer can offer that, or even close.
When we re-think the cube in light of QE (and the development of GPU's and graphics API's over the next few years) I think you find that it really was the perfect Mac (EXCEPT for the price). The evolution of QE and graphics cards might just make a graphics card upgrade much more significant than a CPU upgrade as GPU's get utilized in more and more serious computational work. PCI and the like? Not really needed, especially if we get a faster firewire soon. But a swappable GPU (and maybe a CPU daughter-card) with a few high capacity RAM slots are just what a modern cube would need. Small, cheap, 'upgradeable' in al the important areas, and no extra fluff. Mix in JYD's proposed manufacturing strategy -- a seriously pared down ATX-style MoBo and case -- and you have a recipe for the perfect headless 'upgreadable' 999USD 'Mac'. Perfect! Never happen though.
When we re-think the cube in light of QE... I think you find that it really was the perfect Mac (EXCEPT for the price). The evolution of QE and graphics cards might just make a graphics card upgrade much more significant than a CPU upgrade as GPU's get utilized in more and more serious computational work. PCI and the like? Not really needed, especially if we get a faster firewire soon. But a swappable GPU (and maybe a CPU daughter-card) with a few high capacity RAM slots are just what a modern cube would need. Small, cheap, 'upgradeable' in al the important areas, and no extra fluff... and you have a recipe for the perfect headless 'upgreadable' 999USD 'Mac'. Perfect! Never happen though.
<hr></blockquote>
Matsu you have hit it ~ The Cube is the perfect Mac. I'm an early "switcher" having bought my first mac in 15 years when the Cube went on sale or $1099 with a $100 rebate at Circuit City in January of 2001 (just after MWSF) that made my purchase price $999.
As far as upgrades I bought a WD120 hard drive w/ 8 MB buffer and installed it in about 15 minutes. Then, after reading about the dual CPU daughtercard swap in Accelerate your Mac, I located a good deal on a DP 500 ($900!) and bought it just to get the dual CPU card, it also had an OEM Radeon that fits in the Cube. I'm currently using the DP 500 to run games (Quake & Unreal) and now that I see that a Gightz upgrade for the Cube will be out next month, I may wait for that and keep the DP 500 as it is still under Applecare anyway. Oh and when I got the DP 500, I bought a 17" Apple TFD for the Cube and hooked the 19" NEC to the DP 500, it can run both displays at once, as I bought a Radeon 7500 PCI card, but mostly I just have it connected to the NEC as I use the Cube far more because of the beautiful silent running.
Apple should bring back the best computer ever made at the price you suggested, $999. The R&D is done, just crank up the assembly lines.
Keyboard Mac, base it on the Amiga 500, 600, or 1200 and add everything in via the keyboard unit. Use a CD-ROM instead of a floppy drive, and there you have it!
How is haing problems with these things impossible today? I buy a new PowerMac it has 3 slots for cheap RAM, 2 open ATA positions for cheapie IDE drives, and 4 slots for cheapie PCI cards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's not possible out of the box: Even a pro can't have a machine ship with no RAM, no drives, or a sketchy PCI card. The stuff that does ship is Apple certified. He's welcome to screw it up later, but the odds are as good as Apple can reasonably guarantee that the box can be pulled out of the box, set up, and running without a hitch.
And that's the pro machine. In the consumer space, the out-of-box experience is even more critical. Apple might be able to more narrowly target the poor gearhead market, but this strikes me as a rather... finite... market compared to the one served by their current offerings.
Anyone looking to test a pro PCI card, for instance, will probably want to test it on the platform it will be running on: A PowerMac running OS X.
<strong>Matsu (some of the most incisive comments ever made post Cube!) and Aphelion!
I agree!! Verily!!!
</strong><hr></blockquote>
As do I. I have 4 cubes for my office and I much prefer them to the towers. I just don't have the acreage for the towers anymore, I never add HDs or PCI slots. I'll up the RAM and maybe the HD and that's about it.
I love the LCD iMacs, but there are places where I want a bigger monitor. The cube really was great for my needs. I got them at closeout: $1499 including a 15" LCD. If Apple brought them back and matched the iMac specs, I'd pay $999 for 4 more of them, and spring for 17" LCDs.
Are you getting the G4 1 gig upgrade? What about the Geforce 3?
My dream Cube spec a year or so ago was a 1 Gig G4 with Geforce 3...with 17 inch monitor. I was just waiting for the 'bump' that never arrived!
Damn!
I've thought about getting a 2nd hand Cube and upgrading it...but I'm not technical enough to handle it! Re: cooling issues and adding fans to the motherboard! Shiver! (Wonder if local Mac dealer would do it on my behalf?)
Are you getting the G4 1 gig upgrade? What about the Geforce 3?
My dream Cube spec a year or so ago was a 1 Gig G4 with Geforce 3...with 17 inch monitor. I was just waiting for the 'bump' that never arrived!
Damn!
I've thought about getting a 2nd hand Cube and upgrading it...but I'm not technical enough to handle it! Re: cooling issues and adding fans to the motherboard! Shiver! (Wonder if local Mac dealer would do it on my behalf?)
Lemon Bon Bon</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm actually really happy with the performance of the 450MHz Cubes with OS X. I've got 320MB RAM and I don't heavily tax the system - even PS, Ill, InDesign are all reasonable, so right now I have no plans to upgrade the CPU. I think the Rage 128 may get upgraded to a Quartz Extreme compatible card first, and then maybe in time a faster CPU.
But the Cube really is the most ideal 'office' machine Apple has shipped probably since the workhorse IIci. If Apple intends to move into the IT space, they'll need something similar to get people's interest. The iMac is nice, but the monitor choice needs to be flexible, and the tower is just too much.
Remember, the clone companies were given little more than rights, and the rediculously lousy Tanzania motherboard. Yet they developed with what they had, and ended up making Tanzania-based macs that were faster and cheaper than Apple's Macs, that's why Apple took them out. Why can't apple, with all their money and technology they have access to, create a cheap mac? Any reason they can't just take the motherboards from the G4/350s and stick 700Mhz G3 and G4s on them and sell them for under $1000? Truth is, integrated LCDs (and LCDs on desktops in general) is no more than a gimmick. It offers no functional advantage, in fact most LCDs are lesser as monitors than CRTs, and they don't save enough space to be worth the extra money. No matter how dumb a computer user is, they can plug a monitor into the only place it will fit in. and apple doesn't cater to high school and college students at all. Apple acts like the iMac is their base model. They don't acnowledge the existance of the eMac or iMac G3. Picture yourself as an unknowing PC user. are you going to be convinced to spend more than twice as much for a less compatible computer, just because it has a movible monitor built in on an arm? I think Steve Jobs knows he's not making the best moves. He's just rediculously stubborn. You can't argue that.
<strong>Remember, the clone companies were given little more than rights, and the rediculously lousy Tanzania motherboard. Yet they developed with what they had, and ended up making Tanzania-based macs that were faster and cheaper than Apple's Macs, that's why Apple took them out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
did you ever had to deal with them clones?
some smuck at my last company had the great idea of buying umax box's.
horrible!
open it up and you get the shivers. cheap crap. (i had) nothing but problems. and ontop they looked like sh!t.
[quote]Why can't apple, with all their money and technology they have access to, create a cheap mac?<hr></blockquote>
i think apple got the message and will tweak the emac.
[quote]Any reason they can't just take the motherboards from the G4/350s and stick 700Mhz G3 and G4s on them and sell them for under $1000? Truth is, integrated LCDs (and LCDs on desktops in general) is no more than a gimmick. It offers no functional advantage, in fact most LCDs are lesser as monitors than CRTs, and they don't save enough space to be worth the extra money.<hr></blockquote>
-smaller
-sharper picture
-brighter picture
-less power hungry
-less heat
-less radiation
[quote]No matter how dumb a computer user is, they can plug a monitor into the only place it will fit in. and apple doesn't cater to high school and college students at all. Apple acts like the iMac is their base model. They don't acnowledge the existance of the eMac or iMac G3. Picture yourself as an unknowing PC user. are you going to be convinced to spend more than twice as much for a less compatible computer, just because it has a movible monitor built in on an arm? I think Steve Jobs knows he's not making the best moves. He's just rediculously stubborn. You can't argue that.<hr></blockquote>
stubborn is steve's second name ...well third.
but i think he will act on the demand for a real "low cost mac".
but he is not going to jeopardize the "all in one", "out of the box", "my mac just works"-experiance with minor hardware.
Any reason they can't take the old 15" iMac and revamp?
In light of the comment of "the g3 has a long life ahead of it", and lower CRT prices, I would think this reasonable.
Plug in a 1GHZ G3 sahara, a video card that's just barely good enough for QE, some sort of Altivec DSP, and a $500-$700 USD price point. This would be stiff competition for Micro$ofts upcoming low-end PC, and could be released well before, stealing their thunder, so to speak.
Seems quite reasonable to me, and fits right in with the end of the "non-competition" contract (and Steve's ego - he's gotta be good and livid with M$ by now).
<strong>Any reason they can't take the old 15" iMac and revamp?
In light of the comment of "the g3 has a long life ahead of it", and lower CRT prices, I would think this reasonable.
Plug in a 1GHZ G3 sahara, a video card that's just barely good enough for QE, some sort of Altivec DSP, and a $500-$700 USD price point. This would be stiff competition for Micro$ofts upcoming low-end PC, and could be released well before, stealing their thunder, so to speak.
Seems quite reasonable to me, and fits right in with the end of the "non-competition" contract (and Steve's ego - he's gotta be good and livid with M$ by now).
What ya'll think?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree, they could use the old 15" iMac G3 cases and just put in G4 motherboards with more RAM and a bigger hard drive. But then it might take away sales from the LCD iMac. Will Apple offer low end Mac buyers a choice, or stick with the LCD iMac? Will Apple still sue PC Makers who use G3 iMac type shells?
Heck, even the old classic Amiga systems were more upgradable than the iMac. Last I heard they had G3 upgrade cards for the Amiga 2000, 3000, 4000 series, and the G3 AmigaONE accelorator for the Amiga 600 and 1200 series.
Last Low Cost M$ PC was called the Xbox, basically part PC and part game console.
Unless you meant a PC not made by M$ but also low cost and runs M$ software? Check out <a href="http://www.compgeeks.com"; target="_blank">http://www.compgeeks.com</a>; for refubrished eMachine and other systems at discount prices.
Last I heard they had G3 upgrade cards for the Amiga 2000, 3000, 4000 series, and the G3 AmigaONE accelorator for the Amiga 600 and 1200 series.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>Last Low Cost M$ PC was called the Xbox, basically part PC and part game console.
Unless you meant a PC not made by M$ but also low cost and runs M$ software? Check out <a href="http://www.compgeeks.com"; target="_blank">http://www.compgeeks.com</a>; for refubrished eMachine and other systems at discount prices.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Teehee....
[quote] What's this I hear about a low cost M$ PC ???
The site seems to be down right now, but try later, it's quite amusing. Seems that M$ wants to produce their own low-cost ($500) hardware. What I found funny was that they're to be 'bout 600mhz and VIA chips - Intel must be just pissed. Granted it could be just a joke.....
Comments
<strong>Apple sells just the motherboard online(providing pointers to where to get the rest of the parts, and possibly some kind of assembly guide for certain "preferred configurations"). Customers buy their own case, RAM, video, audio, etc. Apple sets aside a few people to work with the OpenDarwin and GNUStep people on source code compatibility, then releases Darwin/GNUStep binaries for certain key OS X apps, like Mail, either free or at low prices. Of course, if we can get source code compatibility, then these apps could also run on x86 Darwin.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Several problems:
First, if you play around with Apple's BTO offerings you'll notice that it's impossible to configure a machine that doesn't have all the necessary bits. This is absolutely intentional on Apple's part, and it's something they've done for as long as I can remember. The last thing they want is for someone - anyone - to pull a Mac out of the box and have it not work because they left off a critical component. The out-of-box experience you describe is just about the worst case imaginable.
Then, you have hardware support problems - especially, cheap RAM, devices and PCI cards that render the system unstable and introduce hardware conflicts.
GNUStep is not happening mostly because, except for the crucial gcc, Apple is holding GNU at arm's length. If there's an alternative offered under a different license, Apple prefers it when possible. (There's also the minor detail that it's a dated and incomplete knock-off of an old technology of theirs).
Branding. Steve and Jon Ives probably lie awake nights imagining someone pointing to a hideous, generic ATX case with wires coming out all over the place running a bailing-wire-and-duct-tape GUI and saying it's a Mac. Remember that "whole widget" thing? Apple really is serious about that. Really.
Cheap PCs use ATX motherboards and ship in tower cases for the convenience of the box maker, not the consumer. BTO is really easy for the manufacturer when there have slots and bays to stick cards and drives into, and both motherboards and cases are commoditized and easy for the manufacturer to purchase because they're ATX. That's why, if you look at the low-end Sony offerings, every PCI slot is stuffed full. The slots aren't there for your use. They're there for Sony's. Any benefit in terms of aftermarket upgradability is unintentional, and increasingly unwanted (mostly, but not entirely, because of pressure from Microsoft and Intel).
<strong>
Then, you have hardware support problems - especially, cheap RAM, devices and PCI cards that render the system unstable and introduce hardware conflicts.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
How is haing problems with these things impossible today? I buy a new PowerMac it has 3 slots for cheap RAM, 2 open ATA positions for cheapie IDE drives, and 4 slots for cheapie PCI cards.
<strong>
How is haing problems with these things impossible today? I buy a new PowerMac it has 3 slots for cheap RAM, 2 open ATA positions for cheapie IDE drives, and 4 slots for cheapie PCI cards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The idea being that the users buying Powermacs are intelligent enough to troubleshoot bad RAM, HDs, etc. You definately don't have to trouble-shoot a know-nothing with a new iMac that got a "great deal" on a new HD online....because that would void the warranty. Whole widget is the idea that out of the box, Apple certifies that everything, be it hardware, OS, or software, works together. No other manufacturer can offer that, or even close.
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>
When we re-think the cube in light of QE... I think you find that it really was the perfect Mac (EXCEPT for the price). The evolution of QE and graphics cards might just make a graphics card upgrade much more significant than a CPU upgrade as GPU's get utilized in more and more serious computational work. PCI and the like? Not really needed, especially if we get a faster firewire soon. But a swappable GPU (and maybe a CPU daughter-card) with a few high capacity RAM slots are just what a modern cube would need. Small, cheap, 'upgradeable' in al the important areas, and no extra fluff... and you have a recipe for the perfect headless 'upgreadable' 999USD 'Mac'. Perfect! Never happen though.
<hr></blockquote>
Matsu you have hit it ~ The Cube is the perfect Mac. I'm an early "switcher" having bought my first mac in 15 years when the Cube went on sale or $1099 with a $100 rebate at Circuit City in January of 2001 (just after MWSF) that made my purchase price $999.
As far as upgrades I bought a WD120 hard drive w/ 8 MB buffer and installed it in about 15 minutes. Then, after reading about the dual CPU daughtercard swap in Accelerate your Mac, I located a good deal on a DP 500 ($900!) and bought it just to get the dual CPU card, it also had an OEM Radeon that fits in the Cube. I'm currently using the DP 500 to run games (Quake & Unreal) and now that I see that a Gightz upgrade for the Cube will be out next month, I may wait for that and keep the DP 500 as it is still under Applecare anyway. Oh and when I got the DP 500, I bought a 17" Apple TFD for the Cube and hooked the 19" NEC to the DP 500, it can run both displays at once, as I bought a Radeon 7500 PCI card, but mostly I just have it connected to the NEC as I use the Cube far more because of the beautiful silent running.
Apple should bring back the best computer ever made at the price you suggested, $999. The R&D is done, just crank up the assembly lines.
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Aphelion ]</p>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
<strong>
How is haing problems with these things impossible today? I buy a new PowerMac it has 3 slots for cheap RAM, 2 open ATA positions for cheapie IDE drives, and 4 slots for cheapie PCI cards.</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's not possible out of the box: Even a pro can't have a machine ship with no RAM, no drives, or a sketchy PCI card. The stuff that does ship is Apple certified. He's welcome to screw it up later, but the odds are as good as Apple can reasonably guarantee that the box can be pulled out of the box, set up, and running without a hitch.
And that's the pro machine. In the consumer space, the out-of-box experience is even more critical. Apple might be able to more narrowly target the poor gearhead market, but this strikes me as a rather... finite... market compared to the one served by their current offerings.
Anyone looking to test a pro PCI card, for instance, will probably want to test it on the platform it will be running on: A PowerMac running OS X.
[ 07-08-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
I agree!! Verily!!!
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>Matsu (some of the most incisive comments ever made post Cube!) and Aphelion!
I agree!! Verily!!!
</strong><hr></blockquote>
As do I. I have 4 cubes for my office and I much prefer them to the towers. I just don't have the acreage for the towers anymore, I never add HDs or PCI slots. I'll up the RAM and maybe the HD and that's about it.
I love the LCD iMacs, but there are places where I want a bigger monitor. The cube really was great for my needs. I got them at closeout: $1499 including a 15" LCD. If Apple brought them back and matched the iMac specs, I'd pay $999 for 4 more of them, and spring for 17" LCDs.
Are you getting the G4 1 gig upgrade? What about the Geforce 3?
My dream Cube spec a year or so ago was a 1 Gig G4 with Geforce 3...with 17 inch monitor. I was just waiting for the 'bump' that never arrived!
Damn!
I've thought about getting a 2nd hand Cube and upgrading it...but I'm not technical enough to handle it! Re: cooling issues and adding fans to the motherboard! Shiver! (Wonder if local Mac dealer would do it on my behalf?)
Lemon Bon Bon
<strong>johnsonwax...
Are you getting the G4 1 gig upgrade? What about the Geforce 3?
My dream Cube spec a year or so ago was a 1 Gig G4 with Geforce 3...with 17 inch monitor. I was just waiting for the 'bump' that never arrived!
Damn!
I've thought about getting a 2nd hand Cube and upgrading it...but I'm not technical enough to handle it! Re: cooling issues and adding fans to the motherboard! Shiver! (Wonder if local Mac dealer would do it on my behalf?)
Lemon Bon Bon</strong><hr></blockquote>
I'm actually really happy with the performance of the 450MHz Cubes with OS X. I've got 320MB RAM and I don't heavily tax the system - even PS, Ill, InDesign are all reasonable, so right now I have no plans to upgrade the CPU. I think the Rage 128 may get upgraded to a Quartz Extreme compatible card first, and then maybe in time a faster CPU.
But the Cube really is the most ideal 'office' machine Apple has shipped probably since the workhorse IIci. If Apple intends to move into the IT space, they'll need something similar to get people's interest. The iMac is nice, but the monitor choice needs to be flexible, and the tower is just too much.
<strong>Remember, the clone companies were given little more than rights, and the rediculously lousy Tanzania motherboard. Yet they developed with what they had, and ended up making Tanzania-based macs that were faster and cheaper than Apple's Macs, that's why Apple took them out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
did you ever had to deal with them clones?
some smuck at my last company had the great idea of buying umax box's.
horrible!
open it up and you get the shivers. cheap crap. (i had) nothing but problems. and ontop they looked like sh!t.
[quote]Why can't apple, with all their money and technology they have access to, create a cheap mac?<hr></blockquote>
i think apple got the message and will tweak the emac.
[quote]Any reason they can't just take the motherboards from the G4/350s and stick 700Mhz G3 and G4s on them and sell them for under $1000? Truth is, integrated LCDs (and LCDs on desktops in general) is no more than a gimmick. It offers no functional advantage, in fact most LCDs are lesser as monitors than CRTs, and they don't save enough space to be worth the extra money.<hr></blockquote>
-smaller
-sharper picture
-brighter picture
-less power hungry
-less heat
-less radiation
[quote]No matter how dumb a computer user is, they can plug a monitor into the only place it will fit in. and apple doesn't cater to high school and college students at all. Apple acts like the iMac is their base model. They don't acnowledge the existance of the eMac or iMac G3. Picture yourself as an unknowing PC user. are you going to be convinced to spend more than twice as much for a less compatible computer, just because it has a movible monitor built in on an arm? I think Steve Jobs knows he's not making the best moves. He's just rediculously stubborn. You can't argue that.<hr></blockquote>
stubborn is steve's second name ...well third.
but i think he will act on the demand for a real "low cost mac".
but he is not going to jeopardize the "all in one", "out of the box", "my mac just works"-experiance with minor hardware.
In light of the comment of "the g3 has a long life ahead of it", and lower CRT prices, I would think this reasonable.
Plug in a 1GHZ G3 sahara, a video card that's just barely good enough for QE, some sort of Altivec DSP, and a $500-$700 USD price point. This would be stiff competition for Micro$ofts upcoming low-end PC, and could be released well before, stealing their thunder, so to speak.
Seems quite reasonable to me, and fits right in with the end of the "non-competition" contract (and Steve's ego - he's gotta be good and livid with M$ by now).
What ya'll think?
<strong>Any reason they can't take the old 15" iMac and revamp?
In light of the comment of "the g3 has a long life ahead of it", and lower CRT prices, I would think this reasonable.
Plug in a 1GHZ G3 sahara, a video card that's just barely good enough for QE, some sort of Altivec DSP, and a $500-$700 USD price point. This would be stiff competition for Micro$ofts upcoming low-end PC, and could be released well before, stealing their thunder, so to speak.
Seems quite reasonable to me, and fits right in with the end of the "non-competition" contract (and Steve's ego - he's gotta be good and livid with M$ by now).
What ya'll think?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree, they could use the old 15" iMac G3 cases and just put in G4 motherboards with more RAM and a bigger hard drive. But then it might take away sales from the LCD iMac. Will Apple offer low end Mac buyers a choice, or stick with the LCD iMac? Will Apple still sue PC Makers who use G3 iMac type shells?
Heck, even the old classic Amiga systems were more upgradable than the iMac.
'splain prease?
Unless you meant a PC not made by M$ but also low cost and runs M$ software? Check out <a href="http://www.compgeeks.com"; target="_blank">http://www.compgeeks.com</a>; for refubrished eMachine and other systems at discount prices.
<strong>
Last I heard they had G3 upgrade cards for the Amiga 2000, 3000, 4000 series, and the G3 AmigaONE accelorator for the Amiga 600 and 1200 series.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Yeah, but the A1200 was one mean mother to open.
*sigh* I kinda miss the old Amigas.
<strong>Last Low Cost M$ PC was called the Xbox, basically part PC and part game console.
Unless you meant a PC not made by M$ but also low cost and runs M$ software? Check out <a href="http://www.compgeeks.com"; target="_blank">http://www.compgeeks.com</a>; for refubrished eMachine and other systems at discount prices.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Teehee....
[quote] What's this I hear about a low cost M$ PC ???
'splain prease? <hr></blockquote>
Matsu:
<a href="http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=4248"; target="_blank">theinquirer - microsoft to get into the hardware business</a>
The site seems to be down right now, but try later, it's quite amusing. Seems that M$ wants to produce their own low-cost ($500) hardware. What I found funny was that they're to be 'bout 600mhz and VIA chips - Intel must be just pissed. Granted it could be just a joke.....