MP All Models My theory on why Apple announced new Mac Pro today - New mid-tower

[takao]

Steve Jobs doesn't care about what the custom Debian/XP games-player wants, he's far more interested in what your families want from a computer... I mean, I'm a designer, and he's been quoted as saying he doesn't care about us either, even though it was the creative community that kept the company afloat through the bad times. But I also understand, that with the mid-range models, they're trying to do something a bit more ambitious and appealing to the general public than pandering to a fringe market who want to tinker with their machines.

to bad that this market (which makes up the majority of my friends) are people who are actually software developers ... something apple has hardly in big supply
perhaps it's also a matter of age since i have for sure a problem naming a single person at my age (24-25) who doesn't play computer games (and i'm not talking about solitaire) especially guys
the general public wants either cheap PCs (like my mother), play games (me, 24 and my brother 16), don't want to use them at home after using them all day at company (father) or it should look cute (sister 27)
somehow i think apple lacks in a few of those...

The other thing is, of course, that anyone who knows Apple's history will also know how their fingers were badly burned with the proliferation of models and configurations back in the day, causing tremendous confusion amongst consumers.

dozens of other companies don't burn their fingers currently ... so ? after all it's how you do it (not that apple has a shortness of confusing configurations .. 5 different powerbooks G4 like in the past ? currently 4 different _base_ models for the imac )

And what's more, I believe that Apple are truly casting around for the next huge thing in computers, content and interface; something that will really capture people's imagination and that it will not involve a mid-sized tower.

i heard that 10 years ago and the only thing which disappeared is the crt-imac introduced back then

seriously what else ? more gadgets ? touchpads ? a lot of companies burnt themselves on that streaming content from computers to TVs ? done to death and even with apple doing it no raving success
sure all nice things but such stuff doesn't make a small tower obsolete

unless of course you come up with some sort of ad-hoc computational grid inside your home where every little devices puts together their computational power wirelessly on demand ... but that is still research topic (researched by people who in their spare time like to fiddle with hardware i guess )

 

[Blue Velvet]

Just wait until next Tuesday, and you will have an eye opener.

I hope you're right, if only to end this discussion once and for all. But I fear that such a categorical prediction is based on wishful thinking, not anything of substance.

 

[sushi]

They cannot see inside Steve Jobs head. How can they be so certain?

Based upon past conversations...

Just wait until next Tuesday, and you will have an eye opener.

Or you too, again.

In reality, no one knows for sure. It seems there is a large demand for a mini tower based upon posts on MR.

For those who think Apple will introduce a mini Tower, will they have a professional model and consumer model?

 

[netdog]

Based upon past conversations...


Or you too, again.

In reality, no one knows for sure. It seems there is a large demand for a mini tower based upon posts on MR.

For those who think Apple will introduce a mini Tower, will they have a professional model and consumer model?

They have a Prosumer model, the Mac Pro Jr. (MPj). Prosumers aren't looking for $999 boxes. Their cameras cost a couple of grand minimum, and they are happy to pay the same for their PC. The MPj is the perfect headless Mac for the Prosumer market, at least for those who want to save a few quid off the Mac Pro. To be honest, for those not pushing through a great deal of HD Video, the MPj truly is a great solution. 4 cores will make their Aperture, CS3 and Lightroom hum side-by-side.

The iMac, while great for what it is, is made of laptop parts. Apple isn't going to start a line based on desktop parts now. The two existing architectures serve their market just fine.

Long live the Mac Pro Jr.!!!

 

[maccompaq]

Quad core 2.8Ghz XEON at the same price as a 2.8GHz C2E iMac?

=

NO mid-tower. A fourth desktop, when the low end Mac Pro essentially IS a mid-tower? Confusing amount of product lines? So not the Apple way.

I AM STEVE JOBS. but I still cannot see inside my own head.

Another EXPERT posting.

 

[jnc]

Another EXPERT posting.

Yep. But I understand. Anyone who doth not agree with yon thinking pattern be subject to your highest level or sarcastic ridicule. It's fine. You keeping waiting for that headless iMac, while everyone else is out using the thing, heh.

 

[roland.g]

The move in August to a silver iMac removed a lot of the desire for a midtower. Sure people still want expandability, but they really won't use it much if at all, and the Mac Pro offers that. The displays are not that competitive, spec and price-wise, and an iMac looks just like them now.

So on the midtower, um yeah - NO.

 

[dwl017]

I find it very interesting that so many "Experts" adamantly say there will not be a mid range tower. They cannot see inside Steve Jobs head. How can they be so certain?

Just wait until next Tuesday, and you will have an eye opener.

You dont have to see inside of Steve's head just look at the past, Apple has done the entire mid range line. They have no reason to go backward regardless of how many people cry about a mid range box.

 

[prostuff1]

Do I want to see a Mid-Tower type mac... Yes. Do I actually see one being made in the near future...No. Unfortunately that is how I see it and many others do.

Opinions below:
I don't believe the iMac sales would be cannibalized all that much, if at all. If the iMac sales are cannibalized it will probably be by the new Mid-Tower, which could be released at the same price, if not a little bit higher, and then apple would probably be making money. There would not be as much, "design" that would have to be done to make things work and the parts could/would be more standard making the fabrication cost lower and therefor increasing the profit margin.

I would love to see a mid-tower mac. I ended up building a PC about a year ago because I wanted something more (read more room for proper HD's and video cards) for my media center needs. The PC works quite beautifully, even though it is Windows.

If Apple had had a mid-tower I would have seriously considered getting one.

I see the point of not introducing a new mid-tower but I just don't quite agree with it.



As far as I am concerned there are two "holes" in the mac product line. I am waiting for a 13in MacBook Pro and the mid-tower mac. I really do not want to upgrade from my iMac until the 13in MBP comes out. I will probably buy an external monitor to go with the 13in notebook and when the funds become available buy a mid-tower mac...if it exists. Apple has then essentially sold me two computers instead of one, thereby making more money then they would have by not filling the "holes" in the product line.

 

[dwl017]

I agree completely, this put me off, the only reason I'm a Mac user now is because a family member purchased an iMac for me, I would be very hesitant to spend that much money on a Mac, even though I absolutely HATE PC's / Microshaft / Windows.

Mac Mini - Underpowered for the average user
iMac - All in one not for everyone you cant reuse the components when you upgrade

<Insert new mac>

Mac Pro - Great performance, but the price is too high

I love the iMac personally but it does need a little tweaking to the graphics and such.

Who ever started this stupid idea that the Mini was underpowered ? For the love of God! not everyone is racing home to edit video using Final Cut Pro 2.

 

[mcarnes]

I really think Apple is afraid to release a "mid tower" because the cube fell so hard on it's face. I mean, that had to hurt.

 

[Blue Velvet]

the general public wants either cheap PCs (like my mother), play games (me, 24 and my brother 16), don't want to use them at home after using them all day at company (father) or it should look cute (sister 27)
somehow i think apple lacks in a few of those...

Cheap? Mini. Play games? Get a console. Look cute? iMac or Mini... your father is a lost cause and has more sense than most of us here.

The general public who buy computers are far more varied than a group of 20-something young men who like playing WoW.

dozens of other companies don't burn their fingers currently ... so ?

Because they're either selling to enterprise and they're selling a known quantity: a Windows machine which means they're dealing in a marketplace that is trying to distinguish itself on specs and hardware alone. Switchers are beset by doubts, Apple is a small player in the scheme of things... they're focussing on narrow, profitable bands instead of offering a potential solution to every need.

Look at how the iPods are tightly structured in their bands and marketed, and they've got a huge marketshare... but none of them conflict with each other for mindshare nor are they overburdened with features that time and time again are shown to be only used by a minority of users. Apple understand this, geeks don't.

seriously what else ?

The convergence of web, TV and computer with the realistic development of interfaces closer to how humans really work e.g. Touch, gyroscopic devices like the Wii controller... is what will be the next huge thing. 10 years ago we didn't have the computational power, the engineering or even the web infrastructure at user-end to consider it as realistic.

Reading about where broadcasters and other content creators want to go is more useful than looking at the here and now from a hardware point of view.

Anyway, if I seriously knew the detailed answer to that question, I wouldn't be slogging my guts out being a designer involved in publishing and marketing, nor would I be posting here.

They're far more likely to do something with the Mini/Apple TV than release a mid-sized tower which would dilute and unbalance their computer lines. Of all the lies that Steve Jobs has told over the years about upcoming products, the statement that the AppleTV is merely just a hobby is something I have tremendous trouble believing...

 

[CWallace]

Look at how the iPods are tightly structured in their bands and marketed, and they've got a huge marketshare... but none of them conflict with each other for mindshare nor are they overburdened with features that time and time again are shown to be only used by a minority of users. Apple understand this, geeks don't.

Bingo.

"Never say never" is my motto, but when Apple had six product lines (three towers, two desktops and one AIO) and the clones during the pre-G3 Power Macintosh days, their marketshare shrank. It was too many products chasing too few users and fratricide resulted.

The current Macintosh lineup - desktop and mobile - is not for everyone, but then neither is the Macintosh itself.

The lack of a mobile quad-core Core2 CPU from Intel is likely holding back Apple. Once it ships, we'll likely see a BTO 24" iMac and BTO 17" MacBook Pro with it. But right now, the desktop quad-core Core2 generates over three times the heat as the (nearly) equivalent mobile dual-core Core2 and that would mean large and loud fans and poor battery life.

 

[Silverhawk]

All I'm saying is that before the Power Mac G4 went to the G5, there was a whole slew of people who stuck with their G4's, there was a big enough of a market for people to have after market parts for it and its still a cult favorite to some to this day.

By remembering that, they should of seen that a mid-size tower would of given a bigger bargain than an All-in-one that uses proprietary parts that's a hassle to fix compared to a simple concept as to a mid size version of the Mac Pro

 

[synth3tik]

I only hope a mid range tower will come out to end these threads. I highly doubt there will be one however.

 

[deathshrub]

This is the first thing I thought of when I saw the new higher-price for the entry level Mac Pro.

How many "average" computer buyers are ever going to be aware of the single proc option? Very very few. You go to Apple's site and all you see is $2799. The press release: $2799. Yes the option is there, but again, it's really just for the pros who may not need all those cores.

For all intents and purposes, you have the all-in-one at $1199 and the pro model at $2799. Huge disparity there.

Will it really be a mid-tower? Who knows. It might just be something completely different. People are talking about a beefier TV. *shrug* Again, I reiterate: There is a sizable segment of the population who don't want to buy another monitor along with their Mac. They already have monitors. They, such as myself, want something like a Mac Mini with the graphic capability of the iMac, or better. Look at the news articles that show Apple's market share rising, about folks disappointed in Vista and are looking to switch. Out of that potentially huge market, a vast majority will have monitors already. Some will be satisfied with the Mac Mini, but others will want more and a $2800 Mac Pro is too big a bill to swallow.

All I know is that I was set to place an order today for a Mac Pro, and now I'm waiting until after the keynote, just in case.

Midrange product is the iMac. High range workstation is the Mac Pro. Entry level machine is Mac Mini. There is no gap.

 

[saltyzoo]

I don't think anyone is looking down on anyone, but people do get weary of rehearsing the same arguments over and over again

What's more interesting is that people feel the need to argue about a product someone thinks would be useful and marketable. If you said you wanted a circle shaped laptop with a mirror in the lid, I wouldn't feel the need to tell you "it ain't gonna happen" over and over again. I find it interesting that you do feel this need to tell others they are wrong over and over again, past the point where you are "weary" of doing it.

with people not recognising the difference between their wants and needs, versus what Apple would have to do make this proposition viable and the historical track record of Steve Jobs.

There are so many ways I could go with this one. I'll settle with this one. Nobody needs a computer at all. Many people live quite well without one. If you do need a computer, you could probably fulfill that need for half the price by buying a cheap PC, you don't need an Apple. Therefore, by your own argument, Apple are fools for even existing.

What makes anyone here think they know more about what it would take to produce and market this mythical machine than Apple?

What makes you think you know so much about it that you know that Steve/Apple hasn't been planning to fill this void for years and were just waiting for the right time? You can't dismiss everyone else for not being "Apple" without dismissing yourself as well.

So, yeah. One day, this machine might happen, but I doubt it. Not because I don't want it to, or have no need of this machine; it's just that with the iMac there, it's unlikely.

Fair enough.

And what's more, I believe that Apple are truly casting around for the next huge thing in computers, content and interface; something that will really capture people's imagination and that it will not involve a mid-sized tower.

Dream big. But don't pass up money people want to give you today, but can't because you aren't fulfilling their "wants".

 

[saltyzoo]

Look at how the iPods are tightly structured in their bands and marketed, and they've got a huge marketshare... but none of them conflict with each other for mindshare nor are they overburdened with features that time and time again are shown to be only used by a minority of users. .

You've got to be kidding. iPods overlap all over the place. It took me 3 weeks to figure out which one fit my needs because of that very thing.

 

[ksz]

And since each Mac Pro brings in nice profits, that would be the thing to announce.

Irrelevant. Wall Street operates on emotion as well as reasoned logic. But nevertheless you missed the whole tongue-in-cheek nature of the post.

 

[CWallace]

Irrelevant. Wall Street operates on emotion as well as reasoned logic. But nevertheless you missed the whole tongue-in-cheek nature of the post.

Sorry. I am also reading threads on airliners.net where the stock price of Boeing and Airbus are matters of national security to the US and EU, so I applied that (il)logic to your post.

 

[Zwhaler]

Good theory... but I still believe that Apple is adament that the iMac is their "midrange machine". But who knows, everything will change in MacWorld...

 

[drmacjazz]

Apple already makes Mid towers

Not trying to be facetious here, but imho Apple already has made thousands of mid-towers. They're called G5s and 1st version MacPros. Think about it. They don't come with monitors, they're very expandable, they don't have all the additional power that mid-tower users won't need and they fit into the price category the mid-tower guys/gals are looking for.http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/smilies/smile.gif


Only drawback is you have to buy them without warranties.

WayneN.

 

[Faraden]

Who ever started this stupid idea that the Mini was underpowered ? For the love of God! not everyone is racing home to edit video using Final Cut Pro 2.

Oh im just joining in the conversation

 

[TechHistorian]

What makes you think you know so much about it that you know that Steve/Apple hasn't been planning to fill this void for years and were just waiting for the right time? You can't dismiss everyone else for not being "Apple" without dismissing yourself as well.

All you need to know is the history of Jobs and the Mac. Jobs' vision of the Mac was an all-in-one box with limited expandability (and that mostly in the form of external devices). Jobs sees computers as appliances. When you outgrow your refrigerator, you don't buy a new compressor. You buy a new fridge. Jobs only reluctantly agreed to the expandable Mac II. Note that Next wasn't big on expandability, either. Jobs then returns to Apple -- next thing you know, the towers and pizza boxes are weeded and the all-in-ones return. Heck, Apple (the company) wasn't too fond of the expansion possibilities of the Apple ][ back in the day.

At just about every point in Jobs' long career in computer manufacturing, he has viewed computers as closed boxes -- and as world-changing paradigms. It's possible he's had a change of heart along the way -- but 30 years of evidence overwhelmingly indicates otherwise.

Additionally, it's largely (but not exclusively) gamers who want the mid-tower. Jobs isn't that fond of games. In the Mac's early days, he took great pains to position the Mac as a business machine rather than as a gaming machine. I'd argue that that was a big mistake. Back when the Mac was the only real GUI PC, it had a chance to be the gaming system. Jobs felt otherwise, and Apple lost out on that segment of the market (at a time when the Apple ][ commanded more of the home/gaming sector than did the MS-DOS alternatives). But Apple lost it's chance back then to position the Mac as a gaming platform. Having lost that battle, it isn't going to keep on fighting it. Instead, Apple's trying to position itself for the "next big thing" -- and that ain't games. It's "lifestyle" (at least according to Apple's offerings so far).

 

[iMpathetic]

Who ever started this stupid idea that the Mini was underpowered ? For the love of God! not everyone is racing home to edit video using Final Cut Pro 2.

Yeah! Some people (looks at his Dell) have to use 500MHz computers every day, and they don't keel over and die. I bought a mini, the Core Duo, and it'll do fine for dabbling in CS3 and fun stuff like that. Also, even if they were racing home to edit using FCP2, I'm sure they'd live.

As for the whole headless Mac thing, can we please stop talking about it? It's not like lives hang in the balance or anything. If Apple releases one, great. If not, life will go on.