Ideas for Mid-Range Headless Mac

[blenderdude]

I think most of us agree that there is a gap in headless macs between the entry-level Mac mini and the professional level PowerMacs.

This is a mockup of one idea I had for design/specs of such a machine:

http://www.cgartwork.com/jms/cmac.png

'c' stands for "center" of lineup, I need a better name ;)

This computer would have a 7200rpm 3.5" hard drive, mabey an extra hard drive bay, 2 memory slots, and perhaps an exchangeable graphics card. Prices could be $999, $1099, and $1199 depending on configuration.

I'd love to hear your guys' ideas and see your mockups too!

[cardiac dave]

How about the oMac? for O-O-Oval!

[ITASOR]

Just curious, what did you use to make the 3D versions in the first one?

[liketom]

is it me or does that look like a xbox 360 lol

nice idea but where would that fit in with the iMac

mac mini - $499
eMac - $799
cmac - $899
iMac - $1299
Powermac -$ 1999

too tight a price range i thinks

[feakbeak]

is it me or does that look like a xbox 360 lol

nice idea but where would that fit in with the iMac

mac mini - $499
eMac - $799
cmac - $899
iMac - $1299
Powermac -$ 1999

too tight a price range i thinksI'd agree with you if this weren't headless. The Mac Mini and eMac are pretty close in price but I think the head/headless factor provides a definitive differentiator for the two products. I agree with the original poster, I think they should have a headless Mac with equivalent specs as the iMac - that way you could get an all-in-one or headless Mac at the budget and consumer level.

I would have bought one of these instead of the Mac Mini had it been available. I didn't want to splurge on a PM because it was my first experience with Mac and didn't want to invest a large sum of money to try out OS X.

blenderdude, I like the design and your proposed specs. Here are some of my thoughts/suggestions:

1. Needs to have a second 3.5" drive bay.
2. Needs to have user-replacable GPU card.
3. The case should be easier to open than the Mini's. It doesn't have to be as nice and easy as the PM's but not as difficult as the Mac Mini.
4. With changes #1-3 I would expect the case would have to be at least a little larger, to be honest I wouldn't mind a more traditionally styled tower, like the PM only smaller. Now that the Macs are leaving the G5 the cases shouldn't need to be quite as huge to account for all that cooling.
5. I think your pricing is low for a machine with such specs. I would think it would be more in line with the iMac, ~ $1199 - $1499.

Nice job though, looks great.

[liketom]

Maybe as a replacement for the Mac Mini ?

drop the price to $ 599 and we might have a winner - a bit bigger unit but with more upgrade possibilities

ie HDD /GPU/MEM

[zelmo]

So, you're basically thinking it'd be nice if Apple brought back the single processor G5 Power Mac and put it in a smaller case, right? I agree, and I like your design. I think your price is low, though.

I'd go with a taller version of the Mac mini, so there's room for at least one more drive bay, another Ram slot (or three), a PCI card, and a user-replaceable GPU. It could be three times the height of the Mac mini and sell for around $1399-1499. That'd split the gap between the high-end mini and the low-end Power Mac. Where it compares to the iMac line is pretty irrelevant, imho.

[liketom]

So, you're basically thinking it'd be nice if Apple brought back the single processor G5 Power Mac and put it in a smaller case, right? I agree, and I like your design. I think your price is low, though.

I'd go with a taller version of the Mac mini, so there's room for at least one more drive bay, another Ram slot (or three), a PCI card, and a user-replaceable GPU. It could be three times the height of the Mac mini and sell for around $1399-1499. That'd split the gap between the high-end mini and the low-end Power Mac. Where it compares to the iMac line is pretty irrelevant, imho.
yeah but what it boils to is it wants to be a Headless iMac (old iMac that is lol)

[minimax]

Why not introduce a third, 'high-end' mac mini instead of this midrange alternative (that is hardly different from the mac mini )?
They could've introduced during the last upgrade:
1.67 GHz PPC G4
512 MB RAM
100 GB 5400 rpm HD
128 MB ATI 9600 (with 64 MB 9600 for the standard one)
Superdrive
for around $899

That would have been a real winner. i would have bought it in an instant.

[feakbeak]

So, you're basically thinking it'd be nice if Apple brought back the single processor G5 Power Mac and put it in a smaller case, right? I agree, and I like your design. I think your price is low, though.I agree with you here. It is somewhat like the old SP PM. I considered that machine when I was buying my Mac Mini, but it seemed pricy for what you got back then: only a 1.8 GHz G5, only 80 GB HD and the 1/3 CPU/bus ratio. More annoying than those specs was the fact that for level of machine you don't need a case the size of Rhode Island. Granted, you got quite a bit of expansion room in terms of RAM and PCI slots but it simply doesn't need to be that big for a SP machine. I've always been disappointed by the fact that there are only two internal hard drive bays in that huge PM G5 case.

If my ideal headless mid-end Mac was made available today this is what I would buy in a heartbeat.

- 2.0 GHz G5
- 1 GHz FSB
- 512 MB (two slots, supporting up to 2 GB)
- ATI 9600 w/128MB GPU (user-upgradable)
- 160 GB drive (2nd drive bay available)
- Super Drive (same speeds as PM drive)

I think all of the above could put into a PM-styled case that is at least half the size of the current PM case. I think such a machine could be priced at $1499-$1599 base with BTOs going up from there.

I think Apple has been hesitant to release such a Mac for fear it would cut into PM sales, which is not a good reason. I think there is a market that wants an iMac spec'ed machine in a traditional mid-size case, costing under $2000.

[zelmo]

I agree with you here. It is somewhat like the old SP PM. I considered that machine when I was buying my Mac Mini, but it seemed pricy for what you got back then: only a 1.8 GHz G5, only 80 GB HD and the 1/3 CPU/bus ratio. More annoying than those specs was the fact that for level of machine you don't need a case the size of Rhode Island. Granted, you got quite a bit of expansion room in terms of RAM and PCI slots but it simply doesn't need to be that big for a SP machine. I've always been disappointed by the fact that there are only two internal hard drive bays in that huge PM G5 case.

If my ideal headless mid-end Mac was made available today this is what I would buy in a heartbeat.

- 2.0 GHz G5
- 1 GHz FSB
- 512 MB (two slots, supporting up to 2 GB)
- ATI 9600 w/128MB GPU (user-upgradable)
- 160 GB drive (2nd drive bay available)
- Super Drive (same speeds as PM drive)

I think all of the above could put into a PM-styled case that is at least half the size of the current PM case. I think such a machine could be priced at $1499-$1599 base with BTOs going up from there.

I think Apple has been hesitant to release such a Mac for fear it would cut into PM sales, which is not a good reason. I think there is a market that wants an iMac spec'ed machine in a traditional mid-size case, costing under $2000.


Yes! I know a few folks who were excited by the mini, then completely underwhelmed by the spec's and also by the fact that it is locked down pretty tight as far as expandability goes.
There is nothing in Apple's Mac line for someone who wants an expandable headless Mac but doesn't have $2000 to drop on a Power Mac or need dual processor power.

[El Phantasmo]

If Apple offered a $999 "headless iMac", I seriously think it will give them a really good boost to their market share. Imagine getting a G5 2.0GHz with superdrive and whatnot for a grand.

You'll have the $499 mini for average computer use (web, email, pictures, music, etc), a $999 mac for photo editting, video editting, audio applications, etc. and the $1999 dual processor powermac for all the heavy stuff proffesionals do.

And obviously they would still offer their two AIO computers: the eMac aimed at the education market, and the iMac aimed at people who just want to get a fast computer with all they need built into a compact (and sexy) case.

just my opinion :)

[kalisphoenix]

A good idea (and beautiful mock-up), except being a UNIX nerd I hear "headless" and think, you know, HEADLESS. As in, why have a video card?

It seems like this would be a great machine for home servers. Perhaps replace the video card and optical drive with a second SATA drive in RAID-0/1, set up the machine like an Airport Express to automatically create a new network when you plug it in, and then log in using ARD in order to administer it. Or, conceivably, a version of the OS X Server Admin tools that is used to administer the server remotely without the slowness/junk of ARD.

So what you get is:
PPC G4 or Intel processor, moderately high speed...
512MB RAM upgradeable (two slots should be enough, if you want more than that buy a damn XServe)...
SATA RAID 0/1...
Gigabit ethernet, Airport...
The case you created (it's beautiful)...

And voila! OS X as it comes from the shop is perfectly good for home servers. Add a couple chopped-down Server Admin tools, the RAID, USB2/Firewire 800, and you can have a really awesome home server for under $750, I bet. Probably could be done at $500. For OS installs (gasp) you just hook up external firewire drives. For any other install you do it through the server admin tools. Perhaps you place a small button on the outside that boots it in target disk mode? Another way to install software. Seems very simple to me.

The iServe(tm). Think Warez.

Edit: Just realized that this is basically a Mac mini with RAID and without an optical drive. Well, and a few other things, but they're minor. But really, I think this sucker could have some great uptime. Perhaps it has a battery (iGhettoUPS)? Not too much to distinguish it from the Mini, but I'd certainly buy one if Apple made it. I <3 my home servers, even the ones that aren't Apples.

[miloblithe]

The problem is that too many options would eat into Apple's margins. They'd have to dedicate resources to a new design that would effectively give people the option not to buy an iMac (and purchase their monitor elsewhere) or a powermac, which is more expensive. The only way it would be worth it is if Apple were to gain enough additional customers with this product to make up for the lost revenue that would have come from the more expensive iMac or PowerMac. Currently, I doubt the math adds up well for Apple. With the Intel transition though, things are going to change, but it seems to me that headless products are going to be even worse then because Apple will not want to make products that are directly comparable to PC products in terms of specifications, because Apple can't compete with box assemblers on price. They have to be different enough that people focus on design, software, etc (Apple's advantages) rather than number of expansion slots, memory slots, standard RAM, etc. (Apple's weaknesses)

Like all of us, I'd love a machine like this to exist and I'd definitely buy one, but that's not really the issue for Apple.

[nagromme]

I agree, there's a gap in the lineup. (And your design is cool and Apple-like :) )

The question is, when will the gap be big enough that Apple decides to fill it? I think that time will come--and I bet Intel helps: cooler, smaller, Pentium-M derived towers.

Right now, the gap overlaps with the iMac a lot: many people who want a mid-range headless will SETTLE for an iMac (or Mini or PowerMac or even a laptop + screen).

So even though demand is there, it would cannibalize a lot of other sales.

That won't always be true. At some point the new sales would outweigh any cannibalization issues--and cannibalized sales are still sales. So I think as the Mac market as a whole grows, the chances of more headless options increases.

It might also be that the Mini gains more powerful versions--once we have Intel. Like putting a dual-core Yonah, extra RAM, higher GPU, and higher-RPM drive into a new top-end Mini.

But if I had to guess I'd predict this: the PowerMac line will get more compact--and they'll simply sell lower-spec'd models of that to fill in the mid-range. Which would be great, considering how people could BTO higher specs for just the items they need.

[iMeowbot]

I'd go with a taller version of the Mac mini, so there's room for at least one more drive bay, another Ram slot (or three), a PCI card, and a user-replaceable GPU. It could be three times the height of the Mac mini and sell for around $1399-1499. That'd split the gap between the high-end mini and the low-end Power Mac. Where it compares to the iMac line is pretty irrelevant, imho.
That would look pretty sharp in a clear Lucite stand.

[feakbeak]

The problem is that too many options would eat into Apple's margins. They'd have to dedicate resources to a new design that would effectively give people the option not to buy an iMac (and purchase their monitor elsewhere) or a powermac, which is more expensive. The only way it would be worth it is if Apple were to gain enough additional customers with this product to make up for the lost revenue that would have come from the more expensive iMac or PowerMac. Currently, I doubt the math adds up well for Apple. With the Intel transition though, things are going to change, but it seems to me that headless products are going to be even worse then because Apple will not want to make products that are directly comparable to PC products in terms of specifications, because Apple can't compete with box assemblers on price. They have to be different enough that people focus on design, software, etc (Apple's advantages) rather than number of expansion slots, memory slots, standard RAM, etc. (Apple's weaknesses)

Like all of us, I'd love a machine like this to exist and I'd definitely buy one, but that's not really the issue for Apple.You have good points that are quite valid and so Apple probably won't make a machine line this on PPC or Intel in the near future... which is why I hate you. :p Don't make me face reality! :o

All I really want is a mid-end, mid-size tower. This is mostly what I buy/build on the PC-side because buying/building the bleeding edge, decked out machine is too costly in terms of price/peroformance ratio (IMO) - just like the PM's. I'll be honest with you, if there becomes a way to hack Apple's DRM/firmware and run OS X on a self-built PC I will do it. Not because I don't want to support Apple. I would pay for OS X and I would gladly buy this type of mid-end, display-less (is that better, kalisphoenix?) machine if Apple offered one - even at a reasonable premium over other x86 box makers. However, if they don't offer such a machine, but I can build one myself and run OS X on it - I can't help but say I would do that.

[blenderdude]

Here's a small update:

http://www.cgartwork.com/jms/pmacmini.png

is PowerMac mini a better name?

I changed the Pentium D to a Pentium M, perhaps that would make the $999 price point more realistic.

[miloblithe]

But if I had to guess I'd predict this: the PowerMac line will get more compact--and they'll simply sell lower-spec'd models of that to fill in the mid-range. Which would be great, considering how people could BTO higher specs for just the items they need.

That sounds very reasonable and realistic. Especially once dual-core chips are prevalent, a low-spec'd, mid-range, $1000-$1500 PowerMac does sound pretty doable. In the long run, Apple needs to build a machine like that to expand its possibilities of being purchased by corporations, libraries, etc. Once that looks viable, I'd expect we'll see this machine.

I also expect that it won't _quite_ be what we had in mind. :)

[mattzilla]

Here's a small update:

is PowerMac mini a better name?



How about the Mac Midi ? :p

[GFLPraxis]

Well, the Mac Mini is really a headless eMac...

This could be a headless iMac. Just give it the same specs as the iMac, without the screen.

[feakbeak]

Well, the Mac Mini is really a headless eMac...

This could be a headless iMac. Just give it the same specs as the iMac, without the screen.That's the general idea, but additionally if you are going to be putting those specs in a more traditional case it should be upgradable by the user. Specifically: extra RAM slot(s), 2nd HD bay, user-replacable GPU and perhaps a PCI slot or two.

[zelmo]

That would look pretty sharp in a clear Lucite stand.

Ah. someone appreciates me. :)

[BlizzardBomb]

Hmm... do you really think Apple would do this after what happened to the Cube?

[CompUser]

Have the powermacs have the dual processors. Then have the iMac and "cMac" have similar specs but the "cMac"would offer upgradable graphics, room for 2 hard drives, an upgradable optical, and why not one or two PCI slots.

Drop the prices!
Minis: $399
eMac: $599
"cMac": $999
iMac: $1199
PowerMac: $1799

Also have the 20" cinema cost $499 and have a 17" LCD cost $299.

[feakbeak]

Hmm... do you really think Apple would do this after what happened to the Cube?The Cube is exactly what I don't want and why I was underwhelmed with the Mac Mini. I don't want a new cute design, I want the best specs Apple can give me for my dollar without a display attached or specs compromised for design.

Don't get me wrong, I love Apple's designs but not at the expense of performance.

Example 1: Mac Mini, cool design, nice budget Mac. Compromises: slower/small HD than could have been used if they would have used cheaper, faster 3.5" drives, slower optical drives, non-upgradable GPU. In short, the machine's specs are lowered because most of it is laptop parts to keep it so small. While it is neat that it is so tiny, I don't really care!

Example 2: iMac G5. I love this design! However, in cramming all that stuff behind the LCD that hot G5 proc heats up too much to let it run full blast all the time so they throttle performance down. While you can turn this off when you need more power the fans then go nuts. I think it would be better to design it so that it can run at maximum performance all the time at a reasonable volume. Also with this design you can't put a second HD in, upgrade the GPU or use any PCI cards.

I don't like beige boxes either, but what's wrong with a reasonably sized tower, styled like the PM or something different. I just want a somewhat traditional case so that cooling and/or fan noise is not an issue and that I can upgrade the thing quite easily. I'm sure after all my posts many would just say "Buy a PM and shut up!" and you'd have a point. The old SP PowerMac was close to what I wanted at a price that wasn't too bad. However, I think they were just stretching the PM line down, it was obvious. If Apple designed a consumer tower from scratch I think it would be a hit - just a gut feeling I have and it is something I've always wanted. Perhaps, that is why I am biased.

[AP_piano295]

How did you make that image?

I love it meaning wat software did u use

[BlizzardBomb]

The Cube is exactly what I don't want and why I was underwhelmed with the Mac Mini. I don't want a new cute design, I want the best specs Apple can give me for my dollar without a display attached or specs compromised for design.

Don't get me wrong, I love Apple's designs but not at the expense of performance.

Example 1: Mac Mini, cool design, nice budget Mac. Compromises: slower/small HD than could have been used if they would have used cheaper, faster 3.5" drives, slower optical drives, non-upgradable GPU. In short, the machine's specs are lowered because most of it is laptop parts to keep it so small. While it is neat that it is so tiny, I don't really care!

Example 2: iMac G5. I love this design! However, in cramming all that stuff behind the LCD that hot G5 proc heats up too much to let it run full blast all the time so they throttle performance down. While you can turn this off when you need more power the fans then go nuts. I think it would be better to design it so that it can run at maximum performance all the time at a reasonable volume. Also with this design you can't put a second HD in, upgrade the GPU or use any PCI cards.

I don't like beige boxes either, but what's wrong with a reasonably sized tower, styled like the PM or something different. I just want a somewhat traditional case so that cooling and/or fan noise is not an issue and that I can upgrade the thing quite easily. I'm sure after all my posts many would just say "Buy a PM and shut up!" and you'd have a point. The old SP PowerMac was close to what I wanted at a price that wasn't too bad. However, I think they were just stretching the PM line down, it was obvious. If Apple designed a consumer tower from scratch I think it would be a hit - just a gut feeling I have and it is something I've always wanted. Perhaps, that is why I am biased.

Yes, I see where you're coming from. People wanted a headless iMac not a headless eMac. Just remember if you want a removable GPU and PCI slots etc etc. it'll be bigger than the design posted. In fact, turn that box on it's side, make it taller, chop down the width and OMG its the Mac Mini! ;) and I can imagine that thing getting blown over by you walking by it :p

[blenderdude]

How did you make that image?

I love it meaning wat software did u use

Thanks! I used Blender (http://www.blender3d.org) (a free, open source 3D app) for the computer, and photoshop for the reflection, the text, and the compositing.

[TBi]

Here's a small update:

http://www.cgartwork.com/jms/pmacmini.png

is PowerMac mini a better name?

I changed the Pentium D to a Pentium M, perhaps that would make the $999 price point more realistic.

I like the name, it's the one i thought of myself. PowerMac Mini sounds cool.

Nice set up but maybe a bit too fast for the price. Personally i'd like the power of an iMac in a smaller package. In other words the exact same specs in a different case.

Maybe a case similar to the full PowerMac, just tall enough to fit a 120mm fan at the front and a dvd writer above it and deep enough to house the dvd drive. Dual DVI, 2GHz single G5 so as not to canibalise sales of the power mac, 2 Ram slots, full size superdrive, 3.5" hard drive (don't really mind if it only takes one) and don't really care if the graphics is not upgradable. You can put a big tall (heatpipe?) heatsink on the G5 and radeon and the 120mm fan can spin slowly and quietly to keep the whole thing cool.

BTW i do like that case you designed, very fancy. Looks a bit too much like the XBOX 360 though...

[TBi]

Hmm... do you really think Apple would do this after what happened to the Cube?

As far as i remember the cube was over priced and thats why it didn't sell well. (although i'm newish enough to mac's so i could be wrong)

[supergod]

I like the design you have, but I have a couple of thoughts. It's interesting how you decided to blend the Power Mac with the Mac Mini with some newer Apple shapes like that of the Cinema Displays (that is what I see most when I look at this, with it's rounded shape). I think you need to borrow a bit more from the Power Mac to make this work.

As much as I hate to say it, this box needs some handles. Not necassarily of the Hummer-Esque badass Power Mac G5 variety, but there is no way to pick this thing up. That isn't a problem when you're a mac mini and quite tight and small, but this thing would need two hands and at least give the user a place to hold it from. Handles are an absolute must.

On the same aspect of practicality it should have a USB,Firewire and headphone port on the front. And a power button might just be useful.

It's interesting that you've borrowed the Apple Logo idea from the mini, putting it on the top, but you didn't really work it thoroughly. Each Apple product is designed to have the logo be visible and part of the design: the mini puts it on the top because the machine is expected to go right on the desktop and is so low that putting it on the front or side wouldn't give it enough visibility. Likewise the iMac has it on the front because that is where you will be looking. This machine will go on the desktop and I think it is cool in your render the way you draw the connection between the box and the mouse: but this doesn't make any sense. The box would be much taller than that.

Now, unless we're talking about giants here, no one would be able to see the logo while they were using the computer. The design is cute, but not really practicle. And I know what I'm saying sucks too, because it means that the use of white plastic on the top becomes almost redundant without the grey contrasting logo, but there is a workaround.

Take the logo and put it on the "right" side of the machine. And then take the USB/Firewire ports off the front and place them on the top. Alternatively you could use the top for a different purpose, for instance, putting a built in iPod dock on the top.

[TBi]

A case that looks like this (http://www.123macmini.com/news/story/339.html)

[andrewag]

When the mini was introduced i was kind of disapointed that the specs were so low. I was hoping for something more like this. Or, with the same specs as the mac mini but with 3.5" HDD etc.

I guess the small form factor is the gimic that helps sell the machine.

[prostuff1]

While i could see something like this working and being sucessful i really don`t see it hapenning until a while after the intel switch.

Like someone else pointed out the thing does need handles and the case needs a little tweaking. Front firewire, USB 2.0 and audio would be good.

It would be cool if you put a logo on the side that lit up when the mac was on or off ( it could be the power light??). And can this thing be laid on it side?? If so then maybe some cool things could be done so that the computer knows what way it is an make sure the apple logo is right side up. Now what i meen?? If the box was up and down the logo on the side would be up and down, but when the box is layed flat the logo would rotate so that it would still be in the correct postion.

I think most would be happy if it had one HD bay (could always use and external), user upgradable GPU (which would be really nice) and no PCI slot(as long as there are enough firewire and USB). Then you could price it below the iMac and not worry about it cutting into sales of the iMac

The only thing i can see wrong and that would hinder this from being made is that almost to much of it is upgradeable. I meen if you pay $1,000-1,500 for it and it is that upgradeable then why buy an iMac?? Just go get a cheap monitor and you have something that is more expandable at less cost. I think you would have to price it almost exactly the same as the iMac to make it work!!

Just my thought

[jamesW135]

Very nice idea. Send it to Apple. :p

[RobHague]

*prays that something like this is what will be announced next month* ;)

I agree completley with the points made here, im trying to break into the 'Mac World' of computers and finding it extremley difficult to make a choice. There simply a lack of flexability.

Mac Mini - Seems Perfect! Compact design, I can buy an apple screen to go with it, which i can also then connect other equipment upto later! Problem, the specs of the Mini are low, the hard drive is limited (80Gb wouldnt be even nearly enough for me) and the graphics system is urmm *pathetic* :o.

eMac - Slightley better specs than the mini, but still not that great. Its also got an in-built CRT! Too big and clunky and i cant use the screen for other external devices.

iMac G5 - More like it! G5 at last and upto 400gb HDD. Problem, screen is built into it still - even though that makes it great, a slim design(thats perfect for me) i cant use the screen for anything else. Why couldnt they have added an input for an external source???

Next Problem is the onboard graphics, the rest of the system is fine but with a 20" screen im going to want to play UT2004 at the screens native res with some spangly effects and such.... and i cant even get a BTO option to change the 9600. So while ill be set for most things, im going to be even more limited witht he limited amount of entertainment software out on Mac. And when you are spending £1500 thats not that reasuring.

Plus! What of the 9600 in a year? Its already looking bleek now, in a years time it will look ancient. No no ><

Leaves me with PowerMac

Great spec, can get a top-class graphics card. Lots of upgradability, big hard drive. Problem, its like the PC i just got rid of...(size, weight, cables) and problem 2 is that its the most expensive of the range.

If i go with the PowerMac id have to leave out/cut back on options i would be able to afford with the imac - if i get the iMac im going to be disapointed when i try and play Doom3 or UT2004 on that nice 20" screen...in the transition from PC, while i plan on buying a console at some later date i do still want to game on the mac.... my account will be devistated after the Mac purchase so i might not be able to get a console as soon as id like...

Basically any system apple could come up with that included the G5 and an upgradable graphics system would solve all my concerns/problems.

I remember the very first time i actually was drooling at the Mac's was when i saw a G4 CUBE in PC World with all the kit attached. It looked sweet. If there was a 'G5 Cube' id buy one in a shot.