$499 Headless iMac?

[MrChowWow]

OS X on Intel Machine

I was just thinking of the rumor from a year ago about how Apple was "planning" on porting OS X over to run on Intel machines. We all thought that this would scare Microsoft. But, I can see Jobs saying,"Why have them run it on Intel machines when they can run it on Apple machines?" Hence, this miniMac. Let's eliminate the only reason Windows user DON'T buy Apple computers: price.

Brilliant. I don't even need a new Mac but I'll buy one of these puppies. Yeah!

 

[edgar_is_good]

iPod docks, home on iPod...

There was a rumor a while back about "Home on iPod", your home folder on your iPod. Never saw the light of day. The iPod's hard drive is not meant to be used as a desktop hard drive is. Unless you constantly skip tunes and don't use playlists, the drive spins up and loads up it's buffer and is not in use for long periods of time. Would not be the case if you were using it as your boot drive.

Wouldn't have to use it as a boot drive, could boot off a small internal drive, just use extn'l for apps, prefs, and probably enough free space on the main drive to cache high disk use resources.

The reason I don't think Apple will put a dock on this thing is that you have two choices
a) make it external - this makes one orientation preferred, i.e. sideways or flat, and if flat, makes it a lousy place to stack a monitor or
b) make it internal - this makes it significantly bigger than it needs to be, and makes it difficult or impossible to operate your ipod directly while it's in there.

However, including an external dock would be welcome, but unlikely.

 

[adamjay]

"Ummm...$600 is NOT a highend desktop in the PC world. Im not sure where that thought came from."

Reasonably high end. A pretty nice Athlon 64 system (the closest equivilent to a G5) can be put together for six hundred - look at prices on Newegg.

indeed!!
you dont even have to build it yourself.
Cyber Power Systems in Los Angeles has been building many custom PCs and i have alot of friends in the Audio field buying AMD 64bit systems from them.

here's what you can get from them ( cyberpowersystem.com ) for $600
AMD ATHLON64 2800+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology
GigaByte GA-K8NS nForce3 MAINBOARD
512 MB PC3200 400MHz DDR MEMORY
160GB 7200 RPM ATA 100 HARD DRIVE
GeForce MX4000 video card 64MB AGP
16X DVDRW/CDRW DRIVE (i.e. "Superdrive")
USB 2.0, Ethernet, Firewire, Audio, TV-Out, etc.
Windows XP Home
Mouse/Keyboard

100% assembled, just like Macs are.

includes 3 year warranty on all components, and Life-Time phone support.
you want 3 year on-site service? add $119, think of it as equivalent to AppleCare.

needless to say, thats alot more machine than this "rumored" mini-Mac. and its 64-bit so you, ironically, have a PC that will outlast the mini-Mac.

It is said that even the cheapest mac, that doesnt even exist yet... still has a crap ass price/performance ratio.

 

[adamjay]

and something else to keep in mind...
not sure if its been mentioned because i'd rather not sift through 40+ pages to find out... anyways. Depending on how small this mac is, it may use LAPTOP ram. i.e. So-Dimms. and this ram is more expensive than the Dimm's PowerMac G4's and G5's use(d). So this could make ram upgrading a more costly endeavor.

 

[DrEwe]

The reason I don't think Apple will put a dock on this thing is that you have two choices
a) make it external - this makes one orientation preferred, i.e. sideways or flat, and if flat, makes it a lousy place to stack a monitor or
b) make it internal - this makes it significantly bigger than it needs to be, and makes it difficult or impossible to operate your ipod directly while it's in there.

However, including an external dock would be welcome, but unlikely.

I agree - having owned the Altec and the Bose iPod speakers, and both times having had the hassle of finding updated "inserts" to get my iPod to fit, having an integrated dock would seem to be an invitation to instant obsolescence every time they update the iPod form factor.

 

[stvli]

Wow, longest thread I've ever seen here. Would like to throw my two cents in.

I'm a graphic artist/fine artist/digitasl photographer. I regularly do work in Photoshop/Illustrator/InDesign that is larger than 24" x 36" at a resolution of 300dpi. I have a 733mhz Quicksilver and a 933 mhz G4 ibook. Both handle everything I throw at them with no issues whatsoever.

I laugh at everyone who says that these computers aren't enough for the market they are aimed at. My wife has a 1.25 Ghz G4 Powerbook, and when I get to use it, it's like a dream. In my experience, for what I use the processor for, if it can handle what I throw at it, this is the perfect option for a low-cost headless Mac, something I've secretly been wanting for quite some time.

Next summer I will finally be in the market for a G5 and will have the money for the high end model, whatever it be at the time. If this rumor does pan out to be true, I will gladly add it to my order as I begin to expand my studio.

[edit]

Would like to add that in the quicksilve I have 1.25 Gigs of RAM and in the iBook I have 768 MB of RAM, a large factor in the ability of my machines to run the tasks that I throw at them, SO the RAM upgradability of the machine is an important issue. Even if it does come with 256, if I can throw a 512 or a gig chip into it from crucial, then I'll be happy.

[/edit]

I totally agree... 1.25Ghz G4 is sufficient for an "average user" who would use it for daily tasks such as browsing the web, IM, email, word processing (iLife) Even if they installed programs such as Photoshop the "mini mac" would still be fine. People are ranting on about how the processor doesn't cut the cheese... Ha ha ha.... I wonder how the industries coped when these processor speeds were around.

 

[Photorun]

indeed!!
you dont even have to build it yourself.
Cyber Power Systems in Los Angeles has been building many custom PCs and i have alot of friends in the Audio field buying AMD 64bit systems from them.

here's what you can get from them ( cyberpowersystem.com ) for $600
AMD ATHLON64 2800+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology
GigaByte GA-K8NS nForce3 MAINBOARD
512 MB PC3200 400MHz DDR MEMORY
160GB 7200 RPM ATA 100 HARD DRIVE
GeForce MX4000 video card 64MB AGP
16X DVDRW/CDRW DRIVE (i.e. "Superdrive")
USB 2.0, Ethernet, Firewire, Audio, TV-Out, etc.
Windows XP Home
Mouse/Keyboard

100% assembled, just like Macs are.

includes 3 year warranty on all components, and Life-Time phone support.
you want 3 year on-site service? add $119, think of it as equivalent to AppleCare.

needless to say, thats alot more machine than this "rumored" mini-Mac. and its 64-bit so you, ironically, have a PC that will outlast the mini-Mac.

It is said that even the cheapest mac, that doesnt even exist yet... still has a crap ass price/performance ratio.

That's nice, you can get a decked out Dodge Neon with a turbo for 1/2 the price of a Porsche... but it's still not a Porsche, not the same attention to detail, ergonomics, quality of build, etc. Some of us have money for the Porsche and laugh at Neons.

 

[@HomeNow]

I laugh at everyone who says that these computers aren't enough for the market they are aimed at. My wife has a 1.25 Ghz G4 Powerbook, and when I get to use it, it's like a dream. In my experience, for what I use the processor for, if it can handle what I throw at it, this is the perfect option for a low-cost headless Mac, something I've secretly been wanting for quite some time.[/edit]

The question is more weather they can be successfully marketed using a 1.2 Ghz processor as a switcher's computer when they are competing against computers that have a 2.4 Ghz processor, or in the case of marketing them as an upgrade for an existing Mac user can the compete against the 700 Mhz to 1 Ghz G4's the were available 2 years ago as well as the available upgrades to existing computers. As a Cube owner the prospect of upgrading to dual 1.2's for $599 (rumored pricing for upcoming boards), or even a single 1.25 for $350 is a lot more attractive than a new 1.25 Ghz "single" iMac mini, unless the new iMac has more to offer than my Cube such as analog video in/out, superdrive, etc.

 

[stealthboy]

That's nice, you can get a decked out Dodge Neon with a turbo for 1/2 the price of a Porsche... but it's still not a Porsche, not the same attention to detail, ergonomics, quality of build, etc. Some of us have money for the Porsche and laugh at Neons.

Amen to that. It's a great analogy. Nobody can understand why I love my Porsche 911 so much in somewhat the same way that PC users don't "get" the whole Mac thing. They argue about specs, price, etc. But there's so much more including design, style, and attention to detail.

The only way to understand is to drive/use one .

 

[Armsreach]

The question is more weather they can be successfully marketed using a 1.2 Ghz processor as a switcher's computer when they are competing against computers that have a 2.4 Ghz processor, or in the case of marketing them as an upgrade for an existing Mac user can the compete against the 700 Mhz to 1 Ghz G4's the were available 2 years ago as well as the available upgrades to existing computers. As a Cube owner the prospect of upgrading to dual 1.2's for $599 (rumored pricing for upcoming boards), or even a single 1.25 for $350 is a lot more attractive than a new 1.25 Ghz "single" iMac mini, unless the new iMac has more to offer than my Cube such as analog video in/out, superdrive, etc.

I don't think that's really an issue at all. It's been stated in this thread countless times, but honestly, leave the tech world and the safety of these forums for a second and consider the user next door. I know when my parents made the switch to a Mac they never once considered Ghz in the equation. That is the truth with many users I've dealt with. Even professional users. The concern isn't "Is this the fastest I can get with my money". The concern rather is, "What's the cheapest computer that will last me a few years until I need to upgrade again?" Most average users expect to upgrade their computer every 2-3 years (thasnks to the media portraying it that way). This computer is that possible answer and this reason is the main reason that the price myth exists for Macs. It's not that they are necesarily too pricey, but that there's less pricey alternatives that will last just fine until the user needs to upgrade.

 

[adamjay]

That's nice, you can get a decked out Dodge Neon with a turbo for 1/2 the price of a Porsche... but it's still not a Porsche, not the same attention to detail, ergonomics, quality of build, etc. Some of us have money for the Porsche and laugh at Neons.

that analogy loses any validity once you actually try to do something processor intensive with the computer. Encode an mp3, rip a CD, render audio in Cubase, etc. etc.

you see the top speed of a Porsche is far more than the top speed of a Dodge Neon, yet a G4 1.25ghz is half as fast as the slowest AMD64.

so, what were you saying again? That your porsche can only get up to 45mph on the freeway before it overheats?
I see....

 

[Photorun]

WAIT A MINUTE, DECEPTION ALERT!

indeed!!
you dont even have to build it yourself.
Cyber Power Systems in Los Angeles has been building many custom PCs and i have alot of friends in the Audio field buying AMD 64bit systems from them.

here's what you can get from them ( cyberpowersystem.com ) for $600
AMD ATHLON64 2800+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology
GigaByte GA-K8NS nForce3 MAINBOARD
512 MB PC3200 400MHz DDR MEMORY
160GB 7200 RPM ATA 100 HARD DRIVE
GeForce MX4000 video card 64MB AGP
16X DVDRW/CDRW DRIVE (i.e. "Superdrive")
USB 2.0, Ethernet, Firewire, Audio, TV-Out, etc.
Windows XP Home
Mouse/Keyboard

100% assembled, just like Macs are.

includes 3 year warranty on all components, and Life-Time phone support.
you want 3 year on-site service? add $119, think of it as equivalent to AppleCare.

needless to say, thats alot more machine than this "rumored" mini-Mac. and its 64-bit so you, ironically, have a PC that will outlast the mini-Mac.

It is said that even the cheapest mac, that doesnt even exist yet... still has a crap ass price/performance ratio.

LIAR = STRONG WORDS AROUND HERE!

I went to cyberpowersystem.com, first off, MY GOD are they UGLY!!! So yeah, no R&D like Apple to make a good looking machine, these are henious, they're typical peecee luser, ZERO taste!!!

So you almost had me bought, as probably you wanted other Mac users... but rather than take your word I did a configuration for supposedly a good machine under 64 AMD, and you clearly didn't post your, ahem, catch to all this. Add in a combo drive (beige, WTF, peecee luser weenies are still stuck in 98?!?) add a 5200 video card, add this and that to make it, say, the equivalent of the lowest end G5 and you're at $1326... and it's ugly... AND it doesn't come with any iLife apps, or Appleworks, basicaly you can play games, even get a coupon off half life. Funny how peecee luser/apologists are so quick to overlook that they're cheap-ass systems lack any and all software to do a damn thing, Apple's software would be worth hundred if all added up vs. peecee software. $1326 is NOT $600 or even $500!

You're now going to tell me to compare it to the potential G4 stripped model coming out. Okay, I custom configed another of these godawful butt ugly systems (how do you peecee lusers live without yourselves anyways, are you color and object blind? These systems are so frickin' FUGLY!!! Then again lack of taste and brains goes hand in hand). I configed an underwhelming P4 system, gave it the weak 5200 Apple will probably have to use, even gave the system 256 or RAM, added combo drive and came up with $594. Mind you this is a BUTT UGLY huge system, that the G4 probably could keep pace with, and a peecee that comes with NO software what-so-ever.

Any you peecee apologists come here to these forums and try to use fuzzy logic to tell us how overpriced Macs are. Truly you need to back away from Gates Koolaid and don't slowly back away, but run, from the fabrications and lies spun in the peecee world. Your lies aren't just tiring, they're really old.

 

[Armsreach]

you see the top speed of a Porsche is far more than the top speed of a Dodge Neon, yet a G4 1.25ghz is half as fast as the slowest AMD64.

Uhm, different architectures man. The clock cycles are drastically different so comparing the speed of one chip to the other isn't a 1:1 comparison. Kind of like comparing kilometers per hour to miles per hour.

 

[Photorun]

indeed!!
you dont even have to build it yourself.
Cyber Power Systems in Los Angeles has been building many custom PCs and i have alot of friends in the Audio field buying AMD 64bit systems from them.

Not to mention Microsuck should pay CONSUMERS to buy their products and get thier bugs and stuff, so these systems you are fawning off on us, fabrications of greatness (cough WEAK cough) that are so crappy, even if they were that cheaper (they're not) they're still running Windows, full of bugs, flaws, butt-ugly interface, viruses, crashes, etc... and to some of us who actually VALUE our time (clearly not you) we don't want to dicker around with all that crap, time is money, some of us NOT like you kinda don't like wasting it. Then again, with your fuzzy illogical points here, clearly you're all about not just wasting your time, but others. In short, go away.

 

[dicklacara]

Throw out microsofts webtv, who needs Tivo?, ad what is the point of of the DLink Medialounge. Hook up your headless imac to a HDTV and get the bluetooth wireless keyboard and mouse. With the new quicktime codec streaming HD 1080i at 6-7Mbits per second you could have some serious video streaming going on at home. The headless imac could be to video what the airport express was to audio creating the perfect multimedia setup.

Add to that an iSight and you can video chat (3 at a time) with all of your friends all over the world (who also buy similar setups to get the same capabilities)

 

[Photorun]

Uhm, different architectures man. The clock cycles are drastically different so comparing the speed of one chip to the other isn't a 1:1 comparison. Kind of like comparing kilometers per hour to miles per hour.

Thank you. I'm not sure why were even feeding this troll.

 

[adamjay]

LIAR = STRONG WORDS AROUND HERE!

I went to cyberpowersystem.com, first off, MY GOD are they UGLY!!! So yeah, no R&D like Apple to make a good looking machine, these are henious, they're typical peecee luser, ZERO taste!!!

So you almost had me bought, as probably you wanted other Mac users... but rather than take your word I did a configuration for supposedly a good machine under 64 AMD, and you clearly didn't post your, ahem, catch to all this. Add in a combo drive (beige, WTF, peecee luser weenies are still stuck in 98?!?) add a 5200 video card, add this and that to make it, say, the equivalent of the lowest end G5 and you're at $1326... and it's ugly... AND it doesn't come with any iLife apps, or Appleworks, basicaly you can play games, even get a coupon off half life. Funny how peecee luser/apologists are so quick to overlook that they're cheap-ass systems lack any and all software to do a damn thing, Apple's software would be worth hundred if all added up vs. peecee software. $1326 is NOT $600 or even $500!

You're now going to tell me to compare it to the potential G4 stripped model coming out. Okay, I custom configed another of these godawful butt ugly systems (how do you peecee lusers live without yourselves anyways, are you color and object blind? These systems are so frickin' FUGLY!!! Then again lack of taste and brains goes hand in hand). I configed an underwhelming P4 system, gave it the weak 5200 Apple will probably have to use, even gave the system 256 or RAM, added combo drive and came up with $594. Mind you this is a BUTT UGLY huge system, that the G4 probably could keep pace with, and a peecee that comes with NO software what-so-ever.

Any you peecee apologists come here to these forums and try to use fuzzy logic to tell us how overpriced Macs are. Truly you need to back away from Gates Koolaid and don't slowly back away, but run, from the fabrications and lies spun in the peecee world. Your lies aren't just tiring, they're really old.

well thats what i configured on the site, and it was $600 on the nose.
maybe EVERYTHING on macs are more expensive, even PCs configured with Safari. hahahaha.
I actually really love OSX, i just feel that the hardware needed for it to run is grossly overpriced, and this creates a culture of elitists such as yourself who feel that just because it costs more and looks better it truley is better. When it truley comes down to what you are doing with the computer. And all the functions i mentioned are half as effecient on a G4 1.25ghz.
I used to own a Powerbook, sold it and for the same price got an AMD64 notebook that gives me 2 and sometimes 3 times more power with nearly all operations (i didn't use final cut pro on mac, or adobe premiere on PC so i can't compare all operations), and i'm just speaking from experience.

Drive your porsche, see if i care. I'm perfectly comfortable with the size of my penis, however.

 

[macmax77]

indeed!!
you dont even have to build it yourself.
Cyber Power Systems in Los Angeles has been building many custom PCs and i have alot of friends in the Audio field buying AMD 64bit systems from them.

here's what you can get from them ( cyberpowersystem.com ) for $600
AMD ATHLON64 2800+ CPU w/ Hyper Transport Technology
GigaByte GA-K8NS nForce3 MAINBOARD
512 MB PC3200 400MHz DDR MEMORY
160GB 7200 RPM ATA 100 HARD DRIVE
GeForce MX4000 video card 64MB AGP
16X DVDRW/CDRW DRIVE (i.e. "Superdrive")
USB 2.0, Ethernet, Firewire, Audio, TV-Out, etc.
Windows XP Home
Mouse/Keyboard

100% assembled, just like Macs are.

includes 3 year warranty on all components, and Life-Time phone support.
you want 3 year on-site service? add $119, think of it as equivalent to AppleCare.

needless to say, thats alot more machine than this "rumored" mini-Mac. and its 64-bit so you, ironically, have a PC that will outlast the mini-Mac.

It is said that even the cheapest mac, that doesnt even exist yet... still has a crap ass price/performance ratio.

wow , i don't like you, but at least your sig is cool, hehehhehe

 

[sushi]

They argue about specs, price, etc. But there's so much more including design, style, and attention to detail.

The only way to understand is to drive/use one .

So very true. Working in a PC environment, I love to take on the Mac challengers.

What is really interesting, is seeing the lightbulbs go on as I show them how the Mac is integrated and easy to use.

I demo with my PB15. I start up 6 or so QT videos to play at once while using PP, Word and a few other apps. You know, things you can't do with a PC.

Of course I love to show off the multi language support that OS X has built in. That usually gets some significant jaw impressions!

...and I make sure that Word, PowerPoint and Excel are running. Totally amazes most PC folks as most say they heard that Mac will not run these apps. Of course the internet and e-mail are other ones that I demo since many believe that the Mac cannot do these tasks.

Force Quit is another jaw dropper. It simply works, unlike the various Windows task managers.

Based on subjective observation, it seems most PC folks love to tinker with their systems. They think in terms of upgrading individual components vice complete systems. That is why a headless Mac will sell well since they can continue to use their existing USB keyboard&mice, monitors and most other peripherals that they currently have.

It looks like Apple is headed in the right direction.

Sushi

 

[@HomeNow]

I don't think that's really an issue at all. It's been stated in this thread countless times, but honestly, leave the tech world and the safety of these forums for a second and consider the user next door. I know when my parents made the switch to a Mac they never once considered Ghz in the equation. That is the truth with many users I've dealt with. Even professional users. The concern isn't "Is this the fastest I can get with my money". The concern rather is, "What's the cheapest computer that will last me a few years until I need to upgrade again?" Most average users expect to upgrade their computer every 2-3 years (thasnks to the media portraying it that way). This computer is that possible answer and this reason is the main reason that the price myth exists for Macs. It's not that they are necesarily too pricey, but that there's less pricey alternatives that will last just fine until the user needs to upgrade.

But you are leaving out a very important factor, the salesman that is trying to "sell" the customer up. I have read recently that the most people still buy computers with a final price over $1000, as well as replacing their monitors with a new computer purchase even if they had no intention of replacing the monitor or spending more than $499 for the computer when they walked into the store. The has been used as an argument for why the iMac really is a good deal, and competative in today's market.

When a new, uninitiated customer comes in and looks at an iMac mini and the salesman turnes them toward a Sony saying "That Mac uses a processor that is 2 years old, and half as fast as the one in this model." Apple will still loose the sale and the consumer will still be none the wiser as they boot up their Sony every day. Apple needs to win the marketing war, and they can't do that with 2 year old technology even if it is at bargain basement prices. This is especially true since they are preparing a new OS, and a new version of QT should be out soon, so the computers need to be able to handle this and the new OS's and technology that Apple will be releasing at least for the next 12-18 months given Apple's recent hardware upgrade schedule.

 

[Armsreach]

Based on subjective observation, it seems most PC folks love to tinker with their systems.

Do they love to, or do they HAVE to?

 

[adamjay]

and i like how just because i present an argument that doesn't fit into the worldly-view of the devout mac enthusiast, i'm all the sudden a troll.
mature, really.

my post was in response to someone saying that $600 can't buy you any better than a low-level PC.

but if i hint that theres a flaw in anyway with this great holy company known as Apple, i'm the anti-Christ.

fine, have your cake and eat it too, i'll leave.
i'll turn my mac off of Folding for this elitist site too. Thanks for the hospitality and knee-jerk debate tactics. Ciao!!!

 

[oxjox]

With the (almost) edition of the ipod dock - it sounds like a design I thought up after the introduction of the iMac G5. After making this concept I realized that with all the time and effort (R&D) to make this third party add-on, you could actually put the whole computer inside this iStation and have a headless Mac.

almost

 

[rdowns]

If Tiger's not in the box, it'll be $19.95 through the OS X Up To Date Program.

Apple would be foolish if these shipped without Tiger. Not a smart move if their next experience with Apple after buying, is having to pay for an OS upgrade or having to update the OS for that matter.

 

[Photorun]

BS Alert

"Ummm...$600 is NOT a highend desktop in the PC world. Im not sure where that thought came from."

Reasonably high end. A pretty nice Athlon 64 system (the closest equivilent to a G5) can be put together for six hundred - look at prices on Newegg.

Anyone reading this post, try configuing a REAL high end machine through Newegg that comes close to a G5... and watch in amazement as you see the price once you start adding things we get automatically on a Mac soars right past $1000.

Peecee lusers love this strawman of this high end ultra cheap peecee, but as Mac users don't buy it, it's smoke and mirrors and pure unadulterated BS.