Low End PowerMac G5?

[MikeBike]

Edit: BTW, the XP discs that come with that Dell are probably just install discs. They'll usually just re-install all that crap with it as bundled apps. Sometimes they give you the option to not install them with XP, but sometimes they don't.

I think she paid for a REAL copy of Windows XP Pro. Not a Ghost disk image. But, I'll have to check.

This machine runs so poorly I asked her if she was running Oracle Database in the background! Just a joke. Just about 100 processes, seemingly useless processing, running in background. My question is does anyone from Dell actually use the machines they sell? Or do they just not give a Damn.

 

[maya]

If I'm spending that kind of money I might as well be getting the iMac G5. Headless mac good but not at this price. That is why the Cube didn't sell - it cost too much.

the Cube was not very expandable at all.

If this system is the same form as the current PM, there is a good chance it will last for a good 3 years.

This makes a great gaming system for all those nutz out there who spend $$$$ to modify they systems to be the best.

 

[nagromme]

A sub-eMac bottom-end headless would sell for sure, but Apple just said publicly that they don't plan to offer anything in the sub-$800 market because they can't make much money at it. So that's buried for now--although I suspect they DO have a low-end headless in the works for some FUTURE date, maybe with a G5.

Now, that leaves MID-range towers. THAT's what this is, and why not?

Maybe you won't but it, maybe it will be the least popular Mac in the lineup, but it will still sell.

And here's the clever part.... Apple didn't have to design a whole new machine. That makes this smarter than pizza boxes, cubes, headless eMacs, and many other concepts that sound good at first glance.

(But they really ought to drop the plastic 17" LCD and put a widescreen 17" LCD in an Al case.)

 

[maya]

I think she paid for a REAL copy of Windows XP Pro. Not a Ghost disk image. But, I'll have to check.

This machine runs so poorly I asked her if she was running Oracle Database in the background! Just a joke. Just about 100 processes, seemingly useless processing, running in background. My question is does anyone from Dell actually use the machines they sell? Or do they just not give a Damn.

Hmm, I say they don't give a damn

 

[pigwin32]

here you go, your precious headless mac. you people better buy them, cause i for one never asked for it.

My goodness Wonder Boy, it would be tragic if no-one bought it, then you would quite rightly be able to say "I told you so", and imagine how silly we would all feel.

Personally I believe this plugs a gaping hole in their lineup. If Apple wants to expand into non-traditional markets such as large corporates, a slimline headless option is essential to complement their server offerings. Corporates buy these by the truckload. Plus Windows' users who are rightly scared by the security vulnerabilities inherent in the Windows platform but are unwilling to throw away their entire investment in hardware just to shift to Mac. This is surely a burgeoning market, especially with Apple's profile being through the roof due to the success of the iPod.

And frankly, if Apple gets it wrong again with the pricing, I'll happily wait a couple of years and pick one up second-hand to replace my (also second-hand) Cube. But face it, Apple is unlikely to slap a G5 in a beige box with a noisy fan.

 

[maya]

People make up your mind either you do or do not want a "headless mac". From what I gather from the responses on this thread people will choose the iMac over this "headless" abomination.


How many mac people really run out to the local store to max up they mac's. Not many unless you are a gamer. If you want a "headless mac" at the price of an eMac not going to happen Apple might as well just close it doors and put a sign saying,"Out of Business" try the "Windows"

 

[maya]

My goodness Wonder Boy, it would be tragic if no-one bought it, then you would quite rightly be able to say "I told you so", and imagine how silly we would all feel.

Personally I believe this plugs a gaping hole in their lineup. If Apple wants to expand into non-traditional markets such as large corporates, a slimline headless option is essential to complement their server offerings. Corporates buy these by the truckload. Plus Windows' users who are rightly scared by the security vulnerabilities inherent in the Windows platform but are unwilling to throw away their entire investment in hardware just to shift to Mac. This is surely a burgeoning market, especially with Apple's profile being through the roof due to the success of the iPod.

And frankly, if Apple gets it wrong again with the pricing, I'll happily wait a couple of years and pick one up second-hand to replace my (also second-hand) Cube. But face it, Apple is unlikely to slap a G5 in a beige box with a noisy fan.

I am with Wonder Boy on this one.

 

[earthtoandy]

man everytime apples plans to release a product you all say "it wont work, what are they thinking...they will fail" they havent made many missteps lately... once again you will be proved wrong!

 

[pigwin32]

I am with Wonder Boy on this one.

Wow so lucid, actually I can really see your point now, what was I thinking, please disregard my previous post.

 

[AidenShaw]

the price is absurd

$1507
Dell Dimension 4600 3.4 GHz
512 MiB
80 GB
DVD + CD-RW (dual optical)
19" 1280x1024 LCD Flat Panel
128 MiB GeForce FX 5200 Graphics Card with TV-Out and DVI
5.1 Audio
Windows XP
Microsoft Works
Color printer
3 yr at home warranty
_______________________

This new G5 isn't the headless iMac people have been talking about. For that price you can get much more in an Intel box - *and* a 19" LCD display!

Knock at least $500 off the price, and put it in an SFF box or a mini-tower - not the huge G5 Maxi-Tower.

 

[~Shard~]

Wow so lucid, actually I can really see your point now, what was I thinking, please disregard my previous post.

Hey, easy now pigwwin32, maya made several significant comments there and numerous potent points within his epic essay - it actually took me quite a while to read that reply of his, so go easy on him - it takes a lot of effort to simply say, "Yah, you know, what that guy said"...

 

[QCassidy352]

It's a good idea. I have a single 1.8 G5 and I love it. I don't want an imac because I plan to keep the display a lot longer than the computer and I want to be able to use my Radeon 9600 instead of a 5200 Ultra. Also, faster bus and more RAM slots. No, it's not for everyone, but I for one could never justify the cost of the dual G5s but would go for this one (if I didn't already have one... )

 

[segundo]

$1507
19" 1280x1024 LCD Flat Panel

This new G5 isn't the headless iMac people have been talking about. For that price you can get much more in an Intel box - *and* a 19" LCD display!

Okay, I see your point, but the dramatics of a 19" LCD are somewhat lost since this is the same resolution of a standard 17" LCD. However, you still have a good argument that Apple's hardware is overpriced.

Yet, I still find Apple computers to be an overall excellent value. Yes, I still have to convince myself of that, but it works eventually.

 

[feakbeak]

It's not the Corvette... someone pissed in the gas tank

When you buy a Corvette, should you have to take in for an overhaul before you drive it anywhere? Hell no. Macs just work. Right out of the box. No futzing neccessary. 95% of computer users couldn't format the HD and reinstall Windows if their lives depended on it.

You are correct you shouldn't have to fix it up. However, that's not the fault of x86 hardware. It is the fault of Dell, who partners with many crappy third-party software vendors to preload a ton of useless software on their consumer systems.

Many small-time Windows apps setup services or call programs to run in the system tray on startup using the Run key. So you end up with dozens of processes running that most users don't even want. Often times, these apps are poorly written and inefficient. This grinds the machines to a halt. You are also correct that most Windows users are dumb and can't resolve these issues themselves. Still, a well maintained x86 based system can run fast, provided you are not running a 9x versions of Windows. WinXP is a good OS in my opinion. *waiting for the insults*

Apple, on the other hand, maintains the "whole package" - hardware and software. They write efficient software, optimized for their own hardware. Plus, because of Apple's minimalist approach they ship their systems very clean in terms of software, so it only makes sense they run faster out of the box.

I own a 1.4 GHz Athlon, 512 MB machine running Win XP SP2 and my machine still runs fast enough for my needs. It's over three years old, and while I have had to do some upgrading in the way of A/V cards and adding another HD, I haven’t put much time/money into it. I can run Far Cry on the medium graphics settings with my ATI 9600 SE. I consider that good for three-year-old hardware.

I'm a Windows software developer, so I need to have an x86 machine around the house for doing work at home. I'm an iPod owner and I am considering buying a Mac for my next machine sometime in the next 12 months.

I would like a PM, but the dual 1.8 system specs don’t seem worth $2000 in my opinion. I believe the dual 2.0 GHz system, with the faster CPUs, FSB, PCIX and more default RAM seem well worth the $500 to upgrade from the dual 1.8 system. However, I just can't afford a $2500 system (and, no, I don't think Apple should offer an awesome system for dirt cheap. I don't blame them for charging $2500 for that system, it is reasonable, it just doesn't fit my current budget).

A single proc PM might be for me, because I could add extra RAM and up the GPU a bit and still easily be under $2000. I already have a nice 19" Trinitron CRT and Acoustic Energy Ego2 speakers... I'd just need a KVM. I'm in the market for a consumer Mac, but the expandability of this new entry-level PM outweighs the benefits of the AIO design of the iMac, IMHO.

 

[nagromme]

$1507
Dell Dimension 4600 3.4 GHz
...

Sounds nice, if you find Windows an acceptable OS. It's good that those folks have options beyond the PowerMac.

I agree with you that Apple could sell a truly LOW-end headless, but that's not what this PowerMac is. This just brings the PMG5 entry point lower--and if you need a G5 tower, that could be a good thing.

 

[rotorblade]

Yep!

I also like the idea that maybe this is a separate G5 with its own case. Cut back on PCI/PCI-X slots and maybe a few RAM slots and all will be good. It's almost ideal for a gamer (more CPU power would be nice, but not completely necessary yet). Perhaps there can be a single-processor line with a smaller mobo and size? Would be nice...

I agree. My idea of a headless iCheap is along those same lines. 1 graphics card slot, 1 PCI/PCI-X slot, space for 1 extra HDD, ample memory capacity. Heck. Sell it without a graphics card and let the user install their own if the want. Out the door for 699.00.

 

[Garissimo]

<...>
Knock at least $500 off the price

And watch your iMac inventory sit on the shelves and gather dust. The price is exactly where it needs to be.

<...>
and put it in an SFF box or a mini-tower - not the huge G5 Maxi-Tower.

This I agree with. The PowerMac enclosure is pretty obtrusive. Something along the lines of a modified XServe form factor would be pretty interesting, if they can cool it and keep it quiet.

 

[rugonnaeatthat]

Cache

Don't the G5's have more cache? Would this not mean faster 'feeling' computer? My emac 700 has so many unexpected spinning balls even with 640mb ram and I've compared this with my friends 867 powerbook and the difference is huge - simply put abslutely no lag. I've always put this down to cache and motherboard speed - couldn't the same difference convince someone to buy a Powermac over the imac?

 

[earthtoandy]

two things are complained about...price too high and eating into imac sales. But these are related. Supply and demand. Raise the price and demand goes down. They dont want to sell too many of these things that the imac dies so the price may seem a little high. just a small deterrent. and they arent worried about PC prices cause if you are gonna buy the mac you are gonna buy it. and non power users that are just getting in on a mac always will go for the imac.

 

[melgross]

$1507


Knock at least $500 off the price, and put it in an SFF box or a mini-tower - not the huge G5 Maxi-Tower.

I basically agree. I've been saying this for a long time now.

As someone who has designed audio equipment for my own concern for the professional market, I can see how it could be done.

Remove the handles-very expensive.
cut down the motherboard-3 1/2 inches and much simpler.
smaller power supply-don't need 450 watts for this.
eliminate Toslink audio-VERY few people use this-have a i/o board for $75 for those who do.
smaller case-no need for full height case now-can be almost 8 inches shorter.

The result is the mini-tower.

manufacturing costs are lower
boxing costs are lower
shipping costs are lower
warehousing costs are lower
more room for dealers.

I believe that this could be brought in for $999.
Is it a good idea? I don't know, esp. in light of the new iMacs.

But, I do think that it would sell.

 

[~Shard~]

Since they can fit the G5 into the new iMac enclosure, maybe they'll do something along the same lines for this lower-end PowerMac. One of the main detractors for the PowerMac is the huge case, so maybe Apple can remedy that with a smaller, sleek case, a slightly stripped down system (no duals, less slots/bays/whatever) and come up with a real winner.

 

[macidiot]

Many times in Apple's past their low end Powermac wasn't a good seller. Mac users tended to ignore the low end unit and the expensive high end and focus on the midrange unit.

I think its a result of the way Apple(and many computer makers) configures its product mix. Typically, the sweet spot machine is the middle one. Usually, the middle config offers a lot more value compared to the low end model even though its more expensive. Also, usually, the high end model offers lower value vs. the middle model. Mostly its for those that absolutely need (and can justify)that incremental boost. Either that or they want bragging rights. The same situation happens a lot in tech, for example, cpu's.

 

[maxvamp]

Desktop machine? I think not...

Has anyone thought of this machine as a cheap(er) Mac OSX server that could be used in a smaller cluster, or as a file / web / print server, as a good developer / test machine? Maybe for something for the cross platform power user / switcher?

For any of those uses, this machine may turn out to be more attractive than an XServe and is configured appropriately.

Another point.... I have a 4 year old PM 733. This might be a great replacement for those of use on a very tight budget ( as opposed to a $800 proc upgrade, and a $350 video card upgraded ), and where we do not want to give up any hardware that we have in our older systems ( capture cards, raid controllers, etc. ).

Max.

 

[alexf]

This would seriously suck.

1) It has the same specs as the iMac, and the same price. The only difference is that the iMac has a FASTER graphics card (Ultra, not normal FX 5200), and includes a $600 LCD screen.
2) It would ruin their "all-dual lineup".

Now, if it had an FX 5200 Ultra, and was dual 1.6, this would be nice. But otherwise, stay far away unless you have a spare $600.

It would be an FX 5200 Ultra for sure; there is no way a normal FX 5200 would be in there.

Also, the price of $1499 would only make sense if the other prices are lowered, as otherwise to get the exact same machine plus one more processor would cost $500 more, which does not make sense; a dual should be no more than $300 more than an exact same single.

 

[iDave]

Since they can fit the G5 into the new iMac enclosure, maybe they'll do something along the same lines for this lower-end PowerMac. One of the main detractors for the PowerMac is the huge case, so maybe Apple can remedy that with a smaller, sleek case, a slightly stripped down system (no duals, less slots/bays/whatever) and come up with a real winner.

Gosh, I hope so. The Power Mac case is humongous!