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

[jnc]

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.

They already have.. today, actually. It's quad core, 2.8GHz. $2299.

 

[iMpathetic]

Still a bit expensive......


oh crap


To, um, go along with my other post, I am completely removed from this discussion and I don't care.

 

[PNW]

I don't think anyone is looking down on anyone, but people do get weary of rehearsing the same arguments over and over again 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. What makes anyone here think they know more about what it would take to produce and market this mythical machine than Apple?

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.



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.

I hate it when I come in late to a thread, a post gets me all riled up and then someone has made my point much better than ever I could have

I imagine there are people out there simply not buying a Mac because there isn't what they want. If anything it'd just sell more Macs overall. With iMacs sales not being greatly affected.

That'd be me. We have a mini (1.8Ghz CD) for our family computer (web, email, calendar, connected to the stereo for music). It's a great little box, but it's noticeably slower than the old P4, running Linux (and XP virtually), that I use for work /play. Plus my box has dual monitors which I'm totally addicted to. The top end iMac has the kind of specs I'd like in my next box, but not only do I not want or need another monitor, the new glossy monitors are really bad for photo work (I'm an amateur, but still I need all the help I can get). That leaves the single processor Mac Pro, which has way more power than I need. I'm also used to spending $1500- $1800 on a CPU, and I'd rather put the extra $ toward photoshop (I'm currently still on 7).

They already have.. today, actually. It's quad core, 2.8GHz. $2299.

In no way can a >$2000 computer be considered "mid-range"