Small Form Factor(SFF) - return the Cube?

[Mav451]

That probably is true. Not that Apple really has much of a choice in the matter...

I wonder how much PPC and the chipset differences have/or have nothing to do with the different Video Card bios?

 

[rueyeet]

Get rid of Jobs and find someone from the PC world that knows whats going on and who wants to sell to consumers not just a bunch of Pro's.

How about Gateway CEO (and founder) Ted Waitt? He should have time for a CEO-ship, since he's giving up the CEO spot of his own company to eMachines' CEO Wayne Inouye. Doesn't even have to worry about his retail stores anymore.

Apple will never beat Dell at the low-cost, high-volume game that has sent every other PC manufacturer scrambling for profits. Alienware wouldn't either, which is why that's not their strategy. What thatwendigo was trying to say is that it's a choice between selling to the masses for low prices, and relying on volume to make up for low margins; or selling to at higher prices to a smaller market, and making up the difference on the smaller volume in the higher margins. Apple and Alienware have both gone the second road, since Dell's got the first pretty well blocked off in the computer market. Neither Apple nor Alienware will probably ever have significant market share.

Where Apple and Alienware differ, and where your main beef seems to lie, is in the customization offered to the buyer. But that, too, is a difference in retail philosophy. Alienware offers the high level of customization that it does because of its roots in providing tricked-out, top-of-the-line systems for gamers, who are used to the concept of tweaking and modding their machines, fine-tuning components to maximize performance. That kind of consumer would settle for nothing less than absolute freedom to define their own system.

Apple is not serving that kind of consumer. There are those who would go to Alienware's site and have no clue which graphic card was better, and not care. There are those who find that a site like Dell offers so many choices that it's confusing. There was a time in Mac history (the Performas) when there were so many models with so many spec sheets that no one could tell them apart, and it hurt sales. For these consumers, the fact that a Mac comes with what they need (because we're not talking about the Mac users who know or care about their graphics card--those are the pro users), doesn't have a million confusing options, and is usable for most people most of the time is what they care about.

If you want hyper-configurability along with a low price, you are indeed better off on the x86 side of the fence. The Alienware machines you're looking at are probably the better choice---for you. But then, you aren't the consumer that Apple is targeting (much to your annoyance, it seems).

 

[cyberddot]

Thanks, again

I guess what the thread meant to suggest was that some of us would be willing to drop Apple-Dollars on a system that is like the iMac, only on one that is a little better. As others have said, Apple's already got the sealed box that is eMac. The iMac could provide that transitional box with limited user-end upgradability. That version would cost more in order for Apple to profit from the upgradable and therefor more enduring piece of art. Soon? Probably not, but the Cube wasn't pulled from the line up with no hope to return to it, or a similar footprint.

Others might start thier own "beef" thread(s) which will provide ample opportunity for you unemployed psychiatrists and economists with what appears to be a great need to assuage those deep seated resentment(s) of Steve Jobs, or the simian fascination with shiny green boxes. Oops, I stepped down a level didn't I?

Thanks for your consideration, and you more level headed approach to staying on topic, or starting your own conversation.

Cheers,
Dot