The Paris Mac Revolution: off with it's head

roland.g

macrumors 604
Original poster
Apr 11, 2005
6,560
1,485
Everyone wants a headless Mac, the return of the cube, call it what you will. We all know the gap is there. Minis are great but don't have the expandability and not everyone wants integrated graphics. The new Mac Pro is awesome with Quad Core dual Xeons, but it is more of a monster than the G5 PowerMac was, and no real low end means what do you buy if you want a good computer, expandability and you don't want the integrated display of the iMac.

Give us the headless Mac

Base Model:
2.0 ghz Merom, upgradable to 2.33
250 GB HDD, upgradable to 500, plus a 2nd 500 available
512 MB RAM, upgradable to 2 GB
x1800 video with 128 MB VRAM, upgradable to 256
some way to drive 2 screens or a 30" ACD, whether a graphics card option, or use of the empty pci slot
airport & bluetooth standard
superdrive
keyboard & mouse
Front Row, remote, IR sensor

Base model price: $1499

Nicely equipped: 2.0 ghz, 2 GB RAM, 500 GB HDD - $1999

And offer a discount when adding a display
Bundled with 23" ACD - screen adds $949, with built in iSight & IR sensor

You could make the argument to drop the base to $1399 or $1299, but then you are dropping $300-400 off the 20" iMac after taking out an LCD. They won't want to cannibalize the iMac so much as offer us a prosumer option.
 

Krionis

macrumors newbie
Jun 15, 2006
28
0
I always Though Apple needed an expandable lower end computer. But i think that it should be available really low. Like 800$. I dont know exactly what the specs would be but it could have a conroe supporting motherboard and 512 ram and some low end gpu. But i think we could really just solve this issue by allowing other computer comapnies to offer OSX or allow us to build custom comouter that we can put OSX onto.
 

killr_b

macrumors 6502a
Oct 21, 2005
816
330
Suckerfornia
The title of this thread is awesome.:D

I figure they have to release a consumer targeted tower or equivalent.
This is Apple, so it might not be a "tower," and that could be the hold up.
The cube is dead (shields up captain) and the pizza box is, yep, unattractive on a desk.
Maybe the Mac Pyramid? :D A nice glass lookin' one... or mirrored...

How else are we gonna gain market share?
I mean of course, while still having a unique Apple steez.

But really, there isn't the propper room in the pricing structure.
A Dell tower will be the price of a Mac Mini, and that's Apple's answer.
 

Yvan256

macrumors 603
Jul 5, 2004
5,034
893
Canada
It's not that complicated...

Give us the headless iMac. And by that I really mean it. Take the boards inside the iMac, make a new case for it.

Introducing "Le Mac".

Introducing it in Paris would allow for the name. ;-)

What Apple really needs, however, is a way to upgrade the GPUs on their computers. Since we're limited to begin with, how about using "laptop PCI"-type graphic cards/modules? (can't remember the name...)

Imagine if you could buy a new GPU module from Apple for the Mac mini, iMac, MacBook and MacBook Pro. Built-to-order options, too (so you're not stuck trying to sell an "intel integrated GPU" module that nobody wants).
 

irishgrizzly

macrumors 65816
May 15, 2006
1,462
1
I think the trouble for us is that Apple knows it customers too well. They could give us a cheap, low end headless mac that has massive expandability options. But they won't because they don't want us to buy a cheap mac that will last 6 years, when they can sell us a more expensive model that lasts 3. And we do.

Until sales of minis and iMacs drop, this is not going to change.
 

roland.g

macrumors 604
Original poster
Apr 11, 2005
6,560
1,485
Dr.Gargoyle said:
Apple might release a mini on steroids, but I very much doubt the return of the Cube. A Cube 2.0 would cannabilize on both mini and Pro sales without any significant increase in total sales.
I disagree. Sure it would cannibalize the Mini a bit, but you're getting someone at a higher price point, and I think there are too many Mac faithful steering away from the Mini because of the GPU and 2.5" drives. It's just not enough. Not to mention, it's the entry level switcher model. They have already hurt their Mac Pro sales by not offering a lower end for under $2000 and so made that machine more of a true Pro model. It appeals to those who really need it, and those who don't see any issue with price. And those people will continue to buy and configure because it is the highest end, baddest thing out there. The headless Mac will get a lot more switchers and give those of us who owned PowerMac G4's & G5's a robust and economical option without the overkill. If they are worried about us not buying as often. First, a midrange pricepoint makes it easier to upgrade more often. Second, I've had my G4 6 1/2 years. And I use it everyday. So it's still up to the individual. Third, go ahead and use a soldiered CPU so all I can do is put RAM, HDD, and GPU changes and when I want more ghz, I upgrade.
 

Dr.Gargoyle

macrumors 65816
Oct 8, 2004
1,253
0
lat: 55.7222°N, long: 13.1971°E
roland.g said:
I disagree. Sure it would cannibalize the Mini a bit, but you're getting someone at a higher price point, and I think there are too many Mac faithful steering away from the Mini because of the GPU and 2.5" drives. It's just not enough. Not to mention, it's the entry level switcher model. They have already hurt their Mac Pro sales by not offering a lower end for under $2000 and so made that machine more of a true Pro model. It appeals to those who really need it, and those who don't see any issue with price. And those people will continue to buy and configure because it is the highest end, baddest thing out there. The headless Mac will get a lot more switchers and give those of us who owned PowerMac G4's & G5's a robust and economical option without the overkill. If they are worried about us not buying as often. First, a midrange pricepoint makes it easier to upgrade more often. Second, I've had my G4 6 1/2 years. And I use it everyday. So it's still up to the individual. Third, go ahead and use a soldiered CPU so all I can do is put RAM, HDD, and GPU changes and when I want more ghz, I upgrade.
First of all, I can see your point and I do see the need. Actually, I did the same when I bought my PM. I bought one of the very last MDD ever sold (PM G5 has been on the market for a year then) just because I wanted to be able to upgrade, so I do understand your need.
Now, let me clarify how I see it. With a beefed up mini I meant a mini with a separate GPU and hopefully with one or two 3.5"" HD, two RAM slots. I believe that this machine will be Apples version of a media hubb (iHome). However, I seriously doubt any iHome will be released before Leopard.
Moreover, I also doubt we will see a down sized "cheese grater" since this machine would hurt both iMac & mini sales too much without any significant increase in total sales. (perhaps even mac pro sales) My guess is that a down sized cheese grater would only provide more options for the customers and not provide any significant amount of additional customers.
To summarize things: if Apple have plans to introduce a media hubb in a not too far future, which I do think they will, it will most likely be in the segment you are referreing to. Consequently, I doubt that Apple will introduced anything in this segment before the iHome release, since it would just not make sense businesswise.
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
42
1123.6536.5321
I have been promoting a Conroe mini-tower here (along with Aiden) for quite some time.

For me, it's simple:

An iMac meets all of my current needs from a power perspective - I do not require the quad processing power of a Mac Pro - it would be wasted on me.

However, I would like to have some expandability besides the RAM, etc. What if I want a larger HDD? What if I want to upgrade my video card, or Superdrive? Or, perhaps most significantly, what about the built-in display? All are possible, but not very easily. I don't really want to be playing around with thermal paste, tiny screws, etc.

Further to this, what if my display dies? The rest of the machine is perfectly fine, yet, apart from hooking up an external display, I'd need a new one. Vice versa, if my Mac dies (logic board, HDD, whatever) but the display is still fine, I'm expected to throw out a perfectly good display since I need to buy a new iMac?

Therefore, give me an iMac with a bit more expandability without making me pay significantly more for a Mac Pro which is overkill for my needs.
 

roland.g

macrumors 604
Original poster
Apr 11, 2005
6,560
1,485
~Shard~ said:
Or, perhaps most significantly, what about the built-in display? All are possible, but not very easily. I don't really want to be playing around with thermal paste, tiny screws, etc.QUOTE]

Exactly to all your points. But the display. What if I want a 23" ACD. And while they're at it, give us a bundling discount, $50 for buying the two together.

Shard, thanks for gracing us with your presence. Your input is always appreciated.
 

~Shard~

macrumors P6
Jun 4, 2003
18,377
42
1123.6536.5321
roland.g said:
Exactly to all your points. But the display. What if I want a 23" ACD. And while they're at it, give us a bundling discount, $50 for buying the two together.

Shard, thanks for gracing us with your presence. Your input is always appreciated.
Thanks roland.g, no problem at all. Just speaking my mind. :cool:
 

Dr.Gargoyle

macrumors 65816
Oct 8, 2004
1,253
0
lat: 55.7222°N, long: 13.1971°E
dextertangocci said:
I Want The Cube Back!!!!
You want Apple to introduce a financial failure?
Even if I too would love to see a new Mac model, I doubt Apple is inclined to repeat the mistake of the Cube. The sales figures of the Cube where a flopp to put it mildly. Besides, if I remember it correctly, the Cube wasn't much better in terms of upgradability than the current mini.
 

Grimace

macrumors 68040
Feb 17, 2003
3,541
35
with Hamburglar.
roland.g said:
Base Model:
2.0 ghz Merom, upgradable to 2.33
250 GB HDD, upgradable to 500, plus a 2nd 500 available
512 MB RAM, upgradable to 2 GB
x1800 video with 128 MB VRAM, upgradable to 256
some way to drive 2 screens or a 30" ACD, whether a graphics card option, or use of the empty pci slot
airport & bluetooth standard
superdrive
keyboard & mouse
Front Row, remote, IR sensor

Base model price: $1499

Nicely equipped: 2.0 ghz, 2 GB RAM, 500 GB HDD - $1999
Who would by a Mac Pro if your "nicely equipped" option was $1999? I'm probably the only guy who feels this way, but I think Apple has the marketshare pretty well targeted. I don't think that "everyone" wants a headless mac. The iMac is a fantastic prosumer computer, you just don't have PCI slots or the ability to run a 30" display (the latter seems silly since the main display is built right in.)

just sayin...I think low-end towers are an invention of the Windows world. The all-in-one suits the most people in the mid-range. Serious expandibility (based on what you want to do) is targeted specifically at the Mac Pro line. Is the impetus for this the cost of the Mac Pro or the large casing? Your proposed options would necessitate a fairly large casing...
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
Remember, the iMac is using the laptop chipset -- not the desktop version of the series, the actual laptop chipset.

So it limits the headless iMac possibilities at the moment ...
 

quruli

macrumors regular
Aug 11, 2006
154
0
Sun Baked said:
Remember, the iMac is using the laptop chipset -- not the desktop version of the series, the actual laptop chipset.

So it limits the headless iMac possibilities at the moment ...
What's your point?
 

Chundles

macrumors G4
Jul 4, 2005
11,966
375
Dr.Gargoyle said:
You want Apple to introduce a financial failure?
Even if I too would love to see a new Mac model, I doubt Apple is inclined to repeat the mistake of the Cube. The sales figures of the Cube where a flopp to put it mildly. Besides, if I remember it correctly, the Cube wasn't much better in terms of upgradability than the current mini.
The cube offered user-upgradable RAM, Video card, HDD and even optical drive. It was very extensible within the constraints of the design.

Would have sold much better too had it been priced at something a little less extravagant. Yes, it did flop, but it wasn't the machine's fault, it was the marketing and sales department - they condemned it before it was even released, by the time a proper price point was given it was too late.

The Cube was put on hold, it has never actually been cancelled...:D

But I still don't think they will do it.
 

Dr.Gargoyle

macrumors 65816
Oct 8, 2004
1,253
0
lat: 55.7222°N, long: 13.1971°E
Chundles said:
The cube offered user-upgradable RAM, Video card, HDD and even optical drive. It was very extensible within the constraints of the design.
My bad.
Chundles said:
Would have sold much better too had it been priced at something a little less extravagant.
I seriously doubt that a downsized cheese grater would differ much in that aspect.
Chundles said:
The Cube was put on hold, it has never actually been cancelled...:D

But I still don't think they will do it.
Maybe iHome will bring back something similar...
 

Sun Baked

macrumors G5
May 19, 2002
14,874
57
quruli said:
What's your point?
The gap is for something more than a Mac Mini with a graphics card.

Something based on a Performance Desktop chipset fills the gap.

A machine which would be able to compete with premium tower PCs -- but it needs volume, quite a bit.

For $1499/$1999 people expect a lot more than the 945GM can deliver.
 

roland.g

macrumors 604
Original poster
Apr 11, 2005
6,560
1,485
carletonmusic said:
Is the impetus for this the cost of the Mac Pro or the large casing? Your proposed options would necessitate a fairly large casing...
I think someone else said it here. The iHome or whatever, digital media hub probably won't come out before Leopard. And maybe that is the direction and form to consider.

Price is part of it. Case is also part of it. The iMac is a great computer in terms of all the innards. I just want a separate display, possibly a second HDD. The size really wouldn't have to be more than 3 times the height of the Mini or so, a little deeper, and maybe just a little wider to accommodate 3.5" drives. We throw around the word "cube" but I not saying it has to be cubical or that small, but not really too much bigger. Slot load horizontal at the top, two drives slots below that, ports just below that, GPU and pci below that, RAM below that and CPU/cooling on the bottom. vertical motherboard.
 

QCassidy352

macrumors G4
Mar 20, 2003
10,633
2,773
Bay Area
irishgrizzly said:
I think the trouble for us is that Apple knows it customers too well. They could give us a cheap, low end headless mac that has massive expandability options. But they won't because they don't want us to buy a cheap mac that will last 6 years, when they can sell us a more expensive model that lasts 3. And we do.

Until sales of minis and iMacs drop, this is not going to change.
Exactly. People really need to stop with this "headless imac" nonsense. I know you want it (heck, I'd buy one too), but it's not going to happen.

First, who does this target? Not students, who are better off with space saving macbooks or imacs. Not casual "grandma" users who will never ever upgrade anything on the mac. Not professionals, who want a real pro computer. This appeals to the "knowledgable consumer." This mythical beast is common on MR, but rare in the real world. So we're talking about a small market for this box.

Second, if they're going to sell you an upgradable computer that's going to last and last, they need to get a big chunk of change off you right away (mac pro). If they're going to sell low margin machines, like this one would be, they need to sell them to you more frequently.

So there's not a big enough market, and what market there is wouldn't be very profitable for apple. I don't see it happening.
 

roland.g

macrumors 604
Original poster
Apr 11, 2005
6,560
1,485
QCassidy352 said:
This appeals to the "knowledgable consumer." This mythical beast is common on MR, but rare in the real world. So we're talking about a small market for this box.

Second, if they're going to sell you an upgradable computer that's going to last and last, they need to get a big chunk of change off you right away (mac pro). If they're going to sell low margin machines, like this one would be, they need to sell them to you more frequently.

So there's not a big enough market, and what market there is wouldn't be very profitable for apple. I don't see it happening.
You may be right about the second point. But don't tell me about mythical beasts when there are a lot of PC users out there that fit in this target. So I'm guess there are Mac users too. They also did away with low end Pro towers, even if you configure a Quad 2.0 ghz with no RAM, it is still over $2100. The PowerMac G5's came in under $2000 at one point, and came in single 1.8's awhile ago. So, they did create more of a gap, when prices are supposedly coming down. Maybe there is the issue of purchase frequency, but people are still buying machines more often than they really need them, because they want newer and faster. Like I said before, use a soldiered not socketed CPU and people will buy a new machine for more ghz. Release new models, faster speeds, more drive space, and people buy them.
 

quruli

macrumors regular
Aug 11, 2006
154
0
roland.g said:
You may be right about the second point. But don't tell me about mythical beasts when there are a lot of PC users out there that fit in this target. So I'm guess there are Mac users too. They also did away with low end Pro towers, even if you configure a Quad 2.0 ghz with no RAM, it is still over $2100. The PowerMac G5's came in under $2000 at one point, and came in single 1.8's awhile ago. So, they did create more of a gap, when prices are supposedly coming down. Maybe there is the issue of purchase frequency, but people are still buying machines more often than they really need them, because they want newer and faster. Like I said before, use a soldiered not socketed CPU and people will buy a new machine for more ghz. Release new models, faster speeds, more drive space, and people buy them.
Then is no Gap. The iMac is there to fill this "gap" you speak of. Just because you don't like the iMac doesn't mean it doesn't serve its purpose.

It is not about PC or Mac users. It is about enthusiasts, which don't make up a large portion of people buying PC's.

How many general consumers upgrade beyond memory? Not many.