The Return of an Apple Cube... as an iMac?

[~Shard~]

Re: Re: New iMacs for sure, but so soon?

Originally posted by primalman
Where are you getting this info? Jobs will probably never give another Keynote at the summer Macworld, be it in NY or Boston , he will no doubt be there at MWSF.

I just assumed that since no news has been made yet about Jobs giving the keynote, that he probably isn't going to. And I guess based on that, I assumed that nothing too earth-shattering would be announced. Sure, maybe a couple product announcements (G5 xServes, LCDs, ???), but not a whole lot of amazing news.

So, a couple assumptions I guess - that's all! Just my $0.02...

 

[hulugu]

Re: Re: Lets hear it for the mac 128...

Originally posted by greenstork
I used to play Net-Trek at our school computer lab. It must have been one of the first multi-player games, what ever happened to that.

Net-Trek, yay I freakin' loved that game, that and Sim City.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

you know if apple did a cube or new imac that it would look different because they think different, so what would it look like? aluminum? plastic? colors? changing colors? who knows? any concepts? Arn is going to hate me

 

[Phil Of Mac]

Re: Re: Re: New iMacs for sure, but so soon?

Originally posted by ~Shard~
I just assumed that since no news has been made yet about Jobs giving the keynote, that he probably isn't going to. And I guess based on that, I assumed that nothing too earth-shattering would be announced. Sure, maybe a couple product announcements (G5 xServes, LCDs, ???), but not a whole lot of amazing news.

So, a couple assumptions I guess - that's all! Just my $0.02...

They usually don't announce those things three months in advance. More like three weeks. And MWSF has always been huge.

 

[~Shard~]

Re: Re: Re: Re: New iMacs for sure, but so soon?

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac
They usually don't announce those things three months in advance. More like three weeks. And MWSF has always been huge.

Fair enough - you guys have been following these events far longer than I, (I've been into Macs for only 8 months or so!), so I stand corrected!

 

[mgcman]

With Nintendo GameCube Circuitry Built In!

see http://www.macgamecube.com for the details. The GameCube is, of course, a cube

 

[GregA]

I think there's a lot to be said for a headless eMac (or headless iMac - once it's headless... it's the same thing right?).

Many PCs are small boxes now, and people like options for their monitors. Whether you imagine an iMac or eMac without the screen, a cube, or even an iBook without screen or keyboard - there are a few options for Apple. Some buyers might already have their own speakers (& USB mouse?), so another place to cut price. Many people want to put the computer under their monitor so a flat top could be useful.

On the topic of various product lines, a few people suggested Apple stereo appliances. Steve Jobs said he didn't want the PC merging with the TV - but that leaves lots of consumer-appliance options. The iPod was a new way of thinking about walkman - what can Apple do for your TV & stereo space? NOT computers, but stereo appliances built for specific functions.. (and hence cheaper!)

Lastly... a home server? Great idea but it would have to be VERY different to a business server. For instance - it might be an all in one box, preconfigured, with little expandability. A firewall, proxy, router, network hub, airport, mail server, and share files and profiles. Who knows, maybe it would look like a cube?

... Actually, give me 2 of those servers for a couple of small offices, and throw in an easy configurable VPN between them (use iChat to find each other?) and I'm a buyer.

 

[iEric]

All I'm waiting for is the iMac with a G5..i dont care if its the same casing or the cube. Anythinig that Apple makes is beautiful

 

[finelinebob]

Re: Re: Re: Re: it figures...

Originally posted by ClimbingTheLog
That's what Conduction is for.

The new iMac will be a cube machined from a solid piece of aluminum. The case is the heatsink. The G5 and the hot switching transistors will be mated to the 'case' for cooling.

One friend who has a Cube has one huge problem -- her cat loves to sit on top of it. Nice, warm spot. Flat. Big enough for her when curled up (small cat). Sure, it's a bit problematic for the Cube (covering the vent, rolling on and off of the on/off button, etc.), but kitty's gotta have her warm spot.

Given the amount of heat that would need to be conducted away from a G5 and all of its required circuitry, I'm afraid the poor kitty would get fried on a G5 Cube. So, given several posters' love of the half-dome iMac and the need for a conducting surface that could maxmimize heat dispersal, maybe the next Cube should be a Sphere [if I remember my calculus correctly, a sphere maximizes surface area/volume].

[ps: my friend uses a very swanky, small aluminum mesh wastebasket placed upside-down over the Cube to keep it cat-free ... for those overly concerned about either the cat's or the Cube's welfare ... please don't call the SPCA or SPCM(acs)!]

 

[TomSmithMacEd]

What do you guys have against the eMac? In benchmarks with the same memory it outperforms the 15" flat panel iMac, if you aren't gaming (which macs aren't for) then you are set! I know I am.

 

[joshbuddy]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: it figures...

[if I remember my calculus correctly, a sphere maximizes surface area/volume].

err.. its the other way around


a sphere minimizes the surface area to volume ratio. i still think a cube (cube-ish) design would fare best... i mean, a semisphere sitting on my desk would just look out of place. the inability to stack them is also a bit of a liability. Why would you EVER want to stack them i hear you ask?

http://space-simulator.lanl.gov/photos/ss1.jpg

let that be your answer

*j*

 

[macMaestro]

The cube has a very nice spot in Apple's lineup - a spot that otherwise is conspicuosly empty.

Also, I think Apple will go with an aluminum apple on white plastic look. Aluminum will stay a pro material.

 

[lind0834]

To quick for the G5 in an iMac?

Anybody remember how long the G3 was in the CRT iMac after the G4 was introduced? It was like a year or two wasn't it? I think it would take a miracle to get a G5 into the FP iMac that fast.

I would like to see an update to the iMac though. The first G3 iMacs where tray loading, then they got slot loading. The first G4 imacs where tray loading.......

Here's to hoping.

 

[MrMacMan]

Originally posted by Phil Of Mac I think Apple's desktop product line should go something like this:

Power Mac G5
Dual Processor (2.0, 2.2, 2.4)

G5 Cube
Single Processor (2.0, 2.2), fanless, made for business and upper consumers, can be connected into XGrid.

iMac G5
Single Processor (1.8, 2.0), lower price, all-in-one, price comparable to Cube.

eMac G4
Pumped to G4 max.

I honestly think that the reason Power Macs are outselling iMacs is all the pent-up demand for the 970. The iMacs are pretty overpriced now, but that's only because they're G4's. And heck, I almost bought one. But I'm happier with Kira. [/B]

Thats really nice... but I think alot too powerful for the machines to be upgraded to.

You would have the iMac G5 and the cube G5 duking it out...

They would kill each other.

Along with the fact that
Its impossible to have 0 Fans for the G5 Processor

Sorry, even if there we 5 fake fans in the G5 PowerMac you would still need 2 fans.

That is absurd...

Originally posted by mgcman
see http://www.macgamecube.com for the details. The GameCube is, of course, a cube

Measure the gamecube, tell me its a cube without lying when you come back.

I have one, its very nice... but not a cube.


I'd rather the iMac (still G4) be at like:
1.0
1.2
1.4 Models

The Cube is a G5:
1.6
1.8
2.0 Models

PowerMac G5:
2.0
2.2
2.4- 2.6?

 

[NeXTDev]

Return of the Cube!

I don't think we need an iMac. Like the grid shown earlier, the eMac is really what people want in the low end - bare bone cost, harder to damage and does well in a variety of resolutions CRT, all-in-one construction for durability and compactness. It is what should have been the new iMac instead of the iLamp.

As for the cube... make it larger so that it isn't as difficult to build. The market segment is prosumer/corporate or pros that don't need the slots. It has to have a G5 for marketing reasons - 1.4 and 1.6GHz G5's, 700/800MHz FSB, 333MHz DDR SDRAM, GeForce FX 5200/Radeon 9600 (dual display) AGP4X, 512MB RAM with 3 DIMM slots for 3GB max, single 7200rpm low noise ATA 80/120GB hard drive (no need for SATA here), Combo/SuperDrive, USB2, Firewire 400 & 800, Gigabit Ethernet, Bluetooth ready, Airport Extreme ready, no modem, no slots. It should cost $999 in its base config and be $1499 in its max "better" config.

It should also have cooling zones with temperature controlled slow speed fans just like the PowerMac G5, but the zones are vertical, not horizontal.

It should be steel - not aluminum or polycarbonate. It can have a brushed steel exterior, but the emphasis should be on low cost while still looking good and distinctly Apple (at least, Apple's current industrial design).

I think such a system would sell - and sell well.

In conjunction, the PowerMac G5 should be boosted to 1.8GHz, dual 1.8GHz, and dual 2.2GHz with the entry machine dropping the SuperDrive to go Combo and sell at $1699. The middle machine should move to $2499. Drop the silly non-PCI-X in the base machine and bump to to a full DDR400 with 512MB on the base machine and 1GB (using 4 slots) on the upper machines.

That would then be a strong lineup with few weaknesses. Apple can't afford to fall behind here - it must keep the pressure on and gain some serious marketshare NOW!!

 

[wdlove]

I'm definitely looking forward to MWSF January '04 to celebrate the 20th aiinversary of the Mac. Never really liked the look of the base of the iMac. I think that the Cube look would be much more stylish. The added aluminum look would be awesome.

 

[sXe]

this won't happen. why would apple make the iMac with a G5? that would totally disrupt the pro/consumer lines and there doesn't appear to be a new chip in the future anytime soon for apple. maybe as a 20th anniversary machine, but not an iMac. the iMac part is wrong, the cube is right, and the 20th anniversary part is also carrying some truth. don't get all excited and expect a new iMac at MWSF in January. They'll keep the old form more likely than not.

 

[BWhaler]

All I know for a fact is AI is wrong. That's all I'll say since I have my own interests to protect, but don't get yourself too worked up about a iMac cube anytime with no monitor any time soon.

For those of you who don't have the fact base to know for sure, it should be pretty obvious if you think about it from a company trying to make as much money per unit perspective.

Sure, I'd love one too. But come January, there are going to be some pretty disappointed people, I suspect.

I honest to God think AI just makes stuff up.

 

[blurtigo]

I'd love to see the Cube return, as I'd go for that rather than getting the upcoming fanless accelerator card for it. But if it does I expect it to be as a limited 20th anniversary Mac. They know this will sell, as it will be perfect upgrade to those who still use and love the Cube.

But I think a cube iMac with screen would be pretty ugly. I think the base of the current ones is already a bit too big, especially on the 15" model. A cube base would only make that stand out even more. And I don't think you can change the iMac from an all-in-one design with screen either, as that is what has always defined the iMac.

I think the next obvious step for the iMac is to do ayway with the base altogether. A tablet, with a docking station for when you want to use it at the desk. Combined with the bluetooth keyboard & mouse, it would make one very funky system. Totally wireless.

The only question is whether the consumer is really ready for something like that just yet.

 

[xDANx]

Re: Market share and the $599 G4 Box

Originally posted by Tux Kapono
3. They need market share not just for programs, but increasingly for web sites. A lot of them just don't work on Macs.

4. I have a feeling we'll be surprised at the introductory price point. This may be the $599 G4 box mentioned a while ago that overwhelmingly received positive feedback. I personally think it's Apple's key to salvation.

this is only vaguely off topic...

i'm beginning to think that apple isn't interested in expanding market share (much). they seem to be quite happy remaining around the size they are with a customer base generally equally as happy spending more than everyone else on computers. and apple's size allows a degree of control over the entire computing experience that a much larger company would probably get taken to court over every other week. apple likes it's fat margins and brand image as the computer for creative professionals and discerning end users. apple could probably put out a cheap headless mac in a heartbeat...but why would they even want to? the only thing it could possibly bring is increased market share...which everyone seems to assume, for perfectly understandable but cliched reasons, is a positive thing. but it doesn't necessary mean higher profits and more control...in fact, with the current state of the computer industry a good case could be made that it means opening up a very large door to the opposite. apple's current business model seems to be working just fine, especially considering its new technological inputs (IBM/G5).

apple doesn't need saving anymore. i can't see them introducing a low-end headless mac...apple simply doesn't compete on price and probably never will. if you think huge market share is really important then you'll probably disagree, but stop and think about what it would mean for apple to grow a great deal beyond where it is now and how hard it would be for everything that makes apple apple to remain intact.

niche: n 1: a position particularly well suited to the person who occupies it

 

[xDANx]

Originally posted by macMaestro
The cube has a very nice spot in Apple's lineup - a spot that otherwise is conspicuosly empty.

i'm not convinced that "pro all-in-one" is a big hole in apple's lineup. actually, i'm not even sure it's a hole at all...more like a chasm...like the one that the marketing department would fall into should it ever try to promote something like this.

 

[SeaFox]

Originally posted by xDANx
i'm not convinced that "pro all-in-one" is a big hole in apple's lineup. actually, i'm not even sure it's a hole at all...more like a chasm...like the one that the marketing department would fall into should it ever try to promote something like this.

I'd like to know what Wintel machines qualify as "Pro" All-In-Ones. Seems like an oxymoron to me.

I also wonder if the 12" Powerbook could be listed in the High-End Consumer Laptop slot. Or the 1.6Ghz G5 in the High End Consumer Headless.

 

[voicegy]

Originally posted by wdlove
I'm definitely looking forward to MWSF January '04 to celebrate the 20th aiinversary of the Mac. Never really liked the look of the base of the iMac. I think that the Cube look would be much more stylish. The added aluminum look would be awesome.

I'm trying to imagine the current iMac chrome arm and flat screen on top of a cube, and my gag reflex starts up...talk about looking even MORE like a table lamp...ah, but to each his own, my kind-hearted fellow MacRumor's member...

When the iMac got its bigger screen, that made the machine just about perfect...it was a better balance between the dome and the screen size. Chuck that stupid cd tray for a slot loader, couple it up with wireless keyboard and mouse, and that's a handsome machine, IMO.

To mess with the iMac current form factor would be a high challenge, and I'm most curious to see if the rumored "face lift" of the iMac turns out to be true.

No doubt that there is much anticipation and excitement regarding an "anniversary" machine. The last special edition machine (the 20th Anniversary Mac, which was actually a celebration of Apple Computers' 20th Year as noted by arn) was NOT done on Steve's watch...when he came back, as you all recall, he bargained-basmented the price of the remaining stock (those baby's went for 10 grand...he reduced the remaining down to just under 2 grand) and, of course, they flew out the door and still fetch around 2 grand on the open market.

That action by Steve showed that he didn't want to be associated with it...now, if that means he just didn't want to be associated with THAT particular machine (makes sense, since he had no hand in it) or that he doesn't want to be associated with ANY machine that is part of a limited-edition anniversary-marking device....well, that's anyoneÕs' guess.

He may feel that, in these times, to market such a device "wouldn't be prudent"...but I'm willing to bet that the significant upcoming dual anniversaries (20 Years of Macintosh / 25 Years of Apple Computer) is just too tempting of a milestone for his beloved garage-started company to pass up.

It is with baited breath that I wait eagerly for January's MacWorld...this is one NOT to miss, is bound to have a surprise or two, and may, just MAY, give us a "babe" limited-edition machine (albeit expensive, but who cares, we'll ALL want one!) that reflects the many years that Apple has survived the worst of times and will, hopefully, KNOCK OUR SOCKS OFF!!!

 

[Awimoway]

Re: Re: Market share and the $599 G4 Box

Originally posted by xDANx
i'm beginning to think that apple isn't interested in expanding market share (much).
. . .

Your whole post is very well put. I think the comparisons Jobs has made to BMW ought to be a clue. It's not for everyone, but it is a vastly superior experience for those who are willing to sacrifice for it. On the other hand, Apple does need to make a profit. Are they making much of one? And it does seem that even in the last couple of years they have, fairly often, made statements about gaining marketshare or lamenting the fact that no matter what they do, they don't seem to gain much. Maybe I'm wrong about that and I'm confused by the daily statements of this nature by Mac fans. I know I'm going to start paying a lot more attention to whether Apple itself ever says anything like this.

But another possible flaw in this take is that Apple does answer to its shareholders. I'm not sure they are or would be satisfied with an elite, high-paying 5% marketshare. A minority, certainly, of say 10-20% might be acceptable, but I don't think Apple is making much of a profit right now (correct me if I'm wrong; I think most of their financial security comes from cash, savings, stocks, etc.) and Apple has been particularly cryptic about the profitablity of their Apple Stores.

But it's a good thought that likely has a lot of truth to it.

 

[voicegy]

A quote I picked up from the net:

"Analysts shouldn't view the stores solely as a profit/loss balance sheet, but instead see it as a marketing program to change public perception."

From the same article, something that I really took no notice of the many times I've been in our local Apple store, but now that I think about it, is pretty darn cool:

"Apple doesn't have those terrible security gates at the doorway. You know the ones that screech with malice when you walk out with a product for which they forgot to deactivate the theft-deterrent security tag. The Apple Store runs on the honor system, and as one leaves the store one has the sensation of being a person and not just another number in the consumer herd. It's a first-class experience from entrance to exit."

Not to mention the best public restrooms you'll ever find in a mall. (point those out to someone next time you bring a newbie to an Apple store..it always makes 'em gasp)