Why is there a Mac truck sized hole in the Apple desktop product line?

[fernmeister]

I think it's funny that not only is it consistently Apple vs Ever Other PC Maker in terms of market share (as opposed to listing the market share of Apple, Dell, Gateway, Sony, HP, etc.,) but profitability also gets thrown out the window as a measure of success as well. Besides Dell, Apple has been the only computer company to consistently turn a profit (anyone compared Apple and Dell stock prices recent?). Compaq used to be a major player. IBM used to be a major player. Gateway used to have B&M stores in major markets. Market share don't mean squat if it's costing you boatloads of money to get it. Apple went that route in the clone era and it started to kill the company.



Lethal

Relative Market Caps speak to this,

Apple - $161B
Dell - $65B
IBM - $157B
HP - $135B
Gateway - $176B

 

[saltyzoo]

Relative Market Caps speak to this,

Apple - $161B
Dell - $65B
IBM - $157B
HP - $135B
Gateway - $176B

How much of that 161B is mac vs iPod? That would be a more telling number.

I have a basic question about an underlying assumption here: Namely that Apple should provide a product lineup that covers every type of consumer? Somebody brought up Peterbilt earlier. They build big giant trucks. People that buy their trucks probably like them and buy more. However, since I don't need a big giant truck I go to the Honda dealership and buy a Civic.

Oh, and a much better analogy would be if Peterbilt refused to sell their truck without a $90,000 trailer. If I already own a nice trailer, or my business doesn't require a trailer I have to buy a Mac (the truck not the computer ) or waste 90grand.

 

[slu]

How much of that 161B is mac vs iPod? That would be a more telling number.

Now your argument is in a much better context....

Market Cap is the value of all the outstanding shares of common stock. So current price times number of outstanding shares is the market cap. This is the value the market places on these companies. There is no way to attribute any of that 161B directly to "Mac vs. iPod". Certainly the success of the iPod and renaissance of the Mac helped this number go way up, but this number also reflects many other things including future speculation on the part of investors on where Apple is going and how well sales will be in the future.

As I stated back on the first page, and as many others have stated, if this market was profitable for Apple, they would enter it. They have proven that they will not sacrifice profitability for market share. If and when a mid-range tower will be profitable and will increase overall Mac sales, then you will see one. And not one second before.

 

[contoursvt]

I'm still using my 21" Trinitron CRT moniotors which are 10 years old. Works perfectly. There is absolutely no need to ditch monitors if they are working fine and if people are happy with the size. I have gone through numerous computer configurations without the need to toss a monitor or spend more to buy a computer that had a built in screen when it didnt need to be built in. The imac is IMO a wasteful purchase. Without the ability for adding / changing cards and a built in monitor, its just begging to go into a landfill sooner for the majority of people.



PS. I have never ever in my life met anyone that couldnt figure out how to plug in a monitor. The 55 year old book keeper at my work managed to figure out how to plug in her keyboard, mouse, monitor and printer on a new Dell purchase. She only called to ask about her printer software.

Actually, you'd be surprised how many people find that intimidating enough. The assumption that everyone is familiar with what they're doing with a computer just shows your blindness.

No, I buy what Macs are there for the work I need to do now, instead of whining about what Macs aren't available on some forum... I had an OK monitor, a tower was too large for the small space, leaves me with the MBP really, to do the work I do. And sure, I can't upgrade the hard drive that easily without pulling the thing apart, but it can be done or I can use externals... I've been through enough desktop machines and Apple realise it's a stagnant market.

The day you see a midrange tower from Apple is the day after the iMac is gone. Simple as that... and until then, you've got some options and compromises you have to make if you want to use a Mac, same as in most things in life.

If all these things are more important to you than the OS, then get a Windows box.

 

[slu]

News Flash for the people complaining about the built in monitor:

You don't have to keep your old iMac if you get a new one! You can sell it. There are many people who can't afford a new Mac that would love to buy it from you. And thanks to the internet, this process is rather painless.

Some of you act like Apple:

1. Forces you to upgrade
2. Forces you to throw out your old Mac when you get a new one hence "wasting" a monitor

 

[saltyzoo]

Now your argument is in a much better context.

Market Cap is the value of all the outstanding shares of common stock. So current price times number of outstanding shares is the market cap. This is the value the market places on these companies. There is no way to attribute any of that 161B directly to "Mac vs. iPod". Certainly the success of the iPod and renaissance of the Mac helped this number go way up, but this number also reflects many other things including future speculation on the part of investors on where Apple is going and how well sales will be in the future.

As I stated back on the first page, and as many others have stated, if this market was profitable for Apple, they would enter it. They have proven that they will not sacrifice profitability for market share. If and when a mid-range tower will be profitable and will increase overall Mac sales, then you will see one. And not one second before.

LOL

So the second making 16 wheelers becomes profitable Apple will start making them? Your argument falls flat. There a millions of reasons why Apple might not make them. One may be that they are making a mistake. *gasp* Heresy!

News Flash for the people complaining about the built in monitor:

You don't have to keep your old iMac if you get a new one! You can sell it. There are many people who can't afford a new Mac that would love to buy it from you. And thanks to the internet, this process is rather painless.

Some of you act like Apple:

1. Forces you to upgrade
2. Forces you to throw out your old Mac when you get a new one hence "wasting" a monitor

They do. If your motherboard fries and your iMac is out of service plan you either pay for repairs (if it's not new enough that isn't even an option) or throw out a perfectly good monitor.

If your monitor goes out you either pay for repairs or throw out a perfectly good computer.

There's nothing painless about that.

PS> I think it's funny that all these idiots that can't plug in a monitor are savvy enough to sell and buy computers on a whim.

 

[madmaxmedia]

No that's not the underlying assumption for some of us, and the subject is not inherently childish (though I doubt that was your point.) It's not like the OP is asking for some ultra-niche device. The mid-sized desktop is the most common PC form factor. It's size has proven acceptable to most consumers, it's easy to to add RAM, expansion cards, and upgrade the graphics. And you don't need to replace your existing monitor.

The market size for such a Mac computer is probably decent, but exactly how big everyone is largely guessing at in the dark.

People are failing to see that this is a judgement call between market size AND Apple's design philosophy. There are plenty of compelling arguments on BOTH sides, but everyone seems insistent on shouting and exaggerating that their POV is the only correct one.

As Apple's market share grows, they WILL create new form factors for Macs (as they did with the Mini), in both desktops and notebooks. Exactly what form these new models will take, is anyone's guess for now. People have been pretty horrible at predicting future iPod designs after all.

I have a basic question about an underlying assumption here: Namely that Apple should provide a product lineup that covers every type of consumer? Somebody brought up Peterbilt earlier. They build big giant trucks. People that buy their trucks probably like them and buy more. However, since I don't need a big giant truck I go to the Honda dealership and buy a Civic.

Those saying there is a hole in the product line might as well beg for a Peterbilt minivan. All the arguments hold true. I'm sure they could increase total market share of vehicles sold if they sold minivans and sedans. Hell, why not motorcycles and scooters too? I'm sure there are Peterbilt enthusiasts who would purchase one. Hell, maybe they would pull minivan sales from dodge, ford, and honda.

Life is all about about making value decisions. You have to decide how much you want to run OS X on an Apple box (and i'm ignoring hacks and osX86 cuz that's just buggy and unreliable). If you don't feel it is worth it to give up your old monitor to get a new OS X machine, then don't buy one, and please stop complaining.

This is basic childishness. If you look in my sig you'll see I have an Thinkpad X40. I wanted an ultraportable laptop, a product that Apple didn't offer. So I bought one from somebody else. I didn't come to this forum and cry about the lack of an ultraportable Mac. I bought the product I needed. Is it perfect? No, I wish it ran OS X, but in an imperfect world, it properly balances my needs with what I was willing to pay.

If you want a mid size tower computer, then go buy one from Dell or HP. If you keep complaining that Apple is foolish to not offer one, I'll be back to complain about the lack of a BMW one-half series with a hybrid engine that gets 100 mpg and costs under 20K. Stupid BMW. They have no idea what a mistake they are making.

 

[zap2]

I had a friend in college who ate nothing but junk food. It was such nutrition-free garbage that I don't know how he was still standing. My education was in biochemistry, so I knew how nutrition affects mental ability. I asked him one day to imagine how much better he could do if he ate well. To that he replied. "I'm Student Body President. I'm getting straight As, and I'm going to medical school." Yes he was excellent, but he still was not performing his best.

Apple's tired to fill the product niche, G4 Cube, Single G5...it didn't sell well!

 

[madmaxmedia]

Both were fundamentally flawed in that they were too expensive. Actually, the more accurate way of saying this is that Apple was actually going after a DIFFERENT market than a hypothetical mid-sized/mid-priced desktop.

What most people are asking for is simply a bigger Mini, not an over-engineered, overpriced 2007 Cube.

Apple's tired to fill the product niche, G4 Cube, Single G5...it didn't sell well!

 

[Eidorian]

Apple's tired to fill the product niche, G4 Cube, Single G5...it didn't sell well!

The single processor Power Mac G4 and G5 sold rather well on my campus until the iMac G5 showed up.

I have a department full of MDD alone just because they didn't have built-in monitors. Once the iMac G5 hit 2.0 GHz then it just killed off the single processor Power Mac G5.

 

[bigandy]

I can't believe this discussion is happening again.

They do. If your motherboard fries and your iMac is out of service plan you either pay for repairs (if it's not new enough that isn't even an option) or throw out a perfectly good monitor.

If your monitor goes out you either pay for repairs or throw out a perfectly good computer.

There's nothing painless about that.

Why? Surely you accepted this may happen when you bought the thing.... Same thing I accept buying a MacBook Pro. Same problem there. Should all the notebook owners start crying over this too?

 

[contoursvt]

Not many new switchers realize that Apple charges 2/3s the price of the computer just for a system board. If they were told that ahead of time, they probably would not have purchased it. A notebook is different because people buy a notebook for its portability..its a necessity for travel or work sometimes. A home computer sitting on a desk should not be the same.

The imac is just a batteryless laptop with a seperate keyboard so repair prices will be just the same as a notebook. Just not worth fixing if it breaks. Just toss it away. Now why anyone needs a battery-less notebook at home I dont know. If the screen fails or gets damaged (ie children playing in a room and somehow hitting the screen by accident) then the computer will be trash as well. If the logic board fails, your monitor is trash too. Thats fine, it only takes once for someone to get burnt to realize their mistakes.

I can't believe this discussion is happening again.




Why? Surely you accepted this may happen when you bought the thing.... Same thing I accept buying a MacBook Pro. Same problem there. Should all the notebook owners start crying over this too?

 

[Evergreen]

Both were fundamentally flawed in that they were too expensive. Actually, the more accurate way of saying this is that Apple was actually going after a DIFFERENT market than a hypothetical mid-sized/mid-priced desktop.

What most people are asking for is simply a bigger Mini, not an over-engineered, overpriced 2007 Cube.

Exactly. Why is it impossible to have a midtower (a very popular PC), while a niche machine like the Mini exists in the product line?

 

[hugodrax]

I think this is just Apple trying to get the most out of 2 very different target markets and making sure that each product fits the consumer optimally as to not confuse or upset the consumer.


So lets say Apple sells 200 page college ruled notebooks for students and a fully fledged leather dayplanner with calculator and 5 extra pockets for professionals.

If Apple were to create a between product with 100 page college ruled pages, fake leather, only 1 extra pocket and no calculator, then the fear is that both "students" & "professionals" who buy the median product will only complain about how it doesn't fully suit their needs.

To top that off comes the problem of pricing and cannibalization, if the median product wasn't so gimped and actually satisfied the both Students and Professionals other issues are created for the two existing products on the low and high end.

Still better to cannibalize your own product than have competitors do it for you. They could offer a 1200 dollar mid-tier tower and I would still buy Mac Pros.

 

[hugodrax]

Apple's tired to fill the product niche, G4 Cube, Single G5...it didn't sell well!

No intel chips either, and I never bought an Apple desktop until they went Intel. I think they could a 1200-1500 midtier tower product line. 1 socket penryn solution and it would get a bunch of sales to people who want to switch but do not want pro workstations or laptops or all in one solutions.

 

[contoursvt]

I think Apple has too much $$ invested in notebook parts which explains the mini and imac and of course the notebooks. I believe this is why they wont get into the desktop scene except for the low volume mac pro (compared to imac and notebook sales).

If they did come out with a mid tower design, it would probably wipe out the majority of imac sales and at least 1/2 of the mac pro sales. I would suspect that it might even make a dent in the notebook sales as not everyone buying a notebook actually moves it around. I know people that use notebooks much like desktop machines.

If apple did make a mid tower, something this size would be great. Heck even if they didnt offer a quad core and only a dual core, I think many would buy it. This antec case for example is designed to be quiet, hold 4 drives and offer decent cooling...
http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews/antec_p150/

 

[benpatient]

just wanted to take a second to say i also want a mid tower headless mac.


the arguments against such a machine are weak. weaker than.

 

[Freyqq]

I started a thread about this months ago. I was flamed into oblivion making the same exact point.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/350117/

apple needs a midrange tower.

Apple's tired to fill the product niche, G4 Cube, Single G5...it didn't sell well!

because they were all priced badly for what they were

for under $1000 (really) I can build a desktop that would put any mac desktop to shame. Its unfortunate. If only apple sold OSX separately.

~200 Intel E7650 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115029
~125 mobo http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131187
~140 micro-atx case http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811133035
~60 antec 500 watt http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817371007
~80 320 hd http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822136074
~35 dvd burner http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827151153
~300 geforce 8800GT *when it comes out in a couple weeks
~55 2 gig ram http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227198


TOTAL = $995

this thing is roughly the size of 1.5 mac minis and has greater power than a current mac pro for about 1/3 the price

 

[Eidorian]

this thing is roughly the size of 1.5 mac minis

Even mATX is huge compared to a Mac Mini

and has greater power than a current mac pro for about 1/3 the price

Sadly not true for the E6750.

 

[Freyqq]

Even mATX is huge compared to a Mac Mini

Sadly not true for the E6750.

ok maybe 2 mac minis. Even so..compared to a mac pro this is a tiny tiny machine.

depends on the usage obviously, but i could build 3 of these for the price of 1 Mac pro..and i'm sure 3 of these would destroy a mac pro in pure processing power, like rendering etc. In 3d apps 1 of these things already destroys a mac pro. Even so, this thing is no slouch at all in a much smaller package for 1/3 the price.

 

[ocbo41]

this thing is roughly the size of 1.5 mac minis and has greater power than a current mac pro for about 1/3 the price

In 3d apps 1 of these things already destroys a mac pro.

Whaaat?? I would like to see some benchmarks against the 3ghz octo
The mac pro would run circles around that rending in maya. Have you ever actually USED 3d apps?

The only thing thats really better is the video card, and if your using it for animation you should be using the Quadro not a card designed for gaming.

If you had 3 of those in a little render farm then you might be ahead by a bit, but add in the license for two more copies of maya and now your way over budget.

**Edit**
And I recall reading an article somewhere that compared the mac pro to a dell and a custom pc and the custom pc with the equivalent hardware was a couple hundred more, and the dell a couple hundred less....not thousands, don't compare an apple with an orange, I wouldn't doubt that would make a nice gaming machine.

 

[gauchogolfer]

It comes down to this: Apple is a multi-billion dollar computer company that has a vested interest in maintaining their growth and profitability. Do you really think that they've not considered every market that their products (existing or otherwise) could go into, and whether or not it makes business sense? If you have all of the resources of Apple working on this, and decide it's not a good idea from a business perspective, why not go with that? Without access to their decision making process, criticizing their conclusion as being wrong seems infantile to me. They've made their decision, and the stock price and market share is at an all-time high. They must really need advice from people here on the forums.

 

[paul619LT]

i agree

 

[Freyqq]

well..they probably considered the profit margins on each possible system and decided that they would make more money in the current configuration versus a different configuration. Secondly, they would lose they're niche status. All apple products are "special". The mac mini is smaller than anything I can think of...even if its a horrible computer. The imac is very nice..for an all in one. The mac pro has 2 xeon processors. None of them are "regular" computers. They're all niche. Niche products have higher margins b\c they can charge more. A midrange tower would not be a niche product. Everyone already builds midrange towers. Therefore, apple would have to compete..directly..with other towers. Competition leads to lower margins.

Apple doesn't care how many units are sold per say..if each unit has a high margin..they're making a profit.

At the same time, the consumer is left without a product that would be beneficial.

 

[randyhudson]

I'm forced to purchase a Mac Pro

Here's a perspective from someone who gave a MacBook to his parents last Chistmas, and has been waiting to pull the trigger on a new Mac ever since:

How does EA justify porting Command & Conquer 3 to Mac OS X when the all-new, 24" iMac couldn't come close to playing this game at native resolution. I was all set to purchase an iMac Saturday, when I noticed my 6-year-old son playing Lego Star Wars on one of the iMacs on display. The new iMac can't even render "rectangular blocks" at a decent clip. This is a brand new "desktop" model and it's maybe half as powerful as my out-dated 7900 GT in my SFF XP box. Reason #1 why I must purchase a Mac Pro: I'm not willing to take a step backwards in graphics.

And to cement my decision NOT to purchase an iMac, one of my hard-drives failed last week. So while in the store, I read up on replacing/upgrading the iMac's internal drive, and it's worse than any notebook. You have to remove the LCD panel from the front to get to the drive. But hey, there's only one screw ;-) ! Reason #2 why I'm forced to purchase a Mac Pro: Replacing a hard drive should be trivial.

Lot's of dual-OS Users would purchase Mac Pros to have access to both OS X and XP (for specific software like games). The Mac Pro is a well-engineered, quiet desktop with plenty of power for games, home video editing, etc., and room for 4 hard drives. Apple needs to recognize the XP->OS X transition period that we live in (for example, I need to configure my Logitech Harmony 880 TV Remote). If you could dual boot XP/OS X from 3 Raptors in RAID 5, without being charged the unnecessary "Xeon premium" or $1K for "server-class" RAID, I think these things would be flying off the shelves. I wouldn't be surprised if people have purchased them primarily to run XP or other operating systems. Although, I bet such buyers would soon find a new religion.

So, I guess I'm waiting for the Mac Pro refresh like many others. The only other real option is a MacBook Pro.