Why no headless iMac equivalent?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by theSeb, Apr 18, 2011.

  1. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #1
    I am not sure if this is the right forum, because it could go into any of the desktop sub-forums...

    Why can't apple produce something to fill the range between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro for those that would like an Apple desktop machine with desktop CPUs and GPUs with the ability to put a couple of HDDs and maybe a BluRay drive (for data and ripping movies) without an integrated screen?

    I don't want or need another monitor. I already have a good monitor and I don't need to replace it just because I want to upgrade my computer. I simply want something that looks similar to a Mac Pro, with desktop/consumer grade CPUs. The Mac mini is too slow and does not have the storage expansion that I want. The Mac Pro is overkill for my needs, but I may end up getting one anyway if Apple does not release what I actually want.

    Surely I cannot be the only one?

    No, a MBP attached to a monitor with external drives is not the solution before any one suggests it .
     
  2. ascii42 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    #2
    I know exactly how you feel. The bulk of the cost of the Mac Pro is in the case and the Xeon processors. I know for certain I don't need Xeon processors, and I would be content with a tower that didn't weigh a ton like the Mac Pro does.
     
  3. iLucas macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2011
    Location:
    Indiana
    #3
    Because if they produced say a $1200 tower with better specs then the mini, but not as good as the mac pro it would take away the sales of the mac pro. I'm sure theres a lot of people similar to you that do not need the power of the mac pro, but need more than the mini and do not want the iMac, so they infact buy the mac pro, keeping its sales up.
     
  4. Mactrillionaire macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2010
    #4
    Well, I think that sometimes the answer is in the question. If you want a Mac, but don't need much power, Apple would like you to buy a Mac mini. If you want something more than that with a beautiful display, Apple would like you to buy an iMac. If you would like lots of power or some configurability, Apple would like you to buy a Mac Pro. Apple doesn't offer another option because they are minimalists (that is, they feel like what you are asking for is already offered in the Mac Pro).
     
  5. DannyBres macrumors 65816

    DannyBres

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    That will compromse their Mac Pro sales.

    If you are a professional needing more power than an iMac currently you have to buy a Mac Pro another model would just reduce these sales.

    Why not buy a refurb?


    Refurbished Mac Pro 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon

    Originally released early 2009
    One 2.93GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processor
    3GB (3 x 1GB) of 1066MHz DDR3 ECC memory
    640GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7200 rpm
    18x SuperDrive (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
    NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512MB GDDR3 memory

    for £1900

    What do you use your mac for?! Why is an iMac i7 2.93 16gb with 1 raid array over firewire 800 and 4 USB 2 ports, not enough for you?

    I agree the screen situation is a pain but hey you get an amazing 27" display with it!
     
  6. aristobrat macrumors G5

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    #6
  7. theSeb thread starter macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #7
  8. VPrime macrumors 68000

    VPrime

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2008
    Location:
    London Ontario
    #8
    he never said the iMac hardware wasn't enough for him, just that he doesn't need the screen.

    Though the question is kind of silly... I can ask why doesn't Lamborghini or Ferrari make a car with out the body if all I want is the frame and engine?
    The answer is simple, it is because they just don't want to ;)
     
  9. theSeb thread starter macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #9
    A refurb may be an option...


    I use my mac to run my business, write code (both xcode and windows), rip movies, stream media and various other bits and bobs. I am not a patient person and don't have the time to wait for things to happen, but I don't believe that I need the power of a Mac Pro to compile. However, having said that, multiple VMs to test would benefit from powerful CPUs.

    The iMac 2.93 would be perfect for my needs, if it didn't have a screen, but, as things currently stand, it's not an elegant solution. I don't want the iMac display because I already have a 24" monitor. Two of them on my desk will look weird. I am unfortunately OCD when it comes to these things and having a 24" and a 27" monitor just won't do.

    Also I would prefer my storage to be inside the computer and not out. I already have a NAS box, I don't want another box cluttering up my home office. I want things to be neat and tidy - tower with plenty of internal storage that is always available for streaming and testing stuff and NAS for backups.

    I'll probably shell out of the Mac Pro in the end because it makes sense for tax purposes, despite my ranting.
     
  10. theSeb thread starter macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #10
    Actually, I think the question is more like, why can't Porsche make a 4 door saloon that is as quick as a 911 turbo. And they did!
    :)
     
  11. Phil A. Moderator

    Phil A.

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Location:
    Shropshire, UK
    #11
    And that's exactly why Apple don't do a headless machine between the Mini and the Mac Pro: If they did, you would have bought that, but because they don't they know you (and people like you) will buy the Mac Pro, even if you don't feel you need all the power
     
  12. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #12
    Mac Pro is nothing else but a sub-1500$ PC with a fattier price tag. Equivalent workstation with Xeon CPU costs around 1300$ from Dell when I last checked. What you really want is a cheaper Mac Pro.
     
  13. Herdfan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    #13
    So why doesn't the iMac take sales away from the Pro. Here we are on the cusp of a refresh of the iMac which if the rumors of the Sandy Bridge and TB are true, will make the iMac a very powerful machine.

    I think the issue is it would take sales away from the iMac. So price it accordingly. Make a box maybe the size of 3 Mini's stacked on top of each other with configurations similar to the iMac line. Then sell it for less than the iMac, but at a premium so there is more profit in it.

    As environmentally conscience as Apple is, why do they want me to buy something I don't need (monitor) so that an old one will end up in a landfill somewhere?
     
  14. DannyBres macrumors 65816

    DannyBres

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2007
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    You aready have a NAS and a 24" screen, you crave tidyness and you dont need the power of an Mac Pro.

    Your options in my opinion:

    Buy a Mac Pro (~£1900)

    or

    Sell your 24" (~£100)
    Buy an iMac (~£1700)
    Upgrade NAS (~upto £300)

    they would cost the same.

    The iMac would also add a wow factor to your office when meeting clients! :p
     
  15. G4er? macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Location:
    Temple, TX
    #15
    The one computer Apple won't build is the only Mac I want to buy.

    Arguments that a mid range Mac would kill iMac sales or kill Mac Pro sales aren't always valid.

    The Mac Pro isn't just overkill for me in terms of capability it is also overkill in size. I don't want something that is bigger and heavier than the PowerMac G4 I have.

    The iMac isn't for me. I do not want a built in screen nor do I want to buy plastic overlays to try to turn the glossy screen into a matte screen. I have a perfectly good monitor.

    What I do find curious is the number of Mac users that have said, "I you want a mid sized computer running OSX build a Hackintosh."

    I rather Apple build one.
     
  16. 50548 Guest

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2005
    Location:
    Currently in Switzerland
    #16
    Oh boy, here comes the fabled xMac again...the rumor that refuses to die...1996 Performas anyone? :D
     
  17. dwarnecke11 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2009
    #17
    Considering what a poor value the mini is when you pair it with an Apple display, a headless iMac with an Apple display would be a terrible value. The 21.5" and 27" iMac displays are very high quality IPS units (although not immune from QC issues).

    Of course, if you have an existing display and you just want a more powerful mini, there certainly is a void between the Pro and mini. I'm just not sure if it would be a profitable venture for Apple.
     
  18. theSeb thread starter macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #18
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

    I can't see why not. If it was £300 or £400 cheaper than the equivalent iMac, there would be plenty of profits for Apple to have.
     
  19. theSeb thread starter macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #19
    Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)

    I am not so sure that a headless iMac would take away sales from the mac pro. It's also easier and cheaper to manufacture than an iMac. I reckon it would carve a niche for itself and enhance the model line-up. Cheaper pricing with equivalent desktop grade internals would encourage more sales. Some people that truly need the power of a mac pro would still buy it, but I think that new buyers would be interested in this as well. As things stand, mac pros account for very little of Apple's revenue.

    From a profit point of view, whether you shift a couple of cheaper units versus one more expensive one, you're still making a profit.

    Hellhammer, I recall a thread on here a year ago where various posters showed that the mac pro in dual CPU configruations is only slightly more expensive than the equivalent Dell workstations. The picture looked a bit worse when comparing the single CPU models. I don't recall seeing Dell workstations for that cheap. Has the situation changed?
     
  20. Hellhammer Moderator

    Hellhammer

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Location:
    Finland
    #20
    The situation was a lot better before Nehalem Mac Pros. Back then Mac Pro was a great deal. DP Mac Pro is still a good deal but last time I checked an equivalent SP Dell was less than 1500$.
     
  21. Diesel-Benz macrumors member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2011
    #21
    xMac has been a desire for over 15 years, ain't gonna happen in Steve's lifetime.
     
  22. G4er? macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Location:
    Temple, TX
    #22
    Problem for Apple is the number of people sitting on the fence. How many are buying nothing from Apple because of this gap? How many are buying from Apple but aren't truly satisfied with their purchase? How many are buying the mini or an iMac that doesn't have any internal expansion and are detracting from Apple's carefully thought out designs by having to clutter up their desks with a bunch of external devices. We can't all afford Mac Pro's nor does everyone have the room for something that large.

    I can't bring myself to accept the compromises I would have to make buying a mini or iMac. I can't afford a Mac Pro. I want a mid sized machine. I'm close to throwing in the towel after owning Macs for 18 years and going Windows. Kind of sucks to give up the OS you like because you can't get the computer size and features that work for you.
     
  23. carlgo macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    #23
    Apple has always seemed strangely obstinate on this. It would be a popular product and simply involves putting existing components into a different box, a stylish box for sure.

    Perhaps a fear of unfavorable price/spec comparisons in this very competitive part of the the industry, maybe just a Jobs thing...
     
  24. sinser macrumors 6502a

    sinser

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2003
    #24
    It's a shame that Apple doesn't really give us an option.
    I hate the horrible iMac glossy screen, Mac Pro looks like overkill, so basically I have no Apple desktop :-(
     
  25. old-wiz macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2008
    Location:
    West Suburban Boston Ma
    #25
    There's also the issue of support; if you could just open the box and replace the video cards as well as other stuff, then Apple would have to decide which video cards to support.
     

Share This Page