Apple really needs a midrange computer

[yg17]

This is more of a rant, but hey, it might spark some discussion...

Anyways, I've wanted an Intel Mac for awhile now, mainly due to my need to sometimes, albeit rarely, run Windows. And Apple really has no options that fit my need. I want to replace my PowerMac, so my options for a desktop machine are:

Mac Mini: Not enough power or expandable enough.
Mac Pro: What the hell am I going to use 4 cores for? Way too much money and power.

Then there's the iMac. The specs are perfect...but I already have a 20 inch widescreen Dell monitor that I don't want to get rid of, and I don't have the need, nor desk space, for dual monitors with an iMac.

The Mac Mini is great for the average user. The Mac Pro is great for the power user. Then there's those of us right in the middle. I think the iMac is probably meant for us, but when you already have your own monitor, then the iMac option is out.

And I know I'm not the only one, there is a huge hole in Apple's model lineup. Something with the specs of the 2.16GHz C2D 20" iMac, just without the screen and in a slightly larger (more expandable...room for 2 hard drives, at least 1 PCI slot) case for around a thousand bucks would be perfect.

Thoughts? Am I totally insane?

 

[solvs]

This has been talked about many times before. Usually it turns into a big fight. Personally, I would love something like that. It would be perfect for me, and many others who don't want the screen of the iMac, the mini is not enough, and the Mac Pro is far too much with a price tag to match. And really expensive RAM. But I don't see it happening any time soon.

I would love to be proven wrong though.

 

[R.R.Mac]

i agree compleatly . i would love a mid range. they also need a macbook which has a bigger screen. so you would have some 13" and maybe some 15" screens!

 

[WildPalms]

iMac seems pretty midrange to me!

 

[Scarlet Fever]

do we have a poll for this? It's an argument i've heard several times before.

I think you have valid ideas, but the reality is that the market for this type of computer is probably very small. I'd buy one, but thats only because i'd like to put extra sound and graphic cards in. I'd say a vast majority of users don't need this kind of expandability in their computer, and the ones who do probably have enough money to buy a PowerMac/MacPro.

As for solutions to your problem, I can think of two;
-Sell your monitor. You can probably pick up a few hundred for it, which can go towards your iMac.
-Buy a second-hand late-model G5 PowerMac. It shouldn't be too much more than a range-topping C2D iMac, and its still faster in some applications.

As for a 15" MacBook, I don't think the market for this is very big at all; probably smaller than the market for headless iMac.

 

[2ndPath]

Yes, a mid-range Mac with more expansion options than the iMac and without built-in display would be very nice. This would be what I would like for my next Mac.

 

[solvs]

iMac seems pretty midrange to me!

Except it has a monitor built in. And doesn't have an upgradable video card. And can only have a max of 3GB with only 2 slots. And changing the hdd and/or optical drive (which is a slower, laptop type) is difficult. I think it has more of a market than you'd think, especially since it comes up all the time. Not to mention the fact that almost every other mid range PC in the world is like that. If Apple released one at a good price, without crippling it, it would definitely sell.

A larger MacBook, probably not so much, but people seem to want a smaller MBP, which I'm sure would sell. Even a MacBook with a better video card would be nice. I'd like one of those too, and I am not alone. Just because some of you don't want one, doesn't mean there isn't a market.

 

[2ndPath]

Not to mention the fact that almost every other mid range PC in the world is like that.

Unfortunately this might be exactly the reason why Apple doesn't make one. Because the don't want to appear to similar. But then it took Apple 20 years to admit that having more than one mouse button is good and as a result they introduced Mighty Mouse. So we can still hope.

 

[macjackpro]

I don't think you are insane. I'd buy one tomorrow. Also, the C2D desktop chips are cheaper than the notebook chips used in the iMac, and have a faster bus. "Prosumers" like me need the much desired "headless iMac", but with the desktop conroe chip...and as you say, two hard drives.

This is more of a rant, but hey, it might spark some discussion...

Anyways, I've wanted an Intel Mac for awhile now, mainly due to my need to sometimes, albeit rarely, run Windows. And Apple really has no options that fit my need. I want to replace my PowerMac, so my options for a desktop machine are:

Mac Mini: Not enough power or expandable enough.
Mac Pro: What the hell am I going to use 4 cores for? Way too much money and power.

Then there's the iMac. The specs are perfect...but I already have a 20 inch widescreen Dell monitor that I don't want to get rid of, and I don't have the need, nor desk space, for dual monitors with an iMac.

The Mac Mini is great for the average user. The Mac Pro is great for the power user. Then there's those of us right in the middle. I think the iMac is probably meant for us, but when you already have your own monitor, then the iMac option is out.

And I know I'm not the only one, there is a huge hole in Apple's model lineup. Something with the specs of the 2.16GHz C2D 20" iMac, just without the screen and in a slightly larger (more expandable...room for 2 hard drives, at least 1 PCI slot) case for around a thousand bucks would be perfect.

Thoughts? Am I totally insane?

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

To not sell a midgrade Computer without a display is illogical for any computer company. Fact is the world has billions of displays, Its why my last purchase wasnt a Mac. Near nothing Mini,overkill proMac and the yes I allready own a display thankyou iMac. Apple pushes people away because it refuses to sell to the consumer needs & wants. Apple wants to tell people what they need. Not a good business model unless your happy with 5% marketshare.

 

[miniConvert]

Unfortunately there are many big holes in Apple's product lineup. But, quite rightly so, Apple isn't trying to fill them and be the 'one stop shop' for our digital lives. Designing Apple's awe-inspiring products obviously consumes a lot of time and effort, and I just don't think they could successfully design and manage a range of products too much larger than what they already have.

In some ways it absolutely sucks that they don't have a massive range of products designed for just about every persons every need, a la Dell or Nokia, especially for folk like me who aren't satisfied with Apple's current laptop lineup just as the OP isn't satisfied with the desktop lineup. What we have to recognise, however, is that this is Apple - with their distinctive, carefully engineered products - which has chosen to differentiate itself by focusing very narrowly and critically on the product areas it believes it can excel in.

 

[Queso]

I think Jobs pulls away from this idea because the Cube didn't sell. Of course, these days they could do it much cheaper, so it might be more successful, but it's a case of once bitten, twice shy.

 

[2ndPath]

I think Jobs pulls away from this idea because the Cube didn't sell. Of course, these days they could do it much cheaper, so it might be more successful, but it's a case of once bitten, twice shy.

But the cube was really a different product: A powermac was basically stripped from most of its expansion options and put into a small cubic case. This machine relied heavily on its design to sell, especially as it was even more expensive than a powermac, which offered more expansion options. With this concept it is not surprising that the cube failed.

The mid-range Mac people (or at least I) are asking for is really a completely different machine.

And I don't know wether it is entirely correct to say that the Cube failed. It failed as it was originally concepted but parts of the concept live on the the Mac mini which seems to be much more successful than the original Cube.

 

[freebooter]

I had a Mac mini G4 but wanted more speed. I would've bought a headless Mac.
As things were, I bought a 24" iMac and it works great, but I always feel a pang when I realize that there is no way to upgrade the display. The one it comes with is alright, but...
That MacPro is too damn big and the memory is too damn expensive.

Mac-Medium is needed. One with accessible guts.

 

[valdore]

I completely agree with the sentiments about a mid-ranger to fill the gap between the iMac and the MacPro. I would like a mac desktop system with a traditional tower and monitor, but I don't need, nor can I afford, a MacPro. I'll probably just have to suck it up and buy an iMac eventually.

 

[exabytes18]

Yea, Apple really needs a midrange computer. Last month, I was in the market for a new computer. GAaaaa! I wanted a computer with a decent Conroe and a decent graphics card (no monitor necessary). Anyways, Apple seems to be missing my segment of the market, so I built my own PC and have been happy ever since.

 

[dpaanlka]

What a unique idea for a new thread topic!

Although, I do agree a mid-range tower would be awesome. After the Power Mac G5 was introduced, Apple actually had a mid-range tower for a while. It was called the Power Mac G4.