Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Consumer Mac Tower?
- Thread starter kildraik
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The problem with their last consumer tower was that Apple couldn't quite differentiate it from the rest of the line.kildraik said:
Which is where the mini tower format would come in handy.
Was a great machine and I remember we pointed a lot of people to that machine, who wanted an iMac G5 -- but wanted to be able to swap stuff and upgrade.
But Apple killed it and that low-end tower price point.
That is seriously dissapointing, but I hope they go through with trying it again. The Mini's been doing great and I can only guess that the G5 is still running strong (until Mac Pro), but it just seems more reasonable to build a mid-range tower.Sun Baked said:But Apple killed it and that low-end tower price point.
(Edit): I wonder how many times I've said that in this thread...
THX1139 said:
I have to agree. The current Power Mac is huge. Taller than a small baby.
Even though they are big, they are damn sexy! I believe the chip is Water-cooled(enough cooling forya, I have seen the fans in that thing). But that damn G5 gets SO hot. They are SO big. It only makes sense.kildraik said:
People talk about this all the time. I'd love to see it happen, but don't know how likely this is.
Apple hasn't had anything like this in years, probably since the 9600 days. The cube doesn't count, it was really just a mini (no slots). And all the recent towers have just had a base configuration, nothing consumer oriented (smaller and cheaper). I'd love to see a $1500 minitower with a couple slots and one extra drive bay, they could do one even cheaper if they wanted.
Josias said:
One word: GAMERS.
iDave said:
The G5 is a waste of space, but blame IBM, not Apple. Sadly, it has to be that big for cooling. And the mini is a GREAT box for the price, don't confuse "sad" with "not fitting your needs".
surroundfan said:
The mini's graphics are just fine for HTPC use, the duo plays back 1080i/p without breaking a sweat. It's actually a great HTPC, just add an external drive and usb tuner. What other expandability do you need for HTPC?
Heb1228 said:
Or because they just need one feature at any given time. If your computer is fine other than lacking that one feature, it doesn't make sense to replace an entire computer earlier than necessary. Not to mention that you may want a feature that isn't available standard in PC's yet.
Heb1228 said:
The way it should? It just makes things easier for Apple, it's not the best case for the consumer. (and I have to note that you've made NO argument *why* that's the way it should be, besides "simple is good") I'd love to see a mid model added, and see apple expand the BTO options so that all processor speeds could be available in all models (such as 2.16 in a mini).
"Pro or consumer" is like saying a car company should only make the tiniest econo car and the hugest SUV with nothing inbetween. There are plenty of pros who don't need the overkill of the full tower and enthusiasts who just want a fast processor and swapable video card. Not to mention that such a machine would be relatively cheap for Apple to make. I have to agree that the main reason is to force some of the users to the more expensive machines.
THX1139 said:
That's funny, I think the G5's case is pretty lousy, especially compared with the G4. The G5 holds one extra drive, no opticals while the (smaller!) G4 could have up to SIX, two of which could be opticals. The G5 case is basically a giant cooling system.
THX1139 said:
Sounds like you don't even understand the complaints. Apple could easily make a machine that's somewhat expandable, somewhat not-huge, and somewhat cheap. Pretty much all Apple models are at one extreme or another, there's no middle ground whatsoever. A laptop with an external monitor makes no sense for that sort of application, it's way too expensive if you're not going to use the portability. Miniturization adds a LOT to the price of components, to be completely honest Apple should be able to build a small, basic tower *cheaper* than a mini.
But for a midtower, I could see them going the pizza box route. Makes the most sense for gamers and media center folks.
milo said:
The MacMini is okay as a HTPC now, notwithstanding its limited capacity HDDs and lack of HDCP on the DVI out.
But, as I said, the ability to swap out drives and GPUs to keep in touch with the latest developments in HT would be a major advantage.
For example, when HD-DVD/Blu-ray drives roll in, change the optical drive.
When GPUs with HDMI output and HDCP roll in (at sensible prices that is), change the GPU.
Aesthetically, the ability to put bigger HDDs and TV tuners inside the computer would also be a big advantage, rather than having all sorts of things hanging off the machine (even if most of the said accessories don't actually look too bad).
Apple just isn't going for that market of home PC builders that would actually do stuff like that. What percentage of consumers actually ever open the case of their PC? Very small I'd imagine. Most just buy a new computer when they need a new feature. Apple are keeping things simple by selling computers that basically have no upgradeability.surroundfan said:
If people really want a machine you can pull cards in and out of, they pay extra and buy a PowerMac (or Mac Pro, whatever).
We're talking about Apple. I don't think I need to advance an argument on why simple is better. It seems to me one of the principles the company is build upon.milo said:
It's fine if you don't agree that simple is better. 95% of the computing public seems not to.
surroundfan said:
I have had my mini attached to my HDTV (Hitachi 51") ... worked great.
I have a G4 PPC mini, plenty of power. I don't like integrated graphics, but I think its fine for HDTV. Small HDD?, I had several firewire drives connected. This was faster than the built in and expandable. I also had them in another room (quieter). Expandability? what needs to be expanded?
Not enough HD space?, add another firewire drive.
Not enough RAM, put a bigger one in.
Hmmm. Let's look at the stats for my mini thanks to my ever-so-useful irc sysinfo script...zap2 said:
hostname: simulacra - os: Darwin 8.6.1/i386 - cpu: 2 x i486 (Intel 80486) (1670.00 MHz) - processes: 97 - uptime: 6d 5h 48m - users: 5 - load averages: 1.43 1.28 1.19 - memory usage: 912.09mb/2048.00mb (44.95%) - disk usage: 874.58gb/976.42gb (89.57%) - ethernet traffic (en0): 1.29mb in/28.15mb out - airport traffic (en1): 6120.31mb in/15842.82mb out
oh hells yeah
Heb1228 said:
Generally, "simple" is a good thing. But I think the idea that more simple always equals more better is just silly. By your logic, I guess it would be even better if apple only had one laptop and one desktop? Or why not just sell laptops, that's the ultimate in simple ("better")? To return to my previous analogy, do you really think it's "better" if a car company just sells their smallest and biggest models and discontinues all models in between? That's more simple, right? There are many arguments in favor of having a model between the mini and tower. If the only argument against it is that it adds a third model where there are now two, that's pretty weak.
"Simple is better" is an oversimplication. I think the smarter statement is that finding a balance that's reasonably simple yet offers enough choices for consumers is better.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned for the HTPC is the notion of using the network for storage, especially if it can be done wirelessly. The big drives are on another machine, or even can be network drives that don't require a computer of their own.