Open letter to Steve Jobs. Re: Mac Mini Pro

[Tilpots]

I agree with the article. It's sort of like the 8 Hot Dogs in a pack, 10 Buns in a bag deal. Many people want the 8 Hot Dogs, but have zero use for 2 extra buns. Wierd comparison, but I hope you get what I'm saying.

As to the article's tone, if he's upset, let him vent. His message is not lost because of he's angry.

 

[ditzy]

I admit I used the wrong words 'overpriced behemoth' on the Mac Pro. I meant that it's the only (slightly overkill) option available for people who need a computer with higher performance than that of the highest end iMac, but not more than what the MP has.

My bad.

Fair enough. I also think there if a gap in the mac line. It's just that I think this without being critical of the existing products. (apart from maybe the mini)

 

[ditzy]

I agree with the article. It's sort of like the 8 Hot Dogs in a pack, 10 Buns in a bag deal. Many people want the 8 Hot Dogs, but have zero use for 2 extra buns. Wierd comparison, but I hope you get what I'm saying.

As to the article's tone, if he's upset, let him vent. His message is not lost because of he's angry.

You're right the message is not lost, but because of the tone of it, all the way through reading it I kept on having to remind myself that I agreed with most of it. Because of the tone he almost coverted me to thinking the oppersite that he wanted us to think. I don't think he has done his cause any good.

 

[JNB]

I agree with the article. It's sort of like the 8 Hot Dogs in a pack, 10 Buns in a bag deal. Many people want the 8 Hot Dogs, but have zero use for 2 extra buns. Wierd comparison, but I hope you get what I'm saying.

As to the article's tone, if he's upset, let him vent. His message is not lost because of he's angry.

And we all know how decades of complaining and derision about it have changed things.

Now I'm even more depressed about the chances for the "Mini Pro", "Headless", or "Midi" Macs.

Apple has great product differentiation, but does have some interesting spec gaps between the desktop lines. I'd love a Mini for my wife, but I don't see it as entirely suitable (pretty close, though). A new iMac is, well, a bit much for her. Give me a little more on the Mini, some expandability, and we can talk. Oh, and a free-standing iSight, while they're at it.

At the other end, I'd love the idea of a lower end Mac Pro. I was always a Mac/Power Mac guy, but when it went to the "Pro" designation, the specs & pricing jumped beyond anything I needed or could justify.

 

[jeremy.king]

Lame useless rant in my opinion.

The guy lost all credibility with his threats of continuing upgrading his Dual G4, a machine that cost an inflation adjusted $2K+ back in the day, plus whatever upgrades he has added. All he did is demonstrate that the quality and upgradability of the "Pro" line is worth the investment.

Apple hasn't had any trouble selling Macs, and frankly they haven't even offered a middle road desktop since the Performa line. This isn't a recent development by any means and ranting on your blog doesn't help much. I'm disappointed that I just padded the author's pocket with little ad revenue.

I just don't understand how people think they can dictate what a company should and shouldn't sell, especially a company with record revenue every quarter.

 

[MM123]

Do BMW and Mercedes lower their prices to increase market share? Like those luxury cars, when people see the Apple logo on your Mac they know you've spent money on it. The high price for these types of products, in itself, drives their demand as it adds a sense of exclusivity to it.

But Apple has more than just brand, it has superior design and a superior operating system. Hence, you're actually getting pretty good value for money!

Yes, they do not lower the price, but how would you call introduction of BMW 1 and Mercedes A some years ago? I would say, they just fill the gap in their production line. That's exactly what Apple should do. That's all.

 

[inkswamp]

I agree with the article. It's sort of like the 8 Hot Dogs in a pack, 10 Buns in a bag deal. Many people want the 8 Hot Dogs, but have zero use for 2 extra buns. Wierd comparison, but I hope you get what I'm saying.

I totally get it and I think it's one of the best analogies about this I've seen. You're either forced into buying too much or too little and neither option is satisfactory. Exactly right.

As to the article's tone, if he's upset, let him vent. His message is not lost because of he's angry.

Right. He's angry because Apple's shortsightedness is affecting his work. He's relied on them and they're letting him down. He might be feeling a little duped at this point. Who wouldn't be angry?

Hell, I'm angry about it. I've been using Macs for over 15 years and this is the first time Apple has nothing that I want to buy--and I've been ready to upgrade for nearly a year. The iMacs have awful displays. The Mini is underpowered and the Mac Pro is too much power and cost for me.

It's remarkable to me that anyone is actually surprised that people might be angry about this.

 

[Consultant]

People THINK they need certain things, but what exactly can't an iMac do?

Refurb iMac is just slightly over $1000, and it comes with a screen already, if you have another display, all you need is to hook up the extra display.

 

[ceres]

Well, I've tired of waiting for the Mac Midi. I'm going to try the hackintosh route. I've ordered the parts for a quad-core E6600 in a nice and quiet mid-tower, advanced logic board (with a 6-port ICH9 SATA controller, 4 ram slots, 6 USB, 1 FW, 2 eSATA, 802.11n, and optical and coaxial digital audio ports), 750 gig hard drive, DVD burner, 4 gigs of RAM and 256 mb dual-DVI 8600GT, and another copy of Leopard. All for just over US$1,000. It makes me a bit nervous, but from what I've seen on the web it's become much easier to do the install. Once it's up and running, I'm going to OC the cpu to 3 gHz. I'm sure I'll have a busy weekend...

Good luck and much fun building your machine.
Please get back to us with how it worked out. I am sure the scene will keep on fascilitating OS X Installation on PCs. Depending on how much of a mass effect this will create it might force Apple to open up its OS Strategy.

 

[sine-nomine]

The gap in Apple's lineup could probably be filled if they would offer a version of the Mac Pro that wasn't Xeon-based. You'd have more power and upgradeability than a Mini or an iMac, but at a lower price. Not everyone who needs more than a mobile processor needs a Xeon.

 

[inkswamp]

People THINK they need certain things, but what exactly can't an iMac do?

Are you kidding?

 

[Tallest Skil]

...what exactly can't an iMac do?

Easily upgrade a HDD, GPU, or CPU (not happening with Apple, but hey, it's possible on the Mac Pro...).

 

[inkswamp]

no chance for a expandable midrange mac ever........

Apple's other co-founder, Steve Jobs, didn't agree with Jef about many things, but they both felt the same way about hardware expandability: it was a bug instead of a feature. Steve was reportedly against having slots in the Apple II back in the days of yore, and felt even stronger about slots for the Mac. He decreed that the Macintosh would remain perpetually bereft of slots, enclosed in a tightly sealed case, with only the limited expandability of the two serial ports.

http://folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Diagnostic_Port.txt

I'm certainly in no position to criticize Steve Jobs, but that's one of the most moronic things I've ever read. It's a little like saying the ability to change your car mats is a problem for a car buyer and that whatever car mats come with the car is good enough for everyone.

If we were all buying computers to do exactly the same tasks, then his view would make perfect sense, but everyone has different needs and people will always want to beef up some aspect of their computer to better suit the work they do on it. Being able to expand your hardware is something that has always been part of the computer-using experience and always will be.

And remember: at one time, Steve Jobs believed people only needed one mouse button. No matter how much some of you view him as a source of infallible wisdom, the fact is that sometimes he's wrong.

 

[nick9191]

I would be happy with the mini as it is, except in the style of the Time Capsule except bigger, and with a 3.5" desktop hard drive, and with a dedicated GPU. Even just a rubbish GPU so not to eat into iMac sales.

Say a 2.66 core 2 duo
2gb RAM
250gb hard drive
2400XT 128mb

Say $1199 (yes obviously it should be cheaper but taking into account Apple's pricing this is what they'd charge).

It would make so many people so happy.

 

[ryannel2003]

While I agree there should be some sort of affordable, expandable Mac, isn't it obvious that Jobs would have introduced one by now if he really wanted one? I'm one of those people who don't use any major Pro apps (Aperture on a rare occasion) and the iMac fits my lifestyle of computer usage perfectly. Maybe people would quiet down if Apple introduced a $1500 Mac Pro model. Even though, I've seen some refurbs going for $1700 on the Apple Store website.

When I think about it, Apple had a more affordable PowerMac G5 about 3 years back for $1699 and it wasn't a great seller, so that could be another hindering factor in releasing a "cheap" tower.

 

[crontab]

All he did is demonstrate that the quality and upgradability of the "Pro" line is worth the investment.

That is exactly what I took away from the read. He NEEDS to go ahead and purchase the Mac Pro and stop whining about the cost. Look at the ROI on the G4 Pro already - slam dunk when it comes to making the decision.

 

[Grimace]

Despite the fact that some people would like this, it is not the kind of market to which Apple wants to cater. Apple wants an all-in-one solution for home/work prosumers (iMac) - not something grossly expandable. It needs to be something that has few options: more control = it just works!

I know, I know -- but LIKE, EVERYONE would buy one! That isn't the point. Apple creates its own customers by the types of products that are churned out. Apple doesn't want the casual do-it-yourself user. Sorry!

 

[Cheffy Dave]

Well, I've tired of waiting for the Mac Midi. I'm going to try the hackintosh route. I've ordered the parts for a quad-core E6600 in a nice and quiet mid-tower, advanced logic board (with a 6-port ICH9 SATA controller, 4 ram slots, 6 USB, 1 FW, 2 eSATA, 802.11n, and optical and coaxial digital audio ports), 750 gig hard drive, DVD burner, 4 gigs of RAM and 256 mb dual-DVI 8600GT, and another copy of Leopard. All for just over US$1,000. It makes me a bit nervous, but from what I've seen on the web it's become much easier to do the install. Once it's up and running, I'm going to OC the cpu to 3 gHz. I'm sure I'll have a busy weekend...

Go with 3/4 -10,000 RPM WD Raptors,( I know,I know $$$$$ ), tie em to that processor, and Good kick ass OCZ RAM, you be smokin

I OC'd my AMD 3700 single core to 3.0, coupled it to premium OCZ RAM and 2 WD Raptors, and booted XP Pro in under 13 seconds. A 10,000 RPM H.D.D. will do as much as the fastest Processor to give you the speeds you seek

Now you got me scheming about doing my own "hackintosh"

 

[inkswamp]

Even though when I think about it, Apple had a more affordable PowerMac G5 about 3 years back for $1699 and it wasn't a great seller, so that could be another hindering factor in releasing a "cheap" tower.

$1699 is not affordable for most people, especially when the machine in question doesn't ship with a display. That's going to put most people over $2000.

Apple could very easily package the current components in one of the mid-range iMacs into a Mini-like case (bigger, of course, but something along those lines) and sell it for ~$1000. The additional $500-600 for a decent display puts it into the realm of being a reasonably powerful and affordable machine. This is a no-brainer. The only reason I can think that Apple hasn't done it is because of some underlying philosophical design b*****t that doesn't wash with most of the users out there, including me.

There is a point where Apple must find a balance between their computer-as-a-beautiful-piece-of-art aesthetic and the computer-as-a-tool demand from a majority of the buyers. That Apple refuses to give even an iota on that is frustrating.

 

[ryannel2003]

$1699 is not affordable for most people, especially when the machine in question doesn't ship with a display. That's going to put most people over $2000.

Apple could very easily package the current components in one of the mid-range iMacs into a Mini-like case (bigger, of course, but something along those lines) and sell it for ~$1000. The additional $500-600 for a decent display puts it into the realm of being a reasonably powerful and affordable machine. This is a no-brainer. The only reason I can think that Apple hasn't done it is because of some underlying philosophical design b*****t that doesn't wash with most of the users out there, including me.

There is a point where Apple must find a balance between their computer-as-a-beautiful-piece-of-art aesthetic and the computer-as-a-tool demand from a majority of the buyers. That Apple refuses to give even an iota on that is frustrating.

I completely agree with everything you've said, but Apple is extremely stubborn when it comes to designing computers for the public, not themselves.

 

[asme]

The writer is a cock.

I'd sign a similar open letter if it weren't written like such a smarmy-ass hipster demand.

I mean, he first gives the concept, which is OK. But then demand exactly what specs it should have? Come on.

He sounds very pissed when he's writing, but if you get annoyed about these computer-y sorts of things, then you really need a life.

 

[inkswamp]

He sounds very pissed when he's writing, but if you get annoyed about these computer-y sorts of things, then you really need a life.

For some people, their livelihood depends on their computers. I don't begrudge anyone for getting a little miffed about their needs as a user/business person being trumped repeatedly by Apple's needs to produce the prettiest computers. Apple doesn't appear interested in budging on that even a little. Put yourself in that guy's shoes for a minute. You've invested money in a particular platform and the platform's hardware options have grown more restrictive and more expensive. You don't think even a little anger is justified?

And anyway, this is really an ad hominem thing, isn't it? The issue is Apple's lack of choice for its users, not this guy being angry. Seriously, do you think saying...

The writer is a cock.

... is justified for strongly expressing his annoyance with the state of Apple's hardware?

 

[Macky-Mac]

Alas, Apples' current product line seems to be bringing in piles of profits so they don't have a lot of incentive to try to sell something to meet the needs of any and every user no matter what

being angry about the fact that a company doesn't make a product you want seems like a pointless waste of energy

 

[feakbeak]

I'll admit the author's tone didn't help and while he has some good points I don't think he made an overly strong argument for a mid-range Mac desktop machine.

However, I, as well as many others have wished for such a product from Apple for some time.

Here is a short list of what I'm looking for and I think most others who wish for a mid-range Mac would agree.

1. Desktop Core 2 Duo CPU - not a mobile part, not a Xeon, an actual desktop CPU for a desktop computer.
2. Some expandability, what the average PC case provides. Room for another hard drive or two, 2-3 PCI slots a mobo with 3-4 slots for RAM.
3. This ties into #2 but is significant enough to stand as a point on it's own - the ability to put in a true graphics card and upgrade it.
4. No built-in display like the iMac. Some of us find all-in-one designs limiting. Don't get me wrong, I really like the iMac design, it looks great and for some users and situations it's perfect. However, the iMac is the only moderately powerful desktop Mac offered by Apple and it's not a one-size-fits-all solution.

The Mac Pro meets most of these requirements but the problem is that it exceeds them, it's overkill. I don't want an eight-core system, even if I downgrade to a single four-core CPU, it's still a Xeon - I don't need, nor do I want, a server chip. ECC RAM, this is a big one - it inflates the cost of RAM significantly and for my needs it's completely unnecessary. The case is huge, it's just way too big.

So while I want a moderately powerful desktop Mac, with some expandability and a separate display the Mac Pro really is not the computer I'm looking for.

Although I think it would be best to distinguish a mid-range desktop Mac from the Mac Pro, I think the name "Mac" would work perfectly, I would be content if Apple just allowed you strip down some more features of the Mac Pro.

Offering a desktop Core 2 Duo chip options with non-ECC RAM for a little under $2000 would probably be enough to get me to bite but I'd really prefer a smaller case.

The truth is Apple has a gap in their product line in the eyes of many computer users. As a consumer, you either buy a laptop or a gimmicky desktop (iMac/Mac Mini) that have issues with power (mobile-part-based) and expandability. Your only other option to avoid these shortcomings is to buy a workstation/server class machine.

Anyone on these forums who asks for just a little more power or expandability from the laptops/iMac/Mac Mini is told they should buy a Mac Pro. When they complain about the price, stating that a server/workstation machine is overkill for what they want, they are given stupid car analogies and told that because it's "Apple" they should have to pay out the nose. It's a ridiculous stance to take. There is clearly room in Apple's product line to offer a product that fills this gap. I believe there would also be a sustainable market for such a product.

 

[Neutral Gamer]

Yes, they do not lower the price, but how would you call introduction of BMW 1 and Mercedes A some years ago? I would say, they just fill the gap in their production line. That's exactly what Apple should do. That's all.

The BMW 1 Series and Mercedes A Class are still more expensive than similar range models from their competitors. They introduced new models into their range BUT still kept those products' prices high to keep that image of exclusivity and luxury.

And I agree with you 100% that that's what Apple should do, simply fill in the gap in their product range.

At the same time they can keep the prices for these new products relatively higher than PC equivalents because of the Apple brand, design and OS as I mentioned earlier.