Apple's new iMac 24"

[Viro]

Too much? What would you remove from the Macbook?

[Mikuro]

Originally Posted by Viro

Too much? What would you remove from the Macbook?

Definitely the iSight, probably the remote, and maybe Bluetooth, too. Even Airport is not needed by lots of people, so it shouldn't be standard on the cheapest machines. A Core Solo model at the bottom would be appropriate as well. If they took out all the non-essentials, they could offer a machine to compete with the low-end PC laptops, which are perfectly adequate for a large market.

The MacBook is, IMO, the most appealing machine on the market, but I still think it fills its role (as an entry-level notebook) very poorly. Same goes for the Mini.

[Viro]

I think Apple has always billed itself as being ahead of the technological curve. Macs were shipping with USB and Firewire ports long before such devices were common places. As such, I don't see the Macbook as deviating from this tradition. Does it have stuff that most entry level laptops do not have? Sure, like the iSight, remote control, and firewire port. However, most laptops these days do have wireless as standard, even the £350 ones in the UK (Macbooks cost £670 at the minimum).

[fryke]

I guesss it's just not that interesting for Apple to make a MacBook model without AirPort/Bluetooth/iSight and with a Core Solo processor. You'd have to actually create different bezels (no iSight), AirPort/Bluetooth are part of the standard platform Apple's using cheaply (and crippling the features off doesn't save money) and I'm not sure they'd save that much by going Core Solo as well. So the price difference between that (imagninary) low-cost model to the cheapest _available_ model would probably be too small. But that's _all_ off-topic imho.

Back on topic... I've said it when they released the 20" iMac first and I'll state it again: The CPU loses its worth _MUCH_ faster than the display does. Seriously: The upgrade path for a Mac mini with gorgeous Cinema Display is so much better... But I guess they _will_ actually sell quite a few of these monsters. I'm sure they're awesome desktop machines. (I'm just not a desktop-machine user...)

I still think for consumers and pros a higher end Mac mini (a "Mac", what a nice product name...) would make a better deal - and attract more switchers.

[Mikuro]

I agree completely about the iMac, Fryke. I've been saying that for years, actually, except that back in the CRT days, it was more because the CPU would outlive the monitor than the other way around! (In my experience, CRT iMac monitors started getting slightly "funky" in a year or two, and nearly unusable in 4-5.) I will probably never buy another all-in-one system, because there will always be some parts that are more valuable or live longer than others.

But man that 24-inch iMac looks nice!

The Mini is perfect for me, except I would like more power, and would definitely be willing to pay a little more — just not quite as much as the Mac Pro. As a Mac user, I've always had to settle on hardware, because Apple has never offered a machine that fit me to a T. (Well, maybe in the 68k era, before I was really paying attention or making buying decisions.)

A consumer-level tower would probably shut me up for good, along with most people who don't like Apple's desktop offerings.

What would also be nice is a CPU that acted like a monitor "dock". It'd give you the elegance of an all-in-one design without all the drawbacks. But then, we don't want another non-standard monitor connector, that's for sure...

[ora]

Originally Posted by Mikuro

A consumer-level tower would probably shut me up for good, along with most people who don't like Apple's desktop offerings.

I agree actually. At the movement I use my PowerBook much fo the time, and have an old sawtooth G4 with a few cards chucked in the back as a file/media server and to drive a decent sized display for movies. I'd like something like a not-quite-mini mac more along the size of some of the smaller atx cases. Some more ports, space for a second drive and maybe a couple of pci slots (I massively extended the life of my sawtooth with a 6 port usb2 card to drive some external burners and HDs etc). I'd also want to be able to open it up without a putty knife, but I understand that on the mini as its not means to be upgradeable.



The iMac's are great for some, often people who aren't regulars on boards like these . My mum has a G5 iMac and its pretty much perfect for her work. She spends all day at it so the screen quality is important. Its has enough ports for here limited needs, it has a small footprint. I guess what me and Mikuro would like is a low buget-prosumer machine . I just can't justify all that money on a MacPro just to be a companion machine to a portable. Neither the iMac or mini fulfill that need for me but maybe its too small a niche for Apple to want to fill..

[MorganNiemand]

They could bring back the beautiful cube design and pack it full of expandable consumer desktop features, another problem presented by a consumer level desktop would be Apple's extremely high prices of the monitors themselves, sure, they are of great quality and look beautiful, but people buying a sub-$1000 machine are not going to want to pay $700 for a monitor. Perhaps a lower standard monitor in the $300-$500 price range.

[fryke]

Well, there's tons of monitors outside of Apple's for those. ... By cube design, do you mean Apple's Cube or NeXT's Cube? Because Apple's wasn't really expandable. NeXT's had more space, I guess. ... Hm. I'm thinking more of a wider mini, really. Space for a 3.5" harddrive inside as well as a real graphics card.