Why is Apple missing the midrange?

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Tutelary

I'm a nice banned boy.
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
2,014
How about this?

A core/core2 screenless imac. Maybe a mini tower you can add another hard drive to, and 3 or 4 pci-e slots total?

Where is this in Apples lineup? I've decided to get a 24inch lcd for myself, and yet, I cant match that screen with anything other than a mac mini in the current lineup. How stupid.

Right now without a screen you have:

mac mini on the extreme budget low performance end, and mac pro on the extreme high end.
 
Tutelary said:
How about this?

A core/core2 screenless imac. Maybe a mini tower you can add another hard drive to, and a 3 or 4 pci-e slots total?

Where is this in Apples lineup? I've decided to get a 24inch lcd for myself, and yet, I cant match that screen with anything other than a mac mini in the current lineup. How stupid.
Click to expand...

LOL... I just started this exact same thread a few days ago.

I have an Intel iMac and just bought a 20" widescreen Dell to go with it.

I'm hoping that Apple releases a machine like you listed so I can sell the iMac, buy the midrange Mac and another 20" Dell and call it a day.

I'm a designer so two 20" monitors are actually nicer than one 24" (I almost bought the 24 and backed off at the last second once I realized that I really want another monitor to hold my palettes, guides, notes, etc).
 
Rocketpig said:
LOL... I just started this exact same thread a few days ago.

I have an Intel iMac and just bought a 20" widescreen Dell to go with it.

I'm hoping that Apple releases a machine like you listed so I can sell the iMac, buy the midrange Mac and another 20" Dell and call it a day.

I'm a designer so two 20" monitors are actually nicer than one 24" (I almost bought the 24 and backed off at the last second once I realized that I really want another monitor to hold my palettes, guides, notes, etc).
Click to expand...

This is why people dont switch. Here I sit with money, and nothing. And worse, I could buy this product NOW...yet Apple will wait until macworld (yay for new product right after friggin christmas), and probably STILL not fill this gap.
 
Tutelary said:
This is why people dont switch. Here I sit with money, and nothing. And worse, I could buy this product NOW...yet Apple will wait until macworld (yay for new product right after friggin christmas), and probably STILL not fill this gap.
Click to expand...

While I wouldn't buy one right now (I just bought the monitor and a camcorder and the iMac in Feb and a Macbook in July), if they released one, I'd have one in my grubby hands by Christmas.

Big mistake by Apple IMO.
 
I agree in a way it's rediculous. You can buy a mac mini with onboard graphics and laptop ram or u can spend pretty much 2 grand more and buy the tower. Seems pretty stupid. I'de love to buy a tower but I'm not spending that much when I Can build a kick ass rig for like $700. Just no mac OS.
 
Me and a friend were just talking about the EXACT same thing! I think I would really buy a mac if they had a midrange system. A tower; I want control, I don't have figgen 3 Gs to spend on a mac pro though.

So in short... Seconded!
 
agreed. that's one thing that's keeping me away from macs. i am thinking about the mac book pro though. that's of course completely different.

more to the point. RELEASE A MID RANGE!
 
I keep missing what everyone is refering to mid-range?

iMacs start at $1299
MacPros start at (Stripped down) $2,124

Building and engineering an entire new system just to fill an extremely small gap there is a bit much even for apple IMO. If you dont need the power get the iMac, if you need the stand alone system and expandability get the MacPro. I'm probably missing something here but I dont see a reason Apple needs to fill that price gap. Why not come out with something between the mini and the iMac if thats the case? I'm confused :confused:
 
I ordered the parts for a home-built Allendale system the other day. I would've bought a Mac, but I just can't afford a Mac Pro, and I need a tower. Sorry, Apple! :(
 
liquidtrance123 said:
I keep missing what everyone is refering to mid-range?

iMacs start at $1299
MacPros start at (Stripped down) $2,124

Building and engineering an entire new system just to fill an extremely small gap there is a bit much even for apple IMO. If you dont need the power get the iMac, if you need the stand alone system and expandability get the MacPro. I'm probably missing something here but I dont see a reason Apple needs to fill that price gap. Why not come out with something between the mini and the iMac if thats the case? I'm confused :confused:
Click to expand...

I want a 23/24 inch lcd and I dont want a cheesy mini, and I dont need a mac pro. There is no machine to fill that void, its pretty simple. Apple needs an imac with no screen.
 
Desktop publishers and most graphics professionals would probably like a less high-end computer than the Mac Pro, but that can take more RAM and hard drives than the mini or iMac. It's not like you really need dual 5150s to run Photoshop.
 
Black Morty Rackham said:
Desktop publishers and most graphics professionals would probably like a less high-end computer than the Mac Pro, but that can take more RAM and hard drives than the mini or iMac. It's not like you really need dual 5150s to run Photoshop.
Click to expand...


I'd disagree with this. If the iMac is not enough for them (for 99% of them it's PLENTY) then a mid-range machine is not going to be enough either. Of the 100-200 different shops (Ad agents, Design Shops, Marketing Agencies, Print Shops, etc) that I deal with that use Macs Most of them use iMacs. If they needed more then an iMac they would have had Power Macs already. Of those that do have Power Macs MOST of them got it because they were either unaware they could run dual monitors on the iMac, liked the look of the G5 tower, or some oher dumb reason. Very few (there are some though) actually NEED anything more than an iMac.
 
Tutelary said:
I want a 23/24 inch lcd and I dont want a cheesy mini, and I dont need a mac pro. There is no machine to fill that void, its pretty simple. Apple needs an imac with no screen.
Click to expand...

You know the iMac has a dual-link DVI slot, right? You can add on any monitor of your choice with it.
 
The iMac can only hold 2 gigabytes of RAM, right? That's a pretty bad thing if you want to work on really large images.
 
CEpeep said:
You know the iMac has a dual-link DVI slot, right? You can add on any monitor of your choice with it.
Click to expand...

why would I buy a computer with a monitor then have to buy another monitor? That makes absolutely no sense, and I STILL wouldnt be able to add another hard drive or swap the video card should I so choose.
 
supergper said:
I'd disagree with this. If the iMac is not enough for them (for 99% of them it's PLENTY) then a mid-range machine is not going to be enough either. Of the 100-200 different shops (Ad agents, Design Shops, Marketing Agencies, Print Shops, etc) that I deal with that use Macs Most of them use iMacs. If they needed more then an iMac they would have had Power Macs already. Of those that do have Power Macs MOST of them got it because they were either unaware they could run dual monitors on the iMac, liked the look of the G5 tower, or some oher dumb reason. Very few (there are some though) actually NEED anything more than an iMac.
Click to expand...

I've been a designer for seven years and spend a lot of my time talking to other designers... And the tech-savvy ones groaned when Apple released the Mac Pro. Most were okay with it because all they know are PPC Apples. But the ones who can build their own computers or customize them were angry because they realized that the Mac Pro is complete overkill.

And speaking from the perspective of an iMac owner, a built-in screen, single HD and 2 GB of RAM max kinda suck.
 
Rocketpig said:
I've been a designer for seven years and spend a lot of my time talking to other designers... And the tech-savvy ones groaned when Apple released the Mac Pro. Most were okay with it because all they know are PPC Apples. But the ones who can build their own computers or customize them were angry because they realized that the Mac Pro is complete overkill.

And speaking from the perspective of an iMac owner, a built-in screen, single HD and 2 GB of RAM max kinda suck.
Click to expand...


yeah, the mac pro is overkill for most designers, graphic artists, etc...thats exactly what I just said. However the iMac is a good fit for most. Yeah, it has a built in display, but that display is as nice or nicer then most designers would be using otherwise, and you can run dual monitors so thats a non-issue. A single HDD, if 500 GB is not enough for you then you need to take a step back and look at what youa re doing wrong. Most the time in even the smallest of shops the designers are not even saving their wokr on the local mchine anyways, rarely do you find a professional shop that does not have servers that has all their projects on them. usually you'll have one or two (maybe three or four) projecxts on your HDD. Again, 2gb is enough memory for 99% of the stuff most designers will be doing.

I do think a mid-range headless system would be widely accepted but I think the market is not nearly as large as most you guys are thinking it is.
 
supergper said:
A single HDD, if 500 GB is not enough for you then you need to take a step back and look at what youa re doing wrong.
Click to expand...

Take into account RAID and/or scratch disk. Probably more the former than the latter. Doing any important work without RAID is very risky. If your single disk crashes you lose everything (you can always have disk recovery services but that costs $thousands per drive).
 
they should release a computer that had the same specs as the iMacs, at the same price, but in a smaller tower with no built in screen at the same price as the iMacs. that way, they don't hurt sales of the iMacs from people that really want an built in screen/SFF, but they would gain the sales of people like the ones in this thread saying they have the cash but no Mac to spend it on...

my bet: they would call it "Mac"...

Pyromaneyakk said:
Take into account RAID and/or scratch disk. Probably more the former than the latter. Doing any important work without RAID is very risky. If your single disk crashes you lose everything (you can always have disk recovery services but that costs $thousands per drive).
Click to expand...
Not to mention people using the Mac Pro for what it is made for. Heavy work, such as rendering (Maya requires hundreds of gigs for a render), video editing (think of all the gigs of raw HD video), or music editing.
But then again, if they are buying the space, then chances are, they know what they need...
 
Pyromaneyakk said:
Take into account RAID and/or scratch disk. Probably more the former than the latter. Doing any important work without RAID is very risky. If your single disk crashes you lose everything (you can always have disk recovery services but that costs $thousands per drive).
Click to expand...


yeah, but like I said, most the time the projects are on the server, and even when you are working on them they are STILL on the server which should have RAID.
 
supergper said:
yeah, but like I said, most the time the projects are on the server, and even when you are working on them they are STILL on the server which should have RAID.
Click to expand...

that's not entirely true. take me for instance: a freelance web designer working alone entirely on local storage. I've got a 1.8ghz single proc, single core powermac g5 that's getting really long in the tooth, but it's running a 30" apple cinema display, 4 gig of ram and two 500gig harddrives. I'd like to upgrade to a new machine, but what choice do i have? i could get an iMac but that'll halve my total ram and halve my local hard drive space and add a 17" (but more likely a 20") LCD that i definitely don't need. i don't want to have to keep the powermac just to use as a fileserver, but stepping up to a new powermac seems a bit ridiculous. I don't really want to spend $2200 on a machine with dual dual procs (no way i need 2 dual core Xeons), a worse graphics card than i currently have, and special ram (FB-DIMMs). I'd much rather be able to get a core2duo tower (or even a single woodcrest xeon tower) without a monitor that i can upgrade at will (which isn't possible on the mini). just food for thought
 
I want a tower like the Mac pro for more upgrade options. You can't upgrade the video card in a mini or imac. And you can't add extra hard drives without going external. You are also limited to 2gb of ram. A tower gives me alittle bit more control over my hardware.

All I want is a Core2duo option and the freedom to use a video card of my choice.
 
liquidtrance123 said:
I keep missing what everyone is refering to mid-range?

iMacs start at $1299
MacPros start at (Stripped down) $2,124

Building and engineering an entire new system just to fill an extremely small gap there is a bit much even for apple IMO. If you dont need the power get the iMac, if you need the stand alone system and expandability get the MacPro. I'm probably missing something here but I dont see a reason Apple needs to fill that price gap. Why not come out with something between the mini and the iMac if thats the case? I'm confused :confused:
Click to expand...
yeah you should have to pay $2400+ just so you have a computer so you can upgrade your own video or sound card right? Psh! who the hell wants to pay $700-$1299 for something the could actually upgrade thats just crazzy talk. :rolleyes:
 
I'm in a similar situation. Some freelance design/photoshop work, basic use, encoding, video media work, etc... I'll be buying the Mac Pro even though it's total overkill for my needs. I already have 2x19" LCDs left over from my PC tower that I want to use with my Mac when I buy it. An iMac would look mismatched with my gear (I'm OCD about stuff like that) and I need something that I can add another HDD to for all my storage needs.

I'm justifying the Mac Pro purchase by saying that I'll avoid a total system upgrade for a fairly long time. Now that Macs can run Windows natively also, what reason do I have not to switch? The Mac Pro is a kickass system whether it's PC or Mac. Just my 2-cents
 
Mid-range is essentially where the biggest bang-per-buck occurs. The highest value, for your money.
Apple has never been about that. You see, if they actually had a product with high-value combined with relatively low cost, they'd never sell the low bang-per-buck, over-exorbitantly priced "low-end" Mac Pros.

The $1999 1.6Ghz G5 is one great example. Buying any kind of iMac, when you have a perfectly good LCD already is another example. So what about the "head-less iMac"? MR members talked about this straight through the G4 era, right into the G5 era. Nothing.

Now it's the Intel Conroe era and I still don't see it happening.
 
pixelbaker said:
I'm justifying the Mac Pro purchase by saying that I'll avoid a total system upgrade for a fairly long time.
Click to expand...

If I were to buy a mac pro right now (by christmas), I would hope it would last a good 4 or 5 years. Even the low end. 4 cores is a lot of cores to work with. I just dont see software maturing fast enough to be pushing 4 cores in 4 years. I'd probably get 2 gig initially and add another 2 within a year.
This is the only thing that to me would really justify the cost as a midrange user. I would however, hate to know I got mine and someone who is searching for the cure for cancer or something had to wait another month for theirs to ship.
:(
 
I say Apple should bring back the cube.... Core 2Duo with two expansion slots and one slot for a video card with support for two 3.5 HDDs all in cube form... <drool>
 
Yes, I agree Apple is missing the mid-range, and yes I think they should do something but it, but hhey, our opinions haven't changed their mind yet :D
 
If you take 3D design applications and heavy-duty gaming out of the equation, then there isn't anything the mini, iMac, or macbook can't handle.

So my question is why do you need all that internal expansion on a mid-range Mac?

If it's to play games, then explain why Apple should waste resources developing a new product to persuade gamers who can just go buy a cheap PC or xbox?

I don't necessarily think Apple is missing a product, I think people are missing the point.
 
Tomahawk said:
I don't necessarily think Apple is missing a product, I think people are missing the point.
Click to expand...
I'm just annoyed that Apple aren't selling a product I want at a price point I can afford. The iMac doesn't fit my needs, but the Mac Pro does. I just can't afford the Mac Pro.
 
I think the point is being able to "expand". And when you get an iMac, or Mini you're basically stuck with what you got. Plus i'm sure Apple is worried there would be too much competition if they made a midrange Mac Pro because there would be so many non-Mac systems with similar hardware specs for far cheaper.
 
Tomahawk said:
If you take 3D design applications and heavy-duty gaming out of the equation, then there isn't anything the mini, iMac, or macbook can't handle.

So my question is why do you need all that internal expansion on a mid-range Mac?

If it's to play games, then explain why Apple should waste resources developing a new product to persuade gamers who can just go buy a cheap PC or xbox?

I don't necessarily think Apple is missing a product, I think people are missing the point.
Click to expand...

you're trying to pigeonhole the rest of the market. You have no idea what everyone elses needs or wants are. I want to be able to change videocards myself, I want to be able to expand storage. I dont give a rats ass about gaming, I want control of my computer. Buying an imac takes that from me. Again: I want to get a 23/24inch lcd and pair it with a system I can expand or modify, and Apples lineup does not do that.

I've noticed that Apple users seem to have this incredible "if Apple doesnt want to give it to you, you dont need it" mentality, which is just wrong. We tell Apple what we want, its Apples job as a company to reasonably provide it. I think the ratio of people in this one thread agreeing they need this kind of pc is high enough to justify the concept of it.

Heres the crux of it: if Apple doesnt want to give me what I'm asking for (which is an entirely reasonable product) then to hell with them. I want to switch, but I'm going to do it on MY terms. Apple can fumble around with its 3% market share or whatever and people like me who would have switched will no longer even consider it.
 
Tomahawk said:
I don't necessarily think Apple is missing a product, I think people are missing the point.
Click to expand...

Internal hard drive redundancy. I can put that in a sub $200 desktop PC with software RAID on XP, but I can't get it for less than $2200 in any Apple machine.

Your are right! I did miss the point. Please help me find it.
 
Tutelary said:
you're trying to pigeonhole the rest of the market. You have no idea what everyone elses needs or wants are. I want to be able to change videocards myself, I want to be able to expand storage. I dont give a rats ass about gaming, I want control of my computer. Buying an imac takes that from me. Again: I want to get a 23/24inch lcd and pair it with a system I can expand or modify, and Apples lineup does not do that.

I've noticed that Apple users seem to have this incredible "if Apple doesnt want to give it to you, you dont need it" mentality, which is just wrong. We tell Apple what we want, its Apples job as a company to reasonably provide it. I think the ratio of people in this one thread agreeing they need this kind of pc high enough to justify the concept of it.
Click to expand...

I really don't care what ya'll whine about.


nessus said:
Internal hard drive redundancy. I can put that in a sub $200 desktop PC with software RAID on XP, but I can't get it for less than $2200 in any Apple machine.

Your are right! I did miss the point. Please help me find it.
Click to expand...

No.
 
i have always backed away from the apple pc [ yes apple is a pc btw, just different os ] in the last 10 years, but i've always wanted one cause i've used them is junior-high/high-school. the last time i used one was back in 1996 when i left high school. i agree with the other guy, they should bring the cube back. that thing was/is excellent to what, i think others want[maybee wrong] a mid-range mac, hell all other system builders have low/med/high-end systems. if they take it, the g4 cube and make it too where it looks like a shuttle or APEVIA (ASPIRE) X-QPACK case but apple style that resembles the the g5/macpro tower case, stick a core2/core2duo, then i'll probably get one if the price is right. but then again apple will just give me the finger instead
 
I think its funny cause most you guys are crying about being able to control your computer and do what you want to do with it. Apple has never allowed for easy expansion so why would they start now? Part of what make Macs work so reliably is this very fact. Some are crying about "...but I can do this in windows..." well, be my guest, go do it in windows and run that sorry OS...have fun with your viruses and spyware. No skin off my nose :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top