Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Desktops (Apple) Apple

Apple Store Reopens With Many New Products 519

Posted by timothy
from the such-a-world-of-bounty dept.
An anonymous reader writes "After being down for a couple of hours, the Apple store reopened this morning. All of the speculation has turned out to be a reality with Apple dishing out many new products and among them are; iMac 20", three iMac 24" models, two Mac Mini models, and two Mac Pro models — with one including an ATI Radeon HD 4570 graphics card. Also as rumored, there was the new Airport Extreme, and Time Capsule in 1TB. The Mac Pro is the granddaddy of them all. The lower-end Quad Core system includes a 2.66Ghz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor, 3GB of memory, 640GB hard drive, 18x double-layer Superdrive, and a NVIDIA Geforce GT 120 with 512MB of memory priced at $2,499. Finally, we have the 8-core system which includes two 2.26Ghz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors, 6GB of memory, 640GB hard drive, the 18x double-layer Superdrive, and of course the NVIDIA Geforce GT 120 with 512MB of memory priced at $3,299."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Store Reopens With Many New Products

Comments Filter:
  • Eh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dreamchaser (49529) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @09:24AM (#27050661) Homepage Journal

    Wake me up when they make a nice, expandable, mid ranged desktop class Mac. I still think that's the big gap in their lineup.

  • by realxmp (518717) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @09:50AM (#27050947)

    The majority of their Macs, iPhones and displays are manufactured, assembled and shipped straight to their destination from Asia. The only parts of Apple that is really American is their R&D and sales and marketing parts, the rest was outsourced years ago.

    Instead of looking at the Pound-Dollar relationship you probably want to take a closer look at the relationship between the pound and the currencies of South Korea, etc.

  • by outZider (165286) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @09:51AM (#27050969) Homepage

    You do for most Dell and Lenovo products.

  • by walter_f (889353) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @09:53AM (#27051011)

    an increase in price, and not a minor one.

    The entry level Mini now has 128 MB of video RAM, but a shared one as before and with still 1 GB RAM total.

    Then again, you get even more of these USB ports than before - great, isn't it? Especially considering the price jump of 100 euros over here in Europe.

    But at least one good thing: Apple did not throw out Firewire from the Minis, so we should probably praise them for this, day and night...

  • by wiredog (43288) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @09:59AM (#27051081) Journal

    How many people who would buy one would upgrade it? At the mid range you can get a pretty good (Windows or Linux) laptop, or iMac, or Mac Mini. High-end, sure, you want to put in the latest and greatest video card, or USB 3.0 card, without buying a new box. But any other expansion? Why not use USB? Or bluetooth? Most devices will work Well Enough that way. The EyeTV HDTV tuner is USB and works fine.

    A Mac Mini looks to be a decent media center if you get a wireless keyboard+mouse and download HandBrake+VLC. A better AppleTV than the AppleTV, since it comes with a DVD player. The 24" iMac is Good Enough for anyone who isn't a media producer. It's certainly a decent software development machine, although a Mac Pro is better since it can do multiple screens.

  • by tepples (727027) <tepples AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @10:02AM (#27051137) Homepage Journal

    The only parts of Apple that is really American is their R&D and sales and marketing parts

    And the only parts of Apple that distinguish a Mac from any old Lenovo or Lenovo-compatible PC is their R&D and sales and marketing parts.

  • by bbasgen (165297) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @10:08AM (#27051219) Homepage
    I am disappointed to see that the new iMacs don't have quad cores, although I'm a bit heartened to see they at least support up to 8 GB RAM. An imac quad core would be a great virtualization machine. I think Apple has missed the mark to not go quad core -- at least in the high imacs -- considering these models will likely be out for 9 months to 12 months. I'm also disappointed that prices didn't drop a bit considering the current market conditions. To ask folks to put down $1200 to have an all in one solution may be a non-starter nowadays. If you want a Quad core mac, you have to pay $2500 -- and for that you get 3GB RAM. Wow. Anyway, I can understand why there isn't fan fair here -- these are pretty minor speed bumps. These were much needed so I'm glad to see them arrive, but in the absence of new innovation, these speed bumps are decent today, but in 6 months they are going to be quite far behind.
  • Re:Eh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SoupIsGoodFood_42 (521389) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @10:13AM (#27051275)

    Expansion isn't as important these days. Most people will only want to upgrade the HDD and perhaps the RAM, both of which the iMac will do. You can also add a 2nd monitor to it, USB will do the rest. People who make their own computers or have some niche requirements may not like the all-in-one designs, but that's not the majority, and hardly a glaring gap in their line-up.

  • by Spatial (1235392) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @10:24AM (#27051405)

    The lower-end Quad Core system includes a 2.66Ghz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor, 3GB of memory, 640GB hard drive, 18x double-layer Superdrive, and a NVIDIA Geforce GT 120 with 512MB of memory priced at $2,499.

    Since they don't come with a monitor, the profit margin on these things must be around 50%. Wow!

    The hardware is typical mid-range stuff: decent hard disc, low-end GPU (renamed 9600GSO) and mid-high end CPU (renamed i7 920). Including a high quality motherboard and PSU, that would cost around 900 dollars at retail. That leaves a healthy 1,600 for the case, OS, software and peripherals.

    Honest question: Who buys these things?

  • by BrokenHalo (565198) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @10:25AM (#27051417)
    How much of this price change is due to the fluctuations in exchange rates?

    Well, I'm not sure how it works in other countries, but here in Australia the price seems to be pegged at an advantageous rate (for Apple) and that is that. There is no room for negotiation: you either want the product or you don't. This is IMO one of the more distasteful aspects of Apple's business model.

    Their model doesn't annoy me enough to stop me using my second-hand MacBook, since I find it complements my (linux) desktop machines quite comfortably, but my approval isn't required...
  • Re:Eh (Score:4, Insightful)

    by drsmithy (35869) <drsmithy.gmail@com> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @10:28AM (#27051443)

    Wake me up when they make a nice, expandable, mid ranged desktop class Mac.

    Amazingly, that now pretty much describes the bottom end Mac Pro...

    ...Except for the price tag.

  • by SoupIsGoodFood_42 (521389) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @10:37AM (#27051551)

    Looks like Apple has finally moved on from FireWire 400, as all the new products only have FireWire 800 ports. About time -- two different FireWire ports was starting to get annoying, although it does mean you'll need to get an adapter for old stuff.

  • Re:Eh (Score:0, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @10:38AM (#27051571)

    Expansion isn't as important these days. Most people will only want to upgrade the HDD and perhaps the RAM, both of which the iMac will do. You can also add a 2nd monitor to it, USB will do the rest. People who make their own computers or have some niche requirements may not like the all-in-one designs, but that's not the majority, and hardly a glaring gap in their line-up.

    I want to have a machine with PCI slots so I can put in an eSata or SCSI card and don't want to drop $2500 minimum for one. I work at a company that unfortunately has to have Macs around for testing certain hardware and it ticks me off that I have to budget four times as much $$$ for a Mac to get the ability to put in a SCSI card.

  • by Reapman (740286) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @10:45AM (#27051649)

    Last I saw Apple is a tech company... they just released a ton of new products. How is this not applicable? I guess when Google released their single cellphone, or Microsoft releases a new line of Zune's, that would also not be worthy for technical people?

    If you don't like stories on Apple, you can, you know, set your preferences to block it.

  • by binary paladin (684759) <binarypaladin.gmail@com> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @10:49AM (#27051693)

    I walked into a Mercedes dealer today when I realized that, as a contractor, what I need is a truck and not a car.

    As Mac user *I* don't need a laptop without an optical drive, which is why didn't buy the Air.

    Oh, and one more thing, I'm tired of the "one button" crap. It's just old. The fact that you neanderthals are still using crappy plastic buttons rather than gestures and other multitouch goodies isn't my fault. I use an external mouse when I have the room, but when using a touch pad, sorry, Apple is by far the nicest to work with, period.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @11:17AM (#27052129)

    I've been an Apple fan since my Apple ][+ when I was 9 years old. Throw in a 512ke, SE, 6100, iMac Rev B, and my iMac G5; along with my Dad & family's numerous machines, and I love it all.

    However, I probably won't be buying another Mac any time soon for a few reasons:
    * I live in a multi-computer home environment. I've got two Windows machines, an Ubuntu machine, a MythTV, and random stuff. The Mac works great *when you do everything the OSX way*. However, in a mixed environment, it doesn't. I'm thinking of movies, pictures, address book, and things like that.
    * I bought my iMac G5 20" ALS, and it was a great machine for about 40 months. Then, it failed. Apple told me to go pound sand since I was out of my 36 month AppleCare (that I never used previously). That stings. Higher-quality hardware my ass. I recapped the PSU, and I recapped the logic board. There was something else wrong with this machine, so I finally sold it for parts on eBay. Bummer to have a perfectly good machine die on me and have no recourse other than my wallet.
    * I was really getting into iMovie HD 6 (I think that's the version), then the iMovie programs got really dumb.
    * I hate backing up /home/username. I just really want to backup my documents & mail & a few other things. So, either I back up the whole gargantuan mess, or just my documents. Rooting around for all the necessary prefs files is a PITB.

    The big challenge for Apple, to me, is a few fold:
    * The hardware *is* expensive. And, in my experience, very proprietary to the point where a failure totals a machine. My x86 tower is nicely generic.
    * OSX isn't perfect. Neither is XP/Vista/Ubuntu.

    Okay, I don't quite know what my rant is. I'm just in a small minority of "Mac Fanboy for ages, switching to Windows and living just fine."

  • by Just Some Guy (3352) <kirk+slashdot@strauser.com> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @11:37AM (#27052407) Homepage Journal

    People that want the Apple name in their house and dont understand the the the price they are paying is not worth the equipment they are getting.

    ...to you. As their market share is still increasing, and quickly, it's objectively true that their equipment is worth what people are paying. Whether you think that's fair or reasonable is irrelevant: the market has spoken.

    Hold on what am I thinking this is Apple the all mighty and great the fans will flock to them and pay what ever they want.

    I'm not a fanboy. I have a Mac only because a friend was practically giving one away. Still, when it up and dies, it will probably be replaced by another one.

    I spend all day managing FreeBSD and OpenBSD servers from a heavily-hacked Linux desktop. I don't like the Mac because I'm not capable of anything else, or because I can't build my own (like the handmade home server sitting next to it), but because when I get home at night I just don't to mess around to get the thing working. I like doing normal-people things like making home movies of the kids, and playing with my iPod, and playing closed-source video games. If I can afford a Mac that lets me spend more of my free time doing the things I want to do, then it's my own business if I choose to buy one.

    Looking down on others because you can't comprehend psychology and economics doesn't make you elite. It makes you an uneducated snot who's far more pretentious than the people you're looking down on.

  • by sbryant (93075) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @11:42AM (#27052493)

    Mac Mini got its update but the price is absurd as well.

    Too damn right!

    It's priced at 599 US dollars, and at 599 Euros (for the cheaper one)... except that 599 Euros is well over 750 dollars. I'm sure there will always be price differences, but this is just plain idiotic. That's a price increase of 25%. I think it would actually be cheaper to buy direct from the US and pay shipping and import taxes!

    -- Steve

  • by obijuanvaldez (924118) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @11:47AM (#27052555)
    No kidding.
    The Mac Pro spec as priced out on newegg:

    Western Digital Caviar 640GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive $69.99
    Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz Quad-Core Processor $288.99
    EVGA 01G-P3-N959-TR GeForce 9500 GT 1GB Video Card $69.99
    ASUS P6T Deluxe Motherboard $289.99
    LG 22X DVD&#177;R DVD Burner Black SATA $22.99
    LIAN LI PC-60USB B2 Silver Aluminum Case $119.99
    G.SKILL Value 1GB 184-Pin DDR SDRAM $29.99 ea x 3 = $89.97
    Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 64-bit $179.99
    Rosewill RG530-2 530W Power Supply $54.99

    Subtotal: $1,186.89

    This list may not include incidental things e.g. thermal compound, the exact same number of USB ports, but I think is a fair line by line comparison. Noting that the prices on the Mac Pro will not get better with time, although the above price will. The markup is about 100%. For this item, I am just not buying any argument that if you compare line by line that Apple products are reasonably priced. Literally.

  • by stewbacca (1033764) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @11:48AM (#27052579)

    I have a 1999 G4 tower. I upgraded the CPU from 400mhz to 800mhz about 4-5 years ago and added some ram. But yeah, then I've purchased three Mac laptops and two iMacs since then, because frankly, I've never really needed to upgrade. /andecdote

    It would be nice to have a $500-ish tower with specs similar to a Dell Inspiron 530 though.

  • I was seriously considering buying a Quad-Core MBP. Not even a refurb, brand spanking new. There doesn't seem to be one to buy. Apple has officially fucking lost it, considering that the Quad-core Q9000 has about the same TDP as my Core Duo. As far as I'm concerned the only bright spot here is the Mac Mini, which finally gains the power to do HD video in its base configuration. It's a little overpriced for the specs, but the form factor will be worth a couple hundred bucks to a lot of people. This is the first mac mini which deserves to be used as an entertainment STB coupled to an HDTV. Finally, I think Apple has also completely fucking blown it not offering a touch option on all iMacs. Speaking of which, I'd like to add touch to a 32" screen, does anyone have any info on doing this by putting a sheet of glass over the display and reading its state with pressure sensors or something? I don't demand multitouch or immensely high accuracy. A screen this big just always makes me want to be able to jab at it.

  • by jackchance (947926) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:31PM (#27053181) Homepage

    Mac Mini got its update but the price is absurd as well.

    For those whining about the price of macs, go spec a computer that has equivalent hardware and equivalent software.

    Included in the price-tag of the mini (and the other over-priced macs) is OSX, iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, garageband, and iWeb. Things may have improved in the last few years, but last i check there was no software on windows or linux that was as easy and fun to use as iMovie, iDVD, and garageband. To get that functionality in windows you would have to pay hundreds of dollars (or steal the software).

    Can someone tell me (honestly, i would like to know) the current free options for making movies/music/dvds on windows and linux?

  • Re:Eh (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:47PM (#27053439)

    It's not that it "hurts" their sales, genius, it's that there are ADDITIONAL sales that they could garner by targeting that market.

  • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @12:51PM (#27053501)

    * I live in a multi-computer home environment. I've got two Windows machines, an Ubuntu machine, a MythTV, and random stuff. The Mac works great *when you do everything the OSX way*. However, in a mixed environment, it doesn't. I'm thinking of movies, pictures, address book, and things like that.

    This depends a lot in my experience based upon how you interoperate. OS X is very good at using open standards and file formats provided you pick decent software to run on top of it. It is less good at interoperating with Windows proprietary formats and protocols and if your servers or Windows machines are using them and you're set on them, Linux is often better at reverse engineered solutions. Example, if you standardized on Windows Media formats, OS X will play them, but not as well as Windows or even Linux. If you picked MP3, MP4, OGG, and the like, OS X is much better than Windows at interoperating.

    I bought my iMac G5 20" ALS, and it was a great machine for about 40 months. Then, it failed.

    Your anecdote certainly shows reason to be annoyed, but what could Apple the vendor do to prevent this? Extend their warranties to four years and then people complain when machines fail a month after that. Would you like more reliable hardware? Of course, we all always want more reliable hardware, but Apple already is the top rated among major vendors by consumer reports and other independent reviewers. Some people will always have hardware fail regardless. You're that person. And Apple is already taking flack for using more expensive and reliable components. Just look at all the comments here about how expensive Apple is compared not to the other top rated vendors, but ones with very poor reliability numbers. People don't look at reliability when buying.

    I hate backing up /home/username.

    Umm, you've heard of Time machine, right? You can apply it only to selected parts of your filesystem and it does versioning more smoothly and easily than almost anything. Or, use one of many third party backup solutions that handles them intelligently.

    * The hardware *is* expensive. And, in my experience, very proprietary to the point where a failure totals a machine. My x86 tower is nicely generic.

    Apple has custom motherboards, but other than that, everything is pretty much off the shelf. What are you looking to replace? I don't see how it is any harder than anything else (with the exception of the motherboard which you have to buy from Apple).

    * OSX isn't perfect. Neither is XP/Vista/Ubuntu.

    I don't really see how this is a challenge for Apple. You want them to be perfect? Not going to happen.

    Okay, I don't quite know what my rant is. I'm just in a small minority of "Mac Fanboy for ages, switching to Windows and living just fine."

    Hey, use what you like and what works for you. I use OS X, Linux, and Windows daily. On my laptop Linux and Windows live in VMs and OS X gets the most love because OS X handles migrations the best and because running OS X in a VM on top of Linux or Windows gives me more headaches. People get way to hung up an emotional about these things.

  • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @01:21PM (#27053961)

    For this item, I am just not buying any argument that if you compare line by line that Apple products are reasonably priced. Literally.

    The main part of your argument and pricing is that you didn't spec out a Xeon processor and a matching 2 dual chip MB. That is a significant difference. While on the surface a Core i7 is similar to a Xeon, they are not the same in terms of performance and function. The MacPro is a workstation not a desktop. Ignoring that basic difference allows you to make your comparison, but your comparison isn't really valid then.

  • by EastCoastSurfer (310758) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @02:38PM (#27055109)

    Yes. At some point you have say "this costs too much and isn't worth it." $599 is a 20% increase over $499.

  • Re:Eh (Score:4, Insightful)

    by binary paladin (684759) <binarypaladin.gmail@com> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @02:54PM (#27055357)

    *sigh*

    Look, I don't like iMacs because of the built in display. That might not be YOUR problem with them (the cost doesn't bug me) but it's my primary beef.

    People like iMacs. Otherwise, Apple wouldn't be selling them. I understand why the crowd here doesn't like them and even doesn't get them. Again, they're not selling to you. They're selling to someone who just plugs it in and turns it on like any appliance. It's easier to set up than a DVD player.

    Also, people here seem to measure computer purely in terms of tech specs. There is something to be said for the simplicity of the iMac. Although its strengths are weaknesses to someone like me.

    The critics here can complain and complain that THEIR needs aren't being met by Apple, but again... Apple doesn't care. The iMac is an exceptionally popular machine. I wouldn't use it, but I'd certainly consider putting my mom on one (she's on a Mini now). It's stylish, clean, etc. Those things MATTER to some people and they certainly matter to the people that buy them.

    Again, I would love an affordable Apple tower (I'd even pay more than normal for it if the case were half as cool as the Pro's) and don't want an iMac. I also hate BMWs, but don't find myself confused when people buy them. BMW isn't selling to ME. That's the problem people miss. "Apple is sitting on a gold mine if they just targeted people with my needs and budget! There are dozens of me! They're so stupid."

    They're not stupid. That's why they're continuing to make bank. Evil? In many respects. Lock in? Totally. Products not well suited to gamers? Who woulda thunk it? But they don't sell to you and they don't make OS X generically available because they don't find that it's financially viable and no forum dweller is going to convince them otherwise. The problem continue to be, in this crowd in particular, a sense of entitlement. "I deserve to be able to install OS X wherever I want." No, you don't no more than I "deserve" to be able to throw a Honda alternator in a Dodge.

  • Re:Eh (Score:4, Insightful)

    by SeanMon (929653) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @03:03PM (#27055473) Homepage Journal

    Amazingly, that now pretty much describes the bottom end Mac Pro...

    ...Except for the price tag.

    Except for the price tag and the use of overpriced server-class components, yes. The really screwy thing, of course, is that the 24" iMacs all have 4GB of RAM, whereas the hideously expensive quad-core Mac Pro has only 3GB (and you can bet Apple will charge through the nose for more).

    And you can bet that it has 3GB because it's using triple-channel DDR3, which is required with the latest Core i7 processors and boards.

  • Re:Eh (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @03:03PM (#27055477)

    The processors and chipsets would also be considered server class.

  • by sneakyimp (1161443) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @03:32PM (#27055889)

    Because the pile of pieces can be assembled with the OS installed in under a few hours. An equivalent Mac (oh wait, there IS NO EQUIVALENT MAC AVAILABLE AS A TURNKEY SYSTEM) would easily cost you twice as much. Personally, I would consider myself lucky to make 3 grand in a few hours.

    And, btw, I'm not anti-apple. I love OS X. I have an iMac on my desk right now. I do, however, hate the overpriced options in the apple store. While the baseline prices are not bad, everything else is easily 50% more than it needs to be.

    Furthermore, I'm not a troll. I post here all the time. Just because you're afraid of the guts of a computer doesn't make me a troll. On the contrary, this is relevant information -- especially useful for folks wearing Mac blinders. You should take it to heart.

  • Re:Eh (Score:3, Insightful)

    by binary paladin (684759) <binarypaladin.gmail@com> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @04:07PM (#27056373)

    "Or someone who wants to put a lot of storage into a Mac without forking over $2500 for a baseline tower. Snow Leopard is supposed to have ZFS support - it would be awsome to put four 2-terabyte drives into a system without forking out the cash for a couple Xeons in the process."

    And this doesn't qualify as a geek... how?

    "And no, four external drives is not a substitute. Internal drives are far less likely to be jostled, which can shorten the life of the drive. And Firewire 800 is nice for single drives, but isn't a substitute for 3.0 Gbs SATA and a raid card."

    Couldn't agree more.

    "So I'll probably be taking a hard look at building a Hackintosh once Snow Leopard is released. I like Apple's stuff, but I don't want to pay for Xeons when I just want a case with space."

    So build a Hackintosh. My only point is that, while you may WANT those things, Apple doesn't owe it to you to accommodate you. This may have something to with the fact that while the needs you mention above are NEEDS to you, you're niche and not worth rolling out a product line for. I'm in your niche! It'd be nice, but Apple doesn't owe it to me and if I don't give them my money well... they're doing fine with iPods and iMacs and aren't too worried about me or you. There's no reason to be indignant about it anymore than I should be indignant that BMW doesn't offer a 3/4 ton pickup with 4 wheel drive. Someone may love BMWs that wants and truck. BMW has lost a truck sale by not offering that. They don't care.

  • by gobbo (567674) <wrewrite AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @05:13PM (#27057223) Journal

    The 24" iMac is Good Enough for anyone who isn't a media producer. It's certainly a decent software development machine, although a Mac Pro is better since it can do multiple screens.

    I'm a small-scale media producer (modest A/V projects, web, SOHO support, etc.) and after waiting for a couple of years for a headless mid range machine out of Apple (don't really need quad-core Xenons or 8GB RAM for video editing with basic effects), researched a hackintosh. By the time I'd priced out the components I wanted with reliable firewire and audio and a quality monitor, I was $180 short of a refurb 24" imac.

    Posting from it now, and yes it can drive a second monitor, so I can get 3840 x 1200 resolution, if I want to splurge for another IPS screen.

    The thing is, many people don't want to run a laptop HD in their desktop (mac mini) or want to supply a decent but not huge display of their liking (imac 20 = crappy screen, imac 24 = pricey and big).

    The upgrade issue is moot if you're an Apple user, something DIY fanatics don't know. The resale value on used Macs is so high it doesn't make sense to put in components other than RAM: selling it and buying new (or refurb) is wiser.

  • by ogdenk (712300) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @05:20PM (#27057305)

    The new Mini is expensive, and there's little justification for it at that spec level.

    It's a pretty pricey little box but show me a cheaper PC in that SAME small form factor w/ the same Core 2 Duo CPU w/ 1066mhz FSB, DDR3 RAM, Firewire 400 and 800, gigabit ethernet, SPDIF Audio In AND Out (24-bit 96khz at that), displayport, an IR reciever for the remote, and a DVD burner.

    Even if you found a mini-itx board with all of those goodies (you may but you most likely won't), by the time you got everything built, it would cost just as much if not more than the $600 mac mini. The new mini is not a wussified EEE desktop.

    Now try to find an HP or Lenovo SFF desktop that has all of the same gear at a reasonable price.

    BTW, it may be integrated video but the GF9400M is no slouch, I have no problem playing Call of Duty 4 @ 1280x800 on my low-end Macbook white.

    Don't believe me? Prove me wrong.

  • by lucas teh geek (714343) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @05:31PM (#27057475)
    I wont buy an iMac until they support the opposite feature. when the iMac is getting old and slow, the 24" screen will still be perfectly fine; I'd like to be able to use it as just a monitor, so it could be the second desktop for the iMac bought to replace it.
  • *Yawn* ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by oblivionboy (181090) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @05:44PM (#27057621)

    ....I think what people are really wanting this year is an Apple netbook. Come on Apple, take some risks, surprise us a little.

  • I can't wait... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by caitsith01 (606117) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @06:00PM (#27057815) Journal

    ...for the front page Slashdot stories when Dell, Lenovo and Sony modestly update their current lineup of computers!

    Oh wait...

  • Re:Eh (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Lars T. (470328) <Lars.TraegerNO@SPAMgooglemail.com> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @06:17PM (#27057965) Journal
    Which geeks have Apple sued for building a Hackintosh?

    And before you say "Psystar", they aren't "geeks".

  • Re:Eh (Score:3, Insightful)

    by RedBear (207369) <redbear AT redbearnet DOT com> on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @06:50PM (#27058325) Homepage

    Indeed, that's exactly what people want to do is upgrade the RAM and hard drive. Right now you still have a choice between A) a computer with a built-in (i.e. non-replaceable) screen, a desktop-size fast hard drive with plenty of space, easily accessible RAM slots, and a decent graphics card, or B) a tiny computer with a much slower notebook-size hard drive, RAM slots and small hard drive that are a royal pain to upgrade, and not-so-great integrated graphics.

    What a large swath of middle-of-the-road customers and long-time PC owners really want is a Mac with a decent video card (possibly upgradeable), a desktop-size fast hard drive (easily upgradeable), and RAM slots that are also easy to get to. To be quite realistic they would only have to about double the height of the Mac mini in order to fit in a full upgradeable graphics card, desktop-size hard drive and easily accessible RAM slots, and it would still be an amazingly compact but much more powerful and flexible computer.

    They could even stick in one or two ExpressCard slots at that size for additional expandability of function without adding substantially to the size. Imagine a desktop machine that could share the same ExpressCards that you use with your mobile MacBook Pro system. A system like that would satisfy almost everyone who doesn't like the Mac mini's lack of expansion options and the iMac's built-in screen, and could be sold for a price in between the two, like $999 and up. It would rock the world and probably be more popular than either the iMac or Mac mini combined.

    The form factor I've described would be a mind-bogglingly excellent little headless server for many homes and small businesses. It would also be a great media center, or basic gaming machine, or damn near anything that doesn't require the massive power of the Mac Pro.

    For the life of me I can't fathom why they continue to ignore the mid-range consumer that wants flexibility without having to buy a Mac Pro. It would really be a hit and there really is a market for it. I think they just don't want to deal with supporting the technical problems that might arise from people expanding their systems. They want their more popular "consumer" items to be confined to a small number of configurations that are easier for AppleCare technicians to support.

  • by stewbacca (1033764) on Tuesday March 03, 2009 @07:05PM (#27058447)
    And I disagree with this:

    I have to respectfully disagree with you on the "midrange" idea. Apple did that under Scully and had a panalopy of mis-named models, like Centris, Deforma? Quadro, Hydra? I think it confused the market.

    All they need is ONE model, and they could even call it...drum roll...Macintosh. There would be no confusion, as long as they made one model (with the same type of upgrade options you see now on the Apple store). A simple tower with two or three expansion slots an expansion bay..generic Intel processor, like a 2.4 C2duo, 2gb ram, 500mb hard drive, and $600 price tag (no monitor). It would be a couple hundred dollars more than an equivalent Dell Inspiron 5xx, but it would run OSX (worth the extra money) and benefit from consistently high consumer reports ratings in dependability and service.

The reason that every major university maintains a department of mathematics is that it's cheaper than institutionalizing all those people.

Working...