[CityGuy2003]

this is what i think that the apple line should look like eventually -- i dont expect it next week or next month -- hopefully next year...
i posted a less detailed version of this on another post in another forum earlier but thought i would put it up for discussion...
so...what do you think?

+++++++++++++++++

Professional Line: (upgradable towers)

Fastest:
1 Gigahertz G5
256 MB Ram
100 GB Hard Drive
SuperDrive
nVidia Graphics
USB
FireWire
etc

Faster:
900 Megahertz G5
256 MB Ram
80 GB Hard Drive
Combo Drive
nVidia Graphics
USB
FireWire
etc

Fast:
700 Megahertz G5
128 MB Ram
60 GB Hard Drive
Combo Drive
nVidia Graphics
USB
FireWire
etc

Apple monitor options: 15, 17, 22 inch LCD�s

Prices: $2000-$3000

--------------

Middle of the Road (iMac) Line: (closed all-in-one systems)

Fastest:
1 Gigahertz G4
256 MB Ram
60 GB Hard Drive
Combo Drive
nVidia Graphics
USB
FireWire
Built-in 16 inch LCD
etc

Faster:
900 Megahertz G4
128 MB Ram
40 GB Hard Drive
Combo Drive
nVidia Graphics
USB
FireWire
Built-in 14 inch LCD
etc

Fast:
700 Megahertz G4
128 MB Ram
30 GB Hard Drive
CD-RW Drive
nVidia Graphics
USB
FireWire
Built-in 13 inch LCD

Price: $1000-$2000

------------

Low End Line (Enterprise Workstation Line): (upgradable tower or desktops)

Fastest:
1 Gigahertz G3
128 MB Ram
40 GB Hard Drive
CD-Rom Drive
USB
FireWire

Faster:
900 Megahertz G3
128 MB Ram
20 GB Hard Drive
CD-Rom Drive
USB
FireWire

Fast:
700 Megahertz G3
128 MB Ram
20 GB Hard Drive
CD-Rom Drive
USB
FireWire

Price: $400-$900

Apple monitor options: 15 and 17 inch CRT and 15 inch LCD

[ 09-11-2001: Message edited by: CityGuy2003 ]

[PowerBookDude]

Originally posted by CityGuy2003:
<STRONG>
--------------

Middle of the Road (iMac) Line: (closed all-in-one systems)

Fastest:
1 Gigahertz G4
256 MB Ram
60 GB Hard Drive
Combo Drive
nVidia Graphics
USB
FireWire
Built-in 16 inch LCD
etc

Faster:
900 Megahertz G4
128 MB Ram
40 GB Hard Drive
Combo Drive
nVidia Graphics
USB
FireWire
Built-in 14 inch LCD
etc

Fast:
700 Megahertz G4
128 MB Ram
30 GB Hard Drive
CD-RW Drive
nVidia Graphics
USB
FireWire
Built-in 13 inch LCD

Price: $1000-$2000

------------
</STRONG>

They would probably never have three different size shells (as they would have to for the different screen sizes). It would probably cost to much.

[CityGuy2003]

ok, thats a very valid point...so lets say all the revamped iMacs have 15inch LCDs built in

[scarab]

I doubt it will be wise to have machines with different processor famliies at the same speed.

Anyhow, I agree that Apple needs to release some kick-ass hardware soon. The 'wow' factor just isn't really there anymore.

[PowerBookDude]

Originally posted by CityGuy2003:
<STRONG>
+++++++++++++++++

Fastest:
1 Gigahertz G5

--------------

Fastest:
1 Gigahertz G4
</STRONG>

Apple would not do that.

Because for example someone is looking for a new powerful computer and they look at an iMac and a tower. They would not know that the tower is better then the iMac because both have a 1GHz chip. And so the customer would buy the cheaper and not get the more powerful computer as they wanted to get.

Now you say the would know by the price tag the tower is more powerful? No. They could very well think that the reason the tower is more expensive because it is bigger (so they think upgradebale). And if that isn't more important just speed is they would probably get the iMac.Again not knowing the tower is faster.

[CityGuy2003]

ok...so lets say this:

pro line:
fastest: 2 gighertz g5
faster: 1.8 gigahertz
fast: 1.4 gigahertz

imac line:
fastest: 1.2 gigahertz g4
faster: 1 gigahertz
fast: 800 megahertz

workstation line:
fastest: 800 megahertz g3
faster: 600 megahertz
fast: 400 megahertz

also...i forgot to put this in @ the beginning...lets say everything is dual processor standard

[rambo47]

I think once the G5 is on the scene Apple will drop the G3 from all desktop Macs. Once the mobile G4 is available the G3 will disappear from PowerBooks as well.

A friend suggested an alternate direction, but I don't give it much creedence. She thinks that if the G5 is non-AltiVec, perhaps the G4 will be eliminated and the line will be G3 and G5 only, nothing with AltiVec. This was based on early talk of the G5 by IBM not including AltiVec, and the end of Apple's partnership with Motorola. Personally I think the first scenario is the likely one.

Granted the G5 is coming, when and where is the big question mark. However, no one has really gven clear cut evidence as to how much it will really cost. Personally I don't see it starting out at a very cheap price.

[scarab]

pro line:
fastest: 2 gighertz g5
faster: 1.8 gigahertz
fast: 1.4 gigahertz

imac line:
fastest: 1.2 gigahertz g4
faster: 1 gigahertz
fast: 800 megahertz

workstation line:
fastest: 800 megahertz g3
faster: 600 megahertz
fast: 400 megahertz

Sounds really great but it probably won't happen next year with Apple's progress.

Why is the workstation line 'slower' than the iMac line? Workstations are supposed to be professional machines while iMacs are consumer computers.

G5 without AltiVec sounds real bleak, but I remember hearing news about IBM's plans to use their own technology to replace AltiVec.

Most of all, Apple has to reconsider their price points. Current PowerMacs are pretty pricy.

By the way, I too do not see many computer makers openly supporting AMD processors, be it Compaq, IBM, Dell or HP. It's probably due to the slim profit margin and perhaps even market perception.

[scarab]

One thing about removing AltiVec from the G5 will be the performance of the existing applications coded to make use of the AltiVec engine. Developers will be pissed.

[welborn]

What Apple's hardware line should really look like:

Server: 2U rackmounted multiprocessor AMD machine with hot-swappable SCSI drives and power supplies and on-board Gig-E. PC-standard motherboard, but best of all components. Running MacOS 10 Server for X86. ~$6,000

Pro, legacy: Stylish-cased G4. These boxes would be designed for users of legacy applications that are not yet rewritten/recompiled for Carbon (which would allow them to work with a simple recompile on an x86-based OS X system). Need more bays than they currently have.
Multiprocessor, Superdrive ~$3500
Single processor, CD-R ~$1600

Pro: Stylish-cased AMD machines. These boxes would have the best components offered in standard PC desktops, but at a price premium. Apple would have to work hard to keep these at the bleeding edge of the PC world. (Runs x86 OS X)
Multiprocessor, Superdrive ~$3500
Single processor, CD-R ~$1600

Consumer, legacy: For consumers who have a large investment in legacy 68K and PPC software that will not be (or is not yet) ported.
Midrange G4, flatscreen: ~$1600
top G3, flatscreen: ~$1200
low-end G3, CRT: &lt;$700

(The laptop line would be similarly configured. What PC-head wouldn't pay $2500 for a Titanium-Powerbook-looking machine with a fast Pentium III in it? And who cares if the machine ends up running Windows underneath OS X most of the time?)

Then Apple could say that they will sell their last consumer legacy machine by a certain date, but keep PPC for high-end applications that may require it, until the chip family dies a horrible death.

Software houses would simply have to ship their programs as obese binaries (x86 and PPC, compiled with either Carbon or Cocoa APIs), and offer free cross-platform same-version upgrades.

The big step would be to use the cross-licensing agreement with Microsoft to ship a modified VMWare for the new x86 machines, allowing OS X-x86 to run Windows apps. The licensing agreement could also give MS the ability to bundle the Cocoa objects with Windows OSes (or at least, for Apple to be able to keep it up to date and make it available for Windows freely).

Then, Apple would allow hardware makers to include OS X with every PC made, for a price 20 percent of Microsoft's licensing fees.

The licensing fees would be pure gravy, and the hardware business would slowly either morph into all x86 or die altogether. Eventually, Apple's hardware and software companies will have to split (in a scenario like this). It might as well be made less painful.

[ 09-19-2001: Message edited by: welborn ]

ok...

basically...

my idea was the line maintaining the PowerPC chips...

i think that @ this point it wouldnt be prudent to abandon the chip line...

...Apple has built its marketing and its lines on the chips...eg. computers are deliated based on the PowerPC processor...

...however, while i wouldnt in a million years have Apple switch its Pro and Consumer lines to x86 chips...i could see them moving the server line to something much higher level...say, running the IBM Power4 Chip??

[Leonard]

Mac OS X on x86 is not going to happen!!! Mac OS X on x86 was just a contigency plan by Apple, it will never leave R&D. Go daydream somewhere else.

The PowerPC with Mac OS X is way more powerful at lower Mhz than anything else - which will be proven as soon as 10.1 comes out and the native games (such as Giants, Star Trek Voyager: Elite Force, and Castle Wolfenstein) and applications (such as MS-Office X, Final Cut Pro, I'd really like to say Photoshop, but can't).

You'd also never get a Pentium III in a Powerbook - the Pentium is way to hot.

[gumby5647]

Originally posted by rambo47:
[QB]Once the mobile G4 is available the G3 will disappear from PowerBooks as well.

QB]

ummmmm, uhhhhhh...so why do we have a powerbook G4 then?

I really think that Apple sould become a Digital Hub Provider. Something like "iTV" with iTunes in a set top box could be great! Plus it would give Apple the chance to enter new markets.

Read an article about it here:
http://www.macobserver.com/editorial/2001/09/19.1.shtml


Don't be suprised if Apple unveils one of these.

[geekstud]

Originally posted by Leonard:
<STRONG>Mac OS X on x86 is not going to happen!!! Mac OS X on x86 was just a contigency plan by Apple, it will never leave R&D. Go daydream somewhere else.

</STRONG>

From where, exactly, do you believe Mac OS X came? Hint: NeXTstep/OPENSTEP, which at one point ran on the following platforms: m68k NeXT systems, x86 Intel systems, HPPA RISC workstations, and Sun SPARC (4/5/10/20) systems.

Running Mac OS X on other platforms should not be difficult. The hard part would be dealing with the lack of "Classic" for some users, as it would be tough to write an emulation for the moto chips to run on other platforms with good performance, and the added complexity of supporting an increased number of video/network/other cards. These issues are the tough ones, not getting the basic OS running.

Cheers,

-Nathan

[sek929]

Originally posted by CityGuy2003:
[QB
Fastest:
1 Gigahertz G3
128 MB Ram
40 GB Hard Drive
CD-Rom Drive
USB
FireWire


[ 09-11-2001: Message edited by: CityGuy2003 ][/QB]

Hate to burst your bubble....but the G3 is at the fastest clock speed it can acheive right now (without overclocking) so 1ghz is a no-go.

Plus I'm sure Apple wouldn't be offering three different case types with three different mobos, and three different processors.

I think their line is fine now and will continue to bear resemblence to the current line in the future until their user base increases and they can start offering a little more variety. Right now its just not a viable plan.

[neutrino23]

I like your idea of the low end industrial tower. Without putting in prices or specs here is a pie-in-the-sky suggestion for a product line from Apple.

High end towers
Six PCI slots, multiple drive capacity, beefy powersupply, same case could be configured as server.
HD, processor speed, memory all BTO.

Mid level towers
Similar to today's tower.
HD, processor speed, memory all BTO

Low end towers
Smaller, boxy, low cost tower.
Perhaps with limits on bus speed, peripherals and such to save cost.
Could be used in volume as an embedded computer in universities and industry. Possibly sold with no graphics card. Completely managed via Ethernet.

Slim Tower
(cube replacement)
Standard graphics card slot, one PCI slot, fanless or ultraquiet fan design.

All-in-one LCD
Based on the 15 inch Apple LCD display.
High end iMac replacement.
Perhaps two levels based on processor speed.

All-in-one CRT
Legacy iMac, dirt cheap for companies that just need a simple terminal as a node on a network. Apple already paid for all the engineering and promotiion of the name. Might as well keep it around for a while.

TiBook
No change from whatever Apple is planning

iBook
Faster bus speed, better keyboard

sBook
subnotebook
Sub three pound notebook, perhaps just for Japan.As thin and light as possible.
Features connectivity to the Japanese portable phone networks such as iMode.

PDA
Checkbook size PDA with option to clip on a cell phone. Contact manager can autodial, autoanswer, receive/send faxes. Color display, OS X light.

That is too many damn products. Apple would be going back to its early 90's days with that strategy. I say keep it the way it is now, maybe shrink the iBook to 3.5 lbs (but still include everything it has now)
Once the G5 comes, it will replace the high end towers, and the (flat panel) iMac and iBook will switch to Apollo G4s. The TiBook will also use the high end Apollos. This makes the best sense for the near term for 2002.

[juanvaldes]

Lower prices, and add a high end server. Rackmount, etc...

[Scotttheking]

This thread now belongs in the Lounge.
Sending it there.

[juanvaldes]

#1 thing they should do...well on top of my earlier recommendations.

iMac 128, 128, 256
iBook 128, 256 in combo
Power Mac 256, 256, 512
Power Book 128, 256

...this is just what I feel all models should have for base RAM.