[Gornlo]

Nice write-up, but the way it dances around the need for a small desktop model between the Mini and Mac Pro is glaring. C'mon apple, give us the xMac!

[icerabbit]

I agree that many a MacWorld reader has expressed a similar opinion regarding the lack of some products, the lack of features with some products and voiced that there are no options of alternative products. MacWorld often is not as critical as I would be on certain issues. Which is sad given that MacWorld indeed indirectly helps push the platform forward by pointing out the bad stuff.

With computers it really is an Apple or nothing. So why shouldn't Apple diversify their offerings? They can have a safe profit margin on any machine and product they sell. Do they fear competing with themselves? Or have evidence that any of the two - three products mentioned wouldn't sell in sufficient quantity?

My "wish" for a 12" MBP stems from the fact I used to have a 12" laptop which was an absolutely great, thin and lightweight machine (my mom uses it now as her main machine); plus that I think Apple is unlikely to release a matte MB. They haven't done it yet, plus according to Apple consumers WANT glossy, which makes me a pro-sumer, I guess. Anyhow, Apple might be more willing to bring back the 12" PB form factor in the MBP line given enough interest and honest feedback on what the MBA lacks for many.

[Jon Seff]

icerabbit, do you remember the days of the myriad Performa models...not even Apple could keep track of them. I think there's something to said for Apple's simplified product line. The average consumer probably doesn't need to have a dozen models to choose from -- it just makes things more confusing and could actually hurt sales.

Not saying that another model wouldn't be nice, but do you really think that Apple could "have a safe profit margin on any machine and product they sell"? I think the better way to think of it is, Apple only sells machines and products it predicts it'll have a safe profit margin on.

I'm sure somewhere at Apple there's a mock-up of a mini tower in someone's office (or just brain), but like so many products, it may never see the light of day. Or maybe it will. We certainly don't know.

[whitedog]

The reason Apple was drawn overboard in the '90s with so many different models of Mac is that they did not support user customization to any great extent. So they tried to make a computer for every conceivable need. As we know, the strategy didn't work well at all. When Steve cancelled the clone contracts, be bought up Power Computing's online sales and warehouse assets so Apple could begin to offer BTO options, as Power Computing had done. This helped them simplify their lineup.

As many here suggest, however, they've taken this simplification idea too far and shut out many users whose needs are not met by Apple's current options. But it's not an either/or proposition. Adding one or two more models would not take us back to the bad old days; it would simply fill some holes in Apple's offerings and take care of some unmet needs. If you want to get an idea of how spartan Apple's lineup really is, check it out a Fry's store. The choices seem sparse indeed compared with other computer brands available there. It's almost embarrassing.

[icerabbit]

I did not follow Apple closely back then. I had interest, did see them at the Apple reseller - even went to Apple Expo in the Netherlands with a friend - but my budget didn't allow me to buy one. 25% VAT stings quite a bit.

The way I see it there is 0 chance of consumer confusion. Apple has 2 lines of notebooks: MB & MBP and 3 desktops: MP, Mm & iMac. Every one of which is very distinguishable from the other. See http://www.apple.com/mac/ The way Apple represents it, it is 6 machines to pick from. What confusion could there be if there were something in-between the mini & the Pro? What confusion would there be if they shrunk the MBP? There is precedent for the compact desktop (Cube) and the compact pro notebook (12" PB). Was there consumer confusion when the Cube was around? Or the iBooks?

If there's anything confusing it would actually the MacBook Air which is part MacBook but styled like a MacBook Pro.

We're not talking about Apple becoming Dell, HP, ... with a maze of machines nor Emachines or other system builders with economy components. We're all talking about a few extra products to respond to consumer and prosumer demand.

Nothing says the headless midrange Mac could not be profitable. I'm not requesting they sell this machine at $500, quite the contrary. With the right case and the right hardware they can have their markup just like any other Mac ... and they will sell like hot cakes. Let's no forget that more standard components are cheaper to design, manufacture and work with than all the custom stuff Apple has been doing over the years (G4 iMac, Cube, Mac mini, ...) I still love my Cube. It was a design way ahead of its time and a true shame Apple didn't offer it at a more competitive price and the stars didn't line up right. So I understand that they want to avoid another 'flop'.

Might they lose some Pro sales when the midrange is out? Yes, they will from the people for whom the Pro is overkill, like me. We purchased the top dollar DP G5 because that was the option we had basically. Now several years later we know fully well we could be served by something half that size.

Might they lose some iMac & mini sales. Sure. But it is all one Apple for another. And by limiting this machine's number of cores, one free expansion slot, two hard drive bays and one optical drive, etc ... the professionals who need the quad cores and more, 4 drives, etc will still buy the Pro. People that want all-in-one will still go all-in-one.

Don't forget however that Apple will also gain many more switchers. Many switchers have bought a MacBook for their first Mac. I think it is guaranteed that a mid range desktop will bring a boatload more users on board. Yes. We're repeating ourselves, but for the average PC guy and geek, the mini is too small, too limited and the Pro too expensive. Most people are used to the box that sits on or under the desk and don't like the all-in-one idea (one part breaks, there goes the system for a week or two).

It is the performance and features that matter, while pricing it relatively competitive. Hover it well equipped in the iMac range (remember it doesn't include a monitor) and I will buy.

[jarek91]

This article is the perfect compliment to a series I've been running on Mac/PC price comparisons. The old rule that Macs cost more just isn't true. They're almost always cheaper than the PC equivalent. If anyone is curious, the posts are over at SoapBoxRants.

Perhaps if we get enough of this information out there, people will realize what a wonderful deal a Mac truly is.

[icerabbit]

I agree that general perception is skewed because there is a lot of competition in the PC market with a lot of economy machines, clearance deals, etc. Apple never has any super sales. Only briefly, when a new system is out, they will sell off the old supply at a discount for a couple weeks. Apart from that it has often been proven that you will find comparable prices between PC and Mac and that Macs can be better value in the workstation arena. The opposite (that Macs are pricier when the direct equivalent exists) is also true however as I have used one A brand notebook with the exact same components, screen etc that costs half of a MB. So, in that regard the MB is very expensive for what it is ... as the PC notebook was also new to the market and sold with a profit.

Anyhow. Most of us will say that an Apple product is a good buy in general terms, even though we know there is quite a bit of markup and we are picky on details that Apple has been skimping on (white wires with black hardware anyone?), dislike glossy screens and always find that missing feature or two. The sum of everything (but mostly OSX actually) makes it worth it.

But as far as the a mid range desktop is concerned there isn't one. Unless you accept the 20" iMac with its mediocre screen. Apple has no 'average' product. Only value-ish and limited (mini) or top of the line coslty workstation (pro) ... and that's growing a little old.

[AbbiV]

This is 1 of the best articles you have ever written. VERY useful. Keep up the good work :-)

[thaJack]

I have a Mac Pro. It's the 8 core 2.8, I have the NVidia 8800 graphics card, two internal 500 GB drives and 6 GB of memory.
It makes no sound really. Less than my laptop... and, in fact, no more than the external Western Digital MyBook that I am using for Time Machine.
Very quiet.

[technolawyer]

We just took delivery of a Mac Pro quad core (the "cheap" one) with Apple RAID last week. We removed the stock 320 GB drive and added 4 1 TB Seagate drives. It's silent. I've seen others remark on the lack of noise this computer makes. It makes sense -- that large case probably helps keep it cool unlike a laptop.

[thaJack]

Well, I only have the two internal disks, but the extra processors... it's whisper quiet. You have to stick your ear up to the front of the case to be able to hear anything at all. And, as previously mentioned, the external MyBook (an old one) makes as much, if not more, noise as the Mac Pro does.

[mikesweetser]

I totally agree with this article re: getting an iMac instead of a Mac Pro. After several years of use, my Power Mac G5 (one of the last PowerPC models) was finally showing its age, especially with me running Photoshop and several video editing tools, so it was time to upgrade. I went to the Apple Store all set to plunk down all the cash on a Mac Pro and a new display for what would've been more than $3500, when I saw the 24" iMac for much less, in less space, and more than powerful enough to do what I needed. Even with upgrading to 4 GB, getting AppleCare and software (Quicken and Parallels) it still came to less than three grand.
I've been using it for about 48 hours and I couldn't be happier - it runs Photoshop like a dream, and even when I ran Boot Camp to install Vista Home Premium, it's running THAT even better than I could've hoped (a whopping 5.6 score on the performance test!)
This is the perfect machine for me and I'd strongly recommend that anybody thinking they need a Mac Pro to be a "power user" look at the iMacs first, especially if they're also considering a monitor upgrade.