Apple Lineup

clv101

clv101

clv101

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
10,962
Location
Bristol
I like Apple. It’s good kit. However now I’ve had a good think about it, the Air looks rubbish. The latest inexcusable omission I’ve discovered is that it has no Kensington Security Slot. This makes it largely unusable for a vast number of people including me.

In my opinion Apple have dropped the ball with Air. The products Apple should bring to market are:

13” MacBook Pro – virtually the same as the plastic MacBook but with the metal case, backlit keys, great build quality and a 1440x900 screen.

Headless iMac – same spec as the current iMac, but in a small case similar to a shuttle case with user replaceable/upgradeable optical, 3.5”drive, graphics card, RAM and processor. No screen.

With these two additions the lineup would be great. The Air, with its current specification/price just seems an irrelevance.
 
I think the Air has ruled out all probability of a 13" MBP.

I find 15" small enough, 13" is bad, and lower is just not bareable :(

As for the headless iMac.. I wish it'd happen, only when they update the ADCs
 
There must be a design reason why they couldn't include the Kensington lock because lets face it, the thing is asking to be robbed.

The good thing about the Air is it has some cool features that will no doubt filter down into the rest of the line so its good news for the rest of us who wont be buying one.
 
I can't see then coming out with a headless iMac. Likely to lose too much in terms of hardware sales, also likely to get more support calls as fit cards that don't work etc. Sounds exactly like a user upgradeable mini or a small scale xMac that some people have been asking for.
 
If the MacBook had the "Swipe" thing on the touchpad, that would make it ridiculously desirable for me. Now I feel I'd be missing out if I got one, and with the Air being so new, I can't see them back-porting that feature to the regular MacBooks...

Personally, 13.3" is the largest size I'd want for a laptop. Anything bigger seems unnecessary. I've seen the Sony Vaio 17"ers... that's not a laptop, it's a breeze block... they're HUGE.
 
They'll bring the multitouch trackpad to the notebook line, when they're next updated.

Only a few apps actually allow you to use the multitouch, so it's hardly a "must-have" for me :o
 
Mr.Clark said:
Personally, 13.3" is the largest size I'd want for a laptop. Anything bigger seems unnecessary. I've seen the Sony Vaio 17"ers... that's not a laptop, it's a breeze block... they're HUGE.
Click to expand...
Totally agree - laptops should be small.
 
If it's a desktop-replacement then I have to disagree.

My 17" MacBook Pro seemed like the perfect size, purely because every inch of real estate was used in the pro apps.

If you have a machine, and the laptop is for portability.. then sure.
 
Like I said, personally. :)

I have a reasonable PC for gaming and stuff, the only time I use a laptop is if I'm going somewhere on the train (and in the other office, if there's no spare PCs)
 
EVH said:
If it's a desktop-replacement then I have to disagree.
Click to expand...
Naw, I use a laptop at at work every day. It leaves my desk maybe only 5 days a month and that's mostly to work at someone else's desk. I still like a small one. I use an external keyboard and large external monitor.
 
clv101 said:
Naw, I use a laptop at at work every day. It leaves my desk maybe only 5 days a month and that's mostly to work at someone else's desk. I still like a small one. I use an external keyboard and large external monitor.
Click to expand...

You need to rethink why you need a laptop.

Not having a go, but if it never leaves, and is constantly plugged in to a monitor and keyboard then surely a Mac Mini would be better?
 
Nope 'cos it wouldn't be practical for the 5 days a month then I do have to work somewhere else - when I want it to be as small and light as possible. The other 15 days a month I'm at my desk with my nice keyboard, mouse and screen. Yesterday I had a meeting in London - MacBook works great on the train there and back and for minimal tinkering in the meeting. A 15 or 17 incher would have been extra size and weight for no good reason.

I just see no need for large laptops - if I'm mobile I want it as small/light as possible and if I'm static I use external devices. I think it's crazy to use a laptop at a permanent desk for any significant length of time, even a 17 inch one. The screen is at the wrong height and the wrong place wrt the keyboard.
 
I don't think there is any need for a 13" MBP - the 15" MBP is only slightly wider than the MB, same thickness and weighs the same, I don't think anyone would buy the MB over the MBP for size reasons alone.

Headless iMac - not going to happen. Apple already has low, mid and high end machines and none of their other product ranges overlap. Apple doesn't care about people reusing their screens from PCs tbh.
 
Hamish said:
I don't think there is any need for a 13" MBP - the 15" MBP is only slightly wider than the MB, same thickness and weighs the same, I don't think anyone would buy the MB over the MBP for size reasons alone.
Click to expand...
But a 13" MBP could be an inch narrower than the MB, thinner and lighter. Not to mention looking better and having higher build quality. Worth £200 over the plastic one? I expect so for many.

Headless iMac - not going to happen. Apple already has low, mid and high end machines and none of their other product ranges overlap. Apple doesn't care about people reusing their screens from PCs tbh.
Click to expand...
Those aren't the points. The point is providing a Mac with decent performance/features (3.5" drive, proper graphics card, ability to drive two screens) without having the pay the premium of a 20" or 24" Apple TFT. I for one wouldn't dream of buying an iMac with the built in screen but would consider spending ~£7-800 on a headless iMac. It's not an overlap, it's better than a mini and worse than a pro. The imac is not directly comparable because of the screen.
 
clv101 said:
But a 13" MBP could be an inch narrower than the MB, thinner and lighter. Not to mention looking better and having higher build quality. Worth £200 over the plastic one? I expect so for many.

Those aren't the points. The point is providing a Mac with decent performance/features (3.5" drive, proper graphics card, ability to drive two screens) without having the pay the premium of a 20" or 24" Apple TFT. I for one wouldn't dream of buying an iMac with the built in screen but would consider spending ~£7-800 on a headless iMac. It's not an overlap, it's better than a mini and worse than a pro. The imac is not directly comparable because of the screen.
Click to expand...

Like it or not, the imac occupies that slot in apples product line. You might not think it should because of the screen but it does.

I desperately want and have argued countless times for a decent desktop mac that gives me more performance than a imac without having to buy a mac pro but I don't expect it to happen.

'User upgradable' graphics isn't going to happen, even the mac pro cards use a special BIOS so aren't really user upgradable unless you buy from apple.

To be honest I wouldn't care if they made it a mini like sealed box, so long as it had a Q6600 and discrete graphics in it.

Oh, I disagree about a 13" macbook pro though, why on earth would they do that? What you're asking for is a macbook air changed to suit your needs. But theres nothing to differentiate a 13" macbook pro from the macbook, better built would mean admitting the macbook could be better built. No company is going to do that...
 
But a 13" MBP could be an inch narrower than the MB, thinner and lighter. Not to mention looking better and having higher build quality. Worth £200 over the plastic one? I expect so for many.
Click to expand...
True the 13" MBP could be slightly smaller then the MB in width and length by around 5mm but it wouldn't be any thinner as the limitation is because of the thickness of hard drives and CD ROM drives. It would also demand the price premium of the Pro range so would be around £300-400 more expensive that the comparable MacBook for a slightly smaller, aluminium case and maybe a slightly faster processor. People would laugh in Apple's faces :(
 
With both these things - I don't think they will happen. Just that I'd like them to happen - they describe the products I'd like Apple to make.
 
clv101 said:
I just see no need for large laptops - if I'm mobile I want it as small/light as possible and if I'm static I use external devices. I think it's crazy to use a laptop at a permanent desk for any significant length of time, even a 17 inch one. The screen is at the wrong height and the wrong place wrt the keyboard.
Click to expand...
I suppose it depends what you're doing, I'll grant you that.

I usually take a FireWire HD with me when recording in the studio, but when I had my 17" MacBook Pro I'd take that, and use it for the same reason.

What made it good, was I could travel around with it quite easily (2cm bigger than the 15") but if I needed to do some serious audio/picture editing I wasn't limited by a small screen (it was the resolution that I liked) on the road.

That said, it was never perched on a desk at any time in it's life..
 
None of their products overlap and why would they. They currently have a very complete line up that is non confusing to a consumer.... They are also selling plenty! Why would they produce two different types of 13 inch laptop? Why would they produced a head less iMac? Where would it sit? In between the mac pro and mac mini?


I can't argue with the lack of Kensington compatibility on the air though. It's worth remembering this is MK1 though and all apple products are better after at least 2 incarnations imho!!!

As for dropping the ball, sales figures will decide that :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom