I’d love to see Apple build something as upgradeable and flexible as the old G4 towers. I have two of those beasts, and have added RAM, SATA controllers, bigger hard drives, better optical disc burners, better video cards, and accelerators to them over the years. They aren’t super fast, but they do run Tiger quite nicely, along with most recent productivity software (Office 2004 and Adobe CS).

My point is that at least some model of Apple’s Macintosh should be considered a 10-year personal investment, not a 3-year corporate write-off. These 1999 machines were given to me by my company, once their useful life there was exhausted (about six years!). My kids enjoy the upgraded versions and will for several more years, thanks to cheap upgrades.

I think a lot of us would enjoy a desktop Mac with full accessibility and user-replaceable components. Companies who sell replacement parts are plentiful. Want more storage? Memory? Video capability? A new optical drive? More ports? A faster network connection? It’s all out there. Just give us box to put it in. Oh, and while you’re at it, Apple, give us the ability to upgrade the processor again!

I’d love to see a new Mac in a IIci type case. It would be very easy to get into and configure, and can be optionally placed up-right if need be.

Maybe the reason Intel’s newest chipset has been postponed for a few weeks is because they sold all their first run to Apple?

Industrial Design has always helped set Apple apart from the crowd. When people think Apple, they often think style. Refreshing their product design helps keep Apple fresh in the mind of the consumer. Apple themselves have set this expectation with customers. Even if Apple only updated product X with had a larger HD and speed bump but it came in a restyled case, that’d be enough to stimulate sales.

I’ve had a 15” 1.83GHz Core Duo MacBook Pro for the last 2 years. Nice keyboard, display (although the newer, higher res one would be beneficial from time to time) and have never had any issues with it. If Apple could build this product, no compromises, into the Air form factor I’d be in. Until then I’m fine with the extra weight. I also run a MacPro with 23” Cinema Display. While the Pro line has been slightly face lifted over the years inside and out, it’d be nice to see a refresh on the exterior design. As for the Cinema display line, well, I wonder if Apple actually remember they sell displays? Not only is their pricing out of step in today’s market, it’d be good to at least pop a camera in the top for those of us that are more than often strapped to the desktop.

After a bit of experimentation over the years, they seem to be settling on some unification with their design. Maybe going thinner and lighter is where it’s at next. I just hope with all this extra attention they’re gaining these days, they don’t stop pushing the boundaries on all of their products, not just some.

Yet another well reasoned piece—the Apple product line really has no competition except for the new designs coming out of One Infinite Loop. My only question is how a word like alternation got past your spell-check and proofreading? “but a serious alternation”

Peace!

When spelling checkers are smart, we won’t have to worry about this anymore.

Peace,
Gene

Yet another well reasoned piece—the Apple product line really has no competition except for the new designs coming out of One Infinite Loop. My only question is how a word like alternation got past your spell-check and proofreading? “but a serious alternation”

Peace!

… b.) The Mac Pro is HEAVY, which can be dangerous both for the Mac and for the spinal cord of the poor soul who has to lug it around (and the sharp edges on the carrying handles don’t help the situation). There are also arguments for a redesign based on the amount of desk space consumed by the footprint. What it really comes down to is this: the massive case used for the MacPro was designed to house all the cooling apparatus required by the G-5, which is no longer necessary.

Why are you moving a Mac Pro around? I have moved mine once since setting it up – when I got a new desk. The concept of a tower is a machine that won’t be moved around and thus can house the most impressive components with no thought to portability.

I used to be a Mac Genius (when the Mac Pro came out I was the first to replace a logic board in my store and thus was the Mac Pro expert) and I have 2 observations of my own here:
1) There’s not really a lot of empty space in these things. The footprint is partially the result of 4 SATA 3.5 in drive bays, the MLB is very large, and the heatsinks are not exactly tiny either. Plus you have power supplies, optical drive bays, etc… Yes, the G4 and earlier PowerMacs got a most of this into a smaller form factor but what you may not be aware of unless you tore them down to the casing, as I have, is that the heatsinks in the G4s are much smaller and the 2 (not 4 in most cases) IDE drives were much, much more tedious to switch out which in these days of large multi-media files can be a big deal. The reason this is so has a lot to do with the location of the stacked mounting sleds in order to fit that smaller form factor. Thus to get 4 SATA 3.5in drives easily accessible in the MacPro you have established a wide, long footprint to start with. As for the massive case not being needed for cooling, although they are much quieter than the G5 PowerMac, the MacPro really does need that huge heatsink. A smaller sink, or lesser volume of air and you are back to needing liquid cooling. Not a great option, trust me.

2)If you must move a MacPro, bend at the knees, not the waist, and place your hands into the space at the “feet” of the tower so that your palms are gripping the main case, not the “handles”. You will lift with your legs and you will find the grip quite comfortable. In fact, this is so much better on your hands that it is the way I grip every Apple tower produced since the G3 blue and white. Those corner handles have always had tough edges.

Cheers!

I think a redesign would be appropriate to stay ahead of the competition. And to refresh purchases. Lets figure what happens:

Apple releases a new redesigned macbook and macbook pro
we want, but have a good current model
we sell it on ebay or craigslist – our old one
buy a the new one cause were apple fanatics and like the lastest and greatest
apple profits with now a sale of the new unit and a new customer. Extends market use. No one throws out thier macs like they do PC’s. We give them away or sell them. Increasing Apples market share.

So why a redesign? I thiink that answers the question.

I agree with Joel in general, but I’d make two points. a.) The aluminum case and “cheese greater” front of the Mac Pro is something you either love or hate, let’s not get into that. What is beyond argument is that a metal case interferes with radio waves, one remembers the G3/4 cases with fondness because you didn’t have to hang any antennae out of them. b.) The Mac Pro is HEAVY, which can be dangerous both for the Mac and for the spinal cord of the poor soul who has to lug it around (and the sharp edges on the carrying handles don’t help the situation). There are also arguments for a redesign based on the amount of desk space consumed by the footprint. What it really comes down to is this: the massive case used for the MacPro was designed to house all the cooling apparatus required by the G-5, which is no longer necessary.

Your point is well made but when ever I hear anything like this I always default to “Apple knows what they’re doing – irresepctive of what they actually do”. I would tend to think that if Apple redesigns their computers then an argument of “do they really need to?” is simply not an issue. If Apple thinks they need a redesign, then they have good reason.

It’s also clear that if Apple doesn’t think they have a reason to update, they won’t (as your long lasting examples show).

In short, I’m constantly amazed how many people don’t trust Apple to do what they have done best for the last ten years.