Apple fixes Windows Software Update utility

... so how about that expandable, affrdable mid-range tower people have been talking about, especially of late? :)

What does that have to do with software update on Windows? And why would Apple release a machine that would not only cannibalize iMac sales but more importantly, high margin MacPro sales just to satisfy a *small* group of power users.

All I have on my PC at work is QuickTime. Safari is still listed under "Updates" even though I don't have it installed. iTunes + QuickTime is listed under "New Software" which is were Safari should be.

He means they are listening to customer feedback. At least in some sense they are. It's insane to think that if I don't want a Mac with a built in screen my only options are a $600 computer and a $2300 one. If they made a headless Mac for just $100 to $200 less than the iMac, that would not cannibalize sales. If you have your own monitor you'll appreciate the savings. If you don't you'll appreciate the value of a built in 20-inch monitor for just $100 more. And 24-inch for just $200 more. Upgrade cycle would likely be faster as well for people who want headless Mac. Another win for Apple.

I believe Guy Kawaski, a former Apple Fellow, pointed out that it's better to cannibalize your sales than leave that job to your competitors. If customers buy an Apple midtower instead of an iMac or Mac Pro, who cares? At least they bought an Apple instead of a competitor's midtower.

Haysek, if you're right that it's a small group, then the impact to Mac Pro sales would be minimal. If it's a large group, then Apple is missing out by not selling to that group. In other words, even if you're right, you're still wrong. The only way a small group is a valid reason is if Apple couldn't recoup the R&D costs through sales, but that's not the point you argued.

But yes, this is far off-topic.

Much as I love both models, for many situations, the Mac Mini is too little computer, and the Mac Pro is *way* too much computer.

Also, I imagine there are institutions and corporations that have policies in place not allowing all-in-one computers.

Even if they are side by side in the store, the iMac is going to win out for the typical consumer. But, Apple could just not sell the mini-towers in the stores. Only make the available online. They could at least start out that way and see where the demand goes (like they did with the eMac).

And why would Apple release a machine that would not only cannibalize iMac sales but more importantly, high margin MacPro sales just to satisfy a *small* group of power users.

Your statement is completely contradictory.

If such a machine would 'cannabalize' sales of those machines, doesn't that mean there's a much larger market than what you profess?

And what does it say about the costs or value of the iMac and MacPro that such a computer would 'cannibalize' their sales?

Finally, you might not realize this, but the MacPro is a niche product. It's user base is really, really small. The reason is that it is just way too overpriced for what most people want/need.

got to agree here - the only people i know with one are people in design firms. actually that design firm mostly employs mbp and imac as mac pro are way too expensive.

im sure there are the power users with mac pro but... they are very few