Slashdot Mirror
Think Secret Predicts Sub-$500 Headless Mac
eadint writes "I have just read an article posted on Think Secret that discusses a
confirmed $499
Apple box sans monitor. According to the article, this has been
under development for almost one year and may be available towards the
end of 2005Q1. The system is rumored to be based on a G4 with 256MB
of RAM , 40-80GB HD with a combo drive (sorry, no SuperDrive). Although Apple has stated in the past that they have no motivation to
compete in the sub-$600 PC market, this system was based on polls showing that more people would buy it after initial exposure
to the iPod." "Confirmed" seems a strong word, but I hope this is more than wishful thinking.
Last summer I read from a south asian government press release that Apple would be working with said government to build a cheap system for use only in that market. I firmly believe this rumored, stripped down machine is for that market.
Here's the press release
A lot of things about the Mac experience is unqquntifiable - that is, I can't draw you a graph based on fact that shows you a heap of things better on the Mac platform. Instead the best anyone can do is explain that, the GUI at least, is just so much better than anything else they've ever used.
:)
:)
That's certainly true for me. It's a mixture of thousands of small things - spring-loaded folders; labels; the application install process (or lack of); the dock (yes I like it); the way windows show you where they are coming from and where they are going with neat effects - this actually helps subconsciously build a better understanding of where your stuff is on screen and where it's gone to; beautiful icons; running a beautiful fullfeatured OS that runs MS Office, Photoshop and more but not being Windows; the way aliases (shortcuts) automatically update; the way searching is faster (there's a reason why the search functionality in Windows is called "Search", and in OS X it's called "Find"); the sheer "fit and finish" that goes into the GUI - NEVER will you have a busy or hung application that displays white contents when you drag something else over it, OS X stores the contents of a GUI app in a different way so that even when the app is hung it can be nicely moved around; the way you can Command-Click on any GUI element such as a scrollbar, and you can use it without forcing it to the front; the way you can close application windows without closing the app; the instant sleep instant wake function; bloody fantastic bluetooth support; seamless integration with Windows networks.
There's so much more, especially the little things, there's nothing bigger
And on top of all that it's built on a Unix foundation so, you have great things working out of the box, Apache can be turned on with the ticking of one easy to find check box - and BANG it's serving your "Sites" folder. Not to mention the security.
Well, just try it, ok
This sig has been deprecated.
Tiger does NOT need a 64 meg graphics card. I am running it on this PowerBook with a 32MB card, and I would not be suprised at all to have it run on something even weaker.
This sig has been deprecated.
One potater, two potater, three potater four. All as healthy and mature as any linux distribution, but it's not like most would ever buy a Mac just to run linux.
Unless this is another of those "just cause I can" things. :-)
--- Egads, I glow in the dark!
I guess the eye-candy wears off after a while as you said.
/System/Library and /etc for where to make my changes.
For me as a developer, I find I am much more productive under Mac OS X. The OS almost entirely "just works," has the MS Office apps I need to collaborate with staff and clients, and I can mostly just focus on my development without chasing down dependencies in this lib or that to get this feature or that working. I was never able to avoid being a "tweak" while running Linux or FreeBSD to do development. Mac OS X has freed me from that, thankfully.
Comparing it to Windows-based development, I spend 1/100th the time chasing down system problems that keep me from development work. Under Windows, it seems like I'm always fighting some stupid problem with dll hell or just the windowing system or underlying kernel breaking and wasting hours (sometimes days) at a time.
The most time-draining thing Mac OS X has caused me to waste time on so far was about 2h to figure out postgresql not getting enough sysv shm. That was solved by a few google searches and a grep through
I don't want to discourage anyone from doing what you describe, but you might want to avoid the $50 KVM switch.
Sure, back in the old days I used a $30 physical A/B/C/D switch for VGA connections which worked fine with my Amiga (15kHz) and VGA (31kHz), but as soon as you crank the resolutions and frequencies up, the cheap KVMs don't hold up.
If you want to do it right, you need a good KVM. Specifically, you need to look at the specs of the device, and how high a bus rate it can handle; this makes all the difference in your display quality. Personally, I use a Belkin OmniView 4-port PS/2 & USB device (vendor page here) which has worked great for me. You can get it cheaper, and despite what I found on pricegrabber about the device (reviews), I have had no problems. Unfortunately, it doesn't QUITE end there, though. You still need cables, and you can't get away with cheap cables; you should really go with the ones that Belkin sells, since they're up to spec. I tried the $15 cables, and your screen ghosts pretty bad.
In the end, total cost for the 4-port KVM I bought? With 2 sets of high quality cables and another set of cheap cables, I ran nearly $190, though I probably could have done better by going online. YMMV.
(note: I don't work for Belkin and have no particular love for the company, its just that I did a little research and found this to be the best product circa early 2002)
Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
- 4 years old
- running nonstop (over 5 mos. this time)
- running no antivirus software and on a university network
- doing everything their new WinTel machines can, only smoothly (OK I've disabled chat services so they'll get some work done; likewise it is game-free)
- stock, but the heart of a productive video editing set-up (despite a wimpy video card)
- only slightly less snappy than the shiny new G5 in the next rack over, which is rated at over 5 times the MHz (well, until they rip or render).
Panther (10.3) actually sped up the 350MHz iBook w/ 384MB of RAM that I use for field work; even on that hand-crank antique OS X is eminently usable, and wows onlookers (although often it's Quicksilver's functionality that's really causing the eyepoppiing).OS X on a cheap G4 will convert people. The only key issues for me are stock RAM configurations and build quality.
Damn those pesky terrorists
"spring-loaded folders" - I think those are annoying.
/Library folder that may be orphaned, but this happens in every OS, and is probably better to leave behind(they don't take up that much space
Turn them off.
"the application install process (or lack of)" - (lack of) a central location to add/remove software from your computer.
Drag the application to the Trash can. Done. True, you have support libraries in the
"the dock (yes I like it)" - I don't. You can't see your application titles unless you mouse over them. What if you have 6+ Word docs open?
Use Expose after you get to the document(I can't believe expose wasn't even talked about yet, or Cmd+` to cycle through you apps
If Mac's had a way to turn off the Scale/Genie effects entirely, I wouldn't mind at all.
It can be turned of very simply. Apple Logo->Dock->Dock Preferences
The only way to close a Mac app is to Control-Click it on the dock, and wait for a menu to quit the application
Apple users abuse the hell out of hotkeys. cmd+w to close a window, cmd+q to quit the application. if you get really happy, cmd+tab+q+tab+q etc... to close all the applications.
I just need a computer to get my work done, IM my friends, and maybe read some original and witty jokes
You sound like Apple's target audience:-D
Any that means they never will?
2. A new G4 desktop system in Spring of 2005? No chance. Apple is moving away from the Motorola G4 archetecture, in favor of the IBM G5.
Two words: PowerBook, iBook.
Well, a few more words: G4 isn't going any time soon, as they will still be using them for the PowerBook and iBook for a while longer. They have even said themselves not to expect a G5 laptop any time soon. So even though they may upgrade the eMac, there is no reason to believe they won't base this rumored machine on a G4. Especially if it's designed to be a small, bottom end machine. I mean, if it's good enough for their top-end laptops, then surely it's also good enough for their bottem-end desktop?
3. The current G4 eMac is $800, and their margin on it is thin (by Apple standards.) This rumored system is pretty much a G4 with the $100 monitor removed. No way Apple sells it for $500.
Unless you know the cost of the hardware for each of these machines, it's pretty hard to go by the price of the eMac.
4. Everybody who says they would never buy one of the current Macs, but would buy this one for $500 out of impulse, is a damn liar.
Utter BS. How can you possibly make such hardline judgements about complex things like purchasing decisions? For starters, not everyone even likes to buy 2nd hand, let alone that fact that a G4 tower will probably be much bigger than this thing.
http://www.apple.com.au/server/clustering_resourc
good start point for further research...
That's pretty much what this would be, actually.
Take an iBook, lop off the LCD, scrape off the keyboard and speakers, and replace the 4200 rpm laptop hard drive with a 7200 rpm full-size one...voila! Identical specs to what they're describing here (even down to the ports/power supply, if you check AppleInsider.com).