Slashdot Mirror
Will Mac mini Lead the Charge to Smaller Desktops?
elecngnr writes "Maybe size doesn't matter. ZDNet has a story about how the Mac mini may shift consumers away from the larger tower style desktops to smaller ones. Other computer makers, such as HP, have so far been unsuccessful in marketing small computers to consumers. However, Apple does have a history of leading the charge in paradigm shifts in certain aspects of consumer products (e.g. GUI's, color changes, the iPod, and the list goes on). It is also important to recognize that they have been wrong at times too (e.g. the Cube, the Newton, and the one button mouse). Time will tell which list the Mini will belong to."
"What we found was, at least at that time (before HP bought Compaq), that people were still concerned about expandability," Anderson said. "It's been an important feature of the PC for the last 20 years, but as the PC has gone mainstream, it's been something that people liked but that they haven't used."
;)
Will it make a shift to smaller sized desktops? Maybe. Most people never need to open their case for a memory upgrade or some other piece of hardware being added but a lot of people do enjoy the ability to do that. As long as these small form factor machines are still able to be upgraded fairly easily I don't see why they wouldn't be popular... Personally I am rearranging my computer desk to accommodate the Mini. Not because of its size but because I want to show off the fact that I have this sleek, little, quiet, box sitting on my desk (BTW - I took Slashdotter advice from yesterday's article about the Mini and hardware upgrades and went with 512MB. I couldn't justify the $210 for 1GB when 512 was only $80). I am not looking forward to using two thin putty knives to open my brand new machine though. Why couldn't they have just made it user serviceable for RAM?
For the first time since I was 12 I am nervous about opening a computer case and swapping out some stuff inside. To me, that's just wrong.
Most buyers tend to purchase PCs based more on price and quality of technical support than on design, analysts said. Yet executives such as HP's Anderson see a market for unobtrusive desktops that consumers would purchase as second or third computers and use in settings such as kitchens, where large desktops are impractical.
Ok, I'm a geek and I love to have the Internet wherever I am but why in the kitchen? Like I don't have enough shit on my crappy counter space... Why not do something like those failed Motorola wireless AIM clients and have a docking station and wlan? Why do we have to have a small form factor machine in the kitchen? Most people here seem to be using this machine in the media room because it's small, quiet, and has DVI. That makes more sense to me.
Building in 120GB, 160GB or higher capacity drives, for example, will mean miniature PCs able to match larger machines in storing large numbers of MP3 files or even digital photos.
Oh come on. Not many people have enough photos and MP3s to fill even 10GB nevermind 120GB or 160GB. I am still using a 10GB HD in my XP machine. Yeah, my music is stored elsewhere but it's still less than 7GB of MP3s and 10GB more for SHN/FLAC (which most people aren't into). I want to know how many regular computer userse have 100GB of music and photos. Geeks are in the minority when it comes to computer purchases from major vendors that would be hurt by this "gamble". I'm sure it won't be anything for them to worry about.
I didn't get the Mini because it was small, quiet, or good looking. I got it because OS X is not Windows, is built on BSD, is now affordable, and isn't as susceptible to all the bullshit that my Windows machines are. If anything the Mini might open the door to more users for Apple which may or may not be a good thing
How was the Newton wrong? It may not have taken off, but it definitely had an impact. Palm would likely never have existed if Apple hadn't tried the Newton.
"Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
Perhaps the title should be that size does matter. Rather, being small is becoming more important. Perhaps we can think of this as Maslow's Hierarchy of Computer Needs. First we just want a machine that has enough power to do what we want. Then we want a machine that is small and unobtrusive and with enough power to do what we want.
what, do they just not realise it or something? the cube and newton are certainly failures and are discontinued, but Apple continues to bundle one-button mice with their computers. what's more, a lot of mac users seem to be perfectly happy with it.
i can understand it as a personal preference, of course, but what you like or dislike doesn't define failure, does it?
Of course, the cube's problem wasn't the design, it was the price tag. If they'd sold the cube for $500, it would have been a big hit, and you'd see grey cubes everywhere, from other computer manufacturers to George Foreman CubeGrills.
Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
It is also important to recognize that they have been wrong at times too (e.g. The Cube, the Newton, and the one button mouse)
God will you people PLEASE come up with something more original to pick at Apple with than the One Button Mouse. They obviously weren't THAT wrong about the one button mouse, they still use them. And they like it!
Smaller is cool. Saves you having to buy a desk with one of those PC tower compartments.
But you know what I'd like to see more of? Quieter PC's. Everything seems to be getting faster and/or smaller, but quieter would be nice.
I tend to think of it as more an issue of intended use, rather than size. This is the ultimate iteration of the iMac... the Console Computer. Now it just LOOKS more like a console. I remember the first iMac. When I looked at the side of the box, there were 3 steps listed for setup: step 1) take iMac out of the box. step 2) plug in power and keyboard. step 3) there is no step 3. this is just the next logical step. A small, unobtrusive computer that anyone can set up and use. As to the poster above saying he/she dislikes the inability to open this and modify it... that's the point. Like a console, it is intended to be "perfect" from the factory and never need modification. Just plug it in and turn it on.
In Soviet Russia jokes are formulaic and decidedly non-humorous.
The cube was a brilliant design, and people I know that have it love it.
Only problem was that it was too frickin expensive.
Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
Just because a product flops or isn't the mainstream flagship product of its type doesn't mean it's wrong.
Arguably, Apple was right with the Newton and the Cube - they were just a few years early on both counts. Arguably, Apple is right with the one-button mouse; just not right for everybody.
Within the context of pushing paradigm shifts, you could argue that these three were unsuccessful, but you can hardly argue they were "wrong."
It all depends, really. People like some things bigger. Pizzas, for instance, because it means more bready-cheesy-tomato-saucy goodness. Bigger homes mean more space AND a (perceived or true) better return on investment. Big SUVs are great in the winter weather, and they have a lot of room for hauling stuff.
However, they don't always prefer bigger. People love the small size of the iPod. They love smaller, slimmer cell phones. They prefer babies to teenagers. You don't see too many huge women as centerfolds. Huge bazooms, yes; land whales, no. Middle-aged-crazy men prefer sports cars to minivans. I myself prefer women who require small maintenance to those who require a lot. And you can bet that taxpayers prefer small government to big. People love laptops that are smaller and lighter.
So maybe there is a market for this, which will be helped along by the Mac mini being stylish and from a company that's considered cool. Maybe it won't start a trend. The market will decide, as the market always does.
The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
I think cost will be a huge part of this equation. Clearly Jonathan Ive's design team at Apple has been incredible fitting powerful components into minute packages. I doubt Dell and HP will be nearly as successful, and furthermore doubt that it is in their interests to attempt this. Dell has always found success through fitting inexpensive components together to market towards the masses. Focusing on design can only increase costs and reduce profitability.
Rome did not create a great empire by having meetings; they did it by killing all those who opposed them.
Surely you jest. They moved 4.5 million iPods just during the Holiday Season. The "geek circle" can't be that big. Go to a gym sometime; tell me that all the women working out with their shiny pink iPods are geeks.
Bloomingdales sells iPods; Nieman Marcus sells insanely expensive iPod cases. You can't possible believe that these are typical geek shopping venues.
Two big problems with the One Button Mouse:
1: They continue to refuse to admit that it is a mistake, instead touting it as the supposed superiority of Mac over PC. (Note: Every time I sit down at my Mac to work with Maya, the first thing I do is plug in a three-button mouse with scroll wheel -- and so does everybody else.)
2: It is all a Big Lie to start with! Mouse click, mouse double-click, mouse click and drag, mouse+alt, mouse+option, mouse+shift, mouse+Apple, mouse+control, mouse+every combination of the above!
It has never been a single button mouse. It's just that the rest of the buttons are exceptionally inconveniently located on the keyboard, most of them in the lower left quadrant! It's all style over substance crap that doesn't endear me to Apple!!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Big SUV's are NOT nice in winter weather. Learn to drive, get a small, front wheel drive car, put good tires on it, and you'll have something that is 1000 times easier to drive in winter weather. Plus you'll finally be out of my lane because you'll know the size of your f-ing car!
P.S. Yes, I know the argument between front-wheel and rear-wheel control in the winter. Here's what it amounts to: Given a person who knows how to drive each, it's more difficult to lose control in a front wheel drive car, but it's easier to regain control in a rear-wheel drive car. So, for most people, front wheel drive is better.
Yes, go to your mom, dad, sister - whoever you think is not geeky enough. Ask them whether they know that mouse wheel is clickable? Now watch them trying to do it... Yeah, great fun. Ask them whether they know that they can drag things with the right mouse button? BTW, Ask them what happens when you drag things with the mouse - will they get moved or copied or what? What exactly in what situation? So, how many points scored? Do you still think that simple mouse (that they probably like to handle with two fingers and release before clicking) is a bad thing for _them_?
:) No bash.org'ese replies please :)
Me - I trained myself to handle my mouse with both hands equally well
We've all wanted to see MS's dominance challenged. We've been working hard to make Linux a viable candidate and it is. We've always known Mac's were a better GUI experience and really a better desktop than Windows. We've always known if they would just bring it to the masses it would go far. Well, now Apple is doing just that.
The other consideration is psychological, consumers tend to gravitate towards big things because they think their more powerful. I've seen so many people by the 17in powerbook for absolutely no logical reason whatsoever. Yes, people doing video editing, sound editing, and graphics work can make us of a 17in, but the vast majority of buyers are normal users. I joke around with my one 17in wielding coworker, and call it the SUV laptop phenomenon. People are buying 17in powerbooks much in the manner that others buy hummer H2s.
... is that they still need some work in the cooling arena. Unless it's an under-powered machine, of course (which the Mac mini appears to be).
I tried the mini PC thing for a while, and now I've gone back to a regular sized mid-tower, and am much happier. The reason? Cooling. From the moment I bought my first mini PC, I suspected that it would run a bit hot. And it did with a 3.06GHz Pentium 4 in it. The CPU temperature was always running near the limit and occasionally on warmer days the temperature alarm would go off. So I added an additional fan and, since it seemed stable, I just ran with it that way for a long time. Then one day I remembered that Pentium 4 processors had a thermal throttling feature that inserts idle cycles when the temperature gets too high. So I did some searching and quickly found a utility that could tell me if the Pentium 4 in my mini PC was throttling. Sure enough, it was. All this time I had basically been running a crippled machine because the tiny case simply couldn't adequately ventilate the high-performance hardware. I tried a second model of mini PC, but returned it because it too had this same problem.
I moved the CPU and all the other hardware (except the mobo of course, since they're always proprietary in these mini PCs) into a normal sized mid-tower case. Now that same processor with the same heatsink/cooler runs well below the Pentium 4's thermal limits. And it never throttles itself.
And if you're thinking, "Well Mr. Smarty Pants, I'll just buy a mini PC and soup it up with the sweetest CPU cooler I can find!", then think again. These cases are far too small for your typical enthusiast to install a fancier cooling system. Someone with a lot of skill and specialized tools might be able to engineer a proper solution, but you won't find anything off-the-shelf anywhere.
The moral of the story? Mini PCs are for the weak. If you want performance in a mini PC case, they're just not there yet. And the Mac mini does not appear to be an exception. It too comes fairly weakly equipped.
Despite what EULAs say, most software is sold, not licensed.
Laptops are expandable and hatches reveal the slots for RAM and other optional extras like wifi modules. Why this cannot be done for a small form factor PC I don't know.
I'd rather go buy a cheapo tower that can take an ATX motherboard of my choosing...it's cheaper to deal with.
What Apple does is probably good for the people who use Apples and want a smaller, cuter LOOKING computer, but the market of people that use Apple is different than the market of people who use PCs.
Apples are the closest thing you can get to a car with the hood welded shut.
I believe your mistaken. Just because you'd rather buy a cheap tower and build your own PC doesn't mean "the market of people who use PCs" are anything like you. In fact, given that computer systems are just about commodity items, "the market of people who use PCs" are most likley people who will never, ever even open up their computer. And that's exactly why Dell is #1 and not the maker of some "cheapo tower."
Thus, a "car with the hood welded shut" (e.g. the Mac Mini) is not only attractive for Apple users, but also for most PC users.
For you and other "tinkerers" there will always be the option to build your own, but you're a rare breed. Dell isn't interested in your business, and neither is Apple.
I maximize my desktop space by putting the computer case on the floor. I like my cases to resemble the layout of a '56 Ford pickup engine compartment... room to climb in and walk around. If I want to change out a drive, it shouldn't be necessary to route my screwdriver through an alternate unverse to reach the screws. I don't want to disconnect the IDE ribbons to see the memory chips. I don't want to worry about the audio cables getting sucked into the CPU fan. For those times when a small form factor is important, such as hotel room microdesks or college dorms, there are notebook computers. They work great.
Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
"It has never been a single button mouse. It's just that the rest of the buttons are exceptionally inconveniently located on the keyboard, most of them in the lower left quadrant!"
You need to switch to decaf. First and foremost, the Mac was developed to be used with the mouse and keyboard at the same time. The idea was that you had one hand on the mouse and the left hand on the keyboard (sorry lefties). The hand on the keyboard meant that you had all the modifier keys you needed already beneath your fingers, so extra buttons on the mouse aren't necessary if you work this way. Besides which, the common menu commands all have consistent keyboard shortcuts associated with them, and as you gain in experience with the Mac, you rarely find yourself mousing to the menu bar. Microsoft of course missed this with Windows and went to the philosophy that it was all about the mouse. I know Mac users who tell PC users that they only like multi-button mice because it leaves one hand free when they're surfing pr0n sites.
I use a PowerBook and I thank God for the trackpad, because it means that I never even have to remove my hands from the keyboard to reach for a mouse, which I absolutely hate doing. I also have tap-and-hold enabled so I don't even use the button at all, much to the amazement of my PC-using friends. So in effect I use a no-button mouse. I will grant however that the scroll wheel is a much more useful innovation. Not necessary for mouse-haters like me, but more useful.
If I understand you correctly, you are upset that the mouse that is bundled with most Macs only has one button. And yet, you seem to be aware that the operating system performs all the functions of multibutton mice, either by using the keyboard, or by allowing you to plug in a third party multibutton mouse.
Are you just upset that Apple won't sell you a multibutton mouse? I'm trying to understand whether you are a total moron, or just a slow learner.
The size of computer systems has been shrinking for years.
Sure, but not at such a rate. In the space my PC tower uses, you can put about fourteen (14) Mac minis. 2 stacks of 7 units. You can put at least 4 Minis in a Shuttle (3 stacked, one vertically).
blah
They weren't wrong about the cube!
...
Actually, of the three things on the list, I would be most willing to agree with the cube being listed.
For the others:
Newtons - Newtons failed because they were so far ahead of their time. A PDA, before there were such things as "PDAs", that actually allowed you to write the way you know how as opposed to learning a new character set?? Over 10 years later and I STILL don't think you can find this on ANY handheld. Apple had the right idea - let the human dictate to the PDA and not vice-versa, but, just technology hadn't advanced far enough, yet (Eat up Martha).
one-button mouse - Will people just get over this? Please? The general public just doesn't care about one vs. multi button. Personally, I've have a 2 - 4 button trackball (Now with a scroll ring!) on my machine machine for the last 10 years. However, the one button mouse is a godsend when dealing with people that don't work on computers day in and out.
I can't count the number of telephone support calls I've had that sounded like a bad "Who's on first?" routine:
Me: OK, I need you to click the icon with the right mouse button.
Them: I did. The icon got dark.
Me: It sounds like you didn't click with the right mouse button.
Them: How do I know which one is right?
Me: It's the mouse button that is on the right side of the mouse.
Them: There are no buttons on the right side of the mouse.
as opposed to dealing with Mac users:
Me: With your left hand, press and hold the "Control" key located at the lower left corner of the keyboard. Now, click the mouse on the icon.
Them: A little menu appeared.
- Tony
You mention the Cube as a mistake. Hmm, wasn't that a small computer? And was it successful? Personally, I would love a small computer, but given that the cost is typically the same an a larger machine, isn't nearly as expandable, and I can't get dual CPU's, it's not going to happen soon.
Of course, the standard PC answer is to any Mac innovation is "Who cares? If it's of any real importance PCs will have it in a year anyway. And it will be cheaper." To which the Mac answer is, "Yeah, and it won't work as well."
As a lifelong Apple customer, I say this without a hint of troll:
Apple often miscalculates the value delta between "cheaper" and "won't work as well". People will find a way to deal with the latter, if the former is significantly true.
The "as well" chasm must be wide and painful before most people will throw money at it.
For my money Macs are a great value. But I don't suspect that's true for everyone.
Last time I looked just about everyone had a PDA. Sure apple didnt stay in the PDA market, but they did create the market as it is known today. Why would you consider the Newton a failure when all that went wrong is that it came too soon for there to even be a market for it?
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
It is interesting to me that the Mac Mini uses a Laptop hard drive. The Mac Mini and iMac G5 also share the same laptop slot-loading drive as the PowerBooks. Airport cards in desktops and laptops are identical too. The Mac Mini does NOT use laptop ram but the iMac line does. Obviously the iPod is using some small hard drive, perhaps one also used in laptops, but I am only guessing.
The point is that Apple is enjoying some economies of scale. By buying larger quantities of laptop parts, they not only get better per unit pricing, but also reduce inventories, support costs, engineering overhead, etc.
If they are smart, the big PC makers will follow suite inroder to reduce costs for their laptops as well as provide cooler desktops.
Apple recognized with the iMac that the computer needed to move from boxy to foxy. Dell, Gateway, and others tried but couldn't think outside the box. They just used black cases or rounded some edges. The Mac mini is really an evolution from the original iMac and is no smaller than the iMac G4's housing and no more an engineering wonder than the iMac G5 behind the monitor.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
While you're wrong about HP (well, OK, they don't 'invent' much in the consumer space, but elsewhere...), you raise an interesting point about what Apple may have learned from Newton/Cube/iPod sales--timing.
I wondered why it took Apple so long to do the Mini; I don't think it was because of design challenges alone. I suspect that they were waiting for a number of factors to line up first: iPod market saturation, cheap laptop HD's & G4's, and the market momentum shift towards computers as an appliance... a shift that is in its early but not infant stages. The trick, I suspect, is in hitting the market at the right angle, like orbital re-entry. I was wondering why Jobs didn't make more fanfare about the Mini when he introduced it, but 'got it' when he held up the packaging--it would fit in a large purse. This thing will sell itself, through positioning and word of mouth, and it will have a long run as a product; watch for some interesting iterations and really interesting hacks.
Damn those pesky terrorists
I only need one mouse button to open the terminal.
I don't understand why there have been so many comments about the one-button mouse.
The Mac mini doesn't even come with one of them.
What, really, is the gripe? There is nothing stopping you from using a multi-button mouse. There isn't even the disincentive of having the machine come with a mouse that you'd won't use. Is it really that offensive that Apple doesn't want to sell you something that you can get elsewhere, or that you might already own?
Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
Smaller desktops will happen and here's why:
1. It costs less in raw matterials to busild something smaller.
2. It costs less to ship smaller, lighter devices.
3. The devices can be built to accomidate a larger market by adding features that offer extra value without costing a lot to build in.
3A. By offering a feature laden product that can't be internally accessorized easily, they build a market that will want to replace their computers more frequently. Building future market for the manufacturer (planned obsolecence). Note: this will also create a market for USB style accessories.
4. Less space for retailer's stock.
Look for computers to evolve into machines that don't have sockets to add RAM (it will be soldered on the motherboard) and are fabricated more like the new PS/2 from Sony. All the ports will be USB and or Firewire. Much of the design will be borrowed from Notebooks and use "mobile technology" including power-bricks, 2.5" HDD's, and thin style accessories. Things like internal speakers and fans will go away. The CPU heat sink will be a large aluminum panel which will double as a part of the case.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
Just because they released a design first doesn't mean that it was an original concept at the time. Don't attribute Apple with more inspiration than they have.
...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
And here it is now.
You: "Okay, now control-click on the file.
Them:"I clicked, but it just made the file open. I didn't see any menu."
You: "No, no, control-click the file."
Them: "What do you mean, 'control-click'? My mouse only has one button."
You: "Control-click, as in 'put your hand on the keyboard, hold down the button called control, and then click.'"
Them: "I did that and it made a copy of the file."
You: "NO! IT IS THE BUTTON NEXT TO IT, AND IT ISN'T THE ONE WITH THE APPLE ON IT!"
Them (completely astonished): "Oh there it it. You mean I have to do all of that just to do something else???
A perfect example of the "as well" chasm is Linux. It's significantly cheaper than Windows, yet for most folks, doesn't work as well.
I do run Linux, and I'm not trying to troll, but Linux has a long way to go when it comes to some things. Compare installing a new piece of hardware in Linux vs. Windows*:
And I haven't even covered the cases where the drivers won't compile, or the vendor changes chipsets and the device won't work with Linux at all.
Granted, you only have to setup Linux once. But I've found that installing Linux and getting the hardware to work typically takes between two and three times what it would take under Windows, if it is supported at all. I can talk someone through reinstalling Windows over the phone, but I wouldn't dare try that with Linux. (Of course, you might never have to do the latter, so it might be a moot point).
* - based on a true story...
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.