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
People like big things. Big TVs, big SUVs, big houses... big computers. Size still matters. I bet if they started selling room-size computers again, people would be buying them.
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."
Let's get this out of the way right now. Please make all your valuable n-button-mouse replies to this post.
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.
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
I think its important to point out that size is lower on the list of reasons why the mini has been selling like hot cakes to all users (mac and pc)
For the simple fact that had the mini been 6x6 inches or 66x66 inches, the mini does not get infected with ad-ware spyware etc...
I think we are at a point in history, when a large number of people are finnaly just "getting sick" of dealing with windows... its almost that some have forgotten that they bought a computer to DO stuff with it NOT maintain it....
currently, support of windows is spiraling out of control..hatred of its inefficiencies is at an all time high.
people (especially that have bought ipods) are now realizing there is a better way. a way that simply let's them DO the things they really want to do with a computer...
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.
Although it wasn't well worded, I don't think the OP was trying to say that all of those ideas from Apple were failures in the sense that they don't work or are bad ideas, but rather that they failed to inspire industry-wide trends. The one-button mouse works just fine for the Mac because it was designed with a one-button mouse in mind, so they continue to use it. Nobody else picked up on it, though.
This small form factor could turn out the same way, but I doubt it. Small seems to be the way to go, especially now that upgrades are getting less and less significant to most users (is 4 GHz really going to be better than 3.5?) If you can't make them faster, or if the consumers stop caring whether or not their computer is faster, form factor is a reasonable direction to push research.
I wish that my inferiority complex were as good as yours.
-RenderHead
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.
Now I agree with the argument that maybe Apple should offer a better mouse out of the box, but, well, mice are pretty cheap.
--- Ban humanity.
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."
I can just imagine it, another small fanless box with 250GB to 1TB in disks and just enough CPU power to serve it up to the network and play internet gateway, maybe even run some print queues.
This time not only no monitor, but not even a video out; Rendezous makes it easily available to all computers in the house.
Add "iVision", a dumb MPEG4 playback box for next to your television (plays just audio too!), the HDTV downloads predicted by Robert X. Cringely and you have the home multimedia promise delivered.
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.
Steve Jobs obviously has good taste in sensing trends and managing to bring them to market just a little more quickly than others. You could make a list of things that were more or less in the air, that the Mac wasn't first to offer, but successfully offered on a large scale six to twelve months ahead of the PC world.
All of these points can of course be debated depending on how you count "introduced on a large scale" and "when," but...
--Introducing the Sony 3.5" floppy in the first place
--Screens with black text on a white background
--Easy-to-use workgroup-strength plug-and-play networking
--Laser printers
--SCSI interface
--DROPPING floppies as standard equipment
--USB ports (!)
--Optical mice as standard equipment
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."
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
Apples failure with the Newton, Cube etc. haven't been because the innovation was wrong... The Newton concept lead to Palm and then to PocketPC. The Cube beat Shuttle to the SFF. Apple's failures in these cases were due mainly to a lack of conviction... (and possibly money)... and maybe coming to market too early. Have they learned thier lesson? They got the iPod spot on... they didn't invent MP3 players... but they pitched thier product at eactly the right time to capture the imagination. I'm sure the Mac mini will do well... for a start it's soo much cheaper than the other Macs... and sooo small. I'm buying one for my mother-in-law...
I always laugh at HP's moto... HP invent. Do they? Naa...
I hope the Mac mini will encourage people to think small.
return 0; }
I think one new thing with computers getting so cheap will be the distribution of machines with software. When per-seat costs are $1500 and up, machines like the Mini Mac start to look very affordable, considering the cost of supporting unknown hardware.
People said Bill Gates was crazy when he said hardware will be free, but I can see it happening now.
The Mac Mini is FAR smaller than ANY mini-ITX I have seen and also WAY more powerful. Most small form factor PCs use low power processors that are weak at best - the G4 in the Mac Mini is throwing out some impressive results.
Yell & scream & rant & rave... it's no use... you need a shaaaave ~ Bugs Bunny
...because all the mini-itx stuff hangs on so tightly to legacy crap.
I have been looking for YEARS for a legacy-free mini-itx type (SFF) motherboard and have yet to see one.
By legacy-free I mean: no PS/2, no parallel, no VGA, no serial (9-pin or 25-pin). I want USB 2.0, DVI, and gigE. Give it a mini-PCI and/or mini-AGP and I'd be happy.
I've seen Via *announce* a line with just VGA/USB/Ethernet and the rest as headers, but nothing else that fits the bill.
My only "issue" with the mini Mac is the 10/100 Ethernet instead of 10/100/1000. That, however, is what I consider a very minor flaw in what otherwise is my dream machine.
The only other Apple product I owned was the Newton, so it isn't a Mac fan-boy thing.
The mini-itx industry was just too damn hung up on legacy crap for me to ever really be more than just mildly interested in their products.
-Charles
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
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.
I hate one-button mice - their terriable and disgusting. But my Mom bought her iMac three years ago and guess what she loves the one-button mouse compared to my Dad's three button mouse on her PC. In fact so does my Dad because he was conned into buying the PC (I told him to buy an iMac but he was told that Mac's were harder to learn and run?!?!?) with the three button and he hasn't used his Dell in 3 years - a waste of $599. Of course he likes my Mom's iMac with it's one button mouse even thought she paid $1199. And he liked that everything he needs is in the dock - now they fight over using the iMac - and he wonders why I never told him to buy an iMac.
My point is that the Mac mini - which he has already ordered since his Dell monitor will work with it - is not for the poweruser but for the everyday consumer who knows nothing about computers, and doesn't want to, but just wants it to work and use it and not feel like the first computer was a total waste of their time. He's already auctioned it off on eBay (the CPU and mouse) and I got him a one-button mouse like Mom's!
Save Pangaea!! Stop Continental Drift!!
No, it is not a flaw. It is built into the design of the OS and to the interface guidelines from day one. What you may not realize is that everything that is accessible from a right click contextual menu on OS X apps is (or should be in the case of 3rd parties) completely accessible by some other method that does not require a multi-button mouse. The menu is optional for those that get used to using control-click often (and it's just control--nothing else!) or who choose to have a multi-button mouse.
This is not the case for Windows or X11. For those of us that do use those systems regularly (myself included), a multi-button mouse make more sense because we've been forced to use it to access complete functionality of applications. The mind-share of the one-button mouse users are even smaller than those of us devoted to OS X, but the design of that mouse and it's use in OS X is most definitely not "flawed". Just different. Maybe too different these days, but there you go...
I get along fine with my PB when I don't have the space to attach an extra mouse. The thing that bugs me more than having to use control is the fact that the function key is where my finger wants control to be, but that's a problem with many more laptops than just Apple's.
I just read another article (reg. required) that describes how Apple with their Genius Bars give person to person tech support for free. With this computer being so light weight, it is convenient just to carry it over to an Apple store when there is a problem. That is much better than Dell's approach which relies on wasting time having an automated system diagnose your problem before a technician will talk to you.
Also, I don't think the cube was such a failure in light of the Mac Mini. I am sure whatever Apple learned from designing the Cube was apply to designing the Mini. The first thing I thought when the Mini was introduced was that it is the Cube was reborn. Also, one button mouse is debateable. Apple still ships computers with them. Moreover, I have never really needed a second button.
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
My business does a fair bit of on-site support for small businesses running consumer-grade PC's.
One of the major issues with the smaller systems (and why I steer my customers away from them) is heat dissipation. This was especially bad with the HP Pavillions. Basically, all those cables get in the way of airflow and it becomes easier for the processor to overheat. The fact that the case is smaller also makes for smaller air intake areas which get clogged by dust more easily, etc.
Now, Mac has had small form-factor systems in the past that were very reliable hardware-wise. So they might be able to do it again. But as chips get hotter, it becomes harder.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Funny you should mention that. I've shifted Macs lately, and the d@mn new one doesn't handle it correctly. I plug in the 3-button scroll-wheel mouse, the latest MouseWare driver loads (I know it's the latest, I've checked their update site - v5.2.1) and it refuses to let me set the middle button as Middle Button. The option doesn't allow itself to be changed in Preferences. And this is a major navigation tool in Maya. Some identical (as identical as our Sys Admin can make them) Macs next to mine work fine, but some others don't in this regard. SA still doesn't know what the problem is.
So don't tell me how hassle free this is compared to a PC. Chances are good if I was running Windows Maya with a stardard scroll-wheel mouse permanently installed and used for all Windows work including Maya, I wouldn't be having this problem.
The real truth in Windows vs Mac is: Once you're inside the application, be it Maya, Photoshop, Microsoft Office, or anything else that runs similar versions on both platforms, it's all the same because the application's interface is the one you're using.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
I play UT a lot, and have a 9200 in my G5 tower. It handles fairly high resolutions just fine.
The Mac mini would handle most gaming (ESPECIALLY at TV or HDTV resolutions) just fine.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
While I agree with most of your post, this is incorrect. The iMac G5s use standard 184-pin DDR DIMMs.
The G4's might've used SO-DIMMs, but I haven't had one open.
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.