Posted by
CmdrTaco
on from the that-sure-didn't-take-long dept.
pentae writes "BYODKM are featuring some of the first in line to serve up Mac mini accessories. Exactly how much market share will this buy Apple once the affordable, stylish Mac steals the Windows users who love their iPod?"
615 comments
Good idea
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
steals the Windows users who love their iPod?
I would imagine this was more apparent back when iTunes wasn't available on Windows. New iPods charge over USB2. And most people have XP. Having an iPod with your PC is now just as easy to deal with as having it with your Mac.
Back when you had to use MusicMatch, it was an awful experience.
There is a big need however for mouse and keyboard packages for this computer (that aren't made by Apple and overpriced). Has anybody considered what Windows keyboards would be like with a Mac. The alt key is the rightmost (on the left side) on a win kb, whereas its in the middle on a Mac kb. So is the windows key the mac alt key, and the pc alt key the mac apple-key?
Having an iPod with your PC is now just as easy to deal with as having it with your Mac.
maybe, but it's certainly not as 'cool' as having the whole shebang, and that's largely (for many people, at least) what having and using an iPod is about.
I think that this is the answer for those people who got an iPod and became people who love Apple products, but can't afford to really break into the company's line, and it's incredibly chic to boot.
Next time a person needs to go and get a new computer, they will consider spending $500 on a mediocre PC that is in a large and gaudy beige case and runs a pain-in-the-ass Windows operating system, or they could get a very small, fast, and attractive Mac that's as easy to use as the iPod they've come to love.
Re:Good idea
by
CptChipJew
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I disagree that the masses want to own a Mac with their iPod.
I see tons of people with iPods now. At least 10% of the people at my gym had iPod minis. And regular iPods are all over the place at my school.
There is no way all of these people own Macs, and I think the general populous doesn't really care. They just want a hip music player that works with their computer.
-- Vonal Declosion
Re:Good idea
by
NeuralAbyss
·
· Score: 1, Informative
I've got a Logitech wireless keyboard, and the keys are as follows, on the bottom row:
Ctrl Start Alt space Alt Start Menu Ctrl <> alt Apple space Apple alt <> opt'n space opt'n
You just disagreed citing the fact that people don't have a Mac for their iPod, and that's precisely the reason why Apple made this.
If people wanted a hip music player that works with their computer, why wouldn't they want a hip computer as well? That's what this is, and it doesn't break the bank.
That was my first thought too. It strikes me as a pretty obvious issue and one would also have to think that Apple thought of this as well. They probably have some kind of backup plan. Maybe they could include stickers that you can put on your old keyboard or something like that. Not bundling a keyboard and mouse is a big step for them. It will be interesting to see how they handle it. They might also try to sell their own keyboards and mice.
-- ---
Don't ever trust a woman until she's dead- B.B. King
It isn't just that. But a mac has style. With good design and style they can add to the user's own style - just like with systemadministration you learn to solve problem, search solutions more logically. In a mac it's the interface, it's the logic, the way things are organized. It could be a part of your culture.
Now try it the other way around. Has a win* ever brought you new (positive!) experiences? Could that be part of your culture? I'm trying hard not to exaggerate. Think about that.
Linux comes in the picture, beacuse you see real flexibility, transparency and logic. Macs with their style. The M$ way is to get dumb customers fit their needs. Keep them dumb. Feed them with junk food, let them watch kill-em-all action films, blind them with marketing. In all these mention areas, you have a choice. Consider that. Please.
-- "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you,
then they attack you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
they will consider spending $500 on a mediocre PC that is in a large and gaudy beige case
I think this is the first time I've ever seen beige referred to as gaudy.
-- It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Re:Good idea
by
AmicoToni
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I use, and recommend, a Sun Type 6 keyboard, Item-number #320-1271. It comes with a standard USB connector and a Mac-friendly layout, including the "command" key in the correct position.
depends on which keyboard you get. this 9$ logitech job i have has alt rightmost (windows/command in the middle) on a PC, but if you plug it into a mac, it swtiches the layout.
if you plug an apple usb keybaord into a PC (at least with the one i have, from an older g4/400) the alt key is the alt key, and the command key is the windows key. they are just in the "wrong" spots (vs pc104).
I have yet to see anyone's mouse/keyboard "package" that I liked. I'd much rather buy them separately!
I plugged my Happy Hacking II keyboard into my Mini and it's just fine. Since I'm already used to the layout, no adjustment was required. The "Windows" keys (diamond character on the HH kbd) are the Apple keys now. I also plugged my Logitech trackball in. Not only do both buttons work, the little up/down arrow buttons that Logitech put on in place of a scroll wheel now work too! (Never managed that on the Linux box.)
If you think Apple's prices are high, what I paid must be in the stratosphere. The HHKB was around $70, I think, and the trackball $20. I don't remember specifically, because it didn't matter - they were what I wanted!
Re:Good idea
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Informative
I wouldn't call $29 for the apple keyboard overpriced.
Re:Good idea
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
The difference is, if you have an I-pod you strap it to your arm or hang it round your neck and show it off to your peasant friends with thier crappy discmans, thus making you cooler than them.
with an I-mac mini, you can't casually show it off to them, you would have to tell everyone about your I-mac mini, and explain why its so much better than thier craputer, thus making you a geek, and therefore not cool.
Non-nerds generaly dont reasearch what computer is the best, they wander into PC world and say 'I have 500 pounds, give me a computer' this is the reason why Intel integrated graphics can exist.
Yeah, and I haven't seen a new PC in a beige case in quite a while, either. Most of them are white, multiple shades of grey, silver/gunmetal, or black now.
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Good idea
by
theblueprint
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Well, I bought myself an iPod for Christmas, and I've gottnen used to it "just working". I wonder how much of a better computing experience I can get with a mac, and have tried our grapic design dept's G5 to surf/. while they're at lunch...I think the real draw is knowing that all of your apps can work as well as iTunes.
I've looked at getting a mini, but I think that for the money, I might be able to get something like a G3 tower on eBay for around $300. I'm more interested in a tower-style system since there'd be more room for larger drives. I've got too much music (200+GB) to be accomodated in a mini, and this would be an even lower-cost solution. The high quality of my iPod makes me comfortable purchasing a used mac.
And no, an iPod on window isn't as easy to use as a mac. I've had i/o errors trying to connect my iPod, and few of my friends pcs have firewire ports, and if they do, they're the four pin connectors. I'm guessing that a mac would be much more accomodating to my ipod.
-- "from the bricks to the booth...I predict the future like Cleo the psychic..."
If 5-10% of the masses do, that's what matters. If ALL the masses get them, then people will start making viruses and adware for them, and nobody wants that.
-- Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
What is hard to believe about it? Some people have large music collections. 200GB with a high bitrate, FLAC , or others wouldn't be that big of a music collection. Don't you know people with > 1000 cd music collections?
Sure, they don't own Macs *now*. But don't you think that a good experience with one Apple product would make them more willing/likely to try another? Apple is betting on this.
I enjoy using the wireless logitech keyboard and mouse combo($50). Just make sure that the set you buy has the OS X sticker on it and it is an optical mouse. I believe it has the apple and windows stickers on it. I use it for linux, os x, and win xp.
I am a fan of the logitech trackball when sitting in the easy chair with the linux laptop. I am running suse 9.2 with all the buttons working. I felt guilty leaving mandrake 10.1, but was it an easy install. My wireless g worked without a hitch.
Am I becoming a Novell Nerd?
Haven't sprung for the mini...yet. I want to put it in my entertainment center. If the roof wasn't leaking....
The alt key is the rightmost (on the left side) on a win kb, whereas its in the middle on a Mac kb. So is the windows key the mac alt key, and the pc alt key the mac apple-key?
Usually the alt key corresponds to the Mac's option key and the Windows key becomes the Mac Apple key.
Parent is a GNAA troll, stupid! We don't need them here
And you sir, are a fascist! Parent poster made a valid point. makes me want to consider putting a GNAA reference in my signature myself.
Comments should be moderated by content, not poster.
They ruin my day. There's an extremely annoying button called 'open', which strangely seems to minimize the current window. It's the second key on on the far left, and I constantly press it by accident when I'm aiming for shift. I hate using sun machines for that reason:)
It isn't just that. But a mac has style. With good design and style they can add to the user's own style - just like with systemadministration you learn to solve problem, search solutions more logically. In a mac it's the interface, it's the logic, the way things are organized. It could be a part of your culture.
Now try it the other way around. Has a win* ever brought you new (positive!) experiences? Could that be part of your culture? I'm trying hard not to exaggerate. Think about that.
Linux comes in the picture, beacuse you see real flexibility, transparency and logic. Macs with their style. The M$ way is to get dumb customers fit their needs. Keep them dumb. Feed them with junk food, let them watch kill-em-all action films, blind them with marketing. In all these mention areas, you have a choice. Consider that. Please.
This is perhaps the most pathetically pretentious post I've ever read on Slashdot. Something like that belongs on Kuroshin, not here! All it needs is a snide comment about people who drive SUVs or read a different newspaper to you.
reached a weak point at you, did I? The brain? Hurts to think about things, does it? To try to imagine 'what the hell is he trying to say?'. Keep spitting around - see where it leads to. Ever heard the word 'creative'? and how about 'cooperative'?
-- "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you,
then they attack you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
There is a cut, a copy and a paste key. They are useful if cut and paste with the mouse doesn't work. Another useful key is the front key, pressed once it brings the window that is under the pointer to the front, pressed twice it puts that window behind all others.
Re:Good idea
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Before buying this keyboard i strongly recommend you to try it out. All the sunBlades at my school have this type of keyboard. The keyboard got quite a different feel than most other keyboards, therefore it takes a while to get used to. If you tend to use more than one computer in a day try to make sure all the keyboards are either the type 6 or none are. If you mix them you might eventually go mad;)
well, when you plug a USB windows keyboard (keyboard with windows key) into a mac, it's a little confusing. Ctrl is Control, alt is Option (alt), and the windows key acts as Command (apple key)
Why would people want a hip computer? You don't carry it around in public with you, you don't flash any iconic white earbuds on the subways with it.
Certainly there are some people who want stylish hip everythings, but there are some people who like those hideous Paris Hilton toy dogs.
Most people just want a computer thats just not completely ugly that they can stick in their home office or den and use. Thats why those black Dells sell so well (or at least one reason).
I still think this is a good move, and that Apple will sell a lot of these computers, but I feel like some of the people on this board are stretching it a little.
-- [SIG] It's like putting a moose in the blender -- a recipe for disaster!
I recently bought a logitech usb keyboard. It had the proper mac labels and puts the keys where they belong (Control-Alt-Command-Space, not control-command-alt)
-- I use Macs to up my productivity, so up yours Microsoft!
Re:Good idea
by
Durandal64
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
It's not about hip; it's about statistics. Apple's research showed that between 6% and 10% of iPod owners who were not already Mac owners would consider a Mac as their next computer as a result of their iPod experience. Another sizable portion said that they'd love to own a Mac, but that the price was prohibitive. That's why Apple made the Mac mini.
4 million iPods were sold last quarter, and 90% of them to Windows users. So that's 3.6 million Windows users with iPods. If 10% of them switch to Macs as a result of their iPod experience, that's another 360,000 Mac users, or an over 33% increase in unit sales. (Apple sold just over a million Macs last quarter.)
I was wondering about how the Windows keyboards would work with a Mac Mini, so I asked one of the salesmen at the local Apple store. He said you can set up the alt/windows/control etc. keys to map however you want.
I'm more interested in a tower-style system since there'd be more room for larger drives.
This is where firewire-based drives come in. On a 400Mbit bus, you can easily add large amounts of external storage. Add in a firewire hub, and you can easily create your own firewire-based RAID array.
There is always network storage devices as well, which would be a natural for storing large amounts of music (which you could then easily share between machines).
maybe, but it's certainly not as 'cool' as having the whole shebang, and that's largely (for many people, at least) what having and using an iPod is about.
Mod that shit down as the troll/flamebait it is.
Listening to music is what having and using an iPod is about. The full-size iPods make it easy for most people to have their entire music collection with them anywhere, and the iPod Shuffle provides a very simple way to listen the way a large portion of MP3 listeners like to enjoy their collections: in shuffle mode.
I don't own an iPod to impress you.
I also am not "showing off" when I talk on my cell phone in a public place.
This is just another example of people who don't own a particular useful gadget jealously making the assumption that those who do are simply using them to flaunt their vast wealth. Never mind that you might have spent more on your shoes than they spent on their iPod shuffle.
News flash: None of those people you see on the street with white headphones give a fuck what you think about them. They are too busy enjoying the sound of Stereogram's "Walkie Talkie Man" blasting in their ears to even know that you are there.
Well, I thought that was the case, but pressing f12 on my g4 here a couple of times hasn't ejected any drives. It might be due to the dual-drive setup, but I doubt it. I haven't quite figured out why it maps up that way sometimes but not others.
get something like a G3 tower on eBay for around $300
Oooooh, woah. Panther on a Beige G3 is like, well, win98 on a 486, if you remember that. Spotty. Not always very responsive. Hardware issues, like PCI video.
The G3's (including Blue and White G3) run various kinds of RAM... but OS 9 isn't very fussy about that, while OS X is. If your G3 tower is willing to run under OS X without you staring at the 'spinning beachball' all the time, you'll need well over 512MB.
Better to get a G4 tower, if you actually care about longevity for the machine. A dual 450 can be had pretty cheap and should have a couple of years left in it.
The price/performance of used Macs is a shocker if you've never looked before. In part it's because the price/usability ratio is still acceptable, and in part it's availability. I hope the miniMac drives those prices down somewhat. Low End Mac is a good place to check out before buying a used Mac, especially if you want to run OS X on it. (Posted from a G3 iMac.)
If it doesn't map to eject, the F12 key will - it does on every other ejectless keyboard. Interestingly, on USB keyboards with power buttons aimed at the mac market, the power key brings up the classic "Are you sure you want to shut down your computer now?" prompt. Sadly, the same power button doesn't boot the computer.
-- Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
Style doesn't make my compiles faster. Style doesn't make my programs provide solutions faster. It doesn't do anything as far as my computing goes. If I think my box looks ugly for some reason, I'll put it under a desk or down the hall in a closet.
If "style" improves your computing experience, just think that some TypeR stickers will do for your car!
Is there such firewire-raid-hubs on the market now?
You can get Firewire hubs, but they don't have any hardware RAID built into them. I was referring more to using the software RAID that is built into every copy of Mac OS X.
But who knows? Perhaps a firewire-based hardware RAID enclosure does exist somewhere. One where you could add in standard EIDE drives would be interesting (although I imagine somewhat expensive).
Yaz.
Re:Good idea
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Just make sure that the set you buy has the OS X sticker on it and it is an optical mouse.
Right, because that sticker makes the mouse work with Apple computers.
It also makes your wife love you and keeps the moon from falling. Very, very magic.
(Hint to the humor impaired: Mac OS X will work with any USB mouse on the market, sticker or not.)
I think the point that GP was trying to make was that some Logitech Cordless combos have the Mac sticker on the box.
This in and of itself is unimportant (as you noted).
But it happens that these models with the Mac sticker on the outside also have dual-marked keys. My Logitech Cordless Desktop Bluetooth MX keyboard has a Start/Option key, and an Alt/Command key.
The HHKB was around $70, I think, and the trackball $20.
The Apple Pro keyboard (with black keys, from 3 years ago) was $80.
The white-key keyboards are now $30.. but they're cheaply made. Every one I've used has the 'sd' echo problem. (The 'd' and 's' keys are sketchy and so you'll often 'lss' or 'cdd' instead of 'ls' or 'cd').
Re:Good idea
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Children... children... why don't you both agree that one of you is pretentious and the other one is brainless. It hardly matters which...
There is a big need however for mouse and keyboard packages for this computer (that aren't made by Apple and overpriced).
I'm a long-time Apple and SGI user (mainly Apple) who works full-time on Compaqs at work (day job)...and believe me, Apple is doing Anybody who buys a Mini a HUGE favor in not shipping an Apple "Pro" keyboard with the unit. Ask any halfway honest Mac user, they'll tell you the same thing. It's a marvel of a technological piece of shit. I'm convinced the 'keys' are riding on a bed of room temperature oatmeal (with a 'splash' of cream for added 'muck' factor). Terrible, that a company could cram pretty good tech and engineering into boxes, and make the tactile user 'interface' so atrocious. I'll take my throwawy Compaq board (from 5 or 6 yrs ago), any day of the week. The Mouse? I've been on Kengington TurboPro trackballs forever. 'Nuff said.
And yeah, the Control keys are in the same spot, and the Apple alt-Option key is in the middle, like the Start key, Apple's Command (or 'splat' key - next to the spacebar) is the 'Alt' key. Switching, in this case, is trivial. The devil is in the PS/2 vs. USB hookup, it can be negotiated. Also, the older Apple Extended Keyboards (which go for about $5 on eBay), can be used with an ADB - USB converter, and they are the 'one' for the Mac
Re:Good idea
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I do recommend everyone visit the Cathedral in Barcelona at least once in their life.
I think I didn't express myself clear enough. under 'macs' I meaned 'apple products', inclusive OSX, inclusive ipod steering-design, etc. If you use OSX it does add to your style, doesn't it? It gives you a feeling, which is a useful experience, and you can benefit from it later.
-- "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you,
then they attack you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
In some circumstaces it may be idiotic to make snide comments about people who drive SUVs. However, making snide comments about these snide commentators is far more idiotic.
Re:Good idea
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Of course, 98% of statistics are crap when they're pulled out of your own ass.
If it helps to know, I'm about to buy a Mac Mini, but have no desire to own an iPod. Currently at home I have 3 Windows boxes and two Linux boxes. I want to get to know the Mac, and possibly use it as my main box eventually (of course, also eventually upgrading to a higher end Mac).
I'll then demote the Windows boxes to development platforms... at least that's the plan.
-- Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
Wouldn't it make sense it give the iPod vga out and bluetooth and 802.X, then it'll be a Mac Mini killer?
Maybe VGA, bluetooth and 802.X can be part of the cradle, so when you are at home and you plug your iPod in, it becomes your Mac desktop?
It is to my 80 year old Grandmother. I put a M$ wireless button mouse on her Mac figuring she would love not having the cord. Well accidentally right clicking all the time was reason enough for her to yell at me to give her back her one button mouse.
Reason enough!
No, it wouldn't make sense. Why would Apple want to kill one of their own product lines with another of their own product lines? A house divided cannot stand.
Besides, the iPod, even with VGA out (why VGA? it's old, and the connector is bulky. Just use a mini-DVI like the 12" Powerbook has), bluetooth and/or WiFi, would have a very hard time replacing a desktop machine. I can't think of too many software developers, DB admins, graphic designers, or CAD users that would like to work/play on a 2" screen.
the base of the monitor designed to sit directly on top of the Mini? I guess the grandstand would allow 'room for error' in case you bumped the table or computer, the monitor wouldn't fall. Seems they also missed the most obvious color as well, which would be my choice for the grandstand - white.
You only need to avoid putting weight on the inner white plastic part of the top. The alu extrusion that runs around the outside of the case will be able to support somthing without pressing on the drive.
You could stack a load of minis on top of each other by putting the first on the right way up then the next on on top upside down to avoid loading the white plastic.
I would suspect that having access to the back of the Mini so you can get to the ports without having to remove the monitor would be a very good idea.
Infact, I have an old Apple ][ stand that provides the same funtion.
--
Too many zeros, not enough ones
Re:Wasn't
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Skirt? Twenty dollars for a slab of acrylic? If you're not capable of turning that out for yourself in a half-hour, then I suggest you attend Remedial Nerd 101....
Seems they also missed the most obvious color as well, white.
Not really. It's a lot harder to match resin batches for coloration than to make a generic clear and;or metalic that doesn't need an exact match. That's probably why they don't offer one. Most Mac fanatics wouldn't be satisfied with anything less than stylistic perfection, leading to huge numbers of returns because the stand was a half-shade more yellow than the particular machine.
-- That is all.
Re:Wasn't
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I'll feed the troll.
Okay, so if my time is $40 an hour, shazam, I've made money because the $20 includes materials!
how much market share will this buy Apple?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I know I'm getting one... And most of my (Non Geek) friends who heard about the Mini are either decided to buy it or considering to do so. Personally I think Bill Gates should be very very worried:)
Re:how much market share will this buy Apple?
by
justin12345
·
· Score: 1
Yeah ditto here. My friends all fall into 2 catagories: poor as dirt or the type that will walk into a Bestbuy and walk out with the newest, smallest Viao as an "impulse buy". Both are considering the mini, the first because they can afford it and its actually a beautiful piece of equipment, and the second because "hey why not, then I will have both".
I actually am considering getting a mini, even though I already have a PB. I a server to sit in the courner with my ST:TNG collection on it and serve it to my laptop wirelessly. The mini seems like it would do this nicely and if I compressed everything I could get DS9 on it too.
dunno about the skirt... It seems fairly useless, but I am ordering my tower now. This is exactly what I needed.
The "tower" is also useless.
The mini already stands up on one side or the other just fine. I'm using one like that right now.
--
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Stealing Windows customers?
by
agraupe
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
I'd be worried about this, if I were Microsoft. But I would also be worried about this if I was distributing a desktop linux distro. Now that Apple hardware is (relatively) cheap, and damn sexy, I might have to buy one. I'd probably dual boot OS X and Gentoo, but there are others who will probably go for the nice look of OS X, along with BSD under the hood, and leave Linux/*BSD for ever. The only thing that is working in Linux/*BSD's favor is multiplatform compatibility (i.e. you can run the same OS on x86 and PPC), and selection of application. Fink (is that it?) is working on taking one of those away. All this being said, is it necessarily a bad thing if Linux is relegated to the server room with a small percentage of workstations, with Apple picking up the rest?
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Whafro
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
As far as I'm concerned, just because OS X is developed by a big corporation doesn't put it outside the sphere of *BSD. If you're using OS X, you haven't "left Linux/*BSD" forever.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
agraupe
·
· Score: 1
Well, you know what I meant. I meant the "free" BSDs (not to be confused with FreeBSD).
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Haydn+Fenton
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I seriously think it won't be too long before Microsoft are in serious trouble over their market share.. Lets just think about it:
Firefox has come along, its much better than IE and IE is starting to lose a relatively large part of its market share. IE was left too long to be fixed up and now MS are paying for it. Google (not like it ever didnt, but still) owns the shit out of MSN search, although MSN is getting better and better. Macs and Linux are much much cheaper and more secure (or less exploits\viruses are made for them, same difference), add that to the fact that Microsoft are going to change the updates to subscription only customers. Gmail whoops Hotmails ass when it comes to email, so theres another big blow to MS (think about the advertising revenue they will lose). IIRC, Microsoft also annonced that they will be stopping access to Hotmail via Outlook for non-paying customers. And in 20xx, out comes Windows Longhorn and then Blackcomb, which will use a completely new Windows API.. the very thing that has kept Microsoft top of the league for so long. Since no apps that run on 9x\nt\xp\etc will run on Longhorn, I think Microsoft are going to really start to lose market share in everything. Recently there's been a lot of stories about OSS software being used by several countries' governments, and the stories about Sun and IBM releasing patented technology to OSS.
Recently I've also been noticing Microsoft have been making other bad business decisions (sorry, none seem to be coming to mind atm) which will no doubt lead to a difficult time for them in the future.
Of course, none of this is to say Microsoft are out of it, because with their bank balance, they could change tactics at almost any time and get back into things before its too late. Although I severely dislike Microsoft ('s business practices) and hope they take a good bashing soon, I think we need them, or something like them, for things to run as they are.. Without Microsoft we wouldn't need *as much* F/OSS or other things.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
doon
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I've gotten rid of windows a long time about, and the Mac Mini, finally allowed me to get my wife off windows also. It wasn't for lack of trying, it was just that the pricetag made it ok (My wife is an accountant by day, artist by night). So the mac appealed to her artistic side, and didn't upset the accountant side. So with her pc scheduled to become another small server, we are down to 1 box @ home that has Windows on it, and that box dual boots FreeBSD 5.3 (where it spends most of its time).
As for it stealing Linux/*BSD users away. I can see this sort of happening. My primary workstation now is an 17" Al powerbook, It replaced a Dell Inspiron running slackware. I still use various forms of *nix everyday. My firewall @ home and my other laptop here are OpenBSD. My file server and workstation run FreeBSD (5.3 on workstation, 4-Stable on the file server). At work all 36 Servers run FreeBSD 4-Stable. So while it might not be on our desktops everyday, we still use it.
-- To E-mail me, replace the first period in my domain with an @
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
jest3r
·
· Score: 1
Of course as you mentioned there is Fink which lets you do things like this relatively easily...
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
WordODD
·
· Score: 1
I am amazed you aren't being flamed to death yet here by the rabid linux zealots. damn I wish I had mod points right now. This is one of the MOST REALISTIC comments about the future of Linux I have ever read here...
-- Please do not let scientific accuracy interfere with the intended humourous/interesting/insightful value of this comment
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Mononoke
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
A.) It may be cheap and sexy, but it's hard to find apps for.
Wrong.
B.) No Games. Sorry.
Wrong.
C.) Regardless of the low price, Apple has a huge hurdle to overcome with the general masses that they won't be missing out if they get it.
Possibly correct, but most people won't even get this far in your message.
-- NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Ohreally_factor
·
· Score: 1
C.) Regardless of the low price, Apple has a huge hurdle to overcome with the general masses that they won't be missing out if they get it.
Possibly correct, but most people won't even get this far in your message.
I got that far, but I couldn't comprehend it. What was Nanogator trying to express here?
-- It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Whafro
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Yeah, I know what you meant, but I don't see why it matters. OS X is based on free software, plays well with other free software (x11, etc), is relatively easy to use and has fewer "gotchas" than do Linux and *BSD.
This isn't like someone put a bash shell in windows and is calling it "Winix" or something... This is an OS that claims to have the best of both worlds--the availability of using open source and open standards while being accessible to even the newest of users. If you're a nerd who cares the way you seem to, you're still going to use Linux/*BSD, but I don't see how it hurts the community if you switch to OS X.
If I were someone who was a strong BSD proponent, I, for one, would welcome our rich, talented, and innovative overlords.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
evand
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Since no apps that run on 9x\nt\xp\etc will run on Longhorn, I think Microsoft are going to really start to lose market share in everything.
Will my existing Win32 and.NET apps continue to run under Longhorn without modification?
The goal is that apps written against the documented Win32 APIs and the.NET Framework will absolutely run well without any modifications under Longhorn when it ships.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
David+Rolfe
·
· Score: 1
Well, you know what I meant. I meant the "free" BSDs (not to be confused with FreeBSD).
Additionally to the sibling poster... Darwin is a "free" BSD. And to address your line in the great-great-grand-parent:
"The only thing that is working in Linux/*BSD's favor is multiplatform compatibility (i.e. you can run the same OS on x86 and PPC)..."
If that's the only thing working in its favor then you will hate to hear that people are getting Darwin running on x86. Of course you were probably thinking "Aqua isn't free, so I'll just rule that out," which is fair. We probably won't see Aqua on x86 anytime soon... but if your core goal is to have the same BSD running on your Mac and your Opteron, well that choice is here now (including Darwin). The difference will be that you don't have the same spread of gui apps, only the subset of X11 apps.
-- Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Richard_at_work
·
· Score: 1
I 'switched' to OSX jsut before Christmas with a purchase of an iBook. I then bought a Mac Mini as soon as they became available in stores here in the UK (I managed to walk into a retailer and pick my mac mini up 3 days before my colleague received his preorder from Apple).
Theres been one single app that I cant replace from Windows. DVDShrink. No other App does what it does 100% (Rip, Compress to mpeg2 and burn if needed, but I prefer to rip, compress to 50% mpeg2 and have it output each title as a single vob - something nothing on OSX has been able to replicate).
Everything else I have either replaced with the MacOSX version of the same app, or replaced with a better third party app. Its fantastic, I certainly wont be moving back!
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
daviddennis
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
A closer reading of that FAQ answer would make me a bit alarmed if I were a Windows user.
They are saying that "the goal is", not that it will happen.
I could say today that my goal is to create a pig that flies over the moon, and that wouldn't make it happen, even if I were Microsoft.
I was a MacOS X early adopter (perhaps was is the wrong word; I use it on my primary computers to this day), and I still remember how MacOS 9 applications ran under MacOS X. That is to say, not all that well. Everyone who was running X, including myself, absolutely longed for native applications in the first year or so. After Photoshop and Final Cut Pro made it to X, pretty much all was bliss, but it took us a year of pain to get there.
If I had to guess, I'd assume that Win32/.net applications would have a similar trajectory of doom, and if there are significant differences between Win32 and Longhorn APIs, I'd be pretty alarmed by that paragraph if I was relying on non-Microsoft Windows software, or if I was developing same.
Microsoft might be counting on Office to hold people in the new environment. They'll build a version of Office for Longhorn with lots of spiffy features. The old Office won't work well on Longhorn. So someone buys a new computer with Longhorn (probably not compatible with XP), and they have to upgrade Office so they can run Word. This is just what Microsoft wants.
Microsoft has on its side the makers of commodity computers, and that's a powerful friend because many people like having interchangeable computers where nothing is particularly special but you can build interesting things out of components. I don't like that at all - I like my computers being special and unique, like Apple's - but I recognize much of the world loves it. I also think most of the world hates change and so really has to have a powerful jolt to switch.
Because of this, I think there's about a 10-15% ceiling on Apple's market share even if things go outstandingly well. Of course that would mean a 3-5 times improvement over the next few years. I think that's very doable, and I think some of the lovers of commodity computers might go for Linux as a commodity OS. That might mean there would be a world of 10-15% Apple, 10-15% Linux and the rest Microsoft.
I don't think Microsoft's majority of computers sold is in danger, but they're in deep danger of slipping significantly if they don't improve their products dramatically, even pre-Longhorn.
D
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
b1t+r0t
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Well, you know what I meant. I meant the "free" BSDs (not to be confused with FreeBSD).
Everything that's in BSD is also "free" in OS X. The non-free parts of OS X aren't in Darwin or BSD. There's no Quartz, Aqua, Quicktime, iTunes, etc. in BSD. You also don't get Apple's particular packaging of the OS for free either, but that doesn't stop anyone from making their own distro of Darwin/BSD.
Just because someone charges money for a distro that comes with non-free stuff doesn't make its core less free (as in speech). I don't hear people bitching about Red Hat Enterprise not being a "free" OS, especially now that the "free version of Red Hat" doesn't exist any more (yes, I know they renamed it, but there's more to it than that).
--
-- "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
daviddennis
·
· Score: 1
I hear that Best Buy is going to stock the Mac Mini at some point and that might fix the "no software at Best Buy" problem for real. Not that I would buy my software there, of course. Apple Retail stores are great, and there's nothing like them for Windows.
I agree with the people who say that if you want to play games, get a game console. It's cheap, it's better for games than all but the most amped-up PCs, and when technology improves you can throw it away and buy a new one without getting all teary-eyed about your $3,000 investment down the drain.
A large percentage of people are very change-resistant, so your point C is actually valid, sad as it may be.
D
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Ohreally_factor
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I don't see how it hurts the community if you switch to OS X.
If anything, it will help the community over the long term, especially if you are a developer. I think far too many developers are saddled with diminished expectations, a result of their roots in the Windows world. Developers should be shooting for "better than OS X" instead of "as good as windows".
I know that I'm generalizing, and that there are lots of developers that aren't ham-stringed in this way. I'm just saying.
-- It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
b1t+r0t
·
· Score: 1
A.) It may be cheap and sexy, but it's hard to find apps for. Best Buy, for example, carries no Mac software.
Ignoring for a moment the dual-system software that gets carried accidentally by Best Buy, CompUSA carries Mac software.
B.) No Games. Sorry.
Yes there are games. Just maybe not the ones you want to play. Sorry. This is primarly due to the near total market share of Windows. (There are even less games for Linux.) If I want to play games, I've got a PS2, a Gamecube, and just about every system ever released in the United States, except XBox. I don't even play games on my one Windows system.
C.) Regardless of the low price, Apple has a huge hurdle to overcome with the general masses that they won't be missing out if they get it.
I have no idea what you were trying to say there.
--
-- "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
ThousandStars
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I already addressed part of the "MS better fear Apple" idea in this post. You may want to read the post and replies.
I don't think MS is worried about Apple overtaking Windows and Office, which are still the crown jewels. Keep in mind that we're talking about a company that just posted $10B in profits last quarter. Reread that statement: $10B in profit, not revenue. Wow.
MS should be worried about the present media file format wars, which it could very well lose. Overall, I think the number of Windows customers MS stands to lose to Apple is probably negligible. I'd like to see a more open, multi-platform world -- I type this from a PowerBook -- but the realist in me sees predictions of MS's demise as premature.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
groomed
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
A few thoughts:
The key advantage of GNU/Linux and the BSD's is the unfettered freedom to do with them as you please. This freedom is important only to a small number of people, and immediately useful only to an even smaller number. Those who use GNU/Linux and/or BSD on the desktop because it's "better" are either deluding themselves or they are very particular about their environment. In any case, the demand for such systems on the basis of the freedom they provide alone will always be relatively marginal.
That said, historically open systems have always trumped closed ones. Don't forget that Microsoft's success in the late 80's and 90's is due in large part because their systems (first DOS, then Windows 3.0) were more open than those of the competitors (Atari, Commodore, Tandy, Apple, IBM,...).
It's not like Apple has only just now discovered how to build great products. Apple has always been building great stuff, with the possible exception of the "beleagered" late 90's. The current frenzy around Apple, then, can only be partially explained by the greatness of their current crop of merchandise. Much of their success has to be attributed to fashion and sheer hype, which may evaporate as rapidly as it has come. It may only take one guy in a garage working on something we don't know about yet.
Internationally, Apple is a much less powerful brand than might seem the case from an American vantage point. Service can be abysmal, presence is spotty at best. A friend of mine is now on his 3rd or 4th iBook in about 2 years. Each of them has broken down, whether due to the disk failing, the power supply exploding [figure of speech], or the screen/graphics card going bonkers. Each time it means he has to take the iBook away and wait 2 to 6 weeks for it to come back: no substitute on loan, no brand new replacement, not even so much as a sympathetic nod.
The FOSS desktop has made immense progress over the past few years and continues to improve. Progress may be fitful and slow, and detractors may argue that it won't ever lead to something as polished as Mac OS X or even Windows XP (and I think they're probably right), but these people forget that it was the truly horrible system called DOS which ultimately left all others in the dust.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
bcmm
·
· Score: 1
While I doubt that is true about API incompatibility, it would be interesting to see Wine ported to Longhorn to run XP software...
Also, where is your source for the allegation that windows update will be restricted to subscribers?
-- # cat/dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
jjshoe
·
· Score: 1
it has a 'bsd like' micro kernel. How does that make it linux/bsd? Why do people think the entire os is based on bsd? what a joke.
-- -- botsex is {grep;touch;strip;unzip;head;mount}/dev/girl -t {wet;fsck;fsck;yes;yes;yes;umount} {/de
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
bcmm
·
· Score: 1
Much of Gentoo can run on OS X using portage for OS X.
If it was at all feasible for me to buy a Mac, I would be tempted by using OS X and portage.
It would be like GNU/OS X instead of GNU/Linux...
Is the important thing the kernel or the rest of the OS?
-- # cat/dev/mem | strings | grep -i llama Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
porcupine8
·
· Score: 1
Exactly. No way would my fiance, or other Linux users who are going to switch, ever consider it if it weren't really truly Unix. It just happens to be a distribution that can run Office and Photoshop natively.
-- Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
the bsd kernel is anything but "micro", if you want a micro kernel check out l4
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
dr.badass
·
· Score: 1
it has a 'bsd like' micro kernel. How does that make it linux/bsd? Why do people think the entire os is based on bsd? what a joke.
You don't know anything about Mac OS X, do you?
"Darwin 7.0.x (corresponding to Mac OS X 10.3.x) consists of over 250 packages. Many of these ar Apple packages (including the Mac OS X kernel and various drivers), while the others originat from *BSD, GNU, etc. Apple has leveraged a lot of existing open source software by integrating i well (usually) with their system: apache, bind, binutils, cvs, gcc, gdb, gimp_print, kerberos, mysql openssh, openssl, pam, perl, postfix, ppp, python, rsync, samba, and many more BSD/GNU/othe packages... are all part of Darwin." -- Architecture of Mac OS X
-- Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
A.) It may be cheap and sexy, but it's hard to find apps for. Best Buy, for example, carries no Mac software.
What idiot buys software at Best Buy? There's this thing called the internet, I hear it's going to revolutionize the industry.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Matey-O
·
· Score: 1
spent a shor tperiod of time using VirtualPC on my iBook (part of our Select program, so the experiment didn't really cost any money)
I nuked the XP partition after finding an alternative to Frontpage (NVU - not too bad!), and I nuked the gentoo, debian and Fedora Core partitions after discovering Fink.
Really, life's a lot easier staying in OSX, I've got snort and ethereal and nmap/nmapfe and it's all _native_
I expect when the web/mail server goes (wallmart $200 special) it'll be replaced with a Mini poste haste.
-- "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Richard_at_work
·
· Score: 1
Doesnt do what I want (and ive discussed this with the author of that app, he wont be adding the feature in). Thankyou anyway.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
dr.badass
·
· Score: 2, Informative
A.) It may be cheap and sexy, but it's hard to find apps for. Best Buy, for example, carries no Mac software.
This has more to do with the software retail industry being a big racket than anything else. Small players, if they can get on the shelves at all, generally don't see a cent of the profits. The costs involved in getting it on the shelves (all that packaging, shipping, etc.) can overshadow what meager returns they see.
All of the large Mac software producers I can think of also produce Windows software. Adobe, Microsoft, Blizzard, etc.
On the web, it's a different story. Some of the most interesting new Mac software available is only available online. OmniOutliner, Delicious Library, NetNewsWire, SubEthaEdit, etc. I don't think that any of these producs are really losing out not being on the shelves at BestBuy.
-- Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
LnxAddct
·
· Score: 1
You seem to think that linux's only worth is that its free and runs on cheap hardware. That is certainly not why I use it, and although I've used macs and are okay to work on, people on slahdot way overrate the whole mac "experience". It's certainly great as a desktop but I could never see it being used in many businesses, it looks more childish then windows xp. Also, I prefer the gui interfaces of linux (in particular Gnome) to OSX and Windows. IMHO its the cleanest and most professional looking desktop at the moment while still maintaining ease of use. Finally, linux has a huge software colelction and a very easy method of isntalling it all (at least on most distros). So let's see, I can go with a Mac mini for $500 + $300 (monitor) + keyboard + mouse, or go grab an entire PC for $433 to $600 that comes with everything I need and I can run linux on it. Mac mini is a very nice and small little beast, but apple's hardware is the only reason I'd ever buy it. I've never been impressed by their software and I'd have to immediately put yellow dog on it. I also find linux easier to use from a user perspective, even my parents can use fedora, where as they couldn't even navigate off of the desktop in OSX (yes, they've tried). Just because it looks nice doesn't mean using it is. Linux will win because of its stability, ease of use, large library of readily avaible software, and a great community (not everyone wants windows that slurp around your screen, etc...). Regards, Steve
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Viceice
·
· Score: 1
I think you've got the nail on the head. The problem with the lack of software for the mac is a valid one. In teh course of my work i use many small apps that are made to do very specific tasks. Most of these apps can be downloaded for free and the things that they do are exacly like yours.
For instance, there are 101 functions a windows machine can do with a DVD burner that a Mac cannot, by virtue of the fact that more people write apps for Windows then Mac.
Then there are other thigs like image processors, file management related hacks etc.
-- Sometimes I wish I was a plumber, then I'd know how to deal with other people's shit.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 1
The only thing that is working in Linux/*BSD's favor is multiplatform compatibility
Yes, but it's a bad platform. Given that Mac OS X can already run any UNIX software that can compile on the PowerPC --including atrocities like X11 applications --there's no reason to ever use Linux on a Mac.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 1
I think first they should shoot for "as good as Mac OS X," or even "doesn't massively and completely suck when placed next to Mac OS X." Let's walk before we can run, huh?
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 1
It may be cheap and sexy, but it's hard to find apps for.
The stock answer to "all Linux applications suck" is "write your own." Therefore, the stock answer to "there's no Mac software" --even before "wrong, dumbass, get back under your bridge" --should be "write your own."
The developer tools for Mac OS X are free and of much higher quality than the developer tools for Linux, and no operating system is easier or more fun to develop on than Mac OS X with the Cocoa application environment.
So if the literally hundreds of thousands of Classic Mac, Mac OS X, Java, UNIX and Windows (yes, Windows, via Virtual PC) applications aren't enough for you... shut up and write your own. Troll.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Hognoxious
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The goal is that apps
written against the documented Win32 APIs and the.NET Framework will absolutely run well without any modifications under Longhorn when it ships.
Translated: [Cackle!] Ours will.
-- Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
hunterx11
·
· Score: 1
The kernel isn't the OS. The kernel doesn't really matter to the user experience; you can even get Debian GNU/NetBSD.
To be fair though, the entire OS isn't based on BSD--there's a bit of GNU, and a small amount of NeXTSTEP, too.
-- English is easier said than done.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
TheMediaWrangler
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I see Linux and OS X as complementary products, not strictly as competitors. The spread of Linux is helping businesses to see that it doesn't have to be a Windows-only world, this helps Apple. Also, Apple is strong in education. With kids learning about computers on OS X they'll have less fear of using other Unix variants, this helps Linux/*BSD. I have used Macs for a long time, my early experience learning about OS X v10.0 lead me to buy my first-ever x86 pc ($99 used) so that I could play with various Linux distros.
-- People should not fear what they do not understand; people should fear because they do not understand.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
bob+beta
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
OS X is based on free software
Do you have a URL to the link where I can download the source code for the MacOS GUI? Because some of us are thinking of porting it to NetBSD, but can't find the source tarball.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
bob+beta
·
· Score: 1
People like you are really tearing down the meaning of terms like 'free' and 'distro' the way we used to think of it.
And while I don't use Linux much anymore, personally, I still find it sad that Apple and a few other corporate interests seem to have had such an easy time stealing the terminology and the mindshare.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
HiThere
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
It doesn't matter... as long as Apple is a small minority.
If, however, you have a longer memory, you may remember that when Apple was a large player in the personal computer market, that it was more hostile to linking to other computers than MS is today. On the AppleII, e.g., the built-in basic refused to generate program text files. The floppy disks were of a totally non-standard format (and they patented the chip used to read those disks, and refused to license it).
So while I'm glad that MS stands to lose market share, the thought of Apple becoming dominant does not thrill me.
Fortunately, I believe that Apple has lost the designers that originally made it such a stellar performer. The new Macs are glitzy, but when it comes to ease of use (for a practiced user) they are more difficult that KDE. I believe that Gnome is shooting for the user that wants a "simple user interface". (Certainly, to my eyes, Gnome is oversimplifying...this probably means that they've hit many people's sweet-spot.)
What originally made the Macintosh so stellar was the care that was given to it's human factors interface. (The mistake was to attempt to exclude games, e.g., no color model in the early Mac OS.) This care is missing from the current rewrite. It's quite easy to get lost in the disk. I can always, with effort, disentangle my position, but my wife frequently asks me to help her locate herself. And when she does, there's not standard way that I can tell her to use. (This is made worse because the Gimp is one of our most needed programs, but the implementation of X for the Mac doesn't understand Macintosh aliases as being links. [There's probably a good reason for this, but I don't know it.]) This means that we need to use two different models of the same desktop... and I don't know how to even attempt to explain it to her except by a kind of "If you're in Gimp you do it this way, but normally you do it that way" kind of explanation.
--
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
bob+beta
·
· Score: 1
Apple Retail stores are great, and there's nothing like them for Windows.
And if there WERE, people like you would be peeing your britches in fury at the GALL of the evile MONOPOLY activity.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
spectre_240sx
·
· Score: 1
I have to disagree with you hear. The days of macs being incompatible are pretty much over. For one thing, the majority of pc owners don't play many games, and if they do, then they're usually the web-based java type. As far as apps go, anything that's widely used is available or has an alternative that is available on OS X. The only problem I've run into as far as compatibility goes is companies that use expensive proprietary solutions like BusinessWorks or Heap to manage their business. I don't think that will be much of a worry in the future due to the excellent developer environment in OS X.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
jo_ham
·
· Score: 1
A) I can buy Mac software from many places, especially online. Maybe ot Best Buy, but hey, I don't want an extended warranty given to me via enema.
B) I own Quake III, UT2k4, UT, Football Manager 2005, Elite Force 1 and 2, C&C Generals, Halo, Medal of Honour.
It's clear from the list I'm an FPS fan, but it's clear from your post that you don't know your arsehole from your earhole.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Ohreally_factor
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Have you ever checked out Sun's Project Looking Glass? It's pretty cool stuff, although some of its "advanced technology" we've already begun to seen come to market. Also, check out the demo by Jonathon Schwartz. (Warning: huge.mov file)
I don't know how far along this project is. I think the demo was old when I saw it a few years ago. The point is that there are useful creative ways to approach the desktop other than the Apple approach. However, I will readily admit that Apple has done the best job so far with OS X. Not that you need to twist my arm to sing Apple's praises. =)
-- It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Have you ever checked out Sun's Project Looking Glass?
Yes, it looks neat, but it seems to have no practical application that I can think of. Okay, you can rotate your windows along an axis parallel to the plane of the display. So? That's just a fancy way of scaling windows, a job which Exposé does better in my opinion.
The point is that there are useful creative ways to approach the desktop other than the Apple approach.
Creative, yes. Useful? I'd say not. It's possible that this is just lack of creativity on my part...but I really don't think so in this case. I can't recall ever thinking to myself, "This thing I'm trying to do would be so much easier if only I could rotate this window along an axis parallel to the display plane."
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
evand
·
· Score: 1
You're right -- Chris Sells is indicating that the goal is to support Win32 and existing.NET code, not that it will be definitively supported.
Historically, though, Microsoft's legacy application support has been quite good -- it's possible, for example, to run 16-bit DOS programs on Windows XP!
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Yaztromo
·
· Score: 1
It may be cheap and sexy, but it's hard to find apps for. Best Buy, for example, carries no Mac software.
If there are two things that characterize gaming on Mac OS X, it's that typically the games come out later on OSX than on Windows, and that there isn't the sheer mass of games available as there is on Windows. Still, that is a long way from "no" games -- typically all the best games from the Windows world make their way to the Mac OS X world in short order.
Yaz.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Kplusplus
·
· Score: 1
Darwin is free, you can download a copy from apple's site opensource.apple.com
You get an ISO and you burn a copy then install it. How is that not free as in beer and free as in speech? You can download the entire source and binary version completely free.
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Kplusplus
·
· Score: 1
I don't see how this is a flaw inherent to OS X. Completely different toolsets created this problem. You could just by Photoshop and have a native application that uses the native APIs that natively understands file aliases.
BTW Aliases rely on HFS+ in order to always point to a file regardless of thier location, so in linux there is no way to do this since there is no HFS+ writing (Journaled or otherwise).
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Correction -- The $10 Billion figure is for revenue, not profits as you say.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
fermion
·
· Score: 1
This was also the goal of OS X and carbon. It mostly worked, if you were running in the emulated environment. And it did not work all the time. This was also true of the various MS Windows flavors. Developers often have to do some testing to figure out exactly what is running, if not various compilations.
It is reasonable to expect that many apps, especially the games, will be broken. It is also reasonabl to expect that MS will take this opportunity to break specific unwelcome applications. MS will maintain the necceasry APIs and update thier applications to work with longhorn. Hopefully they will get changes to developers, and hopefully the developers have not written code that depends on obsolete features.
-- "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide."
Orphan Black
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
ThousandStars
·
· Score: 1
It's not like Apple has only just now discovered how to build great products. Apple has always been building great stuff, with the possible exception of the "beleagered" late 90's. The current frenzy around Apple, then, can only be partially explained by the greatness of their current crop of merchandise. Much of their success has to be attributed to fashion and sheer hype, which may evaporate as rapidly as it has come. It may only take one guy in a garage working on something we don't know about yet.
From the time I became intereested in computers in 1995 until about two years ago, Apple didn't make any good products. They had an inferior operating system until OS X 10.2. In '95 they were around System 7, IIRC, which was abysmal even when compared Windows 95, which left much to be desired. At that time they had a bewildering array of overpriced models whose benefit wasn't clear, to add to their general malaise. Things didn't really improve, and once they released OS X in 2001 at least they had an OS that showed promise. Unfortunately, the hardware at that time wasn't fast enough to run the software well. I don't think all their machines were acceptable for OS X until the iBooks moved to G4s, and perhaps not even then until every machine shipped with a 1 Ghz+ processor. Jaguar improved things, but not enough, because for a long time during the G4 tower era the hardware simply wasn't competitive with PC hardware given the price. That was finally remedied with the release of the G5s and the further clockspeed increases on the G4s. Only with the release of Panther have things become really, really good.
So good that I'm typing this on a PowerBook. From 1995 - 2001, I would have sworn I would never, ever type those words. Strange how things work out: The Apple computer that I wrote off as dead and probably should have died for incompetance is reborn; the one-time enemy of free computer users during the 80s becomes a champion of FOSS in the 00s; AMD takes the speed crown from Intel for an extended period of time. What a world...
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Kplusplus
·
· Score: 1
Care to share any of these? I happen to write Mac software and apps that are overlooked/specialized are perfect since I know what people want and can easily package up a solution that is much better than what the user was looking for.
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Kplusplus
·
· Score: 1
Beveled glass and textured metal widgets are more childish than garrishly bright green and blue widgets? Maybe in your mind.
As to the gui interface of Gnome, which interface are you talking about? Last I checked there are hundreds of themes for Gnome and while I love my "Industrial" theme and login panel theme, I can't say it's the best for everyone.
If your parents have trouble navigating off the desktop, that's fine. Give them what works for them, but using 1 case as representative of everyone is silly. My parents need to be told how to do everything on their windows box and refuse to learn how to do it themselves and ask me over and over again each time they use thier machine. So am I to assume that Windows is astoundingly perplexing and users can never become accustomed to it?
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
mjpaci
·
· Score: 1
"The goal is that apps written against the documented Win32 APIs and the.NET Framework will absolutely run well without any modifications under Longhorn when it ships."
So I guess MS Word, Excel, and PowerPoint will break?
--Mike
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Now that Apple hardware is (relatively) cheap...
After you upgrade the memory, the hard drive, and repurchase all your existing software, that is. Then come up with a monitor.
Oh wait: it isn't!
Macinistas: the most delusional group on the planet...
Hmm...not too sure, but have a look at MediaPipe. I won't burn for you, but it has pretty limitless possibilities for conversions/effects (ie shrinking/colour/etc).
It might take a minute to get used to (it's almost like scripting) but there's a reasonable community who can help you out.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Everything else I have either replaced with the MacOSX version of the same app, or replaced with a better third party app.
Gosh, how much did that cost?
In other words, your $500 "cheap" computer actually cost you...???
Barnum was right.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
quarkscat
·
· Score: 1
Hey, I see nothing wrong with your scenario. Just so long as Microsoft is DOOMed!
There was a previous post on/. (damn, can't find it) that many of the desktops at Sun were already Apple Macs. The new world order could be:
(1)toasters, refrigerators, etc NetBSD (2)autos, spacecraft GNU/linux/RT (3)corprate (data) servers GNU/linux (4)mail servers FreeBSD (5)firewalls,routers OpenBSD (6)desktops Mac OS X and (7)dustbin of history MSFT
Granted, it will take a while for Borg Bill & Co. to piss away their ill-gotten gains ($50B). One really good, far-reaching class action law- suit against MSFT for their crappy software might be the tipping point, however.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
macshit
·
· Score: 1
I wouldn't worry too much. If OSX succeeds wildly what will happen is that free software will change it's goals to adapt. For instance, replacing the unfree parts of OSX with something just as nice.
The cool thing about free software is that there is no bottom line -- you can keep hacking as long as you want.
To be honest, it might be really nice: being a unix system, Apple's software interfaces are much closer to those already used by most free software. Much free software makes no attempt to use MS interfaces, even if there would be "market share" advantages in doing so, because it's just too painful, and the MS interfaces are simply too weird and alien. Apple has a much better record of creating elegant and functional software, not just externally (as with the GUI), but internally as well.
-- We live, as we dream -- alone....
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
fitten
·
· Score: 1
I've thought about getting a MacMini to play around with OSX. I've also thought about getting one to play with LinuxPPC. The problem is that I already do everything I want, efficiently and well, with my Linux and Windows boxes. I don't really have any need to get a Mac of any kind and it won't let me do something I don't already do (or can't program if I can only find it on OSX).
The other main issue about the MacMini is processor speed. My slowest laptop is measurably 2X as fast crunching data as the PowerBooks and still 50% faster or more than the MacMini. Switching to a MacMini means I'll take 50% or longer to do the amount of work I do now and that doesn't sound like a good tradeoff to me.
Nice machine (the MacMini) for some folks but not nearly enough of a machine for many of us. I know some folks don't like to hear it but I can put together a comparable Athlon64 machine for $600 (that's the MacMini + the memory upgrade to 512M that is pretty much required to actually use the thing) that would be 2X or more faster at getting my work done. It just doesn't make sense for me to get one other than as a toy.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"Will my existing Win32 and.NET apps continue to run under Longhorn without modification?"
"The goal is that apps written against the documented Win32 APIs and the.NET Framework will absolutely run well without any modifications under Longhorn when it ships."
Oh boy, sudden flashback... about 10 years ago:
"Will my existing Mac System 7 apps continue to run under Copeland without modification?"
"The goal is that apps written against the documented Toolbox APIs will absolutely run well without any modifications under Copeland when it ships."
And we know how well that one worked.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
jjshoe
·
· Score: 1
When did i say it used the bsd kernel? i said 'bsd like'. go back and read please.
-- -- botsex is {grep;touch;strip;unzip;head;mount}/dev/girl -t {wet;fsck;fsck;yes;yes;yes;umount} {/de
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
jjshoe
·
· Score: 1
I'm not talking about the packages that come with it. Please go back and READ my post.
-- -- botsex is {grep;touch;strip;unzip;head;mount}/dev/girl -t {wet;fsck;fsck;yes;yes;yes;umount} {/de
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
bob+beta
·
· Score: 1
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
bob+beta
·
· Score: 1
I've downloaded and installed Darwin. On both Apple and x86 hardware.
What I object to is somebody referring to MacOS as "somebody charging money for a 'distro'."
Utter nonsense. It's just another commercial OS, and not even one that's free like Solaris. I wouldn't mind trying it on my Beige G3s. Damned if I'm going to spend three or four times as much as I did for the Beige G3 to do so.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Flasha da plastic! Flasha da plastic!
(just spend more money!)
Why is that always the Apple Way?
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
chrysrobyn
·
· Score: 1
Apple faces a perception problem. For every vocal person like NanoGator (who seems to have positive karma despite this Troll moderation), there are probably 20 quiet ones who believe the same thing, despite what Mac fans believe.
A.) It may be cheap and sexy, but it's hard to find apps for.
Wrong.
Where can we send NanoGator to buy Mac applications? Best Buy, Circuit City, Sears, even ElBo used to have Mac games. There's always the Apple website (and probably 10 other internet and catalogs of reasonable repute), but for the person wanting instant gratification, there's work to be done in cities without the Apple Store. Even cities with an Apple Store find that they are not always convenient to all the residents.
B.) No Games. Sorry.
Wrong.
I enjoy games on my Mac -- and have for a few years now. Bleeding edge gamers, however, can start naming tens of games that are not out for the Mac. Sure, MacHeads can point out that 90% of those are junk and not playable after 5 hours, maybe even 80% of them turned out to be a waste of money. Aforementioned MacHeads would point out Apple's list of games as proof that good games are out there, but it's still a perception problem.
C.) Regardless of the low price, Apple has a huge hurdle to overcome with the general masses that they won't be missing out if they get it.
NanoGator, I think you're more right than any of us would like you to be. I think a lot of that will be addressed after developers and store owners see how popular a $500 Mac turns out to be.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Golias
·
· Score: 1
Still... day-amn. $10 Billion is a lot of money for a company which makes products that everybody hates.
The real problem Microsoft has is that their bread-and-butter is becoming something they can't rely on much longer.
Making the OS which goes into 90% of computers was great, from a Wall Street point of view, when the personal computer market was a massively expanding industry... But now everybody who's likely to own a computer already has one. To make matters worse, computers from five years ago still run fast enough to do most of the things that people want to do with them. This means fewer new customers and fewer purchases from existing customers, which all adds up to a market which will never grow as fast as it did in the 90s.
The outlook for Office is far more bleak. At one time, Microsoft made more money selling MS-Office to Mac users than Apple made selling the Macs themselves, but no more.
Once word processors were capable of on-the-fly spelling and grammar checkers, people were satisfied. No new "feature" since then has been regarded by customers as a particularilly welcome one. Nobody wanted "Clippy", and nobody is likely to want whatever features get rolled into the next MS-Word, either. People have been fairly satisfied with their spreadsheet programs even longer. The Microsoft business model has been counting on people buying a new copy of Office (and maybe a new Windows computer to run it on) every three years or so for almost two decades now. Office, not Windows, is what made them what they are.
But if I'm using Office 2003 or Office for OS X right now, what possible reason could you give me for moving up to whatever the next version is... short of breaking interoperability to force and upgrade for the sake of keeping up with any of my customers/business partners/etc. who might have just bought a new computer and got the latest version to go with it?
People are starting to lose patience with this nonsense of paying several hundred dollars every few years just because the "standard" document format in the business world gets changed.
This is why open-source Office clones are catching on, and it's also why this was the right time for Apple to release "Pages", their new Word Killer app. Expect to see them come up with a cocoa-based spreadsheet within the next year or so. (Hey, maybe buy the rights to the name "Visi-Calc", and bring us all full-circle.)
For Microsoft, the future is (believe it or not), media devices. That's why the X-Box 2 is so very critical to their long-term strategy. I know it doesn't look very promising, but MS always takes three attepts to win at anything, right?
I would not be surprised to discover that in 2009 there will be an X-Box 3 in every home, providing games, Internet, PVR functions, and on-demand movie "buy or rent" downloads.
If not, the 800-pound gorilla could find itself weighing in at about a buck twenty, and getting pushed around by the chimps and orangutans.
--
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Which just goes to show that it doesn't pay to be a fanboy of any platform.
Apple is making the best OS on some of the finest hardware at a reasonable (if not especially cheap) price at the moment, but that doesn't mean that this will still be the case ten years from now.
Competition is good.
Free software is nice, but free markets are what really make sure that computers continue to meet the consumer interest.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
poopdeville
·
· Score: 1
Last I dealt with Debian's PPC mailing list, there was talk of doing an OS X port of Debian. I think we/they concluded that such a port would conflict with Fink's work too much.
-- After all, I am strangely colored.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
poopdeville
·
· Score: 1
(This is made worse because the Gimp is one of our most needed programs, but the implementation of X for the Mac doesn't understand Macintosh aliases as being links. [There's probably a good reason for this, but I don't know it.])
It's because aliases aren't really symbolic links. They're userland files the Finder can parse. The Unix shells don't have this technology built in. If you really need to use Gimp and links together, there's no way to do it but using the terminal. (Maybe I should write a little graphical utility...)
-- After all, I am strangely colored.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
poopdeville
·
· Score: 1
Is the important thing the kernel or the rest of the OS?
Though the question is clearly rhetorical, you're on the verge of making a great point. Kernel design has stabilized horizontally in the last few years, so that the fastest kernel is only marginally faster than average. Although I wish Apple had been a bit smarter about memory management in Darwin/OS X, ease of use is my primary criterion choosing OS X over Debian. (And Fink lets me use Debian's only real ease-of-use trump -- the ability to easily install open source software via apt-get).
-- After all, I am strangely colored.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
poopdeville
·
· Score: 1
The problem is that I already do everything I want, efficiently and well, with my Linux and Windows boxes. I don't really have any need to get a Mac of any kind and it won't let me do something I don't already do (or can't program if I can only find it on OSX).
As a Mac user, I have to say, don't get a Mac. Really, I don't mean this in a bad way. If you're satisfied with your current setup, there's absolutely no need to learn a new technology just to stay current or trendy.
I got my PowerBook last year because I need to do a bunch of scientific computation, need portability, and realized that although Windows dual-booting with linux on a laptop would work, the total cost of ownership would be higher. I mean, I'd have to invest time figuring out how to make everything work (I hadn't used Windows for about 5 years prior). OS X "just works" for trivial tasks, and the unix subsystem works just as easily as Debian's. And my PowerBook and OS X are just sexy.:-)
At any rate, these are just computers after all. Smart users use the best tool for the job given their needs and constraints.
-- After all, I am strangely colored.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
poopdeville
·
· Score: 1
It's cheap, it's better for games than all but the most amped-up PCs, and when technology improves you can throw it away and buy a new one without getting all teary-eyed about your $3,000 investment down the drain.
Are there really many spoiled brats out there who just throw out $3,000 machines? Surely, once you have a good case, upgrading and staying current can't be too difficult. Even if this were impossible, a nice $3,000 machine would make a great, if over-powered, server of some kind.
-- After all, I am strangely colored.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
fitten
·
· Score: 1
I have nothing against the Mac, although your suggestion that it is "current or trendy" is somewhat subjective:)
If someone wanted to pay me to develop on a Mac, I'd get one without batting an eye. If Macs became a major part of the software market, I wouldn't hesitate to get one. It just doesn't meet any of my criteria at the moment to get one.
Also, I don't really need a computer to be sexy... I have a wife for that:) I would like to be able to justify an Athlon64 laptop, though, to run SuSE 9.2 Professional AMD64 on though. I really like it on one of my AMD64s at home.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
arminw
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
...will absolutely run well without any modifications...
If that really does happen, then the new flavor of Windows will STILL be insecure and users will have to contend with all the malware that currently can and does afflict Windows. Many programs for Windows are written with the assumtions of the user having unfettered access to every bit and byte on their PERSONAL computer. Personal computers were meant to be used by ONE user only and that user has total control over ALL of their machine.
UNIX flavored systems were and are designed with the many user premise that the ordinary user does NOT have access to the total machine unless that user is also the administrator or root user. All programs written for such a multiuser environment are aware of the elaborate permissions structure. Windows also has a permissions structure, but restricting permissions causes many Windows programs to fail. If MS enforces their permissions structure, then any old program unaware of these will likely fail. This means that all the old malware will also fail and result in a secure system for most ordinary users. If the old programs still run under their new system, so will the old malware and the users will have no more security than they have now.
Any user, on any computer can fall victim to social engineering and be tricked into facilitating the entry of malware into their system. However, if that user does not have the ability to install and run new software without knowing and/or giving the administrator password, new programs including nasties, cannot be added to the computer. Every system should have at least two accounts, a restricted one for every day use and another ONLY for tasks requiring system administrator activities.
-- All theory is gray
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
dr.badass
·
· Score: 1
I'm not talking about the packages that come with it.
So, where exactly do you draw the line? What does it not do or not have that makes it not based on BSD?
-- Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Because commercial software for Windows is free... yeah...
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Agreed, 'the goal is' phrase rings alarm bells... remember the 'seamless transition' from the 9x kernel to the NT kernel?
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Lord+Flipper
·
· Score: 1
"As good as" isn't the nature of technological advancement.
It's a leapfrog thing. You know, the old 'standing on the shoulders of giants' math thing. Original poster had the right idea. "As good as" is like setting 'mediocrity' (not to mention, 'redundance') as a goal. That's not a 'goal' at all.
I just hope the hardcore Linux, *nix developers start working on squeezing the most out of cycles and RAM, rather than using the apparent 'abundance' of those two things as a 'cushion'. Tighten it up, that's what i say.
If Apple has to bust ass to stay in the thick of the tech 'wedge' between empowerment and the 'lowest common denominator' 'good enough for the newbs' stuff, then so be it.
As a user, I don't give a rat's ass about competition in the marketplace. I want the people writing the code of the stuff I want to use, to have a drive to be 'better than the rest', and if they get surpassed, to just get back in and do it again, and on and on.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 1
It's a leapfrog thing.
That's real nice in theory, but it doesn't match the facts. For the past 20 years, one company has been right there on the leading edge, and everybody else has been struggling to keep up. About 10 years ago, a new thing came along, and now it's struggling to keep up with the folks who are struggling to keep up with the leader.
And yes, when the status quo is "compared to the leader, we suck," I'd say "let's be as good as the leader" is definitely a worthy goal.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Holi
·
· Score: 1
Wow that was a most arrogant post.
BTW Your system sucks and I drink at the Liquid Lounge in Providence.
-- Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Kplusplus
·
· Score: 1
Why is the open source way to always waste time and productivity? Why is the open source way to always go with the worst solution merely because it was free? Why is the open source way to deal with bugs, missing features and glaring omissions all to avoid paying for a better application? If you really can't afford a mac app that does what you need are stuck with Gimp, fine, BUT if you can afford the native solution and know how to use it why bother forcing yourself to put up with something that comes up short?
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Holi
·
· Score: 1
Until you get Macs in the work place you won't get them into the majority of homes. People like to use what they know, and if you use a computer at work it is most likely an x86.
Find me a decent POS software package that handles inventory control, purchasing, time clock management and payroll then will talk, but really these very boring but necessary pieces of software are what is needed to bring the Mac out of obscurity. Plus it needs to lose the hipster, I'm better then you attitude perception that people have.
-- Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Kplusplus
·
· Score: 1
You say arrogant, I say honest. When was the last time you had mac software that was lacking in features or usability? What about that was buggy and unreliable?
While an application being for the mac doesn't automatically make it awesome, the sheer amount of bitching that mac users will do when the littlest of details is off does. Mac users simply don't put up with crap since they don't have to, so when you write mac apps it pays to take the time to invest extra time making sure you did it right.
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Holi
·
· Score: 1
When was the last time you had mac software that was lacking in features or usability?
Well let's see how about OS 7 - OS 9 oh and we can add that joke of an OS, OS X not the version it is at now but the one they initially released. can you honestly tell me OS X was ready to be released when it was. Even Pixar did not switch till many things were fixed. As for current software I am not so sure as I run a retail business right now and there really is a very limited amount of software for the Mac platform that handles point of sale. Now I am sure that some one will pipe up with some but really there is nothing out there that can handle what I need.
And besides iLife what else besides Adobe, Macromedia, and MS products fits your description. Are you saying that there are no crappy shareware type apps for the Mac, I bet there are a thousand people on slashdot that will prove you wrong.
oh and by the way, I was saying you were arrogant for saying you can write software that's better then what the users want.
-- Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Lord+Flipper
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, I understand that position. I mean, why be a second or 'same' rate version of a second-rate thing, in the first place. But come on, 'aim high, settle for a tie' is almost certain to yield better efforts and results than 'aim for a tie'. My point, whether clear or not, was that competition (in the true sense, that of 'competing to win'), would push both sides, further. Even if a desktop Linux came out with a GUI/CLI that was as good as OS X I wouldn't switch, what would be the point? It isn't going to happen, anyway, because Apple, under current leadership (no bets on what happens 'after'), isn't sitting still. by the way, as far as MS goes, they've coerced, manipulated, co-opted, assimilated... but 'struggled'? I don't see it.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Kplusplus
·
· Score: 1
Hmm, funny. You see OS 7 - OS 9 all worked perfectly fine for me and did exactly what they were supposed to, so your gonna have to point out the deficiencies to me. As to OS X, it's initial release despite it's code name was no speed deamon, but it was rock stable and ran all the software it claimed to as well as it claimed to.
Why would Pixar switch it's entire development pipeline that creates billions in revenue over to a brand new and wholly untested system? If they had done that, it would have been the most brain dead move ever. Pixar only moved to OS X BECAUSE of the XServe Dual G5 cluster setup, which was wholly created for VT and Pixar. They switched for performance, not the OS.
Again, if there are deficiencies in the available application why aren't you emailing application authors and telling them what is missing in their offering? I get emails and comments all the time about what people like/don't like and I use them to decide what to add/change/enhance. I know I'm not the only mac developer that does that, and I know that Mac users are very fickle and will quickly throw your app in the trash once they have decided they don't like it.
Like I was saying before, mac users value their mac applications because they work as their mac does, exactly as they are told to. I never said there was no crappy mac software, I know of plenty and some are created to intentionally be crappy, but what other platform has a website entirely dedicated to ridiculing bad applications(perversiontracker.com)? Like I said, mac users are often very vocal about what they don't like, I just use that to craft better stuff.
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Ohreally_factor
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Maybe you're ultimately right, that this is eye-candy without a purpose. But I think this is one of those things were the uses are only suggested by the demo. To see if it were really useful, one would need to play around with it for a while, just like I had to play around with OS X to get a feel for it. The demos I had seen of OS X before I had actually tried it were kind of a tease.
What I find interesting in concept (although I obviously haven't been able to try it) is the idea of a 3D UI, which Looking Glass approaches. (It's not quite there, imho. It's closer to the 2.5D you can build in After Effects, if that example means anything to you.)
The proof is in the pudding, of course, and the Looking Glass pudding hasn't been served yet. But the ideas intrigue me.
So, this might or might not be uselful. But my original point was that people are doing interesting things in UI design that go beyond what we have now, but I wish there was more of it. Many developers seem to be in a mental cage of MS's devising.
-- It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
jjshoe
·
· Score: 1
It loads a kernel based on os9. I don't see how it can be anything else.
-- -- botsex is {grep;touch;strip;unzip;head;mount}/dev/girl -t {wet;fsck;fsck;yes;yes;yes;umount} {/de
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
jjshoe
·
· Score: 1
It boots a kernel based on os9. How could it be anything else?
-- -- botsex is {grep;touch;strip;unzip;head;mount}/dev/girl -t {wet;fsck;fsck;yes;yes;yes;umount} {/de
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
agraupe
·
· Score: 1
Yeah, yeah I know. And, yes, I will say "aqua isn't free", and at that ponit, I don't see how it matters one way or the other if you can run Darwin. Without aqua, it is basically a *BSD fork, with nothing muich going for it. If your goal is to run the same OS on all your computers, I doubt you'll go for half with GUI and half without.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
>Developers should be shooting for "better than OS X" instead of "as good as windows".
Indeed.
"Better than very good" is always a better target than "as good as shit".
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 1
But come on, 'aim high, settle for a tie' is almost certain to yield better efforts and results than 'aim for a tie'.
That sounds real good on paper, but it never, ever works in practice.
Let's say you're just learning to compose music. Does it make sense to try to be better than Bach? Of course not. That's putting the cart before the horse. In order to be better than Bach, you have to first be as good as Bach, which in and of itself is a task for a lifetime.
If you're trying to build a computer operating system, in order to be better than Apple you first have to be as good as Apple. And given that Apple's got a thousand man-years of collective experience on the subject, and has had more spectacular failures than the hobbyists have had even modest successes, I'd say that merely being as good as Apple is a pretty tall order.
Long story short: The people who make things like "Gnome" (c.f. the related story about the oh-so-embarrassing "Gnome" screen shots) have a lot to learn about basic human interfaces. They are, right now, about 25 years behind the state of the art. Expecting them to somehow leap ahead and make something even better than the state of the art is expecting a pig to fly. You can hope and you can pray, but buddy, it just ain't gonna happen.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
dr.badass
·
· Score: 1
It loads a kernel based on os9. I don't see how it can be anything else.
Now you're just making shit up. The Mac OS X kernel is called XNU and is based on Mach and BSD, and has nothing to do with OS 9.
"XNU's BSD component uses FreeBSD as the primary reference codebase (although some cod might be traced to other BSDs). Darwin 7.x (Mac OS X 10.3.x) uses FreeBSD 5.x. As mentione before, BSD runs not as an external (or user-level) server, but is part of the kernel itself. " -- XNU : The Kernel
-- Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Mattintosh
·
· Score: 1
That's one hell of an expensive OS. I paid $5000 for my beige G3. I sure hope you don't pay $15,000 for MacOS X, 'cause I got it for just $129.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Trillan
·
· Score: 1
When it boils right down to it, Linux is free and Mac OS X isn't. So no, I don't think it would be a bad thing if Mac OS X sent Linux-on-the-desktop packing. (Not that I think it's doing so, but it's an interesting question that I feel deserves an answer.) If you improve it to the point that a compelling case can be made for using it as a desktop operating system, people will use it as one.
Maybe that means that Linux on the desktop needs more work. Maybe it will get it, maybe it won't. But if it can't compete with at least some success against another niche OS that costs $150 per year (or two) to keep up to date, it doesn't deserve to survive...
Personally, I'm hoping this drives both OSes to new heights.
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Yes it is, when you already own it....
Re:Stealing Windows customers?
by
aztracker1
·
· Score: 1
With the System.Windows.Forms interface in.Net being abstracted from the underlying Win32 Graphics API, they will probably run without flaws (if managed-only code)
this being said, the way that the underlying API works for some who use it directly may lead to issues... this probably won't affect the majority of.Net and/or VB4-6 based applications, as this is a relatively small subset of the full API.. applications (especially graphics apps) are most likely to be affected by this in certain uses...
Hopefully MS PhotoDraw, Paint Shop Pro, and PhotoShop are tested thoroughly, as these probably push the envelope in the more obscure API calls.
Just IMHO, and not based on anything in particular, but the above is what I feel will be the case.
Computers, or fashion items?
by
EvilCabbage
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'm contemplating getting one of these for my mother (okay... and one for myself...) but I'm wondering if this is a case of form over function?
I'm totally new to the Mac world, save from a few experiences with an iPod which I found to be totally unfulfilling, so is the Mac Mini really a good place for me to start, or is it much like the iPod, and just another fashion accessory with secondary consideration given to functions?
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
remahl
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Read the review from AnandTech. It is very comprehensive (18 pages!) and doesn't fail to point out the design features Apple put in to enhance the user experience. Nor does it fail to hilight the weak points of the design.
In my experience, it is very rarely "form over function" with Apple, it's function intersecting form.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
drinkypoo
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
As long as you put 512MB of ram in it, the mini should be capable of running anything your mom wants to run for the next few years. If you want to do video editing or something, well, the G4 can do it, but you'd be better off with a G5. Frankly no 1+ GHz computer is really a toy, ANY of them can run the office apps and such. To me, 1GHz was the line that had to be crossed to get decent performance. Sure, most of us said this kind of stuff when the 386DX came out - it's a 32 bit processor! blah blah blah! And of course, not all 1 gig chips are created equal, compare via to an athlon xp sometime, but I've never met a 1 gig chip that couldn't do everything the average user needed to do with a modern operating system slowing it down:)
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
jxyama
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
>is it much like the iPod, and just another fashion accessory with secondary consideration given to functions?
can you explain how iPod is "form over function"? i find it to be the most usable mp3 player out there. about the only thing i feel it's missing is a radio.
in any case, Mac mini - what you see is what you get. if you want expansion, then it's "form over function" for you and the machine will not serve you well. otherwise, it's as capable as any other desktops out there - it's got USB ports, firewire ports, DVI (VGA adapter included), Combo drive, etc. (i personally don't consider lack of p/s, parallel or serial ports "lack of function" as much as keeping the legacy ports. similarly for floppy disk.)
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Sophrosyne
·
· Score: 1
I think it's a great way to start- I am running an eMac which is basically the same hardware in the mini- and the system is great- My only suggestion is add at least 512 Mb of RAM.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
wnorris
·
· Score: 1
if you've never really used OS X before, this is definitely a decent machine to get you used to the mac world. Buy one, use it for 6 months, and if you totally fall in love with the mac way of doing thing then work into something bigger like a Powerbook or G5 iMac/PowerMac. You won't feel so bad about buying a whole new computer so soon down the road considering this one only set you back $500. And if you don't like it... again, it was only $500.
However if you're already a Mac user, I wouldn't imagine the mini would be all that attractive as far as computing power and such, unless all you're looking for is to add a small workstation to that tiny desk in your living room or something.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Jeff+DeMaagd
·
· Score: 1
i find it to be the most usable mp3 player out there. about the only thing i feel it's missing is a radio.
I too found the iPod to be a perfectly usable device. I also consider "missing a radio" a feature. That is one things Apple and its fans have right. I suppose it would be nice to have for NPR but those dozens of stations with dozens of transmitters are serving up "material" I don't want.
The Mac mini is decently upgradeable, save the video card and CPU. The options are more limited than would be for a standard ATX style case (or even a Shuttle-type), but it would serve fine for the average user. IMO, typically only enthusiasts and occasionally professionals upgrade CPUs and video cards, the only time nearly anyone upgrades or expands is if something dies.
Even before the mini, a there are a lot of upgrades that can be done by simply plugging in an external device. From what I've seen, typically the external device is an added hard drive or optical drive.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
beejay54
·
· Score: 1
Depends. My first mac was an eMac. Mostly because it seemed to fit my budget and I could still afford to jam it with RAM and all the other accessories. To be honest, it's one of the best computers I've ever owned. Hardware interoperability is never an issue and it really makes you feel like you've been missing out in previous years. I think the best part is the community though, It's not like linux where if you have a problem your counting on someone with the same config or distro specific paches to help you through, it's very nice. If you can afford it you can't go wrong with their 'Power' line, although my eMac is a tough bugger too. All the ports and standards you could ask for and industrial design that is really form out of function and not the other way around. I'm not a big mac pusher or anything, I just know when I'm happy with something. Good luck.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Ohreally_factor
·
· Score: 1
However if you're already a Mac user, I wouldn't imagine the mini would be all that attractive as far as computing power and such,
It depends. I know a few Mac users that are still using old iMacs or earlier machines that haven't upgraded for budgetary reasons. Those who own old beige macs might have upgraded the CPU (amongst other things) and are able to run OS X with the X Post Facto hack from OWC, but they still lust after the new hardware.
-- It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
segmond
·
· Score: 1
My main workstations are PIII's 500mhz with 256-512mb of ram. I do everything on them, play music, video editting, graphics plus my software development. I remember clearly when I moved from 10mhz to 33mhz, I thought it was the end of the world. I will never forget that, I get more done with less Mhz than most people do with their Ghz.
-- ------
Curiosity killed the cat. {satisfaction brought it back | it didn't die ignorant | lack of it is killing mankind
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
dduck
·
· Score: 1
Well, the Mini is neato, but the dual G5 Power Mac is one swee-eeet workstation!
That's more or less what happened to me: I went to the on-line store for a look at the Mini, and ended up noticing that if I was goo get a system for serious development, I might as well enter the ADC program and get one of the big machines with a 20% discount. Hence, a dual 1.8GHz G5 on the table next to the now-secondary Windows-PC.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
drinkypoo
·
· Score: 1
I feel much the same way but I would far rather have a fast processor than putz around with the slow stuff. My first computer was 1MHz, as was my second, and my third was less than 8. I even have owned and used as my primary computer a Sun 3/260, which I upgraded to a 4/260 - you want to talk about night and day? But ultimately if you're doing video editing, transcoding, and the like, you're simply better off with the fastest computer you're willing to pay for.
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
radish
·
· Score: 1
Well I'd like the iPod to play mix albums back without inserting irritating gaps between the tracks...for one.
--
----
Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
larryj
·
· Score: 1
I've had mine for 2 weeks now and I absolutely love it. This is my first Mac but it doesn't take long to fall in love with OS X. I did upgrade to 512 megs of RAM but it really wasn't bad with 256 for basic stuff. It's plenty fast enough for general use (email, web surfing, iTunes, etc). iPhoto can cause brief delays, but it's not enough to be annoying.
I bought a KVM switch but I'm not switching over to XP much anymore. Once I finish Half-Life 2 I'm not sure if I'll have any reason to go back to XP.
I didn't care for Quicken 2005 for the Mac. It doesn't do direct downloads from Bank of America. I've been using Moneydance for a few days now though (http://www.moneydance.com/) and it works great with BoA.
This is the perfect computer for parents, grandparents, etc. too. It's very easy to use as everything just makes sense. On the other hand, it's also a lot of fun to tinker with. I installed Oracle 10g this weekend along with the Perl DBI. Best of both worlds IMO.
-- What if the Hokey-Pokey really is what it's all about?
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I find it the worst mp3-player available. Let me highlight the major points versus for example iRiver or iAudio:
No USB Mass Storage driver. Requires crappy iTunes software. No guarantee that it will ever be upgraded when MS Windows breaks compatibility (happened with the old Sony player, effectively turning the player in a very expensive book stand).
No possibility of copying songs while over at a friend's in either direction (as in "you've gotta have this...").
No good codecs except MP3 and AAC, especially no OGG or WMV which could be useful once in a while.
No good voice recording feature / memo function.
No radio.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Mr.+Underbridge
·
· Score: 1
In my experience, it is very rarely "form over function" with Apple, it's function intersecting form.
Puck mouse?
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 1
I think your point is absolutely right on. Any computer on this side of (arbitrary threshold) is capable of doing any of the tasks that your average person could want to do today. Just like any computer on this side of (another arbitrary threshold) could do any of the tasks of 1984.
Now, we look back on the computers of 1984 as ancient history, but the fact is that they did everything we wanted them to do at the time. Twenty years from now, we'll look back on the computers we have today as ancient history because they're not capable of doing whatever the hell we'll be doing in 20 years -- and if you think you know, you're kidding yourself --but that doesn't change the fact that they're more than adequate for us today.
Well, as long as the software is up to snuff, I mean. I don't know anybody who would compare a top-of-the-line Windows or UNIX workstation to a Mac for a home user and declare either of them "adequate."
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
bonch
·
· Score: 1
about the only thing i feel it's missing is a radio.
And because of the burgeoning iPod accessory market, you can have radios too! Even guitar amps and voice recorders...
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Dephex+Twin
·
· Score: 1
Yes, and this is completely honest here, the puck mouse was designed so that mousing could be done with the fingers and a stationary palm, rather than using the whole hand. And if you get used to using the puck mouse a little bit, it is convenient in that way. The biggest problem with it is that you can't easily tell if the mouse is pointed in the right direction without looking.
--
If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the universe. -- Carl Sagan
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
That is exactly what Hitler would have said, were he alive today.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You get less done with less, since apparently your time is not overly valuable. Compiling, video editing, and nontrivial image editing all consume considerably less time for everyone else than for you. Now playing music, that you could do on a P5. No need for those 500MHz P3s.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Mike+McTernan
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The bundled ear buds make a pretty crappy sound and yet are almost a trademark of iPods. I'd say that is form over function...
-- --
Mike
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
How is that form over function? The fact that they are white? What does that have to do with sound quality?
The fact that they are earbuds? Last I checked, you can get good sound quality from earbuds.
That leaves... Umm... What form?
Do you know what "form over function" means? It means they when it came to "making it sound good" or "making it good looking", they chose good looking.
As far as I can tell, the problem with the iPod headphones is that they are not high quality earbuds. This has nothing to do with form (or looks), but rather just with not spending a lot of money on the included headphones.
Of course, I have never found any portable devices that come with good quality headphones, so...
In other words, that does not sound *at all* like "form over function.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
FunkyChild
·
· Score: 1
Do you know what "form over function" means? It means they when it came to "making it sound good" or "making it good looking", they chose good looking.
Erm, what? So the fact that they're white precludes them from sounding good? You making a pretty wild assumption that Apple could either have white earplugs or good sounding earplugs, and had to choose one or the other, at equal cost.
I would presume the situation would be more like the earplugs were going to be white anyway, and to keep the overall costs down, they chose to use a pretty average set that probably aren't the best quality. Most people that care about sound would use their own anyway, and besides, when you buy an iPod at the online Apple store, as an optional extra, you can buy some other inner-ear earplugs that probably sound better, and are *gasp* white, too.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
toddestan
·
· Score: 1
Note how he says workstations. Sure, his PIII can be tied up all day encoding a video, but what does he care when he can move over to the next workstation and keep working?
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
toddestan
·
· Score: 1
can you explain how iPod is "form over function"?
How about not including a panel you can open to get to the battery so it can be replaced?
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
suckmysav
·
· Score: 1
"Twenty years from now, we'll look back on the computers we have today as ancient history because they're not capable of doing whatever the hell we'll be doing in 20 years."
This is true to a point, but I have been using PCs since the CP/M days, and I have to say that the need to upgrade to ever faster machines is less now than it has been at any time in the last 25 years.
10 years ago nobody in their right mind, let alone me personally, would consider using a 5 year old computer. Today, plenty of people (myself included) are doing just that.
Apart from video encoding, which will always be ruled by the "faster is better" maxim, there are really no compelling reasons for your average punter to need anything like the 4Ghz(or PR rated) CPU's that are currently the flagship models for AMD/intel.
With the currently stagnated state of MS Windows (until Longhorn in 2006 or later) there is less reason than ever before for people to upgrade. I am typing this on a mobile PIII/700Mhz laptop. Even my fastest PC (at home) which I use to do video encoding and games is only a 2Ghz XP2400. A faster CPU would be nice for video encoding, turning a six hour encode session into a four hour session but this is not enough to justify the expense of an upgrade in my opinion.
As far as games go I have yet to see a game that doesn't work perfectly smoothly on my XP2400, and that includes Far Cry and Half-Life 2, both of which run flawlessly (not counting the obscene load-times for HL2, but that is not a CPU bound phenonenom at all)
I fully expect to have the same suite of PC's for another year at least, and quite possibly two, without any substantial changes.
Maybe I'll consider getting a hardware MPEG2 encoder card though, anybody have any suggestions on a good encoder card that allows transcoding of existing video streams as oppossed to "hardware encoding of ONLY the data stream coming from its in built TV tuner" ala the Hauppauge PVR350 et al?
-- "You can't fight in here, this is the war room!"
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 1
Don't get an MPEG-2 encoded. MPEG-2 is all but dead. The only thing it's still being used for are standard-definition DVDs and broadcast television, two technologies that are on their way out. The future is M.264/AVC.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
phpsocialclub
·
· Score: 1
I can not believe that they have not fixed this yet. This is the single most annoying thing about the ipod.
I am a dj and often use my Ipod to "warm up" the crowd. My mixes are all one solid mp3 so I do not get that annoying click.
I wish they would go ahead an fix that.
It also sucks to listen to live shows
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Phil+Wilkins
·
· Score: 1
Actually for earbuds, they're pretty good. Not as good as the ones that form a seal with your ear canal, and obviously not as good as a proper pair of over-ear phones, but for what they are, they're great.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
suckmysav
·
· Score: 1
All I want to do is make standard DVDs that can be played on a standard DVD player. I'm not particularly interested in HDTV or any of the fandangled new codecs because the originals I have are low definition anyway so why bother transcoding them to some whizbang hi-definition format that is not now (and possibly will never be) widely adopted?
Use of MPEG2/DVD is widely supported, requires no special equipment and the use of which does not act to provide momentum and demand for the widespread adoption of various DRM schemes that will be without a doubt fully integrated into whatever the next generation of "high definition" content delivery mechanism is.
No thanks, for what I want MPEG2/DVD is just fine, as are plain old unencumbered audio CD's and MP3 files. Portability is more important to me than wringing the nth degree of a barely perceptable level of image quality out of a $20,000 home theatre system that I don't even own.
Thanks for the tip anyway.
-- "You can't fight in here, this is the war room!"
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
That was his point exactly. He was saying that it ISN'T a case of form over function.
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Trillan
·
· Score: 1
Or by feel, until they added the notch to the button for "up."
Re:Computers, or fashion items?
by
Phlod
·
· Score: 1
Well, personally, I've always used my fingertips to mouse. I've never noticed that the form of the mouse ever had anything to do with my ability to use my fingertips to move the mouse around. The only time I've noticed myself using my whole hand/arm is to pick it up and move it when I get too far in one direction. So, I guess that explaination for the puck-mice has always kinda struck me as not the whole truth. Methinks it has more to do with Apple wanting to be different, once again. But that was a horrible design. Even with the notch, it was tough to use without looking at it.
the more they grab from microsoft, the better. if it takes cute computers and nifty mp3 players to do it, who cares? mac makes a superior product to windows IMO, and more poeple should get wise to that fact.
Good for CRT Monitors too?
by
javacowboy
·
· Score: 1
I'm wondering if the grandstand would withstand the weight of a 17" CRT monitor, like what I have now.
This would save a lot of space on my desk.
On the other hand, the minitower might be a good idea too.
-- This space left intentionally blank.
Re:Good for CRT Monitors too?
by
lanc
·
· Score: 1
maybe, maybe not - but your monitor can surely maintain the weight of your mini:)
-- "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you,
then they attack you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Re:Good for CRT Monitors too?
by
midifarm
·
· Score: 2, Informative
If space is of concern, I've read that you can successfully put the MiniMac on it's side without drive malfunctions.
Peace
Re:Good for CRT Monitors too?
by
Peter+Cooper
·
· Score: 1
The answer is no. The base of every single 17" CRT I've seen is significantly larger than the Mac Mini, so it'd be both unstable and look silly. Apple also says not to put anything on top for cooling purposes, although, as far as I can tell, most heat escapes from the rear of the unit.
I wouldn't have an issue with putting a few Mac Minis on top of each other, or maybe an external hard drive, but nothing more than this.
Re:Good for CRT Monitors too?
by
jo_ham
·
· Score: 1
The article says right there on the page that the Grandstand will support loads up to 60lbs.
Weighing your monitor is left as an exercise for the reader.
Pretty weak accessories
by
agent+dero
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
These accessories I'd think can be useful, but not *that* useful. I mean, what is the point of the 'Mac Mini skirt?'
I'm really trying not to troll here, but I think worthwhile accessories would be to the tune of, a dock type thing, that has a built-in USB pro-audio card that looks kind of like this "Mini Skirt."
The Mini is already stylish enough, and I think the only merit of the two latter products is stylistic, if they expanded the usefullness and capacities of the Mini, then i'm all for it;).
-- Error 407 - No creative sig found
Re:Pretty weak accessories
by
nomadicGeek
·
· Score: 4, Funny
what is the point of the 'Mac Mini skirt?'
You can hide your weed under it.
Re:Pretty weak accessories
by
Dr+Reducto
·
· Score: 1
I know exactly what you are saying. These are basically just "stands" for the Mac Mini. But hey, the company got a free advertisement that will probably drum up some sales. They are smarter than me in that respect, and will probably be laughing all the way to the bank.
Re:Pretty weak accessories
by
drinkypoo
·
· Score: 1
Only if your weed is transparent. If the bottom of the Mini gets very warm, and it has any ventilation, it could be a good thing, otherwise I'd say it's just something to keep your mac off the table so you don't scratch it when you put down your keys or something. In other words, a waste of money.
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Pretty weak accessories
by
gad_zuki!
·
· Score: 1
These are cosmetic/weak. Obviously, you're going to need a couple things to actually use this computer:
1. A USB hub. It blows my mind Apple wouldnt put in at least four ports. Two are going to be taken by the keyboard and mouse. I mean, how much money could they be saving by saving two ports. Or they could have added PS/2 ports for older mice/keyboards. You're not going to be able to use a USB printer or scanner without that hub.
2. A KVM switch. Considering they're aiming for the first time Apple buyer with a PC, this is pretty much a must have.
Not to mention selling this with 256megs of ram isnt such a hot idea. The real problem here is if people perceive this as being too cheap they're just not going to buy it. Toss in 50+ bucks for the 512 upgrade, 20 something for a usb2 hub, and another 20 something for a KVM, it adds up to an extra 100 just to have a usable machine.
Re:Pretty weak accessories
by
Otterley
·
· Score: 1
Most decent USB keyboards have a built-in hub that will handle peripherals that don't pull a lot of power off the bus (e.g., mice, cameras, scanners, etc.) I plug my mouse into my keyboard and I still have 2 ports free.
Re:Pretty weak accessories
by
clontzman
·
· Score: 1
Keyboards might have gotten a lot better since I was last looking, but usually keyboard USB ports are only USB 1.1. Better than nothing, but kinda unfortunate.
Re:Pretty weak accessories
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Apple's $29 keyboard has a 2-port USB hub built-in. It is fairly easy to find a nice looking USB 2.0 hub with 4 or more ports these days for under $20. USB to PS/2 adapters cost under $10 and Mac OS X has built-in drivers for them. You don't need to use either port if you get Apple's wireless keyboard/mouse combo. Most people have a USB 1.1 hub lying around unused. The idea about a computer coming bundled with a KVM is a nice dream you have.
Re:Pretty weak accessories
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Funniest thing I've ever seen on Slashdot.
That "Grandstand" looks like a Mini oven
by
Dammital
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
They've got a monitor pedestal that closely encloses the Mini. As densely packed as that Mac is, there is probably a reason that the case is made of aluminium. I'd be careful about insulating that box.
Re:That "Grandstand" looks like a Mini oven
by
Sophrosyne
·
· Score: 1
From what I've heard the metal is cool to the touch.
Re:That "Grandstand" looks like a Mini oven
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Informative
As densely packed as that Mac is, there is probably a reason that the case is made of aluminium.
Only that it looks good. I know what you're getting at, but an aluminum case does not have significantly better heat transfer. The Mac Mini has forced convection (with a very quiet fan). Heat conduction through the case is laughably insignificant compared to even natural convection, given many factors such as the distance from the hot components. (If the case gets hot enough for conduction to be a factor, everything's already fried.)
Many overclockers buy aluminum cases for their better heat transfer. Many overclockers are idiots with too much money who don't have any theoretical knowledge of science or the ability to set up a controlled experiment.
Re:That "Grandstand" looks like a Mini oven
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Here's why Shuttle uses aluminum:
Ken Huang: Aluminum is simply the best material to achieve the style and light weight that most XPC users demand. Steel, of course, is a better acoustic dampener, and we will soon release the SB86I, compatible with BTX and utilizing a steel case.
Re:That "Grandstand" looks like a Mini oven
by
dabigpaybackski
·
· Score: 1
Oh, you must be referring to the "Dutch Oven" pedestal.
-- "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
Don't count your chickens...
by
Faust7
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
once the affordable, stylish mac steals the Windows users who love their iPod
Bit of an assumption there, isn't it?
True, this is the first Mac to be within an average joe's price range -- and the fact that it includes no keyboard, mouse, or monitor doesn't matter because it's aimed at potential switchers. Whip out the PC, slide in the Mac Mini.
All the conditions are there. But does the Mini offer enough to get people to climb out of their boxes of complacency and tolerance, and actually switch?
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
All the conditions are there. But does the Mini offer enough to get people to climb out of their boxes of complacency and tolerance, and actually switch?
Only time will tell, but right out of the gate the Mini became the fastest-selling Mac ever.
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
antifoidulus
·
· Score: 1
Heh, it's just more editorializing in the stories, nothing new. I really wish they would keep their opinions out of the story submissions.
(Btw, yes I am a mac lover, I would get the mini cept for I don't like the G4 bus, so I'll be going for an iMac G5)
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
Ohreally_factor
·
· Score: 1
I don't think it's so much that the Mini offers enough to entice people, but that all the various Windows malware and other Windows headaches will entice some people "out of their boxes of complacency and tolerance".
-- It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
drinkypoo
·
· Score: 1
Most PC users out there still have PS/2 keyboard and mouse. It's about $15 retail to get the USB adapter widget. Pretty trivial cost but it's a real issue.
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
jfengel
·
· Score: 1
It won't be quite that easy; a lot of older PCs and some new ones have a PS2 keyboard and mouse. Unless the mac mini has those, you're gonna have to blow fifteen bucks on converters.
Fine with me; I'm getting my mac mini as soon as I can scrape together a few hours to get to the Apple store. I haven't owned a mac since my 5300cs died early and utterly unlamented. Man, that computer sucked.
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
Ohreally_factor
·
· Score: 1
drinkypoo, my dear lad, are nuts? $15 to get a PS/2 to USB adapter? Try $1.50. Sure, you can pay more if you want, but it's not necessary. Just make sure you're getting USB Male To PS2 Female, of course.
-- It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
Ohreally_factor
·
· Score: 1
You're off by an order of magnitude on the cost of adapters. See my reply to drinky poo's post above.
-- It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
drinkypoo
·
· Score: 1
1) That's $1.50 + $4.99 shipping.
2) I'm talking about being able to go in and buy them from a store. Most people won't order one off ebay, and even if they did it wouldn't help them hook up their mini when they get it home if they didn't realize that it was going to require one and thus didn't order one.
3) I am nuts, but my prior comment is no indication of this.
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
True, this is the first Mac to be within an average joe's price range -- and the fact that it includes no keyboard, mouse, or monitor doesn't matter because it's aimed at potential switchers. Whip out the PC, slide in the Mac Mini.
I shelled out for the 1.42/80GB model with an additional 1GB from a 3rd party vendor. I can tell you the Mac Mini is not ready for prime time even with the 1GB upgrade. The thing is dog slow and looks like crap if you use it with an analog monitor. Even browsing the web is frustrating, flash animations occassional stutter (ex homestarrunner) and picture heavy pages like eBay gallery can take 15 seconds. I use it as an email and MP3 station... that's about it.
BTW avoid buying directly from Apple since they tack on a state sales tax. I saved $40 by ordering from MacMall.
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I call shenanigans. Even my Powerbook G4 with under half the specs doesn't have those problems.
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
No, it does, you just don't THINK it has those problems because you're happy in your little underspeced Mac ghetto.
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
Lord_Dweomer
·
· Score: 1
Well, I'm a Windows user who is positively in love with my iPod (and wish that Steve would get off his high horse and make a damn video ipod already that can play divx and xvid and be updatable for future codecs).
That being said, I use my computer first and foremost as my *shudder* media center. I use it for music, watching downloaded tv shows, movies, and games.
Simply put, in terms of what I download, the Mac falls far behind the PC in terms of availability of those things.
ESPECIALLY in the games department, although that is starting to change.
Is it any wonder that a large portion of the mac crowd still think the only video format for the mac is Quicktime's?
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Enjoy that onboard GeForceFX 5200 when CoreImage arrives.
Re:Don't count your chickens...
by
Myopic
·
· Score: 1
All the conditions are there. But does the Mini offer enough to get people to climb out of their boxes of complacency and tolerance, and actually switch?
I hope the Mini does better at that than John Kerry.
Exactly how much? That's a tall order. A percentage point...maybe two. Not much more than that though, I wouldn't imagine. It looks like a nice system, but I wouldn't imagine that the iPod set Apple seems to be targeting would see the value in having multiple computers. I don't mean geeks with iPods, now, I mean the people who bought an iPod as much because it was the thing to have and be seen with as it was a nice piece of useful technology. It's harder to be seen on the Metro or walking around campus with a Mac Mini. Maybe if they made distinctive earphones for it.
As cynical as I'm being here, I would like to see the mini both on my desk, and putting a dent in the market!
-- "These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based on the order in which I joined" --Homer re:
i think the population that had their iPods bought (it is quite expensive, afterall) - teens, college kids with well to do parents - and i'm sure there are lots of them - have no particular affinity towards windows. it's something they have because it was something gotten for them.
when they are ready for an upgrade, i'd imagine some of them will be curious what Mac will be like and look at Mac mini and iBook. if their parents can be convinced, which has been made easier with $499 Mac mini, they will switch no problem - and they probably won't have much trouble adjusting either. (and the details like Mac mini has no keyboard/mouse will not matter much, i'm pretty sure they are used to buying from dell, being lured by $299 desktops after rebate, but then talked into buying $100s in upgrades.)
Re:Market share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Exactly how much? That's a tall order. A percentage point...maybe two.
Well that depends on how you look at it. Let's say Apple has a 5% market share now. Let's say the Mini increases that by a percentage point or two.
You might not consider that significant, but that's increasing Apple's market share by 20 to 40%, I'd call that a significant increase.
Macintosh no longer works in percentage points... they work in the acual number of users that way they almost come close to microsofts number! 70 mac users vs 90% microsoft!
Re:Market share
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
A percentage point or two would be huge for Apple.
Dude, I think I've got some of the Plasticsmith's other work in my closet. If you get the 18-inch Acrylic model, he throws in an extra bowl for "Tasting and testing fine tobaccoes". Combines portability and durability into a classy package. I knew this dude who made his own homemade stand, and it broke right in the middle of a party. his room still smells like bongwater.
So yeah, dude, this guy's stuff for the mac mini will be like killer.
Re:Top-Notch Product
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Thats the way. If someone didnt switch yet from win to a clickety-click-self-everything-autoconfigured-and- managed linux, because 'linux? thats a complicated hax0r-system!', then here's the opportunity. a nice and powerful, and not expensive mac. And of course it does run linux if you want:) Its little, silent, powerful (no I am no apple representative) - and it just workz. Viruses? Ha. Ha. Ha. And you still can use the MS office things, until you get seomething better. OOo for example. Throw out your windows - have fun.
-- "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you,
then they attack you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Seriously, on the Mac, unless you're already into X11 apps, OO.o sucks. If one were already an OO.o user that was moving to OS X, it might be acceptable, but for someone used to either the Mac OS or MS office on the mac, it's more pain than it's worth.
I honestly think...
by
Faust7
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
But I would also be worried about this if I was distributing a desktop linux distro. Now that Apple hardware is (relatively) cheap, and damn sexy, I might have to buy one. I'd probably dual boot OS X and Gentoo, but there are others who will probably go for the nice look of OS X, along with BSD under the hood, and leave Linux/*BSD for ever.
All it would take would be for Apple to release OS X for the PC. Any chance Linux had at serious penetration of the desktop market would evaporate.
Re:I honestly think...
by
FLAGGR
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Except that'll never happen.
Imagine how much money they would make selling their OS for ~200$. Now imagine what they make now, even with their tiny market share, selling 3000$ minimum machines:) Apple would lose so much money moving the PC platform, its not even funny.
Re:I honestly think...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
imagine though if apple's hardware business actually imploded and they became a software company. how do you think they'd survive then? they'd only have their operating system and applications, and without their own platform on which to sell them, they'd logically turn to the biggest market.
I dunno... I still would go for Linux because I like total control of my system (I'm a Gentoo user, surprise). If there were a "power user" version of OS X, where the system is built more like a typical linux distro (i.e. you *can* have no graphics, and so on), OS X would *kill* linux (if it were on the x86).
Re:I honestly think...
by
FLAGGR
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Check out Apple's latest quartly results. Their hardware buisness is growing, so we don't have to worry about any implosion for awhile at least:)
Check out how much money they are making selling $500 machines. The Mac Mini is hugely successful, and the cost of the hardware must be at least 80% of the cost of the machine, so they must be bundling the OS 'free' as such. IF they sold OSX for $200 for x86, it would fly off the shelf and pretty much be 99% profit.
Re:I honestly think...
by
Jeff+DeMaagd
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
IF they sold OSX for $200 for x86, it would fly off the shelf and pretty much be 99% profit.
But then people will complain they have to buy something that has the same functionality as what they got with the computer for free. And they'll complain that they can't use the exact same software as they did with their Windows system. I am serious.
There is a lot more to it than saying you can get 99% profit on an OS. Even Microsoft doesn't get that, I think their Windows division is a little over 80% profit. Remember, Microsoft operating systems are on about 90% of PCs.
Apple would have to start (nearly) from scratch to get native support for all devices on the main board of every x86 system, and make it easy to add support for nearly every other device out there, even if it was designed to be Windows-specific. In short, you'd have to sign on every device maker to make drivers. Darwin for x86 is being maintained and apparently does work but there is more to it than just putting the Aqua UI on it and shipping it.
Then people would expect OSX x86 to run all their Windows programs flawlessly. I'm not sure if the Linux Windows translation/emulation is up to that yet.
Just log in as ">console". Or over SSH for that matter. The graphics don't slow anything down if they're not being used. And as someone else said, OS X Server on XServe is designed to be run headless.
--
-- "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
"Open source is evil." - Microsoft
Re:I honestly think...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
You can run OSX headless if you really want, or even drop out of the GUI to a plain old text console from the login screen by giving the user 'console'. If you really wanted to you could even set it up to start up to a text console every time (that's basically what the open source darwin is, OSX without the Aqua GUI goodness, set up to boot to a text console).
You have a point, unless they teamed up with Dell etc to produce a set number of 'standard' x86 systems and target OSX for that? Im just postulating here, we all know they wont actually do anything about OSX on any other platform. I disagree with you when you say 'Im not sure if the Linux Windows translation/emulation is up to that yet' and cite it as a issue if OSX wanted to do it, remember that a company the size of Apple can throw a LOT of money and time at something it really wanted, and Windows emulation really wouldnt be an issue if Apple wanted it.
Re:I honestly think...
by
David+Rolfe
·
· Score: 1
Additionally, OS X (not server) can also run without graphics. But, if you eschew Aqua so badly, but still want a gui you could start up X instead (god forbid) and then treat your PowerMac like any other homebrew BSD box. Oh oh, then you could run one of the myriad window managers and tweak it all crazy to have window controls at the bottom, and a dock at the TOP. You could use GTK if you are fervent about that.
-- Read Heinlein's 1953 Revolt in 2100, now more than ever.
All it would take would be for Apple to release OS X for the PC. Any chance Linux had at serious penetration of the desktop market would evaporate.
..i don't necessarily agree on that point: a lot of people value linux because it is free and open, and not just because of the fact that it runs on x86 hardware and is not a Microsoft product.
no matter what platfom OSX might run on, a lot of it isn't GPL'ed software (or your favourite open licence), and likely never will be.
All it would take would be for Apple to release OS X for the PC. Any chance Linux had at serious penetration of the desktop market would evaporate.
Why does everyone look at it this way? The "Apple can/should/could/will crush Linux" way? Linux, as it stands, is only marginally more tolerable than Windows (on the desktop, at least.), dispite it's significant technical chops.
If Linux had something that approached the quality of Mac OS X (and I don't mean making it look like it), then Linux would have a serious chance to make it on the desktop.
-- Don't become a regular here -- you will become retarded.
Apple uses a radically different driver scheme than Linux. They use object-oriented drivers based on I/O Kit using a restricted subset of C++. Besides, the XNU kernel is based on Mach, so I doubt *nix drivers would be very useful.
You can always login as >console to use no GUI. Or modify your ttys file not to launch the GUI by default. Apple was so nice as to include the line you need, and comment it out.
Imagine what would happen if Apple sold OS-X for the wintel platform, but you could get it for $499 in a small diminutive box with an Apple logo, a wintel class processor (AMD or whomever) and is marketed as BYODKM... now that would be interesting. Something that primarily booted OS-X, but could also dual boot Windows and/or linux. It would very cleanly nuke Dell and MS in one swoop.
-- This msg is brought to you by the letter 'W'.. for Worthless Wuss
Re:I honestly think...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
How about they release OSX/x86 as a "for free" but unsupported distro. Support is only on apple hardware. That would get many to try it.
Re:I honestly think...
by
David+Rolfe
·
· Score: 1
I have the Dock at the TOP with Aqua.
And I have mine at the bottom left so the trash is always locked in the same place.
Yes there are many, many options to fool around with. Step into ~/Library/Preferences and start looking at all the stuff you can tweak with the 'defaults' command (for example, bandwidth limiting iChatAV even lower than the slider allows). I think a more interesting form of tweaking, beyond just moving the dock around is software like this:
As another poster said, Drivers are beautifully setup on OS X due to the fact that IOKit is a Object Oriented C++ API for writing Drivers. The reason it is so amazing is that functionality is inherited allowing you to write more robust drivers in much less time. The current set of Drivers would just as easily support your entire PC system due to the fact that you would have at least basic support for all your devices.
Darwin has IOKit and does support PC devices well. However you are correct about software since all those windows apps would steal require Windows. The fact that Windows comes preinstalled would always trump another OS for the majority of the market that sees a computer as a handy appliance.
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Re:I honestly think...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Dumbfuck. It's "It was a joke. Laugh."
Re:I honestly think...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Other than the Apple GUI (which you don't need if you are a Linux zealot), OS X is every bit as free and open. You can install it from binary for free on any system you can get it to run on, load up X11, and away you go.
In fact, it's more free than Linux, because it uses the BSD license, not the GPL.
Check out how much money they are making selling $500 machines.
They are not selling $500 machines.
They are selling a bare CPU box in it's minimum configuration for $500. You have to add in, at minimum, a keyboard, mouse, and monitor.
As an experiment, I built up a fairly minimal 'bundle' system based on the Mac Mini. My shopping cart price was $995, and all I was buying was the CPU box, keyboard, mouse, and a plain 17" monitor.
" imagine though if apple's hardware business actually imploded and they became a software company"
Apple is, first and foremost, a hardware company.
They have absolutely no desire at all to be a software company. None at all. They only do software as a means to sell more hardware.
As it is, they are able to "sell" a copy of OS/X with every single Mac they sell. Were they to release OS/X for i386 then they would open themselves up to rampant piracy and would be lucky to sell a copy of OS/X for every 5 copies in circulation and their hardware sales would fall absolutely plummet as fast as you can say "can you burn me a copy too mate".
It would be an unmitigated disaster. Please direct your future coporate strategising efforts towards helping Microsoft, as we can use every bit of help we can get in removing thier monopoly from the industry.
-- "You can't fight in here, this is the war room!"
You mean to tell me that you have no keyboards, mice, and monitors in your possession? I've accumulated so many that giving up a set for a Mac Mini would be trivial...
-- My other car is first.
Re:I honestly think...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Other than the Apple GUI [...]
Without Apple's GUI you simply don't have the OS X experience anymore... and therefore you simply don't have a Linux-desktop-killer... you just have another BSD variant, and it would be about equal to Linux.
...In which case, the whole argument becomes moot anyway.
Currently, it's the proprietary bits of OS X that differentiate it from other desktop environments--and these components are not open or libre, as the grand-parent post correctly points out.
(Although I don't personally think that the free/libre argument has any effect on global adoption of desktop environments--as we can all see from Microsoft's Windows.)
There is a lot more to it than saying you can get 99% profit on an OS. Even Microsoft doesn't get that, I think their Windows division is a little over 80% profit. Remember, Microsoft operating systems are on about 90% of PCs.
Apple would have to start (nearly) from scratch to get native support for all devices on the main board of every x86 system, and make it easy to add support for nearly every other device out there, even if it was designed to be Windows-specific. In short, you'd have to sign on every device maker to make drivers. Darwin for x86 is being maintained and apparently does work but there is more to it than just putting the Aqua UI on it and shipping it.
It's only fair to point out the early versions of Mac OS X were released to certain developers and parties on x86 *first* (saying this as one of them), owning to it's NeXT heritage.
I recall it ran out of the box on stock x86 hardware in the past (on random non-brand desktop systems I installed it on). This is helped by a remarkable number of devices being very standardised to the extent that supporting common configurations is actually not that hard (this is true of graphics cards, sound cards and DVD/CD ROM drives). The same was true for BeOS too (in that it ran 'out of the box' on generic PC's and gave great performance with out a huge number of device specific drivers), so it's certainly possible.
From a technical perspective, it really would be essentially as simple as putting Aqua on Darwin and shipping it, they'd want to do some decent testing and fill in any missing gaps, but the architecture is really well suited to making that a straightforward processes. In part, I see Darwin as just the act of keeping the old x86 code current rather than them creating something from scratch - something I fully expect Apple would do anyway, even if it were not public.
I also don't see that not able able to run existing Windows software would be a huge problem for users - hey it's not a problem for them on the Mac and if anything it's a feature (the alternative approach being part of the whole imperative to switch).
I can understand the economic arguments for not releasing an x86 release of OS X (comparisons with the the unfortunate failure of the perfectly good alternative BeOS seem relevant), but I don't see any technical hurdles standing in the way.
A keyboard, mouse and 17" Monitor cost you $445? Son, you got ripped off whichever way you look at it. I can pick up a 17" monitor for around $250, and a keyboard and mouse certainly wont cost me $195. Remember that these systems are designed for switchers, people who will already have those things.
The Mac mini IS Mac OS X for Intel in a metal box instead of a cardboard box for $499 including a free ( as in beer ) computer.
Here's the bundled software that comes in the metal and plastic box: Mac OS X 10.3.7 = $129 Mac OS 9.2.2 = $99 iLife 5 = $79 AppleWorks = $49 Quicken for Mac= $59 Nanaosaur 2 = $20 Marble Blast Gold = $20 Apple Hardware Test = $0 Apple Developer Tools = $0 TOTAL =$455 Apple Hardware Tax = $44 ( including 1 year warranty ) Sale Price = $499
To use Mac OS X for Intel connect Apple box to KVM switch to Intel Box and press power.
Apple has clearly shown that it must sell Mac OS X for Intel at $499 to make up what it would otherwise make from hardware sales. Even if they released it for real as a bunch of DVDs in a cardboard box ( which they could do if they wanted 'cause they have the parallel version for Intel in development ) they would still charge $499 a copy with the bundle above to make it usable. The only way they would drop to $200 would be at the point where the market share v's Windows approaches iPod-like market share.
It's only fair to point out the early versions of Mac OS X were released to certain developers and parties on x86 *first* (saying this as one of them), owning to it's NeXT heritage.
Then you probably also remember that was part of their Yellow Box/Blue Box/Red Box strategy, before Jobs came in and said "this sucks", and we got Carbon instead. Rather than developing OS X for x86, they could bring back the Red Box. IIRC, and it's been quite a while since I played with the Next cube at the local ACM student chapter, but I believe programs came with a single installer for both platforms; you'd just have a copy of each platform binary inside the.pkg, and the right one would be automatically selected during the install.
So, in an ideal world, Microsoft would be smacked down for being a monopoly, and they would be forced to integrate Red Box into.NET. Then you wouldn't have to worry about platform issues; just write to the api, and you'll get your muliplatform binaries in the package along with whatever libraries were needed.
This would also be a lot safer for Apple than trying to write a whole OS for x86, and they wouldn't have to worry about people pirating their OS without buying any hardware from Apple.
I know this sounds like the origional promise of java, write once deploy anywhere, but this way you wouldn't have java's sucky performance.
The more the merrier
by
cyberfunk2
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
I knew those free mac minis were a scam ! Now I'm going to have to buy all those shiny accessories to go with mine!
I mean.. err.. uhm... ah screw it.
Fashion Accessories
by
Orinthe
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
A bunch of plastic cases and monitor stands? Surely there must be something better than this out there. I was expecting mini-footpring accessories to be more than a block of clear plastic. Why would someone waste their money on something like this for a $500 computer? The iPod is a luxury item, and people who buy it can usually afford $30 iPod socks and the like.
Can these kinds of fashion accessories really sell for the mac mini like they do for the iPod, given their totally different price points relative to their respective markets?
-- SELECT quote.text AS sig FROM quote NATURAL JOIN attribute WHERE attribute.description = 'witty'; 0 rows returned
Re:Fashion Accessories
by
advocate_one
·
· Score: 1
Why would someone waste their money on something like this for a $500 computer? The iPod is a luxury item, and people who buy it can usually afford $30 iPod socks and the like.
ahh so you think they should be charging more then??? cos by your logic, Apple owners have more money than sense???
-- Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
I don't see where anything I presented implies that. I am simply saying that a $250~$600 iPod(|mini|photo) does not target the commodity market, but rather is a luxury item. Their price points are on the high end of their market (though, IMHO, well worth it). People who buy such things (myself included) are more likely to buy pretty little fashion accessories to go along with them (though I have none).
The mac mini, on the other hand, is targeted towards the lower end of the market--people who don't want to shell out the money for a $1000+ middle-to-high-end computer. I'm simply wondering if the average person who buys a $500 mac mini would actually spend $35+ on a block of plastic to make it look cool(er)?
-- SELECT quote.text AS sig FROM quote NATURAL JOIN attribute WHERE attribute.description = 'witty'; 0 rows returned
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
Chess_the_cat
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
It has very few advantages over a Wintel box at the same price - in fact the same money buys you a lot of power in a Windows machine.
This has nothing to do with hardware and everything to do with being able to run OS X natively. Throw in the iLife Suite and now you can see the appeal. I've got my order in.
-- Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
I picked up a Mac Mini Last Weekend but....
by
ttlgDaveh
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I wandered down to the Apple Store in London last Sunday and came back with the base Mac Mini and am extremely impressed with it, this being my first foray into the Mac world.
Anyway, having just looked at the accessories (Coral link as the original is/.ed) I wouldn't pick up any of them, they look a bit crap and the Grandstand appears to be the only one with any use and then only if you have very limited desk space.
From the story title I was hoping for something a bit morethan bent plastic/metal.
Re:I picked up a Mac Mini Last Weekend but....
by
clontzman
·
· Score: 1
Not sure if you're reading responses, but are they doing any on-demand upgrades in the Apple store? Say, if you wanted 512MB and the Airport/BT combo, can they do those while you wait?
Re:I picked up a Mac Mini Last Weekend but....
by
ttlgDaveh
·
· Score: 1
When I was there they were doing RAM upgrades only, but that may have been because it was the day after release and the place was packed.
Re:I picked up a Mac Mini Last Weekend but....
by
Icekold
·
· Score: 1
No, they aren't doing Airport/BT upgrades. I asked in the store about this and they recommended I order the thing online. The guy also said that they only sell memory upgrades as an addition to the 256MB already installed, in other words, you'd be stuck with a useless 256MB stick if you got the memory upgrade from the store on Regents Street, hence why buying online was the better option as they don't do that.
Re:I picked up a Mac Mini Last Weekend but....
by
Trillan
·
· Score: 1
How'd you find the 256MB of RAM? Or did you already upgrade it?
Consensus is that it's very slow, but I actually had to run Mac OS X with 256MB once and it wasn't as bad as everyone is saying.
Re:I picked up a Mac Mini Last Weekend but....
by
ttlgDaveh
·
· Score: 1
I've not had a problem with it, but then to be honest I've not done much more than surf the web/rip a cd/watch a dvd/play AvP on it. I suspect that if you were to do any anount of taxing work on it then you would need more RAM.
Re:I picked up a Mac Mini Last Weekend but....
by
Trillan
·
· Score: 1
Well, I definitely agree with that. It got upgraded (again) as soon as possible. But it sounds like with 256MB it isn't choking on its own excrement and vomit at least.:)
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
vena
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Then again, iPods are overpriced and under-featured and seem to have caught the public interest - so maybe people really are as stupid as Apple thinks they are
nobody wants 500 features in a walkman, they just want a friggen walkman.
My mac mini is great. I really like it.
But it doesn't replace my windows PC. It's very much a second computer to do different things on. If I only had one computer it would be my PC still.
Re:My mini mac
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Two years ago I was looking for a laptop. I knew that I didn't want to run windows on it, at least not alone (I was willing to dual boot with Linux if I discovered that I absolutely needed Office or something). I had been thinking about playing around with OS X for a long time mostly out of curiosity (I was always a big fan of Next, and a lot of Next's technology wound up in OS X).
So I bit the bullet and got an iBook. I figured if I wound up not liking OS X or if it wound up being impractical, I could always put Linux on it and it's just my laptop, it's not my primary machine or anything. I really only wanted to use it for writing and other basic tasks while travelling.
Two years later, I haven't turned on my PC in well over a year. It's not even plugged in anymore. I bought the iBook for the sole purpose of using it as a secondary machine that I would only use for very basic tasks. I wound up making it my primary computer and I use it for everything. I do things on the Mac that I never did on the PC. I just enjoy using it more so I tend to do more with it. I am now looking at Mac desktops because I realize that there are serious risks associated with using a laptop as a primary home PC. I backup regularly and take other precautions, but I just would feel better if I had a desktop that sat in one place all the time and held all my valuable data in a stationery place (not that I won't still make backups). I just don't want something to happen to the iBook and then be without a computer while it's getting fixed (and no, I can't just fire up the old Windows box, it's in storage).
The Mac Mini may well be the answer I'm looking for. I just need to replace the slow hard drive with something faster than 4200 RPM, add some RAM and it is pretty much my ideal desktop machine.
I think that once a few windows users try the Mini, they'll have a hard time going back just like I did. Apple still won't pose any serious threat to MS, but any gain they get will help them establish a stronger prescence in the market. At the least, it would be nice if Apple's success in this sector helps spur the development of open standards that help all OSes compete on more even ground with MS.
The mini is very good in many ways. As I said, I really like mine.
But it's not a replacement for my PC because there are several pieces of software I want to run on pc. Also it's just too slow for many things I want to do. A faster mac would be considerably more expensive.
And finally I find the mac user interface to be really painful to use compared with windows. There are a couple of major design flaws that make it much slower to use than my PC for general use.
As I said, I have a place for both. It's possible I'll end up using the mac for lots more things than I first thought but it won't replace my PC at all.
But it's not a replacement for my PC because there are several pieces of software I want to run on pc
Have you considered emulation? If those apps can run without needing 100% of the CPU, it might work for you. It does for many. However it may appear in relative terms, a 1.25 GHz G4 is not a slow chip. If people could get useful work done on their 400MHz Pentiums just a few years ago, emulating same on the G4 should be feasible, and is, if you're not playing games.
And finally I find the mac user interface to be really painful to use compared with windows. There are a couple of major design flaws that make it much slower to use than my PC for general use
I find the exact opposite, so it's my view that these "major design flaws" are in fact just differences that you just need to get used to. I'd be interested to know what you think they are though, since there's really very little about the Mac interface I'd consider a design flaw, rather than just the result of a design decision, and more often than not one that appears very logical and thought-through overall. Almost everything is done the way it is for a reason (brushed metal notwithstanding), and usually once the reason is explained, most people seem to agree it's the right thing. On the other hand on Windows many things appear to be done for no other reason that it was too hard to do right. I don't mean this as flamebait, but as someone who has built many user interfaces in his career - sometimes doing things the right way takes extra time and effort, and it's easy to see that if corners have to be cut, this is one place where it can be done without harming the raw functionality (but at the expense of usability). From that perspective many design decisions in the interface on Windows appear to me to be cut corners.
I have a dual 2.0 g5 with 1.5 gb of ram and I run virtual pc and windows xp on. Don't believe the hype it is usable, but it runs pretty slow.
I only run a legal office management client on it and nothing else. Some times I use it to get files off the office windows network when it does not agree with samba for some reason (they have an ill configured NT machine as a server)
Don't get me wrong, I drink the mac kool aid, but I would be wary of buying a mini to run virtual PC on, you would be better off with a real pc or remote desktop, which runs great on the mac.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
FLAGGR
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Find a PC for the same price with comparable features. Most people point to Dell/HP/etc boxes. They always end up having crappy integrated graphics cards, and things like that. You won't find a PC for a comparable price. (Remember to factor in software. The mini comes with OSX, which has software for everything, and for what it doesnt have, it also comes with iLife '05, and a few games too. Windows boxes come with WindowsXP, which has um, solitare, spider solitare.. and then CD's full of shareware. Boo.)
Mirrordot link to story...
by
kikensei
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Since the origiinal story must be hosted on a mac mini, its already down for the count...:
http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/c5e2ce0f2841a64d8 a5f9e8b9b0c97bd/index.html
Re:Mirrordot link to story...
by
byrd77
·
· Score: 1
They're actually made by plasticsmith.com pictures, features, looky looky
-- - Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero.
Alternate Link
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Here's the google cache so you can RTFA before you post
Why does this look like an ad for the plasticsmith to me? Sure, yay, lets put products for the mac mini up, but FFS, folks, it's a single company even. This is just blatant advertisement.
-- --
Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him?
--
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
Ginnungagap42
·
· Score: 3, Informative
High end audio equipment too has many FEWER features than your standard Best Buy components. The preamp on my hi-fi only has a source selector switch and a volume control. But even with this severe lack of features, it sounds like Pink Floyd is playing live in my living room.
Lack of features doesn't necessarily translate to poor quality.
wow, pretty sure of yourself, aren't you?
by
untaken_name
·
· Score: 0, Troll
I mean, begging the question of whether people will pay for a hard to upgrade Mac Mini when they already have a perfectly good PC...seems a bit arrogant. Oh wait, it's an Apple fanboy who posted. That explains it. I mean, sure, it's *possible* that some people will switch to Mac because of the Mini, but assuming that enough people will do so to change the shape of the market? Holy shit. Wasn't the Mac II supposed to do the same thing? And that one that looks like a fucking lamp? Whatever. I'm sure I'll get a billion angry replies to this post, but I don't care. I conceed the possibility that the Mac Mini will do what no other Mac has and give the PC a run for its money. However, I don't think it's very likely, let alone already established fact.
Re:wow, pretty sure of yourself, aren't you?
by
wootest
·
· Score: 1
Noone's denying that it's going to be tough. However, the Mac Mini is the cheapest computer Apple's ever made, which lowers the bar by a mile. This, together with the facts that Apple is becoming more and more widely known these days and that they finally have a modern OS that has momentum, is what all the hype is about.
Re:wow, pretty sure of yourself, aren't you?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Historical fact: early in the design phase of the original Mac 128k $500 was the price point being sought after. Unfortuantely, much of the more advanced tech ended up making the price go up (and up). Then the brand new CEO (Scully) made them tack on an exhorbitant margin. (Selling Pepsi may rot the brain...)
Re:wow, pretty sure of yourself, aren't you?
by
untaken_name
·
· Score: 1
Noone's denying that it's going to be tough.[sic]
Actually, that's pretty much why I had the problem with the poster in the first place. Precisely because they denied that it would be tough, and indeed considered the question answered already. Like I said, I believe it is *possible*, but not likely. However, I'm not saying it's 100% impossible. In contrast, the poster assumed it was not only possible, but inevitable. That's why I posted. I'm all for cheerleading, but I'm getting sick and tired of fanboys of all stripes asserting things just because they wish them to be true. Logic dictates caution, in cases such as these.
Re:wow, pretty sure of yourself, aren't you?
by
wootest
·
· Score: 1
I think this article was meant to stir up controversy first and spread truth second. I think he knows that there are a lot of people who use an unprotected PC for years and never have any trouble. It's all great food for thought and a possible scenario, but it's not a probable scenario. I believe that something like this will happen, but on a much smaller scale. For example, Joe Sixpack wouldn't drop his Dell and sprint for the closest Apple Store five seconds after finishing the column, but it's certainly possible that there'll be more people considering a Mac for their next purchase.
Just rest assured that not all Mac users are flaming Mac fans, trying to convert everyone.
Re:wow, pretty sure of yourself, aren't you?
by
untaken_name
·
· Score: 1
What's the matter, Apple fanboys? Truth hurt? Go ahead, mod me down instead of responding to my point. That will certainly convince me that Apple fanboys aren't blind loyalists! WTG.
Overpriced Keyboard
by
midifarm
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
The overpriced Apple keyboard is a whopping $29! I know that may seem ourageous to those that buy $9.99 Best Buy specials, but I prefer a keyboard that doesn't feel like crap.
I spent $60 for my buckling-spring PS/2 keyboard that I'm typing this on. I have a PC running Linux, and I certainly want a keyboard that doesn't feel like crap.
I must say, the apple keyboards certainly are a decent step up from the crap Dell ships, and an order of magnitude better than the sub-$10 keyboards sold at best buy, but if I owned a Mac, I'd have to get non-Apple keyboard. I grew up on IBM model-M's, and I won't accept any lesser quality (Unicomp makes comparable keyboards nowadays).
-- Lex orandi, lex credendi.
Re:Overpriced Keyboard
by
jxyama
·
· Score: 5, Informative
it's got an USB hub built in too. a nice touch, esp. with the proliferation of keychain memories.
If the $60 price tag doesn't scare you off, Apple makes a Bluetooth version of their keyboard. They say it has a year of battery life. If that's true I say bravo.
Peace
Re:Overpriced Keyboard
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 1
I had to stare at your comment for like five minutes to figure out what you were talking about. You're talking about the USB ports on the keyboard, aren't you? They've been on literally every Mac keyboard since the Mac went USB, so I've always taken them completely for granted. Are you seriously telling me that there are USB keyboards out there that don't have ports on them? Where are you supposed to plug in your mouse?
It would take me a lot to switch to a wireless mouse or keyboard. Although the stated battery life is rather impressive, I've never used a wireless input device that didn't have just a tiny delay that drove me absolutely bonkers.
-- Lex orandi, lex credendi.
Re:Overpriced Keyboard
by
Swedentom
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I recently bought an iMac G5, with Apple's Wireless Mouse & Keyboard. The mouse indeed has a delay, which was very annoying for a while. However, after about a day, I didn't notice the delay anymore. There is still some loss of precision, but it's not something I notice anymore.
Having just one mouse button is never great, but what's bothering me is the lack of a scrolling wheel. Having a second mouse button isn't very important in OS X (IMHO).
But I must say I am more satisfied with the wireless keyboard. The buttons are better and easier to press than those on the older Pro Keyboard. There is no delay on the keypresses (that that be noticed).
Overall, except for the mouse delay and the obvious no-scrollwheel problem, both devices are great. They feel good, work well, and the Bluetooth connection is solid. Actually, I found the wireless range of these products to be much longer than Apple claims.:-)
-- Sig Nature
Re:Overpriced Keyboard
by
Swedentom
·
· Score: 2, Informative
You are supposed to plug them into the computer directly! Yes, I know, it sort of sucks.:-)
Apple has always had this, not only with USB, but also in the olden days with ADB, on the first Mac, which is great.
-- Sig Nature
Re:Overpriced Keyboard
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 1
You are supposed to plug them into the computer directly!
Are we talking about the same thing? Computer mice? Little lozenge-looking things about the size of your palm? The cords on them are only about a foot long. Are you really expected to keep your computer a foot away from where you're working?
Are you seriously telling me that there are USB keyboards out there that don't have ports on them? Where are you supposed to plug in your mouse? Abso-fuckin-lutely. The PC market is full of, well, crap. That said, most macs that I've seen ship with a 2-3' usb a to a extension cable. I'm guessing that it is there if you don't want your mouse to be plugged in your keyboards. I always found it was a bit of a pain in the ass to plug the mouse in the side of the keyboard, the cord always seemed to get in the way.
Re:Overpriced Keyboard
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 1
Oh, I'm an idiot. I never even thought of that. I tossed that very extension cable in a draw and never thought of it again. In particular, I never thought of putting it on the mouse. I just always did it the most obvious way: mouse plugs into keyboard, keyboard plugs into monitor, monitor plugs into computer, computer plugs into wall. Easy.
Apple has always had this, not only with USB, but also in the olden days with ADB, on the first Mac, which is great.
just to pick nits, (why? i dunno) the 1st 4 macs (Macintosh 128k, Macintosh 512k, Macintosh 512ke, and Macintosh Plus, and likely the Lisa/Macintosh XL) used a serial mouse that plugged into the back, and the keyboard used a funky preparatory connector that plugged into the front of the computer using an RJ11 or RJ12.
ADB (designed Steve Wozniak of all people) didn't debut until the Apple ][GS shipped. (i shit you not!)
-- Don't call me back. Give me a call back. Bye. So yeah. But bye our, well, but alright we are on a shirt this chill.
Re:Overpriced Keyboard
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
mouse plugs into keyboard, keyboard plugs into monitor, monitor plugs into computer, computer plugs into wall.
why didn't you just do it the easy way and plug the mouse straight into the wall?
Re:Overpriced Keyboard
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Having a second mouse button isn't very important in OS X (IMHO).
Yeah, but why waste perfectly fine PowerPC hardware by using something as hideous as MacOS?
Re:Overpriced Keyboard
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Ah, yes. The pointer device plugs into the text input device. The text input device plugs into the display device. The head bone is connected to the butt bone.
Oh. I didn't mean the keyboard. Yes, that was built in! But I seem to recall the mouse was not the tradditional Apple//-type serial. It may have been ADB, but having thought about it for a while I think you're probably right and it wasn't. It was probably a mini-serial, or I may be completely stark-raving nuts and it was just the usual Apple screw-in connector.
I lusted after the Apple//c when I was a kid, but I rarely got to touch one.:)
I'm guessing that it is there if you don't want your mouse to be plugged in your keyboards.
Close, but it's meant to extend the keyboards cable in case you want to set your tower on the floor, rather than on your desk.
Apple's keyboard is not overpriced
by
Peter+Cooper
·
· Score: 1
Apple's mouse and keyboard package isn't overpriced. I just bought a Microsoft PC keyboard that costs as much as the Apple one I'm typing on now, and the Apple one is far quieter (though, sadly, is not ergonomic). The Apple mouse, frankly, is a piece of ass. As a Mac user, I can deal with one button easily.. but no scroll wheel? Is this 1994?
Re:Apple's keyboard is not overpriced
by
drinkypoo
·
· Score: 1
Personally I'm not interested in quiet. I want good tactile feel. To that end I bought some clicky IBM keyboards with replacable cables. They last forever and really minimize my fat-fingering of other keys (I have very large hands...) They're pretty pricy, but less than the apple keyboard. And, I got these at surplus for a buck a piece, so THESE weren't pricy:)
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Apple's keyboard is not overpriced
by
Peter+Cooper
·
· Score: 1
Interestingly enough, I just had to buy an IBM keyboard for my father who also likes those noisy clicky things. It was £28 (about $50) to my Apple's £20. I'm not sure what the US is like price wise, but £20 (about $35) for a keyboard is good (it's the only reason I got one, I prefer ergonomic keyboards). Of course, you can pick up el cheapo PS/2 keyboards for a few dollars, but we all know what that's like:-)
Re:Apple's keyboard is not overpriced
by
drinkypoo
·
· Score: 1
Here, the USB Apple keyboard is $60 new. Last time I looked these IBM keyboards were from $50 to $100 depending on features (available: black case, trackpoint.)
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
For an early batch of accessories these don't seem that bad. Yes they're simple and functional, though that is in keeping with the Apple style. I do think that we'll see more of, and more sophisticated accessories soon. I do think that Apple has a hit here, my Dad, who was a dyed in the wool Win fan, shocked me by stating that his next computer was going to be a Mac. His plan is to have it as his safe for surfing machine, and his Win machines are going to be relegated to running the free programs he finds for Ham radio and antenna design. I guess he was hit one too many times with malware and wasn't going to take it anymore, that or he was tired of me pointing out that I've never had those type of problems;-)
Re:Accessories
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Versiontracker has quite a few free programs for ham radio for OSX. Maybe you can get him to turn off those Win machines for good!
I tried that, though he uses the SW for PSK31 and Hellschreiber, neither of which is available free on the Mac. I think that the only reason that he's considering the mac now is the price drop, that and I wowed him with video iChat. Now he wants to see his grandchildren without driving. Thanks for the effort though.
L8r,
Bah! Here's the accessory I want..
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I want to buy a mac mini, connect it to my laptop via a USB2 or Firewire cable, then bring up some VMWare-like software on my laptop that lets me run the mac in a window (or fullscreen) on my laptop. Bonus points if I can cut-n-paste between the Mac and the PC (a la VPC)...
Re:Bah! Here's the accessory I want..
by
TheRaven64
·
· Score: 1
Well, you could connect it with a FireWire cable, and run IP over Firewire, giving you a 400Mb/s point to point connection. This would probably be fast enough to do most things over VNC or similar. No cut and paste though.
Re:Bah! Here's the accessory I want..
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Actually VNC is excellent for shared clipboard. Have you actually USED it?
Macfanboys and Windows drones don't get it.
by
jotaeleemeese
·
· Score: 1
Companies using Linux don't care about OS market share, they care about services, they don't sell the distro, they sell computing platforms that have the hughe advantage that are completely open.
You may not care about this as a geek in your basement playing games and pretending that you are a hacker or cracker (fscking root kits...) but it is pure gold to have access to the source code of an application for unncountable reasons that would be too long to describe here.
And I am not talking about small companies. The two industries I am most familiar with, oil industry and financial institutions have embraced FLOSS, Linux included, but always as part of a comprehensive package of support and services.
Companies trying to distribute distros as their only business model (are there still any of those?) may be worried, companies using Linux as cornerstone of their business model as solution providers have nothing to fear from the Mini Mac.
Ok, but how long will we have to wait before there are MM-copycat designs out there, with lower price point and PC hardware in them? When iMac came to the market we had bloody iEverything in transparent plastic, including toasters, and all that in a few months. I doubt that MM will become more than an niche market gizmo, like it already is..
The SFF PC has been around for a while, but typically, Apple is the one who creates such a fanfare around it, just by raising the bar and saying of the competition "that's not good enough, we can do better".
The current (admittedly not trying too hard) attempts to get a PC into the same size box (indeed an actul Mac Mini box) have so far failed, falling far short of the CPU, ports, graphics card and so on. They couldn't even fit the optical drive back into the case.
I doubt that getting the existing PC hardware into existing MacMini box is going to work, at least a bit of customization regarding shape of the MB will be required. But still, once this market is open, there will be succesfull copies. OTOH, iPod is on the market for quite a long time, and there are no real alternatives to it..
Re:Copycat?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
>OTOH, iPod is on the market for quite a long time, and there are no real alternatives to it..
Yeah, whatever. Don't count the iPod photo and iPod shuffle out yet.:D
They're the real iPod killers!
There's more to this than just the iPod slant
by
QuietLagoon
·
· Score: 1
Look at the software included with the Mac Mini. As I have stated here earlier, the main reason I keep Windows on my desktop was that it runs Quicken on an inexpensive box. Now the Mac Mini, because a full copy of Quicken 2005 is included in the base package, can take that spot on my desk.
And all that other cool multimedia software that is included is just icing on the cake.
Re:There's more to this than just the iPod slant
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Thanks for your insightful technical reason for wanting a mini. Sounds like an infomercial to sway people that have absolutely no computer knowledge at all.
Your comment reminds me of a clip I saw on TV last week. This guy that has absulutely no driving experience wins pit passes to an open wheel road race. Just as the professional driver is about to pull out of the pits to line up, the guy frantically runs up to the car and tells the driver. "If it starts to rain, your traction will not be as good".
Quicken has been available for the Mac platform for years and just like the PC version, you must keep buying it again and again about every two years and click through all the advertising popups.
Re:There's more to this than just the iPod slant
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Quicken? I can't find that on mine.
Re:There's more to this than just the iPod slant
by
Tablespork
·
· Score: 1
Be careful with that, as I have read some pretty terrible reviews of Quicken for Mac(all versions), although I have never used it. I'd do some more research if that's your only reason for buying.
Re:There's more to this than just the iPod slant
by
QuietLagoon
·
· Score: 1
I've used both the Mac and Windows versions. I agree, the Windows version is better than the Mac, it seems that the Mac version is about a year behind the Windows version. The Mac version has all that I need.
what they should have done with the mini
by
jhoffmann
·
· Score: 1
they should have put a firewire port on the bottom so you could plug in expansion devices (another HD, video capture) into a similarly designed enclosure.
Re:what they should have done with the mini
by
drinkypoo
·
· Score: 1
I would far rather have a second port on the back of the mini. There's no reason you can't have a 1' or shorter firewire cable connecting to a similarly designed enclosure, and you can do that even if you want to put them side by side instead of stacking them, which might not be convenient.
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:what they should have done with the mini
by
jmcmurry
·
· Score: 1
I think it's only a matter of time before someone starts selling a drive enclosure that perfectly matches the Mini's footprint and comes with a 6" FireWire cable, designed to fit under the Mini. Something like the 10MB drives you could find for the Plus and SE/30 cases.
Extra points if it includes a USB hub on the front.
It seems an AC has beat me to it, but I'll flesh out the point anyway.
Apple's hardware business is about as niche as you can get - and with that comes risks. The Mac's traditional strongholds of education and professional video/audio are under siege. Especially the latter: the old, tired argument of "WellMacsarebetterforgraphics!" is simply not true anymore. Apple doesn't have much of the market at all, but what it does have is all it's got. It can afford to expand its share but there is not much room for shrinking. The loyalty of Apple customers is legendary, but for all that, the company's position is precarious. Apple has been "saved" countless times... by investment from Microsoft, by a killer product that just came out in the nick of time (iMac), by branching out into other profitable areas (iPod). That is not the status, the strategy, of a company that is 100% assured of its own survival. It is not inevitable that Apple's hardware business would implode, but it is more of a possibility than it would be with, say, Dell or HP.
Now, say that this did happen. Where would Apple have to turn? Would it do what Nintendo swore it would do, and disintegrate completely? Or would it turn into a software company? If it became a software company, what market would it have to look to for suvival?
How about the biggest computer market on earth? PCs. They could release OS X for PCs, and it would be a huge breath of fresh air into the market - an OS with an unmatched reputation for ease of use, finally in a position to challenge Windows.
You do make a good point, so we should never say never. And though I doubt this coming to pass any time soon, if ever, there is an important precedent. NeXT was forced out of the hardware market to become a software company.
Another good example is SGI. Their unix workstation business was doing great. Two years later it had totally cratered and they were pushing WinTel out of despiration.
The whole OSX-Transition/Slow G4 thing a few years ago *may* have caused serious damage in their professional markets. However, Apple was able to reposition itself as a high-end 'yuppie' home/consumer brand. However, that market is much more fickle.
-- Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
Re:Potentiality
by
CrackedButter
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I wasn't going to chime in but nobody else has done yet. Isn't the SPARC platform more niche than Apples?
Microsoft never invested shit in Apple, they bought some non voting shares and agreed to develop their software for the Mac for 5 years at least, thats it. Btw, they have sold said shares as well.
Macs ARE better for graphics, you would know this if you worked in the industry. There are many advantages to using a mac rather than a PC. One of them being the hardware specs being the same and the monitors calibrated in same way right off the production line. Something you use on one mac will look the same on another. Take that to the windows world and you have a greater variety of hardware and displays with which to show your work on. Work you produce might not look tho same on another PC. There is an advantage in buying the same exact hardware over and over again. Dell doesn't do that.
Don't exclude the fact that Tiger is going to have real time filters built into the OS, with CoreVideo and CoreImage. Athough that is coming this season.
1) Microsoft never invested in Apple, they came to an agreement on a lawsuit where Apple was suing for copyright infringement of it's UI.
2) Apple has yet to ever be "saved", because they have always had LARGE cash reserves of greater than 5 billion dollars(currently 4/5 billion in cash reserves).
3) Macs ARE better at graphics, OS Level Color correction and accuracy management(ColorSync) is a BIG deal. Add to that the purchasing en masse of the tools that graphics/media pros use. Things like the Logic, Final Cut, and Motions of the world.
4) The iPod didn't come in the nick of time, Apple was profitable before and after the iPod. The iPod was merely a toy Steve concocted that took off liek a bat out of hell.
5) Apple is assured of it's survival as long as they continue to make those innovative and easy to use apps that they are known for.
The rest of your thoughts seem fine.
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Another good example is SGI. Their unix workstation business was doing great. Two years later it had totally cratered and they were pushing WinTel out of despiration.
Is that the sequence of events though?
My impression was that although there was always some doubt as to how long they could keep up their previous business model, their flirting with Intel and Microsoft was a large part of the problem -- it distracted their attention when they should have been focusing on the future, and they were totally out-maneuvered by their "partners" (remember the "Fahrenheit" debacle, where microsoft pretended to be cooperative, and then pulled out and left SGI hanging, having wasted a lot of valuable time?).
[A key business truth: "microsoft is not your partner".]
Yes, although many SGI fanboys blame the symptom and not the disease. (Understandable because everything was hunky-dory and then 3-4 years later they're dead.)
SGI was a big enough company that a software project like Fahrenheit wasn't that big of a deal.
-- Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
Re:Potentiality
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
> Isn't the SPARC platform more niche than Apples?
Yes, and Sun is now heavily pushing x86 machines, which demonstrates the point.
Yes, although many SGI fanboys blame the symptom and not the disease. (Understandable because everything was hunky-dory and then 3-4 years later they're dead.)
The thing is that everybody knew they couldn't just keep coasting; the question was what they should change to adapt for the future. They chose just about the worst possible route: partner with microsoft.
SGI was a big enough company that a software project like Fahrenheit wasn't that big of a deal.
What I've heard said is that they delayed thinking about better solutions because they thought Fahrenheit was "the future", whereas microsoft apparently never took it seriously at all (and so continued full speed ahead with their proprietary interfaces), and basically just strung SGI along.
Granted this is as much SGI's fault as microsoft's: (1) always hedge your bets, and (2) always assume microsoft is out to screw you.
I have never used a Mac, so an honest question. Can we run C, C++ on a Mac. I understand VC++ is not a possibility. Is there a Mac version of Oracle and D2K?
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
remahl
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Of course you can run C++ on a Mac.
The compiler Apple ships with its IDE (Xcode) is gcc and it naturally supports C++. A lot of Mac software is written in C++ (most Carbon applications). You can also mix C++ with Objective-C and Cocoa (ObjC++).
Oracle does have products for the Mac (though I doubt you'll run them on the Mac mini). I don't know what D2K is.
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
CausticPuppy
·
· Score: 1
As for VC++, you can't run Microsoft's IDE, nor do you actually need to, but you can run managed C++ (.Net) under Mono on OSX.
-- -CausticPuppy
"Of all the people I know, you're certainly one of them." -Somebody I don't know
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
CausticPuppy
·
· Score: 1
Replying to my own post...
I see that Mono has a compiler for C#, not for managed C++, though I'm wondering if it can execute the IML that was compiled from C++ on a Windows box?
-- -CausticPuppy
"Of all the people I know, you're certainly one of them." -Somebody I don't know
All Macs come with a developer tools disk which includes XCode, Apples free IDE. XCode let's you work with C, C++, Objective-C, Java, etc... I also remember reading that Oracle recently released Oracle 10g for OS X. I do not know what D2K is, so I can't answer that part of your question.
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
adeydas
·
· Score: 1
D2K is Developer 2000.
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Perhaps it's an honest question, but it's also a goddamn ignorant one. Of course there are C/C++ compilers for the Mac. There are C and C++ compilers for every platform under the sun and it's mother.
Neither C or C++ was created under Windows either.
-- What if the Hokey-Pokey really is what it's all about?
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
Leo+McGarry
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Oracle does have products for the Mac (though I doubt you'll run them on the Mac mini).
As a matter of fact, you can. Just fine. I have an Oracle 10g developer edition running on -- no kidding -- a 400 MHz G3 iMac downstairs. Fast? Hell no. But it works more than well enough for doing Oracle front-end development. The same machine is also running a developer instance of Sybase ASE.
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
fpillet
·
· Score: 1
Mac OS X is a BSD system, so you have access to the wide variety of Unix-ish open source software. Whatever your favorite language is, if there's a BSD interpreter/compiler/whatever, it probably also runs on OS X.
Apple gives away free development tools. GCC is the base compiler on Mac OS X. XCode is a development environment that can do pretty much everything. I also highly recommend Shark from the free CHUD package (check out the Celestia optimization tutorial). It makes wonders when it comes to analyzing your app's performance problems.
Oracle 10g was recently released for Mac OS X Server (download here).
There are also zillions of OSS packages that work on OS X (check out DarwinPorts and Fink for example).
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
ThousandStars
·
· Score: 1
Assuming this isn't just a troll of some kind, I'll answer honestly: yes, as another poster said, you can. If you're interested in programming, try http://developer.apple.com.
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
iluvcapra
·
· Score: 1
I understand VC++ is not a possibility.
As everyone else here has stated, you can compile C and C++ on Mac OS X using gcc and the bundled IDE (XCode is free as in beer, but > $100 value, IMO).
For rapid application development, the Apple cognate for VBasic would be Objective-C + Cocoa Bindings. This week I wrote a special-purpose table/row-based music-library type program in about three hours, with about 20 lines of code and everything else wired together graphically in Interface Builder.
I am not trained as a programmer, and took no computer classes in high school or college (my degree is in film production). If I could learn it by osmosis over lunch breaks in a few months, I'm sure anyone with experience could make huge use of the facilities available.
-- Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
Guy+Harris
·
· Score: 1
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
druske
·
· Score: 2, Informative
As a developer, one of the things that you should factor into a Mac purchase is the cost of the development tools. Sure, free tools exist on both Windows and OS X platforms, so it's a draw for tools like Java/Eclipse, gcc, etc. But OS X comes bundled with the very capable XCode and Interface Builder IDE, whereas Microsoft's Visual Studio will set you back a few hundred bucks. While I don't think it's possible to directly compare those two products, the point is that a very rich set of development tools can be figured into the value of a Mac purchase.
Have a look at the XCode tools and see if that doesn't make a Mac purchase a little more appealing.
Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac
by
Trillan
·
· Score: 1
Actually, I think they're skipping putting the disk in the box lately. But the installer is available on the hard drive, and can be downloaded for free (registration required) in any case.
Sales of the Mini - any reports so far?
by
dduck
·
· Score: 1
So, has the Mini led to an uptake in the sales of Apple hardware, as one might expect? Any data on this, anyone?
Personally I'd really like to know if there has been a surge in the sales of the/other/ Macs... I decided to skip the gateway drug^H^H^H^HMac and go straight for the bigger iron, and I bet I'm not alone.
Re:Sales of the Mini - any reports so far?
by
Zemplar
·
· Score: 1
" So, has the Mini led to an uptake in the sales of Apple hardware, as one might expect? Any data on this, anyone?
Personally I'd really like to know if there has been a surge in the sales of the/other/ Macs... I decided to skip the gateway drug^H^H^H^HMac and go straight for the bigger iron, and I bet I'm not alone"
Absolutely not.
I'm not going to be a Mac Mini adopter now and then feel like I need to shell out $120 to upgrade to Tiger [that should be out soon]. I've got my eye on either a dual 2.5 PowerMac or G6/whatever might come along with Tiger's introduction in the upcoming months/weeks.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The Mac Minis has exactly that, a crappy gfx card. Please try again when i can put my PCI-e nVidia 6800GT card in the mac mini...
Of course it's form over function. Anytime you use a notebook hard drive and CD it's the case since both those devices cost more and perform worse than their desktop counterparts. The same can be said for the outdated processor and lack of memory expansion. The mini is all about style over function, but then that's true of the entire mac/OSX experience.
What the Mac mini has is great design, and Apple actually sacrificed quite a bit of power to provide that great design. How? Well, to get the machine into a box that small, they put in a 2.5 inch laptop hard drive rather than a 3.5 inch desktop hard drive. These are more expensive than desktop drives, so the drive they put in as standard is only 40Gb and only runs at 4200rpm (although I have heard that some Mac minis come with 5400rpm drives, although it is pot luck whether you get one). If Apple had gone for a bigger case, they could have put in a 7200rpm drive of at least 80Gb and probably cut the price, but they didn't. They assumed that their market would want a small and stylish computer with less power rather than a large and less stylish one with a little more. So I don't think the comparison with a cheap Dell is quite right. The computers two computers are designed with slightly different things in mind.
(Where I think Apple did mess up a little was by providing only 256Mb of RAM as standard. With this little memory the machine is going to be swapping a lot and with that slow drive this is going to slow it down quite a bit. This is one case where paying for an extra 256Mb is going to be really worth the money.
Actually Apple needs to move up to 512Mb standard across its entire range of machines. They have just done this for Powerbooks, but they need to do it for everything else as well.
Okay, here's just a quick calculation I did based on the components I used to build a machine. I excluded the wifi card, since that isn't included in the default MiniMac. Of course, you just buy a PCI card and slot it in. I also didn't include a floppy drive. All the prices are from the computer components site OverclockersUK and include VAT (sales tax for you Americans) and shipping within the UK. You could reduce the price even further by seeing if anybody else sells the parts cheaper - I just used OverclockersUK because I've ordered lots of components from them.
CPU: AMD Sempron 2200+ 1.50GHz (Socket A) CPU OEM £32.31 Mainboard: Abit KV7 KT600 (Socket A) Motherboard £38.19 HDD: Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 8 40GB ATA-133 2Mb Cache - OEM £29.96 GFX: Asus A9250/TD ATI Radeon 9250 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI (AGP) - Retail £32.31 RAM: Crucial 256MB DDR PC2700 CAS2.5 £27.61 CDRW: Sony CRX320E 52x32x52x16 CDRW/DVD Combi Drive £26.50 Modem: Creative Modem Blaster V.92 PCI - OEM £11.69 CPU HSF: Akasa AK-827 (Skt A) £7.16 Case: OcUK Value Rainbow Series Case w/350W PSU £22.27 OS: Get a friend to download a Linux distro of your choice or on their advice. Based on a 3 disc Linux distro (say, Mandrake 10.1), and discs costing 19p each, that's £0.57. Total £228.57 including VAT excl shipping
Mini Mac £339 including VAT excl shipping
Looked at like that, the Mac mini is obviously cheaper!;)
Seriously, though. I'm not a PC zealot, and I do have a Mac laptop. I wouldn't be drawn to comparing Linux and OS X, since they both serve different purposes for me. And the Mac mini is nice and small and is arguably nicer looking.
The flaws in my analysis? Erm, the fact that the ATX case is rather big in comparison to the Mac mini. And I didn't include case fans, which might be necessary. Also, there is something to be said for getting a computer, turning it on and it all working rather than having to plug it all in (or getting a geek friend to do it for you) and install the software. This analysis may fall on the lack of a geek friend or associate willing to put it together (if you are in a big city like London, head on down to your local LUG - there are lots of nerds willing to put your hardware together and install Linux). Plus the price difference would be absorbed by a copy of XP Home OEM if you wanted to run that (something I'd advise wholeheartedly against unless you were a gamer, in which case, neither the MiniMac nor my specification will suit you since you would probably want a better graphics card than a 9200/9250 - plus OS X sucks for games). I've also omitted the FireWire ports since the card doesn't, as far as I'm aware, support FireWire. It's possible to get a different motherboard which does support FireWire. My brother is using the Asus A7N8X-E which does support FireWire (and 5.1 audio etc.) - that is about twenty pounds more expensive. Even with that taken in to account, it's still cheaper than the MiniMac.
So, I've found a PC with comparable features. It doesn't use integrated graphics (Intel Extreme etc.), it uses a graphics card similar to the one in the MiniMac. I have factored in software (Linux). It's not a "Windows box", but it's usable. No problemo, right? The fact that you can get a cheaper PC box is no reason not to buy a MiniMac. In fact, I have an unhealthy lust for one, if only to replace my ageing iBook. If you prefer OS X, iLife and so on, go for it. It's a great little computer, and I'd certainly not say no if offered one.
As for that article, the bit about wifi and Bluetooth: "you're stuck using USB dongles and adapters". Bull. There are many PCI wifi cards (this post came via one), and with a little bit of hunting around you can find a PCI bluetooth card (though, it's probably cheaper to use the USB adapter). It would be very cool if they combined the wifi and bluetooth cards in to one PCI card. Plus, some of the motherboards I've seen come with
-- catch (HumourFailureException e) {
e.user.send("You, sir, are a humourless idiot.");
}
A few, for a while.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Then the more savvy will begin to realize that the G4 is bottlenecked by its slow bus speed, and there'll be a lot of pissed off people having spent money on a computer that, even by Apple's own standards, is outdated. Yes, it fits neatly into a small box, that doesn't necessarily make it worth buying.
Re:A few, for a while.
by
phillymjs
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Then the more savvy will begin to realize that the G4 is bottlenecked by its slow bus speed, and there'll be a lot of pissed off people
No, the more savvy will just stick with their Windows boxes, because they know how to maintain them and are willing to take the time to do so. The Mac mini isn't aimed at them.
The mini is aimed at people who just want to visit web sites and send e-mail, have never used Windows Update, Spybot or Ad-Aware in their life, and cannot comprehend why they get all those pop-up ads and their PC seems to be running slower and slower with each passing month. "The more savvy" are far, far outnumbered by these people.
Just from the orders placed between the announcement of the mini and its release date, it has become the fastest-selling computer ever produced by Apple. They're going to sell millions of the things, and make a lot of new lifetime Mac users in the bargain.
~Philly
Re:A few, for a while.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
so you are saying that most computer users are savvy? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA... your the biggest fucking moron I have ever encountered.
Then the more savvy will begin to realize that the G4 is bottlenecked by its slow bus speed, and there'll be a lot of pissed off people having spent money on a computer that, even by Apple's own standards, is outdated.
It hardly makes sense to criticize a budget model for not having the latest state-of-the-art processor. Apple certainly is not treating the G4 as outdated. In practice, the G4 is a good performer. It is included in all of Apple's iBooks and Powerbooks as well as in the eMac. benchmarks put it pretty squarely in the middle of the pack as far as Apple's offerings go, and not that far below the G5 models.
Re:I GOT A GREASED UP YODA DOLL SHOVED UP MY ASS!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
this is the best troll post ever.
+5 insightful, man.
+5 insightful.
Re:Please clear up confusion
by
ninthwave
·
· Score: 1
I would agree, except to argue that one of the problems that has led to what people perceive as bad code in Microsoft is some of the comprises that were put in place to deal with a variety of hardware.
Also by having the large variety, there is a problem with getting "the experience" that Apple sells.
I have always liked Apples product package as a whole, but have disliked the price and the pain to develop on it. With the mac mini and the moving to gcc this has eased to be acceptable for me.
I agree Microsoft gives you more options, but there are some problems with other levels of choice in the upgrade cycles and the compatability. Ever since I have seen companies need to upgrade all copies of Office because a customer was using a newer version of Office and their docuements were not compatable with the old version. After the upgrade hurdles upon hurdles of pain had to be completed to have the older documents viewed properly by the new Office.
It is that pain and how it creeps across microsofts products that I feel truly limits their choices.
I am not saying Apple is much better on forced upgrades and compatability issues, but they are bit. A shift in market share and they might both hurt.
So I agree with your points but I don't know if you are locked in more, just locked in a different way.
-- I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
karstux
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
No wintel PC offers the same combination of price, form factor, silence, computing power and style.
They may outperform the Mac mini in a few of these categories, but only at the expense of drastically underperforming in the others: A fast PC usually isn't small nor silent. If it's silent, it's usually large, expensive and not all that hot in terms of performace. If it's cheap, it will be large and f'ugly.
If you consider that and the software the mini is shipped with, you'll find that the mini has a vastly superior price/value ration than virtually all of the x86 world. Plus, it brings the convenient safety of (at the moment) not being targeted by malware authors. I could very well imagine Apple winning big with the Mini.
-- Don't whistle while you're pissing.
Mac Mini? Bah!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0, Funny
This wonderful piece of journalism exposes the Mac Mini for what it really is!!!! Apple's Safari browser can't even render MSN correctly, half the time!!!!!
Re:Mac Mini? Bah!
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
took me a bit to figure out that it was supposed to be funny. the writing on that ''article'' sucks ass.
I've got an El Gato EyeTV 500 attached to our mini, and it works perfectly. It's the "maxi" (1.42GHz) mini, so I'm not sure if the cheaper one has enough CPU, but the maxi is routinely displaying 720p on our TV, and in my experiments (our TV won't anti-overscan the picture at 1080i, and the native resolution is 720p anyway) it appears to be able to do 1080i without using all of the CPU as well.
The combination of the mini and the EyeTV 500 makes for a great HTPC, at least for digital over-the-air TV (and unencrypted QAM digital TV over cable).
I would really like to see someone come up with some Mac Mini accessories like the EyeTV 500, but in a package that fits the Mini. You know, lego-style - just clip the EyeTV 500 onto the bottom of the Mini.
Apple should have put a dock connector on the bottom of the mini to support this, but for now a couple of cables along the back are easily hidden. This would make it much more attractive for building a PVR.
Just imaging, snap on a VoIP module, or a PVR module, or a hard drive module. Although it you snap on too many, it might get a little on the tall side!
--
"Tomorrow's forecast: a few sprinkles of genius with a chance of doom!" - Stewie Griffin
Re:EyeTV 500
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
El Gato's own website says you need a G5 Dual to smoothly decode 1080i with EyeTV 500. How are you able to accomplish this with a Mini without using all of the CPU?
It does skip a frame here and there, and it uses perhaps an average of 85% of the CPU. Before I bought the mini, our 500 used to be connected to a single 1.6GHz G5 Powermac. It looks just as good on the "maxi" mini as it did on that machine, IMHO.
Most expensive
by
Jozer99
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Those are the most expensive pieces of bent plexiglass that I have ever saw. Come on people, you could save $30 by buying a $5 piece of accrylic from Home Depot and bending it in your oven.
Yes, but there are reasonable limites, for instance, paying $60 for something that cost $2.50 to make (besides perscription drugs, that is).
If Apple's marketing team has any brains...
by
NewOrleansNed
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
... they'll start selling these things in college bookstores with a low monthly payment.
In high school, kids play with their computers, maybe do some instant messaging and gaming and email. But they don't have to USE their computer very much. Heck, many schools still allow kids to either write or type their reports.
College, however, is a whole new ballgame. Students are supposed to start acting more like professionals and they're expected to spend quite a bit of time researching topics and using their PCs for class related activities. THAT is when you get them. Offer packages with the mini along with a 15 inch flat panel monitor, wireless mouse and keyboard, external floppy, 128mb thumbdrive, and a small black and white printer for less than 20 bucks a month, and watch their parents flock to buy em.
Seriously, who needs a big, loud PC in college unless you're dealing with 3d software or autocad?
And even then, you're likely to use the school's computers for that anyway.
Re:If Apple's marketing team has any brains...
by
DaveCBio
·
· Score: 1
Apple has sold to all levels of schools at a discount for many, many years and it hasn't made a dent in the PC market.
Re:If Apple's marketing team has any brains...
by
PapayaSF
·
· Score: 1
Offer packages with the mini along with a [. ..] 128mb thumbdrive
Better yet, an iPod Shuffle. They can be used as thumbdrives.
-- Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
Re:If Apple's marketing team has any brains...
by
iainl
·
· Score: 1
If you need the screen, keyboard and mouse anyway, why buy a Mac Mini though? You'd be better off with a low-end iMac; the price difference once you add-in a flat screen isn't that huge, particularly if you're happy with a second-hand G4 iMac (which is still as fast as the Mini). A big part of the Mini's appeal is to those who already have all the other bits, and don't want to buy them again.
-- "I Know You Are But What Am I?"
Re:If Apple's marketing team has any brains...
by
Myopic
·
· Score: 1
there are colleges which don't require their students to have computers? seriously? in 2005? in the united states?
my alma mater has been requiring personal computers since the eighties.
-- Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
remember though.
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
apple has already said themselves not to expect the same sort of growth next quarter - it was indeed a one-time boost, maintaining that is where the challenge comes. how will they do so?
RE: Macs switching people from Linux?
by
King_TJ
·
· Score: 1
I definitely put myself in the camp of "switched from Linux to a Mac". I have no real need for a dedicated server here at home right now, but I used to pretty much always keep a Linux distro installed to dual-boot into, so I could tinker with it and keep up with what was new in the Linux world.
Around the same time I bought my first OS X compatible Mac, I quit doing that. For one thing, I used to buy the latest Linux distro in the store every so often, usually at a cost of at least $30-40 a pop. I know I could have just downloaded it for free, but it got to the point where that wasn't worth all the time and effort. (EG. I wanted the latest SUSE to try out a while back, but SUSE wouldn't make the ISOs available for free download. Sometimes the ftp sites would be SLOW, too, when you could easily find what you wanted.)
At some point, I realized "Hey, I spend an average of at least $150-250 a year on "free" Linux distros already, just to feed my habit of trying out various new packages." OS X made a beautiful Unix type workstation for me, and had the huge benefit of running many more apps I liked and wanted to use, too. I no longer have a craving for Linux (or a BSD flavor) on my PC. In fact, my Athlon 64 has been pretty much delegated as my strictly "gaming machine" these days.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
porcupine8
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
the same money buys you a lot of power in a Windows machine.
Really! I had no idea there was a $500 Windows machine that comes with Quicken and equivalents to all the iLife, iWork, and Appleworks (ok, those aren't so great) apps preinstalled. And is damn-near impervious to viruses, adware, and spyware. Could you post a link to this miracle machine?
-- Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It has very few advantages over a Wintel box at the same price - in fact the same money buys you a lot of power in a Windows machine.
People say this all the time, and never can truly justify it. The last time this foolish claim rolled around, there were numerous links to a small form-factor pc that was the same price as the Mac Mini, as long as you bought a "barebones system" that didn't include CPU, memory, hard disk or CD drive.
Now THAT comparison strikes me as truly stupid.
.. and this one makes you bigger?
by
spoonyfork
·
· Score: 1
The grandstand would appear to save space but then serves to make the rear ports awkward if not impossible to access.
The minitower looks like it would have questionable heat distribution functionality. I don't buy into the space saving benefit. If you don't have any room for something 6.5"x6.5" then you aren't going to have room for something 3"x6.5" either. Plus, how can the minitower make the Mac Mini more stable on its side if the base width is only an inch wider at best? Without perpendicular feet the minitower is going to come crashing down just as easily as if a plain Mac Mini were put on its side.
What is the point of the miniskirt?? Seriously, for US$20 what do you get? Both the tower and the miniskirt appear to serve no purpose at all other than to make your Mac Mini bigger. Spend your money on something else more worthwhile, like
--
Speak truth to power.
I dont think they will sell too many accessories..
by
CrazyTalk
·
· Score: 0
Since their site has now been slashdotted. Its amazing the effect slashdotters can have on the economy...
1. Short sell stock in tech company
2. Post story about said company and bring down their server
3. Stock in said company takes a nosedive
4. Profit!
Look, I am a mac fanatic...
by
barfy
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
My main computer is an Ibook, I am going to get a mini, I own an Ipod...
But... Sheesh, why does EVERY apple article have to hit the front page?
Re:Look, I am a mac fanatic...
by
mesach
·
· Score: 1
Because there is no second or third page
-- moo.
Re:Look, I am a mac fanatic...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
why not?
if you don't like it, start your own damn website!
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
i41Overlord
·
· Score: 1
Find a PC for the same price with comparable features. Most people point to Dell/HP/etc boxes. They always end up having crappy integrated graphics cards, and things like that. You won't find a PC for a comparable price.
A PC of the same price, such as the Dell you mentioned, will have much higher end hardware than the Mini. In the case of the Dell, it even includes a LCD monitor which is not included with the Mini.
In the case of graphics cards, the Radeon 9200 in the Mini is a very low end graphics card, on par with an integrated one. It only has a pitiful 32 MB of memory for graphics.
Read the review on Anandtech for an objective, logical review. You won't find that on here, you'll only find emotional outpourings from enthusiastic zealots who have already made up their mind.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Wintel box at the same price - in fact the same money buys you a lot of power in a Windows machine.
Not in such a small, silent, and pretty package. Remember, it's 6.5" x 6.5" x 2" (16.5cm x 16.5cm x 5cm). You can't get a windows machine at that size with the same power, there are no intergrated Radeon 9200 GPUs on mini-itx motherboards AFAIK. The closest you'll get performance-wise in the same dimensions is a P4 mini-itx motherboard, but these come with lousy intergrated graphics chipsets and the CPU requires more sofisticated (and noisy) cooling than that on the Mac Mini.
Plus the Mini runs OSX natively, that alone is more than enough to convince me to buy one.
Yawn...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Then again, iPods are overpriced and under-featured and seem to have caught the public interest - so maybe people really are as stupid as Apple thinks they are.
I often wonder whether this really comes down to a question of taste. Despite what the original poster thinks, people don't like iPods (or Mac OS X, although this applies in a more limited way to that as well) because they're stupid, but simply because they do something, one thing or one limited set of things, very, very well. When people bitch about the iPod not having an FM radio/voice recorder/video capability/robotic dog walker, what they fail to realize is that heaping features on a product often, usually, impedes the product from doing what it was originally meant to do. The iPod does something that no radio, voice recorder, video player, or robotic dog walker could, and does that something better than most other portable digital music players, and if I wanted radio or any of that other stuff, I'd buy a radio. Apple's products aren't about making things that are "simple," but rather about making techie gadgets that don't act and seem like techie gadgets, but instead seem organic. Apple really excels at bringing some sprezzataura to the techie UI world.
Then again, this may be just taste. Maybe there really isn't anything inherently better in this approach versus the Wintel and standard gadget maker philosophy of heaping features on a product and hoping it clicks with the public. But considering that the technologies that last are the ones that just vanish into everyday usability by being simple and by doing something that nothing else does, I really doubt it. I'm sure back in the 19th and 20th century there were phones that heaped all sorts of useless features, and people who bitched about the phones that couldn't shoe your horse for you being for stupid people.
You'll Gag On the Software Costs
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
"Exactly how much market share will this buy Apple once the affordable, stylish mac steals the Windows users who love their iPod?"
Affordable.
let's see. Maybe you want that "standard" office package, so you can ensure compatability (well, sort of...) with your stuff back at the office. Office for the Mac: KACHING!! Do you need a database for this 'n' that? FileMaker Pro: KACHING! Maybe you do web design. Dreamweaver: KACHING! Or is graphics your thing? Adobe Design Series: KACHING!!! Maybe you have need for something else that isn't included in the Mac's long list of included software. KACHING!
That affordable little Mac Mini has just cost you hundreds, maybe thousands in new software. THAT'S the real gotcha, and always has been, that keeps people (I'm talking the 99% of regular users who aren't about to be using OS freebies via Fink, X11, etc.) from casually testing the Mac waters. Take it from a switcher. I thought it was worth it. But others may vote differently with their credit cards.
Re:You'll Gag On the Software Costs
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
That affordable little Mac Mini has just cost you hundreds, maybe thousands in new software.
Sure, if you're scrupulously honest and pay straight retail prices. Plenty of people are in college or know someone who is, so they'll have access to software at student prices. Still more people will just download BitTorrent and start poking around for Mac stuff, and KA-CHING! All the software you need, and probalby some you don't, there for the taking.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
corky_again
·
· Score: 1
I don't know if it makes me stupid or not, but I bought my mini because it was an OS X machine at a reasonable price.
I've used Windows, Linux and various flavors of UNIX at work and at home, but never a Mac. I've been interested in OS X ever since it first appeared, but the cost was always high enough to make me hesitate. The Mini's price was low enough for me to go ahead and make an impulse purchase.
The verdict so far? I love this little machine! And OS X is as pleasant to use as I imagined it would be after reading ATPM and other Mac sites. Now I'm seriously thinking about one of those Powerbooks...
They're actually made by plasticsmith.com pictures, features, looky looky
-- - Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
corky_again
·
· Score: 1
Where I think Apple did mess up a little was by providing only 256Mb of RAM as standard. With this little memory the machine is going to be swapping a lot and with that slow drive this is going to slow it down quite a bit. This is one case where paying for an extra 256Mb is going to be really worth the money.
Definitely. Before I upgraded my Mini to 1GB, it was swapping constantly when I had both RSSOwl and OmniWeb running at the same time. Unless you're only running apps with a small memory footprint, a Mac with only 256M is almost a single-tasking machine.
Re:I dont think they will sell too many accessorie
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
This is an awfully nice website you've get here, guv'nor. It'd be a shame to see it Slashdotted.
Quicken and Downloads
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I didn't care for Quicken 2005 for the Mac. It doesn't do direct downloads from Bank of America. I've been using Moneydance for a few days now though (http://www.moneydance.com/ [moneydance.com]) and it works great with BoA.
As has been mentioned ad infinitum, but many people are still aware of, This Is All Intuit's Fault. Never ending in their greed, they require the banks to pay twice to service all their customers: once to allow Windows Quicken users to access their data, and again to allow Mac Quicken users to access their data. When you use Intuit's software, it verifies the platform you're running against the ones the bank has paid for.
Using third-party solutions, though, most will ignore the platform in favor of (gasp!) usability and convenience.
But really, you've gained a lot by moving to MoneyDance. Quicken's a steaming pile of shit rife with bugs anyway (they've somehow managed to have a recurring bug where Quicken Mac can't even add properly, for one).
I knew it only worked with Windows and I assumed it had something to do with someone not getting paid, but I didn't know the details. I wish I could mod this up. Thanks for the info.
-- What if the Hokey-Pokey really is what it's all about?
If MacOSX/x86 runs Windows software flawlessly, where's the incentive to port your app natively to OSX? Write your programs for windows, and they'll run on both windows AND OSX/x86. That's not a good thing. OSX is all about consistency, user interface guidelines, and core functionnality that people take for granted (common keyboard shortcuts, Services, etc). The emulated apps offer none of that, but the developers will be able to claim that their apps run on OSX.
Why would someone buy this for a $500 computer? Because the Mac mini is not seen as just a computer, it's seen as a gadget, like the iPod.
It's like asking why people would dress up that piece of machinery outside that sits on four wheels and takes them to work. It's just a car! But people like things to look and feel good to use. The PC world still hasn't caught up to the idea of the computer as an appliance you'd actually want sitting in your living room, so we continue to get those big ugly black/beige towers that look the same as they did ten and fifteen years ago.
I completely agree with you. But jsut to be accurate it does not come with iWork (wish it did:( )
But man Mac mini rocks. I'm a true 'switcher'. As they say, once you go mac you can't go back...
-- "There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people."--Howard Zinn
Obviously, you'll need a spot to park your joints. After all, it fits: Apple started in the hippie era (there are pictures of Apple, Inc.'s first vehicle: an old VW Bus) and the skirt effectively allows you to hide your weed. (Someone else already mentioned this.)
Basically, this allows you to screw with your parents/roommates/girlfriend/boyfriend's mind a little.
For all those who don't do drugs (besides caffeine), the skirt is 20$ or 15 euros down the drain. Or slightly better cooling, or no vibrations on your desk. Take your pick.
take one of their fantastic 20 or 23 inch TFT screens, mod the back to include a nice slot.
Take one MiniMac, strip the case away and mod the back panel to fit into slot in Monitor.
And bingo, you have the next iMac. Want to upgrade the processor, remove I miniMac from slot, remove HDD & ram, insert into new chassis, plug in and you are off....
Not to Apple, plese donate any royalties due to me from this idea to UNICEF.
In the words of the late great Arthur Askey,
"I Thank You..."
-- I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
Re:Next Imac Anyone?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Um... have you seen the current iMac?
It's a TVT screen with a G5-based Mac hidden in the back of the case.
i'm getting into the mac mini game myself: here's my product.
operators are standing by : f64
stealing back linux customers
by
zogger
·
· Score: 1
I'm about ready to switch back to apple from linux. I went to linux when my employment situation changed radically and I could no longer afford newer apple hardware and their switch to OSX made it impossible for me to use it on my machine. Last apple I bought was a 1400 PB, but osx won't run on it.. Now that they have apparently seen the light on offering at least something in the ballpark dollars-wise of an entry level machine, I'm giving it serious consideration, although I don't really want a mini, just a normal tower or desktop that is apple branded and certified and runs osx adequately, and inside that 500 dollar new price range. No longer will a thousand dollars or more be an acceptable price for any sort of entry level desktop, so 500 is a lot closer to "the other guys" now. And I don't want used either, not for that kinda loot, I want new with a full warranty.
I like the entire FOSS idea and philosophy, but I also as joe consumer like the idea of my hardware and software actually working without jumping through so many hoops. I have yet to run across a distro that is as close to 100% as I used to get running macs. I know for a lot of folks it works OK, but the best I can hit with my non leet skills is 90% or so, and it's been like that from day one for me with linux. It's like it "almost" works all the way. I use it all the time now, but I also realise it's a compromise on my part, I detest windows and always have, apples got to be too expensive, linux hit a middle ground that worked well enough for most purposes and would run on cheaper hardware. That's changed now completely with apples moves, and it's about time.
If you aren't a programmer or a command line guy of near guru status, linux is just still too hard to deal with. Maybe if some of the really big vendors start offering it right on the shelves in all the retail outlets with a distro they actually stand behind, then maybe, but until then it's still not quite ready for a lot of purposes. It is tantalizingly close, but every release it remains 'tantalizingly close", just more shiny buttons and whatnot, and after a couple/few years, well, it's gotten old.
That is just one guys opinion, not meant to be an indictment of every users experience or opinions or anything or even linux, other than the obvious problems that still exist with it for a lot of people. I have by no means tried every distro out there, and that's a significant part of the problem, even doing that has gotten old. I no longer believe "switching to xyz distro" will work, not with the various hardware it will be attemtpted to run on, there's too much of a variable there. I think long run the linux companies who are providing a distro pre installed and configed on hardware they also sell so that all of everything works right out of the box will take linux mindshare and mass market share. And that unfortunately will mean dell or whomever of the very large size will actually have to do that.
...is accessories that actually add to the functionality of the Mac Mini. How about a firewire hard drive combined with a USB/FW hub that's the same footprint as the Mini and sits underneath it? It could even have some of the ports in the front of the unit. And it would be a 3.5' drive, so it's cheaper and faster than the Mini's internal one. Make it so there's some kind of spring-loaded connector on the top and bottom, so once you hooked up the first unit, all the other ones would automatically be hooked up when stacked. Then you could get crazy and have special modules like an audio unit (better d/a, a/d converter, optical connectors), video (the functionality of an ElGato PVR), some kind of hub for clustering multiple Minis, etc, etc. THAT would impress me, not some pieces of bent plastic.
What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
Ralph+Spoilsport
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
That looks just like it, only without the CD slit.
This way, one could stack the MacMini on top of the drive(s), or vice versa, in a neat little pile.
The mac mini isn't big enough to hold my MP3 collection (right now, teetering around 105 gigs) and certianly won't be big enough to deal with the video I want to run through it. So I need 7200rpm ATA drives in a MacMini box.
Personally, I would cheerfully build my own using some hideous noisy case - I'm not that picky. But Mrs Spoilsport is VERY picky about that kind of thing - heck: she thinks having visible stereo wires to te speakers is like having one's underwear showing or having toilet paper stuck to one's shoe.
She tried to get me to go to wireless speakers, and I said "You Buy 'em". We still don't have wireless speakers, thank Bog.
But, i we could get a MacMini with matching drive(s), it'll make the transition to the full on digital system a simpler effort, as it would please the aesthetes in the home (And to think - I'm the one who makes a living as an artist!)
RS
-- Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
myov
·
· Score: 1
It sounds like you need wireless power:-)
I've been wondering when the various companies will release cases, since it was done all the time back in the Mac Classic/II days. I even remember seeing an expansion box for a II which went INSIDE the existing case (it took the place of the top lid, then the top lid attached to it.
On another topic, I always thought that a modular case was a neat idea. Start with a basic box. You need another drive bay, you clip a module on. It has an internal pass through for ide/s-ata/firewire/etc. External, but still self contained.
-- I use Macs to up my productivity, so up yours Microsoft!
Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
talornin
·
· Score: 1
A problem easy to resolve.
I live my lie with an iBook with 20gig hd space. That is more than I need. But, I also have a server with over 700 gig which is carefully hidden away in the basement.
NFS is your friend;)
-- When in danger, whewn in doubt! Run in circles, scream and shout!
Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 1
FYI, there _are_ 7200rpm 2.5" laptop drives available (40 & 60 gig capacities, I think). I wish Apple had included them as BTO options, but there may be heat issues with them, as someone pointed out to me earlier.
I would like to have seen a headless PowerMac (say, the size of an SFF or so, one PCIe/AGP slot, and one PCI/PCIe x4 slot), and priced around $1000 (using Apple's pricing scheme, of course), with room for a normal 3.5" SATA HD. Have an external SATA II connector for connecting a little external storage as needed, and voila.
The Mac mini is pretty close to what I'd really _need_, however. Once they can get a G5 in a notebook (cooling issues), then they'll be able to get it in the mini. Up the FW port to 800, the networking to 801.11n (by the time this happens, that should be more commonplace and standardized), and better audio options. Oh, and up the standard memory to 512Meg, for cripes' sake!
I'd also like to see that top cheap-ass plastic part replaced by more aluminum. And make it stackable for 'mini-size' addons (external HD, and other accessories). Those stackable mini audio components are a good way to move with this.
Anyway...
Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Oh yeah, and up the network to gigabit. Especially if this thing is supposed to be the hub of an existing home networked type entertainment system.
And the video should be of the latest generation, not the previous (doesn't have to be high-end, just of current generation).
Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I have had a 60GB 7200RPM drive as an upgrade in my laptop now for six months. I can say for certain that it is quieter and cooler than the 30GB 4200RPM drive it replaced. I can also confirm that it is *much* *much* faster. Like you say it is a crying shame that Apple did not include them as BTO option.
What would be really neat on the external Firewire drive of the same footprint as the mini front, is if it contained a power brick for the drive *and* the mini, as well as a USB and Firewire hub with some front ports.
Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 1
So when you replaced your laptop HD, were all the connectors in the same location? Someone who took apart one of the mini's said the tolerances were so exact you'd have to replace it with a drive with connectors in pretty much the _exact_ same location.
That's great news about the coolness of the 7200rpm drive.
Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I am guessing the power requirements are very exact, to the point where a redesign would be required to use a 7200 rpm drive or many of the other dreams found here. Basically, look to the 12" PowerBook and iBook to determine what is possible with the Mac mini. That will be the basis. And, unfortunately, gigabit ethernet and 7200 rpm drive are not yet part of the package. FireWire 800 is way down the line.
Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
How many embedded laptop video controllers are faster than the Mac mini's without costing a significant premium?
Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
Tumbleweed
·
· Score: 1
In about a year, the embedded mobile video controller market will be quite different. Combine that with whatever mobile G5 is available, and I'd be pretty happy, I'm sure.
Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD
by
Trillan
·
· Score: 1
There were such beasts for the Macintosh Plus, so I'm sure they'll be available sooner or later for the Mac Mini.
Strongly Disagree
by
bogie
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
The worst possible outcome of all is an OS like OS X. You take a completely Free and Open OS and then weld a Proprietary hood on it. How is this good for Free software in the long run? It isn't. Imagine if Longorn were to run on GNU/Linux yet have a completely Proprietary graphics and windowing system with proprietary drivers for all. How would that be any different than OSX? Now 90% of the World's OS's run Proprietary Linux. How is this a victory for OSS?
Has the spirit of OSS been tainted by Apple? I think it has. I'm not saying Apple should give what they do away for Free. But acting like just because Apple is based on Darwin that automatically qualifies it as a "good thing" for OSS is Extremely shortsighted. I guess some people are just happy to see any OSS at all being used. I don't object to Apple using what developers put out there to be used in any way they see fit. I object to people pointing to OS X as a model of OSS success when it isn't.
Maybe that's really the future for OSS that advocates are going to see. Maybe all of OSS will be co-opted by companies like Apple and eventually a company like Microsoft. Maybe OSS never had a future to stand completely on its own in the first place. Then again maybe we can point this out to everyone before its too late and future generations think OSS means half OSS/half proprietary in most situations.
I think your wrong when you say that it doesn't hurt the OSS community. It hurts OSS exactly where it's most vulnerable. "Here have some quasi-Free software, trust me is MUCH less painful to use. Stop worrying about what is and isn't True OSS. Relax..." Sorry, don't want to be lulled into that way of thinking. Everytime I read about some OSS programmer(and there are a shitload of them) buying/bragging about a MAC they just bought it bothers me. Not because I believe you should never run a proprietary OS, I run XP on my laptop. But because they trick themselves into thinking OS X is somehow the "Best of both Worlds". I just don't buy into Apple's version of what the Free software world should look like no matter how easy Apple makes it seem. I believe in the GPL and I believe there are consequences to taking Non-Free shorcuts.
-- If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
Re:Strongly Disagree
by
Kplusplus
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
Microsoft couldn't do this because almost all Linux distros are GPL. And the GPL explicitly forbids mixing free and proprietary because of it's viral nautre. That is one of the reasons that Linux itself doesn't underly OS X.
You want to point out that OS X isn't free, but the actual operating system underneath, Darwin, is free and open for all to play with. If someone else wants to build thier own GUI and drawing system on top then they are free to do so.
You believe that OS X harms OSS because Apple claims that it is the best of both worlds. The fact of the matter is that OS X IS the best of both worlds, I have free and open source to everything underneath my toolset and a platform that proprietary software doesn't run from. I can look at the source to CoreFoundation that is toll-free bridged with all the Cocoa foundation objects. I can look at the filesystem code, or networking code, and it's all free. I can use Gimp or Photoshop, I can use vi or Dreamweaver, I have the CHOICE to use either. Isn't the entire point of OSS that warm feeling you get when you have choices? I don't have to use anything and can compare them directly next to each other.
If Gnome or KDE was closed sourced would you be making such a gripe? All OS X is doing is it packages a completely free and open OS with a beautiful DE on top of it, and you never see the ugly scrolling lines. Gnome + GRUB does the same thing. You get a somewhat pretty startup, you get dumped at a login screen if you have that setup and you get a pretty desktop never needing to open a terminal to get anything done.
OSS Developers that get new macs are a good thing because like an earlier poster said, they can finally aim their efforts at making products that are better than OS X rather than as good as windows.
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Re:Strongly Disagree
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
you know, this fanatical stallmanism is getting a little old. sieg heil!!!
on second thought, at least it's better than the gates fanbois.
Re:Strongly Disagree
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
on second thought, at least it's better than the gates fanbois.
Wait... Gates has fans?
Windows sucks, and anybody who knows anything about anything already knows it.
Any time you see somebody say anything positive about any MS operating system in a forum like this, you can pretty much count on them being paid astroturfers from Redmond.
A Stallmanist Linux zealot (sorry! I meant Stallmanist GNU/Linux zealot... Please don't hurt me!) on the other hand is somebody you can be sure is not astroturfing. Linux doesn't make money from anybody really, so who would have any interest in spending money on pimping it?
> Microsoft couldn't do this because almost all Linux distros are GPL. And the GPL explicitly forbids mixing free and proprietary because of it's viral nautre. That is one of the reasons that Linux itself doesn't underly OS X.
What the hell are you talking about? The GPL says nothing about what you can and can't run on Linux. Kernel modules (drivers) can be proprietary (ever hear of the nVidia driver) and the software on top can be proprietary. Nothing was stopping Apple from using Linux, they just chose BSD because it's a more traditional UNIX.
Did you know that Apple uses the (L)GPL'd KHTML rendering engine inside their proprietary browser? How can such a thing occur?
-- My other car is first.
Re:Strongly Disagree
by
ciroknight
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I believe in the GPL as well, but I also believe that for Linux to ever have a future, it needs solidity, which is something that it still fails at having, and therefore, fails to get a foothold on Microsoft.
A thousand monkeys can code a great operating system in no time at all, Microsoft, Apple, or Linux developers included. What Apple did with OS X is take something that OS developers were working on, and gave it direction. They planned how it would work with their hardware, and how their graphics engine would work on top of it, and that's why it was great.
Windows was originally great because of this same ideal; take something that exists, give it direction, and make it work for anyone. DOS had been around quite a while, so they took it, slapped on a graphical shell, and it started working for users. Sure, it had tons of problems, still does, but that's only because Windows leadership and direction has totally failed; they're so rich they don't feel the need to guide their product anymore. They can just pay someone else to do it for them (advertisers).
Linux is everything underneath. It's a great codebase, but it's highly disorganized, and lacking any sort of solid direction. Sure, there are tons of little organizations based on Open Source technologies, and lots of them are doing well. For example, Mozilla's probably one of the most successful Open Source projects in existance to date, because they have a highly organized body driving them, pushing them to be not only innovative, but standard complete and safe. Their success stems from their organization.
Certain Linux distrobutions got their act together organizational wise, and that's why they're doing so much better now as well. Take Suse or Redhat for example. They both have corporate backings which gives them a definite direction, and something to tailor themselves to. Both of those corporations tend to realize that Linux is best in the server room. Maybe this should say something to the Linux developers about where they need to innovate.
Look, you're barking up the complete wrong tree. Apple uses free and open source technologies to bolster their own technology because its readily available, and in great techonlogical shape. It doesn't help the community in the sense of switching to Free and Open Source software. It was never intended to. It intention is, and always will be, to make money and satisfy customers. Linux will never satisfy customers because it's not listening to its customers; It's listening to its developers. You can argue that they are fundamentally the same thing, and this may be true for most Linux users. But to those who don't know jack shit about programming, but know that when an operating system looks good, is fast and responsive, bug free and robust, they will want to use it, those people will choose Apple every day compared to anything.
I praise Apple and their work towards Open Source because they realized how much it helped them become who they are. They realized this by making their software easy, standards compatible, and user friendly. They want people to use their products, and in the end run, this is ultimately what keeps Apple great. The consequences of using Open Source to bolster Closed Source is community resentment more than anything else (look at the Linksys/Busybox situation, for example), and Apple's striving hard to keep their relationship with their community healthy and strong. If they continue on this path, I see nothing to worry about.
Stop being so paranoid, pedantic and proud. Open Source will continue to live, and be strong. It, above anything else, is the future, and companies that understand that, will only grow by embracing it. Just think about that the next time you buy a piece of hardware.
-- "Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." G.W.Bush
Obviously you don't read too good. The GPL the license itself has a viral nature where anything that even links to it MUST in turn become GPLed code.
The linux kernel is a monolithic one that allows modules to be loaded into it. The GPL has no control over that since it is a separate and distinct binary that just happens to be able to be used in conjunction with a GPL work. Basically it's like your new products becoming GPL merely because you used GCC to compile them.
Yes, several things are keeping Apple from using Linux, it's design, it's leadership, the MUCH more frequent core updates, the nasty bugs that can make their way into the kernel, and the AWFUL driver system. If the license wasn't enough to keep them away, everything about it's design is counter to that of OS X.
The Lesser GPL which you mention exists because it wants people to use it without their greater work becoming GPLed. Hence why KHTML and Apple's improvements are open source, yet Safari, the web browser is not.
-- -"I'm one of those Mac people that will break a bottle on the bar and hold it to your throat for bad-mouthing my system"
Certain Linux distrobutions got their act together organizational wise, and that's why they're doing so much better now as well.
Just to put in a plug, Gentoo (my new favorite distro;-) has quite a strong organizational structure. Beyond the normal distro-specific stuff like package manager (Portage), they're adding some quite neat stuff. They're even adding Trusted Computing support--completely controllable by the user, of course. (It's a kernel module, you can rmmod it...) They really seem to have their act together organizationally. (Of course, I came from Slackware, which is Pat churning out updates as fast as he can when he's alive, so something with such an administration running it seems far more organized...)
--
Tired of free iPod sigs? Subscribe to my blacklist
The obvious external HD is the iPod. If you really need an external drive, there are a multitude of Firewire drives available on the market, of which I'm sure some are of the 7200 rpm. If you're adventurous, you can always swap out the drive that comes in the box.
It's Stylish and it Sucks
by
InnerParty
·
· Score: 1
Sooo many PC users are giving up their LGA775 P4s and AMD64 systems for this baby. All that matters is style and size. Steve Jobs, you're a nut!
Re:It's Stylish and it Sucks
by
No-op
·
· Score: 1
As a PC user with an AMD64 and a brand spanking new 3.6 Ghz P4 in a shuttle 81P case, I was seriously dissapointed in the sheer amount of noise and heat that sucker generated. I mean, I KNEW it was going to be loud and hot, but seriously, it's just crazy.
my main surfing box is an old 1Ghz TiBook, but that still works pretty well for my needs. I picked up an apple mini when they came out to dink around with, and it's pretty nice and VERY small. It negated my need to build a nano-ITX based system, which I was pretty pleased about.
while it doesn't have the serious pixel-pushing power that my PC boxes have, those don't get used all that much. I don't need 54 dB of noise and massive power suckage just to look up recipes online, and the mini looks really nice on the kitchen countertop.
The only downside is my wife getting way too seriously into GarageBand - it's SCARY. I keep waking up to thumping bass and all sorts of odd noises that she's importing as loops. It's all fun, though.
-- EOM
Re:It's Stylish and it Sucks
by
InnerParty
·
· Score: 1
I noticed that Prescott P4s are noisy with stock heatsinks/fans, even with the built in fan speed control on the motherboards. I have an AMD 64 personally, an Antec case w/ 120mm fans (swapped out for Vantec Stealth) and a 3rd party heatsink can yield better results.
I think if consumers look at the Mini for what it is, an appliance, it makes more sense. As you, said, you use it in the kitchen, and it suits it's purpose well. But alot of Mac Zealots seem to think this is the model that'll make PC Users "switch" to the platform and then they'll be hooked on OS X and dump PCs for good. Somehow I doubt that considering that most models of Macs are anemic in performance until you get into the very high end G5s (expensive!) and it's not a very good gaming platform which is actually pretty important to many PC users. Other than less virus problems, any advantages of OSX are hard to find. Windows XP is stable enough (blue screens are mostly from hardware failure these days), and it has way more software, unless of course you just have to have GarageBand;)
Re:Macs suck
by
imdylbert
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I'm not sure if i should waste my time replying to a troll, but i will anyway. You really need to know what you're talking about before making idiotic statements. Have you even bothered trying to configure a "better" system from dell or wal-mart at that price level? Try it. You'll fail. And that is not even including the value of the software bundled with the Mac Mini. Add the cost of software on par with the apple software that ships with the Mac Mini and you get a price point quite a bit higher than that of the Mac Mini. Here is an article written just for idiots - i mean people - like you.
And as for the new napster, how much do you really now about it other than the fact that you pay $14.95 a month for it and you can download all the songs you want? Do you realize that you have to use a new player that is designed to work with it? Do you realize that as soon as you forget to make a monthly payment you will lose all of your thousands of songs you've downloaded? Do you realize that this is going to spectacularly fail for napster? I prefer to pay the $.99 a song and KEEP my music forever thanks.
It seems that all these accessories do is make the mac mini BIGGER. In particular, looks-wise the steel "grandstand" pretty much turns your mac mini into an old Compaq desktop. If you wanted a larger mac, you have options - the point of the mini is that it is small.
Awww isnt it cute/pretty.... but it still cant play the games i want to play. Mini skirt? someone should be PUNished.
What's Keeping Me from Buying a Mini...
by
gjs_cds
·
· Score: 0, Troll
Is there Monitors... Sure I know that the whole point of the Mini is to connect to your existing monitor. But right now, I'm in the market to buy an entire set-up (as my current 20" CRT is dying). I don't really want to do the iMac, as it prohibits significant future updates... and their cheapest LCD costs 900 bucks!
So do I want a Mac? Yes.
I've been Wintel for the past 20 years, but forced my department to get me a dual 2-gig G5... I've been using it for the past year, and love it.
Will I buy the Mac? Still Unsure. I know I can get whatever LCD I want, but part of the whole Mac experience is to have a computer that doesn't look like ass...
So Steve, why the crap don't you sell a reasonably priced 17" LCD?
Re:What's Keeping Me from Buying a Mini...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
iBook?
Re:What's Keeping Me from Buying a Mini...
by
SumDog
·
· Score: 1
Get a Dell LCD. They look nice and come with a grey stand. Does it really matter if it matches your Mac exactly? If it bothers you that much, hide the mac in your desk drawer and drill a slot for loading CDs.
Geeze
-Sumdog
Re:What's Keeping Me from Buying a Mini...
by
gjs_cds
·
· Score: 1
Yeah--my wife is an interior designer. We stopped by the Apple Store today after Church. Give an interior designer a picture of what it *could* be, and it becomes the gold standard.
Besides, I think it looks cool too...
So I guess that was my bad... In any event, I still don't get why Apple can't make a 17" model... But who cares anyway...
Re:What's Keeping Me from Buying a Mini...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
> I don't really want to do the iMac, as it prohibits > significant future updates
Such as??? With USB and firewire, your upgrade options are practically unlimited. Heck, even on a PC I haven't added a PCI card in years... the iMac is a great value, and incredible form factor and a killer design statement...
Wait a second....
by
SCVirus
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
on the site it says:
Plug in, turn on and say hello to Mac OS X, the world's most advanced operating system.
Someone wanna tell me how taking bsd, adding a new gui and ports of mac apps (and mac app vulns) makes it the worlds most advanced operating system?
Re:Wait a second....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Dude, chill, it's just marketing.
Re:Wait a second....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
If it said desktop OS would you be happy? I don't see linux or windows touching it for desktop usage for a while.
Re:Wait a second....
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Hmm, so what is your choice for world's most advance OS?
There is a lot more than a new gui. Have you used it?
Of course they're talking about consumer operating systems, so there is some hyperbole. But what exactly were you suggesting as an alternative?
I see no major advancments over BSD in Macosx. Don't get me wrong there a plenty of superficial additions. But no advancments, I mean honestly a gui version of grep? Making a claim of being the worlds most advance when you take another another operating system and make no advancments is just incorrect.
No chance. A more user friendly interface does not make it the worlds most advanced OS. Linux or freebsd certainly have more power then MacOSX (or in the case of BSD at least equal). MacOSX of cource does have user friendlyism coupled with a nice powerful BSD base-- but it makes no advancments on the BSD portion of the OS, and the rest of it is not advanced its merely ease of use.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
For proof read here (macworld.com)
Wow, talk about an unbiased source!
Face facts: by the time you upgrade the memory (at Apple prices), the hard drive (at Apple prices) just to get the thing working the way it's supposed to, then add on the monitor (yeah, you can use the shitty old monitor you've got in the basement - the point of that is...?) and repurchase all your software, your well over the price that upgrading that $500 Dell with a "decent " video card is gonna cost you.
Is there anything more delusional than a Macinista?
There are two psychological/intellectual factors at work in the popularity of the iPod
1) Everyone (yes, EVERYONE) is stupid. We're all just stupid at different times and about different things. Computer geeks rarely make good interior-decorators. Engineers rarely have a talent for creative-writing.
2) People hate to be made to feel stupid. Apple makes the iPod easy to master in part by having a small, simple, focused feature-set: giving the user less to figure out makes them less likely to feel stupid while using the product (a feeling which is almost certain to be associated with the product in the user's mind.)
I blame this phemomenon for the widespread vilification of the Technical Support industry (setting aside overseas outsourcing for the moment.) The majority of the work of a support technician is not to perform tasks themself, but instead to walk the user through tasks which are quite easy to perform, but often very difficult to understand (and oftentimes with the goal of repairing something that the user themselves broke through the result of their ignorance.) Calling Tech-support makes people feel stupid, so they hate it.
The iPod DOESN'T make people feel stupid, so they love it.
It's as simple as that.
-- What is the difference between a small revolutionary change and a large evolutionary change?
Mac Mini is a bad deal
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
My 3 year old pc will outperform this piece of crap. Why buy something that's obsolete the day you open the box?
Keep in mind Mhz is not a way to determine speed. Mac's do much more at lower clock cycles. Still, the MiniMac needs a Giga-bit option. Other than that, it will stand the test of time. Afterall, if all you do is word process, check email, watch videos and browse the web, do you even need more than a 400Mhz PC?
-Sumdog
Re:Mac Mini is a bad deal
by
pclminion
·
· Score: 1
Why buy something that's obsolete the day you open the box?
You have a very weird definition of "obsolete." Since when does slower (if it even is slower) mean obsolete?
Is a 2005 Toyota Camry "obsolete" because it doesn't have the horsepower of a dump truck?
The hardware inside the Mac Mini is about as modern as you can get in a consumer system. The fact that it isn't the fastest thing out there hardly makes it obsolete. You may have some psychological issue surrounding your computer's MHz rating but some of us buy computers for other reasons.
Does this solution give you 5.1 surround sound information? Their website says it includes that information with a G5 but nothing about the mini or other G4. If you had the EyeTV 500 and an M-Audio USB surround sound card is there any reason you couldnt get surround sound through a mini?
A PC of the same price, such as the Dell you mentioned, will have much higher end hardware...
And it runs OSX?
You're comparing apples to oranges.
-- In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
Quit your bitching
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
It's hard to make an ugly flatscreen display. Even the ones Dell sells aren't bad looking.
I'm typing this on a G5 connected to two ViewSonic VX series displays (a 19" and a 15") and a Microsoft Wireless Optical Desktop, and everything matches very nicely, though I wouldn't be crying if it didn't.
If all that's keeping you from buying a mini is your inability to find a cheap flatscreen that is complementary in appearance to it, you must either be really, really gay, or a woman.
If you're interested in running Linux on it, its pretty decent. I'm typing this on a Mac Mini with a GB of RAM now, and both OSX and Fedora Core 3 are snappy as hell. I can open as many apps I want in either without slowing down, or the unit becoming hot to the touch. The only exception to that is running Windows XP in QEmu on OSX. Even then, OSX remains responsive, its just that QEmu is too slow.
The Apple bluetooth keyboard is the best keyboard I've ever used - it looks great, but it feels like one of those old honeywell keyboards. The bluetooth mouse is fine too. OSX doesn't
FC3 works fine with the bluetooth devices, video card, dual booting, DVD player, and putting icons on my desktop for the iPod when I plug it in.
You, sir, have hit the nail on the head
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
The old Office won't work well on Longhorn. So someone buys a new computer with Longhorn (probably not compatible with XP), and they have to upgrade Office so they can run Word.
But, they *can't* do that without wrecking API compatibility for every other app in existence, unless they confine themselves to the hidden APIs that Office undoubtedly uses. But even that seems like a risky move: what if it breaks any professional-grade app's functionality? Remember how a lack of Adobe products seriously hampered OS X's adoption by some of Apple's core consumers. There are plenty of multimedia, 3d modeling, science, and such-like apps for Windows that, if hosed, might be enough to cause a platform migration. At the very least it would drastically slow sales.
Re:You, sir, have hit the nail on the head
by
daviddennis
·
· Score: 1
I think what the Longhorn FAQ is claiming is that you're supposed to write to Longhorn's APIs, not the old Win32 stuff. This is exactly the same as MacOS X; old apps run in a compatibility box, meaning mediocre performance, so users have to upgrade all their applications.
You are right that the lack of Photoshop for a long time seriously hurt adoption of MacOS X. Fortunately for Microsoft, all they have to do is get Office working and I don't think there's a big concern. Look at all the software on a typical Windows box; the overwhelming majority of is has MS's name on it. MS could lose every single creative professional back to the Macintosh and I doubt that they'd even notice it revenue-wise.
(I should clarify one of my earlier statements - when I said "probably not compatible with XP", I meant you probably can't take a computer "built for Longhorn" and run XP on it due to a lack of drivers. Once you go forward, you have to, well, go forward).
D
Not after your first major OS update costs $79.
by
copponex
·
· Score: 1
Nuff said.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
prockcore
·
· Score: 1
Remember to factor in software
That's one thing mac users never seem to do. Sure comparing a new mac with a new PC is one thing, but we're talking about people *switching* from PC to mac. They have thousands of dollars in software already for the PC.
Legacy apps are the thing that has kept the x86 around.. and will continue to do so.
My mom needs Peachtree.. she will never switch to a mac as long as peachtree and quickbooks aren't available.
My wife has tons of software that she uses that is windows-only, yes there is some stuff available for OSX (like Avery Label Maker) but then I'd have to not only buy the machine, but re-purchase all that software as well.
I swear, mac users seem to think the only things anyone uses their computers for is photo editing and web browsing.
Re:Tsunami Song
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
May you fucking well die in agony, you inhuman piece of shit. Your family and your kids too.
That's an excellent question, and one I can only answer by suggesting that they are desperate to come in under a certain price point and they felt that it was necessary to cut memory size rather than something else. I think it was a horrible, stupid mistake, and I don't think that Apple should ship ANY machine with less than 512MB these days.
The 128k mac debacle wasn't really a debacle because it was the only home computer that could do what it did at the time. If there had been competition, they would have been slaughtered.
-- "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
On Slashdot these days, all you need to do is reply to any post arguing benefits of using Windows refuting the arguments through the use of one word "wrong" and get modded "Insightful". Using the phrase "it Just Works" is useful too. How about an intelligent response?
It's just plain impossible to have an intelligent discussion about the pros and cons of Mac vs. Windows now.
Ranting done: So here to better analyze the statements that were made:
A.) It may be cheap and sexy, but it's hard to find apps for.
There are a lot of good applications for the Mac, but depending on what you may want to do it may or may not be sufficient. Microsoft Office and the Adobe line of products are well supported on Mac. If you have specific application needs due to your line of work, you should check this out before switching. Many Windows applications can be run at acceptable speed via Virtual PC.
If you switch you may need to reinvest in application purchases. If you own Windows licenses for a lot of software it can be cost prohibitive to make the switch. That being said, the Mac Mini does come with iLife, Appleworks and Quicken which will get you going.
B.) No Games. Sorry.
The situation is much better than it was before. A number of excellent games are available for the Mac including Rise of Nations, Call of Duty, Unreal Tournament, Battlefield 1942, Knights of the Old Republic, World of Warcraft etc.
That being said, you will usually wait a lot longer to play these games. The big exception is Blizzard which has supported simulatneous release on the Mac for quite some time.
If you don't mind the wait it's not a big deal but for some games this is problematic. It took almost two years for Battlefield 1942 to be released on the Mac. The game when it was first released was groundbreaking - being the first to offer air, sea and ground vehicles as well as the conquest mode. Mac users may be less impressed. They have probably seen these features first in Unreal 2004. Additionally, jumping into BF 1942 as a newbie and playing with people with 2 years of experience can't be much fun.
Even with all these great games available for the Mac - if you are a hardcore gamer you probably won't be happy. If I look at what I am currently playing: City of Heroes, Rome Total War, Vampire Bloodlines, Half Life 2, Battle for Middle Earth - nope none are out on the Mac.
You are also going to be limited by the onboard video in the Mac Mini. Yeah, sure the Radeon 9200 is ok for casual gaming. But if you want silky smooth antialiased gaming at 1600x1200 - that's not going to cut it. You should be looking at a PowerMac in that case. And that's a lot more cash - a PowerMac system comparable to my current gaming desktop (single 1.8Ghz G5, 1GB DDR 400, 160GB SATA drive, GeForce 6800GT vs. sames specs PC with a 3.2Ghz Pentium 4) runs about $700 more than the PC ($2200 vs. $1500).
C.) Regardless of the low price, Apple has a huge hurdle to overcome with the general masses that they won't be missing out if they get it.
Ok I'm not going to touch this one. I have no idea what he's trying to say.
Disclaimer: I work with Macs (OS9 and OSX), Windows, Linux and FreeBSD. They ALL piss me off sometimes.
It's just plain impossible to have an intelligent discussion about the pros and cons of Mac vs. Windows now.
What, you think it was before? Before, any dumbass anti-Apple-fanboy comment would be moderated up to +5 Insightful, like Taco's famous "no wireless, less space than Nomad, lame" quote. I'll be that most of the people bitching about how much attention Apple receives now just miss the good old days where they could fart in Apple's general direction and get easy karma.
Uh no. Both situations are stupid and amount to just a generation of a bunch of noise to the posts.
Consider:
Past: "any dumbass anti-Apple-fanboy comment would be moderated up to +5 Insightful"
is equal to
Present: "any dumbass Apple-fanboy comment would be moderated up to +5 Insightful"
In terms of constructive and interesting conversation which might actually present useful information - both of these are the same. If modded at all they should both be modded as Flamebait, Troll etc.
I'm not arguing that I miss the old days of getting modded Insightful for bashing Apple. I have never gotten karma that way. I would just like to see some actual intelligent discussion of the pros and cons. But I guess that is just too much to expect from Slashdot.
Present: "any dumbass Apple-fanboy comment would be moderated up to +5 Insightful"
Uh huh. What happens even more often than that an Apple story, comment made in defense of Apple, or criticising another platform is automatically blown off as the work of Apple fanboyism. One example: the recent "Why does Windows still suck" story. Even better example: when Apple made a new firmware update for the iPod that blocked Real's attempts to get Real's DRM to play on the iPod. All the catcalls saying "if this were Microsoft..." were just pathetic.
Some people like keys that "click" while others do not. I for one HATE ergo keyboards. I know they're supposed to be better, but then again is the Sys 6 US layout and Esperanto is supposed to be easier than English. I'll stick to what I know and like. It's all about "choice", isn't it Mr. Gates?
There is no how-to other than the instructions that come with the EyeTV.
Except... Throw away the CD they give you and download the latest software from their website. More recent versions have included important performance gains in playback. But apart from that, it's just good to go.
Alas, it's not up to the standard of a TiVo. It does recurring recordings, not season passes. But until they come out with an HD TiVo (yes, there is an HD DirecTiVo, but it has a questionable future and yesteryear's software and feature set) it will have to do.
It's made of clear acrylic, so I wouldn't recommend it... unless you're one of those people who believe the police wouldn't be able to see it unless they open their minds.
-- My other first post is car post.
How about a DVI/USB KVM?
by
Cryptnotic
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
A Mac Mini would fit perfectly on top of my PC tower. If I had a KVM that would fit underneath with short USB and DVI cables to the Mac Mini and longer cables to my PC and monitor/keyboard/mouse, I'd be set. The ordinary DVI KVM's are rather clunky. A sleekly designed one made spedifically with the Mac Mini in mind would be a good deal for switchers (or people with multiple Mini's, maybe).
It doesn't fit your description, but this switch is definitely less clunky, and will work with DVI monitors.
-- It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
find an ipod lover that is not mac ..
by
rofthorax
·
· Score: 1
and I will find you pc enthusiast that doesn't use an intel processor.
The problem with mac, and has always been a problem, it doesn't license its hardware.. Note, PC's architecture wasn't patented by IBM because they didn't think it would be successful, so they didn;t bother.. Recently IBM's PC division was sold off to a chinese PC vendor.. The only way Mac would win the world over is to lose all their patents..
-- Just say no to license servers!!
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
imdylbert
·
· Score: 1
I swear, mac users seem to think the only things anyone uses their computers for is photo editing and web browsing.
Gee...that's because the vast majority of computer users DO only use their computers for the basics such as email, web surfing and word processing. If you are doing something specialized, then, as has been mentioned, YOU ARE NOT THE TARGET AUDIENCE!
Modular Mac circa 1988(?)
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
On another topic, I always thought that a modular case was a neat idea. Start with a basic box. You need another drive bay, you clip a module on.
Apple toyed with this idea back in the 80s but never made it past the design/prototype stage (along with many others since. Look up Paul Kunkel's book AppleDesign for many more.)
Modules connected to an L-shaped base/rail which handled communications between the pieces. Need more modules? clip on more, same goes for the rails. Student who just needs to get onto the school network would just have a CPU box. Home Computer? Clip on a floppy. Workstation? HD unit (this design was in the late 80s I think, used IIGS graphics for the simulated display.) Modem? Extra Floppy? etc etc.
If I searched harder -- and weren't on dialup -- I'm sure I could dig up some images on the web. Else look up Kunkel's book.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
Henry_Doors
·
· Score: 1
How exactly do the recording features & FM radio on my iRiver make it less of an MP3 player? You say if you wanted a radio you would buy a radio, what if you want a radio & an MP3 player would you carry 2 devices? Adding complementary features adds to the value of a product - throwing features in for their own sake doesn't.
I think that people buy iPods mainly because they aren't aware of the competition and they think they are cool because Apples multi-million dollar advertising campagn has been very effective. Does believing advertising mean people are stupid? Not sure but certainly shows a lack of independent thought.
-- "I deny nothing, but doubt everything." Lord Byron
Posting Billions in profits is easy
by
amichalo
·
· Score: 1
It's easy for MS to post Billions in profits. Heck, they haven't had R&D costs in years, just change the menu colors, increment the year number, and start burnin Offic & Windows CDs.
-- I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
i41Overlord
·
· Score: 1
And it runs OSX?
You're comparing apples to oranges.
No, the original poster was comparing apples to oranges. He started comparing the hardware aspects of the Mini vs. PC's, and I challenged him on his comments about the hardware.
He said:
find a PC for the same price with comparable features. Most people point to Dell/HP/etc boxes. They always end up having crappy integrated graphics cards, and things like that.
I then directly addressed his point about the hardware features such as integrated graphics.
Then he threw in the comment about OSX which isn't really an argument at all, since you cannot natively run OSX on the PC, so of course it's not going to come with it. You can't natively run WinXP on a Mac, either, but that doesn't mean that I can use that as proof that PC's are better.
If you want to compare them both, at least stick to the things which can be compared (you can objectively benchmark a processor, memory, or a video card, but your favorite OS is purely subjective)
I blame this phemomenon for the widespread vilification of the Technical Support industry (setting aside overseas outsourcing for the moment.) The majority of the work of a support technician is not to perform tasks themself, but instead to walk the user through tasks which are quite easy to perform, but often very difficult to understand (and oftentimes with the goal of repairing something that the user themselves broke through the result of their ignorance.) Calling Tech-support makes people feel stupid, so they hate it.
I've noticed exactly the opposite. Pretty much every time I've called tech support, I know more about the problem and possible solutions than the tech support person. For example, the cable company screwed up a router configuration. The problem was obvious to anyone who can use google. Explaining the problem to them, on the other hand was a 5 hour exercise in frustration. Eventually I got a tech on the line who had been instructed by his boss to just do what I told him. I blindly told him character by character what to type into the command line, without ever have seen or used one of the routers in question, and suddenly the problem went away.
My point is, tech support is usually filled with clueless morons who know how to read a script. These are people who insist you reboot your machine every time you change a network setting. "Yeah umm Windows is booting, sure. All done." You literally have to lie to them to get anything done. I think the vilification of the industry is the result of minimum wage customer service employees who don't really know anything, but like to think that they do. They can't fix any real problem, but are condescending to everyone anyway. Thus they annoy clueless people by treating them like idiots, while usually being unable to fix a problem. They annoy advanced users by treating them like idiots, while usually being unable to fix a problem.
Re: multi-button mice
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Set up the mouse driver to make all the buttons trigger a "regular" (left) click. Problem solved.
There's no such feature built in to the Apple Mac OS X mouse driver. I suppose you could install the Microsoft drivers -- they probably have the feature -- but do you really want to let Microsoft code sit at such a low level on the Macintosh?
Re: multi-button mice
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
I installed them, and I've never had a problem. Ironically, I had the entire computer freeze shortly before I installed MS's mouse driver (requiring a power cycle), but haven't had any problems since.
If people wanted a hip music player that works with their computer, why wouldn't they want a hip computer as well?
Elementary, my dear Watson. Because you can't brandish your Mac mini in public.
The iPod's a social signifier. Computers that sit at home aren't. The idea of a "hip computer" is one with very limited appeal--a claim that's easy to quantify by pointing at Apple's market share.
The hip market, in other words, is already tapped out. Apple knows this, and that's why it's pitching affordability as a major appeal of the mini. Affordability is a reason the mini surfaced at Target.com, and why, in another area, with the Shuffle, Apple has set its sights on Walmart America.
Apple's going for broad, sweaty, big and beefy market share--with the Walmart move, it's cozying up to Red staters for a change. iPod's given it a taste, and it's tired of settling for the dinky demographic of hip.
Wise move? For now, definitely. And yet...people who flatter themselves with the lable of hip are notorious for being as conscious of inclusivity as exclusivity: forever monitoring their in-group status, they don't exactly like seeing their symbols being crowded by the hoi polloi. Can the aura of Apple's cool survive pro-Bush housewives in stretch latex fondling iPods at Walmart? Stay tuned.
more useful stuff to add...
by
Cryptnotic
·
· Score: 1
...would be a two-port ethernet switch.
-- My other first post is car post.
I got close
by
Scudsucker
·
· Score: 2, Informative
You gotta go with the eMac, as the base config with edu pricing is $749, as the cheapest Mac LCD monitor is $899. The Mini and the eMac seem to have the same processor, memory, hard drive, etc. So, here it goes:
eMac, $749
$99 iPod Shuffle for your thumbdrive
Epson Stylus C86 Ink Jet Printer, $99
For a total of $947.95, for $21 a month on an Apple Credit Account. The price for the Mini would be....
Actually, I guess you can get the Mini for your $20 a month, but you have to give up the LCD panel. Apple sells a 17" NEC CRT for $159. So, for the Mini:
The aforementioned monitor for $159.
Same $99 iPod shuffle
Same $99 Epson printer
USB keyboard and mouse: $52.
Mac Mini, $479.
The total is $888.95. So, for just about $60 less, you get your Mini for 20 bucks a month. Oh, and there seems to be a mail in rebate for the printer for $100, but that's not going to change the payment options. I would provide links, but the links are specific to each session, so it would be pointless to repost them.
The price you are quoting is for the Zen 20 gig, not the 40 gig. The Zen 40 is actually $329.99. And while yes its still costs less than Apple's 40 and it supposedly gets better battery life, it's also an ounce and half heavier and is over 4 cubic inches larger than the iPod.
the creative even has more features!
No, it does not. I has exactly *one* more feature than the iPod: an FM tuner. You should go work for Microsoft because they're all about "Features". I say "Features" with great distain, because in the context of Microsoft and wannabe makers of the iPod killer, they think they have a better product if they have more "Features" on a billeted list. It doesn't matter that if you shoehorn on these "Features", your product gets larger, heaver, and has more stuff to break down, and it especially doesn't matter if a single soul on the planet actually needs said "Feature" - you have a longer list, so you win. Voice recording is a prefect example of a needless addition that.005% of the population will actually find usefull.
Re:Are people that stupid?
by
Scudsucker
·
· Score: 1
Definitely. Before I upgraded my Mini to 1GB, it was swapping constantly when I had both RSSOwl and OmniWeb running at the same time. Unless you're only running apps with a small memory footprint, a Mac with only 256M is almost a single-tasking machine.
It's not too bad as long as you are just running iLife apps, and not to many of them at a time simultaneously. i.e. you can run iMovie just fine, or Safari and iTunes just fine, you just don't want to do all three. But try and fire up Photoshop or Microsoft Word, and you're in for some swappin. I know, I just set my parents up with a 12" iBook, and so far haven't had the time/money to get more memory for it.
Something that was rectangular and fit nicely underneath the Mini would be better, I think. That Belkin one would use full-length cables (probably 3-5 feet) and would be a pain for cable management. It and the bundle of cables would end up on the floor entangled with all the other cables. That's as long as you can switch computers with a hotkey.
-- My other first post is car post.
Re:yeah, but...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 0
Sorry it didn't help. I knew it didn't meet your requirements, but it was the best I could come up with.
Slashdot Mirror
steals the Windows users who love their iPod?
I would imagine this was more apparent back when iTunes wasn't available on Windows. New iPods charge over USB2. And most people have XP. Having an iPod with your PC is now just as easy to deal with as having it with your Mac.
Back when you had to use MusicMatch, it was an awful experience.
There is a big need however for mouse and keyboard packages for this computer (that aren't made by Apple and overpriced). Has anybody considered what Windows keyboards would be like with a Mac. The alt key is the rightmost (on the left side) on a win kb, whereas its in the middle on a Mac kb. So is the windows key the mac alt key, and the pc alt key the mac apple-key?
Propz to GNAA
Which has more hard drive space - the iMini or IPod? They have almost the same price point
Now the skirt, and tower look pretty cool as is.
I know I'm getting one... And most of my (Non Geek) friends who heard about the Mini are either decided to buy it or considering to do so. Personally I think Bill Gates should be very very worried :)
dunno about the skirt... It seems fairly useless,
but I am ordering my tower now. This is exactly
what I needed.
Let the flood of accessories begin.
I'd be worried about this, if I were Microsoft. But I would also be worried about this if I was distributing a desktop linux distro. Now that Apple hardware is (relatively) cheap, and damn sexy, I might have to buy one. I'd probably dual boot OS X and Gentoo, but there are others who will probably go for the nice look of OS X, along with BSD under the hood, and leave Linux/*BSD for ever. The only thing that is working in Linux/*BSD's favor is multiplatform compatibility (i.e. you can run the same OS on x86 and PPC), and selection of application. Fink (is that it?) is working on taking one of those away. All this being said, is it necessarily a bad thing if Linux is relegated to the server room with a small percentage of workstations, with Apple picking up the rest?
I'm contemplating getting one of these for my mother (okay... and one for myself...) but I'm wondering if this is a case of form over function?
I'm totally new to the Mac world, save from a few experiences with an iPod which I found to be totally unfulfilling, so is the Mac Mini really a good place for me to start, or is it much like the iPod, and just another fashion accessory with secondary consideration given to functions?
the more they grab from microsoft, the better. if it takes cute computers and nifty mp3 players to do it, who cares? mac makes a superior product to windows IMO, and more poeple should get wise to that fact.
I'm wondering if the grandstand would withstand the weight of a 17" CRT monitor, like what I have now.
This would save a lot of space on my desk.
On the other hand, the minitower might be a good idea too.
This space left intentionally blank.
These accessories I'd think can be useful, but not *that* useful. I mean, what is the point of the 'Mac Mini skirt?'
;).
I'm really trying not to troll here, but I think worthwhile accessories would be to the tune of, a dock type thing, that has a built-in USB pro-audio card that looks kind of like this "Mini Skirt."
The Mini is already stylish enough, and I think the only merit of the two latter products is stylistic, if they expanded the usefullness and capacities of the Mini, then i'm all for it
Error 407 - No creative sig found
They've got a monitor pedestal that closely encloses the Mini. As densely packed as that Mac is, there is probably a reason that the case is made of aluminium. I'd be careful about insulating that box.
once the affordable, stylish mac steals the Windows users who love their iPod
Bit of an assumption there, isn't it?
True, this is the first Mac to be within an average joe's price range -- and the fact that it includes no keyboard, mouse, or monitor doesn't matter because it's aimed at potential switchers. Whip out the PC, slide in the Mac Mini.
All the conditions are there. But does the Mini offer enough to get people to climb out of their boxes of complacency and tolerance, and actually switch?
The coolest voice ever.
Exactly how much? That's a tall order. A percentage point...maybe two. Not much more than that though, I wouldn't imagine. It looks like a nice system, but I wouldn't imagine that the iPod set Apple seems to be targeting would see the value in having multiple computers. I don't mean geeks with iPods, now, I mean the people who bought an iPod as much because it was the thing to have and be seen with as it was a nice piece of useful technology. It's harder to be seen on the Metro or walking around campus with a Mac Mini. Maybe if they made distinctive earphones for it.
As cynical as I'm being here, I would like to see the mini both on my desk, and putting a dent in the market!
"These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based on the order in which I joined" --Homer re:
Dude, I think I've got some of the Plasticsmith's other work in my closet. If you get the 18-inch Acrylic model, he throws in an extra bowl for "Tasting and testing fine tobaccoes".
Combines portability and durability into a classy package. I knew this dude who made his own homemade stand, and it broke right in the middle of a party. his room still smells like bongwater.
So yeah, dude, this guy's stuff for the mac mini will be like killer.
Thats the way. If someone didnt switch yet from win to a clickety-click-self-everything-autoconfigured-and- managed linux, because 'linux? thats a complicated hax0r-system!', then here's the opportunity. a nice and powerful, and not expensive mac. And of course it does run linux if you want :) Its little, silent, powerful (no I am no apple representative) - and it just workz. Viruses? Ha. Ha. Ha. And you still can use the MS office things, until you get seomething better. OOo for example. Throw out your windows - have fun.
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they attack you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi
Well, there is precedent.
The coolest voice ever.
But I would also be worried about this if I was distributing a desktop linux distro. Now that Apple hardware is (relatively) cheap, and damn sexy, I might have to buy one. I'd probably dual boot OS X and Gentoo, but there are others who will probably go for the nice look of OS X, along with BSD under the hood, and leave Linux/*BSD for ever.
All it would take would be for Apple to release OS X for the PC. Any chance Linux had at serious penetration of the desktop market would evaporate.
The coolest voice ever.
I knew those free mac minis were a scam ! Now I'm going to have to buy all those shiny accessories to go with mine!
I mean.. err.. uhm... ah screw it.
A bunch of plastic cases and monitor stands? Surely there must be something better than this out there. I was expecting mini-footpring accessories to be more than a block of clear plastic. Why would someone waste their money on something like this for a $500 computer? The iPod is a luxury item, and people who buy it can usually afford $30 iPod socks and the like.
Can these kinds of fashion accessories really sell for the mac mini like they do for the iPod, given their totally different price points relative to their respective markets?
SELECT quote.text AS sig FROM quote NATURAL JOIN attribute WHERE attribute.description = 'witty';
0 rows returned
This has nothing to do with hardware and everything to do with being able to run OS X natively. Throw in the iLife Suite and now you can see the appeal. I've got my order in.
Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
I wandered down to the Apple Store in London last Sunday and came back with the base Mac Mini and am extremely impressed with it, this being my first foray into the Mac world.
Anyway, having just looked at the accessories (Coral link as the original is /.ed) I wouldn't pick up any of them, they look a bit crap and the Grandstand appears to be the only one with any use and then only if you have very limited desk space.
From the story title I was hoping for something a bit morethan bent plastic/metal.
Then again, iPods are overpriced and under-featured and seem to have caught the public interest - so maybe people really are as stupid as Apple thinks they are
nobody wants 500 features in a walkman, they just want a friggen walkman.
My mac mini is great. I really like it. But it doesn't replace my windows PC. It's very much a second computer to do different things on. If I only had one computer it would be my PC still.
Find a PC for the same price with comparable features. Most people point to Dell/HP/etc boxes. They always end up having crappy integrated graphics cards, and things like that. You won't find a PC for a comparable price. (Remember to factor in software. The mini comes with OSX, which has software for everything, and for what it doesnt have, it also comes with iLife '05, and a few games too. Windows boxes come with WindowsXP, which has um, solitare, spider solitare.. and then CD's full of shareware. Boo.)
For proof, read here
BYODKM is slow ... try...
http://www.plasticsmith.com/
Since the origiinal story must be hosted on a mac mini, its already down for the count...: http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/c5e2ce0f2841a64d8 a5f9e8b9b0c97bd/index.html
Here's the google cache so you can RTFA before you post
: www.byodkm.net/scripts/show/24-Plasticsmith_Announ ces_Mac_mini_Accessories.html+&hl=en&client=firefo x-a
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:faFfJ4-srE4J
http://www.mirrordot.org/stories/c5e2ce0f2841a64d8 a5f9e8b9b0c97bd/index.html/
Why does this look like an ad for the plasticsmith to me? Sure, yay, lets put products for the mac mini up, but FFS, folks, it's a single company even. This is just blatant advertisement.
-- Who is the bigger fool? The fool or the fool who follows him? --
High end audio equipment too has many FEWER features than your standard Best Buy components. The preamp on my hi-fi only has a source selector switch and a volume control. But even with this severe lack of features, it sounds like Pink Floyd is playing live in my living room.
Lack of features doesn't necessarily translate to poor quality.
I mean, begging the question of whether people will pay for a hard to upgrade Mac Mini when they already have a perfectly good PC...seems a bit arrogant. Oh wait, it's an Apple fanboy who posted. That explains it.
I mean, sure, it's *possible* that some people will switch to Mac because of the Mini, but assuming that enough people will do so to change the shape of the market? Holy shit. Wasn't the Mac II supposed to do the same thing? And that one that looks like a fucking lamp? Whatever.
I'm sure I'll get a billion angry replies to this post, but I don't care. I conceed the possibility that the Mac Mini will do what no other Mac has and give the PC a run for its money. However, I don't think it's very likely, let alone already established fact.
http://xkcd.com/386/
Peace
Apple's mouse and keyboard package isn't overpriced. I just bought a Microsoft PC keyboard that costs as much as the Apple one I'm typing on now, and the Apple one is far quieter (though, sadly, is not ergonomic). The Apple mouse, frankly, is a piece of ass. As a Mac user, I can deal with one button easily.. but no scroll wheel? Is this 1994?
ya know, I think it's really great, but I'm gonna wait a little while for the price to drop... that'll show all you smug early adopters...
For an early batch of accessories these don't seem that bad. Yes they're simple and functional, though that is in keeping with the Apple style. I do think that we'll see more of, and more sophisticated accessories soon. I do think that Apple has a hit here, my Dad, who was a dyed in the wool Win fan, shocked me by stating that his next computer was going to be a Mac. His plan is to have it as his safe for surfing machine, and his Win machines are going to be relegated to running the free programs he finds for Ham radio and antenna design. I guess he was hit one too many times with malware and wasn't going to take it anymore, that or he was tired of me pointing out that I've never had those type of problems;-)
I want to buy a mac mini, connect it to my laptop via a USB2 or Firewire cable, then bring up some VMWare-like software on my laptop that lets me run the mac in a window (or fullscreen) on my laptop. Bonus points if I can cut-n-paste between the Mac and the PC (a la VPC)...
Companies using Linux don't care about OS market share, they care about services, they don't sell the distro, they sell computing platforms that have the hughe advantage that are completely open.
...) but it is pure gold to have access to the source code of an application for unncountable reasons that would be too long to describe here.
You may not care about this as a geek in your basement playing games and pretending that you are a hacker or cracker (fscking root kits
And I am not talking about small companies. The two industries I am most familiar with, oil industry and financial institutions have embraced FLOSS, Linux included, but always as part of a comprehensive package of support and services.
Companies trying to distribute distros as their only business model (are there still any of those?) may be worried, companies using Linux as cornerstone of their business model as solution providers have nothing to fear from the Mini Mac.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Ok, but how long will we have to wait before there are MM-copycat designs out there, with lower price point and PC hardware in them? When iMac came to the market we had bloody iEverything in transparent plastic, including toasters, and all that in a few months.
I doubt that MM will become more than an niche market gizmo, like it already is..
And all that other cool multimedia software that is included is just icing on the cake.
they should have put a firewire port on the bottom so you could plug in expansion devices (another HD, video capture) into a similarly designed enclosure.
It seems an AC has beat me to it, but I'll flesh out the point anyway.
Apple's hardware business is about as niche as you can get - and with that comes risks. The Mac's traditional strongholds of education and professional video/audio are under siege. Especially the latter: the old, tired argument of "WellMacsarebetterforgraphics!" is simply not true anymore. Apple doesn't have much of the market at all, but what it does have is all it's got. It can afford to expand its share but there is not much room for shrinking. The loyalty of Apple customers is legendary, but for all that, the company's position is precarious. Apple has been "saved" countless times... by investment from Microsoft, by a killer product that just came out in the nick of time (iMac), by branching out into other profitable areas (iPod). That is not the status, the strategy, of a company that is 100% assured of its own survival. It is not inevitable that Apple's hardware business would implode, but it is more of a possibility than it would be with, say, Dell or HP.
Now, say that this did happen. Where would Apple have to turn? Would it do what Nintendo swore it would do, and disintegrate completely? Or would it turn into a software company? If it became a software company, what market would it have to look to for suvival?
How about the biggest computer market on earth? PCs. They could release OS X for PCs, and it would be a huge breath of fresh air into the market - an OS with an unmatched reputation for ease of use, finally in a position to challenge Windows.
The coolest voice ever.
I have never used a Mac, so an honest question. Can we run C, C++ on a Mac. I understand VC++ is not a possibility. Is there a Mac version of Oracle and D2K?
Personally I'd really like to know if there has been a surge in the sales of the /other/ Macs... I decided to skip the gateway drug^H^H^H^HMac and go straight for the bigger iron, and I bet I'm not alone.
The Mac Minis has exactly that, a crappy gfx card. Please try again when i can put my PCI-e nVidia 6800GT card in the mac mini...
Of course it's form over function. Anytime you use a notebook hard drive and CD it's the case since both those devices cost more and perform worse than their desktop counterparts. The same can be said for the outdated processor and lack of memory expansion. The mini is all about style over function, but then that's true of the entire mac/OSX experience.
What the Mac mini has is great design, and Apple actually sacrificed quite a bit of power to provide that great design. How? Well, to get the machine into a box that small, they put in a 2.5 inch laptop hard drive rather than a 3.5 inch desktop hard drive. These are more expensive than desktop drives, so the drive they put in as standard is only 40Gb and only runs at 4200rpm (although I have heard that some Mac minis come with 5400rpm drives, although it is pot luck whether you get one). If Apple had gone for a bigger case, they could have put in a 7200rpm drive of at least 80Gb and probably cut the price, but they didn't. They assumed that their market would want a small and stylish computer with less power rather than a large and less stylish one with a little more. So I don't think the comparison with a cheap Dell is quite right. The computers two computers are designed with slightly different things in mind.
(Where I think Apple did mess up a little was by providing only 256Mb of RAM as standard. With this little memory the machine is going to be swapping a lot and with that slow drive this is going to slow it down quite a bit. This is one case where paying for an extra 256Mb is going to be really worth the money.
Actually Apple needs to move up to 512Mb standard across its entire range of machines. They have just done this for Powerbooks, but they need to do it for everything else as well.
The same place you can in the budget Dell. Oh wait, you cant. If you want a PCIE 6800GT then you are not the target audience.
Okay, here's just a quick calculation I did based on the components I used to build a machine. I excluded the wifi card, since that isn't included in the default MiniMac. Of course, you just buy a PCI card and slot it in. I also didn't include a floppy drive. All the prices are from the computer components site OverclockersUK and include VAT (sales tax for you Americans) and shipping within the UK. You could reduce the price even further by seeing if anybody else sells the parts cheaper - I just used OverclockersUK because I've ordered lots of components from them.
;)
CPU: AMD Sempron 2200+ 1.50GHz (Socket A) CPU OEM £32.31
Mainboard: Abit KV7 KT600 (Socket A) Motherboard £38.19
HDD: Maxtor DiamondMax Plus 8 40GB ATA-133 2Mb Cache - OEM £29.96
GFX: Asus A9250/TD ATI Radeon 9250 128MB DDR TV-Out/DVI (AGP) - Retail £32.31
RAM: Crucial 256MB DDR PC2700 CAS2.5 £27.61
CDRW: Sony CRX320E 52x32x52x16 CDRW/DVD Combi Drive £26.50
Modem: Creative Modem Blaster V.92 PCI - OEM £11.69
CPU HSF: Akasa AK-827 (Skt A) £7.16
Case: OcUK Value Rainbow Series Case w/350W PSU £22.27
OS: Get a friend to download a Linux distro of your choice or on their advice. Based on a 3 disc Linux distro (say, Mandrake 10.1), and discs costing 19p each, that's £0.57.
Total £228.57 including VAT excl shipping
Mini Mac £339 including VAT excl shipping
Looked at like that, the Mac mini is obviously cheaper!
Seriously, though. I'm not a PC zealot, and I do have a Mac laptop. I wouldn't be drawn to comparing Linux and OS X, since they both serve different purposes for me. And the Mac mini is nice and small and is arguably nicer looking.
The flaws in my analysis? Erm, the fact that the ATX case is rather big in comparison to the Mac mini. And I didn't include case fans, which might be necessary. Also, there is something to be said for getting a computer, turning it on and it all working rather than having to plug it all in (or getting a geek friend to do it for you) and install the software. This analysis may fall on the lack of a geek friend or associate willing to put it together (if you are in a big city like London, head on down to your local LUG - there are lots of nerds willing to put your hardware together and install Linux). Plus the price difference would be absorbed by a copy of XP Home OEM if you wanted to run that (something I'd advise wholeheartedly against unless you were a gamer, in which case, neither the MiniMac nor my specification will suit you since you would probably want a better graphics card than a 9200/9250 - plus OS X sucks for games). I've also omitted the FireWire ports since the card doesn't, as far as I'm aware, support FireWire. It's possible to get a different motherboard which does support FireWire. My brother is using the Asus A7N8X-E which does support FireWire (and 5.1 audio etc.) - that is about twenty pounds more expensive. Even with that taken in to account, it's still cheaper than the MiniMac.
So, I've found a PC with comparable features. It doesn't use integrated graphics (Intel Extreme etc.), it uses a graphics card similar to the one in the MiniMac. I have factored in software (Linux). It's not a "Windows box", but it's usable. No problemo, right? The fact that you can get a cheaper PC box is no reason not to buy a MiniMac. In fact, I have an unhealthy lust for one, if only to replace my ageing iBook. If you prefer OS X, iLife and so on, go for it. It's a great little computer, and I'd certainly not say no if offered one.
As for that article, the bit about wifi and Bluetooth: "you're stuck using USB dongles and adapters". Bull. There are many PCI wifi cards (this post came via one), and with a little bit of hunting around you can find a PCI bluetooth card (though, it's probably cheaper to use the USB adapter). It would be very cool if they combined the wifi and bluetooth cards in to one PCI card. Plus, some of the motherboards I've seen come with
catch (HumourFailureException e) { e.user.send("You, sir, are a humourless idiot."); }
Then the more savvy will begin to realize that the G4 is bottlenecked by its slow bus speed, and there'll be a lot of pissed off people having spent money on a computer that, even by Apple's own standards, is outdated. Yes, it fits neatly into a small box, that doesn't necessarily make it worth buying.
this is the best troll post ever.
+5 insightful, man.
+5 insightful.
I would agree, except to argue that one of the problems that has led to what people perceive as bad code in Microsoft is some of the comprises that were put in place to deal with a variety of hardware.
Also by having the large variety, there is a problem with getting "the experience" that Apple sells.
I have always liked Apples product package as a whole, but have disliked the price and the pain to develop on it. With the mac mini and the moving to gcc this has eased to be acceptable for me.
I agree Microsoft gives you more options, but there are some problems with other levels of choice in the upgrade cycles and the compatability. Ever since I have seen companies need to upgrade all copies of Office because a customer was using a newer version of Office and their docuements were not compatable with the old version. After the upgrade hurdles upon hurdles of pain had to be completed to have the older documents viewed properly by the new Office.
It is that pain and how it creeps across microsofts products that I feel truly limits their choices.
I am not saying Apple is much better on forced upgrades and compatability issues, but they are bit. A shift in market share and they might both hurt.
So I agree with your points but I don't know if you are locked in more, just locked in a different way.
I was thinking of the immortal words of Socrates, who said: "I drank what?" - Chris Knight (Val Kilmer)- Real Genius
No wintel PC offers the same combination of price, form factor, silence, computing power and style.
They may outperform the Mac mini in a few of these categories, but only at the expense of drastically underperforming in the others: A fast PC usually isn't small nor silent. If it's silent, it's usually large, expensive and not all that hot in terms of performace. If it's cheap, it will be large and f'ugly.
If you consider that and the software the mini is shipped with, you'll find that the mini has a vastly superior price/value ration than virtually all of the x86 world. Plus, it brings the convenient safety of (at the moment) not being targeted by malware authors. I could very well imagine Apple winning big with the Mini.
Don't whistle while you're pissing.
This wonderful piece of journalism exposes the Mac Mini for what it really is!!!! Apple's Safari browser can't even render MSN correctly, half the time!!!!!
The combination of the mini and the EyeTV 500 makes for a great HTPC, at least for digital over-the-air TV (and unencrypted QAM digital TV over cable).
Those are the most expensive pieces of bent plexiglass that I have ever saw. Come on people, you could save $30 by buying a $5 piece of accrylic from Home Depot and bending it in your oven.
... they'll start selling these things in college bookstores with a low monthly payment. In high school, kids play with their computers, maybe do some instant messaging and gaming and email. But they don't have to USE their computer very much. Heck, many schools still allow kids to either write or type their reports. College, however, is a whole new ballgame. Students are supposed to start acting more like professionals and they're expected to spend quite a bit of time researching topics and using their PCs for class related activities. THAT is when you get them. Offer packages with the mini along with a 15 inch flat panel monitor, wireless mouse and keyboard, external floppy, 128mb thumbdrive, and a small black and white printer for less than 20 bucks a month, and watch their parents flock to buy em. Seriously, who needs a big, loud PC in college unless you're dealing with 3d software or autocad? And even then, you're likely to use the school's computers for that anyway.
and it's still not working...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
apple has already said themselves not to expect the same sort of growth next quarter - it was indeed a one-time boost, maintaining that is where the challenge comes. how will they do so?
I definitely put myself in the camp of "switched from Linux to a Mac". I have no real need for a dedicated server here at home right now, but I used to pretty much always keep a Linux distro installed to dual-boot into, so I could tinker with it and keep up with what was new in the Linux world.
Around the same time I bought my first OS X compatible Mac, I quit doing that. For one thing, I used to buy the latest Linux distro in the store every so often, usually at a cost of at least $30-40 a pop. I know I could have just downloaded it for free, but it got to the point where that wasn't worth all the time and effort. (EG. I wanted the latest SUSE to try out a while back, but SUSE wouldn't make the ISOs available for free download. Sometimes the ftp sites would be SLOW, too, when you could easily find what you wanted.)
At some point, I realized "Hey, I spend an average of at least $150-250 a year on "free" Linux distros already, just to feed my habit of trying out various new packages." OS X made a beautiful Unix type workstation for me, and had the huge benefit of running many more apps I liked and wanted to use, too. I no longer have a craving for Linux (or a BSD flavor) on my PC. In fact, my Athlon 64 has been pretty much delegated as my strictly "gaming machine" these days.
Really! I had no idea there was a $500 Windows machine that comes with Quicken and equivalents to all the iLife, iWork, and Appleworks (ok, those aren't so great) apps preinstalled. And is damn-near impervious to viruses, adware, and spyware. Could you post a link to this miracle machine?
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
It has very few advantages over a Wintel box at the same price - in fact the same money buys you a lot of power in a Windows machine.
People say this all the time, and never can truly justify it. The last time this foolish claim rolled around, there were numerous links to a small form-factor pc that was the same price as the Mac Mini, as long as you bought a "barebones system" that didn't include CPU, memory, hard disk or CD drive.
Now THAT comparison strikes me as truly stupid.
The grandstand would appear to save space but then serves to make the rear ports awkward if not impossible to access.
The minitower looks like it would have questionable heat distribution functionality. I don't buy into the space saving benefit. If you don't have any room for something 6.5"x6.5" then you aren't going to have room for something 3"x6.5" either. Plus, how can the minitower make the Mac Mini more stable on its side if the base width is only an inch wider at best? Without perpendicular feet the minitower is going to come crashing down just as easily as if a plain Mac Mini were put on its side.
What is the point of the miniskirt?? Seriously, for US$20 what do you get? Both the tower and the miniskirt appear to serve no purpose at all other than to make your Mac Mini bigger. Spend your money on something else more worthwhile, like
Speak truth to power.
1. Short sell stock in tech company
2. Post story about said company and bring down their server
3. Stock in said company takes a nosedive
4. Profit!
My main computer is an Ibook, I am going to get a mini, I own an Ipod...
But... Sheesh, why does EVERY apple article have to hit the front page?
Find a PC for the same price with comparable features. Most people point to Dell/HP/etc boxes. They always end up having crappy integrated graphics cards, and things like that. You won't find a PC for a comparable price.
8 &p =1
A PC of the same price, such as the Dell you mentioned, will have much higher end hardware than the Mini. In the case of the Dell, it even includes a LCD monitor which is not included with the Mini.
In the case of graphics cards, the Radeon 9200 in the Mini is a very low end graphics card, on par with an integrated one. It only has a pitiful 32 MB of memory for graphics.
http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=232
Read the review on Anandtech for an objective, logical review. You won't find that on here, you'll only find emotional outpourings from enthusiastic zealots who have already made up their mind.
Not in such a small, silent, and pretty package.
Remember, it's 6.5" x 6.5" x 2" (16.5cm x 16.5cm x 5cm).
You can't get a windows machine at that size with the same power, there are no intergrated Radeon 9200 GPUs on mini-itx motherboards AFAIK.
The closest you'll get performance-wise in the same dimensions is a P4 mini-itx motherboard, but these come with lousy intergrated graphics chipsets and the CPU requires more sofisticated (and noisy) cooling than that on the Mac Mini.
Plus the Mini runs OSX natively, that alone is more than enough to convince me to buy one.
Yet another no substance Apple© Slashvertisement(TM).
I often wonder whether this really comes down to a question of taste. Despite what the original poster thinks, people don't like iPods (or Mac OS X, although this applies in a more limited way to that as well) because they're stupid, but simply because they do something, one thing or one limited set of things, very, very well. When people bitch about the iPod not having an FM radio/voice recorder/video capability/robotic dog walker, what they fail to realize is that heaping features on a product often, usually, impedes the product from doing what it was originally meant to do. The iPod does something that no radio, voice recorder, video player, or robotic dog walker could, and does that something better than most other portable digital music players, and if I wanted radio or any of that other stuff, I'd buy a radio. Apple's products aren't about making things that are "simple," but rather about making techie gadgets that don't act and seem like techie gadgets, but instead seem organic. Apple really excels at bringing some sprezzataura to the techie UI world.
Then again, this may be just taste. Maybe there really isn't anything inherently better in this approach versus the Wintel and standard gadget maker philosophy of heaping features on a product and hoping it clicks with the public. But considering that the technologies that last are the ones that just vanish into everyday usability by being simple and by doing something that nothing else does, I really doubt it. I'm sure back in the 19th and 20th century there were phones that heaped all sorts of useless features, and people who bitched about the phones that couldn't shoe your horse for you being for stupid people.
Affordable.
let's see. Maybe you want that "standard" office package, so you can ensure compatability (well, sort of...) with your stuff back at the office. Office for the Mac: KACHING!! Do you need a database for this 'n' that? FileMaker Pro: KACHING! Maybe you do web design. Dreamweaver: KACHING! Or is graphics your thing? Adobe Design Series: KACHING!!! Maybe you have need for something else that isn't included in the Mac's long list of included software. KACHING!
That affordable little Mac Mini has just cost you hundreds, maybe thousands in new software. THAT'S the real gotcha, and always has been, that keeps people (I'm talking the 99% of regular users who aren't about to be using OS freebies via Fink, X11, etc.) from casually testing the Mac waters. Take it from a switcher. I thought it was worth it. But others may vote differently with their credit cards.
I don't know if it makes me stupid or not, but I bought my mini because it was an OS X machine at a reasonable price. I've used Windows, Linux and various flavors of UNIX at work and at home, but never a Mac. I've been interested in OS X ever since it first appeared, but the cost was always high enough to make me hesitate. The Mini's price was low enough for me to go ahead and make an impulse purchase. The verdict so far? I love this little machine! And OS X is as pleasant to use as I imagined it would be after reading ATPM and other Mac sites. Now I'm seriously thinking about one of those Powerbooks...
They're actually made by plasticsmith.com
pictures, features, looky looky
- Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero.
Definitely. Before I upgraded my Mini to 1GB, it was swapping constantly when I had both RSSOwl and OmniWeb running at the same time. Unless you're only running apps with a small memory footprint, a Mac with only 256M is almost a single-tasking machine.
This is an awfully nice website you've get here, guv'nor. It'd be a shame to see it Slashdotted.
I didn't care for Quicken 2005 for the Mac. It doesn't do direct downloads from Bank of America. I've been using Moneydance for a few days now though (http://www.moneydance.com/ [moneydance.com]) and it works great with BoA.
As has been mentioned ad infinitum, but many people are still aware of, This Is All Intuit's Fault. Never ending in their greed, they require the banks to pay twice to service all their customers: once to allow Windows Quicken users to access their data, and again to allow Mac Quicken users to access their data. When you use Intuit's software, it verifies the platform you're running against the ones the bank has paid for.
Using third-party solutions, though, most will ignore the platform in favor of (gasp!) usability and convenience.
But really, you've gained a lot by moving to MoneyDance. Quicken's a steaming pile of shit rife with bugs anyway (they've somehow managed to have a recurring bug where Quicken Mac can't even add properly, for one).
You're forgetting one thing as well:
If MacOSX/x86 runs Windows software flawlessly, where's the incentive to port your app natively to OSX? Write your programs for windows, and they'll run on both windows AND OSX/x86. That's not a good thing. OSX is all about consistency, user interface guidelines, and core functionnality that people take for granted (common keyboard shortcuts, Services, etc). The emulated apps offer none of that, but the developers will be able to claim that their apps run on OSX.
"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." -- CmdrTaco on day of iPod launch, 2001
The point is that this is just the beginning.
Why would someone buy this for a $500 computer? Because the Mac mini is not seen as just a computer, it's seen as a gadget, like the iPod.
It's like asking why people would dress up that piece of machinery outside that sits on four wheels and takes them to work. It's just a car! But people like things to look and feel good to use. The PC world still hasn't caught up to the idea of the computer as an appliance you'd actually want sitting in your living room, so we continue to get those big ugly black/beige towers that look the same as they did ten and fifteen years ago.
I completely agree with you. But jsut to be accurate it does not come with iWork (wish it did :( )
But man Mac mini rocks. I'm a true 'switcher'. As they say, once you go mac you can't go back...
"There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people."--Howard Zinn
Could anyone explain to me what the fuck is the purpose of the "skirt"? Raise your Mac Mini a centimeter higher?? For 20 bucks?! Christ.
take one of their fantastic 20 or 23 inch TFT screens, mod the back to include a nice slot. Take one MiniMac, strip the case away and mod the back panel to fit into slot in Monitor. And bingo, you have the next iMac. Want to upgrade the processor, remove I miniMac from slot, remove HDD & ram, insert into new chassis, plug in and you are off.... Not to Apple, plese donate any royalties due to me from this idea to UNICEF. In the words of the late great Arthur Askey, "I Thank You..."
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
i'm getting into the mac mini game myself: here's my product.
operators are standing by : f64
I'm about ready to switch back to apple from linux. I went to linux when my employment situation changed radically and I could no longer afford newer apple hardware and their switch to OSX made it impossible for me to use it on my machine. Last apple I bought was a 1400 PB, but osx won't run on it.. Now that they have apparently seen the light on offering at least something in the ballpark dollars-wise of an entry level machine, I'm giving it serious consideration, although I don't really want a mini, just a normal tower or desktop that is apple branded and certified and runs osx adequately, and inside that 500 dollar new price range. No longer will a thousand dollars or more be an acceptable price for any sort of entry level desktop, so 500 is a lot closer to "the other guys" now. And I don't want used either, not for that kinda loot, I want new with a full warranty.
I like the entire FOSS idea and philosophy, but I also as joe consumer like the idea of my hardware and software actually working without jumping through so many hoops. I have yet to run across a distro that is as close to 100% as I used to get running macs. I know for a lot of folks it works OK, but the best I can hit with my non leet skills is 90% or so, and it's been like that from day one for me with linux. It's like it "almost" works all the way. I use it all the time now, but I also realise it's a compromise on my part, I detest windows and always have, apples got to be too expensive, linux hit a middle ground that worked well enough for most purposes and would run on cheaper hardware. That's changed now completely with apples moves, and it's about time.
If you aren't a programmer or a command line guy of near guru status, linux is just still too hard to deal with. Maybe if some of the really big vendors start offering it right on the shelves in all the retail outlets with a distro they actually stand behind, then maybe, but until then it's still not quite ready for a lot of purposes. It is tantalizingly close, but every release it remains 'tantalizingly close", just more shiny buttons and whatnot, and after a couple/few years, well, it's gotten old.
That is just one guys opinion, not meant to be an indictment of every users experience or opinions or anything or even linux, other than the obvious problems that still exist with it for a lot of people. I have by no means tried every distro out there, and that's a significant part of the problem, even doing that has gotten old. I no longer believe "switching to xyz distro" will work, not with the various hardware it will be attemtpted to run on, there's too much of a variable there. I think long run the linux companies who are providing a distro pre installed and configed on hardware they also sell so that all of everything works right out of the box will take linux mindshare and mass market share. And that unfortunately will mean dell or whomever of the very large size will actually have to do that.
...is accessories that actually add to the functionality of the Mac Mini. How about a firewire hard drive combined with a USB/FW hub that's the same footprint as the Mini and sits underneath it? It could even have some of the ports in the front of the unit. And it would be a 3.5' drive, so it's cheaper and faster than the Mini's internal one. Make it so there's some kind of spring-loaded connector on the top and bottom, so once you hooked up the first unit, all the other ones would automatically be hooked up when stacked. Then you could get crazy and have special modules like an audio unit (better d/a, a/d converter, optical connectors), video (the functionality of an ElGato PVR), some kind of hub for clustering multiple Minis, etc, etc. THAT would impress me, not some pieces of bent plastic.
This way, one could stack the MacMini on top of the drive(s), or vice versa, in a neat little pile.
The mac mini isn't big enough to hold my MP3 collection (right now, teetering around 105 gigs) and certianly won't be big enough to deal with the video I want to run through it. So I need 7200rpm ATA drives in a MacMini box.
Personally, I would cheerfully build my own using some hideous noisy case - I'm not that picky. But Mrs Spoilsport is VERY picky about that kind of thing - heck: she thinks having visible stereo wires to te speakers is like having one's underwear showing or having toilet paper stuck to one's shoe.
She tried to get me to go to wireless speakers, and I said "You Buy 'em". We still don't have wireless speakers, thank Bog.
But, i we could get a MacMini with matching drive(s), it'll make the transition to the full on digital system a simpler effort, as it would please the aesthetes in the home (And to think - I'm the one who makes a living as an artist!)
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
The worst possible outcome of all is an OS like OS X. You take a completely Free and Open OS and then weld a Proprietary hood on it. How is this good for Free software in the long run? It isn't. Imagine if Longorn were to run on GNU/Linux yet have a completely Proprietary graphics and windowing system with proprietary drivers for all. How would that be any different than OSX? Now 90% of the World's OS's run Proprietary Linux. How is this a victory for OSS?
Has the spirit of OSS been tainted by Apple? I think it has. I'm not saying Apple should give what they do away for Free. But acting like just because Apple is based on Darwin that automatically qualifies it as a "good thing" for OSS is Extremely shortsighted. I guess some people are just happy to see any OSS at all being used. I don't object to Apple using what developers put out there to be used in any way they see fit. I object to people pointing to OS X as a model of OSS success when it isn't.
Maybe that's really the future for OSS that advocates are going to see. Maybe all of OSS will be co-opted by companies like Apple and eventually a company like Microsoft. Maybe OSS never had a future to stand completely on its own in the first place. Then again maybe we can point this out to everyone before its too late and future generations think OSS means half OSS/half proprietary in most situations.
I think your wrong when you say that it doesn't hurt the OSS community. It hurts OSS exactly where it's most vulnerable. "Here have some quasi-Free software, trust me is MUCH less painful to use. Stop worrying about what is and isn't True OSS. Relax..." Sorry, don't want to be lulled into that way of thinking. Everytime I read about some OSS programmer(and there are a shitload of them) buying/bragging about a MAC they just bought it bothers me. Not because I believe you should never run a proprietary OS, I run XP on my laptop. But because they trick themselves into thinking OS X is somehow the "Best of both Worlds". I just don't buy into Apple's version of what the Free software world should look like no matter how easy Apple makes it seem. I believe in the GPL and I believe there are consequences to taking Non-Free shorcuts.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
Peace
Give the razor away, rake it in selling blades.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
Sooo many PC users are giving up their LGA775 P4s and AMD64 systems for this baby. All that matters is style and size. Steve Jobs, you're a nut!
I'm not sure if i should waste my time replying to a troll, but i will anyway. You really need to know what you're talking about before making idiotic statements. Have you even bothered trying to configure a "better" system from dell or wal-mart at that price level? Try it. You'll fail. And that is not even including the value of the software bundled with the Mac Mini. Add the cost of software on par with the apple software that ships with the Mac Mini and you get a price point quite a bit higher than that of the Mac Mini. Here is an article written just for idiots - i mean people - like you. And as for the new napster, how much do you really now about it other than the fact that you pay $14.95 a month for it and you can download all the songs you want? Do you realize that you have to use a new player that is designed to work with it? Do you realize that as soon as you forget to make a monthly payment you will lose all of your thousands of songs you've downloaded? Do you realize that this is going to spectacularly fail for napster? I prefer to pay the $.99 a song and KEEP my music forever thanks.
It seems that all these accessories do is make the mac mini BIGGER. In particular, looks-wise the steel "grandstand" pretty much turns your mac mini into an old Compaq desktop. If you wanted a larger mac, you have options - the point of the mini is that it is small.
http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/editors/2005/01/mi niapplesandoranges/index.php --Here is the link to the article which was SUPPOSED to be above and which i forgot to paste in before.
Awww isnt it cute/pretty.... but it still cant play the games i want to play. Mini skirt? someone should be PUNished.
Is there Monitors... Sure I know that the whole point of the Mini is to connect to your existing monitor. But right now, I'm in the market to buy an entire set-up (as my current 20" CRT is dying). I don't really want to do the iMac, as it prohibits significant future updates... and their cheapest LCD costs 900 bucks!
So do I want a Mac? Yes.
I've been Wintel for the past 20 years, but forced my department to get me a dual 2-gig G5... I've been using it for the past year, and love it.
Will I buy the Mac? Still Unsure. I know I can get whatever LCD I want, but part of the whole Mac experience is to have a computer that doesn't look like ass...
So Steve, why the crap don't you sell a reasonably priced 17" LCD?
on the site it says: Plug in, turn on and say hello to Mac OS X, the world's most advanced operating system. Someone wanna tell me how taking bsd, adding a new gui and ports of mac apps (and mac app vulns) makes it the worlds most advanced operating system?
For proof read here (macworld.com)
Wow, talk about an unbiased source!
Face facts: by the time you upgrade the memory (at Apple prices), the hard drive (at Apple prices) just to get the thing working the way it's supposed to, then add on the monitor (yeah, you can use the shitty old monitor you've got in the basement - the point of that is...?) and repurchase all your software, your well over the price that upgrading that $500 Dell with a "decent " video card is gonna cost you.
Is there anything more delusional than a Macinista?
1) Everyone (yes, EVERYONE) is stupid. We're all just stupid at different times and about different things. Computer geeks rarely make good interior-decorators. Engineers rarely have a talent for creative-writing.
2) People hate to be made to feel stupid. Apple makes the iPod easy to master in part by having a small, simple, focused feature-set: giving the user less to figure out makes them less likely to feel stupid while using the product (a feeling which is almost certain to be associated with the product in the user's mind.)
I blame this phemomenon for the widespread vilification of the Technical Support industry (setting aside overseas outsourcing for the moment.) The majority of the work of a support technician is not to perform tasks themself, but instead to walk the user through tasks which are quite easy to perform, but often very difficult to understand (and oftentimes with the goal of repairing something that the user themselves broke through the result of their ignorance.) Calling Tech-support makes people feel stupid, so they hate it.
The iPod DOESN'T make people feel stupid, so they love it.
It's as simple as that.
What is the difference between a small revolutionary change and a large evolutionary change?
My 3 year old pc will outperform this piece of crap. Why buy something that's obsolete the day you open the box?
Does this solution give you 5.1 surround sound information? Their website says it includes that information with a G5 but nothing about the mini or other G4. If you had the EyeTV 500 and an M-Audio USB surround sound card is there any reason you couldnt get surround sound through a mini?
And it runs OSX?
You're comparing apples to oranges.
In the course of every project, it will become necessary to shoot the scientists and begin production.
It's hard to make an ugly flatscreen display. Even the ones Dell sells aren't bad looking.
I'm typing this on a G5 connected to two ViewSonic VX series displays (a 19" and a 15") and a Microsoft Wireless Optical Desktop, and everything matches very nicely, though I wouldn't be crying if it didn't.
If all that's keeping you from buying a mini is your inability to find a cheap flatscreen that is complementary in appearance to it, you must either be really, really gay, or a woman.
If you're interested in running Linux on it, its pretty decent. I'm typing this on a Mac Mini with a GB of RAM now, and both OSX and Fedora Core 3 are snappy as hell. I can open as many apps I want in either without slowing down, or the unit becoming hot to the touch. The only exception to that is running Windows XP in QEmu on OSX. Even then, OSX remains responsive, its just that QEmu is too slow.
The Apple bluetooth keyboard is the best keyboard I've ever used - it looks great, but it feels like one of those old honeywell keyboards. The bluetooth mouse is fine too. OSX doesn't
FC3 works fine with the bluetooth devices, video card, dual booting, DVD player, and putting icons on my desktop for the iPod when I plug it in.
But, they *can't* do that without wrecking API compatibility for every other app in existence, unless they confine themselves to the hidden APIs that Office undoubtedly uses. But even that seems like a risky move: what if it breaks any professional-grade app's functionality? Remember how a lack of Adobe products seriously hampered OS X's adoption by some of Apple's core consumers. There are plenty of multimedia, 3d modeling, science, and such-like apps for Windows that, if hosed, might be enough to cause a platform migration. At the very least it would drastically slow sales.
Nuff said.
Remember to factor in software
That's one thing mac users never seem to do. Sure comparing a new mac with a new PC is one thing, but we're talking about people *switching* from PC to mac. They have thousands of dollars in software already for the PC.
Legacy apps are the thing that has kept the x86 around.. and will continue to do so.
My mom needs Peachtree.. she will never switch to a mac as long as peachtree and quickbooks aren't available.
My wife has tons of software that she uses that is windows-only, yes there is some stuff available for OSX (like Avery Label Maker) but then I'd have to not only buy the machine, but re-purchase all that software as well.
I swear, mac users seem to think the only things anyone uses their computers for is photo editing and web browsing.
May you fucking well die in agony, you inhuman piece of shit. Your family and your kids too.
...why the fuck is apple even offering a 256mb configuration? macos is absolutely painful with that.
if you want a system that will make someone run away screaming from apple, 256mb will certainly do it.
or are they trying to repeat their 128k mac debacle?
You are not cackling with glee? What kind of Mac fanatic are you?
:-)
You are giving the rest of us a good name. Cut it out!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
...when people are selling accories that do nothing but increase the height of the product by 3/4 of an inch!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
forever? that shows touching faith in apple, and in the IT industry as a whole..
It's just plain impossible to have an intelligent discussion about the pros and cons of Mac vs. Windows now.
Ranting done: So here to better analyze the statements that were made:
A.) It may be cheap and sexy, but it's hard to find apps for.
There are a lot of good applications for the Mac, but depending on what you may want to do it may or may not be sufficient. Microsoft Office and the Adobe line of products are well supported on Mac. If you have specific application needs due to your line of work, you should check this out before switching. Many Windows applications can be run at acceptable speed via Virtual PC.
If you switch you may need to reinvest in application purchases. If you own Windows licenses for a lot of software it can be cost prohibitive to make the switch. That being said, the Mac Mini does come with iLife, Appleworks and Quicken which will get you going.
B.) No Games. Sorry.
The situation is much better than it was before. A number of excellent games are available for the Mac including Rise of Nations, Call of Duty, Unreal Tournament, Battlefield 1942, Knights of the Old Republic, World of Warcraft etc.
That being said, you will usually wait a lot longer to play these games. The big exception is Blizzard which has supported simulatneous release on the Mac for quite some time.
If you don't mind the wait it's not a big deal but for some games this is problematic. It took almost two years for Battlefield 1942 to be released on the Mac. The game when it was first released was groundbreaking - being the first to offer air, sea and ground vehicles as well as the conquest mode. Mac users may be less impressed. They have probably seen these features first in Unreal 2004. Additionally, jumping into BF 1942 as a newbie and playing with people with 2 years of experience can't be much fun.
Even with all these great games available for the Mac - if you are a hardcore gamer you probably won't be happy. If I look at what I am currently playing: City of Heroes, Rome Total War, Vampire Bloodlines, Half Life 2, Battle for Middle Earth - nope none are out on the Mac.
You are also going to be limited by the onboard video in the Mac Mini. Yeah, sure the Radeon 9200 is ok for casual gaming. But if you want silky smooth antialiased gaming at 1600x1200 - that's not going to cut it. You should be looking at a PowerMac in that case. And that's a lot more cash - a PowerMac system comparable to my current gaming desktop (single 1.8Ghz G5, 1GB DDR 400, 160GB SATA drive, GeForce 6800GT vs. sames specs PC with a 3.2Ghz Pentium 4) runs about $700 more than the PC ($2200 vs. $1500).
C.) Regardless of the low price, Apple has a huge hurdle to overcome with the general masses that they won't be missing out if they get it.
Ok I'm not going to touch this one. I have no idea what he's trying to say.
Disclaimer: I work with Macs (OS9 and OSX), Windows, Linux and FreeBSD. They ALL piss me off sometimes.
Sometimes my arms bend back.
really hate the feel of the Apple keyboards. My $3.99 keyboard I got at Fry's feels much better than it, and I don't care that it's less stylish.
I wondered if that would work. post a HOWTO? or is there really no step two (unlike MythTV which is a lot of effort)?
sulli
RTFJ.
You can hide your weed under it.
It's made of clear acrylic, so I wouldn't recommend it... unless you're one of those people who believe the police wouldn't be able to see it unless they open their minds.
My other first post is car post.
A Mac Mini would fit perfectly on top of my PC tower. If I had a KVM that would fit underneath with short USB and DVI cables to the Mac Mini and longer cables to my PC and monitor/keyboard/mouse, I'd be set. The ordinary DVI KVM's are rather clunky. A sleekly designed one made spedifically with the Mac Mini in mind would be a good deal for switchers (or people with multiple Mini's, maybe).
My other first post is car post.
and I will find you pc enthusiast that
doesn't use an intel processor.
The problem with mac, and has always been a problem, it doesn't license its hardware.. Note, PC's architecture wasn't patented by IBM because they
didn't think it would be successful, so they didn;t bother.. Recently IBM's PC division was sold off to a chinese PC vendor.. The only way Mac would win the world over is to lose all their patents..
Just say no to license servers!!
I swear, mac users seem to think the only things anyone uses their computers for is photo editing and web browsing.
Gee...that's because the vast majority of computer users DO only use their computers for the basics such as email, web surfing and word processing. If you are doing something specialized, then, as has been mentioned, YOU ARE NOT THE TARGET AUDIENCE!
On another topic, I always thought that a modular case was a neat idea. Start with a basic box. You need another drive bay, you clip a module on.
Apple toyed with this idea back in the 80s but never made it past the design/prototype stage (along with many others since. Look up Paul Kunkel's book AppleDesign for many more.)
Modules connected to an L-shaped base/rail which handled communications between the pieces. Need more modules? clip on more, same goes for the rails. Student who just needs to get onto the school network would just have a CPU box. Home Computer? Clip on a floppy. Workstation? HD unit (this design was in the late 80s I think, used IIGS graphics for the simulated display.) Modem? Extra Floppy? etc etc.
If I searched harder -- and weren't on dialup -- I'm sure I could dig up some images on the web. Else look up Kunkel's book.
How exactly do the recording features & FM radio on my iRiver make it less of an MP3 player? You say if you wanted a radio you would buy a radio, what if you want a radio & an MP3 player would you carry 2 devices? Adding complementary features adds to the value of a product - throwing features in for their own sake doesn't.
I think that people buy iPods mainly because they aren't aware of the competition and they think they are cool because Apples multi-million dollar advertising campagn has been very effective. Does believing advertising mean people are stupid? Not sure but certainly shows a lack of independent thought.
"I deny nothing, but doubt everything." Lord Byron
It's easy for MS to post Billions in profits. Heck, they haven't had R&D costs in years, just change the menu colors, increment the year number, and start burnin Offic & Windows CDs.
I only came here to do two things; kick some ass, and drink some beer...looks like we're almost out of beer.
And it runs OSX?
You're comparing apples to oranges.
No, the original poster was comparing apples to oranges. He started comparing the hardware aspects of the Mini vs. PC's, and I challenged him on his comments about the hardware.
He said:
find a PC for the same price with comparable features. Most people point to Dell/HP/etc boxes. They always end up having crappy integrated graphics cards, and things like that.
I then directly addressed his point about the hardware features such as integrated graphics.
Then he threw in the comment about OSX which isn't really an argument at all, since you cannot natively run OSX on the PC, so of course it's not going to come with it. You can't natively run WinXP on a Mac, either, but that doesn't mean that I can use that as proof that PC's are better.
If you want to compare them both, at least stick to the things which can be compared (you can objectively benchmark a processor, memory, or a video card, but your favorite OS is purely subjective)
I blame this phemomenon for the widespread vilification of the Technical Support industry (setting aside overseas outsourcing for the moment.) The majority of the work of a support technician is not to perform tasks themself, but instead to walk the user through tasks which are quite easy to perform, but often very difficult to understand (and oftentimes with the goal of repairing something that the user themselves broke through the result of their ignorance.) Calling Tech-support makes people feel stupid, so they hate it.
I've noticed exactly the opposite. Pretty much every time I've called tech support, I know more about the problem and possible solutions than the tech support person. For example, the cable company screwed up a router configuration. The problem was obvious to anyone who can use google. Explaining the problem to them, on the other hand was a 5 hour exercise in frustration. Eventually I got a tech on the line who had been instructed by his boss to just do what I told him. I blindly told him character by character what to type into the command line, without ever have seen or used one of the routers in question, and suddenly the problem went away.
My point is, tech support is usually filled with clueless morons who know how to read a script. These are people who insist you reboot your machine every time you change a network setting. "Yeah umm Windows is booting, sure. All done." You literally have to lie to them to get anything done. I think the vilification of the industry is the result of minimum wage customer service employees who don't really know anything, but like to think that they do. They can't fix any real problem, but are condescending to everyone anyway. Thus they annoy clueless people by treating them like idiots, while usually being unable to fix a problem. They annoy advanced users by treating them like idiots, while usually being unable to fix a problem.
Set up the mouse driver to make all the buttons trigger a "regular" (left) click. Problem solved.
Look the tower is the cube 2, just shorter.
Doh, you're right. Ok, $578 for all that. :)
Warning: Apple/Nintendo fangirl. Likes her electronics cute & cuddly. May be rabid.
There's no such feature built in to the Apple Mac OS X mouse driver. I suppose you could install the Microsoft drivers -- they probably have the feature -- but do you really want to let Microsoft code sit at such a low level on the Macintosh?
I installed them, and I've never had a problem. Ironically, I had the entire computer freeze shortly before I installed MS's mouse driver (requiring a power cycle), but haven't had any problems since.
The MS paranoia is blinding on Slashdot!
Elementary, my dear Watson. Because you can't brandish your Mac mini in public.
The iPod's a social signifier. Computers that sit at home aren't. The idea of a "hip computer" is one with very limited appeal--a claim that's easy to quantify by pointing at Apple's market share.
The hip market, in other words, is already tapped out. Apple knows this, and that's why it's pitching affordability as a major appeal of the mini. Affordability is a reason the mini surfaced at Target.com, and why, in another area, with the Shuffle, Apple has set its sights on Walmart America.
Apple's going for broad, sweaty, big and beefy market share--with the Walmart move, it's cozying up to Red staters for a change. iPod's given it a taste, and it's tired of settling for the dinky demographic of hip.
Wise move? For now, definitely. And yet...people who flatter themselves with the lable of hip are notorious for being as conscious of inclusivity as exclusivity: forever monitoring their in-group status, they don't exactly like seeing their symbols being crowded by the hoi polloi. Can the aura of Apple's cool survive pro-Bush housewives in stretch latex fondling iPods at Walmart? Stay tuned.
...would be a two-port ethernet switch.
My other first post is car post.
- eMac, $749
- $99 iPod Shuffle for your thumbdrive
- Epson Stylus C86 Ink Jet Printer, $99
For a total of $947.95, for $21 a month on an Apple Credit Account. The price for the Mini would be....Actually, I guess you can get the Mini for your $20 a month, but you have to give up the LCD panel. Apple sells a 17" NEC CRT for $159. So, for the Mini:
- The aforementioned monitor for $159.
- Same $99 iPod shuffle
- Same $99 Epson printer
- USB keyboard and mouse: $52.
- Mac Mini, $479.
The total is $888.95. So, for just about $60 less, you get your Mini for 20 bucks a month. Oh, and there seems to be a mail in rebate for the printer for $100, but that's not going to change the payment options. I would provide links, but the links are specific to each session, so it would be pointless to repost them.ipod 40gb- $400
.005% of the population will actually find usefull.
creative zen 40gb - $250
The price you are quoting is for the Zen 20 gig, not the 40 gig. The Zen 40 is actually $329.99. And while yes its still costs less than Apple's 40 and it supposedly gets better battery life, it's also an ounce and half heavier and is over 4 cubic inches larger than the iPod.
the creative even has more features!
No, it does not. I has exactly *one* more feature than the iPod: an FM tuner. You should go work for Microsoft because they're all about "Features". I say "Features" with great distain, because in the context of Microsoft and wannabe makers of the iPod killer, they think they have a better product if they have more "Features" on a billeted list. It doesn't matter that if you shoehorn on these "Features", your product gets larger, heaver, and has more stuff to break down, and it especially doesn't matter if a single soul on the planet actually needs said "Feature" - you have a longer list, so you win. Voice recording is a prefect example of a needless addition that
Definitely. Before I upgraded my Mini to 1GB, it was swapping constantly when I had both RSSOwl and OmniWeb running at the same time. Unless you're only running apps with a small memory footprint, a Mac with only 256M is almost a single-tasking machine.
It's not too bad as long as you are just running iLife apps, and not to many of them at a time simultaneously. i.e. you can run iMovie just fine, or Safari and iTunes just fine, you just don't want to do all three. But try and fire up Photoshop or Microsoft Word, and you're in for some swappin. I know, I just set my parents up with a 12" iBook, and so far haven't had the time/money to get more memory for it.
Something that was rectangular and fit nicely underneath the Mini would be better, I think. That Belkin one would use full-length cables (probably 3-5 feet) and would be a pain for cable management. It and the bundle of cables would end up on the floor entangled with all the other cables. That's as long as you can switch computers with a hotkey.
My other first post is car post.