Accessories for Mac mini

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?"

Comments

Good idea

[Anonymous Coward]

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

Re:Good idea

[Whafro]

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

[CptChipJew]

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.

Re:Good idea

[Whafro]

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.

Re:Good idea

[lanc]

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.

Re:Good idea

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

Wasn't

[Prince Vegeta SSJ4]

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.

Now the skirt, and tower look pretty cool as is.

Computers, or fashion items?

[EvilCabbage]

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?

[jxyama]

>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?

[Mike McTernan]

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...

Re:iPod

[Ohreally_factor]

Exactly! Isn't the Mac Mini an accessory for the iPod?

Don't count your chickens...

[Faust7]

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:Stealing Windows customers?

[Whafro]

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.

I honestly think...

[Faust7]

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...

[Jeff DeMaagd]

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.

Fashion Accessories

[Orinthe]

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?

Re:Are people that stupid?

[Chess_the_cat]

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.

Re:Are people that stupid?

[vena]

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.

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[Mononoke]

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.

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[Whafro]

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.

Copycat?

[rjasmin]

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..

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[daviddennis]

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?

[b1t r0t]

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).

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[Ohreally_factor]

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.

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[ThousandStars]

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?

[groomed]

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:Are people that stupid?

[karstux]

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.

Most expensive

[Jozer99]

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.

If Apple's marketing team has any brains...

[NewOrleansNed]

... 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:Are people that stupid?

[porcupine8]

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?

Look, I am a mac fanatic...

[barfy]

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:A few, for a while.

[phillymjs]

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

Yawn...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet another no substance Apple© Slashvertisement(TM).

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[Hognoxious]

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.

Developers Developers Developers Developers

[totoanihilation]

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.

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[Leo McGarry]

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:Macs suck

[imdylbert]

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.

Wait a second....

[SCVirus]

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:Strongly Disagree

[ciroknight]

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.

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[Ohreally_factor]

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.