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

iPod

[RicJohnson]

Which has more hard drive space - the iMini or IPod? They have almost the same price point

Re:iPod

[Ohreally_factor]

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

Re:iPod

[jarich]

Whatcha want to do is setup a USB based RAID solution, with the iPods being used as drives.

;)

Re:iPod

[rograndom]

Some guy has done this already here's his site (it seems to be down at the moment?). But not to make this post completely worthless, here's a guy who made a raid out of floppy drives.

Re:iPod

[Ohreally_factor]

Mod me down, you passive agressive self loathing bitches, but don't ever cross my path.

If you didn't post as an Anonymous Coward so we could know who you are, you bile filled freak, I'd gladly cross the street when I saw you coming.

Re:iPod

[sharkman67]

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!

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.

Re:Wasn't

[teh_winch]

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.

Stealing Windows customers?

[agraupe]

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?

[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.

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[Haydn Fenton]

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?

[doon]

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.

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.

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[evand]

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.

From Microsoft's Longhorn Developer FAQ:

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?

[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:Stealing Windows customers?

[dr.badass]

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.

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.

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[TheMediaWrangler]

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.

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[HiThere]

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.

Re:Stealing Windows customers?

[Ohreally_factor]

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. =)

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:Stealing Windows customers?

[arminw]

...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.

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.

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?

[remahl]

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?

[drinkypoo]

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 :)

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: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.

Pretty weak accessories

[agent dero]

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 ;).

Re:Pretty weak accessories

[nomadicGeek]

what is the point of the 'Mac Mini skirt?'

You can hide your weed under it.

That "Grandstand" looks like a Mini oven

[Dammital]

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.

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?

Market share

[MattGWU]

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!

Top-Notch Product

[DingerX]

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.

win2*nix

[lanc]

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.

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.

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:I honestly think...

[FLAGGR]

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: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.

I picked up a Mac Mini Last Weekend but....

[ttlgDaveh]

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: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.

My mini mac

[jbb999]

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.

Better link.

[Anonymous Coward]

BYODKM is slow ... try...

http://www.plasticsmith.com/

Mirrordot link to story...

[kikensei]

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:I honestly think...

[FLAGGR]

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 :)

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:Are people that stupid?

[Ginnungagap42]

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.

Re:Good idea

[Ohreally_factor]

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.

Overpriced Keyboard

[midifarm]

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.

Peace

Re:Overpriced Keyboard

[jxyama]

it's got an USB hub built in too. a nice touch, esp. with the proliferation of keychain memories.

Re:Overpriced Keyboard

[Swedentom]

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. :-)

Re:Overpriced Keyboard

[Swedentom]

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.

Re:Good idea

[AmicoToni]

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.

Here is a diagram, a picture, and the online ordering page.
Sometimes it can be ordered for less from different online stores.

Re:I honestly think...

[Anonymous Coward]

> 3000$ minimum ...

RTFA

It's $499 minimum.

Re:Good for CRT Monitors too?

[midifarm]

If space is of concern, I've read that you can successfully put the MiniMac on it's side without drive malfunctions.

Peace

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: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.

Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac

[remahl]

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:Good idea

[theblueprint]

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.

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.

EyeTV 500

[nsayer]

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).

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

Re:Are people that stupid?

[Anonymous Coward]

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.

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:Can we run C++ on a Mac

[Leo McGarry]

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:Potentiality

[CrackedButter]

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.

i made one myself!

[f64]

i'm getting into the mac mini game myself: here's my product.

operators are standing by : f64

What the macmini needs is an external HD

[Ralph Spoilsport]

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

Re:What the macmini needs is an external HD

[Tumbleweed]

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).

Strongly Disagree

[bogie]

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.

Re:Strongly Disagree

[Kplusplus]

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.

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:Good idea

[Durandal64]

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.)

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?

How about a DVI/USB KVM?

[Cryptnotic]

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).

Re:Can we run C++ on a Mac

[druske]

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.

I got close

[Scudsucker]

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.