Apple Store Reopens With Many New Products

An anonymous reader writes "After being down for a couple of hours, the Apple store reopened this morning. All of the speculation has turned out to be a reality with Apple dishing out many new products and among them are; iMac 20", three iMac 24" models, two Mac Mini models, and two Mac Pro models — with one including an ATI Radeon HD 4570 graphics card. Also as rumored, there was the new Airport Extreme, and Time Capsule in 1TB. The Mac Pro is the granddaddy of them all. The lower-end Quad Core system includes a 2.66Ghz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor, 3GB of memory, 640GB hard drive, 18x double-layer Superdrive, and a NVIDIA Geforce GT 120 with 512MB of memory priced at $2,499. Finally, we have the 8-core system which includes two 2.26Ghz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processors, 6GB of memory, 640GB hard drive, the 18x double-layer Superdrive, and of course the NVIDIA Geforce GT 120 with 512MB of memory priced at $3,299."

Comments

Eh

[dreamchaser]

Wake me up when they make a nice, expandable, mid ranged desktop class Mac. I still think that's the big gap in their lineup.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Expandable? sorry, that's too complicated.

Re:Eh

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Expansion isn't as important these days. Most people will only want to upgrade the HDD and perhaps the RAM, both of which the iMac will do. You can also add a 2nd monitor to it, USB will do the rest. People who make their own computers or have some niche requirements may not like the all-in-one designs, but that's not the majority, and hardly a glaring gap in their line-up.

Re:Eh

[drsmithy]

Wake me up when they make a nice, expandable, mid ranged desktop class Mac.

Amazingly, that now pretty much describes the bottom end Mac Pro...

...Except for the price tag.

Re:Eh

[porcupine8]

People have been saying this for years, and yet it doesn't seem to have hurt Apple's sales in all that time. Guess you'll probably be sleeping for a while, because you're just not the market segment they're going after. I'll nap with you while I wait for my tablet mac... though I might wake up just long enough to snag a new mini one of these days...

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Expansion isn't as important these days. Most people will only want to upgrade the HDD and perhaps the RAM, both of which the iMac will do. You can also add a 2nd monitor to it, USB will do the rest. People who make their own computers or have some niche requirements may not like the all-in-one designs, but that's not the majority, and hardly a glaring gap in their line-up.

I want to have a machine with PCI slots so I can put in an eSata or SCSI card and don't want to drop $2500 minimum for one. I work at a company that unfortunately has to have Macs around for testing certain hardware and it ticks me off that I have to budget four times as much $$$ for a Mac to get the ability to put in a SCSI card.

Re:Eh

[binary paladin]

Insightful? *rolls eyes*

While I agree that it's a big gap (I've always hated iMacs, mainly because my monitors tend to have a much longer lifespan than the rest of the computer), who is an expandable mid-ranged desktop targeted at?

Geeks and gamers.

Who is Apple not targeting?

See above.

They have home user machines and workstations. All of these machines are capable of running World of Warcraft which is the only game anyone plays on the Mac anyway.

Re:Eh

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

I don't think people who want to install an eSATA or SCSI card in a mid-ranged Apple computer are in the majority. I'm sure it sucks for those that need to, but that wasn't my point.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

almost all computer upgrades, and software purchases, are made at the time of purchase- excepting Mac users. Can't find the figures right now, but most people never buy anything for their computer after they get it home until they replace that computer...

Re:Eh

[makomk]

Amazingly, that now pretty much describes the bottom end Mac Pro...

...Except for the price tag.

Except for the price tag and the use of overpriced server-class components, yes. The really screwy thing, of course, is that the 24" iMacs all have 4GB of RAM, whereas the hideously expensive quad-core Mac Pro has only 3GB (and you can bet Apple will charge through the nose for more).

Re:Eh

[Ephemeriis]

Wake me up when they make a nice, expandable, mid ranged desktop class Mac. I still think that's the big gap in their lineup.

I agree that such a machine would be great... And it's really what I would personally be interested in... But I can't fault them for not offering such a beast.

People don't upgrade/expand their computers anymore. Even with Windows workstations... Folks buy some kind of pre-configured off-the-shelf box from HP, Dell, or whoever. They use it for a year or two, fill it full of crapware. When it gets slow they throw it out and buy a new pre-configured off-the-shelf box.

Re:Eh

[tyrione]

Insightful? *rolls eyes*

While I agree that it's a big gap (I've always hated iMacs, mainly because my monitors tend to have a much longer lifespan than the rest of the computer), who is an expandable mid-ranged desktop targeted at?

Geeks and gamers.

Who is Apple not targeting?

See above.

They have home user machines and workstations. All of these machines are capable of running World of Warcraft which is the only game anyone plays on the Mac anyway.

Pardon me but making only the high end iMac and Mac Pro capable of GPU options is bulls***; and I'm a former employee of both NeXT and Apple. I sure as frack won't wait for Apple to actually leverage what they developed [OpenCL] if this is the crap they offer for 2009. The Mac Pro is great. Too bad they hose you with only 1 PCI-Express 2.0 x16 slot. I'd love to see at least 2 if I'm to know I've got a system that will do some heavy lifting.

I don't give a rusty f*** to buy a Tesla system for this, nor do I see any information from Apple that they will support such an option because they don't provide a second f'n PCI Express 2.0 x16 slot--a requirement.

I sure as hell won't buy a secondary Mac Pro so I can have 2 GPUs as nodes to build upon. Some inside Apple are that arrogantly myopic to think many would do so.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

server-class components,

Besides possibly using ECC memory is there any other example of that?

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not that it "hurts" their sales, genius, it's that there are ADDITIONAL sales that they could garner by targeting that market.

Re:Eh

[cayenne8]

"Except for the price tag and the use of overpriced server-class components, yes. The really screwy thing, of course, is that the 24" iMacs all have 4GB of RAM, whereas the hideously expensive quad-core Mac Pro has only 3GB (and you can bet Apple will charge through the nose for more)."

That's why with Macs...you buy the min. configuration, especially with respect to the RAM and HDs....and just add them in yourself when it arrives at your home in the box.

I'm looking to maybe get a Mac pro...I want to load it up, but, I will do it as I described above. The day I order the MacPro..I will order RAM and HD's from a 3rd party store....hopefully they'll all arrive about the same day.

Re:Eh

[nine-times]

I agree that expansion isn't a huge deal for most, but some people will sometimes want to upgrade RAM, hard drives, video cards, and maybe even throw in an additional card of some kind (TV tuner?). But really, the main issue is that Apple doesn't really have a normal middle-of-the-road computer. Mac minis are nice, but offering them as your desktop model would be a little like offering the Macbook Air as your only laptop model. Not to criticize the Air, but it's a little light on power/features. Mac Pros aren't even in the class of your typical consumer/office desktop machine. They're professional workstations. So that leaves you with iMacs, but all-in-one models aren't really appropriate for every situation.

I think that a mid-range tower would probably sell well, but they're probably worried that it will cannibalize their existing lineup.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad for your rant that the Mac Pro does come with two 16x slots-- one occupied from the factory, and one open.

And too bad that it's actually been that way for over a year.

Oh well, never let the facts blah blah blah.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

wake me up when they actually ship the new 17" mac book pro.

Re:Eh

[stewbacca]

People have been saying this for years, and yet it doesn't seem to have hurt Apple's sales in all that time.

How do you know if it never happened? What would Apple sales look like if they offered a $600 tower? I bet it would give them a bigger market share, even if it doesn't net them as much cash in sales profit. But it's Apple's call, not mine.

Re:Eh

[nabsltd]

I don't think people who want to install an eSATA or SCSI card in a mid-ranged Apple computer are in the majority.

SCSI, maybe, but eSATA isn't very exotic with cards less than $40.

If you want real performance with an external drive, you're going to want eSATA, and more external drive cases support it than support FireWire 800.

Re:Eh

[bnenning]

People have been saying this for years, and yet it doesn't seem to have hurt Apple's sales in all that time.

It very likely has. Apple's laptops are much more traditional than their desktops, and sell much better.

Re:Eh

[bnenning]

While I agree that it's a big gap (I've always hated iMacs, mainly because my monitors tend to have a much longer lifespan than the rest of the computer), who is an expandable mid-ranged desktop targeted at?

Geeks and gamers.

And anyone who cares about money. The problem with the iMac isn't that a built-in display inherently sucks, it's that it's *far* more expensive than a tower+display.

Re:Eh

[BlueStraggler]

Apple's laptops are much more traditional than their desktops, and sell much better.

They only appear to be traditional, because every laptop maker on earth abandoned the traditional designs and copied Apple's radical Powerbook design in the early 90s.

Re:Eh

[binary paladin]

*sigh*

Look, I don't like iMacs because of the built in display. That might not be YOUR problem with them (the cost doesn't bug me) but it's my primary beef.

People like iMacs. Otherwise, Apple wouldn't be selling them. I understand why the crowd here doesn't like them and even doesn't get them. Again, they're not selling to you. They're selling to someone who just plugs it in and turns it on like any appliance. It's easier to set up than a DVD player.

Also, people here seem to measure computer purely in terms of tech specs. There is something to be said for the simplicity of the iMac. Although its strengths are weaknesses to someone like me.

The critics here can complain and complain that THEIR needs aren't being met by Apple, but again... Apple doesn't care. The iMac is an exceptionally popular machine. I wouldn't use it, but I'd certainly consider putting my mom on one (she's on a Mini now). It's stylish, clean, etc. Those things MATTER to some people and they certainly matter to the people that buy them.

Again, I would love an affordable Apple tower (I'd even pay more than normal for it if the case were half as cool as the Pro's) and don't want an iMac. I also hate BMWs, but don't find myself confused when people buy them. BMW isn't selling to ME. That's the problem people miss. "Apple is sitting on a gold mine if they just targeted people with my needs and budget! There are dozens of me! They're so stupid."

They're not stupid. That's why they're continuing to make bank. Evil? In many respects. Lock in? Totally. Products not well suited to gamers? Who woulda thunk it? But they don't sell to you and they don't make OS X generically available because they don't find that it's financially viable and no forum dweller is going to convince them otherwise. The problem continue to be, in this crowd in particular, a sense of entitlement. "I deserve to be able to install OS X wherever I want." No, you don't no more than I "deserve" to be able to throw a Honda alternator in a Dodge.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

From the configuration options list for the Mac Pro: "The Mac Pro has four PCI Express expansion slots." You can put four GeForce 120's in this thing.

Re:Eh

[SeanMon]

Amazingly, that now pretty much describes the bottom end Mac Pro...

...Except for the price tag.

Except for the price tag and the use of overpriced server-class components, yes. The really screwy thing, of course, is that the 24" iMacs all have 4GB of RAM, whereas the hideously expensive quad-core Mac Pro has only 3GB (and you can bet Apple will charge through the nose for more).

And you can bet that it has 3GB because it's using triple-channel DDR3, which is required with the latest Core i7 processors and boards.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

The processors and chipsets would also be considered server class.

Re:Eh

[Uberbah]

who is an expandable mid-ranged desktop targeted at? Geeks and gamers.

Or someone who wants to put a lot of storage into a Mac without forking over $2500 for a baseline tower. Snow Leopard is supposed to have ZFS support - it would be awsome to put four 2-terabyte drives into a system without forking out the cash for a couple Xeons in the process.

And no, four external drives is not a substitute. Internal drives are far less likely to be jostled, which can shorten the life of the drive. And Firewire 800 is nice for single drives, but isn't a substitute for 3.0 Gbs SATA and a raid card.

So I'll probably be taking a hard look at building a Hackintosh once Snow Leopard is released. I like Apple's stuff, but I don't want to pay for Xeons when I just want a case with space.

Re:Eh

[Gilmoure]

Yup, the old Quadra 700 box size, with 2 or 3 pcie slots and room for three hard drives would be about perfect for me.

I have a Mac Pro tower and it's just too large physically, for my house. I also have an iMac20" and the limited number of ports means I have external USB hub and Firewire hub cluttering the desk. I wouldn't mind so much if it was a Godzilla Firewire Hub but it's not. Sigh.

Re:Eh

[CodeBuster]

no more than I "deserve" to be able to throw a Honda alternator in a Dodge.

There probably are some crafty Cuban mechanics who could make that work, but you would have to go to Cuba to find them.

Re:Eh

[pebs]

I own 3 Macs (Mac Mini, MBP, and a Mac Pro), and have a MBP at work and I've always regarded the iMac as the dumbest product in their line-up. I understand that I might be in the minority, but I don't know, it seems like its a common idea that you shouldn't buy an all-in-one device (as many people found with their TV-VCR combos when the VCR portion crapped out on them).

I was pretty much forced to buy the Mac Pro for my desktop Mac. The Mac Mini is underpowered (slower hard drive), the iMac is stupid, that leaves only the Mac Pro which is overkill, I don't really need the Xeons, but I guess the RAM expandability will be handy in the future. The plus side is that I won't be replacing my Mac Pro for a LONG time.

What a lot of people want is a mid-range equivalent of the Mac Pro. A desktop that has a Core 2 Duo and the possibility to easily install multiple internal hard drives (and video cards) is about all people want. I understand why we won't see this (Apple knows their market). It's just that I've never spent this kind of money on a computer. I always stayed a few generations behind, which is possible with PCs without having to buy used/refurbished. And even buying used/refurbished doesn't save you that much money on Macs (though I got a great deal on my MBP whose GPU is going to fail some day).

Despite the products being worth what they cost, it's expensive to be a Mac user (at least the initial investment, I guess it evens out in the long run). I keep telling myself I'm going to switch back to Linux as my main OS some day... Hey, I can switch back any time I want.

Re:Eh

[bnenning]

They're not stupid. That's why they're continuing to make bank.

They're making bank off their laptops, which are just like everyone else's except prettier. Their desktop sales are much lower in comparison. (Yes, the percentage of desktops is down overall; Apple's desktop percentage is down even more).

The problem continue to be, in this crowd in particular, a sense of entitlement. "I deserve to be able to install OS X wherever I want." No, you don't no more than I "deserve" to be able to throw a Honda alternator in a Dodge.

I agree that Honda shouldn't have to provide support for your attempts, but if you get it working they shouldn't be able to sue you either.

Re:Eh

[binary paladin]

And there are crafty geeks that can build Hackintoshes.

In the auto scenario, no one would freak out about their warranties being voided.

Re:Eh

[binary paladin]

"Or someone who wants to put a lot of storage into a Mac without forking over $2500 for a baseline tower. Snow Leopard is supposed to have ZFS support - it would be awsome to put four 2-terabyte drives into a system without forking out the cash for a couple Xeons in the process."

And this doesn't qualify as a geek... how?

"And no, four external drives is not a substitute. Internal drives are far less likely to be jostled, which can shorten the life of the drive. And Firewire 800 is nice for single drives, but isn't a substitute for 3.0 Gbs SATA and a raid card."

Couldn't agree more.

"So I'll probably be taking a hard look at building a Hackintosh once Snow Leopard is released. I like Apple's stuff, but I don't want to pay for Xeons when I just want a case with space."

So build a Hackintosh. My only point is that, while you may WANT those things, Apple doesn't owe it to you to accommodate you. This may have something to with the fact that while the needs you mention above are NEEDS to you, you're niche and not worth rolling out a product line for. I'm in your niche! It'd be nice, but Apple doesn't owe it to me and if I don't give them my money well... they're doing fine with iPods and iMacs and aren't too worried about me or you. There's no reason to be indignant about it anymore than I should be indignant that BMW doesn't offer a 3/4 ton pickup with 4 wheel drive. Someone may love BMWs that wants and truck. BMW has lost a truck sale by not offering that. They don't care.

Re:Eh

[binary paladin]

"I agree that Honda shouldn't have to provide support for your attempts, but if you get it working they shouldn't be able to sue you either."

I agree too. I'm not defending Apple's business practices (for the umpteenth time) since there's nothing to defend. They're bastards. However, they're bastards with products people want, even people around here. Their business practices are the main reason I'm going with a G1 instead of an iPhone and why my next laptop may not be made by Apple.

However, given their crap, I got an Apple laptop because dammit... I like OS X and the aesthetic IS important to me. (And their touchpads blow everything else away.)

Re:Eh

[DinDaddy]

And if Apple priced OSX like Honda prices their factory replacement alternators, they would probably be happy if everyone did it too.

But I don't think anyone would pay $500 for OSX.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Wake ME up when they make a mouse with two buttons. Geeze!

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

People are always perplexed as to why Apple keeps prices so high as to limit their market share. Lowering prices would increase their market share, so why the heck don't they do it? It's actually quite simple. Given the same net profit on sales, I'll take a smaller market share any day and twice on Sundays. Lower support costs. And I'll bet Apple's thinking the same thing. "Hmm, we could cut profit margins in half and double our market share, but that would also double our support costs. No, thank you!"

Plus, keeping prices artificially high maintains the (false) image that they are a premium brand.

Re:Eh

[ogdenk]

I second that. I would be happy with just a single PCIe x16 slot.

It's REALLY annoying when you know you have the CPU power to run something but the onboard video is holding you back.

I really liked the G4 midtower desktops simply because I COULD swap out the video card.

Not EVERYONE needs to stick a SCSI or eSATA card in their mac but lots of people would like to upgrade their video card.

And if I did want to slap a nice eSATA card in there, I shouldn't have to buy a $2500 machine with a Quad-Core Xeon to do it.

As far as enterprise customers go, I have a hard time believing that they take all-in-one machines seriously, even if they are really cool machines.

Don't get me wrong, the iMac is no piece of shit but they are genuinely missing out by not having a standard desktop offering for less than $2500.

Re:Eh

[Uberbah]

And this doesn't qualify as a geek... how?

Serves me right for posting w/o coffee...I just saw the "gamer" part.

My only point is that, while you may WANT those things, Apple doesn't owe it to you to accommodate you.

Didn't say they did. Maybe I'll pony up for the Family Pack for my Hackintosh so I wont feel too guilty.

This may have something to with the fact that while the needs you mention above are NEEDS to you, you're niche and not worth rolling out a product line for.

Methinks that there's more than a "niche" of people who want lots of storage but don't need lots of processing power, and for whom a vanilla dual core is more than sufficient. This wouldn't be as much of an issue if Apple would up Firewire to match SATA, but for now it's stuck at a quarter of the speed.

Re:Eh

[binary paladin]

"Methinks that there's more than a "niche" of people who want lots of storage but don't need lots of processing power, and for whom a vanilla dual core is more than sufficient. This wouldn't be as much of an issue if Apple would up Firewire to match SATA, but for now it's stuck at a quarter of the speed."

I think it's still pretty niche because you have to append that group to "wants all of the above AND OS X." One thing that's for sure, despite any argument here, Apple certainly doesn't think it's a big market as can be seen by the lack of available products!

Forget upping firewire... what the hell is wrong with eSATA? I like my MBP (I have one of the October 2008 models and violated my own rule about not buying first generation products) but the most annoying deficiency is the lack of eSATA. Firewire800 ANYTHING is overpriced (take external drive docks and such). And, if I want eSATA I have to get an ExpressCard which isn't so bad EXCEPT the only model that works well, from the research I have done, runs around $90. That's a bit pricy.

Re:Eh

[lucas teh geek]

server-class components,

Besides possibly using ECC memory is there any other example of that?

I'd hardly call the option of either quad cord or 8-core "mid-range", and that's completely ignoring the type of processors (they're xeons, go have a look at the price difference between them and your regular mid-range processor)

the mac pro might be good value for what's in it, but what's in it is definitely not mid-range and definitely not needed by the sort of people looking for something they can install a few expansion cards and a graphics card in). right now a hackintosh is the only (cludgy) answer

Re:Eh

[evilbessie]

But not workstation class graphics, no QuadroFX or FireGL cards there...

Re:Eh

[Lars T.]

Which geeks have Apple sued for building a Hackintosh?

And before you say "Psystar", they aren't "geeks".

Re:Eh

[brackishboy]

That would fit in with the fact that the 8-core model ships with a baseline 6GB of RAM.

Re:Eh

[AtariKee]

Never going to happen. Period. Apple would never sell any product that would either enter them into the race to the bottom market that Dell, HP, et. al., compete in, or lower the high profit margins that they currently enjoy. It's just not going to happen because 1-2 thousand hobbyists are clammering for it.

Re:Eh

[AtariKee]

Apple have found a niche for themselves as a combined OS + Hardware vendor where they control the entire environment. They will never make an expandable, cheapo minitower, they aren't the cheapest, and they will never dominate the industry AND THEY DON'T CARE! For one simple reason: enough people like what they produce to generate a very healthy, very profitable business. That, at the end of the day is all they want and they're succeeding at it.

For now anyway.

Re:Eh

[AtariKee]

Exactly.

Let's not forget that due to those high margins, they have almost 30 billion bucks in the bank with NO debt.

Apple just does NOT care about market share. They make money with what they do. Why should they change for a few thousand hobbyists?

Re:Eh

[RedBear]

Indeed, that's exactly what people want to do is upgrade the RAM and hard drive. Right now you still have a choice between A) a computer with a built-in (i.e. non-replaceable) screen, a desktop-size fast hard drive with plenty of space, easily accessible RAM slots, and a decent graphics card, or B) a tiny computer with a much slower notebook-size hard drive, RAM slots and small hard drive that are a royal pain to upgrade, and not-so-great integrated graphics.

What a large swath of middle-of-the-road customers and long-time PC owners really want is a Mac with a decent video card (possibly upgradeable), a desktop-size fast hard drive (easily upgradeable), and RAM slots that are also easy to get to. To be quite realistic they would only have to about double the height of the Mac mini in order to fit in a full upgradeable graphics card, desktop-size hard drive and easily accessible RAM slots, and it would still be an amazingly compact but much more powerful and flexible computer.

They could even stick in one or two ExpressCard slots at that size for additional expandability of function without adding substantially to the size. Imagine a desktop machine that could share the same ExpressCards that you use with your mobile MacBook Pro system. A system like that would satisfy almost everyone who doesn't like the Mac mini's lack of expansion options and the iMac's built-in screen, and could be sold for a price in between the two, like $999 and up. It would rock the world and probably be more popular than either the iMac or Mac mini combined.

The form factor I've described would be a mind-bogglingly excellent little headless server for many homes and small businesses. It would also be a great media center, or basic gaming machine, or damn near anything that doesn't require the massive power of the Mac Pro.

For the life of me I can't fathom why they continue to ignore the mid-range consumer that wants flexibility without having to buy a Mac Pro. It would really be a hit and there really is a market for it. I think they just don't want to deal with supporting the technical problems that might arise from people expanding their systems. They want their more popular "consumer" items to be confined to a small number of configurations that are easier for AppleCare technicians to support.

Re:Eh

[nine-times]

They will never make an expandable, cheapo minitower

I'm not talking about an "cheapo minitower". Just something between a Mac mini and a Mac Pro that doesn't have a built-in monitor. Like a "Mac normal" (not "Pro" or "mini"). I think there's a market for it, but it might possibly cannibalize their Mac Pro sales-- which is why they probably won't do it.

Re:Eh

[laird]

"Expansion isn't as important these days"

I'd suggest that computers are more expandable than ever, but they do so primarily using external expansion - INTERNAL expansion isn't as important these days. I'm a power user and I'm perfectly happy with my Mac Mini. Of course, it helps to have an 8-drive server in the basement (I love ZFS!).

About the only thing that might be worth upgrading is the graphics hardware. It's fine for my needs (web, mail, programming) but someone really into computer games would want better graphics hardware. (And probably a PC instead of a Mac). But I do my videogaming on consoles, not computers.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Then buy a PC. Whiner.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

And before you say "Psystar", they aren't "geeks".

Why do you say that? I haven't read (or seen) anything online about the people behind Psystar - have you? Can you share the link with us?

Re:Eh

[rthille]

My lament for things like this is, "Sadly, I am not a market"

I often wonder why someone doesn't make things I'd pay good money for... it turns out I'm not the only one, but I'm one of few enough that making whatever it is would cost too much at that quantity.

Re:Eh

[Z80xxc!]

Amazingly, that now pretty much describes the bottom end Mac Pro...

...Except for the price tag.

Except for the price tag and the use of overpriced server-class components, yes. The really screwy thing, of course, is that the 24" iMacs all have 4GB of RAM, whereas the hideously expensive quad-core Mac Pro has only 3GB (and you can bet Apple will charge through the nose for more).

And you can bet that it has 3GB because it's using triple-channel DDR3, which is required with the latest Core i7 processors and boards.

...nevermind of course that they're not using a Core i7, they're using an LGA 771 Xeon.

Re:Eh

[NateTech]

Give it a couple of years, and it'll be mid-range, if you buy it now. LOL!

Re:Eh

[NateTech]

Let's see, the 20" iMac is on the coffee table in the living room... I'll just run right out and get a tower and stuff it under... oh, yeah... that won't fit there.

A single power cord with one of those rubber "speed bump" protectors over it out from under the couch, up the corner of the coffee table, and the Apple wireless keyboard and mouse... and it just sits there, looks good, and works as something not hideous to look at.

Works for us...

Re:Eh

[NateTech]

His point is, they're a business -- not basement hackers. Put together a hackintosh in your basement all of your own volition, and who's going to know or care? Certainly not Apple. Publish how to do it, or attempt to sell a product based on their work -- plan on being sued off the planet. Nothing "evil" about it, unless you're bought into the RMS kook-aid... yeah, I said kook. I'll get modded "Flamebait" for it, but I don't see anything "evil" in Apple tightly controlling THEIR product. Anyone wants to make something better, the open-sores community has been promising that for a couple of decades now... and continually under-delivering.

Re:Eh

[NateTech]

A half-joking prediction -- what do you bet Apple buys someone like Drobo or just builds their own prior to Snow Leopard's release, just to try to gather in the "I hate that there's no slots in this thing" crowd? Or perhaps a dual or quad drive Time Capsule? They often pay attention when the dumb-beat of whining gets high enough, but they rarely do it the way you think they're going to...

Re:Eh

[NateTech]

Some of your points are valid, but the corporate "not taking all in one machines seriously" is way off. My company's been buying a standard "class" of machine from Lenovo for each "type" of worker for years. Tech support has one laptop and one desktop option, Enginering has another set, Sales another, but all from the same manufacturer, and RARELY upgraded later on... just replaced after a few years when they start to die and cost too much money to keep on a service contract. It's not the "all in one" that companies don't take seriously, it's the fact that they're utterly and hopelessly stuck (maybe by choice) on Windows servers and Outlook/Exchange. It works for them. I just use the laptop they provide for work stuff, and have all Macs at home, complete with VMs for Windows or whatever I feel like... I see the corporation's machines as dated, incapable of running "everything", and slow... and usually with a whole lot less screen real-estate for the same price as I buy at home... even buying Macs. Want me to run Outlook? Sure boss... stick it here in my VM on this real machine that has a command line and a shell, and can run any OS out there! (Of course, they're not interested in that either... way too much loss of security policy and control... for corporate tastes.) A few friends work for progressive enough and small enough shops that when they asked to use their Macs, that was the answer... "as long as you can run Outlook in a VM for scheduling/whatever". Fine...

Re:Eh

[poopdeville]

This would cannibalize iMac sales, with no gain for Apple.

Re:Eh

[tfoss]

What a large swath of middle-of-the-road customers and long-time PC owners really want is a Mac with a decent video card (possibly upgradeable), a desktop-size fast hard drive (easily upgradeable), and RAM slots that are also easy to get to.

A system like that would satisfy almost everyone who doesn't like the Mac mini's lack of expansion options

It would rock the world and probably be more popular than either the iMac or Mac mini combined.

For the life of me I can't fathom why they continue to ignore the mid-range consumer that wants flexibility without having to buy a Mac Pro. It would really be a hit and there really is a market for it

Hm, should I believe that a random dude on a high-end nerd site has a better idea of what the computer mass market is rather than a company that is currently selling 2.5 million computers a quarter? I wonder what the difference in actual market research budget is between the two.

I think they just don't want to deal with supporting the technical problems that might arise from people expanding their systems. They want their more popular "consumer" items to be confined to a small number of configurations that are easier for AppleCare technicians to support.

That doesn't pass the smell test. Given that AppleCare has to support Mac Pros, the number of configurations doesn't appear to be a problem.

Perhaps it is just that Apple has determined that the number of people who refuse to purchase a Mac due to lack of upgradability is actually pretty small. Crazy idea, I know.

-Ted

Re:Eh

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Like it keep saying, I'm talking about most users. And for most users wanting a mid-range computer, FireWire 800 is enough.
There's also plenty of FireWire 800 enclosures out there. Perhaps no as many as eSATA, but we are talking about Macs here, they are still a smaller market, so there is less of a range for some things, of course. However, I'm happy with the enclosures on offer.

Re:Eh

[bnenning]

And, if I want eSATA I have to get an ExpressCard which isn't so bad EXCEPT the only model that works well, from the research I have done, runs around $90. That's a bit pricy.

I use this $28 card in my Rev B MBP. No driver installation required, and I haven't had any problems so far.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

His point is, they're a business -- not basement hackers

You think you can't be a geek and in business?

Re:Eh

[NateTech]

I know a few. They make an ass-load of money. It's a rare talent.

Re:Eh

[daver00]

The form factor I've described would be a mind-bogglingly excellent little headless server for many homes and small businesses

Why?? What on earth does the Apple brand have that would make it any better than any other box for use as a server? Look I can understand (but not agree with) the idea that people want a nice white shiny thing on display in their office or living room, but precisely what advantage does a mac have as a server? (disclaimer: I actually use a G4 powermac as a server, because it was the best piece of junk I had lying around, but I run a linux server OS). Lets see, Intel chip: check, DDR3 RAM: check, HDD: check, Network card: check... does a server need anything else? You don't need a good video card. And OSX has got to be about the stupidest choice of server OS you can think of... I just do not get it.

Oh and a mac (not)mini that is higher specc'd than a mac mini... for the same price as a mac mini? Unlikely.

Re:Eh

[DurendalMac]

Good luck putting a larger hard drive in an iMac by yourself. I hope you have the portable clean room kit that Apple sells to service providers so you can avoid getting any crud on the inside of the glossy panel or on the surface of the LCD.

As an Apple tech, I (and many others, I'm sure) would love to hunt down the engineer who was fucking STUPID enough to think that was a good idea and beat his ass silly for all the suffering he's caused. The glossy panel and LCD could have easily been integrated into a single module that could be disassembled only if necessary without looking any less pretty. As it is, we get the removable panel that can't get the slightest fucking fleck of dust under it or you have to pull it off and clean it YET AGAIN and an LCD panel that smudges/scratches easier than you can imagine.

Re:Eh

[DurendalMac]

Probably because of the triple-channel Nehalem chipset. It's either 3GB or 6GB if they want to keep triple channel working out of the box.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes well I have a 1 year old iMac. Funny thing is that My model was not that much lower in spec but $300 cheaper. This is the first time Apple have risen the price in 1 year. The last model (one up from mine) was cheaper than the previous (being mine) with better spec. So why is this one so much more than it's predecessor in price but not in performance? Looks like I won't be upgrading!

Re:Eh

[wild_berry]

...does a server need anything else?

You might like to consider rrror-correcting RAM.

Re:Eh

[wild_berry]

...but only if you can get me an error-correcting keyboard.

Re:Eh

[drsmithy]

Apple's laptops are much more traditional than their desktops, and sell much better.

They only appear to be traditional, because every laptop maker on earth abandoned the traditional designs and copied Apple's radical Powerbook design in the early 90s.

It's rather amusing that your own link disproves your claim.

Compaq LTE: Released October 1989 (first "traditional" looking clamshell laptop).
Macintosh Portable: Released September 1989 (still not quite a "traditional" clamshell - you need the 1991 PowerBook for that).

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

So essentially, you have no idea whether the psystar guys are geeks or not & you agree that there's at best a weak correlation between geekiness & business.

Your post was meaningless. Thank you however for wasting a few minutes of my time.

Re:Eh

[Lars T.]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2008/apr/15/soexactlywhoorwhatispsys / http://gizmodo.com/380488/psystar-exposed-looks-like-a-hoax / http://netkas.org/?p=62

Unless you think a lack of (or maybe instead shady) business creds automatically gives you geek creds... But please do tell what geeky things they have done? Is building a cheap PC (with "good" old BIOS), putting EFI on it, pretending they made it, and selling it for far more than cost geeky?

Re:Eh

[ogdenk]

Why does it matter if they use Outlook/Exchange/Win2k3?

Macs can be bound to an Active Directory domain quite easily. Even better, macs can be MANAGED by a Windows domain via GPO's just like a PC if you install some extensions to AD.

MS Office for the mac comes with MS Entourage which is basically the mac version of Outlook and syncs just fine with an exchange server.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

As an Apple tech who breaks the rules sometimes, you don't need the sticky roller, the silly gloves, the bags, or anything but the microfiber cloth and a bit of iClear.

And suction cups to pull the screen are available at any auto parts store.

I actually like the glass screen, it's way easier to take apart than the white iMac w/iSight.

Re:Eh

[DarkVader]

They're using a Xeon 5500. It's a LGA 1366 socket chip.

Re:Eh

[OwnedByTwoCats]

The Compaq LTE did not push the keyboard to the top of the lower case. It had the keyboard at the front, just like the Macintosh Portable that came out a month before. There were other computers with the hinge at the back of the lower case.

Apple was first with the palm rest.

From The Article: PowerBook

Company: Apple
Released: Oct. 21, 1991
Specs: Integrated trackball; keyboard pushed to the back of the lower shell, making room for the palm rest.

Re:Eh

[drsmithy]

The Compaq LTE did not push the keyboard to the top of the lower case. It had the keyboard at the front, just like the Macintosh Portable that came out a month before. There were other computers with the hinge at the back of the lower case.
Apple was first with the palm rest.

That seems something of an abuse of the term "radical design".

Re:Eh

[binary paladin]

Huh. I remember when I looked a few months ago and every card but the expensive one had at least a couple negative reviews from Mac people. Maybe I'll try that out. It'd be nice to save $60.

Re:Eh

[Lars T.]

Apple was first with the palm rest.

That seems something of an abuse of the term "radical design".

Well, then let's agree that everybody else copied it because it wasn't as radical to the wrist as all those radical designs.

Re:Eh

[Lars T.]

Oh, before I forget: Where would you put the trackball/-pad in your radical design? The back of the screen?

Re:Eh

[drsmithy]

Well, then let's agree that everybody else copied it because it wasn't as radical to the wrist as all those radical designs.

So let me get this straight. Your idea of "radical" is NOT the fundamental redesign from a briefcase-like luggable, to a clamshell, but the minor modification of moving the keyboard back a few inches ?

W.T.F. ?

Oh, before I forget: Where would you put the trackball/-pad in your radical design? The back of the screen?

There were actually quite a few laptops that had a thumb-ball mounted on the screen or behind the keyboard, with buttons on the back of the screen, and it worked quite well (certainly no worse than the trackpad or trackpoint options that have persisted today).

All pointing devices on laptops suck. Choosing which one sucks less, is a matter of personal preference.

Re:Eh

[Lars T.]

So let me get this straight, your idea of radical is moving back the screen a few inches from the design of the Mac Portable, but keeping the "good old" keyboard where it belongs for a DOS computer and keeping those WIMP interfaces where they belong, at Xerox PARC.

Not to mention that the radical design of the Compaq LTE was almost identical to the 7.5 years older GRiD Compass. But that didn't run DOS, so obviously Compaq was a real innovator with the LTE.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

You have presented no evidence to show that they are not geeks. Thank you for playing.

Re:Eh

[Lars T.]

You have presented no evidence to show that they are not geeks. Thank you for playing.

You can't prove a negative. And YOU can't prove a positive.

Re:Eh

[RedBear]

Don't underestimate aesthetics and ease-of-use. And the fact that you can clone any Mac onto a Firewire or USB hard drive and instantly have a fully bootable backup of your computer. Or server, in this case. Even if there were no other advantages to Apple's hardware or software that would be a strong argument in favor of using a Mac in a home or small office environment where there may not be an IT person available to repair a PC server.

As you've pointed out you can run alternate operating systems if you have some issue with OS X. Even Windows. But if you run Windows in a virtual machine like VMware Fusion or Parallels Desktop, you then have the ability to not only have snapshot backups of the virtual machine, but you can still clone the entire Mac hard drive which of course includes the virtual machine setup.

The value of having a server system that can be backed and, and more importantly _restored_, by someone without an IT degree can be an immeasurable advantage in many situations. Neither Windows nor Linux can hold a candle to how easy it is to back up a Mac. Did I mention you can do the clone while the system is running? Without expensive, complex "enterprise" backup software? Yeah. Anybody can do it. Literally. And by cloning you are preserving not just the user data like files on a file server, you're preserving the entire setup of the system that would take many hours to reproduce on a new system.

Not only that but the clone is bootable not just on the original system but on any Mac. I can clone a Mac Pro to an external drive and then boot a Mac mini from that same hard drive. Or a MacBook Pro. You'll want to make sure your system updates are current before booting a much newer machine, but that's about the only caveat. Think about the implications of that. If you're using a Mac Pro as an office server and it goes down, as long as you have at least one other Mac available and a recent clone, you'll be able to get that "server" back up and running in a matter of minutes, while you send in the real server for repairs. That is not an exaggeration. Minutes. Not hours, not days.

Higher specc'd? Not really. Just bigger with a cheaper desktop hard drive and standard video card. The high-end Mac mini is $799, I said $999. That's not the same price at all. Even if it sold for more than that there is definitely a market of people who are thus far resistant to migrating away from their precious slightly-flexible PCs to very inflexible Mac consumer hardware. All they really want is a real video card (upgradeable), a real hard drive (upgradeable), and the ability to upgrade the RAM without a struggle.

Getting back to aesthetics, even at twice or thrice the height of the Mac mini this imaginary Mac would still be more attractive and compact (for its class) than anything else on the market. Most people find aesthetics and ease-of-use more important than the more technical merits we geeks pay attention to. I've come to realize they have a perfect right to see things that way. The best specs in the world are worthless to someone who can't figure out how to use the device.

Re:Eh

[DurendalMac]

Oh, I know this as I'm also an Apple tech. It's just a pain in the ass having to clean the damn things for ten minutes to finally get them speck-free. That and the screens scratch VERY easily, so you have to be very careful in getting the screws around the display bezel out. And the 24" white iMac was actually easy to get open. I can't fathom why they didn't use the same design on the other white iSight iMacs.

Re:Eh

[macmurph]

>nice, expandable, mid ranged desktop class Mac.

Yeah bring back the Performa line! 36 models to choose from! Oh, wait, he said "nice".

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the more common definitions of geek is a computer expert or enthusiast. I'd say a company that sells computers capable of running the three most popular operating systems around meets that definition.

If you have evidence to present that shows that these people are not "computer experts or enthusiasts", I'd be interested to read it. Like the OP said, there's very little out there to read about the people behind Psystar

Re:Eh

[Lars T.]

One of the more common definitions of geek is a computer expert or enthusiast. I'd say a company that sells computers capable of running the three most popular operating systems around meets that definition.

If you have evidence to present that shows that these people are not "computer experts or enthusiasts", I'd be interested to read it. Like the OP said, there's very little out there to read about the people behind Psystar

Next you tell me "One of the definitions of an artist is one who paints pictures - so clearly one who paints-by-numbers is an artist.

Re:Eh

[badkarmadayaccount]

PCI is a standard parallel bus with shared bandwidth. Tops out at 133 MB/s. SATA I starts at 150 MB/s. Even if the bus is not the bottleneck, I don't see the point in putting it in, considering that it can run one drive at full blast, at best. Something like PCIe would be more suitable.

Re:Eh

[badkarmadayaccount]

IOW, there is a market niche for pandering to the wants and needs of geeks. Hmmm, barely any support calls, free driver support after you get something workable under a FLOSS license, no wasting money on flashy designs and boxes, just some basic good engineering and they'll fall in love with you (thinkpads, anyone?)... Sounds like good market, any takers?

Re:Eh

[badkarmadayaccount]

Why are external drives an issue? Aren't there some SANesque miniracks for drives out there? A well designed and sturdy enclosure will provide a much better operating environment for a HDD or SSD than the innards of any computer.

Re:Eh

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly, IHBT.

Re:Eh

[NateTech]

You'd have to ask them. They just do. I haven't worked for a company larger than about 15 people yet in my life that didn't use LookOut/Exchange...

Your comments are valid, and even correct, but that doesn't change what they're using.

Entourage, last I checked, requires that the HTTP/HTTPS functionality of Exchange Server be turned on, it doesn't speak "natively" to the Exchange server. Maybe that's changed since I last looked at it.

I (technically) couldn't test it anyway... any "non-company owned device" isn't to be plugged into their Ethernet LAN anywhere in the world, anyway... according to policy...

Dumb, yes. Lose my job over it? No. :-)

Re:Eh

[abhi_beckert]

If you want real performance you're mad to buy a mid-range machine!

My 6 year old G5 PowerMac is still faster at some things than a current mid-range intel based machine, and it's *way* cheaper. You do get better performance from high quality components, there's more than just the CPU/GFX/HDD to consider!

Re:Eh

[Uberbah]

I think it's still pretty niche because you have to append that group to "wants all of the above AND OS X."

Not really, as Apple has been heavily pushing consumer media for a long time now. Garageband recordings, HD home videos, HD TV shows, large music collections and high res photos take up a lot of space. Throw in Time Machine for backups and you'll find yourself needing a lot of storage.

Apple could make ZFS as easy as Time Machine - plug in an internal hard drive, and the OS asks you if you want to make it a part of your storage pool.

Forget upping firewire... what the hell is wrong with eSATA?

Because without daisy chaining, there's not much point with going with eSATA over Firewire.

Re:Eh

[bryan1945]

Yeah, you just have to stop fighting this. I have been /. less and less because the convictions is now approaching zealotry in some areas. People trying to shave $.30 off for the cheapest machine. Complaining that graphics card forgot to include the "ossification overburner". Apple locks in worse than MS. MS is trying to destroy *nix. *nix can solve world hunger and cancer. Whatever. I used an Apple II as a kid, went to Amiga and MS, and got a Macbook Pro 2 years ago. Unless Apple really messes up, I'm not going back hardware wise. Sure, I saved for 3 years for it, but it has been more than worth it. Heck, Keynote was worth it. Still run Parallels. Sorry for the rant, you seemed rational enough for me to bounce stuff off you.

Re:Eh

[binary paladin]

I find that arguments concerning hardware and/or software platforms around here generally devolve down to the level of religious sniping. (Which, for a group that seems fairly irreligious, I find really funny.) There's a really funny duality here though, in regards to Apple in particular:

1. Apple is a lock-in bunch of overpriced bastards. I hate them.

2. OS X is really shiny though and I want it and Apple should provide it to me in the package I want. (Even though I hate Apple.)

And don't get me wrong, I don't particularly love Apple. The iPhone development model makes me ill and it's a reflection of some of the levels of their insanity. But seriously, Dell and Lenovo don't exactly love me personally either so it comes down to me choosing which faceless company that only cares about my money that I buy from. I understand people getting annoyed by nonobjective fanboys but... I've found that most of the people who get really loud about fanboys are... other fanboys.

Re:Eh

[makomk]

Probably no point. The main difference with those these days is in the drivers, and since Apple are using their own drivers...

ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[drachenfyre]

After the disaster that was my ATI card that came with the first generation Mac Pro (2 Warranty replacements for over heating and continued issues even after that, Thankfully they released the NVIDIA 8800 GT for the thing) I would never EVER trust a high end card in my Mac again.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[the_B0fh]

And so, you prefer NVidia's clusterfuck that's going on right now, and has been for the past 18 months or so?

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[xenolion]

What was the model of the ATI card you had, was it a first gen or was the model out for awhile? You leave us very little details to see what you are talking about. I have had both NVidia & ATI cards go bad all where first gen thats why i now wait a few months then they have the the drivers and updated the fans on the cards to fix the problems with the first patch.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[Anonymous Coward]

Well then, it's your lucky day. Those graphics cards are a generation old and mid-range at best.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[Anonymous Coward]

After Apple replaced my overheated X1900 XT, everything has been running perfectly for me. BTW, it is extremely important to periodically clean the air intake on these cards. When I neglected that for a while, the fan kept coming on full blast.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[drachenfyre]

It was the Radeon X1900XT. I had both the original and the updated versions cards. The machine was basically used for World of Warcraft (Which isn't hard on a GPU by any standard). http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/Graphics/X1900XT_Overheating/ATI_X1900_artifacts.html is a convenient rundown on the issues with the card. And yes, I prefer the current NVidia mess. At least I know what I'm getting. The X1900XT issues were related strictly to the Apple versions of the cards. It was stupid when I had to reseat the card at least 5 times to get the machine to boot (It would fail boot bios checks and hang). Since I put in the 8800 GT, I've had no issues. Not one. As I said, I would never trust any Mac with an ATI product in it after that mess.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[xenolion]

I can understand that if you had all those problems. I wish you luck.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[drachenfyre]

Oh, I've loved it since I got the NVidia. Even at 3 years old, the machine is STILL a powerhouse compared to what is coming out today. Quad Core Xeons, an Nvidia 8800 GT, 4 disk raid 0 SATA array (Yes, I use time machine to protect my data) and when my tax refund comes in I can actually upgrade to 8 cores. It runs Windows, It runs OS X, and it runs *nix apps with a native X11 interface. I wouldn't trade it for the world. If it wasn't for all those pluses, I probably wouldn't have kept it through all the video card difficulties.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[Creepy]

ironically, the 8xxx mobiles have had exactly the same problem on many laptops (I've personally had two 8600Ms fail on my PC laptop, but I put an 8800GT in a friend's desktop and that is still running strong - and it gets abused GPU-wise much more than my laptop).

I still think nVidia's OpenGL support is better (especially new features), but since Apple provides the drivers on mac that is less of an issue than it is on PCs.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[cayenne8]

Out of curiosity, what VM are you running for windows?

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[drachenfyre]

Parallels. I also have a separate SATA drive with windows on it if I need to boot windows. I just slide it in when I need it.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[jedidiah]

> And so, you prefer NVidia's clusterfuck that's going on right now, and has been for the past 18 months or so?

It's still better than anything ATI has to offer.

I will probably get a new mini to use with Linux simply for the h264 accleration.

I have 2 already but nvidia drivers have a distinct edge over intel.

ATI is just a joke.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[DurendalMac]

Actually, Nvidia's drivers for OS X have essentially been shit since late Tiger. The 8600GTs (and other cards) performed like utter ass until the 10.5.2 graphics update. Then look at benchmarks outside of games, such as Apple pro apps. ATI utterly rapes Nvidia cards on OS X. For a while, a 2600 Pro/XT would destroy an 8800GT in that arena. There has been some improvement, but the gap is still pretty damn big.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[drachenfyre]

Given the choice between fast video card that dies every 4 months, requires a reboot to involve opening the case and reseating the card (repeatedly) and a slower, but still high performance video card, it's a no brainer to me. I got burned badly once, I don't want to try again. YMMV.

Re:ATI Cards in a MAC... never again

[thexile]

So what's the bad thing about ATI? You didn't mention anything about it.

640GB

[Anonymous Coward]

640GB ought to be enough for anybody!

Should really add a "640kb" tag, or something like that.

More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[Shivetya]

markets.

Man are the fanbois belly aching on many of the bigger sites. What shocked most is that prices for the new machines went up and in some cases a lot. An example comparing old aussie prices to new http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=7199753&postcount=164

What is missing is...

LED screens on the iMacs
Blu-Ray (of course no one really expects it)
Quad Cores

Mac Mini got its update but the price is absurd as well.

For those of us who are still upgrading (I have an older 2.13c2d white model) some selected upgrades push ship times out four to six weeks (like buying an ati 4850 chipset)

Amazing that what Apple considers affordable is getting more extreme. Consumer level goods are professional level pricing.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[tepples]

An example comparing old aussie prices to new

Apple is an American company. How much of this price change is due to the fluctuations in exchange rates?

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[PrescriptionWarning]

There's two Mac Mini's, one is more expensive ($800) but one is less expensive ($600), just to compare I spent $700 on mine about a year ago or so. Granted that it would be way more attractive and competitive (and reasonable) at $500 but its still not too bad if thats what you're looking for. As for me I'm just waiting till ASUS releases a $200 eeeBox as the ultimate XBMC/Boxee pc to hook up to my TV

Re:Why give them free pub...

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, considering they were just released, I don't think you can really claim they're olds.

Apple is simply to expensive.

[JoshDmetro]

I was recently checking out the local Mac store when I realized something. I don't have $2500 -$3000 for a laptop that doesn't even have an optical drive. Sure the Mac looks cool kinda if your a one mouse button kinda guy but I need minimum three buttons. Later that day I went to Wal-Mart bought an Acer Aspire 5315 for $400. I was a bit upset about having to pay for Vista which I promptly deleted after phoning Acer tech support and giving them a piece of my mind. After my new laptop was was formated and the Windows stench was removed I installed Ubuntu. And with Linux there are a few good games based on ID's engines that remind me of the good old Lan party days before hi-speed internet.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[Anonymous Coward]

You sure did show Acer and Apple! I bet you are really proud!! Good job!!

Now Apple will HAVE to lower their prices, and Acer will have a linux laptop out next week... all thanks to you! Awesome!!

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[binary paladin]

I walked into a Mercedes dealer today when I realized that, as a contractor, what I need is a truck and not a car.

As Mac user *I* don't need a laptop without an optical drive, which is why didn't buy the Air.

Oh, and one more thing, I'm tired of the "one button" crap. It's just old. The fact that you neanderthals are still using crappy plastic buttons rather than gestures and other multitouch goodies isn't my fault. I use an external mouse when I have the room, but when using a touch pad, sorry, Apple is by far the nicest to work with, period.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[UnknowingFool]

Laptops are like cars. There are features for every price range. If your #1 priority is price, Apple laptops are not for you. However you can't compare the Acer $499:

• 1.86 GHz Intel Celeron M processor 540
• 533 MHz FSB
• 1 GB of DDR2 system memory
• Intel GMA X3100
• 160 GB hard drive, 5400 rpm
• CD-RW/DVD-ROM combination drive
• 15.4" 1280 X 800 screen
• 802.11g wireless
• 2 hr battery life
• 13.11 lbs

With the MacBook Air $2499:

• 1.86GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
• 1066 MHz FSB
• 2GB DDR3
• 120 GB HD, 5400 rpm
• NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT 256MB GDDR3
• 13.3" 1440 by 900 screen
• 802.11n wireless, Bluetooth
• 4.5 hr battery life
• 3.0 lbs

And complain that the MacBook Air is more expensive because it is designed for ultralightweight applications yet has a faster bus, more memory, better graphics, etc. Apples to oranges.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[fwingo]

A comparable PC laptop (like a Lenovo X200T) would be $800 to $1000 cheaper.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[UnknowingFool]

For a smaller screen, a lower video chip, more weight, and on sale, yes, it is $800 to $1000 cheaper. Base price it is only $100 or so cheaper.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[Slashcrap]

The fact that you neanderthals are still using crappy plastic buttons rather than gestures and other multitouch goodies isn't my fault.

Couldn't agree more. Gestures are where it's at. For example, if I want to launch Safari, I simply gesture like I'm lovingly fingering another man's anus and up it pops. One hundred percent reliable. My Mac understands.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[binary paladin]

Hahaha.

Okay. Okay.

Touché sir.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[CompMD]

I see your MB Air, and raise my generic Dell D630 company laptop valued at $1330:

- 2.00 GHz Core2 Duo
- 800MHz bus
- 2GB DDR2 RAM
- 120GB 5400rpm HD
- 128MB Nvidia Quadro NVS 135M
- 14.1" 1440x900 screen
- 802.11 Draft-n wireless, bluetooth
- 8x DVD+-RW built in
- Smart card reader
- PC Card slot
- A real DB-9M serial port
- 4.5 hr battery
- 5.1 lbs

A real computer geek makes sure he has a serial port.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[stewbacca]

You lost all credibility at "one mouse button". Seriously people, drop this 15-year old myth! If you want to be pedantic, the Macbooks are now a NO-button mouse or an ALL-button mouse.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[UnknowingFool]

One word why people get the MacBook Air: Ultralightweight. I would never get one because I don't need to shave off the 2.0 lbs for the extra money. Others want this feature.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[stewbacca]

Except that the entire track pad is now a button. For the past five years the complaint was, "but two finger click isn't the same thing as two PHYSICAL buttons!". Now they've made the entire track pad a button that has multiple zones that act as, at a minimum, two buttons. Click anywhere on the left half of the track pad and you get a left click--click anywhere on the right half of the track pad and you get a right click. Why limit yourself to two buttons at the bottom of a pad? So yes, the "one button" argument IS old, and hasn't been valid since Mac OS 7.6 about 15 years ago.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[CompMD]

Other people are also really, really, really dumb. :)

2.0 lbs for more than $1000 and less functionality definitely falls in the "really dumb" category for me. I don't hate Macs, I just think that Apple has become an elitist club that requires an insane membership fee to join, and perpetuates the mentality that you have to keep paying them to stay a member.

And that's why I will keep tweaking my old Powermac G3 and G4 towers so they will live forever; the last of the relics which were real Apple computers.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[LionMage]

I have to say, I personally am happy with using two fingers on the touch pad and clicking with the button to do the two-finger-click gesture (which is equivalent to right-clicking). I'm just dubious of the new design where the pad itself is the button. I had thought maybe the pad sent the same event to the OS no matter where you clicked on the surface, but now that you've described it, I guess this is a superior solution... except when some crud gets into the mechanism and prevents one side or the other from registering click events.

I think having gestures + clicking a single physical button that is separate from the pad is the best arrangement, but it seems that Apple ranks cool design higher than ruggedness and reliability in many cases. And I'm saying this as a long-time Apple fan. I'm just glad I bought my MacBook Pro when I did: before they did away with matte finish screens and the separate trackpad button, yet after they came out with LED backlighting.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[stewbacca]

To give Apple engineers a little more credit, the click pad seems to work better closer to the bottom of the track pad, which is feels more natural because we've grown accustom to the buttons being there, not because it is a superior position. On my MacBook, I turn the right click on and still tend to go towards the bottom right corner, even though I don't have to go that far. It's nice NOT to have two physical buttons under your palms that can be clicked when touch-typing. Worse, like most poorly designed generic pcs, are buttons that are hard to click and hold while you are using the trackpad, or hard to click the left mouse button with your right thumb without accidentally clicking the right mouse button.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[ogdenk]

I call. My new Macbook White 2009, $999

-2Ghz Core 2 Duo "Penryn"
-1066MHz front-side bus
-2GB DDR2 RAM
-120GB SATA HDD
-256MB (Shared) GeForce 9400M
-SPDIF Audio In/Out
-Firewire
-13.3" 1280x800 LCD
-802.11a/b/g/draft-n wireless, bluetooth 2.1
-8x DVD+-RW
-4.5hr battery
-5.0 lbs

A real computer geek also knows that USBserial adapters are dirt cheap and work with just about any remotely modern operating system including OSX and even support funky baud rates or port settings.

A PC-card slot would be nice but I can live without it. I wouldn't mind being able to put my old PCMCIA SCSI card to use and use CF->PCMCIA adapters instead of a USB card reader.

The shared-memory video isn't really an issue as the 9400M is actually quite capable and has 16 real stream processors. CoD4 runs well and Quake 4 runs REALLY well. It'll be supported by OpenCL in Snow Leopard as well.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[CompMD]

Nice! That's a good deal you got there.

USB/serial adapters have *terrible* reliability when it comes to the actual serial data implementation. There are myriad problems that can result when trying to talk to devices such as embedded computers, GPS units, or data acquisition systems. This is even true with the manufacturer's Windows drivers running on Windows. They don't always work how you might expect.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[agnosticnixie]

It's only one pound lighter than laptops in its footprint.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[UnknowingFool]

And slower memory. And slower bus. That's if you want the Air. It's a niche product for a specific market. For a general computer, you should compare to a MacBook.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[mgblst]

Well, you can compare them, and you just did.

I agree with you, if you want the cheap one, no point coming here and complaining, go and get the cheaper one. Me, I prefer quality, and I prefer the Mac experience, and only having to put up with Microsoft shit (and I say this having experience in their latest absolutely shit OS Vista) when I am forced to.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[NateTech]

The reality is... gestures, multiple buttons, whatever. I use all of the above, on all the different types of machines (PC, Mac, whatever), just fine. You just have to have enough brainpower to remember how to USE the computer you're sitting at. Supremely tough stuff, I know... but there are a number of us that do just fine running "all of the above", while getting work done on any of them...

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[NateTech]

Of course, the REALLY nice part about OS X and to a lesser extent, Windows... is that almost ALL of the "stuff" people do with the silly pointer and mouse/trackpad "clicks" is still available as keyboard shortcuts, and you really don't have to use the darn pointer at all, if you don't really want to. You just have to have the brainpower of a higher chimp to remember a few keystrokes.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[NateTech]

A real computer geek carries a FTDI-chipset based USB to serial adapter, usable on ANY OS.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[NateTech]

Correction: CRAPPY USB/serial adapters have those problems. Ones based off of solid chipsets and drivers (like FTDI chipsets), don't. Do more homework. Most of us did and moved on from real serial ports a few years ago, maybe after being burned by a $9 "special" back then.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[Anonymous Coward]

Up what pops?

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[DurendalMac]

Because the Macbook Air is certainly the only laptop Apple sells, and it certainly doesn't have a model for less than $2000. The trackpads give you extra "buttons" by placing extra fingers on the pads. It works surprisingly well. Maybe you should look a little further than the front window the next time you check out the local Mac store.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[Anonymous Coward]

The G5s were pretty awesome too.

In fact, I still have one as my desktop computer! It rocks.

Re:Apple is simply to expensive.

[ogdenk]

Yeah, so far I'm real happy with the machine. Would have liked the DDR3 RAM in the aluminum version but I don't "need" it.

If you grab a cheesy USB serial port off the shelf at Walmart for $12, then yeah, they suck.

I have one that's reliable and has no problems talking to just about anything but I had to spend $35 or so.

But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[mwecksell]

I can't find out from Apple's page - do the new Mac Minis come with a bundled remote control? Because I'm thinking of putting one under the TV - especially with the low power draw at idle, the ability to do 1080p without breaking a sweat, and the firewire 800 port that will tell my external hard drives to spin down when not needed. Heck, this could probably handle my Time Machine backups for the other macs in the house while serving 1080p. Now if only Apple would rent HD Movies to this machine. Sadly, they still only rent HD to the Apple TV. ---matt

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[XxtraLarGe]

Heck, this could probably handle my Time Machine backups for the other macs in the house while serving 1080p.

I don't think you'd want to use a computer with only a 120 or 360 GB HD for serving video & Time Machine backups...

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[Teese]

Apple Remote would cost you $20 extra.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[Anal Surprise]

It's on the check-out page.

$19 extra for a remote, which seems reasonable enough.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[Anonymous Coward]

He'd be using it merely for processing. The data would be stored on externals - hence the importance of the Firewire 800 drive. I'm actually considering picking one up to throw in the closet with a bunch of external hard drives as a media server - relatively low wattage, and it will definitely be able to handle 720P output to an Apple TV, possibly 1080P if they ever update the ATV to handle it.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[Chaos Incarnate]

The remote isn't bundled; it's a $20 option. But if you already have a remote from another Mac in your house, it'll work just fine with the new Mini.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[Anonymous Coward]

Heck, this could probably handle my Time Machine backups for the other macs in the house while serving 1080p.

I don't think you'd want to use a computer with only a 120 or 360 GB HD for serving video & Time Machine backups...

Someone should really create a port that would allow expansion via external storage devices. That would be the bee's knees.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[Anonymous Coward]

You noticed his mentioning firewire 800?

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're mostly interested in a set-top box for HD video, why not save a few hundred and get something specialized for that.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[prelelat]

I'm in Canada so I can't benifit from it but if you really want a service that you can rent HD Movies from why not setup the obvious and just go with NetFlix? I do believe it works on OSX.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[cayenne8]

I'd be looking at a mac mini to serve as a MythTV front end to some tv's in my house. I've been waiting for one to come out that would handle HD content.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[jesser]

I got five last-generation Mac Minis and each one came with a remote. So now I have a stack of Mac Minis and five extra remotes.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[paulcone]

It does have that port -- it's called FireWire. I have two drives strung off mine -- one 500 GB and one 1TB.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[Anonymous Coward]

It does have that port -- it's called FireWire. I have two drives strung off mine -- one 500 GB and one 1TB.

I think you missed the joke. But thanks anyway for your informative response.

Re:But do the Minis come with a Remote?

[Gilmoure]

Yup, come with a remote and the Frontstage softeware for flicking through iTunes/iPhoto content. I have a previous generation Mac Mini, with a couple 1TB drives hanging off it. One drive holds my ripped DVD's (around 750GB) and the other drive is my time machine backup drive. This machine feeds an Apple TV for movie playback and is family web server as well.

Looks like these new mini's will be able to do it all without an apple tv.

Cool!

Not as American as you might think

[realxmp]

The majority of their Macs, iPhones and displays are manufactured, assembled and shipped straight to their destination from Asia. The only parts of Apple that is really American is their R&D and sales and marketing parts, the rest was outsourced years ago.

Instead of looking at the Pound-Dollar relationship you probably want to take a closer look at the relationship between the pound and the currencies of South Korea, etc.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[tepples]

The only parts of Apple that is really American is their R&D and sales and marketing parts

And the only parts of Apple that distinguish a Mac from any old Lenovo or Lenovo-compatible PC is their R&D and sales and marketing parts.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[maxume]

They report their earnings in the U.S., and (presumably) a significant number of their shareholders are interested in dollars.

Another side of it is that when they are setting prices they are far more concerned with what people will pay than they are with costs (this is much of the point of positioning yourself as a premium brand).

Re:Not as American as you might think

[tyrione]

Your point?

Apple Pricing and accounting practices are in the Domestic United States of America. Got a problem? Bitch the US Government. While you're at your own government, bitch to them how come it is I'm so hosed by purchasing a product manufactured in Asia, but only sold in the UK.

Oh I forgot! Business laws are nation specific.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[tyrione]

The only parts of Apple that is really American is their R&D and sales and marketing parts

And the only parts of Apple that distinguish a Mac from any old Lenovo or Lenovo-compatible PC is their R&D and sales and marketing parts.

Just a small trinket. Yep! That Lenovo workstation when opened up is just like the Mac Pro! Not even close.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[QuantumRiff]

Except that you don't see any desktop makers supporting 8GB of ram yet... (32GB on the mac pro.) How long has 64Bit vista been out now? Go find a consumer focused piece of hardware that can do that from HP or Dell or Lenovo.. I've been wanting to throw 8GB of ram into a system to play with more advanced stuff in Linux. (video editing, etc) I am now going to seriously look at the iMac.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[imsabbel]

Come on. There is at least some limit to idiocy.
ANY system will support 8Gbytes.
You can get a system with a tyian board supporting 128Gbyte for less than one of those new Mac Pros.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[nabsltd]

Except that you don't see any desktop makers supporting 8GB of ram yet... (32GB on the mac pro.) How long has 64Bit vista been out now? Go find a consumer focused piece of hardware that can do that from HP or Dell or Lenovo..

It's pretty easy to find close to that...the Dell Studio XPS 435 supports 24GB, and comes standard with 6GB.

With an Intel Core i7-920, 6GB of RAM, 750GB of hard drive, a Radeon 4670 and a base price of $1549, it pretty much kicks the base Mac Pro around. The only real difference is that you can get a Mac Pro with two processors, but the i7 is so much better than the Xeons in the Mac Pro, you don't need more than 4 cores.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[IKnwThePiecesFt]

You can get a desktop with 8gb of RAM off the shelf at Best Buy... Hardly difficult to find.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[tepples]

The only parts of Apple that is really American is their R&D and sales and marketing parts

And the only parts of Apple that distinguish a Mac from any old Lenovo or Lenovo-compatible PC is their R&D and sales and marketing parts.

Just a small trinket. Yep! That Lenovo workstation when opened up is just like the Mac Pro! Not even close.

Which was entirely my point: What makes a Mac a Mac is all American.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[joe_bruin]

The only parts of Apple that is really American is their R&D and sales and marketing parts, the rest was outsourced years ago.

Apple has 25,000 employees in the United States, 12,000 of which are in Cupertino, California, and the vast majority of those are in engineering and product development. Apple is one of the few computer makers that designs their desktop and laptop motherboards itself, in the U.S. (as opposed to buying a design from Asian ODMs [see Dell]). All Apple products, from phones to iPods to base stations to accessories are designed, programmed, debugged, and tested in the United States.

Apple writes its own OS entirely in the U.S. It does not have any international code development centers (unlike say Microsoft) except for a few small acquisitions. Apple writes an office suite, various other tools, runs web services, and creates professional grade video and audio software (such as Final Cut Pro), all from California offices. Apple now owns a chip design firm in the U.S. (PA Semiconductor).

The only thing that Apple has outsourced is manufacturing.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[RedK]

The new Mac Pros use nehalem processors, essentially, I7 Xeons. So no, the i7 aren't better than the Xeons in the Mac Pro.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[Anonymous Coward]

You fucking America haters are just too much sometimes. The company was started in an American garage. It has an American CEO. Every product they sell is designed in America. They are listed on an American stock exchange. The fucking headquarters is in California. Unless California has seceded without me having heard about it, Apple is an American company.

Fucking deal with it. Damn. Slashdot has this stupid ass meme that somehow if a company outsources their manufacturing to some other country, somehow the company itself becomes a product of that other country. This is utter and inane bullshit. Get out of your mother's basement and get into the real world fucking retard.

Re:Not as American as you might think

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, this is run-of-the-mill, off-the-shelf equipment. Nothing to distinguish it whatsoever.

Re:Why give them free pub...

[outZider]

You do for most Dell and Lenovo products.

For the Mac Minis,...

[walter_f]

an increase in price, and not a minor one.

The entry level Mini now has 128 MB of video RAM, but a shared one as before and with still 1 GB RAM total.

Then again, you get even more of these USB ports than before - great, isn't it? Especially considering the price jump of 100 euros over here in Europe.

But at least one good thing: Apple did not throw out Firewire from the Minis, so we should probably praise them for this, day and night...

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[cerberusss]

I wonder if the old MacMinis will be available in the brick-'n-mortar stores against a reduced price?

Anyone knows how Apple deals with oldish models?

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[UnknowingFool]

Check out the Apple store online for clearance items for discontinued products. There is a small discount.

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[Uberbah]

And usually the best deal you can get is a refurb of the previous generation. I got a mid range Macbook Pro refurb for $1350 after the last refresh refresh and saved several hundred dollars. Apple refurbs have the same warranty as new machines, too.

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[Gilmoure]

If you have access to a school or business EPP store, you can get discounts on top of the refurb/clearance prices (extra $10-$50 off).

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[NateTech]

Right now the refurbs (well, until today's update of the store -- I haven't looked) didn't include the latest version of iLife, so you have to factor another $99 into the price (or the family pack, or whatever...) So you not only get "last year's" model, but also "last year's" software. I love buying "last year's" ANYTHING, PC or Mac... same thing with cars... but in this case, it's a detail some might overlook.

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[Uberbah]

Hmm, I thought they were treated as new machines in every other respect. If not, I don't have too many moral qualms about grabbing a torrent if I just gave them over a thousand dollars. iLife updates would probably be free anyway if they weren't several gigabytes in size.

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[NateTech]

Yeah, because no developer wants to get paid for their work or anything... (rolls eyes).

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[Uberbah]

Yeah, because Apple losing a potential sale of $79 when the company has gotten $30,000 from me over the course of my lifetime is really going to keep me up at night.

Get off your high horse, he's getting tired.

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[NateTech]

$30K or $5 "already paid" to a company offering a product for sale that you've stolen, doesn't matter. Stealing is stealing.

Just because it's popular to steal other's work these days, doesn't make it wrong for me to point it out. You're just looking for a way to make it seem socially acceptable to do it, especially amongst the Slashdot crowd who tend to think they're "entitled" to anything produced anywhere...

The terms are clear -- Apple says "If you want it, buy it." It's not even problematic like RIAA or other debates here about DRM'ed materials one might have to own in multiple formats under some of the wickedly dumb rules in the music industry.

Some people have morals and live by them, and some people make excuses and rationalizations. It doesn't change the fact that copying something not meant to be copied is piracy, and you're a pirate if you do it. It also doesn't change the fact that you eat away at Apple's margins each time you do it.

If you think I'm on my "high horse" because I don't steal from Apple -- that's fine with me. Also not my fault if you're defensive about your inappropriate and illegal behavior. Otherwise, why did you bother replying?

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[Uberbah]

$30K or $5 "already paid" to a company offering a product for sale that you've stolen, doesn't matter. Stealing is stealing.

Boy it sure was a shame when drove over the speed limit the other day, committing arson. Or that pyro who set an apartment building on fire last year, committing larceny. What's that? You mean we actually have different terms for violating the law in different ways, even though they all involve property?

So feel free to stop lying at any time. Copyright infringement is not theft, never has been theft, never will be theft.

If you think I'm on my "high horse" because I don't steal from Apple -- that's fine with me. Also not my fault if you're defensive about your inappropriate and illegal behavior. Otherwise, why did you bother replying?

I'm not defensive, I just have a low tolerance for tools and fools. I JUST BOUGHT A FUCKING LAPTOP FROM THEM. You think Apple is going to lose any sleep over not getting an extra $79 (for something that should have been WITH the machine) when they've gotten:

Apple ][e
Appleworks
Mac SE
Quadra 660AV
System 7.5
System 8
Clarisworks
Appleworks
Powerbook 1400
iMac rev A
G4 tower
OS X Sever
original iLife
iBook
G5 tower
Macbook
Macbook Pro
10 gig iPod
15 gig iPod
20 gig iPod
30 gig iPod
iPod shuffle
iPod Mini
160 gig iPod
iPod Nano
various iPod accessories

As you can see, I've just taken advantage of poor Apple! If everyone were like me Apple would surely be driven out of business! Don't tell Steve, his health is fragile and he might not be able to handle it!!!

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[NateTech]

Keep rationalizing it... love all that legalese. How about describing things in the effect they have on the real people working for the company?

Don't care what you bought. They set the price, you don't pay it. That's "stealing" to any 5 year old. Adults try to put fancy words around it, but if a kid asks... both the adult and the kid knows what it is.

Doesn't require a law degree to figure it out. Keep working on it.

Re:For the Mac Minis,...

[Uberbah]

Keep rationalizing it...

Oh, pull your head out already. You're like a car dealer who threatens to call the cops on someone in your shop because he took a couple complimentary doughnuts with him, when he just bought a car from you. But anyone that stupid wouldn't be in business for very long. I've averaged at least one Apple product for each year of my life. You know...a dedicated, repeat customer. That you're blathering so much on someone else's product that they give away for free with new machines (which I JUST bought) means you seriously need to buy some pot, buy some prunes, and lighten the fuck up already. Because I'm sure you NEVER copied a DVD, all your installed software follows the EULA to a "T", you never took a drink before you were 21, and of course never speed in your car.

love all that legalese.

It's called reality. Once you've taken care of that anal obstruction of yours, you might check it out sometime.

That's "stealing" to any 5 year old.

Let's put this in terms a five year old can understand: what's the difference for you if I steal your car, versus making a complete copy while leaving yours parked in your driveway. Ruminate on the difference for a while, or ask the nearest five year old if you have to.

Weaker video all around next to the old systems an

[Joe The Dragon]

Weaker video all around next to the old systems and a even bigger mac pro rip off $2500 for a core i7 based system with ONLY ONE CPU and nvidia 9500 video as the GT 120 is a 9500. What a ati card pay $200 more for a 4870 512 makeing it cost $150 + $200 = $350 makeing it about $100 more then other places you can get core i7 systems with better base video and the same cpu speed FOR ABOUT $1000+ less some even with 6gb of DDR3 ram. And why mini DP on a full size video card why not full DP with a DP to mini DP cable?

The old $1,199.00 $1,499.00 level imacs used to have ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory and ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB with a NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS with 512MB memory in the $2,199.00 one now they have slower and weaker NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics on board video in the $1,199.00 $1,499.00 ones and NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 with 512MB memory in the $2,199.00.

The mac mini is still a ripoff $599.00 for 1 GB OF RAM? $50 more for 2gb and $150 more for 4gb?

# [Add $150.00] for a 2.26 cpu

120GB is still small.

The $799.00 mini has the same 2.0 cpu but 2gb of ram and a 320gb hd. It should have at least 128 - 256 vram that does not come from system but it does not.

For about $500 you can get a X2 7750 and 790gx board with 128 side port ram with 4gb of ram apple should of put more in to the mini.

I think that category is fading

[wiredog]

How many people who would buy one would upgrade it? At the mid range you can get a pretty good (Windows or Linux) laptop, or iMac, or Mac Mini. High-end, sure, you want to put in the latest and greatest video card, or USB 3.0 card, without buying a new box. But any other expansion? Why not use USB? Or bluetooth? Most devices will work Well Enough that way. The EyeTV HDTV tuner is USB and works fine.

A Mac Mini looks to be a decent media center if you get a wireless keyboard+mouse and download HandBrake+VLC. A better AppleTV than the AppleTV, since it comes with a DVD player. The 24" iMac is Good Enough for anyone who isn't a media producer. It's certainly a decent software development machine, although a Mac Pro is better since it can do multiple screens.

Re:I think that category is fading

[Anonymous Coward]

The 24" iMac is Good Enough for anyone who isn't a media producer. It's certainly a decent software development machine, although a Mac Pro is better since it can do multiple screens

The iMac supports video spanning - you just need to get the right video-out adpater. The new ones even allow dual-link DVI.

Re:I think that category is fading

[stewbacca]

I have a 1999 G4 tower. I upgraded the CPU from 400mhz to 800mhz about 4-5 years ago and added some ram. But yeah, then I've purchased three Mac laptops and two iMacs since then, because frankly, I've never really needed to upgrade. /andecdote

It would be nice to have a $500-ish tower with specs similar to a Dell Inspiron 530 though.

Re:I think that category is fading

[foniksonik]

iMacs haven't been limited on number of screens for a while now, if you're talking about extended desktops... not sure what else you'd be referring to (multiple video cards?)

Re:I think that category is fading

[primalamn]

iMac can do multi screens, just add the proper adapter [to DVI/VGA] and plug in your new monitor. Easy.

Re:I think that category is fading

[Anonymous Coward]

A Mac Mini looks to be a decent media center if you get a wireless keyboard+mouse and download HandBrake+VLC.

The Mac Mini also has a built-in infrared receiver, so you can use it with a remote as well including the Apple remote, some universal remotes, and the Harmony remote. Also, there are some great media center applications for Mac including Boxee, Plex, and XBMC.

Re:I think that category is fading

[EastCoastSurfer]

A Mac Mini looks to be a decent media center if you get a wireless keyboard+mouse and download HandBrake+VLC. A better AppleTV than the AppleTV, since it comes with a DVD player.

I would agree if the price were $499 instead of $599.

Re:I think that category is fading

[stewbacca]

Did you really just nit-pick a $100 price difference?

Re:I think that category is fading

[cpotoso]

You are wrong, from the page you quote, for all models of the imac: "Support for external display in video mirroring mode"

Re:I think that category is fading

[anagama]

You are wrong, from the page you quote, for all models of the imac: "Support for external display in video mirroring mode"

No -- you are wrong. Lift your eyes up a bullet point, and you will see "Support for external display in extended desktop mode". In other words, the iMac supports spanning AND mirroring.

Re:I think that category is fading

[EastCoastSurfer]

Yes. At some point you have say "this costs too much and isn't worth it." $599 is a 20% increase over $499.

Re:I think that category is fading

[Tubal-Cain]

I just bought a DVD burner from Newegg for <$25. One can rip the ISOs and convert the videos to suitable formats. (or in the case of VLC, play the ISO directly)

Re:I think that category is fading

[sapelko]

well, $599 for a media-center (if that's what you're interested about) is a bit expensive considering it doesn't include a TV tuner/capture card

Re:I think that category is fading

[stewbacca]

On the flip side, I'm not convinced that thousands of reluctant buyers would suddenly spring for a Mac-mini if it were $100 cheaper. If you wanted one in the first place, and given the lack of competition for that sort of rig, most people aren't gonna hold out because they think it should be $100 less--they are going to buy it, because they want it. Lowering the price by 20% is not going to entice a lot of people who weren't interested in a crippled, small-form fact computer in the first place.

Re:I think that category is fading

[EastCoastSurfer]

I don't know if I'd say it's crippled, underpowered, but not crippled. IMHO, the sweet spot price for a mini is $399. They would fly off the shelves at that price. The problem is that it would kill Apple TV sales and sales of iMacs.

Like I said, I really wanted one to run as an HTPC and $599 is just too much to spend. $399 I would have bought one today, $499 and I would have waited, but ended up saying 'what's a $100?' $599 is a new camera lens I want :)

Re:I think that category is fading

[gobbo]

The 24" iMac is Good Enough for anyone who isn't a media producer. It's certainly a decent software development machine, although a Mac Pro is better since it can do multiple screens.

I'm a small-scale media producer (modest A/V projects, web, SOHO support, etc.) and after waiting for a couple of years for a headless mid range machine out of Apple (don't really need quad-core Xenons or 8GB RAM for video editing with basic effects), researched a hackintosh. By the time I'd priced out the components I wanted with reliable firewire and audio and a quality monitor, I was $180 short of a refurb 24" imac.

Posting from it now, and yes it can drive a second monitor, so I can get 3840 x 1200 resolution, if I want to splurge for another IPS screen.

The thing is, many people don't want to run a laptop HD in their desktop (mac mini) or want to supply a decent but not huge display of their liking (imac 20 = crappy screen, imac 24 = pricey and big).

The upgrade issue is moot if you're an Apple user, something DIY fanatics don't know. The resale value on used Macs is so high it doesn't make sense to put in components other than RAM: selling it and buying new (or refurb) is wiser.

Re:I think that category is fading

[kisielk]

We have a full office of software developers here running on iMacs, some of which are 3 years old. All of them have a secondary external display with desktop spanning.

Re:I think that category is fading

[lucas teh geek]

I wont buy an iMac until they support the opposite feature. when the iMac is getting old and slow, the 24" screen will still be perfectly fine; I'd like to be able to use it as just a monitor, so it could be the second desktop for the iMac bought to replace it.

Re:I think that category is fading

[NinjaCoder]

yes I totally agree, and I can't believe this trick is being missed by Apple!

My monitors typically outlast my computers...

Re:I think that category is fading

[mhollis]

I'm still using my G4-400 (Sawtooth). I put in a Sonnet 1GHz accelerator and 1.5G of system RAM and it has been good to go.

One dumb thing I did was to install OS X 10.5. That was a big mistake, as it took a lot of the available RAM in my system. I would limit all G4 systems to Tiger unless they can be expanded past 2G of system RAM.

G4s as of last year cannot run the latest software, and I'm thinking of Adobe's CS4 suite as well as the latest version of Final Cut Studio. But Final Cut Pro HD runs fine, and Adobe's CS3 suite of applications is just fine for me.

I love telling Windows fan-boys about how many years of excellent service my Mac has given me. Then I tell them that Macs cost less than Pee Cees because they cost less per year of service.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on the "midrange" idea. Apple did that under Scully and had a panalopy of mis-named models, like Centris, Deforma? Quadro, Hydra? I think it confused the market.

Apple's midrange is the upper-range iMac and the lower-range Mac Pro. And anyone who totes around the 19" laptop and tries to use it on a plane will recognize it as really a midrange desktop replacement with a bit of portability.

I went to the Apple Store today and started parting out a nice Mac Pro. Total cost with the options I wanted? Over $8.000. I could have gone to $10,000 with Apple RAM. Time to get back to work and earn money.

Re:I think that category is fading

[stewbacca]

And I disagree with this:

I have to respectfully disagree with you on the "midrange" idea. Apple did that under Scully and had a panalopy of mis-named models, like Centris, Deforma? Quadro, Hydra? I think it confused the market.

All they need is ONE model, and they could even call it...drum roll...Macintosh. There would be no confusion, as long as they made one model (with the same type of upgrade options you see now on the Apple store). A simple tower with two or three expansion slots an expansion bay..generic Intel processor, like a 2.4 C2duo, 2gb ram, 500mb hard drive, and $600 price tag (no monitor). It would be a couple hundred dollars more than an equivalent Dell Inspiron 5xx, but it would run OSX (worth the extra money) and benefit from consistently high consumer reports ratings in dependability and service.

Re:I think that category is fading

[MojoStan]

A Mac Mini looks to be a decent media center if you get a wireless keyboard+mouse and download HandBrake+VLC. A better AppleTV than the AppleTV, since it comes with a DVD player.

Except the Mac mini doesn't have an HDMI port, which cuts down on unnecessary cable clutter between the media center and home theater. The Apple TV has one, of course. All media centers (or "home theater PCs") should have HDMI.

Also, does anybody know if NVIDIA's PureVideo hardware acceleration (for high-def H.264 and WMV/VC-1) work in OS X yet? Linux didn't get support until November 2008 (works great, BTW).

Re:I think that category is fading

[evanspw]

Confirmed. I have been doing that since 2007. A 20" iMac, C2D (2dn generation Intel). Spanning. Works beautifully.

Three screens I don;t know about.

Re:I think that category is fading

[arminw]

....when the iMac is getting old and slow, the 24" screen will still be perfectly fine...

After you bought your shiny new superfast iMac, just sell the old one on eBay and use the money to buy yourself a secondary monitor. Since Macs consistently have a higher resale value than other computers, you may even come out with a small positive balance left over.

Re:I think that category is fading

[arminw]

...A simple tower with two or three expansion slots...

You only find yearnings like that on a techie site like /. but never where ordinary computer users roam. The current iMac does everything most users, even power users could possibly want to do. Anyone who needs the specialized options and power of an expandable tower system, should save their pennies and buy a real professional system, such as the MacPro. Even when running Windows, a high performance piece of hardware such as the MacPro is no more expensive than a similar computer system from some other manufacturer. The fact that a MacPro will also run OSX can be considered a free bonus. It is important not to compare only performance specifications, but also the build quality of such high end systems. For example, how much noise does such a powerhouse system generate? Some high end gaming PCs sound like a 747 about to take off, whereas our 8 core MacPro is essentially silent unless it is working really hard computationally. How easy is it to get at the innards to swap out/add hard drives, video cards and memory? Apple, more than any other manufacturer pays attention to such subtle details which never show up on any performance spec sheet.

Re:I think that category is fading

[arminw]

Buy a used G4 mini on eBay for $300-$400. It works great for us, connected to a 47" LCD TV screen.

Re:I think that category is fading

[arminw]

....Except the Mac mini doesn't have an HDMI port....

Our older G4 Mac mini will drive our 47" LCD through its HDMI input just perfectly. All we did was buy a proper adapter cable. However, since the TV also has a VGA input, it allows us to keep the HDMI connection for use by our DVD player. Of course, a separate cable is still needed for sound in either case.

Re:I think that category is fading

[dhuff]

Hell yes. The new models of the Mini, while being decent, incremental upgrades, aren't real bargains. Knock off $100 (low end model) to $200 (high end) and Apple would sell tons of them. Apple needs a line of good quality, low-end machines whose price differentiates enough from the 20" iMac - and the high end Mini ain't it. (Hint: there's a Recession going on out there, and plenty of people aren't going to spend $1000+ for a computer)

Sometimes I wonder if Apple really cares about gaining market share or not...

Re:I think that category is fading

[jedidiah]

...yes, because something as simple as a faster network card, faster version
of USB or a video capture card is something that only "professionals" should
want to or be interested in. Nevermind those cheap multi-terabyte hard drives.

You've just got to love the elitist/exclusionary mentality of Apple Fanboys.

Even laptops have expansion slots. Why not a desktop Mac?

No a Mac Pro is not "comparable". No other manufacturer makes you buy a
Quad core or 8 core system just to get a single expansion slot or drive
bay.

Re:I think that category is fading

[jedidiah]

> The Mac Mini also has a built-in infrared receiver, so you can use it with
> a remote as well including the Apple remote, some universal remotes, and the
> Harmony remote.

Is this something you've actually confirmed or are you just assuming all of this?

The stock remote is particularly lame.

Re:I think that category is fading

[jedidiah]

An AppleTV with an nv8400 would make the mini entirely moot as an HTPC.

It doesn't really take an entire mini. The bulk of the heavy lifting is
going to be done with the video card (nv8x00 or nv9x00) and the current
AppleTV is already enough of a machine to deal with what VDPAU and the
like doesn't accelerate.

So it might make more sense to hold off for an updated AppleTV.

Re:I think that category is fading

[Karlt1]

...yes, because something as simple as a faster network card, faster version
of USB or a video capture card is something that only "professionals" should
want to or be interested in. Nevermind those cheap multi-terabyte hard drives.

A faster network card than Gigabit Ethernet?
Video capture and multi-terabyte hard drives? That's what Firewire 800 is for.

Re:I think that category is fading

[NateTech]

Um, actually -- that's correct. The average computer user is completely baffled when presented with the myriad of options available on PC's these days, and has to go FIND a professional friend or relative to ask, "What the hell is really important?" You know this to be true, if you have any non-technical friends... they've asked you.

I'm generally a computing (not Mac, not WinTel, not Linux) fan-boy, and enjoy them all... but you have to hand it to Apple... they do know how to SIMPLIFY the purchasing and decision-making process for things that just don't matter to most folks.

They've also recently added simply "Back to my Drive" type functionality for their Time Capsule... how many people who are NON-technical can you think of would just love to be able to fire up their laptop and get files off their personal 1TB hard disk at home, WITHOUT thinking about it. Pay someone $100 a year to take care of that crap (we techies all know there's free and almost free ways to do it that are probably "better" to us, but seriously ... $100 a year is nothing if you DON'T know how), and get on with life. Do things important to you and IGNORE the computer...

THAT is the experience Apple strives for... computing that doesn't feel like computing and doesn't present the end-user with too many unnecessary or marginal options that in the end, us techies argue incessantly online about the virtues of, even as the technology is being replaced with the next "thing".

Re:I think that category is fading

[NateTech]

Google it dummy. That took a whole whopping two seconds... and I don't even care.

http://www.tuaw.com/2008/02/11/tuaw-review-logitech-harmony-remote-and-the-mac/

There you go... sheesh.

Re:I think that category is fading

[NateTech]

Actually, they're quite clear on their investor conference calls that they're about growth and profit.

"Market share" is horse-crap marketing speak for "we sold a lot of stuff, but we didn't make any money doing it". It doesn't always mean that you're profitable in your business ventures.

Re:I think that category is fading

[Anonymous Coward]

No G4 cpu is fast enough to decode 720p H.264 video. You need something like 2.0 GHz of Core for that.

Pass.

Re:I think that category is fading

[Gropo]

I love telling Windows fan-boys about how many years of excellent service my Mac has given me. Then I tell them that Macs cost less than Pee Cees because they cost less per year of service.

Excellent. I'm in the same boat, posting this from a Sawtooth 500 --> Dual 1.2Ghz, 1.5GB RAM. Kind of mind blowing to think our motherboards are downright paleolithic by computing standards and still chugging along like little champs. I myself opted out of 10.5 until I finally feel the final itch to get new iron. Guess that'll be once enough software stops supporting Tiger (and PowerPC). Flash video is the only real bummer on this 100mhz FSB (ugh not even 133mhz). I think the power supply's finally giving up. Whenever the CPUs get thread heavy you can actually hear the fans slow down a couple notches at this point.

Previous to this I owned a 1st Gen 601 60mhz upgraded to 266 (via PDS/NuBus slot) which itself lasted me 6 years of loyal service.

Re:I think that category is fading

[Anonymous Coward]

>Works beautifully.

Now all you have to do is get that darn spell checker working.

Re:I think that category is fading

[stewbacca]

I own a 20" iMac (white). You don't have to sell me on one. Would I would like, however, is a cheapie Mac tower like all the other companies make (the only difference being it would run OSX), so I can have a second Mac for my kids. $1200 is a bit much just to run World of Warcraft.

Re:I think that category is fading

[ttldkns]

The imac can to multiple screens too. it has a mini display port on the back and can do extended desktop up to 2560x1600 just like all the other computers with a display port.

http://www.apple.com/imac/specs.html

Re:I think that category is fading

[OwnedByTwoCats]

For you and me, buy a nice monitor and a Mac Mini. I got a 1.4 GHz PPC mini, second hand, for $350 on eBay. I'm sentimental about Classic applications and AppleWorks. I boot 10.3 (for Classic, once in a blue moon), and 10.5.

When it gets too slow, I steel myself to leave Classic unrunnable, and buy a new Mac Mini.

Re:I think that category is fading

[Doggabone]

That's the thing about pricing - you get it to the right spot, stuff flies off the shelf and profits are higher than if you raise the price to high - crippling sales - or too low - crippling profit margin per item. It's easiest to see the effect with downloadable goods, such as music and software, as the numbers can be gimmicked more readily - there's no production or shipping costs to gum up the works. I also would be much more likely to buy a Mini if it were priced lower - the question for the marketers is whether a 20% price drop increases sales by enough over 20% to increase profits. (Plus other considerations - is the Mini a gateway box to an iMac, MacBook, or Mac Pro? First hit's cheap kid, but now yer a fanboi...)

And to that, I have no idea.

Whether $100 is a nitpick depends completely on personal budget - for the next six months, $100 is a LOT of money for me. Next year, it'll be negligible.

Re:I think that category is fading

[mdwh2]

The current iMac does everything most users, even power users could possibly want to do.

Yes but by that reasoning, so does a much cheaper desktop PC, or, in particular, a much more portable laptop.

Some high end gaming PCs sound like a 747 about to take off, whereas our 8 core MacPro is essentially silent unless it is working really hard computationally.

You can have silent PCs too. The main issue is often the graphics card - what card does your Mac have? (If it doesn't have one comparable to the high end gaming PC, then it's not a fair comparison - it's perfectly possible to get silent high end PCs that don't have the latest graphics card).

How easy is it to get at the innards to swap out/add hard drives, video cards and memory?

Easy. But hang on, a moment ago you were playing the card of "You only find yearnings like that on a techie site like /. but never where ordinary computer users roam." Ordinary users don't swap out those things. And for those users who do, they're going to be concerned about how much expansion the computer offers. You can't have it both ways.

which never show up on any performance spec sheet.

Ah yes, this one again. Well my Amiga is the best computer ever, it just won't show up on a performance spec sheet.

Re:I think that category is fading

[arminw]

...The main issue is often the graphics card - what card does your Mac have?...

I don't do much real time display things such as games, so for me, the graphics card is of secondary importance. It is currently an ATI 2600 HD card with 128MB of memory. The video transcoding jobs we used to run on our older G5 2Ghz Dual Macpro took pretty much all night to complete. Its newer replacement, oh well, now already nine months old 8 core Intel takes about a half hour to do such a job. Some video transcoding jobs might benefit from a super hot video card, but as I understood it, it is mostly computational grunt work which needs a powerful processor system with lots of memory.

Re:I think that category is fading

[arminw]

....yes, because something as simple as a faster network card, faster version of USB or a video capture card...

Where can you get an ethernet card that runs faster than the built in 1000Gb/s port? The FireWire 800 connection will allow for the use of large hard drives, as well as high-performance video and audio equipment. This means that even power users don't have to break out the torx wrenches and pry open their iMac.

Re:I think that category is fading

[jedidiah]

It's a disk. What's to think about?

It should not be a mystery.

"Not thinking about it" means not having any control over the process
and quite possibly getting something you didn't quite expect. Making
things easy is one thing, dumbing them down to the point where people
aren't even capable of dragging and dropping things around anymore
is rather excessive.

The point is to empower the user rather than making them co-dependent.

Although this loses sight of the point:

          You shouldn't need to spend 4x the money in order to be a "casual hobbyist".

Re:I think that category is fading

[jedidiah]

Yes... because we spend too much on pretty hardware just so we can make
a mess out of it all again by having an Atari 800 style cabling octopus.

Real bright there...

If I want ugly I can just buy/build a PC with 15 drive bays for 1/4th the price.

Re:I think that category is fading

[torkus]

Besides that, what you spend vs. what you get on the mini is just...too much.

$600 for 1GB of ram and a 160GB hard drive? Without a keyboard, mouse or monitor.

I mean seriously... It's small and that's cool and all but $600 buys a lot of computer these days. Look at the 'upgraded' one - $800. Dell has run deals on Core i7 machines for about that and they include a keyboard, mouse AND MONITOR.

Re:I think that category is fading

[wkearney99]

HDMI is not just video. Yes, you can use a DVI to HDMI adapter, but you only get video. You're stuck having to run another set of cables for audio, potentially at a great loss of audio quality as analog audio won't pass any of the higher quality digital audio.

Re:I think that category is fading

[badkarmadayaccount]

If your gaming rig is about to take off, it's because you have crappy fans/heatsinks, and have not bothered setting up the proper BIOS configuration for such a machine. And although having a monopoly over something, abusing it to leverage into another market is wrong. And Apple technically have a monopoly over Apple-branded computers, therefore, as the producer of Mac OS X, they should not limit it to Apple-branded computers, otherwise they are breaking anti-trust laws (conventions?). So I will run Mac OS X on any machine I damn well please, or else they will be at the wrong end of a class action lawsuit. I don't have much other resources than time, but the rest I can pool together.

BTW, go Psystar!

Re:I think that category is fading

[Lars T.]

Yes... because we spend too much on pretty hardware just so we can make a mess out of it all again by having an Atari 800 style cabling octopus.

Real bright there...

If I want ugly I can just buy/build a PC with 15 drive bays for 1/4th the price.

So in your opinion, a long Firewire cable to the computer is worse than half a dozen audio and video cables.

Re:I think that category is fading

[arminw]

...And Apple technically have a monopoly over Apple-branded computers,...

And Hewlett-Packard has a monopoly over Hewlett-Packard branded computers, Honda has a monopoly over Honda brand cars and Coca-Cola has a monopoly on Coca-Cola branded soft drinks. Honda puts Honda engines in their cars, Ford puts Ford engines in and Coca-Cola into those Coca-Cola labeled bottles with guess what? So what then, is so different about Apple putting OS X into their Apple labeled computers? Do you really think that Coca-Cola would be happy if some other company started putting Coca-Cola into their own brand labeled bottles, then selling it cheaply, with an advertisement telling everybody that they have genuine Coca-Cola in their bottles?

I don't think Coca-Cola would object too much if you started pouring Coca-Cola into your empty 7-Up bottles or some other nondescript bottles and storing them in the refrigerator at home. They probably wouldn't care even if you drank their soft drink out of those foreign bottles. So, likewise, Apple probably doesn't give a hoot, if you personally buy a legal copy of OS X and load it into whatever hardware you can get it to run on. So far at least, Apple has not sicced their legal eagles on the Hackintosh community and most probably will not. Do not however start advertising and then selling your Brand X. computers as running Apple's OS X. That is patently illegal. This is what Pystar is doing.

Re:I think that category is fading

[badkarmadayaccount]

How is it illegal? If the other company payed fair and square for the Coca-cola in the bottle, it's a non-issue. Also, they don't technically sell the bottles, only the liquid, the bottles are a side effect. Apple technically sells both OS X and Macs.

BTW, how is a psystar machine different from a hackintosh?

Re:I think that category is fading

[arminw]

....BTW, how is a psystar machine different from a hackintosh?...

The difference is that if you as a /. techie build one for yourself, Apple may not like it, but will tolerate you doing it. However, once you start making a business of it, advertising that the computers you are selling come with Apple's brand OSX operating system, you are infringing on their trademark and they will come after you with their legal eagles.

Re:I think that category is fading

[badkarmadayaccount]

So, legaly, there is no difference? Thought so. Also, upgrade or not, the EULA is meaninless according to anti-trust law, so those OS X installs have fair and square bought licenses, and Apple doesn't have any say in the matter where the hell the software is going to be installed, period.

Also, aren't you confusing trademark with intellectual property? The trademark is on one of their own products, so there isn't o trademark infringement to speak of.

Re:I think that category is fading

[arminw]

...Also, aren't you confusing trademark with intellectual property?...

I am no lawyer who knows the ins and outs of all the legal aspects of this thing. I do know however that anyone who enriches himself with somebody else's intellectual property or trademark can, and most likely will, find themselves in court. That is where this is right now and eventually we will see how the court settles this issue. Personally, I do not think that a EULA is enforceable and this thing will be settled on the basis of trademark law or maybe even copyright, since PYSTAR has to modify Apple's installation software somewhere, in order to get OSX to install on their hardware.

If the court should decide against Apple and allow PYSTAR to continue playing their game, Apple can withdraw OSX from the open market, forcing PYSTAR and anyone else to pirate Apple software. Legitimate, registered Macintosh users, would be asked to supply a valid Mac serial number in order to buy an upgrade version of OSX directly from Apple. There is nothing any court could do if Apple did that.

Re:I think that category is fading

[abhi_beckert]

You can achieve a pretty nice workflow with synergy or teleport.

Use your new imac's keyboard on your old imac, as if it was a second display. You just use your old imac for stuff like email and calendars and music and stuff, and your new one for surfing the web/games/work.

I use this system every day all day between my 13.3" notebook and my 30" desktop. Works fantastic.

Re:I think that category is fading

[mhollis]

Apparently, these days, "Macintosh" is a little too generic. One could say that "Macintosh" relates to an experience, not an individual product.

For mid-range, how about this? The 24" 3.06GHz iMac at $2200.00 hits your price point. If you have to have something that is expandable, the $2500.00 Mac Pro may be in the sweet spot. Essentially I'm saying, do you need two or four processor cores and maybe a little more expandability with four.

But I don't think Apple is going to be selling anything in the $800 price range in the near future, outside of the Mac Mini.

On the count of 3

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, everybody together on the count of 3.

1...2...3...WHO CARES?!?!?

Re:Why give them free pub...

[Anonymous Coward]

Your welcome.

"I lik teh macz cuz dey iz so simpul 2 uze!"

Re:Why give them free pub...

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, you leave my welcome out of this!! Got it?!?!

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[TheRaven64]

Reread what the grandparent said: In certain markets. The price of the Mac Mini has gone up by a fair amount in the UK. None of the current lineup looks particularly enticing, but I still have 18 months left on my MacBook Pro's warranty, so I don't have to worry about replacing it any time soon. I'm starting to think that my next machine won't be a Mac though.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[Richard_at_work]

Apple never dropped prices for the UK when the dollar tanked against the British Pound, but this rise is due to fluctuations in the exchange rate (which sees the British Pound more or less back to where it was against the dollar before the dollar tanked)? Hell, I'm a heavy Apple user and I'm not even that much of an apologist!

The new Mini is expensive, and there's little justification for it at that spec level.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[morgan_greywolf]

Why not just build one yourself? With the right case, power supply and fan, you could probably build something for around $200-$250 with a full-blown Core 2 Duo and 1 GB of RAM or so.

Virtualization options still limited

[bbasgen]

I am disappointed to see that the new iMacs don't have quad cores, although I'm a bit heartened to see they at least support up to 8 GB RAM. An imac quad core would be a great virtualization machine. I think Apple has missed the mark to not go quad core -- at least in the high imacs -- considering these models will likely be out for 9 months to 12 months. I'm also disappointed that prices didn't drop a bit considering the current market conditions. To ask folks to put down $1200 to have an all in one solution may be a non-starter nowadays. If you want a Quad core mac, you have to pay $2500 -- and for that you get 3GB RAM. Wow. Anyway, I can understand why there isn't fan fair here -- these are pretty minor speed bumps. These were much needed so I'm glad to see them arrive, but in the absence of new innovation, these speed bumps are decent today, but in 6 months they are going to be quite far behind.

Re:Virtualization options still limited

[pseudonomous]

Well ... just buy two dual core mac-minis for $599 each, stack them on top of each other and, viola! there you have you're quad-core machine.
 

Re:Virtualization options still limited

[Just Some Guy]

An imac quad core would be a great virtualization machine.

First, I totally understand what you're saying. I'm one of the many who wish they had at least one mid-range hackable model because none of their offerings really match what I'd want.

Having said that, I think their logic is this: iMacs are meant for regular desktop users. They're not supposed to be workstations or high-end systems, even the higher-end models. If you want to do stuff more advanced than the average person, you're supposed to get the Mac Pro.

While I don't fully agree with them, I can understand them not wanting to cannibalize their most expensive systems by putting the same capabilities in their middling models.

Re:Virtualization options still limited

[jht]

That was my only "rats" about these - I was hoping for a quad-core iMac as at least a BTO option for the high end. Especially since these new models support 8GB of RAM.

Otherwise it was a pretty decent batch of gear, and they also dropped pricing on a lot of the BTO options as well for the other Macs. Keeps them competitive until the next major redesign.

Re:Virtualization options still limited

[bbasgen]

I think you are right on target with Apple's thinking.

The thing that has bugging me for *years* is that their Pro line seems increasingly irrelevant. It seems entirely geared towards high-end multimedia and design use. I understand that is a valid segment of the high-end market -- but I don't get how that constitutes the entire "Pro" market. Why on earth go for a Mac Pro?
* Quad Core
* Nvidia GT 120
* More HDD options
* PCI capabilities

I am surprised that both the iMac and the Mac Pro max out at 8GB RAM. Great for the iMac, of course. It just seems like the pro line-up has become a bit of a fiction. I understood it when they were doing multiple processors as a matter of course -- you needed a big machine. I understood it when expansion (HDD & PCI) was a bigger industry 5+ years ago than it is today with just about everything built in. Nowadays, though, it seems like a false choice -- you could put a quad core and GT120 in an iMac, and you could do it for a competitive price. I remember the days when I'd yearn for the Quadras, the 9500, 9600, and the power mac G3 & G4. Around the G5, though, the iMac became a very capable computer, and the Power Mac G5 lost its luster. Oh well.

Re:Virtualization options still limited

[Anonymous Coward]

There aren't any 4-core Nehalem chips available in the power envelope that an iMac would require. I imagine they'll show in the iMac shortly after Intel releases them (rumor is within the next six months or so).

Re:Virtualization options still limited

[mgblst]

Nobody wants a quad core iMac, what a joker you are. You can do virtualization with dual core no problems. Your just making up excuses.

Re:Virtualization options still limited

[toddestan]

Why would they need a Nehalem chip, and not a Core 2 Quad? There is the Q9550s, a 2.83Ghz chip at 65W, and then there are the mobile ones too which use less power. Of course, perhaps they could redesign the iMac to dissipate a bit more heat anyway, the current ones already run too hot.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[je ne sais quoi]

Grandparent has it totally wrong about the prices, at least on the mini. There was no increase in price, but this is slashdot and everybody loves to hate Apple. The new ones are $599 and $799, which are exactly the same as the old one, if you don't believe the newegg, look at the wikipedia page on them it has all the prices and specs for the old models. Also, as you can see here, Newegg has one of the old models for sale still. They price it at $594, according to wikipedia it's the lower priced model with a smaller hard drive.

The big differences I see is a larger hard drive (120 GB vs. 80GB on the basic), Firewire 800 on the new one vs. 400 on the old one (!!! Looks like firewire ain't dead yet!), display port video out + mini-DVI vs. just mini-DVI, a bump in the processor up to 2 GHz from 1.83 GHz, DDR3 memory vs. DDR2 in the old one (which is nice), and finally the new one has NVIDIA 9400M vs. Intel GMA 950. Oh, and the front side bus is 1066 MHz now vs. 667 MHz previously.

Overall it looks like a nice upgrade on the system.

New iPods and iPhones can do remote

[mkiwi]

If you've bought an iPod touch or an iPhone in the past 2 years, apple has a free program called "Remote." It lets you browse all your music/movies from iTunes over wifi, do coverflow from your mini to the iWhatever, etc. Then you tap on your movie/music and it plays it through the computer.

It absolutely love it; It can be found in the App Store.

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[ifrag]

This is exactly why I have not considered Mac as a viable option for me. The video card offerings are just not current enough. Why is it that everything else in the system is relatively high end and the video cards fall off the face of the planet on the low end or mid-range at best?

Until they either offer a base system with either NO VIDEO CARD (choose your own later) or something in the GTX 200 series, I can see no point in buying one. And what's up with the single HD4870, why not at least offer an X2? High end everything else and then crap for video card makes a nice workstation, but it's an insanely underpowered gaming rig. And at the price range of the Mac Pro, the only reasonable thing to compare it to is gaming class systems.

Prices are completely nuts

[Spatial]

The lower-end Quad Core system includes a 2.66Ghz Quad-Core Intel Xeon processor, 3GB of memory, 640GB hard drive, 18x double-layer Superdrive, and a NVIDIA Geforce GT 120 with 512MB of memory priced at $2,499.

Since they don't come with a monitor, the profit margin on these things must be around 50%. Wow!

The hardware is typical mid-range stuff: decent hard disc, low-end GPU (renamed 9600GSO) and mid-high end CPU (renamed i7 920). Including a high quality motherboard and PSU, that would cost around 900 dollars at retail. That leaves a healthy 1,600 for the case, OS, software and peripherals.

Honest question: Who buys these things?

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

After some customization, I can get a mac pro for $3,500 that is almost comparable (not quite) to the pc I just put together for $1,400.

If people want to throw a dollar sign in the word "Micro$oft", then we need to through a couple in with Apple: "A$$le"

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Just Some Guy]

People that want the Apple name in their house and dont understand the the the price they are paying is not worth the equipment they are getting.

...to you. As their market share is still increasing, and quickly, it's objectively true that their equipment is worth what people are paying. Whether you think that's fair or reasonable is irrelevant: the market has spoken.

Hold on what am I thinking this is Apple the all mighty and great the fans will flock to them and pay what ever they want.

I'm not a fanboy. I have a Mac only because a friend was practically giving one away. Still, when it up and dies, it will probably be replaced by another one.

I spend all day managing FreeBSD and OpenBSD servers from a heavily-hacked Linux desktop. I don't like the Mac because I'm not capable of anything else, or because I can't build my own (like the handmade home server sitting next to it), but because when I get home at night I just don't to mess around to get the thing working. I like doing normal-people things like making home movies of the kids, and playing with my iPod, and playing closed-source video games. If I can afford a Mac that lets me spend more of my free time doing the things I want to do, then it's my own business if I choose to buy one.

Looking down on others because you can't comprehend psychology and economics doesn't make you elite. It makes you an uneducated snot who's far more pretentious than the people you're looking down on.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[obijuanvaldez]

No kidding.
The Mac Pro spec as priced out on newegg:

Western Digital Caviar 640GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive $69.99
Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz Quad-Core Processor $288.99
EVGA 01G-P3-N959-TR GeForce 9500 GT 1GB Video Card $69.99
ASUS P6T Deluxe Motherboard $289.99
LG 22X DVD&#177;R DVD Burner Black SATA $22.99
LIAN LI PC-60USB B2 Silver Aluminum Case $119.99
G.SKILL Value 1GB 184-Pin DDR SDRAM $29.99 ea x 3 = $89.97
Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 64-bit $179.99
Rosewill RG530-2 530W Power Supply $54.99

Subtotal: $1,186.89

This list may not include incidental things e.g. thermal compound, the exact same number of USB ports, but I think is a fair line by line comparison. Noting that the prices on the Mac Pro will not get better with time, although the above price will. The markup is about 100%. For this item, I am just not buying any argument that if you compare line by line that Apple products are reasonably priced. Literally.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Idiomatick]

I think you can get a laptop around the same specs for that much. I bought 3days ago a T500 for 1300$ 2.53GHz dual core (not quad), 3GB ram, 250GB hd(not640), radeon w/ 256mb not 512. But it came with a screen wireless card webcam bluray and is a freaking laptop and 1100dollars less. Mac pricing is insane.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[mblase]

The Mac Pro is just that -- a professional machine. People who buy them usually load them up them with expansions before or just after the purchase: PCI cards for powerful audio or video editing, lots of RAM and internal storage, stuff like that. The price is what I'd expect for a high-quality business machine which will be expensed to the company anyway.

Few consumers want or need to buy expandable PCs or Macs for home use. Those who do are enthusiasts who probably know enough to build their own Intel OS X-compatible PC anyway. The rest of Apple's target audience want something that Just Works and doesn't take up a lot of space or power.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[UnknowingFool]

The MacPro is not a gaming machine. It is not a desktop. It is a workstation aimed at professionals or prosumers. For that reason alone, it is much more expensive. You can't compare it to a Dell home desktop that starts at $399, you have to compare it to a Dell workstation that start at $979. Even then you have to pick a model that offers the Xeon. Adding the options to a Dell workstation to make it comparable to a MacPro quickly raises the price.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Idiomatick]

I did some research and its even better. I can get my laptop for 1300 AND a pc matching their specs for the same price as their pc. So its 55% pure profit, awesome.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[drsmithy]

Honest question: Who buys these things?

If you're buying it to run a business that pulls in, say, half a million bucks a year, then the ~$1500 or so (amortised over 2-3 years) "rip off" factor is little more than a rounding error.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[rsmith-mac]

You're looking at the wrong CPU/Mobo combo. The Mac Pro would have a 2-way Xeon processor in it (you pay a premium for 2-way and higher) and an appropriate motherboard with two sockets, 8 DIMM slots, etc. It still doesn't add up to too much, but you would need to slap something around a few hundred dollars on to that price tag (exact value unknown, the Nehalem Xeons aren't for sale yet).

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not trying to be an Apple apologist, but there is one thing missing from your list that is important to a lot of people: support. Now, I'm not saying support is worth an extra $1000, and I'm sure you could probably get a similarly spec'd Dell or the like for less, but nothing beats being able to take your computer down to the Apple store, or having it shipped off for free, for repairs or help. That's something that the types of people that buy these machines are looking for that building your own does not get you.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[xenolion]

"Looking down on others because you can't comprehend psychology and economics doesn't make you elite. It makes you an uneducated snot who's far more pretentious than the people you're looking down on." Now where did you get that from man I was making a joke. I have many pieces of equipment in my house and work. The main point is for a normal home user these prices don't make sense. Companies will spend it due to how long they can keep it in production unlike home users who like to upgrade every two to three years. Let just see who buys and who doesnt.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[nine-times]

Honest question: Who buys these things?

Honest answer: Media professionals. Not home users, typically, or even office workers.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

Except you can option it to get a dual Xeon configuration, of which the Core i7 is incapable. Since it uses Xeon, you're looking at the wrong RAM and mobo. FB-DIMMs and server-grade mobos please. Also what about workstation grade materials like RAID cards, etc.? Are they tested in QC with your random ASUS motherboard with Windows XP or Vista? And so on and on.

So no, not entirely comparable.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[ptudor]

because when I get home at night I just don't to mess around to get the thing working.

That's the exact reason I give. Things just work with Apple products. All my terminals to OpenBSD boxes and Gentoo boxes and the localhost work for work, but iPhoto, iTunes, Addressbook, and so on work for my life.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[HTH NE1]

If people want to throw a dollar sign in the word "Micro$oft", then we need to through a couple in with Apple: "A$$le"

I prefer Appl€. With the exchange rate, it's pretty much the same thing.

(It's "&euro;".)

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[UnknowingFool]

For this item, I am just not buying any argument that if you compare line by line that Apple products are reasonably priced. Literally.

The main part of your argument and pricing is that you didn't spec out a Xeon processor and a matching 2 dual chip MB. That is a significant difference. While on the surface a Core i7 is similar to a Xeon, they are not the same in terms of performance and function. The MacPro is a workstation not a desktop. Ignoring that basic difference allows you to make your comparison, but your comparison isn't really valid then.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[doh123]

well other than the fact your using different parts altogether... a single Xeon processor thats in the Mac Pro costs $1000 from intel, not $288... their custom motherboard design and lower sells amount would also make the motherboard way more costly than mast produced ASUS stuff.... as well as many other things. You can rate an entire computer based on a small handful of specs when there are literally hundreds of specs to consider for a full machine.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[doh123]

only because you have no clue what your doing... you do not know how to compare machines correctly.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Just Some Guy]

Now where did you get that from man I was making a joke.

Nice try, but I'm not buying it.

The main point is for a normal home user these prices don't make sense.

You're wrong, based on market performance. They might not make sense to you, but a lot of people thought they seemed reasonable.

Car analogy time: any car will get you from point A to point B, but many people spend extra to do it comfortably in a nice-looking vehicle. Your Ford Focus might be a great car - I'm fond of my Oldsmobile - but BMW is selling plenty of upscale models. Even down to the low end of the price scale, you might think generic ketchup is just fine and that Hunt's is ridiculously overpriced. In either example, your opinions simply don't matter: the price difference is worthwhile to a sizable market segment.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[UnknowingFool]

Define normal user. The way you define it, it's a geek who can build and tweak their own computers and maybe even compile a kernel. Most normal people can't tell you the difference between X11 and xfs. For most normal people, a computer is a tool. They don't want to spend more time messing with things than they have to spend. Also price isn't everything and they are willing to pay the difference so their lives are more convenient. You statement would be akin to making fun of people who buy Acuras when Fords are the same thing and much cheaper.

You do get quality when you pay for an Apple product. At home, I have a Linux MythTV server with multiple MythTV clients, an Apple MacBook, and a Windows box. By far the machine that gives me the most headache is Windows with it's constant rebooting or wanting to reboot. Linux is more trouble free but it took me at least six months to get there. From day one, my MacBook worked and just keeps working, and I manage all my Linux boxes from it. The main reason I got it is that it works with all environments, and it is the only Unix laptop you can really buy that's not a custom machine.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[ieatcookies]

And lets be honest, they look nice. I have the new macbook not just because it is capable of doing what I need (primarily java dev), but also because it's ridiculously sexy. It's more expensive than your standard Dell lappy, but I'm down with that, because your standard Dell lappy looks like shit. And I don''t have to install an alternative OS and dick around x11 configs, video drivers, wireless drivers, etc. I agree totally about Mac's just working. I switched my home station to Mac after being fed up trying to get wireless working on my Fedora machine. I don't want to compile kernels anymore, I don't want to compile anything at home !! Those days are over. I also find that my Mac hardware maintains it's performance value longer than my stock PC's. The original Macbook Pro's are still reasonably powerful machines.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[xenolion]

Thanks man I did need a good laugh today. We will just have to wait and see who buys. btw Hunts is horrible stuff, again my opinion there. Go ahead go off again like the first time when i stated my opinion in all of this i guess you missed the "Troll part"? My whole point is people will buy it if they want it. That was also the "people that want the Apple name" Im done with this rant or statement

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[ecotax]

Honest question: Who buys these things?

My boss, hopefully :-)

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

No kidding.

The Mac Pro spec as priced out on newegg:

Western Digital Caviar 640GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive $69.99
Intel Core i7 920 Nehalem 2.66GHz Quad-Core Processor $288.99
EVGA 01G-P3-N959-TR GeForce 9500 GT 1GB Video Card $69.99
ASUS P6T Deluxe Motherboard $289.99
LG 22X DVD&#177;R DVD Burner Black SATA $22.99
LIAN LI PC-60USB B2 Silver Aluminum Case $119.99
G.SKILL Value 1GB 184-Pin DDR SDRAM $29.99 ea x 3 = $89.97

And that right there is where you lose any hope of being relevant. You've picked plain DDR, which not only ISN'T the kind in the Mac Pro (DDR3 ECC), but won't even WORK in the mobo you've listed.

Add to that the fact that the CPU is NOT an i7 920, but rather the Nehalem update to the Xeon. You'll note a distinct lack of dual-socket i7 setups, as it isn't supported. The Xeon versions have the additional QPI links

To use a car analogy, this is like claiming that your Ford Focus is way better than a Ferrari because you got 4 wheels and an engine for so much less money.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Uberbah]

After some customization, I can get a mac pro for $3,500 that is almost comparable (not quite) to the pc I just put together for $1,400.

With what, Xeon's from a pawnshop that some guy "found" at a "garage sale"?

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[stewbacca]

People that want the Apple name in their house and dont understand the the the price they are paying is not worth the equipment they are getting.

Thanks for setting me straight, because everybody values the same things you do, I suppose. For the record, the prices I paid for each of my four current Macs were very much worth every penny...TO ME. Since it is my money, please go away. I could sit here and belittle you for being a cheap bastard, but I won't.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[TubeSteak]

The markup is about 100%.

Macintosh buys wholesale, which means your $1,186.89 is more than they are paying.
Markup > 100%

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[stewbacca]

Well I suppose you could replace "Apple" with "Dell", since that's the usual comparison...and the Mac Pros are hundreds of dollars cheaper (not sure that's still true, though).

A more valid comparison would be, "I can get a cheapie, ugly-ass Acer/HP/Dell with a 2.4gb C2Duo, 500gb hard drive, a 19" monitor and 4gbs of ram for $600, but I can't get a good Mac for under $1200.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[obijuanvaldez]

You're totally right, I got the wrong CPU. As a software developer I am well used to getting things completely wrong the first time. Newegg doesn't have the 5504, who knew? Per Techiestop, you can actually get the CPU for $13 less. For that kind of coin, you may be able to get a grande mocha-choca half-caff-skinny late from Starbucks. w00t.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

DDR memory with the Core i7? Perhaps you could lay off the coffee for awhile. Core i7 requires DDR3. Xeon processor not quoted. Windows Vista Ultimate? MS doesn't have a shipping OS right now. Wait until Win7, maybe. Your hardware list would run FreeBSD well, though.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[gad_zuki!]

Id also shave off 20 to 30 percent for the retail vs OEM price difference. OEMs dont need nor do they pay for the retail package with a box, manual, cables, etc. Not to mention if you were an OEM, Vista would cost 50 or 60 dollars via MS OEM pricing.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[obijuanvaldez]

You have indeed found another flaw found in my comparison. It would be great for the Mac Pro's value if that DDR3 RAM would make up the $1300 difference. Unfortunately it can be had for well under $450/GB. Basically it will come out to costing, at most, exactly the same as I originally quoted. Or less. Coupled with the savings on the CPU, the "Ferrari" you referred to is looking more and more like a new chassis dropped on the same old Ford Focus. But that Ferrari logo sure is sweet.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[UnknowingFool]

Again you got the wrong CPU. Your link is Intel Xeon Quad-core 2.00GHz. The MacPro uses a Intel Xeon Quad-core 2.66GHz which isn't generally available yet. While that might not seem a huge difference, bear in mind that a Intel Xeon 3.0GHz Woodcrest has the almost the same specs as an Intel Xeon 3.0GHz Wolfdale but is $700 cheaper on newegg.com and that's only one generation difference. Also in your overall comparison you neglected to get server components like ECC memory, enterprise grade HD, dual-chip motherboard, etc. Details matter.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[lmnfrs]

Yep, that's a vital point because Nehalem Xeons currently are not available anywhere else, and the Nehalem Core i7 is not comparable. They are newer than the Xeon platform that is available and support 3 channel memory. That sounds nice, but the _older_ Xeon platform supported 4 channel memory with RAID and sparing (just like hard drives) and ECC to mention only a couple things. Desktop and Workstation/Server hardware are not in the same world.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[MikeFM]

Macs are a little more but you get what you pay for as far as quality.

I wouldn't mind seeing a low end Mac, especially a laptop, in the $350 price range as it'd really open up the platform to everyone and probably cause a lot of pain to the PC market but I'm not sure they could maintain their quality for that amount. IMO that is a good reason to allow clones. Let the clones offer the cheap entry level products and dominate on quality. I might even allow clones only within that price range.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Spatial]

Core i7 920, since it's the same basic chip? The only difference at all is that the Xeon has 2xQPI and a lower TDP than the i7. They probably perform identically.

And of course it's not particularly relevant anyway, since he could just pick a much more powerful CPU than the MP's Xeon and it would still cost a lot less.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

The point PC users miss is that it runs the Mac OS. I and many others would buy the hardware regardless of price because the Mac OS is not the virus ridden, 10 years out of date hunk of garbage that is Windows. Yes they are more expensive because the OS is so much better and doesn't constantly get in your way or prevent you for doing productive work.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[SQL Error]

No, he's right. The new entry Mac Pro has a single socket motherboard with only 4 DIMM slots. The CPU is Xeon in name only; it's identical to the i7 920.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

I like what you're saying here.

Apple used to market to DIY guys like you: kit builders. But they found there's way more money to be made selling to the ignorant with good intentions: school-districts and parents, mostly.

But Apple makes good gear. I mean, OS X works! And it's very low-maintenance compared to Linux or Windows. I spend very little time "caring for" my macs. My experience with Linux is: something's always broken and needs to be researched and fixed. BSD worked better. Almost everything worked as described, and stuffed that didn't work had warning in the faq/docs. But OS X is much simpler, much easier to maintain by far for non-hackers.

But you're right, the price is way behind the times. Apple used to compete with Sun and SGI, really. If you had a movie studio or a magazine or TV station and needed FAST workstations to put out your video, publications, animation, etc. Apple gear was a far, far better deal. $40,000 bought you a Sun SparcStation with no software or extra disk/ram. $40K got you a fully loaded mac with Photoshop and external disks.

That was a long time ago.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[registrar]

Researchers. I'll buy one. I've got a half a million bucks to spend, that by law I can't put in my own pocket. (I'll also get an education discount that will reduce the profit margin to about 30%.)

You could call it a tertiary education sector inefficiency, but it's probably better understood as a cheap perk: it's lot cheaper to give me a computer I'm happy with (marginal cost maybe $2000) than a salary I'm happy with (marginal cost about $20,000).

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[jo_ham]

So what you're saying is it's not the same and he deliberately chose the cheaper consumer-grade CPUs (whether the Xeons are worth the extra cash or not) to accentuate the price difference...

The Prayda handbag I bought at the market is totally identical to the real one!

The point is the original poster way up top there *could* have used identical Xeon processors in the comparison, but chose not to. It's not like he had to go for a "closest match" comparison like the days of old when Macs were still PPC.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[beckett]

(It's "&euro;".)

if you are rich enough to own one of these Apples, it's actually

(Option + Shift + 2)

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[qwertyatwork]

Three reasons

First it runs OS X. Maybe thats not good enough for you, and if its not, fine. For me, its a good enough reason.

Second lots of nice high end hardware. Sure, graphics cards leave a lot to be desired. But macs arnt sold to hard core gamers. You want a gaming machine? A mac is not for you.

Third they look SO nice. Rather than getting some ugly grey box, my iMac is a single piece of hardware. With wireless keyboard, wireless mouse, wireless internet I have litterly one wire, a power cable. I like that my computer looks nice.

Fourth (a bonus!) keep in mind, you may like windows, you may like linux, you may like OS X, or you may even like all three. Each person has their own preferences. Just because a mac isnt the right computer for you, doesnt mean its not the right computer for me. I hate windows. But there are those that love it. Great, it works for them and they are happy. Thats part of what makes us individuals.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[NateTech]

Nah, details don't matter to these guys trying desperately to figure it out... Ha. Seriously -- they think they're getting a "great deal" on stuff that isn't the same.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[NateTech]

For his desk, sure.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

That memory's not DDR3, is it?

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that unlike most PCs, the Mac Pro line uses server components?

Have you looked at what a server mobo, Xeon and ECC RAM would cost for a PC?

The difference is huge, much more than it was, say, a decade ago.

A server mobo will cost you 3x as much as a high-end desktop mobo (and 6x as much as a basic one). Similar for CPU and RAM.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[toddestan]

I'm guessing that the problem is that since Apple's line up until the Mac Pro are all dual core machines, if you want more than a dual core you've got to buy the pricy Mac Pro. On the other hand, you can get a quad core PC quite cheap nowadays. So if someone decides they want at least 4 cores (or a decent video chipset, or expansion slots, or more than 1 internal harddrive, etc), they are going to take one look at Apple, go "WTF?", and go buy a PC. It really boils down to a lack of options in the Apple world.

Re:Prices are completely nuts

[jo_ham]

Well, if they want the 4 cores and the expandability, then there's the Mac Pro. There's no "lack of options", just because they're sold at a price point you don't like.

Apple's take on the issue would be that if there *really* was a market for them in the build-your-own sector, then they'd be offering something to fit it. As it stands, I think they know they cannot compete in the market segment of people who build their own hardware, or the home user who upgrades more than just their HD and RAM instead of buying a new machine.

It's not a bad thing, necessarily, unless enough of the hone builders want to use an officially sanctioned OS X box instead of Windows or Linux. Right now, I don;t think there are enough of them though, and Apple knows this. It's more profitable for them to offer the iMac as that box (even with the lack of upgrades) since it slims down their production stream (fewer models) and it drives the pros, who generally spend a lot on hardware anyway, to start at the Mac Pro as the entry level machine if they really need OS X (like an FCP shop, or a Shake farm, or a design shop that prefers Macs).

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[Anonymous Coward]

Very little. Back last year when the Canadian Loonie had passed up the greenback, prices were still quite a bit higher on apple.ca than they were on apple.com.

So much so, that using my academic discount would have resulted in essentially getting the American price, before taxes.

The American automakers tried to pull the same, attribute higher Canadian prices to the exchange rate, and it worked when the Loonie was weak, but once it supassed the Greenback, people caight on that the math just didn't check out.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[BrokenHalo]

How much of this price change is due to the fluctuations in exchange rates?

Well, I'm not sure how it works in other countries, but here in Australia the price seems to be pegged at an advantageous rate (for Apple) and that is that. There is no room for negotiation: you either want the product or you don't. This is IMO one of the more distasteful aspects of Apple's business model.

Their model doesn't annoy me enough to stop me using my second-hand MacBook, since I find it complements my (linux) desktop machines quite comfortably, but my approval isn't required...

The Real World

[Anonymous Coward]

cares. Snooze.

Don't forget the new keyboard

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

I like the new keyboard that ships with the iMac -- basically a wired version of the compact wireless keyboard.

Re:Don't forget the new keyboard

[diqmay]

I didn't notice this till now... where's the damn 10-key? No one is going to use Excel or Numbers on the new iMacs?

Re:Don't forget the new keyboard

[pushing-robot]

You can still get the full-size keyboard. It doesn't cost any more.

That said, full size keyboards have become rather anachronistic, as they put the least used keys in the most prominent position, directly in front of the user:

• Navigation keys? Who needs Page Up and Page Down when they have a scrolling mouse?
• Numeric keypad? Are we still in the eighties? How many people spend more time on the numeric pad than the alphanumerics or mouse?
• Num Lock, Scroll Lock, Pause/Break, Print Screen? Don't make me laugh.

Not only do these extra keys take up prize desktop real estate, they force the user to spread their arms unnaturally far apart to reach the left edge of the keyboard and the right edge of the mouse pad. You might not even notice the stretch after a while, but it makes for poor ergonomics.

While I can still see the advantages of a numeric keypad for spreadsheet or accounting use, I think it makes a lot more sense to use a physically separate pad. With a detached pad, you can put the alphanumeric keys and mouse much closer together (and put your arms in a more natural position). The numeric pad can go in a more sensible location off to the side.

I used to be a huge fan of full-size keyboards (hell, I owned the original Logitech G15 Gaming keyboard a few years back, a 22"x11" monstrosity). But after spending the last 18 months on the new Apple Bluetooth keyboard, I'm not about to go back. It's more natural and more comfortable—and it frees up a ton of desk space.

Re:Don't forget the new keyboard

[diqmay]

While I can still see the advantages of a numeric keypad for spreadsheet or accounting use, I think it makes a lot more sense to use a physically separate pad. With a detached pad, you can put the alphanumeric keys and mouse much closer together (and put your arms in a more natural position). The numeric pad can go in a more sensible location off to the side.

This was honestly the point of my post. I spend an above average amount of time in Excel and Numbers. I am more than willing to admit that the average user probably does not spend enough time using the numeric keypad to make it a mandatory feature, but at the same time I'm hesitant to agree that the standard keyboard should be sans-keypad.

The reason why I am hesitant is from my own personal observations at the local Apple Reseller I've worked part-time for over the last 4 years. When the Apple bluetooth keyboard dropped the keypad, there was a sizable number of people who declined the wireless upgrade due to the lack of a number pad. Our store has mitigated that by stocking up on the previous generation of apple bluetooth keyboards (in the white crumb catcher style), and those sell about 3:2 over the new keyboard to this day.

I'm probably a little hypocritical here since my argument against a mid-range upgradeable tower Mac is the same as yours against a keyboard with a number pad; not enough people would use it to make it worthwhile. Apple has been pretty good about these decisions in the past (i.e. floppy drives in 98), and they're probably right about this too.

even if apple wanted $500 for osx you can still bu

[Joe The Dragon]

even if apple wanted $500 for osx you can still build a better system for less.

FireWire 400 is dead

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Looks like Apple has finally moved on from FireWire 400, as all the new products only have FireWire 800 ports. About time -- two different FireWire ports was starting to get annoying, although it does mean you'll need to get an adapter for old stuff.

Re:FireWire 400 is dead

[cthulhu11]

^old^most I've seen very little FW800 gear

Re:FireWire 400 is dead

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Well, I'd expect to start seeing a whole lot more.

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[Spatial]

Weaker video all around next to the old systems and a even bigger mac pro rip off $2500 for a core i7 based system with ONLY ONE CPU and nvidia 9500 video as the GT 120 is a 9500.

God damn Nvidia and their stupid naming schemes. I thought it was a 9600GSO.

Can't they just settle on one scheme? For anyone who doesn't follow GPU news closely it must be incomprehensible. Not to mention the irritating tendency to release the same GPU over and over again under different names. The 8800GT was also the 9800GT, and it'll soon be the GTS 240 as well. The 8800GTS 512 was the 9800GTX... Etc.

AMD/ATi seem to have gotten the idea at least.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

You might want to try reading a little more closely. People are discussing the prices in various non-US markets. Quoting a bunch of USD prices is, at best, irrelevant.

Re:Why give them free pub...

[kinnell]

Perhaps because this site isn't solely devoted to providing personalised news for you and nobody else? The irony is, you could customise slashdot so it doesn't show apple stories if you were so inclined.

Re:Why give them free pub...

[Reapman]

Last I saw Apple is a tech company... they just released a ton of new products. How is this not applicable? I guess when Google released their single cellphone, or Microsoft releases a new line of Zune's, that would also not be worthy for technical people?

If you don't like stories on Apple, you can, you know, set your preferences to block it.

what in the world are you smoking?

[je ne sais quoi]

The entry level mini now has

NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics processor with 128MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory

whereas the old one had

Intel GMA 950 graphics processor using 64MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared by main memory

So you're getting twice as much graphics memory that is also faster graphics memory. Also, the intel GMA is onboard video the same as the 9400M. As for the price increase, it's only overseas prices that have gone up, the american ones are the same. That means it's probably just the exchange rates that's determining the european price.

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[Stormwatch]

At last! I don't suppose the mini is anything high-end, but the Intel GMA is pretty much WORTHLESS for gaming.

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[MBGMorden]

So you're getting twice as much graphics memory that is also faster graphics memory.

Well, due note that SHARED BY MAIN MEMORY bit. It's important. Essentially, you're not really getting ANY graphics memory. You're just getting slightly faster main system memory, and the graphics chip is now willing to carve out twice as much of that main memory for it's own use.

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[je ne sais quoi]

Well, due note that SHARED BY MAIN MEMORY bit. It's important.

Why is it important? Show me the benchmark that twice as much shared DDR3 memory is slower than dedicated DDR2.

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[UnknowingFool]

This is no different than what was before. The Intel GMA 950 used the board memory. The difference is that while the nVidia 9400M isn't as powerful as dedicated graphics cards, it is far better than the Intel ones. At least you can play games with it.

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[MBGMorden]

It's important because in both cases it's removing all that memory from your main memory.

In a system with dedicated graphics RAM, if it says 1GB RAM with 256MB of graphics memory, then my system ram is 1GB, and they're providing me with an extra 256MB of graphics RAM.

In a shared memory situation, if it's 1GB RAM with 64MB of "graphics memory", then my system ram isn't really 1GB anymore - it's 1GB - 64MB. If it's 1GB of RAM with 128MB of shared "graphics memory", then my system ram is now 1GB - 128MB. In both cases, I didn't "get more graphics memory" - they just changed a setting that allows the graphics card to steal away more memory from the main system. The net memory in the system is unchanged. So you didn't get anymore then you had before. Indeed the base model USED to come with 960MB of usable system RAM before, but now since the graphics card is taking twice at much it only has 896MB of usable RAM.

Put it this way - if you change your retirement plan to now take 6% of your total paycheck rather than 3%, do you go on bragging about "how much more money you're getting now". Of course not - that money was simply reallocated. The increase in one area was at the expense of another area and there was no net change in your income. On the other hand, if your employer instead matched your 3% without taking anything more from your normal salary, THEN you can get happy.

AND PS: Any shared graphics memory will be slower that comparable dedicated. Benchmarks aren't available because generally the same chips aren't available with both, but when a graphics card has it's own dedicated memory it can access it directly. When it's shared it has to communicate with that memory over the system bus. That's slower with far more layers to go through. It's no accident that all high end graphics cards have dedicated memory whilst the low end stuff leeches system ram.

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[MBGMorden]

I'm not arguing at all that the 9400M isn't a superior solution compared to the GMA950. Merely that saying that "you're getting twice as much graphics memory" is very misleading. They simply allowed the graphics chip to use twice as much of the main memory, which for base models is still the same 1GB as it was before. The two models have the same amount of memory (and no real "graphics" memory), it's just allocated slightly differently.

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[kriebz]

I know what you mean, but I bought a white MacBook a little while ago, before they went nVidia, and was pleasantly surprised when I could play HL 2 with CrossOver Games about as well as I could on my old Athlon 64. OK, so HL 2 is probably considered "old" now, too, but you don't need all the sliders to the right to enjoy a game.

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[Stormwatch]

I know what you mean, but I bought a white MacBook a little while ago, before they went nVidia, and was pleasantly surprised when I could play HL 2 with CrossOver Games about as well as I could on my old Athlon 64.

Oh wow, your new machine runs a game as well as your OLD machine did. What a feat!

OK, so HL 2 is probably considered "old" now, too, but you don't need all the sliders to the right to enjoy a game.

Seriously, play HL2 with a good video card and you will find it is a world of difference. And it's not just the eye candy; with Intel video, you get terrible framerates in some parts - for example, most of 'Highway 17' and 'Dark Energy'. This harms gameplay a lot.

Re: what in the world are you smoking?

[Anonymous Coward]

At last! I don't suppose the mini is anything high-end, but the Intel GMA is pretty much WORTHLESS for gaming.

Yeah! And there wasn't blinky LED lit fans, and there wasn't room for this awesome skull sticker and you can't put a window in the side and there is no place to mount chrome handles. The Apple guys don't know how to design a proper gaming rig! Right on!

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[evilbessie]

maybe I'm missing something but it looks like for £150 you get 200GB of HDD space and 1GiB of RAM, they both seem to have 9400M graphics, I can't see how much VRAM they have but then you did used to get the black MacBook for £100 for 40GB of HDD (compared with the top spec white one) so apple do tend to ass-rape you if you buy their shit.

(I don't care what it runs, if I can do what I need it doesn't bother me what system it runs)

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[brackishboy]

Amen. I was gutted that my mid-2007 Macbook wouldn't run Counterstrike. I'm stuck with Unreal Tournament for the time being... :)

Re:what in the world are you smoking?

[Culture20]

Put it this way - if you change your retirement plan to now take 6% of your total paycheck rather than 3%, do you go on bragging about "how much more money you're getting now".

Yes, yes I do. Taxes matter, and a lot of people's retirement plans are pre-tax. To use a memory analogy, it's like having a BIOS mandated 256MB of system RAM allocated as "graphics" RAM, but working on a system where malware (or Firefox) eats up 50% of the leftover system RAM that the OS can see. At least my GPU still runs zippy. ;)

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[je ne sais quoi]

Actually, it's totally relevant because if the U.S. prices are staying the same, but the foreign ones are going up, it's because of the exchange rates, or what apple expects the exchange rates to do. The U.S. dollar sucks right now and europeans should be paying much more for U.S. products. I was in europe last summer and it cost me a tremendous amount of money, just because of the exchange rate.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[MBGMorden]

The U.S. dollar sucks right now and europeans should be paying much more for U.S. products. I was in europe last summer and it cost me a tremendous amount of money, just because of the exchange rate.

Um, no, if the US dollar is down, then while you (as noted) should be spending a lot more in Europe, they in turn should see much LOWER prices (in their terms) for US products.

iMac will drive multiple monitors

[BShive]

You can drive two screens with an iMac! Been done, and planning to do it with the latest crop. Slightly disappointing CPU specs, but at least the HD4850 is an upgrade option.

Re:iMac will drive multiple monitors

[MadCow42]

I've been doing that with my 24" white iMac for a couple years now. I have Windows running in Parallels full-screen on one monitor, and Mac OSX full-screen on the other. It's a great cross-platform development environment, as well as a home machine.

Macs handle multi-screen pretty cleanly - no mucking about needed. Trying to get it to work well on my Dell laptop is another matter... every time you undock it it gets farked up and you have to re-set all the settings.

MadCow.

Re:iMac will drive multiple monitors

[Vancorps]

That's funny because I had the exact opposite experience with a dell laptop and a macbook air. The Air wouldn't detect the majority of displays plugged into it so you have to force it to use multiple monitors, a real pain since most Mac users don't even know how to do that so I'm usually left have to figure it out for them when they can't hook up to the big ole TVs we have in our conference rooms. The Dell had issues until I got proper drivers for it. Then it would detect dock and apply the standard profile. Of course when setting profiles you have to set it, then reboot your machine so that the catalyst drivers actually commit the configuration.

So what I did was set it up without the dock, set the profile, rebooted out of the dock. When I booted back up, I put it on the dock while booted and started over setting another profile. From then on out I had no issues. A real pain but at least it could consistently use multiple monitors unlike the Air that keeps coming back here.

Re:iMac will drive multiple monitors

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

That's funny because I had the exact opposite experience with a dell laptop and a macbook air. The Air wouldn't detect the majority of displays plugged into it so you have to force it to use multiple monitors

I've used laptops from Dell, IBM, and Apple and so far only the Apple one has smoothly worked for me. Generally I use the laptop when I'm out and about, plug into a monitor at the office and plug into a different monitor when working from home. With Mac laptops I can close the lid and take it to the coffee shop and open it and it works. I can close the lid unplug my work monitor, take it home and plug in my home monitor open the lid and it works. With all the others I had to unplug the monitor before suspending then un-suspend, then plug in a new monitor, and even then I often had to mess with the preferences.

It's one of the reasons I haven't bought a Lenovo laptop for a long time.

Re:iMac will drive multiple monitors

[evilbessie]

But still only 2 cores, I push a quad core running vista and my apps, I'd like to do that in a VM but you just don't get enough cores in the iMac to make it possible.

Re:iMac will drive multiple monitors

[iocat]

I haven't had those issues with my Lenovo Think Pad, but neither have I had any multiple monitor issues with my mac book. It is weird to me that this story got no press anywhere but Slashdot that I can see -- I guess w/o Steve Jobs, Apple isn't news to CNN anymore...

And the license for OS X!

[arete]

And the license for OS X!

If you're buying a Mac to put Linux on it, you're probably wasting money. (Unless you're buying a zillion of them and getting a discount) OS X is like that Lenovo one, maybe... except for me the OS X vs Windows difference just dwarfs anything else.

I've been a Mac fan since my Apple ][+, HOWEVER...

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been an Apple fan since my Apple ][+ when I was 9 years old. Throw in a 512ke, SE, 6100, iMac Rev B, and my iMac G5; along with my Dad & family's numerous machines, and I love it all.

However, I probably won't be buying another Mac any time soon for a few reasons:
* I live in a multi-computer home environment. I've got two Windows machines, an Ubuntu machine, a MythTV, and random stuff. The Mac works great *when you do everything the OSX way*. However, in a mixed environment, it doesn't. I'm thinking of movies, pictures, address book, and things like that.
* I bought my iMac G5 20" ALS, and it was a great machine for about 40 months. Then, it failed. Apple told me to go pound sand since I was out of my 36 month AppleCare (that I never used previously). That stings. Higher-quality hardware my ass. I recapped the PSU, and I recapped the logic board. There was something else wrong with this machine, so I finally sold it for parts on eBay. Bummer to have a perfectly good machine die on me and have no recourse other than my wallet.
* I was really getting into iMovie HD 6 (I think that's the version), then the iMovie programs got really dumb.
* I hate backing up /home/username. I just really want to backup my documents & mail & a few other things. So, either I back up the whole gargantuan mess, or just my documents. Rooting around for all the necessary prefs files is a PITB.

The big challenge for Apple, to me, is a few fold:
* The hardware *is* expensive. And, in my experience, very proprietary to the point where a failure totals a machine. My x86 tower is nicely generic.
* OSX isn't perfect. Neither is XP/Vista/Ubuntu.

Okay, I don't quite know what my rant is. I'm just in a small minority of "Mac Fanboy for ages, switching to Windows and living just fine."

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[Anonymous Coward]

The USD has almost doubled in cost compared to the SEK in less than a year.

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[samkass]

I think your typical Mac Pro buyer will spend most of the time in Photoshop, Aperture, Final Cut Pro, etc. I'm sure they optimized the graphic card and processor for those markets.

Re:Apple is simply too expensive.

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think your post accomplishes what you think it accomplishes.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[sbryant]

Mac Mini got its update but the price is absurd as well.

Too damn right!

It's priced at 599 US dollars, and at 599 Euros (for the cheaper one)... except that 599 Euros is well over 750 dollars. I'm sure there will always be price differences, but this is just plain idiotic. That's a price increase of 25%. I think it would actually be cheaper to buy direct from the US and pay shipping and import taxes!

-- Steve

Holy overpriced, batman

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I the only one thinking, "Wow, I could build that Mac Pro for 1/3 the cost?"

Re:Holy overpriced, batman

[doh123]

I'm thinking i could steal one for free... but doesn't mean its gonna happen. I'd like you to show proof you could build a system just as good for a third of the cost.... everyone else who has tried failed.. mainly by using standard Core i7 processors instead of the Xeon versions, which are better, not just a rebranding, and can cost 4X-5X as much.

I've heard of expensive but this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I went to the online apple store and tried outfitting a 24" iMac. To upgrade from two gigs of ram to four gigs costs $1000.00. Probably an error but its a big one.

Re:I've heard of expensive but this?

[AndrewNeo]

Unfortunately I really doubt it was an error. RAM is one of the highest markups I've seen in Apple products.

Re:I've heard of expensive but this?

[Jerry Rivers]

Screw that. Buy your RAM at Crucial or elsewhere for a small fraction of what Apple charges.

Re:I've heard of expensive but this?

[Anonymous Coward]

I went to the online apple store and tried outfitting a 24" iMac. To upgrade from two gigs of ram to four gigs costs $1000.00. Probably an error but its a big one.

Not true. All of the 24" iMacs come standard with 4 gigs of ram. The 20" comes standard with 2 gigs. Raising it to 4 gigs costs $100.

Re:I've heard of expensive but this?

[Anonymous Coward]

Its actually from 4 gigs to 8 gigs that it raises the price a grand. Poor move Apple.

Re:I've heard of expensive but this?

[pushing-robot]

No, the iMacs come standard with 4GB. Upgrading to 8GB is damn expensive, because the iMac has two memory slots and 4GB SODIMMs ain't cheap.

Re:I've heard of expensive but this?

[stewbacca]

I'm not sure it's a "poor move". I would imagine you'd need two 4gb ram chips to get the 8gb mark. How much do single 4gb ram chips sell for these days (quick internet search says $250-$450). I'd stick with the 4gb stock and upgrade in a year when the stuff is dirt cheap.

Re:I've heard of expensive but this?

[agnosticnixie]

It's still 900 from Crucial, which means that's a 25% markup at most. Their markups for DDR3 are about the first time they're close to the levels asked of other OEM.

30-40%, typically.

[argent]

Since they don't come with a monitor, the profit margin on these things must be around 50%. Wow!

Nah, the Mac Tax has typically been documented to be about 30-40%. Unless you count the annoying funky hardware as a cost. Most of the Apple fanboys try and count the design as a benefit worth that extra cost, but I gotta tell you, I'd be happy to pay that surcharge on top of the price of OS X to get a version I could legally run on a Thinkpad or generic white box.

Apple hardware is the price you pay to get an OS that doesn't suck as bad as Windows, with applications that don't suck as bad as the ones you can get for Linux.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[drinkypoo]

I was seriously considering buying a Quad-Core MBP. Not even a refurb, brand spanking new. There doesn't seem to be one to buy. Apple has officially fucking lost it, considering that the Quad-core Q9000 has about the same TDP as my Core Duo. As far as I'm concerned the only bright spot here is the Mac Mini, which finally gains the power to do HD video in its base configuration. It's a little overpriced for the specs, but the form factor will be worth a couple hundred bucks to a lot of people. This is the first mac mini which deserves to be used as an entertainment STB coupled to an HDTV. Finally, I think Apple has also completely fucking blown it not offering a touch option on all iMacs. Speaking of which, I'd like to add touch to a 32" screen, does anyone have any info on doing this by putting a sheet of glass over the display and reading its state with pressure sensors or something? I don't demand multitouch or immensely high accuracy. A screen this big just always makes me want to be able to jab at it.

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[mblase]

High end everything else and then crap for video card makes a nice workstation, but it's an insanely underpowered gaming rig.

Everyone knows that, despite Apple's best efforts, Macs are a year behind PCs when it comes to major games anyway. I doubt anybody who's shopping for a gaming rig even gives Apple a second thought.

Re:Why give them free pub...

[Idiomatick]

It is to warn people away from buying mac products by showing their prices.

Re:Why give them free pub...

[kannibal_klown]

Last I saw Apple is a tech company... they just released a ton of new products. How is this not applicable? I guess when Google released their single cellphone, or Microsoft releases a new line of Zune's, that would also not be worthy for technical people?

If you don't like stories on Apple, you can, you know, set your preferences to block it.

Eh, you can easily look at this from both sides.

On one hand, this was a product refresh (not really a brand-new product). Other companies refresh their products all of the time: Dell, Nokia, Samsung, etc. Yet we don't hear about them, nor do we really care. Some companies do this every month, yet nobody really considers it news worty.

On the other hand, Apple refreshes their products quite slowly... hence why some people find it to be news. Dell might quietly up the CPU or RAM offered in their machines every few weeks and/or drop their prices as the hardware ages, but Apple typically takes forever to do either.

In my opinion, this hurts Apple. Sure, when Apple has a refresh the prices usually aren't too bad. But then those same products (with the same specs) sit on the shelves for months without much of a price break. Meanwhile Dell has either released something faster or dropped their prices since they aren't as "shiny" anymore.

120GB drive is the new combo drive ...

[egghat]

While the 4 billion combo drives that used to cripple the smallest Mac mini and Macbook seem to have been sold, the new 120 Gb drive is now used to cripple the smallest models.

Come on Apple. The price difference between the Seagate Momentus 5400.4 120 Gb and the Seagate Momentus 5400.4 250 Gb is less than 15 dollars ...

Re:120GB drive is the new combo drive ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels that if you can't fit everything in 120GB you also won't fit everything in 250GB. Both will require an external drive of some sort anyway.

It would also be cheaper to buy the low-end model and upgrade the hard drive and RAM yourself anyway. I'm just happy the low-end model finally has a SuperDrive too.

Re:120GB drive is the new combo drive ...

[egghat]

But with a 100 Dollar price increase ...

(here in Europa even 100 Euros, which is 125 Dollars)

And well if you do some video editing and have a music library 120 Gb simply is not enough. My music library is 40 Gb, 1 hour of Video (DV) is around 15 Gb.

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[rsmith-mac]

Crossfire/SLI does not function under OS X at this time (and all indications are that it would take quite a bit of work to change that), so X2 and NV Sandvich cards are out of the question. This makes their GPU choice for the Mac Pro all the more puzzling - the 4870 is competition for the GTX 260, not the GTX280/285. And this isn't even dealing with the wonkier ATI drivers, the lack of CUDA support (technically this doesn't matter with OpenCL, but ATI doesn't have their act together there either) and future support issues*. Why Apple didn't go with a top-to-bottom NVIDIA GPU lineup is baffling.

* There are 2 ATI cards in the current Mac lineup, both of which are BTO options and require separate drivers from the ATI 3k/2k lineup. Anyone want to wager on how quickly driver updates for them will stop coming in?

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[makomk]

God damn Nvidia and their stupid naming schemes. I thought it was a 9600GSO.

Which 9600GSO were you thinking of - the original one that was a renamed 8800 GS and had 96 stream processors, or the newer one with just 48 stream processors? (Yes, Nvidia really did that. Sneaky, huh?)

Bootcamp

[koick]

I think you're neglecting to consider that many gamers are using (want to use) Bootcamp to dual-boot their Apple boxes into Windows.

Re:Bootcamp

[mblase]

I think you're neglecting to consider that many gamers are using (want to use) Bootcamp to dual-boot their Apple boxes into Windows.

No, I'm not. Why would they want a Mac at all if they're just going to install Windows on it and ignore the Mac applications?

Re:Bootcamp

[Anonymous Coward]

Who said anything about ignoring? Windows for games, Mac OS X for everything else.

Re:Bootcamp

[timmyf2371]

I have this type of setup. I prefer the Mac OS and supported applications for general tasks such as browsing, word processing and media management, and I usually play games using one of my consoles, however if I'm wanting to play a PC game then I'll quite happy reboot into XP. It's not like it takes long to switch from one to the other.

Re:Bootcamp

[Anonymous Coward]

Because dual boot doubles your options - and with a decent graphics card you can get the best of both worlds?

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[jackchance]

Mac Mini got its update but the price is absurd as well.

For those whining about the price of macs, go spec a computer that has equivalent hardware and equivalent software.

Included in the price-tag of the mini (and the other over-priced macs) is OSX, iPhoto, iMovie, iDVD, garageband, and iWeb. Things may have improved in the last few years, but last i check there was no software on windows or linux that was as easy and fun to use as iMovie, iDVD, and garageband. To get that functionality in windows you would have to pay hundreds of dollars (or steal the software).

Can someone tell me (honestly, i would like to know) the current free options for making movies/music/dvds on windows and linux?

Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[Shivetya]

because it isn't even remotely easy for the average user. It isn't fun for those of us who don't mind ripping them apart.

The iMac is not meant to be open, now replacing a drive in a notebook isn't that hard because even Apple has a hard time dictating what notebook layouts are like

Re:Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[INeededALogin]

The iMac is not meant to be open
ain't that the truth. My mother's machine had problems with randomly turning off. It was out of warranty and I figured a bad fan or something. The machine, was not friendly to open. I probably spent 3-4 hours taking the thing apart. Putting it back together was a lot easier. I had 2 screws leftover which is kinda bad considering I only pulled about 10 screws out:-S Oh well, it works and mom is happy.

Re:Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[Onan]

Uh, what vintage of imac was that? If you mean the crt or lamp-style ones, that's fair.

But the past-several-years square imacs are incredibly simple to open. Three screws, and the whole back lifts off, exposing every component in the machine.

Re:Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[Tubal-Cain]

I had 2 screws leftover which is kinda bad considering I only pulled about 10 screws out.

Use various colors of permanent marker. Works well for CRT iMacs, eMacs, and *Books.

Re:Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[evanspw]

Nope. What you say is true of the G5 iMacs. The intel iMacs are a fucking nightmare to pull apart. Google it. There's tape around the screen and thermistors to glue and unglue and sorts of fun stuff. Doable but order of magnitude more complicated and awkward than fiddling with a generic PC (or even bog standard wintel laptop).

Re:Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[NateTech]

You didn't mention what the problem was. (just curious).

Re:Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

Yeah, sorry about the HDD, that isn't easily upgradable. But plugging in an external drive is pretty easy. All the big media files which are the cause of my HDD upgrading are OK on an external drive to me. I suspect this is quite common.

Re:Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[DurendalMac]

Um, no. The iSight-less G5 iMacs were simple to open. Any iMac with an iSight camera is a pain the ass. The aluminum iMacs are almost impossible without Apple's clean room kit.

Re:Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[INeededALogin]

You didn't mention what the problem was. (just curious).

Lil late, but basically the computer monitor would blank and the computer acted like it was a zombie or something. I figured over-heating... bad fan....

After opening the beast up(aluminum foil and all), I didn't see anything wrong. Fans worked, temperature was great... ran for a day and then it had the problem(this was with the motherboard sitting on a table. This seemed to kill my theory. So, I looked harder for a bad capacitor or something. I had just fixed an older CRT eMac with bad caps in it so it was fresh on my mind. Nothing, but while searching I noticed a small gap between the power supply and power distributor connectors. I pushed those together and the problem was never seen again.

My guess, since the connector itself was mounted North/South in the iMac. Gravity or vibrations eventually caused enough separation that electrical shorts were possible when the components heated up. The electrical short represented itself in the monitor.

Re:Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[badkarmadayaccount]

You beat me to it. Damn.

Re:Uh, don't try to do the drive in the iMac

[NateTech]

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

The bad capacitor thing is rampant in electronics today. It's amazing the lower quality levels of these components from China vs. older equipment made here.

I have radio systems that have been operating near-continuously since they came off the GE assembly line in the 1980's, and bad caps are not common in them at all... but many more "modern" devices that have had dried out or leaking cheap capacitors since then.

Honest Answer ... Professionals

[acidfast7]

It's a Mac PRO; not a Mac HOBBY, Mac FUN, or Mac HOME. Professionals will gladly pay the extra cost for a shiny designer computer. Let me put it this way. I've made about 500k EUR in the past year or so from submitting grant proposals. If I spend an extra 15min working per day because of the new/shiny/overpriced computer, that's an extra 5 hours per month. Every new PhD student here gets a top-spec MacBook as soon as the enter the group (MacBookPros are kinda heavy and a pain to lug around) because they'll get more done and be more accessible if they have one. Sure, it's a premium over a Dell craptop, but they're more likely to use it and travel with it. To be honest, I can't believe all of these arguments about overpriced equipment. It's device to used by professionals, whom, if they are really professionals, will see the additional value.

Re:Honest Answer ... Professionals

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a Mac PRO; not a Mac HOBBY, Mac FUN, or Mac HOME. Professionals will gladly pay the extra cost for a shiny designer computer.

Let me put it this way. I've made about 500k EUR in the past year or so from submitting grant proposals. Every new PhD student here gets a top-spec MacBook as soon as the enter the group

WTF? You think getting a grant is "making" money? Idiots like you are why conservative libertarians like me think about voting Republican when the candidates didn't seem like a obvious loons (Bush Sr, Shrub term 1).

Re:I've been a Mac fan since my Apple ][+, HOWEVER

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

* I live in a multi-computer home environment. I've got two Windows machines, an Ubuntu machine, a MythTV, and random stuff. The Mac works great *when you do everything the OSX way*. However, in a mixed environment, it doesn't. I'm thinking of movies, pictures, address book, and things like that.

This depends a lot in my experience based upon how you interoperate. OS X is very good at using open standards and file formats provided you pick decent software to run on top of it. It is less good at interoperating with Windows proprietary formats and protocols and if your servers or Windows machines are using them and you're set on them, Linux is often better at reverse engineered solutions. Example, if you standardized on Windows Media formats, OS X will play them, but not as well as Windows or even Linux. If you picked MP3, MP4, OGG, and the like, OS X is much better than Windows at interoperating.

I bought my iMac G5 20" ALS, and it was a great machine for about 40 months. Then, it failed.

Your anecdote certainly shows reason to be annoyed, but what could Apple the vendor do to prevent this? Extend their warranties to four years and then people complain when machines fail a month after that. Would you like more reliable hardware? Of course, we all always want more reliable hardware, but Apple already is the top rated among major vendors by consumer reports and other independent reviewers. Some people will always have hardware fail regardless. You're that person. And Apple is already taking flack for using more expensive and reliable components. Just look at all the comments here about how expensive Apple is compared not to the other top rated vendors, but ones with very poor reliability numbers. People don't look at reliability when buying.

I hate backing up /home/username.

Umm, you've heard of Time machine, right? You can apply it only to selected parts of your filesystem and it does versioning more smoothly and easily than almost anything. Or, use one of many third party backup solutions that handles them intelligently.

* The hardware *is* expensive. And, in my experience, very proprietary to the point where a failure totals a machine. My x86 tower is nicely generic.

Apple has custom motherboards, but other than that, everything is pretty much off the shelf. What are you looking to replace? I don't see how it is any harder than anything else (with the exception of the motherboard which you have to buy from Apple).

* OSX isn't perfect. Neither is XP/Vista/Ubuntu.

I don't really see how this is a challenge for Apple. You want them to be perfect? Not going to happen.

Okay, I don't quite know what my rant is. I'm just in a small minority of "Mac Fanboy for ages, switching to Windows and living just fine."

Hey, use what you like and what works for you. I use OS X, Linux, and Windows daily. On my laptop Linux and Windows live in VMs and OS X gets the most love because OS X handles migrations the best and because running OS X in a VM on top of Linux or Windows gives me more headaches. People get way to hung up an emotional about these things.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[Anonymous Coward]

Uh, that would indicate, presuming you are an American spending US dollars, that the European currencies were trading higher than the dollar (the US dollar was weak).

If the dollar were stronger (which it is, but not by that much) it would have cost you less to travel in Europe.

Perhaps Apple expects the dollar to strengthen further? Which is counter-intuitive given the amount of public debt the U.S. government is taking on (or will take on).

No, I think they sensed that the non-U.S. economies will be growing faster in the future, which would induce greater demand for their products. Or they could be just taking advantage of the average Apple consumer, who seems to get currency exchange rates backwards...There are fewer of those in the US now (collapse of the debt-driven consumer economy means fewer people can afford to be stupid about money) so they have to make up for the loss in market share somewhere....

Starving Artists

[SteelAvian]

Anybody else think it's funny that the people who want macs the most are paid the least? Graphic Designers make half what most engineers do, but they almost always have nice macs.

Re:Starving Artists

[stewbacca]

Graphic Designers make half what most engineers do, but they almost always have nice macs.

"Graphic Designers" is a broad definition. I make very close to 6-figures in the "Graphic Design" field. Very few of the software engineers here at my work make 75k, which isn't quite twice as much as my 90K. And yes, I do have several "nice macs", but I also have a few "boring" Dells as well.

Re:Starving Artists

[cherokee158]

Speaking as a starving artist who has been living off of used Macs for a while, um, no, I don't think it's funny. I think it sucks.

To think I used to complain about the cost of art supplies. Argghhh.

I feel like an overworked streetwalker with two pimps...Apple and Adobe.

Re:Starving Artists

[agnosticnixie]

Most engineers I know have Apple and Sun hardware and battered old boxen cobbled from random corporate leftovers.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[PIBM]

From apple website, you can buy the OS & all you listed for 219$. Build a PC without an OS, add that 219$ and see, you get a much lower price tag.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[Anonymous Coward]

All those are worth $1000? Its funny how the fanbois dance whenever someone tells the truth..

Look again....

[Anonymous Coward]

The Xeon has the faster QPI of the extreme edition i7 965..... the Xeon they're using supports ECC DDR3... and apple happens to be including ECC DDR3...

Apple also happens to use a decent power supply. I don't know who OEM's it, but its certainly better than the rosewill pile of junk you spec'd. If you would have spec'd a PCPower&Cooling supply, or a decent Antec or something, sure. Considering you can run 4 video cards in the mac pro... plus two nehalem chips with the faster quickpath interface, I think your 530 watt power supply would be up in smoke in less than 8 hours.

$5 says the ethernet chips on the mac pro aren't pile of trash Realtek's either... I'm guessing nice intels. And if you HAVENT experienced the difference, seriously... go use a realtek 8169, then remove it switch to a recent intel NIC... the difference is HUGE. (Especially when torrenting, or machine is "Angry" because its running 10 encodes and all 4 cores are sitting at 95%+) With the intel NIC... you don't notice that the machine is doing anything. With the realtek, you wait... and wait... and wait...

So go back to the beginning, and actually TRY and spec equal parts.

Oh, the processor apple's using in the base 8 core is this:
Xeon X5550 2.66 GHz $958
(Times two) so they've got $1900 in processor in that beast. Plus they're 95 watt TDP each instead of the 130 of even the i7 920 (with slower QPI, slower uncore)

Now, on the video card front... I agree, apple is under-powered compared to gamer machines. OSX currently has nothing like crossfire or SLI, so an 4870x2 wouldn't do anything other than give you 2 more screens. I'm hoping they do a video card refresh for more BTO options after 10.6 is released.

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[UnknowingFool]

I think Apple doesn't target their desktop computers to gamers for this reason. Apple is targeting their computers to specific markets. General users who are not gamers: Your average grandmas, college students, etc will get an iMac or MacMini. They may play WoW but Crysis is out of the question. Professionals who edit audio/photo/video will get MacPros.

It's the software...

[argent]

Since people are willing to pay a $1500 premium to buy that Mac Pro, I guess for those people OS X is worth over $1000 more than Windows Vista Ultimate, even after allowing for your using an upgrade price instead of a full license in your analysis.

Re:It's the software...

[stewbacca]

This may sound odd to those of you with little disposable income, but OS X is worth whatever I can afford more than ANY flavor of Windows.

Re:It's the software...

[brackishboy]

As someone with little disposable income, I agree entirely.

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[Spatial]

Gah! It's turtles all the way down, isn't it?

Re:even if apple wanted $500 for osx you can still

[argent]

Then I guess OS X is worth more than $500 to these people.

What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[sneakyimp]

* 2.66 GHZ Nehalem 920, overclocked to well over 3.2GHZ.
* ASUS p6t6 mobo with LOTS of features like SAS ports, RAID 0/1/5/10, at least 3 PCI-X x16 slots, eSATA connectors, etc.
* ATI 4870 with 1GB DDR5 RAM
* 12 GB RAM capable of 1600 Mhz (rather than 1066 avail on the Mac)
* 750 Watt Corsair PSU with gobs of connecting cables
* not one but FOUR WD 640 GB drive configured as RAID 0/1/5/10
* LG Bluray burner
* Acer 23" monitor
* Windows vista 64
* mouse, keyboard

Anyone know when Nehalem Xeon chips might be available for the rest of us? Then we'll compare apples to apples. Damn Mac tax!

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[paimin]

What is it with the anti-Apple trolls on this site comparing a pile of pieces to an assembled, supported, turnkey system? Even for those of us who can deal with cobbling these pieces together and managing the support for them, it is not an equivalent comparison. Apple is not selling a pile of separate pieces, why is that so hard to understand?

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[sneakyimp]

Because the pile of pieces can be assembled with the OS installed in under a few hours. An equivalent Mac (oh wait, there IS NO EQUIVALENT MAC AVAILABLE AS A TURNKEY SYSTEM) would easily cost you twice as much. Personally, I would consider myself lucky to make 3 grand in a few hours.

And, btw, I'm not anti-apple. I love OS X. I have an iMac on my desk right now. I do, however, hate the overpriced options in the apple store. While the baseline prices are not bad, everything else is easily 50% more than it needs to be.

Furthermore, I'm not a troll. I post here all the time. Just because you're afraid of the guts of a computer doesn't make me a troll. On the contrary, this is relevant information -- especially useful for folks wearing Mac blinders. You should take it to heart.

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[fermion]

I have to get a bit, well, organic here. I see people spend $2 for a loaf of bread and I go ballistic. Flour is 50 cents a pound, sourdough is free once you get it started. Water is all but free. With the investment of a food processor you don't even have the effort to knead your bread. For a very slow rise, prep in the evening, rise over night, deflate, rise during the day, bake when you get home. Fresh loaf every other day. Bread for a fraction of what the thieves in the store charge.

Soy milk has also become common for the lactose intolerant and others. They want $3 for quart. You know what you need to make soy milk? Soy beans. Even if you buy the most expensive stuff, it is $2 for the beans, which would easily make a gallon. All you need is a food processor and cheese cloth. If you want flavor and sweetened, leave a vanilla bean in the sugar for a flavoring that costs almost nothing. The left over part of the soy bean is basically free base for sandwich patties. Just add a few seasoning and fry.

And have you priced bay leaves? With a 10 investment years ago and I have all the bay leaves i want, basically for free. The rain waters the tree, and the sun provides the energy. The criminals that would charge for such things. Same for rosemary with grows like a weed.

Or maybe it is that even though we have the skill and intelligence to do such things, we prefer someone else to do the hard work for us so we can just enjoy life. Why else would anyone settle for the crap that has been masquerading as food.

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[paimin]

No, the pile of pieces can be assembled in under a few hours BY THE SMALL MINORITY OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE INTEREST IN AND SKILL TO DO SO. How much would you charge someone who you don't know to put that system together and support it for a year? Why is that cost not in your list?

What is the point of your post? If having a commodity-parts Windows or Linux box is so awesome, then go do that and shut the hell up. Everyone and their damn grandma knows that you can have a computer made of commodity parts. You are not breaking news to anyone, you're just being an annoying douche.

Yes, I know picturing me as a Steve Jobs worshiper with blinders on helps you feel superior. I don't give a DAMN what you think, I'm just sick of these dumb posts littering EVERY SINGLE story that mentions Apple. Get over it already. Apple's business model is clearly not changing.

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[sneakyimp]

The economics of your cooking example are a poor analogy. I'd have to be able to make that bread in about a minute to justify saving $2. As I said in my other post, I'd be happy to make $3,000 in several hours though. It's different by orders of magnitude.

Even so, I'm currently growing dill, rosemary, basil, parsley, tomatoes, and some other stuff because I ENJOY growing things. Likewise, I enjoy tinkering with computer guts. I can appreciate that you might prefer to 'enjoy life' in some other way rather than assemble your own computer. My response to that is that you might save a great deal of money if you knew how to assemble your own machine. Enough, in fact, to buy a weeklong cruise. But maybe that's not your idea of a good time.

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[sneakyimp]

Another thing: A vanilla bean will set you back about $2.

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[sneakyimp]

Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed this morning? It couldn't be worse than my morning. I literally awoke to a dog barfing on my head. I'm not making this up.

Anyways I know this is way off topic, but from my perspective, it is YOU who are being an annoying douche. I tried to provide some relevant information and you seem to be taking it personally for some reason. And, like I said, I have a Mac too. And an iPod touch. And I buy songs from iTunes. Last time I checked, slashdot was not a self-congratulatory Mac lover's circle jerk.

What annoys me about apple is exactly what I said -- the extras are over-priced. This is the very natural reason that every single Apple story has posts like this. What annoys me about you is that you are peevish and annoying. To me and people like me, my post was informative. For some reason it's griefing or gloating to you. WTF?

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[paimin]

You and people like you already know these things, as does everyone else! I picked your post randomly from the slew of identical rants about how $x.xx can buy you such and such a pile of components at newegg.com.

If you have a bone to pick with Apple, write them an email. We don't care! And no, Slashdot is not a self-congratulatory Mac lover's circle jerk -- its a whiney bitchfest because of posts like yours. Thanks!

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[mgblst]

It all sounded great, and then you had to put Vista on it. I will quit my job before I have to use that piece of shit!

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[sneakyimp]

Agreed Vista is P.O.S. There's always BSD or Linux or whatever. Going open source OS would drop the price another $200. Of course, you wouldn't be able to run those fancy multimedia applications like Premiere or After Effects on a *nix machine. I wish Apple had the balls to offer OS X for non-apple hardware.

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[Anonymous Coward]

+10

Re:What you can get for $2400 at newegg.com

[NateTech]

You're both annoying. So there. :-)

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[Anonymous Coward]

And what would you do with a system with No Video Card? Run a headless server? It's not like the videocard manufacturers provide graphics drivers for Apple. All videocard drivers are provided by the OS through Apple.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[jackchance]

From apple website, you can buy the OS & all you listed for 219$. Build a PC without an OS, add that 219$ and see, you get a much lower price tag.

Fair enough. Ignoring the fact that $219 is really the upgrade price (since you need to have previously purchased a mac to use it) if you take $219 off the mac mini price, i think you are getting into the price range where there is a reasonable ($100-150) premium for the form factor and design.

Re:I've been a Mac fan since my Apple ][+, HOWEVER

[JoeMerchant]

I have had similar experiences - less time in actual Apple hardware, but my 2.5 year old MacBook Pro (no AppleCare) has an annoying hardware fault that makes it all too apparent that Macs are subject to the same faults as any other PC.

OS-X is nice, until you start really trying to do Unix stuff on it, then you might as well run a Linux VM instead of fighting with all the necessary "adjustments" to make whatever happy under OS-X.

The Apple apps are o.k. if you use that sort of thing, I did for about a year when I first got them. I just don't have enough free time to screw around making DVD slideshows that nobody really cares about.

For a brief time in 2006-7 the MacPros were good value for money compared to open market dual CPU socket PCs. They're still decent machines, but I agree the prices seem to have stayed high while the competition has come down.

Until Display Port gets much wider market penetration, I'm going to call it a proprietary, overpriced $30 dongle PITA.

I think that OS-X would be a lot more useful if Psystar wins some kind of court decision forcing legal acceptance of hackintoshes. I'd still be tempted to buy the Apple "reference hardware" for professional applications where I don't want to screw around with compatibility issues.

Re:Why give them free pub...

[Anonymous Coward]

but if i turn off apple stories i won't be able to find the right thread to troll in when Jobs finally dies of AIDS

I'm disappointed

[Mathness]

I'm disappointed, after watching the keynote on youtube I was looking forward to some paticular products, like the iRack and iMicrowave.

Idiots buy them

[Anonymous Coward]

Idiots and people who don't know how to use a computer buy them, that's who.

Re:Idiots buy them

[SquirrelCrack]

Idiots and people who don't know how to use a computer buy them, that's who.

You left out people that like being able to get to a unix(like) shell when they want, but have better things to spend their time on (like making money to so they can buy Apple products) than farking with linux.

Those considering a 24" iMac:

[nrozema]

The previous generation 24" iMac can be had for $1299 new or $1199 refurbished through the Apple store. In some ways this machine is superior to the new entry-level 24" model that replaces it - for hundreds less. Slightly faster processor, discrete graphics, etc. A plausible alternative for those underwhelmed by the new specs and overwhelmed by the price.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[bnenning]

Mac Mini got its update but the price is absurd as well.

The mini is reasonably priced for an ultra-SFF. If you're just looking at it as a generic desktop then of course it's overpriced, but it compares well to a Dell Hybrid.

Of course, Apple will probably keep the mini at this configuration for another year and a half at which point it will be horribly obsolete again.

Re:I've been a Mac fan since my Apple ][+, HOWEVER

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

...my 2.5 year old MacBook Pro (no AppleCare) has an annoying hardware fault that makes it all too apparent that Macs are subject to the same faults as any other PC.

Has anyone argued Macs don't ever fail? The point is you can't equivocate and claim they fail as often unless you have evidence to contradict market studies.

OS-X is nice, until you start really trying to do Unix stuff on it, then you might as well run a Linux VM instead of fighting with all the necessary "adjustments" to make whatever happy under OS-X.

I think you have this a little wrong. OS X is fine for UNIX stuff. It takes adjustment, to run software intended for Linux or really iffy ports of said software.I can see where you'd be confused though if you don't differentiate between Linux and UNIX.

Until Display Port gets much wider market penetration, I'm going to call it a proprietary...

Okay, why do we care? People said the same thing about USB when Apple was basically the only company including it on consumer machines. New technologies have slow adoption rates. That doesn't make them proprietary, which is something else entirely.

I think that OS-X would be a lot more useful if Psystar wins some kind of court decision forcing legal acceptance of hackintoshes.

The most Pystar can hope for is a ruling that says pre-installing off the shelf on generic hardware is legal and thus forcing Apple to stop selling OS X in boxes and only sell upgrades via the Web. It makes it less convenient for users and Pystar is still screwed, but that's really the only thing they can hope to accomplish in the long run (aside from a legal precedent against EULAs, which would be awfully nice).

Why does the store go down?

[radish]

OK, here's a question. Why does the store go down for new products? Newegg add new products every day, as do Amazon, eBay, and every other store I can think of, all without downtime. And it's not only a reboot blip, but a gone-fishing page for hours. Is it just to make sure that all the blogs "notice" and sit around waiting to see what's coming? I can't imagine they lack the technical know-how to keep the thing up.

Re:Why does the store go down?

[lmnfrs]

Is it just to make sure that all the blogs "notice" and sit around waiting to see what's coming?

Seriously? A company like Apple would never pull a silly trick like that to grab attention. If that was really their intent, they'd be doing all kinds of crap to garner attention:
-Make a new product custom-milled from a block of some cool metal!
-Name a boring industry number, say 1394, to something exciting that suggested its blazing speed!
-Call a standard media device Super to set it apart from others!
-They'd even name stuff after crazy-cool sci-fi machines and append current product names with the word "extreme"!

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[stewbacca]

They still charge a UK price, regardless of dollar:sterling rate. What I don't know (and haven't read enough of this thread) is if they raised the mini from, say 499 to 599 sterling for an arbitrary reason, or if the new models are the same price as the old (which is the Apple norm).

Shut up whiners!

[Anonymous Coward]

All these people whining about the prices just need to shut the hell up. Apple costs more because it is a BETTER PRODUCT. If you are not happy paying a few measly percent more for a better system, then go use Wind-blows or Lin-sucks. Spend a few hours with either of them and then you will realize that the extra cost Apple charges is well worth it.

Apple has proven that they know best. YOU DON'T. So just shut up already.

Don't Believe Everything You Read

[konohitowa]

The Airport Extreme & Time Capsule 1TB were already there. As far as the iMac goes, they mostly lowered their prices and replaced the motherboard with something that handles faster RAM (1066MHz DDR3 vs 800 MHz DDR2) and more RAM (8GB max vs 4GB max before), and reworked the video options.

In simple terms, if you bought a 24" iMac prior to store closure and configured it with all of the upgrades, when the store reopened you'd find that configuration as the default 3.06GHz machine with faster RAM and different video. Except it would be $400 (US) cheaper.

DELL Studio XPS 435 about $1000 less with x2 ram t

[Joe The Dragon]

You can get a DELL Studio XPS 435 about $1000 less with x2 ram then the mac pro.

With the same cpu power.

750GB 7200 RPM SATA Hard Drive vs 640GB

a 640gb is $50 less on the dell

Dell 24 inch S2409W Widescreen Flat Panel vs none

ATI Radeon HD 4670 512MB vs # NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB

can add ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB for $100 or ATI Radeon HD 4870 GDDR5 1024MB for $200 vs ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB for $200 more

can also get a Studio XPS 435 with No Monitor for $1,299

with x2 the ram or - $150 for the same ram

ATI Radeon HD 3650 256MB
ATI Radeon HD 4670 512MB [add $50]
ATI Radeon HD 4850 512MB [add $150]
ATI Radeon HD 4870 GDDR5 1024MB [add $250]

you can also find other dell core i7 deals as well.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[PIBM]

In the US, it seems so. In other places it's not so much of an interesting price.

The racket comes much more in light when you start looking at the 24" iMacs, with prices, once reduced by the software cost, still over twice as high as equivalently built computers.

You might save space (no tower ..) but you lose on the upgrade possibilities & facilities, so any higher price is very hard to accept.

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[stewbacca]

I've actually played Crysis with decent results on my two year old 2.4ghz iMac (with 2gb of ram and the bigger video card option, Radeon X1600 256mb). I imagine it would be even more playable with the nvidia card in the 24" iMacs and the newer faster Core2Duo chips. It plays better on my iMac than my old "gaming rig" pentium 4 of roughly the same age, with a better video card.

Re:I've been a Mac fan since my Apple ][+, HOWEVER

[stewbacca]

* I hate backing up /home/username. I just really want to backup my documents & mail & a few other things. So, either I back up the whole gargantuan mess, or just my documents. Rooting around for all the necessary prefs files is a PITB.

Time Machine. Ur doin' it wrong.

Corrected video card details

[LionMage]

Summary is wrong; it states a "Radeon 4570" as one of the options. According to the Mac Pro page (under the Comparison tab), the 24" iMac has the ATI Radeon 4850 as an option, while the Mac Pros have an ATI Radeon 4870 as an option.

Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processors

[shmlco]

"... core i7 based system ..."

Sorry, but the Pro is using server-class Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processors, not i7's.

Re:Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processors

[a09bdb811a]

So? The existing Core 2 Xeons are identical to their consumer cousins. Is Nehalem different?

Just one difference that I'm aware of - Intel deliberately disables ECC on the i7's memory controller. Gotta buy a Xeon for that now. Sounds fair eh?

I use ECC in my current Athlon 64 machine, but that's because it has 8GB and I leave it on 24/7. These new Mac Pros start at 3GB, which is ridiculous. I don't even know why they went with triple channel, because from the benchmarks I've seen it doesn't seem to make any performance difference (maybe in dual processor config it does).

Re:Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processors

[MojoStan]

So? The existing Core 2 Xeons are identical to their consumer cousins. Is Nehalem different?

The platform (workstation vs desktop) is different, so I don't think it's "fair" to compare the price of a Mac Pro DP-capable workstation to a Core i7 desktop PC (which the original comment in this thread did).

Typical Core i7 systems have a single processor, support at most 16GB of non-ECC memory, has no PCIe x4 slots, limited RAID capabilities, single ethernet port, etc. It just doesn't compare to a dual-socket Xeon workstation.

Of course, I think it's ridiculous that Apple doesn't offer a single-processor desktop Mac that's not in an all-in-one form factor or uses laptop parts.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[ogdenk]

To be fair when claiming "Apple is so expensive!" you really need to price a PC with the EXACT same specs. Same CPU, screen size, form factor, everything.

You'll find that Apple is either about the same price or cheaper.

The closest laptop I found to my new Macbook white is a Dell XPS series which has less features, is slightly slower and costs MORE. I looked at similar machines from Lenovo, Toshiba and Acer as well. The Dell does come with a little more RAM and a bigger HDD but those don't mean much. Those are cheap upgrades you can do yourself at some point.

Like someone said above, never buy RAM or HDD upgrades from Apple, buy the base machine and upgrade yourself.

The Magsafe power adapters are really slick as well, it's already saved my laptop from my kids twice. They were problematic at first but it looks like they fixed the issues.

Re:What you can get for $3000 at dell.com

[RedK]

I'm pricing a Xeon Dell Precision workstation class machine on dell.ca, which is a better comparison to the Xeon based Workstation that is a Mac Pro, and I'm up to $2800 right now and guess what ? It has 2 GB DDR2 ECC ram vs the Mac's 3 GB DDR3 ECC (triple channel). It has an older, non-Nehalem Xeon processor, same ghz as the Mac but no 2 threads per core like the Mac. 1 SATA hard drive, 80 GB (WTF is this ?), same superdrive optical drive, etc...

I think Apple nailed their market just right. This isn't a cobbled together gaming PC, it's a Professional Workstation with a certain grade of hardware you're not getting in your cobbled together PC.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[ogdenk]

The new Mini is expensive, and there's little justification for it at that spec level.

It's a pretty pricey little box but show me a cheaper PC in that SAME small form factor w/ the same Core 2 Duo CPU w/ 1066mhz FSB, DDR3 RAM, Firewire 400 and 800, gigabit ethernet, SPDIF Audio In AND Out (24-bit 96khz at that), displayport, an IR reciever for the remote, and a DVD burner.

Even if you found a mini-itx board with all of those goodies (you may but you most likely won't), by the time you got everything built, it would cost just as much if not more than the $600 mac mini. The new mini is not a wussified EEE desktop.

Now try to find an HP or Lenovo SFF desktop that has all of the same gear at a reasonable price.

BTW, it may be integrated video but the GF9400M is no slouch, I have no problem playing Call of Duty 4 @ 1280x800 on my low-end Macbook white.

Don't believe me? Prove me wrong.

OSX on non-Apple hardware?

[lmnfrs]

Unless they've changed their EULA or other agreement, no, you can't do that at all. OSX may only be legally installed on hardware purchased from Apple.

Re:OSX on non-Apple hardware?

[agnosticnixie]

It's a license agreement, all you lose is apple support. The law part hasn't been tested.

Mac Mini + XBMC = Heaven

[lucas teh geek]

assuming that Mac Mini is silent, combining it with XBMC would be heaven!

Re:DELL Studio XPS 435 about $1000 less with x2 ra

[Anonymous Coward]

If you think that the Core i7 965 has "the same cpu power" as the Xeon 5570, you're not just utterly clueless, but ....

There are no words.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[agnosticnixie]

When the loonie tanked down while the USD was going back up, there was a short period where Apple was cheaper than OEM who had adjusted and you got essentially the US Student Discount price before discount in Canada...

Re:What you can get for $3000 at dell.com

[sneakyimp]

Dell != Newegg

*Yawn* ...

[oblivionboy]

....I think what people are really wanting this year is an Apple netbook. Come on Apple, take some risks, surprise us a little.

Re:*Yawn* ...

[Anonymous Coward]

....I think what cheap people are really wanting this year is an Apple netbook. Come on Apple, take some risks, surprise us a little.

There, fixed that for you.

Re:*Yawn* ...

[NateTech]

So far everyone I've met (work-mates, friends) who have purchased a netbook have all had the same reaction after about six months to a year... "Damn this thing is slow!" This has led to my new public statement... "Netbooks are just the tiny Toshiba machines you could buy in the mid 1990s, and just as wimpy." They're last decade's laptops with small processors, tiny screens, and limited potential. The laptop manufacturers are pumping them out, but they're just not the same as buying a real laptop with modern CPU and drive speeds. If you need an underpowered, lightweight machine, for a little mobile computing when you're away from your real machines... fine... I don't. I just carry around an appropriately provisioned lightweight MacBook. If I had some aversion to two more pounds I'd get an Air... but then again, same problem... that's a technology step backward in speed and usefulness.

Re:*Yawn* ...

[badkarmadayaccount]

You do realize that one of the defining characteristics of a netbook is "cheap"? Sun Microsystems Inc. is a more likely candidate. Then again, so is IBM... *sigh*

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[agnosticnixie]

I'm a mac user, and mostly OS agnostic (so long as it doesn't include Windows ;) ), love OSX, I'm a practical geek in that I don't like toying too deeply on the hardware side, I prefer software, but seriously, you've got to be kidding

- iMovie - Avidemux is nice although I admittedly prefer imovie
- iPhoto - Digikam, f-Spot, seriously, I rarely use it as I have other pieces of software for my photography habit.
- Garageband is shite, then again, I come from a musical background, I've used actual professional software
- iWeb is horrible, nobody should be allowed to do websites in WYSIWTF
- iDVD - er, you kidding?
And that+iWork is only 220$ btw. But admittedly, on the price of the mini, it's not too bad. I guess. Only, the prices students pay would probably be closer for oem pricing ;)

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[agnosticnixie]

It's not an upgrade price, it's full software: you can install it blank without a previous license behind.

I can't wait...

[caitsith01]

...for the front page Slashdot stories when Dell, Lenovo and Sony modestly update their current lineup of computers!

Oh wait...

Re:What you can get for $3000 at dell.com

[RedK]

Newegg != professionnal grade workstation.

Re:I've been a Mac fan since my Apple ][+, HOWEVER

[dfghjk]

"If you picked MP3, MP4, OGG, and the like, OS X is much better than Windows at interoperating."

Really? I'm interested in seeing how you measure that.

"And Apple is already taking flack for using more expensive and reliable components. "

No they aren't. They take flack for price. You are assuming they are the same.

"People don't look at reliability when buying."

Really? I'd like to see your data on that as well.

"Umm, you've heard of Time machine, right?"

Time Machine is bug-riddled. It never works for me.

Why shut down Apple store for updates?

[root777]

One thing I can't figure out is why does Apple need to shut down their online store for updates? I would hope that they would treat it like any other roll out, create a test environment, make the necessary changes to your portal, update with all the new toys and products and then elevate to a production environment with the old portal pointing to the newly elevated site.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[evilbessie]

You forget in Europe we include the sales tax (VAT) in the headline price, in the states they don't do that. I think (but have no accurate figures so am probably wrong, but by less than 5% either way I'd venture) that sales taxes in the states are about 10%, so you are looking at 660 - 750, which is still more but then you expect that from apple, at lest we do in the uk...

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[sbryant]

For those whining about the price of macs, go spec a computer that has equivalent hardware and equivalent software.

Except that's exactly what we did:

• Mac Mini (basic model), 2.0GHz, 1GB RAM, OSX, iLife etc etc: 599 US dollars.
• Mac Mini (basic model), 2.0GHz, 1GB RAM, OSX, iLife etc etc: 599 Euros (752 USD).

As you can see, we have two computers with equivalent hardware and equivalent software. Identical, even. Yet, one costs 25% more than the other.

The complaint was about prices in other markets. The US price ($599) is about 477 Euros, so a list price of 499 Euros would have been reasonable. There's no justification for what they did.

-- Steve

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[brackishboy]

I'd have to disagree on Garageband. I'm a seasoned Logic user, and I find it very useful as a sketchpad. A four-track recorder to Logic's full studio.

Apple products are better.

[MikeFM]

I simply run Apple products because I've found them better on so many levels. Their hardware has fewer problems, lasts longer, and looks good. Mac OS is okay (better than Windows for most things) and I can easily run virtual machines to get my Linux and Windows tasks done. My client computers and my music player (if you can still call it that when it's really a PDA/phone/whatever) are Apple products because of those reasons.

I still run custom made PC boxes running Linux for most my servers. Along with a fancy IBM box running AIX that is just a bit crappy for the $30k it cost.

The only reason to have a Windows box IMO is to play games. It's kind of like a toy.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[agnosticnixie]

Okay, I guess Garageband can be nice for this. I used to scratchpad on a paper scratchpad, I came down a bit stronger than I felt (I've seen friends do nice brainstorming on it)...

Re:What you can get for $3000 at dell.com

[sneakyimp]

You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Not only does newegg sell fully assembled Macs, it sells very pricey workstation components such as multi-thousand dollar RAID systems, video cards far faster than those available at apple.com, and motherboards with much faster RAM speeds than 1066MHz. What you might find even more interesting, is that if you knew how to install your own RAM, you could buy it from newegg for about 40% less than advertised on the apple store.

Re:What you can get for $3000 at dell.com

[RedK]

And you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about when it comes to Pro workstations. People don't even think about newegg when purchasing a Dell T5400, a HP XW6600 or a Mac Pro. A cheap PC assembled from off the shelf components is going to be cheaper than any of those options, but you still won't see it under the desks of real professionnals that require these workstations in the first place.

Re:I've been a Mac fan since my Apple ][+, HOWEVER

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

"If you picked MP3, MP4, OGG, and the like, OS X is much better than Windows at interoperating."

Really? I'm interested in seeing how you measure that.

It is certainly difficult to measure and you have too look case by case, but OS X does a good job with plugins for standard technologies but just look at what you can play a preview of from an OS native window. Or look at the services provided/supported by the different OS's Linux and OS X both use the open standard ZeroConf for auto discovery and work together. MS implements a proprietary protocol that other OS's need to reverse engineer or the application you;re using has to handle running the ZeroConf server itself (like Adobe CS does for discovery on Windows).

"And Apple is already taking flack for using more expensive and reliable components. "

No they aren't. They take flack for price. You are assuming they are the same.

I'm not assuming anything. Take a look at the studies performed by consumer groups and professional reviewers. Apple has been at the top of the reliability numbers for years and has prices about 20-30% above average, right in line with other companies who get similar ratings.

"People don't look at reliability when buying."

Really? I'd like to see your data on that as well.

REliability numbers don't make it into marketing literature on the side of product boxes. You see bullet points of features and if you look up in this thread you'll see dozens of people comparing the price of Apple systems to "comparable" systems based upon those bullet points. Notice how many reference published reliability numbers?

"Umm, you've heard of Time machine, right?"

Time Machine is bug-riddled. It never works for me.

Okay. Why do I care? Use something else. Ignoring time machine, how is it harder to back up OS X installs using included or third party software compared to any other OS? I don't get it.

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[duffel]

High end everything else and then crap for video card makes a nice workstation, but it's an insanely underpowered gaming rig.

Everyone knows that, despite Apple's best efforts, Macs are a year behind PCs when it comes to major games anyway. I doubt anybody who's shopping for a gaming rig even gives Apple a second thought.

Not now that you can install windows on them. Gaming on my old MacPro is fantastic - plus I'm not tied to windows for my work. Price isn't so bad (not good, just not terrible) when you get a decent gaming pc AND a high powered workstation - although these new ones could indeed use a bit more graphics power.

The clincher for me (personally, no evangelising here) is the operating system though... To say I've used both windows and mac and prefer the latter would be...erroneous. I do use mac os x (with elegance, the slightest touch, subconsciously if it weren't for the beauty - and I don't mean visually). I can't say I've ever progressed to the level of actually "using" windows... the experience (hah!) is better described as suffering, struggling against, despite years of trying. With windows I get stuff done despite the operating system, but the mac actually speeds my process. If I have to pay through the nose for apple hardware, so be it, as long as I get to keep the operating system

Ok, so I did stray into the evangelising. Sorry. It's just so hard not to...

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[jackchance]

The complaint was about prices in other markets. The US price ($599) is about 477 Euros, so a list price of 499 Euros would have been reasonable. There's no justification for what they did.

The only justification that i can imagine is that there are import taxes in the EU. Just a guess.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[rthille]

The justification for it is at the demand level. People are still buying them at those prices.
http://cgi.ebay.com/New-Apple-Mac-Mini-1-83Ghz-Core-2-Duo-1GB-RAM-80GB-HDD_W0QQitemZ280317872335QQcmdZViewItemQQptZApple_Desktops?hash=item280317872335&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=66%3A2|65%3A13|39%3A1|240%3A1308

New in box Mini (from before today's upgrade), only 1.83 GHz, 1GB ram, 80GB drive, and it went for a premium over apple prices...though the lack of tax probably makes up for it.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[Anonymous Coward]

Mac Mini is $599. If you have a $4 putty knife and a $10 set of precision screwdrivers you can upgrade to 4GB of memory for $35, and get a 500GB laptop drive for $90.

I've upgraded plenty for friends (though on 945G, only 3GB of the memory was addressable, though this is a non-issue with 9400M) and it takes about 15-20 minutes if it's your first time opening one up.

Consider the form factor. The thing is a size of a small stack of napkins. Uses 13-15W at idle, 40W under extreme loads (pegged CPU, disk active, optical drive active). It's basically silent. Yes, you can probably get a Dell for under the DIY upgraded $725, but you will NEVER see that form factor or total lack of noise (save for the optical drive, which is a reasonable hum).

It's a boutique product. IKEA is inexpensive, and they do sometimes have some really great stuff (try finding better bed pillows at even twice the price!), but if you want an Eames management task chair, either pay what Herman-Miller wants or hunt for one on Craigslist.

-----

As for the iMacs, no quad cores due to TDP issues and the fact there's no quad core mobile component. i5 is the desktop equivalent of Nehalem (i7) and should be out in under 6 months in desktop and mobile flavors, and that's when we should see quad core iMacs. I'm also hoping for LED backlighting as well, and (I can dream) the successor to Radeon 4850 if it exists. If they just do the quad-core and LED backlighting before Xmas, I will FINALLY plunk down the cash for a top-end 24", and jack it up to 8GB of memory myself. For me, that'll be the computer that replaces both my gaming/development box and Mac Mini in one fell swoop.

Re:DELL Studio XPS 435 about $1000 less with x2 ra

[nrozema]

What happens when you want to add a second CPU to that Dell? Just buy a second one? Comparing a multi-socket workstation to a single socket consumer model (even a high powered one) seems pretty silly.

Hyperdrive5?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder how hard it would be to squeeze a Hyperdrive5 into the spare CD-ROM bay on a single disk MacPro? I mean, if you're already paying through the nose, why not go the distance and make the boot/app drive a Hyperdrive?

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[jackchance]

It's not an upgrade price, it's full software: you can install it blank without a previous license behind.

I know it isn't an upgrade price, but unless you have previously purchased a mac it isn't much use to you. So it is in a sense an upgrade. From the Apple store page on iLife:

Upgrade to iLife '09 and get the most out of the photos, movies, and music on your Mac with the latest versions of iPhoto, iMovie, GarageBand, iWeb, and iDVD.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[jackchance]

what's wrong with iDVD? I have made DVDs of slideshows and movies for luddite friends to play on their TVs and the love them. Years ago i used Roxio and it looked way worse and was more of a pain in the ass to use.

I do agree that iWeb is pretty bad. But I think it is better than nothing if you are a mobileme user that doesn't know any html or css.

Re:What you can get for $3000 at dell.com

[sneakyimp]

I know what a pro workstation is. You're only showing your ignorance when you lionize the Dell and HP workstations. And to say that newegg components are cheap is just plain wrong.

For example, a dual-socket intel Skulltrail mobo is $600:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813121330

This asus mobo is also $600:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131287

There are 15k hard drives faster than anything you'll find in the apple store:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822332012

You can also get the nVidia quadro 5800 at newegg:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133253

Any workstation you buy from Dell or HP you can match with parts bought from newegg. At the moment, only Apple is offering the dual nehalem xeons, but that won't last long. In the meantime, you can't get the quadro 5800 from apple and you can't get any 15k drives.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[agnosticnixie]

No, for iDVD I mean it's got plenty of replacements, no? Or maybe I haven't seen all that iDVD can do that I couldn't simply do by using tags in iPhoto and iMovie and then just burning...

*ponders*

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[jackchance]

The point of iDVD is that it burns DVDs for DVD players. You don't use it for photo/video sharing with another computer. It makes beautiful menus and slideshows and also in conjunction with perian will re-code any kind of video supported by quicktime to play on any standard DVD player (which i believe is mpeg-2).

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[Anonymous Coward]

The Aussie prices _are_ outrageous. Unfortunately what has happened since the last time the prices were fixed is that the AUD has fallen from 0.92 cents to 0.63 cents.

Accounting for the currency difference (and 10% GST (sales tax in Oz)), even though the base model iMac has gone from $1600 AUD to $2000 AUD it is actually (fractionally) cheaper than the US version.

The base model Mac mini is only $7 (AUD, $4.47 USD) more expensive than the US version (after allowing for GST and currency).

What is interesting about this, is that in the past Apple has charged a 20-30% premium over current currency (and tax) rates, so this represents a significant historical departure for them.

Sadly even though this "Apple Tax" has been lifted, the units are far too expensive for me to recommend to friends. At $1600 AUD (or $1400 for a refurb) they were priced just a bit over the comparable Windows offerings. Now though I would find it hard to risk recommending one.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[NateTech]

And as of right now, the pound's dropping off against the dollar again, and your Prime Minister says he's coming over here to "help us into the Global New Deal"...

Frankly, just like in the late 1700's, about half of us aren't interested in Old World "help"... but it'll help the other half figure out that our President is nothing but a socialist... tell him thanks for heading over!

We'll put his butt back on a boat and thank him for "helping" as quickly as we can! LOL!

Oh and let us know when the UK has a computer company worth bragging about. That'll be rich.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[NateTech]

What's "distasteful" about a company saying, "Buy it or don't" and making a profit on it? Good lord...

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[NateTech]

Uhh, at least in terms of what's really going on, you have it backwards. The euro is tanking, and the dollar is coming back strong again. Check your numbers.

The "higher" prices in the EU and UK are a reflection of that and Apple believing that trend will continue.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[NateTech]

Then do it. We'll take the money, either way. :-)

Re:Why give them free pub...

[NateTech]

I haven't seen any of the THREE Apple retail stores around here hurting for customers packing in every weekend, or real sales ringing up and walking out the door. You can say they're "hurting" themselves, all the way to wherever that leads, but it doesn't match the reality of what's happening at their retail outlets.

Re:What you can get for $3000 at dell.com

[NateTech]

People that NEED machines like those (and the Mac Pro) would find assembling a machine to be a waste of time and their talent. All this blah blah blah on Slashdot about whether you can build a workstation cheaper is hilarious, while the people that needed an updated Mac Pro have already whipped out the company credit card and placed the order...

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[TheQuantumShift]

"I think it would actually be cheaper to buy direct from the US and pay shipping and import taxes!"

Hot Damn, I just came up with the basis for our next "Bubble"! Move over Cash4Gold and title loan refinancing, there's a new infomercial in town!

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[TheQuantumShift]

And nobody uses macs for photo editing, video production or animation rendering...

And their design...

[Anonymous Coward]

.., which is worth every penny. Throw in OS X, and Macs come out a lot cheaper than their PC equivalents.

Re:Weaker video all around next to the old systems

[tyrione]

Weaker video all around next to the old systems and a even bigger mac pro rip off $2500 for a core i7 based system with ONLY ONE CPU and nvidia 9500 video as the GT 120 is a 9500. What a ati card pay $200 more for a 4870 512 makeing it cost $150 + $200 = $350 makeing it about $100 more then other places you can get core i7 systems with better base video and the same cpu speed FOR ABOUT $1000+ less some even with 6gb of DDR3 ram. And why mini DP on a full size video card why not full DP with a DP to mini DP cable?

The old $1,199.00 $1,499.00 level imacs used to have ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory and ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB with a NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS with 512MB memory in the $2,199.00 one now they have slower and weaker NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics on board video in the $1,199.00 $1,499.00 ones and NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 with 512MB memory in the $2,199.00.

The mac mini is still a ripoff $599.00 for 1 GB OF RAM? $50 more for 2gb and $150 more for 4gb?

# [Add $150.00] for a 2.26 cpu

120GB is still small.

The $799.00 mini has the same 2.0 cpu but 2gb of ram and a 320gb hd. It should have at least 128 - 256 vram that does not come from system but it does not.

For about $500 you can get a X2 7750 and 790gx board with 128 side port ram with 4gb of ram apple should of put more in to the mini.

What planet are you on? These Xeon Core i7 are the first in the industry. Intel hasn't even released their information on the Xeon 5500 Nehalem because Apple got them early.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[Anonymous Coward]

VAT is not included in the US prices, whereas it is in the other countries, which makes up for most of the difference.

Mid tower expandable mac? its already here

[Goodl]

You can have it now, just get an EFI-X module, I have a mid tower Mac I put together myself using one, whole thing didnt come to more than £300, most expensive part in it was the EFI-X module itself, I have build hackintoshes in the past but the module takes away all the pain of kext and plist tomfoolery.I'm really pleased with it

What kind of screens do they have?

[riker1384]

The previous 20" iMac had a TN screen, and the 24" was an IPS. What kind of screens do the new ones have?

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[je ne sais quoi]

How about you read my comment again? Here, I'll quote it for you, "...or what apple expects the exchange rates to do." Did it ever occur to you that Apple might be expecting the dollar to rebound?

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[Anonymous Coward]

Try www.buy-proxy.com, and get someone to send it to you.

Your links are out of date.

[Anonymous Coward]

From the guardian article you linked to:

But you know what's most interesting? Apple's complete silence on this.

I think things have changed since that article was written no?

Re:Your links are out of date.

[Lars T.]

Oh, really? Well, that must mean Psystar have become geeks since then, hrmm?

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[toddestan]

Most companies adjust their prices as the exchange rate fluctuates, instead of trying to pick a number and sticking with it for the long term. Of course, this is Apple and they do love their price points, so go figure.

Re:More affordable? Prices sky rocketed in many

[ndixon]

According to the UK site, a Mini with 2GB RAM and 320GB HD will cost £711 when I've added a keyboard + mouse. That's without a display of course.

So around £750-£800, for a machine with about the same spec as the Dell I bought nearly 2 years ago for less than £500.

And it's also getting a bit too close to the price of a 20" iMac (£949 with keyboard + mouse).

Yes, even for Apple, the Mini is erm, reassuringly expensive.

Re:What you can get for $3000 at dell.com

[bryan1945]

"I know what a pro workstation is."

Apparently not. Who does your service contract? Do you have to go to each manufacturer for each part if something fails. 4 hour on-site service? If there is a software/hardware conflict, who do you go to, and if they point the finger at each other, what do you do then? Are you paid full time to make sure your machine works, or is that just extra free time for your company? Who pays for problem resolution if any of the hardware manufacturers dispute your claims for failure? Will your company even give the go-ahead for a custom built machine to run production?

Sorry, there is a difference between "pro-level" parts hobbled together into a system and an actual "pro-level" system. Ever stop to think that the reason that the professional system manufacturers cost more than home-built because they do a little compatibility and Q&A first? Maybe not a whole lot, but I would bet that they test out a whole lot more situations than you do, if you actually test out at all.

Hey, I know it's /. and all, and I'm sure you hack a nice machine. Just don't get all nutsy.