$100 increase for Apple's redesigned Mac mini seen as disappointment - Page 6

Drama, much? Not like Apple's computers are cheap anyway.

Apparently the economic as a whole isn't as bad off as you think it is or they wouldn't have "so much cash reserves" and increasing sales and profit each quarter.

Unless Apple was the only CE company in a socialized economy then the entire basis of your argument is flawed. People have a choice and most choose not to buy Apple products. Apple has a choice and they choose to focus on the market segment that historically offers lower per unit sales but at a higher price and profit. It just so happens that Apple ha found to way to move large quantities in the top-teir. That's a plus for them, not a negative. The other vendors aren't being altruistic with offerings by any means.


Apple's last quarterly net profit was $1.67B. Based on your estimated and exampled values Apple would lose about 5% of their overall net profit from just the Mac Mini. That doesn't make sense to me.

The strange thing is, it is over priced as a consumer model IMHO. $499 was a sweet spot for a low end model. Yet it is an amazing price with SL Server unlimited clients! OK I know a DIY or radio shack clunker with Linux is less but hardly in the same league.

Why do you assume it's just the exchange rate difference? Europe has more regulations which increases Apple's operating costs. Why shouldn't Apple pass those costs back to the countries who's policies generate them?

This is the comparison I did in the other thread:

Mac Mini 2010 - $1394 total ($987 for mini)

2.66Ghz Core 2 Duo
GeForce 320M
2GB RAM
320GB HDD
Apple Magic Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard

Dell SP2309 23" HD Widescreen w/webcam 2048x1152 resolution - $219

Add $188 for upgrades from New Egg

Seagate Momentus 7200.4 500GB 7200RPM 2.5" SATA $79
Crucial 2x2GB kit for $109

--

Base iMac - $1199 (+ tax and shipping)

3.06Ghz Core 2 Duo
GeForce 9400M
4GB RAM
500GB HDD
Apple Magic Mouse
Apple Wireless Keyboard
Built in Apple 21.5" display - 1920x1080 resolution

--

So for $195 (and a bit of install) you gain:

320M vs 9400M
23" 2048x1152 display vs 21.5" 1920x1080 display
spare 320GB HDD you can use in a cheap external enclosure for TimeMachine.

You lose

0.4Ghz CPU

Yes, the Dell is TN and the 21.5" is IPS. The IPS 23" UltraSharp is $299. There are cheaper 23" monitors but I like the resolution of this 23".

For me the Mini represents a better value than the 21.5" iMac given the GPU is faster and I can get the screen I want (whether IPS for photo or TN for gaming) with a fairly minimal cost delta.

Personally, I'd get a 4GB module and 1 GB module for 5GB of RAM in the mini. The OCZ 4GB is down to $119 so it's only $10 more than the 2x2GB although I prefer Crucial over OCZ. At least I'm not throwing away the 2GB sticks if I want 8GB later.

Now that Apple appears to be refreshing the mini more often the strategy of buying a new mini every year and ebaying the old one for $200 less than you bought it would work. If there is a Core i3 mini in 2011 that makes the mini a much better value over time than a base iMac.

The higher end iMacs do represent better value but the 2010 mini isn't the worst machine in the line up IMHO.

Is quad core a real requirement or just an assumption on you part? Because in my experience with virtualization, RAM is far more important than CPU - and one thing that I haven't seen discussed much is this unit supports 8 gigs of RAM!

Unless you are running CPU intensive apps - which you wouldn't be doing under virtualization anyway

Strange times.

What is next? Quadra developing some anti-Apple sentiments..?

Strange, I had feeling Macs recently had much more hardware and built quality related problems than before. They do look better but I can hardly agree that they are actually built any better.

That could be due to data density on HDD plates (in your case), also HDD cache size and other factors.

If you compare same generation/same capacity 5400 and 7200 HDDs, you should see the difference.

I'm yet to replace 5400 HDD in my laptop but my colleague did, and he claims about 20% faster boot time. He has re-imaged new hard drive from his old one, so software is identical.

Thanks for your recent refresh of the Mac Mini. It truly is ground breaking. It's small, lightweight, looks pretty and boasts "killer" integrated graphics. We rejoice at the 100% boost in frame rates for your Steam games, because 20 FPS is defiantly better than 10 - Even on a Mac.

It sounds so good on paper, I will have to go and get one. I don't mind even paying an extra £110 for a magic mouse and wireless aluminium keyboard. It's the only item like it in it's product segment, and is worthy of the price premium.

Thanks once again App... Oh, What's this?

http://www1.euro.dell.com/uk/en/home...=ukdhs1&~ck=mn


Oh, look - Competition. 1/3 of the price and comes with a keyboard and mouse. But wait, what am I thinking? Sorry Apple, I digress for a moment there. I will still buy the Mac Mini. It makes much more sense after banging my head against my desk a few times.

In fact, I'll have 2.

Regards,
Tipoo

I haven't been following closely this particular part of the thread, but aren't the prices in Europe all inclusive of VAT, whereas the advertised US prices do not include sales tax. I don't know how much of the difference that would account for, but I don't recall that being discussed.

Maybe I'm remembering back too far...

But, the build quality on every mac I've seen in the past few years is way better than any PC that I've come across. Fewer hardware problems as well, from at least my personal experience. And the Mac build quality and design certainly seems far better today (e.g., MacBook Pro) than from earlier in the century (e.g., PowerBook G4). The general PC build quality, not so much, and they've shifted their focus to cheaper and cheaper products. (I mean, we all know this to be the case, it's not like I'm revealing anything new about the industry.)

Its surprising how people still don't understand basic economics. The price is not a reflection of how much it costs Apple to make the mini, it's based on how much the market will bear. If Apple believes that they can meet their sales targets at USD699 then thats the price they will charge. If it turns out that the market rejects that price then they'll most likely revise it. As for all the people here who are shouting that it's too high and what not, there's a simple solution, don't buy it, duh.

pity the Zino is powered by a butt slow AMD processor

stick in all of high priced intel mobile cpu and downsize it all with mobile componentry and dell would only be a little cheaper, like normal.

Wihtout the aluminium, and OSX

But the price increase still made me choke a little. I was going to get one, but may rethink that. I can get a core i3 based system with a better GPU for less than that. But not as pretty...

decisions.

that aint saying much...

I have two small kids and I own maybe a handful DVDs (grandparents don't understand the concept of digital media so we get DVDs for christmas and birthdays) - and they're all covered in sticky fingerprints and scratches... only a couple of them play properly anymore (if we can even find them).

The Apple TV, on the other hand, is loaded with 3 full seasons of Sesame Street along with countless Elmo and Dora shows and they all play fine and are impervious to little hands.

All our non-kid movies, TV shows and music collection are on my MBP and streamed to the AppleTV when we want them.

I don't miss plastic discs at all.

I paid good money to replace my VHS collection with DVD ... I'm not spending more money re-purchasing everything on Blu-Ray now. Last year I got an AppleTV, ripped my DVDs and then sold the whack of them. What I didn't sell online I dumped off at the latest music/movie trade in shop... did the same with my music collection too.

You high def nerds can all keep your Blu-Ray.

dealing with disillusionment. After all the rah-rah Apple, this is a giggle!

Oh wait this is the sour side of the lemon bon bon isn't it?!

To be honest I don't know if the MBP did go up during the last update, but I think it didn't. The MBP did receive a similar update
if not better and didn't go up in price, so my question is where is the difference in those two products from a technical
point of view that the Mini had to raise by 16%.

I know that the others don't really have better offers in that form factor. The question the whole discussion hinges on is: Is it necessary
to make a desktop that small? And now we are in the area of personal taste and how much will you pay for design. I think that at the moment
the Mini (and the offers of the other competitors) start to get expensive and could slow the rate of adoption.

I hate for this to be my first posting, but Apple is wrong by to cover the cost. I believe the market for these machines are students and families that do not have the money for purchase the 'Real' IMac. If they really increased performance and add more... It would be easier to let go of the money.

I'm not asking for Apple to discontinue but if it's going to be a part of the family, they should all get the same type of roll out. (not just out on the website/But someone from Apple, Steve would be nice, to toot their horns and show why I need this.

RRisueno

I'm not sold on the hybrid drives. A nice option but it only improves the performance of frequent data, nothing else and the OS caches things too so I don't think there will be much noticeable benefit but there is still some extra cost.

The main performance increase in the hybrid drives is the use of the 7200RPM speed. Apple use 7200RPM drives in the server model but not the base consumer model. There's not even an option. If it's easy enough to replace, it's not such a big deal but it's added cost on top of the already high starting price.


It's like if a really attractive girl decides to parade through a monastery wearing very little clothes. You might say she's doing the guys a favor really but those guys have taken vows. Apple is parading beautiful products in front of people but we have to pay a huge price. In the first case, some would say the girl is behaving irresponsibly.

It's hard to suggest the same of Apple because ultimately it's a business that has to make money and they may as well profit from its best product yet so it can ride out periods of low innovation but it's tough. I'm not only thinking from a consumer point of view either, I like helping Apple to succeed as I respect what they do but they are pushing their products out of my price limits. I know 5 people who won't be upgrading to the iPhone 4 just because of the price increase but otherwise would have.

I'm sure there will be enough people to make up for any losses but Apple's philosophy about being 'for the rest of us' changes to 'for the rest of us on upper class pay grades'. The iPhone costs as much as a desktop computer now (well, not Apple's any more).


That generalizes too much. The economy is bad, it's just that it doesn't affect everyone the same. People who are well off will buy Apple products regardless.


I would tend to disagree slightly. I'm sure there are some companies who feel they want to improve things for a significant number of people rather than just people who are moderately wealthy. Google being one of them.


They don't sell all that many Minis a quarter, they sell 12 million Macs per year and 70-80% are laptops. Their flagship model is the iMac so it'll be 1-2 million Minis per year. They'd make very little loss and gain it back on volume. Even if it was as much as 5% of the profit, 5% hasn't somehow become a high number. That's next to nothing. It's like saying it doesn't make sense to lose 1% of the profit just because it's a loss. It clearly does make sense if you hit a wider market. You might double your market by dropping $100.

Jobs said that products are packages of emphasis, you choose what to highlight in a products and it will sell on that. The Mini moniker was as much about cost as it is was about size and this new development goes completely against that. They could even have dropped the optical drive and made it another 25% smaller as long as the cost stays at the $499-599 entry price. USB-powered drives are dirt cheap if you really need one.

Like the upgrade, especially the HDMI. Price here in Japan is OK.

You started off stating that they "so much cash reserves" they shouldn't be concerned with profits so much. You don't think that is a wild generalization?


Google is far from altruistic. On could argue that taking so much money from the "poorest" people in the world compared to Apple taking it from only the "richest" makes Apple 1/2 Robin Hood. You might say that Google charges you nothing, but they do charge those advertising through them, which are owned by or employee all these poor people you mention.

But that is irrelevant. If you can afford a product and want it then you buy it. If you can't afford it then you don't buy it. It's how a free market works. I could right a very long list of things that I want that I can't feasibly afford. I do not for one minute feel I am entitled to them simply because they are out of my price range. If you want more things in life then you work harder and smarter to achieve your goals.

Why should it be Apple's duty to supply one laptop per child for the entire world or are we stopping the humanitarian aspect of for-profit business at a price point more suitable to a specific buyer?


So because they sell less of them they should be okay with making no profit on them? That doesn't make sense and isn't the way business works.

You say that they'd make up the loss in profit in volume. You don't even speculate this could be an outcome, you state it as a absolute fact. You can't possibly know that.

Scenario: Apple drops price on Mac Mini to now only make a $10 net profit on each unit sold. How many more Mac Miinis must they sell to break even against the current net profit per unit? The rational man would say that Apple knows its market better than we do so. We don't have to like it, but we do have to accept it. Personally, to quote you as I think this is dead on it's a beautifully "over-engineered". My interest likely stops with the iFixit Teardown. I'll never buy it because it's too much money for the performance.



* They steal from the rich, but haven't got around to giving it to the poor.

One step forward and two steps back for the new Mini. It appears that while RAM access has been severely eased you need to completely detach everything and remove the motherboard from the back of the device (not bottom) in order to access the HDD.

http://www.hardmac.com/news/2010/06/...t-even-smaller

Welcome to the new Apple Mobile, Inc.

DVD's are digital media.

And maybe you should take control of your children, and your property, I have around 200 Blu-rays, and 350 DVD's, and have children of varying ages, and I have had one DVD fail, and it wasn't the kids that caused it.

It's impressive in design but it really does seem "over-engineered" like some proof-of-concept design or MIT tech art exhibit.

Of course, one can argue that it's not engineered enough if yo can't easily access the components with ease.

I can't wait to see the inside of the case. Is it really a solid piece of aluminium milled on the inside and out. That seems outrageous on the face of it for mass produced consumer electronics.

Are you saying that the 5 people you know won't be upgrading to the iPhone 4 just because of the price increase of the new Mac Mini?

Or are you saying they won't be buying a BMW because you can't afford one?

There are countries that try to ensure that their masses have access to products that everyone can afford. Unfortunately, these countries cannot provide a good range of quality products. This is not one of them.

Here in Europe they tossed on a whopping 250 euro. The basic model was 549 now it's 799. That's (after converting):

699*.812942037 = 568
799 - 568 = 231 euro

So we pay 231 euro more then you guys in the United States of Americaland. Which is $284. So we basically pay for an iPod touch 32GB but don't get it..

Nope, you don't get it.

Perhaps you should look at Macworld's first look at the new Mac Mini. It has been up for more than half a day now.

Interesting that their audience seems to recognize the relevancy of the new configuration. And for a month's daily coffee at Starbucks, the $100 difference is a no brainer.

I would be highly interested why so many feel that the new Mac Mini should be the same or lower priced than a 16GB iPad.

Thanks, I apparently missed that one in my RSS feeds.

Here's the link to the new Mini at MacWorld » http://www.macworld.com/article/1520...10handson.html

Do tell me what I missed. Apple should release there products here at a fair price. Even 699 (which is still $ to ) would be fairer.

It's already been explained ad nauseum in this thread, and pretty much every thread someone complains that the US price is lower than the insert_country price.

Not in all European countries.

You have a couple of choices. Move or change your government/private business, monetary and social policies.

Is Apple trying to force people "up to" an iMac perhaps. I'd argue what Apple's doing here by pricing it so is forcing it to stay a niche product and getting people stupid enough to pay out the money to give them a "HUGE" profit margin markup on the units they do sell. So they are going for low units with huge margins. You can't argue they don't know what they are doing if recent history says anything. What you can say though it that Apple is making a fool out of it's users for trying to convince them it's worth that price. Add on anything to the thing and it becomes outrageous in price.

If you live in Europe and you buy the new Mac mini you are either too rich to know what to do with your money or you like to throw away money. It's not worth near that price, and even more so if you add-on "stuff". It's a disgrace.

Live in Europe + Buy a Mac Mini = You are rich and/or stupid.

Talk of being overpriced: I wonder how many in Europe or anywhere else, would say the same thing for those buying Irish Whiskey.

What?

Exactly. And the people who compare the price against various Winboxen are too misguided.

It doesn't matter.

Apple put this product into its lineup to fill a niche. It will be compared against the customers needs, and it will not be compared against any Windows machine by the target customer. Not often, anyways.

The price will be compared to the other Macs which are contenders for purchase. This machine is for dedicated Apple people and for people who are technological illiterates. Many of the objections I see here, raging from price to specs, are of lesser importance to the target customers. The first group will buy if it meets their needs. So will the second group.

What will you do if future DRM no longer allows you to play your digital content? That has happened more than once, so far, hasn't it?

In this case he has taken his content and ripped it into a DRM-less version, so future changes won't have a restriction on him. There have been services who killed off their DRM and left people stranded, but ripping your movies into AVI or whatever will leave you safe for the future