or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple unveils Mac mini Core Duo
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple unveils Mac mini Core Duo - Page 16

post #601 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
If you look at the "Mini" PC models, you will see that they cost MORE than a Mini, once you add anything other than the bare basics.

And the ones with the same form-factor as the current Mac Mini cost a lot more than it.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
But, if Apple makes the machine just a little bit bigger, to accommodate a 3.5" drive, it will cost more. We will still be talking about a miniaturized machine, with all of the attendant increases in cost.

If you are going to say that the computer I suggest would actually cost more than the Mac mini, please quote my post from page 14 (the one that says "on to flogging my dead horse...") and indicate where my reasoning has gone wrong.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
But, now we will also be talking about a significantly bigger power supply needed for the much hungrier 3.5" drive. This will definitely hold true if Apple has to accommodate the needs of someone stuffing that 500GB (or larger, when it comes out later this year) drive in the case.

You are right, the power supply would have to be beefier than the current Mac mini. However, brining the PSU into the computer casework would save on packaging and this extra money could be spent on an uprated PSU. Pretty much the only things that would have to change would be the output devices in the PSU. The component costs would not be much higher (a couple of dollars at the most).

Higher capacity desktop HDDs only require more power than lower capacity desktop HDDs if they have more platters. Capacity increases from improvements in data density do not add to the power requirements.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
3.5" drives also put out far more heat than the 2.5" models do. 7,200 rpm drives put out even more heat, and there are a few (or there were last I looked) 10,000ATA drives that put out even more heat than that (as well as requiring even MORE power).

Will Apple need to add fans to the case as well? That makes it bigger still. What about the quietness of the machines? That has been praised all over the web. These changes will make this a pretty noisy machine, compared to what it is now, which is almost silent.

Yes, this is something that I have been thinking about. The machine would not support 10,000 rpm drives. It would probably require a fan. But, laptop HD and optical drives could be an option (no reason why they couldn't go into a bigger case), which when taken would mean the computer could ship without a fan. Now the user gets to choose between large HDDs in conjunction with more capable optical drives, and quietness of the machine, rather than Apple making the choice for them.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
The packaging of the Mini might cost Apple $10. $15 at the outside. I'm not sure it even does cost that much. When you get to hundreds of thousands, packaging costs drop precipitously. That's my experience. You can look up custom packaging costs. They are out there, if you want to bother.

I can believe that. Making a computer bigger makes the volume increase faster than the surface area, and it's surface area that costs in terms of packaging. I already acknowledged that the casework would be more costly, but that other savings would significantly outweigh the costs increases.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Insofar as a mini tower goes, well, you should have read the several posts I've made about that. That was my suggestion soon after Apple came out with the first G5 towers. I presented the plans (yup, I actually drew out plans) to my friends in Apple engineering management. They thought the plans made sense, and could be produced, but that "upper" management didn't want to go in that direction. Too bad. They were really very nice. They maintained the aluminum chassis, but were smaller, and didn't have the expensive metalwork for the handles or feet. There were other major changes inside, in the electronics as well to get the price to $999.

Sounds nice. Maybe one day Steve will wake up. I suppose no-one's perfect, he's got it right nearly all the rest of the time.


Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
1. I don't know what "quite a wealthy person" means. It's all relative. I certainly don't think of myself that way.

In this thread you state that you own 10,000 Apple shares. At the moment, they are worth $677,200. In my experience someone with that many shares in one company, probably has money invested elsewhere too. Even if you don't, it still makes you wealthy in my book, and I am sure many others'. But you are right, it's all relative.


Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
First of all, very few people these days "need" a 500GB HD. Those who do, tend to be hobbyists.

Why this fixation on 500 GB? Like I said, the mini tops out at 120 GB and 120 GB laptop HDD is a lot more expensive than a 120 GB desktop HDD.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Look, I know plenty of people who can't afford to buy an iMac, much less a PM, with all of the attendant trimmings. I don't live in a castle all of the time, I do come out to play.

In my user group alone, we have a fair percentage of people with 6000 and 7000 series of machines running 7.5.1. I know what it means for them to consider a new machine. I know people who rely on others to give them old machines, because they can't, or won't, spend the money for one themselves. Some of these people save up for YEARS to buy a new machine. So, I either donate (depending on what it is) my older stuff to the schools, or the user group.

Believe me, I do understand.

O.K. Point well made, and point taken. I hope I did not cause offence.


Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
But the price of $499 would still be a stripped down model, just like the PC mini versions out there are. It wouldn't be complete.

Yes, I am well aware of this. But it would be able to run OS X and iLife very well (better than current low-end iBooks).

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
People are complaining that they are not getting a Superdrive in that $599 model.

They are? Well, like I said, I think they are being churlish. The mini is a great deal if you happen to want exactly what it is offering.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
If you look at the reviews of the iMac, for example, one of the virtues mentioned in most of these reviews is that the consumer doesn't have to think about the purchase. It's all there.

Agreed. The iMac is a brilliant machine.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Apple wants the sale to go something like this:

"What will I need other than my monitor, keyboard, mouse, and printer?"

Nothing.

"What if I want to connect to a wireless network?"

Just this $49 wireless router.

"Yes, but what about for the computer?"

Nothing.

Etc.

No reason that couldn't happen with a $599 configuration of the computer I suggest.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #602 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by AgNuke1707
What if it's a user that wants PCIe graphics AND a tuner? Are they forced to buy a PowerMac at this point ... or do they pick which card they'd rather have? They may not need all the power of the PowerMac (or want to spend the $ on one...) so now THOSE people are constrained.

Yes, they will be. You have to draw the line somewhere. I believe some configurability is better than none.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #603 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
My mini tower design allows for three full size slots. Is the "small" tower full depth and width to enable a full size slot? Or is it like the Cube which offered an extra slot, but half length, and slightly shorter height?

It would be one full size slot.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #604 of 782
People were expecting the price to at least remain the same, with a 64Mb Graphics Card.
If you look at whats inside the Mini it was always a rip-off. The Hard Drive size is laughable, and theres no room for expansion or changing anything.
People expect to get ripped off by Apple, but the $499 Mini was borderline acceptable even though what you get for the money is ridiculous compared to a $499 PC. However, that was a sweet spot money wise that finally got people to consider switching. They got over the lack of keyboard and mouse, even though that's ridiculous enough, not they expect people to forget about having to pay extra for a modem also? Plus its $100 more? Plus they include Integrated graphics without an option for anything better while just a few days ago Apple was telling everyone that IG is crap?
And some of you can actually try to argue Apple's way out of this?

They screwed up.
post #605 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. H
[B]And the ones with the same form-factor as the current Mac Mini cost a lot more than it.

Since you insist in using this form to reply, I'll use it as well.

You do admit that these larger case cost more.

Quote:
If you are going to say that the computer I suggest would actually cost more than the Mac mini, please quote my post from page 14 (the one that says "on to flogging my dead horse...") and indicate where my reasoning has gone wrong.

I believe that I already covered it. You just don't agree, as the post here indicates. But, I will cover each point here.

Quote:
You are right, the power supply would have to be beefier than the current Mac mini. However, brining the PSU into the computer casework would save on packaging and this extra money could be spent on an uprated PSU. Pretty much the only things that would have to change would be the output devices in the PSU. The component costs would not be much higher (a couple of dollars at the most).

Of course, bringing it into the case would make the case MUCH larger again, and add to that already heavy heat load that a big 3/5" HD adds. Heat removal now becomes even more of a problem. Compact cases always have more a problem with heat removal than small cases. As you are still talking about a now, fairly, small case. The entire unit would need a rethinking.

I don't agree that this would lead to a "couple of dollars". How are you coming to that conclusion from a non engineering standpoint?

Quote:
Higher capacity desktop HDDs only require more power than lower capacity desktop HDDs if they have more platters. Capacity increases from improvements in data density do not add to the power requirements.

That depends on the manufacturer. No two manufacturers drives require the same power, even if they have the same number of platters. It might only vary by 15-20%, but it does vary. For example, Seagates Barracuda drives use more power, and put out more heat than other drives in their class by a substantial amount. Going to a 7,200 rpm drive also adds considerable power and heat.


Quote:
Yes, this is something that I have been thinking about. The machine would not support 10,000 rpm drives. It would probably require a fan. But, laptop HD and optical drives could be an option (no reason why they couldn't go into a bigger case), which when taken would mean the computer could ship without a fan. Now the user gets to choose between large HDDs in conjunction with more capable optical drives, and quietness of the machine, rather than Apple making the choice for them.

So, now Apple has to start telling people that they can't put just any drive in their new, shiny machine? Can you imagine the howls that would produce?

By limiting the drives to the smaller, less power hungry, and far less heat producing drives, Apple is telling people that this machine has certain limitations. Accept it, or don't buy it. Or buy an external drive that fits into those nice cases that match the computer, and sit underneith.

By allowing 3.5" drives, Apple is saying to put anything inside that you want to. Even though Apple really doesn't want you to. What happens if your nice new big HD burns the power supply out, or overheats the cpu, and destroys that? Who is responsible? Who pays for the warrantee service?

Do you stick your small drive back in again, and whine when Apple says that you overloaded the machine, thus requiring an out of warrantee service charge?

Quote:
Why this fixation on 500 GB? Like I said, the mini tops out at 120 GB and 120 GB laptop HDD is a lot more expensive than a 120 GB desktop HDD.

Because, several posters specifically used it as a desireable thing.

160 GB 2.5" drives have just come out, and will likely be available for the Mini before too long. As I've said, 200+GB drives will be out by the end of the year. Prices are also dropping steadily.

What we will be seeing before too long, is the discontinuation of smaller 3.5" drives. The industry is rushing into a standardization of the 2.5" drive for desktop use. The availability of 7,200 rpm drives has made that possible for all but the most performance oriented needs. When these drives reach the 300GB point, you will begin to see this happen. This may be no more than two years away. HD manufacturers are already slowing down the size increase of their 3.5" models. Not that they won't get larger, but the pace has clearly slowed down. Perpendicular recording is being applied to the smaller form factor drives.When they (3.5") do, it will be more to decrease the numbers of platters rather than to increase capacity.


Quote:
O.K. Point well made, and point taken. I hope I did not cause offence.

None taken.

Quote:
Yes, I am well aware of this. But it would be able to run OS X and iLife very well (better than current low-end iBooks).

Possibly true, but not the experience that Apple wants the consumer to have. Look at all of the frustrated posts about whether the dual core could play 1080p! A Celeron might not be able to play 720p very well. I'm not sure about that, of course. But it's very possible. You should have seen the criticism over the G4 Mini problems with hi-def.


Quote:
They are? Well, like I said, I think they are being churlish. The mini is a great deal if you happen to want exactly what it is offering.

(We were talking about no Superdrive in the $599 model.)

Churlish indeed! But this is what you get when you start cutting features. You might lose as many sales as you gain. And the ones you lose might be the better customers. The ones more likely to spend additional money.

Quote:
No reason that couldn't happen with a $599 configuration of the computer I suggest.

Only if it has the features it has now.
post #606 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
I believe that I already covered it. You just don't agree, as the post here indicates. But, I will cover each point here.

Please quote my post from page 14 and pick it apart.

It seems that the source of our disagreement about costs hinges on the costs of the casework, but I'm not sure.

However, I thought the thing that we had agreed to disagree about was whether Apple even needed a machine that starts at $399. I also thought that you were happy that Apple's only truly flexible desktop was its Power Mac, but now I know that that is not the case.


Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
I don't agree that this would lead to a "couple of dollars". How are you coming to that conclusion from a non engineering standpoint?

I am an electronics engineer (or at least, I've got an MEng with 1st class honours and am now doing a PhD). I was talking about the increased cost of the PSU components, not of the machine as a whole.


Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
So, now Apple has to start telling people that they can't put just any drive in their new, shiny machine? Can you imagine the howls that would produce?

People wanting more than 120 GB is very different from people wanting 10,000 rpm. Whilst people in that market want larger capacities, possibly at 7200 rpm, I don't think they want 10,000 rpm.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
By allowing 3.5" drives, Apple is saying to put anything inside that you want to. Even though Apple really doesn't want you to. What happens if your nice new big HD burns the power supply out, or overheats the cpu, and destroys that? Who is responsible? Who pays for the warrantee service?

Do you stick your small drive back in again, and whine when Apple says that you overloaded the machine, thus requiring an out of warrantee service charge?

I agree that this could be a problem. I don't know how to estimate how many users are likely to do that, so I can't analyse the risk involved. Some people are always going to be dishonest, you just have to accept it. The question, in this case, is how many?
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #607 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. H
[B]Please quote my post from page 14 and pick it apart.

I don't disagree with everything in your example.

It's the concept that I am having problems with.

If I were to design a machine to those specs, it would be much larger, with much higher specs in the PW and cooling. I don't see it costing less at all. It also wouldn't be a Mini, and that's the other point.

You are talking about a completely different machine. As an engineer, you should see that.

If you want to talk about a completely different machine, then that would be different. But, let's not pretend to ourselves that we are still thinking about a slightly revised Mini.

If this is the tower you are talking about, then I could see it. People opting for that would be more sophisitcated, and could handle choices. I doubt that Apple would ever produce a tower for that price, however.

Quote:
It seems that the source of our disagreement about costs hinges on the costs of the casework, but I'm not sure.

The casework is part of it. But it would also be a bigger, more complex mobo, power supply, cooling arrangement etc.

Quote:
However, I thought the thing that we had agreed to disagree about was whether Apple even needed a machine that starts at $399. I also thought that you were happy that Apple's only truly flexible desktop was its Power Mac, but now I know that that is not the case.

Sure. But, the funny thing here is that I wasn't responding to your post, but someone else's. (don't remember who, now)

Well, I would like to see the iMac back to where it was with user expandability. I would also like to see Apple produce my $999 tower, or something close to it.

Quote:
I am an electronics engineer (or at least, I've got an MEng with 1st class honours and am now doing a PhD). I was talking about the increased cost of the PSU components, not of the machine as a whole.

Have you done any fair amount of real world work/ I'm not asking that as an insult. I just find that people new to the profession still don't have a good handle on the manufacturing process.

Look at what we have. The DESIGN engineer! The GOD.

The Production engineer, one of the angels.

Then we have the lowly line engineer. He's a dwarf.

Unfortunately, often it's the guy on the bottom who knows most about costs, and practicality.

[QUOTE]
People wanting more than 120 GB is very different from people wanting 10,000 rpm. Whilst people in that market want larger capacities, possibly at 7200 rpm, I don't think they want 10,000 rpm.9/QUOTE]

Probably true. But that big hot 3.5" high capacity drive is still going to fry a small unit.


Quote:
I agree that this could be a problem. I don't know how to estimate how many users are likely to do that, so I can't analyse the risk involved. Some people are always going to be dishonest, you just have to accept it. The question, in this case, is how many?

(cheat on warrentee service)

Everyone who puts a big drive in, and fries their machine.

I won't be back here for a few hours. Cheers, Mel.
post #608 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
You are talking about a completely different machine. As an engineer, you should see that.

If you want to talk about a completely different machine, then that would be different. But, let's not pretend to ourselves that we are still thinking about a slightly revised Mini.

If this is the tower you are talking about, then I could see it. People opting for that would be more sophisitcated, and could handle choices. I doubt that Apple would ever produce a tower for that price, however.

Yes, of course I understand that I'm talking about a machine bigger than the mini. It would still be a lot smaller than a normal tower. I also understand that it isn't just a simple modification of the mini, and would cost Apple to develop. But Apple is no stranger to R&D, unlike most other PC makers. I'm confused that Apple ever came out with the mini, it must have cost more to develop than a mini tower. I suppose that now Apple's done it, they could keep the mini, and just bring out a small configurable tower as well.

Like I've said before, I think the biggest selling point of the mini is its price. Next, and less important to most people, is its quietness. Finally, is its size. The quietness could be preserved in my suggested machine by having laptop HDD and optical drive as an option.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
more complex mobo

The chipset that Apple uses in the mini supports PCIe, there just isn't a slot. Since the case would be bigger, the mobo could be bigger, and therefore much easier to lay out.


Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Have you done any fair amount of real world work/ I'm not asking that as an insult.

None taken. I used to work, during the holidays, for cambridge consultants (who coincidentally and completely O.T. span out Cambridge Silicon Radio, whose bluetooth chips are used in Apple's products, and who also span out AlphaMosaic (who were then bought by Broadcom) whose chip is used to decode video in the 5th gen iPod). But no, I do not have any direct experience or education in production of high-volume CE.

Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
(cheat on warrentee service)
Everyone who puts a big drive in, and fries their machine.

Well, I'd like to think that at least 1% of those people would be honest. But we are still left with the question of estimating how many users would put in a too-demanding HDD. We are also assuming that the PSU wouldn't have auto shut-off.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #609 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. H
Yes, of course I understand that I'm talking about a machine bigger than the mini. It would still be a lot smaller than a normal tower. I also understand that it isn't just a simple modification of the mini, and would cost Apple to develop. But Apple is no stranger to R&D, unlike most other PC makers. I'm confused that Apple ever came out with the mini, it must have cost more to develop than a mini tower. I suppose that now Apple's done it, they could keep the mini, and just bring out a small configurable tower as well.

Like I've said before, I think the biggest selling point of the mini is its price. Next, and less important to most people, is its quietness. Finally, is its size. The quietness could be preserved in my suggested machine by having laptop HDD and optical drive as an option.



The chipset that Apple uses in the mini supports PCIe, there just isn't a slot. Since the case would be bigger, the mobo could be bigger, and therefore much easier to lay out.




None taken. I used to work, during the holidays, for cambridge consultants (who coincidentally and completely O.T. span out Cambridge Silicon Radio, whose bluetooth chips are used in Apple's products, and who also span out AlphaMosaic (who were then bought by Broadcom) whose chip is used to decode video in the 5th gen iPod). But no, I do not have any direct experience or education in production of high-volume CE.



Well, I'd like to think that at least 1% of those people would be honest. But we are still left with the question of estimating how many users would put in a too-demanding HDD. We are also assuming that the PSU wouldn't have auto shut-off.

But, you see, if this then IS your mini TOWER, then I have no problem with your assumptions.

It's just too bad that Apple will likely not produce yours any more than they will produce mine.
post #610 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Bergermeister
I think iLife is worth more than to be stuck in a 399 box, especially with OSX... I asked before: what is the value of iLife? If we consider the current price of 79 to be an upgrade price (as it comes included on all machines), then the original cost would be about 149, which doesn't leave much room for OSX on a 399 box.

Why should software be included into the price of the hardware?
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #611 of 782
Oh good ... I was waiting to see what the guys at Ars would say when they got their hands on one ... their results, as you might expect are very pleasing, and a little surprising!

Ars Technica Mac Mini Core Solo Test
MacBook Pro 15" 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 500GB HDD
Mac mini 2.26 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 320GB HDD
iPod 5th Generation, 30GB
iPhone 4, 32GB
Reply
MacBook Pro 15" 2.8 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 500GB HDD
Mac mini 2.26 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB DDR3 SDRAM, 320GB HDD
iPod 5th Generation, 30GB
iPhone 4, 32GB
Reply
post #612 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
]It's also been brought up before, by myself, and numerous others, that buying into the Mac isn't simply buying a Mac.

People also have to be willing to buy other things in the Mac ecosystem. Why is it mentioned so many times, that the reason why people stay (along with other reasons, of course) with Windows is because of the amount of software available?

Well, most of the people I know staying with Windows for software are just gamers.
Quote:
People spending $399 for a computer are less likely to also buy some of that software.

I think a $399 Mac would fit for an email, web, musci & photos, and word processor machine. My parents and relatives, my wife's parents and relatives, and most of my friends' family -- this is the use of their computer ('cept those who like to play games).
Quote:
The Mac, like every other computer platform, lives and dies by the amount, and quality, of software available for it. This is also true, to a somewhat lessor extent, for hardware.

Not quite sure what you're saying here. So an OS lives and dies by the amount of software for it, that would make the hardware would live and die by the amount of hardware available for it. Though the Mini doesn't leave that much room for hardware improvements (excluding external additions).
Quote:
People complain that they can't get a Mini with a 500GB HD. and, yes, they have, right here, on this site, in several threads. Yet, some of them as well, insist on a $399 or $499 machine.

Haven't thoroughly read the thread here, but I think I've seen the complaints that the enclosure doesn't make room for the 3.5" HDs where the 500GB is cheaper.
Quote:
How many people buying such machines would spend the extra money to purchase such an expensive drive?

Not the people I mentioned above who could make use of a $399 Mac
Quote:
To change the entire design of the Mini to allow such a thing, for those who would buy them, would likely raise the price even further. That would move this goal even further away.


Apple has a vision of what their products should be, and how they should get there. They also decide which possible customers they will have to give up to accomplish that. Every company must make those decisions. Not everyone will be happy with them.

I think the Mac Mini is a pretty neat computer. Though it's not one for me, it's kinda nifty. That the thing with one company making the hardware, they can only make so many product lines geared to only so many target markets. There'll always be (sometimes big) gaps in between.

I'm not saying Apple should or should not go to clones, just that they will hit this issue with their product lineup unless they release many more products to fill the spaces which I do not thing they'll do.

I think Apple makes great products and they do seem to last well. However, I wonder if they miss their mark more often than hit them. When Apple released OS X to clone makers, the complaint was that the clone makers were taking market share from Apple and not the other market. So why did people buy the clones instead of actual Apple hardware? If Apple's hardware was so great, people should've still been buying them.
Quote:
I haven't always been happy with them, and I've said so. But, at the same time, we must understand that we simply do not have the information that Apple does. They don't do things in a vacuum.

That is true. However, perception is reality and people will make their comments and opintions based on that reality (like how I did from what I think is the truth). The perception is not always fact which is why some peoples reality is totally distorted -- like there's some reality distortion field (just had to say that one).
Quote:
If people won't, or can't, pay that extra $100 for a Mini, too bad. That's just the way it is. You just have to get over it. Every company in the world works this way.

That's the cold hard reality. As long as Apple's the only manufacturer of computers capable of running OS X, we'll have to take what Apple provides to us what Apple believes we want. The thing with the Windows, Linux, and anything else of the generic x86 market is that they have a wide range of choices when it come to purchasing computers. One thing us Mac users don't have (well, unless you use the Maxxuss or whatever his name is patch).
Quote:
What if Apple released a $299 computer? How about a $199 model?

Well, if it could do email, web, and Office stuff (since that's all I would need for work), I would pick one up to use at the office instead of the stuff they make us use. At that price, I wouldn't have to worry about getting the company to expense it.
Quote:
Is it possible? Sure, if they want to make something unusable by modern standards. Apple has decided that in order to provide what they consider to be the minimum "Mac" experience, their machines must have certain features as standard. And, I should mention, MANY people on these same threads have complained, in the not too distant past, that Apple MUST include these features as standard. to them, Apple, in not including them, would be "ripping off" its customers, because then we would have to pay for features that are beginning to become standard, even in the PC world.

I guess that Apple can't win here.

It's hard for them to win. There's too many people out there with too many wants and needs. One company can't release a product line for each of those, but I kinda covered that already.
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #613 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Faasnat
Why should software be included into the price of the hardware?

Welcome to Macintosh.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #614 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. H
A small tower (just big enough to contain full-size HD, optical drive and space for one PCI-E card) would appeal to everyone to whom a Mac mini appeals, and also, to a load of people to whom a Mac mini does not appeal. So, I'm talking about replacing one profitable computer with another profitable computer, which appeals to a much wider market. I simply cannot see how this would be a bad thing for Apple.

That almost sounds like a Shuttle PC.
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #615 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. H
Well, primarily for a graphics card, if the user wants one. The motherboard would have integrated graphics as standard.

Of course, you wouldn't necessarily have to use the PCIe for a graphics card. You could use it for a TV tuner card etc.

Well, as long as the system can use one of the video cards out there and doesn't have to be a "Mac Edition" card. Seems printing the words "Mac Edition" on the box raises the price somewhat.
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #616 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
If you look at the "Mini" PC models, you will see that they cost MORE than a Mini, once you add anything other than the bare basics. This shows that the costing model Apple uses is correct. A mini anything is always going to cost significantly more. Thats why 1" drives cost more per Gb than 1.8" ones, which cost more per GB than 2.5" ones, which cost more per GB than 3.5" ones.

But, if Apple makes the machine just a little bit bigger, to accommodate a 3.5" drive, it will cost more. We will still be talking about a miniaturized machine, with all of the attendant increases in cost. But, now we will also be talking about a significantly bigger power supply needed for the much hungrier 3.5" drive. This will definitely hold true if Apple has to accommodate the needs of someone stuffing that 500GB (or larger, when it comes out later this year) drive in the case. 3.5" drives also put out far more heat than the 2.5" models do. 7,200 rpm drives put out even more heat, and there are a few (or there were last I looked) 10,000ATA drives that put out even more heat than that (as well as requiring even MORE power).

Will Apple need to add fans to the case as well? That makes it bigger still. What about the quietness of the machines? That has been praised all over the web. These changes will make this a pretty noisy machine, compared to what it is now, which is almost silent.

Well, that's if one cares about the extra noise from fans (okay, maybe not the windtunnel fans, but there are desktop fans that are not that loud). For me, I don't really mind the fan noise (hear the one from my PowerMac now). It's normally covered up by the TV or my daughter screaming. And even when that's not present, it's like white noise in the background. After a while I don't really notice it anymore. Just to say, I have a G4 PowerMac, I've heard the original G5 PowerMac fans were deafening loud.
Quote:
[.....]
Also, the external solutions aren't inelegant. In fact, they are VERY elegant. They also offer more connectivity, and you can decide what size drive you will get. These drive cases and drives cost less that if the choice came from Apple. The cases themselves don't cost much, once you consider what it is you are getting.

Yeah, got no real problem with external cases. Makes things more portable too when needing to take it from home to work or to a friends house or somewhere. Some cases look pretty nice too (though that's a personal opinion). Yeah, buying these from Fry's, Best Buy, or somewhere online would probably be cheaper than an option from the Apple Store (much like how buying RAM from somewhere else is cheaper).

I think the inelegant part may be referring to the external case may actually be bigger than the Mini or something.
Quote:
2. To a great extent, you are right. But the price of $499 would still be a stripped down model, just like the PC mini versions out there are. It wouldn't be complete. People are complaining that they are not getting a Superdrive in that $599 model. It just goes to show how close to the line the machine is.

Not to speak for the other people, but I think people feel that paying $100 more than the previous gen's $499 tag would justify the superdrive. I don't think the other additions are taken into account. If I were to buy the $599 Mini, I would want take the superdrive over the airport and bluetooth since those are two that I wouldn't need.
Quote:
If you look at the reviews of the iMac, for example, one of the virtues mentioned in most of these reviews is that the consumer doesn't have to think about the purchase. It's all there. The Mini, of course, isn't quite that simple, because you still need the monitor and keyboard mouse combo. But, it's close.

I wonder how hard it would've been to just throw in the keyboard and mouse?
Quote:
[....]
Of course, the only fly here is that a modem is no longer included, but, it seems as though most Mac users elect to go for broadband.

Heh, it's funny, one of the features shown of the lastest OS is that now from the print dialog, there's a fax PDF option in the PDF drop down menu. However, seems the means for the OS doing that is disappearing (minus the external option). Not that I would ever use it, just thought I'd say something....
Quote:
If Apple removed several of these features, customers would be back to the "what do I need to buy to do..."

"Will the Celeron play HD trailers from Apple's web site, and others?"

Don't really check out the trailers on Apple's site. If I couldn't view the HD trailers, I'm find with the others (don't have QT pro for the full screen either). However, If I couldn't view HD content at all (when they finally standardize on HD DVDs), that's something else.

I think the appeal of the $399 (or less as you suggested in your previous post) is that down the road, there's less complaint to purchasing a new computer that supports some newer stuff for about the same price. "Ah, I paid $399 for this computer two years ago, I won't mind paying $399 for this one now to do this....."

I think when it gets to be $500 or more, people have to start thinking of their wallets. Heck, my wife won't let me splurge on a $499 computer. When I suggested $399, she reduced it only to a maybe. Sheesh....
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #617 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by AgNuke1707
I understand the request, I really do ... but I just don't see it as practical. You say keep integrated graphics as standard, make the mini a bit bigger so we have an open PCIe slot for graphics or whatever else the user may want. What if it's a user that wants PCIe graphics AND a tuner? Are they forced to buy a PowerMac at this point ... or do they pick which card they'd rather have? They may not need all the power of the PowerMac (or want to spend the $ on one...) so now THOSE people are constrained.

I think I was touching up on something like this in my other posts. There are too many people each with their own need. If there's computer A and computer B which is just like A, but a little extra stuff, there will always be some consumer who really wants computer A.5 or so. Too hard for one company to meet all these needs.
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #618 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
My mini tower design allows for three full size slots. Is the "small" tower full depth and width to enable a full size slot? Or is it like the Cube which offered an extra slot, but half length, and slightly shorter height?

Maybe something like the Shuttle PC (http://www.shuttle.com). Like the XPC barebones....ahh, I dunno. I just say this cuz I was thinking about a Shuttle for a game system to take to LAN parties.
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #619 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Bergermeister
Welcome to Macintosh.

Not sure what that implies, but anyways. I was referring to the comment about a $399 and the cost of iLife and OS X etc. etc. etc. When I bought my PowerMac, it didn't come with iLife (wasn't out yet). The PowerMacs out now include iLife, but the price point is around the same of what my model would've been equivalent to.

I mean, does it cost the full amount of the software package for Apple to include the CDs or DVDs or to build the OS off an image with this already installed?
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #620 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Faasnat
Not sure what that implies, but anyways. I was referring to the comment about a $399 and the cost of iLife and OS X etc. etc. etc. When I bought my PowerMac, it didn't come with iLife (wasn't out yet). The PowerMacs out now include iLife, but the price point is around the same of what my model would've been equivalent to.

I mean, does it cost the full amount of the software package for Apple to include the CDs or DVDs or to build the OS off an image with this already installed?

Macintosh is a package, one the has evolved over the years. Also, as sales increase, Apple does not need to make the same margin on each sale.

The software that comes bundled with the Mac is worth a lot of money as it is good stuff, especially for average users, right out of the box. The addition of a word processor would add ten-fold to the value, but I think that is coming somewhere down the line. (Appleworks was bundled for years and was a very capable program).

iLife's programs, all being made by the same maker, are all very similar (not to mention inter-connnected), thus lowering the learning curve before one can put the software to use. That means time saved, which is money saved. Add lower stress rates and a quicker realisation of pride regarding the work one has accomplished with the machine and software, and, if you ask me, an extra 200 bucks (over your 399 price) is worth the ease of use, quality, stability, lack of viruses, etc. Also, if I have any problems or questions with any part of the package (or the whole thing), I only have to call one support line. If I work hard to earn money, I want to spend that money well.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #621 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Bergermeister
Macintosh is a package, one the has evolved over the years. Also, as sales increase, Apple does not need to make the same margin on each sale.

The software that comes bundled with the Mac is worth a lot of money as it is good stuff, especially for average users, right out of the box. The addition of a word processor would add ten-fold to the value, but I think that is coming somewhere down the line. (Appleworks was bundled for years and was a very capable program).

iLife's programs, all being made by the same maker, are all very similar (not to mention inter-connnected), thus lowering the learning curve before one can put the software to use. That means time saved, which is money saved. Add lower stress rates and a quicker realisation of pride regarding the work one has accomplished with the machine and software, and, if you ask me, an extra 200 bucks (over your 399 price) is worth the ease of use, quality, stability, lack of viruses, etc. Also, if I have any problems or questions with any part of the package (or the whole thing), I only have to call one support line. If I work hard to earn money, I want to spend that money well.

All very good points.

The thing is iLife and OS X raise the value of the machine. They do not raise the costs for Apple.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #622 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. H
The thing is iLife and OS X raise the value of the machine. They do not raise the costs for Apple.

They raise costs considerably, it's just that the costs are (mostly) sunk rather than marginal. Dells pays $x per CPU sold to MS for Windows. Their cost per machine doesn't change if they sell ten million or one million. Apple invests $y million/year in OS X and iLife, and needs to make that up from the sum of all sales. You end up paying a little more marginally from Apple than Dell/MS because Apple needs to spread OS development costs comparable to MS's across one-tenth as many boxes. The fact they can compete at all is probably due in equal measure to Apple's efficiency and the combination of MS's inability to spend most of the money they collect and their unbelievably prolifigate waste of much of what they do spend.
post #623 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Towel
They raise costs considerably, it's just that the costs are (mostly) sunk rather than marginal.

Yes, sorry, I was not trying to imply that iLife and OS X cost Apple nothing to develop. But like you say, they are not marginal costs, so the cost to Apple to include them on a computer are very low compared to what they charge for the shrink-wrapped product at retail.
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
it's = it is / it has, its = belonging to it.
Reply
post #624 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Mr. H
But like you say, they are not marginal costs, so the cost to Apple to include them on a computer are very low compared to what they charge for the shrink-wrapped product at retail.

But, at least in the case of iLife (and all the other stuff people would love to see bundled with their new toy), there is an opportunity cost. Foregone sales of iLife. Just as I expect Apple reckons that selling a Mini with better video or faster HDD will have an opportunity cost in sales of much more profitable hardware.

James
post #625 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by jrwo
But, at least in the case of iLife (and all the other stuff people would love to see bundled with their new toy), there is an opportunity cost. Foregone sales of iLife. Just as I expect Apple reckons that selling a Mini with better video or faster HDD will have an opportunity cost in sales of much more profitable hardware.

James

Welcome to our new member!

However, iLife is included with all new Macs, so any Mac sold means an iLife set sold. There is a difference when it comes to upgrading... buying the box. Some people may choose to hold off on the update until they update their computer.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #626 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Bergermeister
Welcome to our new member!


Thanks! I could have sworn I had an account on here before, but apparently not!
Quote:

However, iLife is included with all new Macs, so any Mac sold means an iLife set sold.

True - but not an iLife set at full retail, hence there being an opportunity cost to consider.
post #627 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Faasnat
Well, most of the people I know staying with Windows for software are just gamers.

I think a $399 Mac would fit for an email, web, musci & photos, and word processor machine. My parents and relatives, my wife's parents and relatives, and most of my friends' family -- this is the use of their computer ('cept those who like to play games).

Not quite sure what you're saying here. So an OS lives and dies by the amount of software for it, that would make the hardware would live and die by the amount of hardware available for it. Though the Mini doesn't leave that much room for hardware improvements (excluding external additions).

Haven't thoroughly read the thread here, but I think I've seen the complaints that the enclosure doesn't make room for the 3.5" HDs where the 500GB is cheaper.

Not the people I mentioned above who could make use of a $399 Mac

I think the Mac Mini is a pretty neat computer. Though it's not one for me, it's kinda nifty. That the thing with one company making the hardware, they can only make so many product lines geared to only so many target markets. There'll always be (sometimes big) gaps in between.

I'm not saying Apple should or should not go to clones, just that they will hit this issue with their product lineup unless they release many more products to fill the spaces which I do not thing they'll do.

I think Apple makes great products and they do seem to last well. However, I wonder if they miss their mark more often than hit them. When Apple released OS X to clone makers, the complaint was that the clone makers were taking market share from Apple and not the other market. So why did people buy the clones instead of actual Apple hardware? If Apple's hardware was so great, people should've still been buying them.

That is true. However, perception is reality and people will make their comments and opintions based on that reality (like how I did from what I think is the truth). The perception is not always fact which is why some peoples reality is totally distorted -- like there's some reality distortion field (just had to say that one).

That's the cold hard reality. As long as Apple's the only manufacturer of computers capable of running OS X, we'll have to take what Apple provides to us what Apple believes we want. The thing with the Windows, Linux, and anything else of the generic x86 market is that they have a wide range of choices when it come to purchasing computers. One thing us Mac users don't have (well, unless you use the Maxxuss or whatever his name is patch).

Well, if it could do email, web, and Office stuff (since that's all I would need for work), I would pick one up to use at the office instead of the stuff they make us use. At that price, I wouldn't have to worry about getting the company to expense it.

It's hard for them to win. There's too many people out there with too many wants and needs. One company can't release a product line for each of those, but I kinda covered that already.

You really should read more of the thread. These points have been discussed back and forth several times.

I'll just respond to the "gamers" portion.

I hope you don't think that most Windows users are gamers. That's a small portion of the platform. There is a difference between people who play some basic games part of the time, and Gamers.

The former are the vast majority. The latter are a small minority.
post #628 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Faasnat
Maybe something like the Shuttle PC (http://www.shuttle.com). Like the XPC barebones....ahh, I dunno. I just say this cuz I was thinking about a Shuttle for a game system to take to LAN parties.

We discussed this as well.
post #629 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Faasnat
Not sure what that implies, but anyways. I was referring to the comment about a $399 and the cost of iLife and OS X etc. etc. etc. When I bought my PowerMac, it didn't come with iLife (wasn't out yet). The PowerMacs out now include iLife, but the price point is around the same of what my model would've been equivalent to.

I mean, does it cost the full amount of the software package for Apple to include the CDs or DVDs or to build the OS off an image with this already installed?

This has been covered as well, but it bears repeating, as it isn't obvious.

One division of a company MUST, by law, pay another division of the same company, Fair Market Value, for a part or service they acquire from them.

If the iLife package has a value, as a pre-packaged product license, of, say $20, then the computer division must pay the software division $20 for each copy of the software it bundles. whether the disks are included or not is something else. It is the license that is of value, and is what the fee is for.

To the company, as a whole, the movement generates no positive, or negative cash flow, except for the bookkeeping costs involved.

But, each division must pay its way.
post #630 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Towel
They raise costs considerably, it's just that the costs are (mostly) sunk rather than marginal. Dells pays $x per CPU sold to MS for Windows. Their cost per machine doesn't change if they sell ten million or one million. Apple invests $y million/year in OS X and iLife, and needs to make that up from the sum of all sales. You end up paying a little more marginally from Apple than Dell/MS because Apple needs to spread OS development costs comparable to MS's across one-tenth as many boxes. The fact they can compete at all is probably due in equal measure to Apple's efficiency and the combination of MS's inability to spend most of the money they collect and their unbelievably prolifigate waste of much of what they do spend.

There are two aspects to this.

The developmental costs are certainly real, and burdensome.

However, Apple sells many copies of its software at retail. While this market is smaller that MS's, by a wide margin, it is enough to help recoup those costs, as well as the marketing costs that are always associated with sales.

Apple sells several million copies of the OS every year, as well as several million copies of iLife as well.

The sales of the OS add several hundred million dollars to Apple's gross, and are considered to contribute a greater percentage (margin) to Apple's profits than hardware sales do.

Software, particularly that such as iLife costs less for Apple to upgrade, then the initial cost of developing the product, even as it adds additional products to the mix. Apple is most certainly earning a good profit on that as well.

The costs of that software is always added to the price of the computer. The question is; how much? Only Apple has those figures.

MS, being primarily a software developer, has tremendous profits vs total sales. Extremely high margins, up to 80%.

This allows them to lose money on most all of their other endeavors. The games division, for example, has been giving them a loss of about $1.2 billion per year ever since they introduced the XBox. No other company could afford such consistent losses at that level.
post #631 of 782
Mr. H, you should be interested in this.

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...ad.php?t=91459
post #632 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
There are two aspects to this.

The developmental costs are certainly real, and burdensome.

However, Apple sells many copies of its software at retail. While this market is smaller that MS's, by a wide margin, it is enough to help recoup those costs, as well as the marketing costs that are always associated with sales.

Apple sells several million copies of the OS every year, as well as several million copies of iLife as well.

The sales of the OS add several hundred million dollars to Apple's gross, and are considered to contribute a greater percentage (margin) to Apple's profits than hardware sales do.

Software, particularly that such as iLife costs less for Apple to upgrade, then the initial cost of developing the product, even as it adds additional products to the mix. Apple is most certainly earning a good profit on that as well.

The costs of that software is always added to the price of the computer. The question is; how much? Only Apple has those figures.

MS, being primarily a software developer, has tremendous profits vs total sales. Extremely high margins, up to 80%.

This allows them to lose money on most all of their other endeavors. The games division, for example, has been giving them a loss of about $1.2 billion per year ever since they introduced the XBox. No other company could afford such consistent losses at that level.

I've discussed this on another thread, but when vista comes out I think you will see what a value ilife and OS x are. Apple sells these at a very reasonable price IMO.
post #633 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Bergermeister
Macintosh is a package, one the has evolved over the years. Also, as sales increase, Apple does not need to make the same margin on each sale.

The software that comes bundled with the Mac is worth a lot of money as it is good stuff, especially for average users, right out of the box. The addition of a word processor would add ten-fold to the value, but I think that is coming somewhere down the line. (Appleworks was bundled for years and was a very capable program).

iLife's programs, all being made by the same maker, are all very similar (not to mention inter-connnected), thus lowering the learning curve before one can put the software to use. That means time saved, which is money saved. Add lower stress rates and a quicker realisation of pride regarding the work one has accomplished with the machine and software, and, if you ask me, an extra 200 bucks (over your 399 price) is worth the ease of use, quality, stability, lack of viruses, etc. Also, if I have any problems or questions with any part of the package (or the whole thing), I only have to call one support line. If I work hard to earn money, I want to spend that money well.

However, there are a lot of people who don't consider ease of use, integrated software, lower learning curve as part of the costs making the Mac a better value rather than a cheaper system (lack of viruses is only until virus writers start writing 'em for the Mac). They just look at the bottom line -- what's going to be coming out of their wallets and make their decision off that.

Another parts it that people who buy systems already know how to work the programs they're going to use on any platform so that part also isn't a factor in the total cost.

Yes, in the long run, there'll be less headache running OS X than something else and less time will be spent hacking away at the OS. But most people don't think of this when buying a computer.
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #634 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Towel
They raise costs considerably, it's just that the costs are (mostly) sunk rather than marginal. Dells pays $x per CPU sold to MS for Windows. Their cost per machine doesn't change if they sell ten million or one million. Apple invests $y million/year in OS X and iLife, and needs to make that up from the sum of all sales. You end up paying a little more marginally from Apple than Dell/MS because Apple needs to spread OS development costs comparable to MS's across one-tenth as many boxes. The fact they can compete at all is probably due in equal measure to Apple's efficiency and the combination of MS's inability to spend most of the money they collect and their unbelievably prolifigate waste of much of what they do spend.

I do agree that it costs Apple money to develop these programs and they need to make it up somewhere. But it's the arguement that including the software with the hardware would raise the costs of the system that much. So if the software wasn't included and was required to be purchased from the store, would that make the hardware that much cheaper?
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #635 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac
I've discussed this on another thread, but when vista comes out I think you will see what a value ilife and OS x are. Apple sells these at a very reasonable price IMO.

Absolutely! And including it with every machine makes it even more of a bargin.
post #636 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Bergermeister
Welcome to our new member!

However, iLife is included with all new Macs, so any Mac sold means an iLife set sold. There is a difference when it comes to upgrading... buying the box. Some people may choose to hold off on the update until they update their computer.

A Mac sold is an iLife set sold? Heh, I've been thinking it's Apple's way of getting people to use the iLife set and then when they release the new version, the users have to purchase the new one.

Not sure if buying the box is just an upgrade. It's for new and upgrading consumers. iLife from the box will install on a system even if there are no previous versions installed. An upgrade would require a previous version to be installed.
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #637 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by jrwo

Thanks! I could have sworn I had an account on here before, but apparently not!
[/B]

At least you got a welcome....

Hehehehe...

A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #638 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
You really should read more of the thread. These points have been discussed back and forth several times.

I'll just respond to the "gamers" portion.

I hope you don't think that most Windows users are gamers. That's a small portion of the platform. There is a difference between people who play some basic games part of the time, and Gamers.

The former are the vast majority. The latter are a small minority.

I didn't say most Windows users are gamers. I just said most of the Windows users I know are.
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #639 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
We discussed this as well.

Heh, when you come back and there are pages and pages of discussion, I kinda quick skim through the posts.....

People here post too quickly and I'm a slow reader. \
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
post #640 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
This has been covered as well, but it bears repeating, as it isn't obvious.

One division of a company MUST, by law, pay another division of the same company, Fair Market Value, for a part or service they acquire from them.

If the iLife package has a value, as a pre-packaged product license, of, say $20, then the computer division must pay the software division $20 for each copy of the software it bundles. whether the disks are included or not is something else. It is the license that is of value, and is what the fee is for.

To the company, as a whole, the movement generates no positive, or negative cash flow, except for the bookkeeping costs involved.

But, each division must pay its way.

Ok, I see that. Best explanation I've seen. I'll go with that.
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
A.K.A. Goose

Hate it when people beat me to registering my username
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple unveils Mac mini Core Duo