Closing the book on Apple's Mac mini - Page 8

As part of that, from Apple's warrantee:




This comes directly from this page on Aple's site:

http://www.apple.com/legal/warranty/hardware.html

There may be other, more specifice limitations for specific products.

Yep, its hideous. And its because Apple wont design for a dock as they should.

Vinea

I don't mind if they do that. If they really do have a better product, then by all means, release it.

But when Apple discontinued the Cube, for example, it was only selling about 50 thousand a month.***

Many people had good reasons for why the sales were low. If Apple had listened to those reasons, the product could very well have achieved a respectable sales quota.

But, Apple discontinued it instead. They had NO replacement in the wings.

When jobs took over, he cut the very profitable, and popular, (according to financial analysts at the time) monitor, printer, and scanner divisions. That put Apple in a more precarious position that it would have been.

Later, after their newer crt monitors had been very successful, among the PC industry as well as Apple users, he discontinued them to great outcry, for the very high priced line of LCD models, which Apple sold far fewer of.

There are more.

***

EDIT: I just noticed an error here. It should have been 50 thousand a QUARTER.

Sorry for the confusion.

The Mini as we know it is dead. The AppleTV has it's purpose and will very likely remain what and where it is in Apple's lineup. Everyone has been speculating about a flash-based Macbook... while we may see such an incarnation, lest we forget that the mini is built off of laptop components. The consumer portable has already be redesigned so I highly doubt we will see any changes to that line. The iMac and the mini are next in line for a major overhaul. We will see the mini continue but only in a slimmed down, flash-based form as a proper compliment to the AppleTV. Now if they could only drop the price.

But the Mac Pro takes a more display space and is a very niche product.

The Mac Mini take very little space to display and at it's low cost can almost be made as an impulse purchase and should be on display to switchers etc. I'm sure the Mini sells in far higher volumes in high-street shops than the Mac Pro 8-core does.

There are good reasons for flash based storage in a portable: power and space saving. I see no such reason to use expensive flash storage in a desktop computer, unless Steve Jobs really want's to make a Mac shuffle that will clip to his pants pocket.

Is that the best you got?

What were those great reasons for the cube? Besides lowering the price? Keep in mind that the cube just made the same margin as a PowerMac, so the price could not be lowered.

So your vision of Apple is that Apple competes head-to-head with ViewSonic, Sony, etc on monitors? And HP, Epson, & Canon on scanners/printers? Then your vision and Apple's appear to be different, because you are attracted to commodities that require hugh investments to stay competitive, while Apple invests in innovative products that allow high margins. Maybe Apple should turn into Gateway?

I vote for Steve Jobs approach - let the followers churn out the commodities.

When Jobs returned, Apple had recently lost a billion dollars in one year. Things had to be slashed and Apple needed to return to its core business, computer hardware, to return to profitability.

Since then, with the success of the iMac and the iPod, Apple is a healthy company again. I see no reason now why Apple should not offer more variety in their line of computers as well as their consumer electronics products such as the phone and the aTV. Personally, I don't think the phone and aTV will turn out to be such huge successes as the iMac and iPod, but we'll see.

What is that nutty comment supposed to mean?

You have nothing to say, so you write that?


If you were around for those discussions, you would have seen some good analysis.

Apple came out with a completely upgradable machine, which they then failed to advertise as one.

They came out with it as a G4 machine, which at the time was a very expensive situation. If they came out with it as a G3, then is could have been as much as 30% cheaper.

Those were two of the biggest reasons, but there were others as well.


That's an narrow minded statement.

You think I was the only one to notice this, and comment badly about it?

You would be very wrong.

I can tell you from personal experience that ad agencies, Tv stations, and design houses were buying Apple's Studio monitors in great numbers, as were video, photo, and graphic pros. That was the market the monitors were intended for, and Apple was very successful in selling monitors into it. If you knew anything about them, and you can look it up now, before you reply, you will see that they WERE innovative.

By your theory, Apple immediately came out with new printers (they never did again), new scanners (ditto there too), and new, competitive monitors (forget it!).

None of that happened.

Even Apple's digital camera, one of the very first on the market, which sold well, and was considered to be a bargain at the time, was discontinued after the second model. Apple could have owned a fair part of that market if they tried, it had sold well.


As Apple becomes a bigger company, they will have to have more products.

It will take the failure of just one highly touted product to send Apple's stock into a tailspin otherwise. Understanding that is just good business.

This time it is different: most of us (and possibly they == Apple should understand it too, if they anygood on marketing) do not need Xeon 8-core superpower and 16 GB of very expensive full-whatervered RAM. So, rereleasing low-priced Cube is much safer now...

Just make it: Core2Duo 2.66 or Core2Quad 2.4 (socket 775), 4GB RAM standard max, standard SATA 3.5 disk, graphic card (not integrated crappy!)...

***

Yes, shure, it is stupid for Apple to compete head-to-head in low-priced monitor market. I never understood why the make these Mighty Mouses myself (worst mouse ever in this world and universe ) still they do them to put in the boxes with Mac Pros neverminding that users ultimately will buy MicroSoft or Logitec after two months of "cleaning the balls"...

If MacBook and iMac 20 will be the smallest/cheapest Apples available -- they'd better forget about switchers, education, home users and focus completeley on new white&nerdy $1000 iPhone models...

Unprofitable business had to be slashed.

But, Apple dropped $1.5 billion a year in profitable products. That was NOT good business.


Apple kept losing business the first four, or so, years after Jobs came back. The iMac line, at best, held the line. They didn't sell nearly as many as people think. Just look at the numbers.

The luck of the iPod was what finally changed things around. Even Jobs didn't think it would sell so well. He even said that they expected it to be a successful, but modest addition.

What did do well, was Apple listening to its customers (finally!), and putting it into the PC world as well, and combining it with iTunes, which was also an idea floated around long before Apple actually did it.

I've been using my mighty mouse for a year and haven't "cleaned the balls" yet, whatever that means.

The ball on my daughter's won't turn anymore, and it's a real pain to try to clean.

Another case of form over function.

I do not believe it!

Mine went useless after 8 months of cleaning-the-ball (and my wife constantly complaining that buttons do not work properly in her favourite Mine Sweeper widget), so it was replaced by some cheap laser Logitech (that still works as expected)...

Yeah, right. The processor was 30% of the cost...


I had two - no doubt they were innovative, but history also showed they were becoming commodities. Good choice to cut them.


You misunderstand - by my theory, another good choice to cut and run.


If Apple was aspiring to be an HP, you are right. Fortunately, Apple's direction is not towards commodities - low margin, high volume, cut-throat.


Fortunately Apple doesn't have your vision. "ADD" is your analysis, but it's more straight-forward than that - innovation which means a very motivated work force. This allows the corporate culture to be innovative, and not stiffling like MS and Adobe . You may be right about the stock price and a lemon, but that's the edge that makes Apple and the Apple brand a leader.

Very little difference when you attach them to a big monitor as Apple always do.

My point was that just because one store doesn't have them on display, or they were missed, doesn't mean the entirety of Apple hasn't got them.


Speaking as someone with a Mac SE/30 running off a 4GB Compact Flash card, I can tell you there's reasons to do it. Silence being the main one.



I don't think it sold well outside of the USA though. Back when the Quicktake came out I had a Canon Ion. That had been out a couple of years before the Apple and it was cheaper here in Europe.


Apart from the ball cleaning, it's my 3rd favourite mouse of all time after the wireless Pro mouse with no buttons and number 1 being Microsoft's second mouse from the 1980s designed by Frog Design for them. It would be number 1 if they got rid of the ball or just added the second button and laser optics to the previous generation Pro Wireless mouse.


And forget about normal business users too who don't require laptops or large screens. A number of my clients use eMacs and 17" iMacs for their office functions, as well as Mac Minis. Apple exiting the utilitarian end of the market is Apple exiting the business market too. For that reason I can't see it happening and I think AI are just plain wrong if they think these models are being killed off and not replaced.

The cpu alone wasn't 30% of the cost. But, the higher spec memory needed at the time to support it was part of it. So was the faster bus.

Your lack of knowledge of the machine isn't helping your sarcasm much.


More lack of knowledge. If you had two, you would know more about them then you do.


Then it's a bad theory.


But, except for the heavy iron, and commercial services that Hp offers, Apple IS trying to become an Hp. Both companies are moving heavily into the consumer space. Hp even resold iPods.


They don't seem to have yours either.

Apple will continue adding product lines as soon as it settles in with the new phone line. Jobs said that they wouldn't have new lines for a while after this one, but that they will arrive.

Maybe, but it didn't have to. The first two or three years of the digital camers "revolution" wasn't seen much outside of the US, though Japan caught up quickly.

Canon Ions predated the Quicktake by about 4 years I think, even in the USA. Apple were late into the market and there was no way they were going to be taken seriously up against proper camera manufacturers.

IMHO I think Jobs was right to get out of peripherals where other people were doing it much better or there was nothing Apple could bring to it that people cared about. A printer is a printer pretty much so there was no reason to buy an Apple printer over anyone else's.

I agree that Apple is caught up with the phone which is one reason there isn't much news on Macs so far this year. Are you quoting something Steve Jobs said, because I don't remember any such statement. At MWSF, he spoke only briefly about Macs and said the usual "we'll have great products coming out later." What you're saying sounds pretty specific.

Mis-fire! It was the same memory as used in the G3s - 66Mhz.


We can look at history, and see that they became commondities. But you are okay with Apple having commodity product lines. I think that would destroy the culture.


Whoa! What's HPs margins? (4.8%) What's Apple's? (30%+) HP is on the Dell side of the equation - cut costs and move merchandise. Low margin and high sales. Apple is about innovation. HP would kill to be in Apple's space.




High margin products, where "Designed by Apple" means 25%+ margins. QED - new product lines mean innovative products, not the "me-too's" like HP is now doing to become a consumer products company.

Not sure what you two are arguing about, since "consumer product" does not necessarily mean "low-margin" or non-innovative.

Look at the iPod... an innovative, consumer-oriented product WITH good margins. Ditto the iPhone. Apple is obviously moving into the consumer electronics space, but they're carefully picking and choosing areas where they can be 'ahead of the pack' and make lots of profit. It's not like they're trying to compete with Sony and Samsung in mass-market, razor-thin-margin TVs, for example.

In other words, you're both right.

.

I sincerely hope you're right, Aegis. But Jobs does have a history of being overly in love with 'minimalism' in all things, including product lines. \
.

And you never should.

But the point was not to reinforce my veracity, it was to get you to check on current Apple pricing, as you seem not to have in awhile.
.

Of course. How else is Apple able to get away with those upgrade prices?

However, I would add that it is a bit of a generational thing. I notice that most folks middle-aged and up are loathe to crack open their machines and DIY it, even for easy tasks like adding RAM. But guys in their 20s and younger usually don't seem to have a problem with it most of the time, especially if they're into high-performance (gaming). Younger people in general seem less afraid of technology.

I think as time goes on, more and more people will not have a problem messing with their machines, though people like that will still likely be in the minority. Doesn't mean that its not the way to go, though, considering the considerable savings for not much work.

.

Yeah, that seems to confirm what's been discussed already, which is that installing RAM yourself does not void the warranty on your Mac, UNLESS you damage your comp while installing RAM. And its common sense that if using 3rd party RAM causes damage, Apple is not liable for said damage.

Both cases are quite rare, in my experience, though apparently some folks are complaining that Apple likes to blame issues on the presence of 3rd party RAM, even in cases where the link is dubious at best. The easy end-run around that, though, is that if you ever have to take your Mac in to be checked out, simply remove any 3rd party RAM and re-install the original RAM beforehand, so that Apple can't attempt to use that as an excuse. Sad that you'd have to, though. \

.

And younger people, in general, have less money.

I'm more than middle-aged and don't have any problem installing memory in a computer. However, I don't change the oil in my own car. I know, what does that have to do with anything? Just demonstrates that certain things are worth paying for, depending on your values.

Amen.

.

Yep, you're right. All the more reason for them to DIY it, when possible, than pay Apple's upgrade prices.

.

To all of those who keep trying to say that the Mac mini is "under powered" or comparing it to other PCees I saw bs. Those that say it is under powered probably have never used one, or possibly at best one could say that the Mini would not suit them. I had an older Mac G4 500 MgHz that I had added larger hard drives to, had added a built in internal 3.5" drive bay memory card reader, attached via fire wire an external HP DVD writer, and added some other peripherals all of which worked fine. Then along came the Intel Macs and the newer QT HD movies with Tiger and Panther and the video card just couldn't keep up. It also didn't work with Apple's Core Graphics. I though long and hard about upgrading the processor and getting a new video card and decided for what I would be better off getting a new Intel Mac. The iMacs were a bit out of my price range at the time, plus I had an investment in the better mouse, keyboard, 18" LCD, and other external peripherals that were working just fine. I checked out the Mini's and found that I could get the 1.8Ghz with the Super Drive or hunt around for some specials with either the 1.6 or 1.8 Ghz models. I also checked out the pros and cons about the Intel graphics chip set and found that found that the "under powered" whiners where right if you were talking about using it for video intensive games etc. I don't play those games so that was a non issue, nut the graphics chip works fine, does support Core Graphics, and HD video clips in QT are also perfectly fine. I got the 1.;66 Ghz model at a special deal with the extra 512 kb memory for a total of 1Gb, got the Newer Tech enclosure that sits under the Mini with the USB and fire wire hub and an empty drive bay that I stuck my 300Gb drive from my old Mac into. I transfered my programs and data from the external drive to the new OSX setup in my Mini and then cloned that drive back to my external drive connected via firewire. I also connected up my peripherals including my external firewire DVD writer. Everything works fine and I can take advantage of all of the new video Core Graphics effects. I also found that if I do want to upgrade the Mini as far as processor to a true Core 2 Duo that is possible (although you will probably void your warranty). I just got two 1 Gb memory chips and will have my memory upgraded. Even with the extra hd/hub enclosure and now the extra memory I still am below $1000 and have spent less that a crappy PC. Which btw, I also got Parallels and have a copy of XP Pro on my internal 60 Gb hd in my mini and it runs faster and better than my 1.6 Ghz AMD processor older HP box with Win XP which I rarely use anyway.

So, bottom line, I think it would probably be a mistake to eliminate the Mini as it definitely serves a purpose for either a "Switcher" or even us Mac users that have older machines with a adequate supply of peripherals and don't need them supplied in a new Mac.

Oh, BTW, the supposed reliable sources (which are not ever named), are they the same reliable ones that Engadget relied upon for their ground breaking story on the delay for the iPhone and Leopard?

I'm glad to hear you say that. I think you're right, most of those who dislike Apple's GPU choices are gamers or video experts. I've never had a problem with any GPU in any Mac I've purchased and I've had nearly 20 of them over the years. Of course, I'm not a gamer either. It would be nice, however, if Apple had a heart and did a little bit more in that department for those to whom it matters.

the sources were never cited.

"Therefore, it comes as little surprise that sources, for whom AppleInsider holds the utmost respect, are now pointing towards the mini's impending demise."

that is not citing sources. "source" is not a source.

Maybe you don't remember much about those days, or weren't very involved, as I was. The cameras before the Apple were pretty poor. The only major manufacturer making a real effort was Kodak (they manufactured Apple's camera. Canon's wasn't called the Ion here, though I forget the name now.


Except that Apple's were doing very well. They were very popular.

Yes, he said that in an interveiw. He was asked if Apple would be coming out with new lines of products other than the iPhone and ATv soon. He said that they wouldn't be coming out with new lines soon, but that they would later. I don't have an actual quote.

We had a discussion about that here at some point.

Apple specs memory in more ways than speed. That's been a problem for a while with Apple. Tighter specs don't mean higher speed. They mean tighter timings.

You may have forgotten when Apple updated the firmware on the G4's, and much menory stopped working.


Explain what you mean by commodity. Apple can still make a product desirable without it becoming a commodity, and still not have that product as a "star" in their lineup.


Hp's margins could be better if they, like most all other computer makers didn't make cheap trash computers as loss leaders. All of their other product lines do quite well. But the numbers you are quoting are not the same numbers. You are quoting Apple's margins, and Hp's profit. Apple's profit is about 12+%.

As a company gets bigger, it becomes more difficult to maintain high margins. growth slows down as well.


Apple doesn't have 25+% margins on their iPod line. It's more like 20%. But, margins are not profit.

No, it doesn't.


He wants Apple to have a very few product lines with a very few models in each, with each model a media star.

I'm saying that as Apple grows, that won't be possible anymore.

And, for the first time in a long time, Apple is on a growth track. They intend to stay on one.

I hope, for the price of my stock, that they remain on it.

Ok, I checked. They are pretty high. I didn't do the math though.

Apple seems to go through periods with memory prices. Sometimes they're very high, as now, and then they lower them to, considering that it's installed, and certified by them, fairly reasonable levels.

Right now, they are in unreasonable mode.

Maybe. My daughter's grown up with computers, as she was using mine by herself since she was two and a half, and had her own since she was four. While she's an expert on anything software related (she's now fifteen and a half), she still is in shock whenever I upgrade a machine of hers. Her friends look at me blankly if I ask them questions about their hardware.

It's actually more than that.

It also means that while the products could have been installed correctly, if THEY damage the machine, it's not covered by warrantee.

So, if your memory melts down, and damages the socket or power supply, tough luck. Same thing for Hd's or any card that may be installed, or optical drive, Firewire, or USB device, etc.

Even if a monitor damages the machine, the warrantee is gone.

I've seen all of the above happen at one time or another.

Exactly. Many of my windows friends buy the cheapest box they can (but with cool features - ie dvd burner, photo station technology etc), and then find it to be "slow" in about a year to a year and a half, and buy another cheap box. You get what you pay for.