Nope, not joking. I don't really see what is that hard with any of it, except for the whole house tivo - and whole house tivo is already in the works.
If nobody else does it, I may form a company and do it myself - there is no new technology required for most of the stuff.
Maybe it's a good idea for you to form a company and go for it. I can't see interest from Apple's part to develop some of the things you sugest. I agree that we'll see the dvr in the future. But honestly security and thermostat systems I don't think so. Maybe, third part developers like yourself might be the key to implement such things. Good luck.
There are some similarities to the arguments in this thread to those that arose when Mercedes-Benz released the A-Class car back in the late 90's.
That car was ridiculed as being just a poor-man's Benz. It didn't have the performance of other Benz's. Because it cost half the price, it must be half as good. It didn't even look like a Benz.
Of course most the complaints came from elitist who didn't like the idea of Average Joe driving the same brand as them.
Any of this sound familia?
Disputing the "inadequacies" of the Mac mini is just the same argument all over again. The A-Class is not a SLK and the Mac mini is not a G5 tower. Each have their target market and each have features that make it appealing to that market.
And has Merceded-Benz lost face since? No. In fact, the A-Class has just had a major upgrade (new shape etc) and the orginal concept of the car has remained: A small Benz at a price that competes on a broader market.
I don't know where people get this idea that I am an elitist or something because I want a computer that is cheap and going to be upgradeable/usable in a few years.
You people see someone "taking shots" as you guys see it at your idol and one of it's products and you guys just go crazy with rage. I don't understand why, it serves you no purpose.
Again I don't care about any company losing face or whatever that has nothing to do with me and I could care less.
Don't take it so personally... Thousands of people post to this board.
Some of the people posting here are commenting upon many years of posts, not just your last reply. Trust me, this thread isn't about you. No worries right?
I don't know where people get this idea that I am an elitist or something because I want a computer that is cheap and going to be upgradeable/usable in a few years.
My barely-upgraded Cube (I replaced the stock 30GB HDD with a 60GB HDD) is still usable after 4 years. Not only that, it's more usable than it was the day I bought it because of constant improvements to OS X and OS X software. Why would the mini be any different? I can safely say that upgrading the mini is no harder than upgrading the Cube (except, possibly, for RAM).
What, specifically, do you want to upgrade? How often? Would it be worthwhile at this price point to simply buy another mini when yours gets creaky, and hand the old one down?
These are honest questions. Given that the mini is upgradeable to a point, the question is, is its current upgradeability enough to get you to the point where you can do a total system upgrade (i.e., buy another mini)?
Look at the prices for Mac CPU upgrades. If I were in that position, I'd just buy another mini and have everything upgraded at once.
Quote:
You people see someone "taking shots" as you guys see it at your idol and one of it's products and you guys just go crazy with rage. I don't understand why, it serves you no purpose.
This is not about you. It's about your arguments. We know you want a bigger mini with more slots. That's fine. But you've argued, variously, that Apple was stupid or cynical or not sufficiently capitalist(?!) in failing to build that mini, and those arguments have been fairly weak.
Quote:
Again I don't care about any company losing face or whatever that has nothing to do with me and I could care less.
Nobody is talking about Apple losing face except you. I'm more than happy to take them down a peg when I feel they deserve it. The point I've made, consistently, which you've dodged, consistently, is that Apple made the design decisions it did precisely in order to make the product appeal as much as possible to the target market. Last I checked, this is what you do in a market economy if you want to remain in business.
Did they fail to build your dream machine? Join the club. You obviously thought the mini was good enough to buy, and so from Apple's point of view it succeeded.
The mini was built in response to customer demand. If you feel they missed, write them. If you're right, and a lot of other people want what you want, they'll have to consider that. If you're wrong, and you're one of, say, a hundred people who just have to have a bigger mini with two RAM slots and a 3.5" drive, then Apple won't built it. That's capitalism.
My barely-upgraded Cube (I replaced the stock 30GB HDD with a 60GB HDD) is still usable after 4 years. Not only that, it's more usable than it was the day I bought it because of constant improvements to OS X and OS X software. Why would the mini be any different? I can safely say that upgrading the mini is no harder than upgrading the Cube (except, possibly, for RAM).
What, specifically, do you want to upgrade? How often? Would it be worthwhile at this price point to simply buy another mini when yours gets creaky, and hand the old one down?
These are honest questions. Given that the mini is upgradeable to a point, the question is, is its current upgradeability enough to get you to the point where you can do a total system upgrade (i.e., buy another mini)?
Look at the prices for Mac CPU upgrades. If I were in that position, I'd just buy another mini and have everything upgraded at once.
This is not about you. It's about your arguments. We know you want a bigger mini with more slots. That's fine. But you've argued, variously, that Apple was stupid or cynical or not sufficiently capitalist(?!) in failing to build that mini, and those arguments have been fairly weak.
Nobody is talking about Apple losing face except you. I'm more than happy to take them down a peg when I feel they deserve it. The point I've made, consistently, which you've dodged, consistently, is that Apple made the design decisions it did precisely in order to make the product appeal as much as possible to the target market. Last I checked, this is what you do in a market economy if you want to remain in business.
Did they fail to build your dream machine? Join the club. You obviously thought the mini was good enough to buy, and so from Apple's point of view it succeeded.
The mini was built in response to customer demand. If you feel they missed, write them. If you're right, and a lot of other people want what you want, they'll have to consider that. If you're wrong, and you're one of, say, a hundred people who just have to have a bigger mini with two RAM slots and a 3.5" drive, then Apple won't built it. That's capitalism.
That's fine and dandy that your cube works for you - if I am not mistaken the cube can use a standard desktop hard drive and has a few more ram slots. The problem with the mini to me is that it uses a laptop hard drive and has one ram slot which I have noted many times and at this point I am just repeating myself. Laptops hard drives are slower in speed, smaller in size, and higher in cost all of which make no sense to put in a DESKTOP computer. The CPU should be fine for a while but everything else limits it - slow cdrw slow hard drive limited ram expandability and built in video card.
Yes I understand it was made that way on purpose but I don't care what does that have to do with what I want? Nothing at all.
All I ever argued was that Apple inentionaly built the thing to be limited as junkyard dawg stated and the only reason they did it was to make more money and force people to buy higher profit margined towers. That is a weak arguement? Hardly - it's dead on.
I never said Apple was losing face. You are wrong again.
You have this funny idea that companies only build things people want and if people don't want it they don't build it - That is like assuming ford can't make a car last 50 years so they don't build one when instead they don't build one because it isn't a good idea financially to do so - just like with the mini.
Me and the other hundred people? This is the kind of thinking that got Apple it's less then 10% market share.
Hey PeePeeSee, just get a Cube! They have been available for four years now and they finally are coming down to Mac mini prices.
Amorph, I just upgraded mine by buying another. I went from 450 to 500 MHz after four years of excellent trouble free use. I also paid half as much as I paid for my first one, and got a 17" Apple Studio Display (CRT) with it.
I also upgraded my dual 500 "gigabit" Powermac by buying a dual 533 "digital audio" (for less than the Cube). I think those two would serve PeePeeSee and JYD just fine. That's what they should spend their $500 on if they don't like the Mac mini for the reasons they stated.
As to Apple's HD future four words: IPTV
The big change: Finally going for the consumer market.
I'm not projecting my own wants and desires onto the rest of humanity. Go read my posts again and try to comprehend them.
If I were projecting my own desires, I wouldn't want a mini at all. I think closed designs with no upgrade path for the CPU and GPU are stupid. I think disposable computers are stupid, because they fill landfills and cost consumers extra.
I think your problem is that you're apologizing for Apple by attributing stereotypical characteristics to anyone who dares criticize Apple in any way. You couch these criticisms in pop-psychology terms to make yourself feel important. You think I sound young and naive? Well you sound like senile old fart! Heh, j/k.
One thing I've noticed in many Apple apologists is a tendency to resort to ad hominem attacks on those who criticize Apple. These apologists first try to defend Apple, but when they're confronted by logical criticisms of their holy computer company, they personally attack the ones being logical. In America, it seems, personal smears are more effective than reasoned discussion.
As for the Mini, I stand by my criticisms; it needs an extra RAM slot, a full-sized HD, and maybe a few more ports on back (or on the front!). These are very reasonable criticisms, and Apple could easily have built the Mini I suggest at the current price point. Maybe the profit on each Mini would have gone down by a few tenths of a cent, but IMO such a Mini would sell better.
If you want to disagree with me, fine, but do it right. Explain why it's a bad idea to build a Mini with a real HD and with expandable RAM. I certainly recognize that there are advantages to the current Mini design, as you will see if you take the time to read my posts.
I don't know where people get this idea that I am an elitist or something because I want a computer that is cheap and going to be upgradeable/usable in a few years.
You people see someone "taking shots" as you guys see it at your idol and one of it's products and you guys just go crazy with rage. I don't understand why, it serves you no purpose.
Again I don't care about any company losing face or whatever that has nothing to do with me and I could care less.
Whoa PeePeeSee, I am hardly the one who is crazy with rage around here. I did not single you (or anyone else) out as an elitist, I was just stating that there other arenas where similar arguments have taken place. And you have to admit that there are some elitists in the Apple community; not all of them post on this site. As dfiler said, this thread isn't about you.
Your arguments have some merit, but it seems that the Mac mini was not aimed at people who like to perform their own upgrades or require fast spinning drives. Apple made the mini for the people who buy a computer to do everyday tasks and never upgrade, or if they do, they pay a service centre to do it for them.
If Apple made their next tower computer difficult to open, with notebook drives and a single RAM slot, I imagine nobody would be disagreeing with your complaints.
I'm not projecting my own wants and desires onto the rest of humanity. Go read my posts again and try to comprehend them.
If I were projecting my own desires, I wouldn't want a mini at all. I think closed designs with no upgrade path for the CPU and GPU are stupid. I think disposable computers are stupid, because they fill landfills and cost consumers extra.
I think your problem is that you're apologizing for Apple by attributing stereotypical characteristics to anyone who dares criticize Apple in any way. You couch these criticisms in pop-psychology terms to make yourself feel important. You think I sound young and naive? Well you sound like senile old fart! Heh, j/k.
One thing I've noticed in many Apple apologists is a tendency to resort to ad hominem attacks on those who criticize Apple. These apologists first try to defend Apple, but when they're confronted by logical criticisms of their holy computer company, they personally attack the ones being logical. In America, it seems, personal smears are more effective than reasoned discussion.
As for the Mini, I stand by my criticisms; it needs an extra RAM slot, a full-sized HD, and maybe a few more ports on back (or on the front!). These are very reasonable criticisms, and Apple could easily have built the Mini I suggest at the current price point. Maybe the profit on each Mini would have gone down by a few tenths of a cent, but IMO such a Mini would sell better.
If you want to disagree with me, fine, but do it right. Explain why it's a bad idea to build a Mini with a real HD and with expandable RAM. I certainly recognize that there are advantages to the current Mini design, as you will see if you take the time to read my posts.
I'm not projecting my own wants and desires onto the rest of humanity. Go read my posts again and try to comprehend them.
Again you make the fallacy of thinking that people automatically comprehend your posts. You think one way many of us think in another way. We're just stating the obvious which is Apple's products have to appeal to mass amount of users within a particular marketing segment.
In 2005 computers under $1000 are for the most part disposable. Asking for a non-disposable computer for $499 is fine. Doesn't mean you're going to get it. Doesn't mean you have to buy it.
Many people will relish the idea of having the choice to save money and worry about their computer needs that may happen in a few years at that time. We live in an instant gratification society.
I did not make a fallacy. Perhaps I was wrong to think that people at AI know how to read - that seems to be your argument, that AI users don't all know how to read and that it's my fault. Or something. I don't really know what you're talking about.
Listen, I think the basic idea behind the Mini is awesome. I believe Apple SHOULD build a $600 computer that meets the needs of the average to below average computer user. My point is that Apple is not doing this as well as they could be.
There's only so many ways for me to say it. I suggest that Apple could have added an extra RAM slot and used a larger HD, and in response you tell me Apple must cater to the masses! Well OF COURSE Apple must cater to the masses!!! Nobody is arguing otherwise.
I think some AI users seriously need to take a good look in the mirror and ask if they are being Apple apologists. Because that's what it looks like from here. I make a few criticisms of the Mini and some AI users simply cannot accept that an Apple computer may be less than perfect. I get ad hominem attacks, insinuations that I don't understand that all Macs can't be towers, on and on and on. I feel like I'm arguing with Apple marketing bimbos! Look, it's OK if a Mac isn't so good. The world goes on. It's just a freakin' computer. When I rip on the Mac Mini, that doesn't mean I'm denigrating Mac users, OK? If one of you thinks the Mini is the cat's meow, that's OK. But please don't attack me for pointing out deficiencies in the Mini's design. Only a stroke patient could truly believe that the Mini's HD is a good choice for a desktop computer. Only an email granny could be satisfied with one RAM slot. And yes, some of us like to upgrade our computer's RAM without throwing out the RAM stick that came with the computer!
Since this is Future Hardware, what could Apple's plans be for the low-end market? Is the Mac Mini all we get? For now, the answer may be yes simply because Apple's sales are too low to support a broader product line. Yet I would not be surprised to see another low-end Mac in a year or two, and maybe Junkyard Dawg will get his wish. Before speculating about what it might be, here is what I think about the current Mini.
Apple didn't cripple the Mini to protect sales of more profitable Macs. A 3.5 inch drive, an extra RAM slot and a couple more USB ports would not suddenly make it an iMac killer. It is too apparent that Apple designed the Mac Mini to be spectacularly small, making it a desktop novelty much like the Cube. Mini is also sold separately, in a very small box, not as part of a whole computer "system." It is more like a commodity than anything offered by Windows PC vendors. Apple is out to beat them at their own game.
So, where does Apple go next in the low-end market? I think a business client computer is a logical next step. Apple is making inroads in the server area. A desktop business Mac makes sense. As always, it would not be just for business, but also for those who are put off by the limitations dictated by Mini's tiny size. A business client would likely have one or two PCI slots too, as well as a built in power supply.
many of us just realize that things take time and the overall market will decide. Sure we wish there could be another mem slot or larger faster hard drive but I think many of us relish the fact that buying a brand new Mac computer now costs $499 to start with an excellent OS and nice software bundle.
Of course we expect it to improve but just as we sometimes resemble AA there are the usual suspects here that are "Baby Dvoraks"(BD) and always balance the AA with their punditry and skepticism. That's fair nothing personal.
I just like to think about a Freescale based Mac mini or a G5 Mac mini for the future. Exciting times coming!
So, where does Apple go next in the low-end market? I think a business client computer is a logical next step. Apple is making inroads in the server area. A desktop business Mac makes sense. As always, it would not be just for business, but also for those who are put off by the limitations dictated by Mini's tiny size. A business client would likely have one or two PCI slots too, as well as a built in power supply.
if you wanna look at IBM and HP, just selling hardware to businesses is a no-win game. the big money is in consulting, total IT services, PLUS hardware
i would love to see apple offer this complete package much much more aggressively, complementing xServe g5, powermac, Mac mini and PowerBook lines with.... the business desktop Mac you mention...!!
edit: plus software, software, software... to once and for all shut the losers up that keep whining "but i need so-and-so-piece-of-garbage-software (eg Lotus Notes) for work and it doesn't work on the Mac"...
i mean, if IBM can convince hordes of businesses to use a piece of absolute trash like Lotus Notes day in day out, or Windows, for chrissakes, with it's billion-and-one vulnerabilities (don't open attachments!! even if it says i love you!! ) apple can do it. someday. when hell freezes over
"On the HD Video front, Apple is reportedly hard at work in discussions with the world's major video content providers (broadcast, cable, satellite, and emerging internet providers) to create a QuickTime-based (H.264, MPEG-4, QuickTime Streaming Server) "tv network" that will reach the world's biggest market for high-definition video content.
Designed to vastly outclass most existing transmission media (digital cable, satellite) for high-definition content by offering more 'channels' and more options for access including streaming free content, on-demand streaming, on-demand downloads and support for a range of popular media devices including Apple's own rumored HD Media Hub (aka iPod Home), this network is gaining momentum fast by leveraging the well-known success of Apple's music distribution channel iTunes.
According to reliable sources, this network will be made public sometime this summer after Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger and QuickTime 7.0 have begun to achieve their peak expected market penetration. The announcement will be designed to catapult Tiger and QT7 into the same level of interest which cross-platform users have shown for iPod and iTunes -- e.g. an essential part of accessing the digital media revolution without piracy.
We expect to have fresh recon related to this HD Video Network (HDVN) initiative in the next few days so stay tuned for a major weekend report on the subject, plus more G5 dirt tomorrow!"
Not that I believe everything MOSR says, but I thought it was interesting article.
If Apples proven success with Itunes store, I think it's possible they will be moving to a HD video content store. Plus, the timing to announce could be at WWDC after Tiger's release. This year's WWDC motto is "innovation" so there is a possibility.
The idea makes sense to me. 2006 will be a huge year for HD with all the networks and cable companies delivering content in HD as well as the current NTSC. So if the HD store comes to fruition this summer will be in a good position to tap this huge new frontier that's coming our way soon.
I hope it's true!, maybe we'll see the MiniMac DVR, Ipod Video, bigger lcd's, etc.
Steve Jobs said that he hates TV. But I think what he hates is the fact we plan our lives around the TV schedule. When Tivo debut it was a huge thing and I think such Apple video store could extend everything Tivo started.
If we can buy and record HD content and later, if we can produce our own content and sell at the store or share with family and friends, that's going to be a huge hit for Apple.
I wonder why Steve hold that Sony HD camera at the latest MWSF. Maybe he's thinking soon we all have such cameras, like the minidv cameras that many of us have now and we could use the content we create to share with others.
There are many possibilities coming our way in the HD front and it's very exciting that Apple could contribute in make it easy and cool.
Comments
Originally posted by e1618978
Nope, not joking. I don't really see what is that hard with any of it, except for the whole house tivo - and whole house tivo is already in the works.
If nobody else does it, I may form a company and do it myself - there is no new technology required for most of the stuff.
Maybe it's a good idea for you to form a company and go for it. I can't see interest from Apple's part to develop some of the things you sugest. I agree that we'll see the dvr in the future. But honestly security and thermostat systems I don't think so. Maybe, third part developers like yourself might be the key to implement such things. Good luck.
Originally posted by Bart Smastard
There are some similarities to the arguments in this thread to those that arose when Mercedes-Benz released the A-Class car back in the late 90's.
That car was ridiculed as being just a poor-man's Benz. It didn't have the performance of other Benz's. Because it cost half the price, it must be half as good. It didn't even look like a Benz.
Of course most the complaints came from elitist who didn't like the idea of Average Joe driving the same brand as them.
Any of this sound familia?
Disputing the "inadequacies" of the Mac mini is just the same argument all over again. The A-Class is not a SLK and the Mac mini is not a G5 tower. Each have their target market and each have features that make it appealing to that market.
And has Merceded-Benz lost face since? No. In fact, the A-Class has just had a major upgrade (new shape etc) and the orginal concept of the car has remained: A small Benz at a price that competes on a broader market.
I don't know where people get this idea that I am an elitist or something because I want a computer that is cheap and going to be upgradeable/usable in a few years.
You people see someone "taking shots" as you guys see it at your idol and one of it's products and you guys just go crazy with rage. I don't understand why, it serves you no purpose.
Again I don't care about any company losing face or whatever that has nothing to do with me and I could care less.
Some of the people posting here are commenting upon many years of posts, not just your last reply. Trust me, this thread isn't about you. No worries right?
Originally posted by PeePeeSee
I don't know where people get this idea that I am an elitist or something because I want a computer that is cheap and going to be upgradeable/usable in a few years.
My barely-upgraded Cube (I replaced the stock 30GB HDD with a 60GB HDD) is still usable after 4 years. Not only that, it's more usable than it was the day I bought it because of constant improvements to OS X and OS X software. Why would the mini be any different? I can safely say that upgrading the mini is no harder than upgrading the Cube (except, possibly, for RAM).
What, specifically, do you want to upgrade? How often? Would it be worthwhile at this price point to simply buy another mini when yours gets creaky, and hand the old one down?
These are honest questions. Given that the mini is upgradeable to a point, the question is, is its current upgradeability enough to get you to the point where you can do a total system upgrade (i.e., buy another mini)?
Look at the prices for Mac CPU upgrades. If I were in that position, I'd just buy another mini and have everything upgraded at once.
You people see someone "taking shots" as you guys see it at your idol and one of it's products and you guys just go crazy with rage. I don't understand why, it serves you no purpose.
This is not about you. It's about your arguments. We know you want a bigger mini with more slots. That's fine. But you've argued, variously, that Apple was stupid or cynical or not sufficiently capitalist(?!) in failing to build that mini, and those arguments have been fairly weak.
Again I don't care about any company losing face or whatever that has nothing to do with me and I could care less.
Nobody is talking about Apple losing face except you. I'm more than happy to take them down a peg when I feel they deserve it. The point I've made, consistently, which you've dodged, consistently, is that Apple made the design decisions it did precisely in order to make the product appeal as much as possible to the target market. Last I checked, this is what you do in a market economy if you want to remain in business.
Did they fail to build your dream machine? Join the club. You obviously thought the mini was good enough to buy, and so from Apple's point of view it succeeded.
The mini was built in response to customer demand. If you feel they missed, write them. If you're right, and a lot of other people want what you want, they'll have to consider that. If you're wrong, and you're one of, say, a hundred people who just have to have a bigger mini with two RAM slots and a 3.5" drive, then Apple won't built it. That's capitalism.
Originally posted by Amorph
My barely-upgraded Cube (I replaced the stock 30GB HDD with a 60GB HDD) is still usable after 4 years. Not only that, it's more usable than it was the day I bought it because of constant improvements to OS X and OS X software. Why would the mini be any different? I can safely say that upgrading the mini is no harder than upgrading the Cube (except, possibly, for RAM).
What, specifically, do you want to upgrade? How often? Would it be worthwhile at this price point to simply buy another mini when yours gets creaky, and hand the old one down?
These are honest questions. Given that the mini is upgradeable to a point, the question is, is its current upgradeability enough to get you to the point where you can do a total system upgrade (i.e., buy another mini)?
Look at the prices for Mac CPU upgrades. If I were in that position, I'd just buy another mini and have everything upgraded at once.
This is not about you. It's about your arguments. We know you want a bigger mini with more slots. That's fine. But you've argued, variously, that Apple was stupid or cynical or not sufficiently capitalist(?!) in failing to build that mini, and those arguments have been fairly weak.
Nobody is talking about Apple losing face except you. I'm more than happy to take them down a peg when I feel they deserve it. The point I've made, consistently, which you've dodged, consistently, is that Apple made the design decisions it did precisely in order to make the product appeal as much as possible to the target market. Last I checked, this is what you do in a market economy if you want to remain in business.
Did they fail to build your dream machine? Join the club. You obviously thought the mini was good enough to buy, and so from Apple's point of view it succeeded.
The mini was built in response to customer demand. If you feel they missed, write them. If you're right, and a lot of other people want what you want, they'll have to consider that. If you're wrong, and you're one of, say, a hundred people who just have to have a bigger mini with two RAM slots and a 3.5" drive, then Apple won't built it. That's capitalism.
That's fine and dandy that your cube works for you - if I am not mistaken the cube can use a standard desktop hard drive and has a few more ram slots. The problem with the mini to me is that it uses a laptop hard drive and has one ram slot which I have noted many times and at this point I am just repeating myself. Laptops hard drives are slower in speed, smaller in size, and higher in cost all of which make no sense to put in a DESKTOP computer. The CPU should be fine for a while but everything else limits it - slow cdrw slow hard drive limited ram expandability and built in video card.
Yes I understand it was made that way on purpose but I don't care what does that have to do with what I want? Nothing at all.
All I ever argued was that Apple inentionaly built the thing to be limited as junkyard dawg stated and the only reason they did it was to make more money and force people to buy higher profit margined towers. That is a weak arguement? Hardly - it's dead on.
I never said Apple was losing face. You are wrong again.
You have this funny idea that companies only build things people want and if people don't want it they don't build it - That is like assuming ford can't make a car last 50 years so they don't build one when instead they don't build one because it isn't a good idea financially to do so - just like with the mini.
Me and the other hundred people? This is the kind of thinking that got Apple it's less then 10% market share.
Me and the other hundred people? This is the kind of thinking that got Apple it's less then 10% market share
Now you're just being spiteful and childish. The Mac never had a %10 marketshare. This ain't Burger King you can't have your way.
Amorph, I just upgraded mine by buying another. I went from 450 to 500 MHz after four years of excellent trouble free use. I also paid half as much as I paid for my first one, and got a 17" Apple Studio Display (CRT) with it.
I also upgraded my dual 500 "gigabit" Powermac by buying a dual 533 "digital audio" (for less than the Cube). I think those two would serve PeePeeSee and JYD just fine. That's what they should spend their $500 on if they don't like the Mac mini for the reasons they stated.
As to Apple's HD future four words: IPTV
The big change: Finally going for the consumer market.
If I were projecting my own desires, I wouldn't want a mini at all. I think closed designs with no upgrade path for the CPU and GPU are stupid. I think disposable computers are stupid, because they fill landfills and cost consumers extra.
I think your problem is that you're apologizing for Apple by attributing stereotypical characteristics to anyone who dares criticize Apple in any way. You couch these criticisms in pop-psychology terms to make yourself feel important. You think I sound young and naive? Well you sound like senile old fart! Heh, j/k.
One thing I've noticed in many Apple apologists is a tendency to resort to ad hominem attacks on those who criticize Apple. These apologists first try to defend Apple, but when they're confronted by logical criticisms of their holy computer company, they personally attack the ones being logical. In America, it seems, personal smears are more effective than reasoned discussion.
As for the Mini, I stand by my criticisms; it needs an extra RAM slot, a full-sized HD, and maybe a few more ports on back (or on the front!). These are very reasonable criticisms, and Apple could easily have built the Mini I suggest at the current price point. Maybe the profit on each Mini would have gone down by a few tenths of a cent, but IMO such a Mini would sell better.
If you want to disagree with me, fine, but do it right. Explain why it's a bad idea to build a Mini with a real HD and with expandable RAM. I certainly recognize that there are advantages to the current Mini design, as you will see if you take the time to read my posts.
Originally posted by PeePeeSee
I don't know where people get this idea that I am an elitist or something because I want a computer that is cheap and going to be upgradeable/usable in a few years.
You people see someone "taking shots" as you guys see it at your idol and one of it's products and you guys just go crazy with rage. I don't understand why, it serves you no purpose.
Again I don't care about any company losing face or whatever that has nothing to do with me and I could care less.
Whoa PeePeeSee, I am hardly the one who is crazy with rage around here. I did not single you (or anyone else) out as an elitist, I was just stating that there other arenas where similar arguments have taken place. And you have to admit that there are some elitists in the Apple community; not all of them post on this site. As dfiler said, this thread isn't about you.
Your arguments have some merit, but it seems that the Mac mini was not aimed at people who like to perform their own upgrades or require fast spinning drives. Apple made the mini for the people who buy a computer to do everyday tasks and never upgrade, or if they do, they pay a service centre to do it for them.
If Apple made their next tower computer difficult to open, with notebook drives and a single RAM slot, I imagine nobody would be disagreeing with your complaints.
Originally posted by Junkyard Dawg
I'm not projecting my own wants and desires onto the rest of humanity. Go read my posts again and try to comprehend them.
If I were projecting my own desires, I wouldn't want a mini at all. I think closed designs with no upgrade path for the CPU and GPU are stupid. I think disposable computers are stupid, because they fill landfills and cost consumers extra.
I think your problem is that you're apologizing for Apple by attributing stereotypical characteristics to anyone who dares criticize Apple in any way. You couch these criticisms in pop-psychology terms to make yourself feel important. You think I sound young and naive? Well you sound like senile old fart! Heh, j/k.
One thing I've noticed in many Apple apologists is a tendency to resort to ad hominem attacks on those who criticize Apple. These apologists first try to defend Apple, but when they're confronted by logical criticisms of their holy computer company, they personally attack the ones being logical. In America, it seems, personal smears are more effective than reasoned discussion.
As for the Mini, I stand by my criticisms; it needs an extra RAM slot, a full-sized HD, and maybe a few more ports on back (or on the front!). These are very reasonable criticisms, and Apple could easily have built the Mini I suggest at the current price point. Maybe the profit on each Mini would have gone down by a few tenths of a cent, but IMO such a Mini would sell better.
If you want to disagree with me, fine, but do it right. Explain why it's a bad idea to build a Mini with a real HD and with expandable RAM. I certainly recognize that there are advantages to the current Mini design, as you will see if you take the time to read my posts.
Ditto.
I'm not projecting my own wants and desires onto the rest of humanity. Go read my posts again and try to comprehend them.
Again you make the fallacy of thinking that people automatically comprehend your posts. You think one way many of us think in another way. We're just stating the obvious which is Apple's products have to appeal to mass amount of users within a particular marketing segment.
In 2005 computers under $1000 are for the most part disposable. Asking for a non-disposable computer for $499 is fine. Doesn't mean you're going to get it. Doesn't mean you have to buy it.
Many people will relish the idea of having the choice to save money and worry about their computer needs that may happen in a few years at that time. We live in an instant gratification society.
Listen, I think the basic idea behind the Mini is awesome. I believe Apple SHOULD build a $600 computer that meets the needs of the average to below average computer user. My point is that Apple is not doing this as well as they could be.
There's only so many ways for me to say it. I suggest that Apple could have added an extra RAM slot and used a larger HD, and in response you tell me Apple must cater to the masses! Well OF COURSE Apple must cater to the masses!!! Nobody is arguing otherwise.
I think some AI users seriously need to take a good look in the mirror and ask if they are being Apple apologists. Because that's what it looks like from here. I make a few criticisms of the Mini and some AI users simply cannot accept that an Apple computer may be less than perfect. I get ad hominem attacks, insinuations that I don't understand that all Macs can't be towers, on and on and on. I feel like I'm arguing with Apple marketing bimbos! Look, it's OK if a Mac isn't so good. The world goes on. It's just a freakin' computer. When I rip on the Mac Mini, that doesn't mean I'm denigrating Mac users, OK? If one of you thinks the Mini is the cat's meow, that's OK. But please don't attack me for pointing out deficiencies in the Mini's design. Only a stroke patient could truly believe that the Mini's HD is a good choice for a desktop computer. Only an email granny could be satisfied with one RAM slot. And yes, some of us like to upgrade our computer's RAM without throwing out the RAM stick that came with the computer!
/rant
Apple didn't cripple the Mini to protect sales of more profitable Macs. A 3.5 inch drive, an extra RAM slot and a couple more USB ports would not suddenly make it an iMac killer. It is too apparent that Apple designed the Mac Mini to be spectacularly small, making it a desktop novelty much like the Cube. Mini is also sold separately, in a very small box, not as part of a whole computer "system." It is more like a commodity than anything offered by Windows PC vendors. Apple is out to beat them at their own game.
So, where does Apple go next in the low-end market? I think a business client computer is a logical next step. Apple is making inroads in the server area. A desktop business Mac makes sense. As always, it would not be just for business, but also for those who are put off by the limitations dictated by Mini's tiny size. A business client would likely have one or two PCI slots too, as well as a built in power supply.
many of us just realize that things take time and the overall market will decide. Sure we wish there could be another mem slot or larger faster hard drive but I think many of us relish the fact that buying a brand new Mac computer now costs $499 to start with an excellent OS and nice software bundle.
Of course we expect it to improve but just as we sometimes resemble AA there are the usual suspects here that are "Baby Dvoraks"(BD) and always balance the AA with their punditry and skepticism. That's fair nothing personal.
I just like to think about a Freescale based Mac mini or a G5 Mac mini for the future. Exciting times coming!
Originally posted by snoopy
.......
So, where does Apple go next in the low-end market? I think a business client computer is a logical next step. Apple is making inroads in the server area. A desktop business Mac makes sense. As always, it would not be just for business, but also for those who are put off by the limitations dictated by Mini's tiny size. A business client would likely have one or two PCI slots too, as well as a built in power supply.
if you wanna look at IBM and HP, just selling hardware to businesses is a no-win game. the big money is in consulting, total IT services, PLUS hardware
i would love to see apple offer this complete package much much more aggressively, complementing xServe g5, powermac, Mac mini and PowerBook lines with.... the business desktop Mac you mention...!!
edit: plus software, software, software... to once and for all shut the losers up that keep whining "but i need so-and-so-piece-of-garbage-software (eg Lotus Notes) for work and it doesn't work on the Mac"...
i mean, if IBM can convince hordes of businesses to use a piece of absolute trash like Lotus Notes day in day out, or Windows, for chrissakes, with it's billion-and-one vulnerabilities (don't open attachments!! even if it says i love you!!
"On the HD Video front, Apple is reportedly hard at work in discussions with the world's major video content providers (broadcast, cable, satellite, and emerging internet providers) to create a QuickTime-based (H.264, MPEG-4, QuickTime Streaming Server) "tv network" that will reach the world's biggest market for high-definition video content.
Designed to vastly outclass most existing transmission media (digital cable, satellite) for high-definition content by offering more 'channels' and more options for access including streaming free content, on-demand streaming, on-demand downloads and support for a range of popular media devices including Apple's own rumored HD Media Hub (aka iPod Home), this network is gaining momentum fast by leveraging the well-known success of Apple's music distribution channel iTunes.
According to reliable sources, this network will be made public sometime this summer after Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger and QuickTime 7.0 have begun to achieve their peak expected market penetration. The announcement will be designed to catapult Tiger and QT7 into the same level of interest which cross-platform users have shown for iPod and iTunes -- e.g. an essential part of accessing the digital media revolution without piracy.
We expect to have fresh recon related to this HD Video Network (HDVN) initiative in the next few days so stay tuned for a major weekend report on the subject, plus more G5 dirt tomorrow!"
If Apples proven success with Itunes store, I think it's possible they will be moving to a HD video content store. Plus, the timing to announce could be at WWDC after Tiger's release. This year's WWDC motto is "innovation" so there is a possibility.
The idea makes sense to me. 2006 will be a huge year for HD with all the networks and cable companies delivering content in HD as well as the current NTSC. So if the HD store comes to fruition this summer will be in a good position to tap this huge new frontier that's coming our way soon.
I hope it's true!, maybe we'll see the MiniMac DVR, Ipod Video, bigger lcd's, etc.
If we can buy and record HD content and later, if we can produce our own content and sell at the store or share with family and friends, that's going to be a huge hit for Apple.
I wonder why Steve hold that Sony HD camera at the latest MWSF. Maybe he's thinking soon we all have such cameras, like the minidv cameras that many of us have now and we could use the content we create to share with others.
There are many possibilities coming our way in the HD front and it's very exciting that Apple could contribute in make it easy and cool.
He never said anything even remotely similar to that.