I find it hilarious that Apple's solution to the messy and complicated desktop is external Superdrives, HDDs and hubs. My ancient iMac has an integrated display, which removes two cords: the data cable and power cable. Unfortunately, I have an external HDD which adds two cords: its data cable and power cable.
iMac + wireless keyboard and mouse + 802.11n to AEBS (or Time Capsule) with a NAS or airport drive + printer/scanner combo (like the Lexmark or HP) w/802.11 = 1 cord for power.
Quote:
Even more unfortunate is that the external HDD has been full for many years and I've been in a constant battle with what to delete because I absolutely refuse to buy another external drive. I'm pretty sure I'd be up to three by now, if I bought for necessity. My home-built PC, BTW, has 5 empty HDD bays. I'll never use them all but it's nice to know I could.
Buy a 4 bay NAS or USB enclosure and attach to AEBS.
Quote:
The problem with Apple's offerings is that they cut fuctionality for vain design frills.
The problem with some folks is that they don't upgrade to the latest wireless technologies but whine about wires anyway.
That said, I wouldn't mind a mini class machine with 4 bays that acted as a home server or an aTV class machine with 4 bays that acted as a iNAS.
I just ordered two 30.6 GHz iMacs Sunday night for my daughter and my wife,
Wow, is it 2015 already?
But seriously, folks, after seeing a friend's $800 quad-core machine overclocked to 3.2GHz per core with 4GB of RAM and 1.5TB of HD space, I'm seriously starting to look at Newegg for my next "Mac." Do I care that it won't be as small as a $799 Mac mini? Not a bit when it will have more than twice the speed, four times the RAM and over 12x the HD capacity at the same price. Do I care that it will have a couple of more cables than an unexpanded iMac? Nope. Do I care that it's not as sleek as an Apple machine (well, most are sleek except for the Mac Pro)? Not in the least. Do I care that its slow-turning 120mm fans will be a tiny bit louder than a Mac's? A little, but I can live with it. The dark side calls...
Then doesn't it make sense for people to compare the mini to a budget dell when there's nothing closer to compare?
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
iMac + wireless keyboard and mouse + 802.11n to AEBS (or Time Capsule) with a NAS or airport drive + printer/scanner combo (like the Lexmark or HP) w/802.11 = 1 cord for power.
Buy a 4 bay NAS or USB enclosure and attach to AEBS.
The problem with some folks is that they don't upgrade to the latest wireless technologies but whine about wires anyway.
That said, I wouldn't mind a mini class machine with 4 bays that acted as a home server or an aTV class machine with 4 bays that acted as a iNAS.
So let's compare...
On the budget PC side, big internal HD.
On the mac side, time capsule or wireless NAS.
Is the wireless going to be as fast? I doubt it.
And isn't the wireless going to be more (way more?) expensive?
Even with the latest wireless tech, there still seem to be some disadvantages to whine about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak
Wow, is it 2015 already?
But seriously, folks, after seeing a friend's $800 quad-core machine overclocked to 3.2GHz per core with 4GB of RAM and 1.5TB of HD space, I'm seriously starting to look at Newegg for my next "Mac." Do I care that it won't be as small as a $799 Mac mini? Not a bit when it will have more than twice the speed, four times the RAM and over 12x the HD capacity at the same price. Do I care that it will have a couple of more cables than an unexpanded iMac? Nope. Do I care that it's not as sleek as an Apple machine (well, most are sleek except for the Mac Pro)? Not in the least. Do I care that its slow-turning 120mm fans will be a tiny bit louder than a Mac's? A little, but I can live with it. The dark side calls...
iMac + wireless keyboard and mouse + 802.11n to AEBS (or Time Capsule) with a NAS or airport drive + printer/scanner combo (like the Lexmark or HP) w/802.11 = 1 cord for power.
Interesting addition. I count up to four cords there, not one.
Quote:
The problem with some folks is that they don't upgrade to the latest wireless technologies but whine about wires anyway.
Not everyone likes so many wireless devices. For one thing, there's a risk of interference. For another, wired connections are almost always faster than wireless. You can keep 802.11n at a theoretical 248Mbps. I'd rather have SATA drives at a theoretical 3Gbps.
Thanks for clarifying that it's an assumption with no numbers to back it up.
Just like yours have been.
Quote:
That doesn't change the fact that people buying the mini are getting less at a higher price. For the record, you can buy a DVD burner for about $30 (meaning apple would get it cheaper, plus save the cost of the CD burner). You honestly don't think apple can afford to put one of those in a $599 machine?
I don't know Apple's costs any more than you do. I don't particularly care either.
Apple sells a product, If it is selling within their expectations, then it must be a good value. If it is not, then Apple would have to do something about that.
Apple's level of support for their products is consistently higher than other manufacturers is for theirs. That accounts for some of the reason why Apple charges what they do. Support is expensive. Factor that in when you make your comparisons.
Reliability of Apple's desktops is also consistently, and considerably higher than for other manufacturers. There must be a reason why. Figure that in as well.
And sure, add in another 5% for extra profit, above what the cheap manufacturers can charge for their generic products.
Quote:
And yet, machines without gimmicks outsell macs by a huge margin. Based on the millions of PC sales, there seem to be many more people who want machines without gimmicks (and without the boost in price that seems to come with them).
Please, don't pretend you're clueless, because I know you're not.
The reason for that, as you know, is the OS, and the fact that most people expect PC's because that's what they use in their workplace.
And that has nothing to do with anything other than to show the long hand of IBM, which is the only reason why PC's grew to dominance at all.
But, are you forgetting that Apple's sales are increasing at least three times as fast as the PC industry these days?
Why do you think that is?
Primarily the OS after all. People are getting fed up with Vista, and MS in general. They are more willing to take a chance on that oddball OS, and quirky company.
Quote:
Again, it's not my idea. PC companies have been selling millions (tens of millions? hundreds?) of those machines for years. And regardless of what you think of their idea, you have to admit that it sells on the PC side.
It's because that's what people expect to buy. That doesn't mean that many people prefer to buy that. People are not adventurous. They just continue doing what they've always done. It takes a good push to move them from their path. Good old Newton's Law.
Vista seems to be that push.
As Apple doesn't break out their desktop sales model for model, we might never know the reality of what models do what. But we do know that their sales have zoomed recently, possibly mostly due to the aluminum iMacs, and according to Apple, better sales of the Mac Pro's. But, it's still just a guess.
Quote:
You didn't answer my question, do you think it's a good thing that Apple only ships a computer if they can think of a gimmick to put in? And refuses to sell a basic computer that just runs the apps people need?
If you stop using that stupid "gimmick" word, I might stop laughing long enough to take it seriously.
If you instead, used the more mature term of "features", then I could respond better. I don't see any gimmicks in Apple's products.
Quote:
And yet the buyer isn't limited to what's featured in the ad sheets. If someone wants more than 2 gigs of ram they can get it in a cheap pc (oh no! they have to look beyond the sale flyer!). But not an option on the mini.
Only in some models. I'm sorry, but most of the cheap ones I see do NOT offer 4 Gb as an option. That makes sense, because most people have no idea of what it would mean anyway.
Quote:
I'm not debating how many people care about this, the point is that you can't put as much HD space in a mini. And you can't. I assume that you've changed your argument from "the mini isn't limited" to "who cares if the mini is limited", you're admitting that it is after all?
You're going around in circles. Of course it matters how many people care. That's what marketing is all about.
And, no I'm not changing anything. The same thing is true. most people who get bigger HDDs, on any platform, but external models.
That's something you are trying desperately to ignore.
Quote:
We're talking about whether the mini is more limited with ram and internal HD than PCs in the same price range. You seem to be trying to change the subject.
So can we agree that the mini is more limited with ram and internal HD than PCs in the same price range?
No. You're making an argument that doesn't exist. But you don't realize it.
Interesting addition. I count up to four cords there, not one.
1 cord on the iMac.
Do you wish to count the number of cords attached to the internet you are also attached to via 802.11n? but yes, the AEBS needs power and a link to a cable/FiOS modem that also requires power and connection to the fiber or cable. Likewise the printer needs power.
Quote:
Not everyone likes so many wireless devices. For one thing, there's a risk of interference. For another, wired connections are almost always faster than wireless. You can keep 802.11n at a theoretical 248Mbps. I'd rather have SATA drives at a theoretical 3Gbps.
Well gee...if you don't like wireless devices why would you whine about having wires? You wouldn't. One extra cable to a dorbo or firewire enclosure isn't going to make much difference.
I think that Apple's lack of response to Psystar is, in part, due to the fact that Apple plans to offer some sort of more-than-Mini, less-than-MacPro in the not-so-distant future. I think they have simply been waiting for adequate market-share growth combined with the continued strength in "switcher" sales to warrant the gamble.
Unfortunately, I think many here will be moaning with whatever choice of trade-offs Apple chooses to bring to market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross
Look, this is not a machine for the majority of people here, who, I assume, like me, have a professional Mac model with upgradable insides.
For everyone else, the Mini, and iMac is a fine choice. I just ordered two 30.6 GHz iMacs Sunday night for my daughter and my wife, both of whom are thrilled at the prospect of getting rid of their old machines.
We can argue this until the end of time, and not come up with an agreement.
But, remember, I was one of the first people on these boards to state my preference that Apple manufacture an xMac (preferably the one I designed).
I know many users (both Mac and Windows) who are content with their move from a modular desktop to an iMac.
These enthusiast sites really lose sight of what more mainstream users want. It is very similar to visiting audio enthusiast sites where people will accept nothing less than components even though the overall consumer market has long ago voiced their preference for receivers. The arguments are also similar - separate pre-amps (tower) allow adoption of newer formats without the need to replace perfectly adequate amps (displays).
And sleek design in an AIO package or a tiny SFF computer with very low noise.
Quote:
Is the wireless going to be as fast? I doubt it.
And isn't the wireless going to be more (way more?) expensive?
Even with the latest wireless tech, there still seem to be some disadvantages to whine about.
Not about WIRES. The whole point of Clive's whine is that OMG Apple designed this sleek AIO that I have to attach all these ugly wires to so i have neither performance or looks.
You can whine about performance of laptop parts vs desktop parts.
You can whine about the performance of 802.11n storage devices vs SATA.
You can whine about the non-upgradability of the iMac and Mini.
You SHOULDN'T whine about wires given that Apple provides a clear mechanism to avoid any beyond a power cord. Yes, wherever your cable modem is will have extra wires to connect drives and wireless access point. But it's not cluttering up your desktop unless you choose to make it so.
Look, this is not a machine for the majority of people here [...]
For everyone else, the Mini, and iMac is a fine choice.
So the MacMini is a computer for "everyone else?" Doesn't "everyone else" these days want Hi-Def content? Last I checked, the Mini is still incapable of natively decoding HD... and using software decoding requires more CPU power than its wimpy Core2Duo has to offer. Sad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
iMac + wireless keyboard and mouse + 802.11n to AEBS (or Time Capsule) with a NAS or airport drive + printer/scanner combo (like the Lexmark or HP) w/802.11 = 1 cord for power. Buy a 4 bay NAS or USB enclosure and attach to AEBS.
Translation: $$$ + $ + $$ + $$ = $$$$$$$$.
This computer for "everyone" certainly doesn't come with the simplicity that "everyone" can afford. After all, if it's Apple/Steve's vision to give us that kind of simplicity, why wouldn't they bundle wireless keyboards & mice? Verily, the BT KB & MM each wouldn't cost that much extra for Apple to include... So obviously Apple/Steve are obsessed with simplicity/"the future" only so far as they aren't missing out on a couple extra bucks.
Meanwhile, to expect each user to upgrade each of their components to the newest wireless equipment/toys is quite unreasonable. Keyboard, mouse, Time Cap, printer... Starts to add up, doesn't it? And let's not forget the batteries that frequently need to be changed to keep some of those devices powered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
The problem with some folks is that they don't upgrade to the latest wireless technologies but whine about wires anyway.
Do you honestly expect every single user to upgrade every component to every wireless technology? If you run out of HDD space, "just" buy another Time Cap, for example? Not quite as easy as you make it sound. Most folks aren't made of money.
So the MacMini is a computer for "everyone else?" Doesn't "everyone else" these days want Hi-Def content? Last I checked, the Mini is still incapable of natively decoding HD... and using software decoding requires more CPU power than its wimpy Core2Duo has to offer. Sad.
There's no problem watching 1080p on a Mini. This issue was discussed here quite a while ago, and resolved. It's not an issue.
The whole point of Clive's whine is that OMG Apple designed this sleek AIO that I have to attach all these ugly wires to so i have neither performance or looks.
... and I don't sound like that. Just because we disagree about displays, optical tricks and reality... doesn't make me an oblivious (and superficial) teenage girl. I'm sorry you incorrectly interpret my valid counter-arguments as whining.
There's no problem watching 1080p on a Mini. This issue was discussed here quite a while ago, and resolved. It's not an issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by everymac.com
For "1920x1080 (1080p) video at 24 frames per second" H.264 HD playback, Apple recommends a minimum MacOS X system of a Power Macintosh G5/2.0 DP or an Intel-based Mac with a 2.0 GHz Intel Core Duo or faster processor, at least 512 MB of RAM, and at least a 128 MB video card.
All Intel-based Mac mini models shipped with at least 512 MB of RAM, and have an "Intel GMA950 graphics processor with 64 MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory".
This indicates that the Mac mini "Core Duo" 1.83, with a 1.83 GHz Core Duo processor, officially supports 1280x720 (720p) video, but not 1920x1080 (1080p).
Yes, there may be anecdotal evidence of 1080p functioning on a Mac Mini... but that certainly does not prove sufficient operability for all users... and certainly does not render it a non-issue.
But seriously, folks, after seeing a friend's $800 quad-core machine overclocked to 3.2GHz per core with 4GB of RAM and 1.5TB of HD space, I'm seriously starting to look at Newegg for my next "Mac." Do I care that it won't be as small as a $799 Mac mini? Not a bit when it will have more than twice the speed, four times the RAM and over 12x the HD capacity at the same price. Do I care that it will have a couple of more cables than an unexpanded iMac? Nope. Do I care that it's not as sleek as an Apple machine (well, most are sleek except for the Mac Pro)? Not in the least. Do I care that its slow-turning 120mm fans will be a tiny bit louder than a Mac's? A little, but I can live with it.
You're not alone in those sentiments. I know people who are building hackintoshes (who have said they would otherwise buy from Apple if the product existed) and I'm looking at that route as well. And I give f**k-all for what anybody thinks about it too. As I've said, if Apple won't sell it to me, I'll buy it from someone else--and that coming from a Mac user going on 15+ years. Apple's line-up is just flat-out weak right now. There's a freakin' huge, untapped market out there for a Mac tower and people are clamoring for it. I hope like hell Apple doesn't put their hands over their ears and refuse to hear it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kolchak
The dark side calls...
I'll see you there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
You SHOULDN'T whine about wires given that Apple provides a clear mechanism to avoid any beyond a power cord.
Translation: My whine is now about money and not wires because the wire whine has been proven to be clueless.
Hey, here's a clue: whining that macs cost $$$ is dumb given that it's like given. Do I need to insert the usual auto analogy here?
Quote:
This computer for "everyone" certainly doesn't come with the simplicity that "everyone" can afford.
Since when as the iMac been a machine priced for "everyone"? Ah, that's right. Never. Because not everyone can afford even a $599 computer much less an iMac.
Quote:
After all, if it's Apple/Steve's vision to give us that kind of simplicity, why wouldn't they bundle wireless keyboards & mice? Verily, the BT KB & MM each wouldn't cost that much extra for Apple to include... So obviously Apple/Steve are obsessed with simplicity/"the future" only so far as they aren't missing out on a couple extra bucks.
Because not everyone cares about one usb cable connecting keyboard to iMac and one usb cable conecting with mouse to keyboard. If they ONLY provided wireless keyboards and mice I'm sure you'd be whining about that.
Personally, I prefer wired keyboards and mice.
Quote:
Meanwhile, to expect each user to upgrade each of their components to the newest wireless equipment/toys is quite unreasonable. Keyboard, mouse, Time Cap, printer... Starts to add up, doesn't it? And let's not forget the batteries that frequently need to be changed to keep some of those devices powered.
So? If the wires bother you that much then upgrade. Or not. Either way it IS an option to go nearly wireless with the iMac and it was designed that way with 802.11N in every iMac.
Quote:
Do you honestly expect every single user to upgrade every component to every wireless technology? If you run out of HDD space, "just" buy another Time Cap, for example? Not quite as easy as you make it sound. Most folks aren't made of money.
You CAN simply attach a dorbo or a USB drive to a AEBS. You can also stick your printer on there if you don't mind walking to wherever the printer needs to be at that point.
So the total investment for a "wireless" iMac is for a AEBS and the keyboard and mouse. All of which you get to reuse if you upgrade to a new iMac.
Yes, there may be anecdotal evidence of 1080p functioning on a Mac Mini... but that certainly does not prove sufficient operability for all users... and certainly does not render it a non-issue.
-Clive
If we're talking about the older machines, then it might, or might not. But it's been tried on the 2 GHz Core duo and shown to work. The newer Core 2 machines do work.
If we're talking about the older machines, then it might, or might not. But it's been tried on the 2 GHz Core duo and shown to work. The newer Core 2 machines do work.
There is plenty of evidence from a simple Google search to Apple's own Mac Mini spec sheet that clearly support 1080 playback. I think Clive won't believe it until he sets it up himself.
The company is being very open about the limitations. They are also being quite smart about everything. They have disabled automatic update for fear of Apple releasing a brick. You can still update manually and so far it works. Everything is on their site.
This computer is not for Joe Average consumer who won't know what to do if they got bricked in the first place. It's for people who know what they're getting into on the cheap. They even hint at the fact that for people who know where to "get stuff" these limitations aren't a problem. No iLife or auto updates? No problem, go get them you know where...The same place where most hard core Mac fans are getting their music from in the first place. *HINT* It's not the iTunes store.
Of course there are risks and limitations. What? You think you're going to get a Quad Core MacPro Clone for $500 bucks? Get real.
The company is publishing the limitations and has a good product.
The company is being very open about the limitations. They are also being quite smart about everything. They have disabled automatic update for fear of Apple releasing a brick. You can still update manually and so far it works. Everything is on their site.
This computer is not for Joe Average consumer who won't know what to do if they got bricked in the first place. It's for people who know what they're getting into on the cheap. They even hint at the fact that for people who know where to "get stuff" these limitations aren't a problem. No iLife or auto updates? No problem, go get them you know where...The same place where most hard core Mac fans are getting their music from in the first place. *HINT* It's not the iTunes store.
Of course there are risks and limitations. What? You think you're going to get a Quad Core MacPro Clone for $500 bucks? Get real.
The company is publishing the limitations and has a good product.
Has anyone tried to update manually?
If not, we don't know.
What will Software Update make of the hardware, and firmware? If there's an OS update, it looks at those things too.
We do know that there is software that won't work, as well as hardware.
This isn't a real clone. It's, at best, a partial Mac.
This computer is not for Joe Average consumer who won't know what to do if they got bricked in the first place. It's for people who know what they're getting into on the cheap.
[...]
The company is publishing the limitations and has a good product.
If this is for people who know what they are getting into then why are they buying it from Psystar? More to the point, why would they spend $150 for a $129 copy of OS X Leopard that isn't even installed. What Psystar is installed is a hacked OSx86 copy that is freely downloaded from any newsgroup or torrent site. Why would someone who "knows what they are getting into on the cheap" want a machine that costs more money than and requires them to send their HDD back to Psystar with all their personal data on it for an update to 10.5.3.
The only people interested in this machine are some odd non-technical geek that thinks he knows but really doesn't. MacWorld spent $751 for a Psystar Mac that doesn't include any worthwhile warranty, a monitor, keyboard, mouse, or many of the "just works" features of OS X. OSx86 is for tinkerer's hobby machine that Psystar is trying to replace with a novice's nightmare.
Comments
I find it hilarious that Apple's solution to the messy and complicated desktop is external Superdrives, HDDs and hubs. My ancient iMac has an integrated display, which removes two cords: the data cable and power cable. Unfortunately, I have an external HDD which adds two cords: its data cable and power cable.
iMac + wireless keyboard and mouse + 802.11n to AEBS (or Time Capsule) with a NAS or airport drive + printer/scanner combo (like the Lexmark or HP) w/802.11 = 1 cord for power.
Even more unfortunate is that the external HDD has been full for many years and I've been in a constant battle with what to delete because I absolutely refuse to buy another external drive. I'm pretty sure I'd be up to three by now, if I bought for necessity. My home-built PC, BTW, has 5 empty HDD bays. I'll never use them all but it's nice to know I could.
Buy a 4 bay NAS or USB enclosure and attach to AEBS.
The problem with Apple's offerings is that they cut fuctionality for vain design frills.
The problem with some folks is that they don't upgrade to the latest wireless technologies but whine about wires anyway.
That said, I wouldn't mind a mini class machine with 4 bays that acted as a home server or an aTV class machine with 4 bays that acted as a iNAS.
I just ordered two 30.6 GHz iMacs Sunday night for my daughter and my wife,
Wow, is it 2015 already?
But seriously, folks, after seeing a friend's $800 quad-core machine overclocked to 3.2GHz per core with 4GB of RAM and 1.5TB of HD space, I'm seriously starting to look at Newegg for my next "Mac." Do I care that it won't be as small as a $799 Mac mini? Not a bit when it will have more than twice the speed, four times the RAM and over 12x the HD capacity at the same price. Do I care that it will have a couple of more cables than an unexpanded iMac? Nope. Do I care that it's not as sleek as an Apple machine (well, most are sleek except for the Mac Pro)? Not in the least. Do I care that its slow-turning 120mm fans will be a tiny bit louder than a Mac's? A little, but I can live with it. The dark side calls...
There isn't one. Just a cheapest one.
Then doesn't it make sense for people to compare the mini to a budget dell when there's nothing closer to compare?
iMac + wireless keyboard and mouse + 802.11n to AEBS (or Time Capsule) with a NAS or airport drive + printer/scanner combo (like the Lexmark or HP) w/802.11 = 1 cord for power.
Buy a 4 bay NAS or USB enclosure and attach to AEBS.
The problem with some folks is that they don't upgrade to the latest wireless technologies but whine about wires anyway.
That said, I wouldn't mind a mini class machine with 4 bays that acted as a home server or an aTV class machine with 4 bays that acted as a iNAS.
So let's compare...
On the budget PC side, big internal HD.
On the mac side, time capsule or wireless NAS.
Is the wireless going to be as fast? I doubt it.
And isn't the wireless going to be more (way more?) expensive?
Even with the latest wireless tech, there still seem to be some disadvantages to whine about.
Wow, is it 2015 already?
But seriously, folks, after seeing a friend's $800 quad-core machine overclocked to 3.2GHz per core with 4GB of RAM and 1.5TB of HD space, I'm seriously starting to look at Newegg for my next "Mac." Do I care that it won't be as small as a $799 Mac mini? Not a bit when it will have more than twice the speed, four times the RAM and over 12x the HD capacity at the same price. Do I care that it will have a couple of more cables than an unexpanded iMac? Nope. Do I care that it's not as sleek as an Apple machine (well, most are sleek except for the Mac Pro)? Not in the least. Do I care that its slow-turning 120mm fans will be a tiny bit louder than a Mac's? A little, but I can live with it. The dark side calls...
QFT
iMac + wireless keyboard and mouse + 802.11n to AEBS (or Time Capsule) with a NAS or airport drive + printer/scanner combo (like the Lexmark or HP) w/802.11 = 1 cord for power.
Interesting addition. I count up to four cords there, not one.
The problem with some folks is that they don't upgrade to the latest wireless technologies but whine about wires anyway.
Not everyone likes so many wireless devices. For one thing, there's a risk of interference. For another, wired connections are almost always faster than wireless. You can keep 802.11n at a theoretical 248Mbps. I'd rather have SATA drives at a theoretical 3Gbps.
Thanks for clarifying that it's an assumption with no numbers to back it up.
Just like yours have been.
That doesn't change the fact that people buying the mini are getting less at a higher price. For the record, you can buy a DVD burner for about $30 (meaning apple would get it cheaper, plus save the cost of the CD burner). You honestly don't think apple can afford to put one of those in a $599 machine?
I don't know Apple's costs any more than you do. I don't particularly care either.
Apple sells a product, If it is selling within their expectations, then it must be a good value. If it is not, then Apple would have to do something about that.
Apple's level of support for their products is consistently higher than other manufacturers is for theirs. That accounts for some of the reason why Apple charges what they do. Support is expensive. Factor that in when you make your comparisons.
Reliability of Apple's desktops is also consistently, and considerably higher than for other manufacturers. There must be a reason why. Figure that in as well.
And sure, add in another 5% for extra profit, above what the cheap manufacturers can charge for their generic products.
And yet, machines without gimmicks outsell macs by a huge margin. Based on the millions of PC sales, there seem to be many more people who want machines without gimmicks (and without the boost in price that seems to come with them).
Please, don't pretend you're clueless, because I know you're not.
The reason for that, as you know, is the OS, and the fact that most people expect PC's because that's what they use in their workplace.
And that has nothing to do with anything other than to show the long hand of IBM, which is the only reason why PC's grew to dominance at all.
But, are you forgetting that Apple's sales are increasing at least three times as fast as the PC industry these days?
Why do you think that is?
Primarily the OS after all. People are getting fed up with Vista, and MS in general. They are more willing to take a chance on that oddball OS, and quirky company.
Again, it's not my idea. PC companies have been selling millions (tens of millions? hundreds?) of those machines for years. And regardless of what you think of their idea, you have to admit that it sells on the PC side.
It's because that's what people expect to buy. That doesn't mean that many people prefer to buy that. People are not adventurous. They just continue doing what they've always done. It takes a good push to move them from their path. Good old Newton's Law.
Vista seems to be that push.
As Apple doesn't break out their desktop sales model for model, we might never know the reality of what models do what. But we do know that their sales have zoomed recently, possibly mostly due to the aluminum iMacs, and according to Apple, better sales of the Mac Pro's. But, it's still just a guess.
You didn't answer my question, do you think it's a good thing that Apple only ships a computer if they can think of a gimmick to put in? And refuses to sell a basic computer that just runs the apps people need?
If you stop using that stupid "gimmick" word, I might stop laughing long enough to take it seriously.
If you instead, used the more mature term of "features", then I could respond better. I don't see any gimmicks in Apple's products.
And yet the buyer isn't limited to what's featured in the ad sheets. If someone wants more than 2 gigs of ram they can get it in a cheap pc (oh no! they have to look beyond the sale flyer!). But not an option on the mini.
Only in some models. I'm sorry, but most of the cheap ones I see do NOT offer 4 Gb as an option. That makes sense, because most people have no idea of what it would mean anyway.
I'm not debating how many people care about this, the point is that you can't put as much HD space in a mini. And you can't. I assume that you've changed your argument from "the mini isn't limited" to "who cares if the mini is limited", you're admitting that it is after all?
You're going around in circles. Of course it matters how many people care. That's what marketing is all about.
And, no I'm not changing anything. The same thing is true. most people who get bigger HDDs, on any platform, but external models.
That's something you are trying desperately to ignore.
We're talking about whether the mini is more limited with ram and internal HD than PCs in the same price range. You seem to be trying to change the subject.
So can we agree that the mini is more limited with ram and internal HD than PCs in the same price range?
No. You're making an argument that doesn't exist. But you don't realize it.
Interesting addition. I count up to four cords there, not one.
1 cord on the iMac.
Do you wish to count the number of cords attached to the internet you are also attached to via 802.11n? but yes, the AEBS needs power and a link to a cable/FiOS modem that also requires power and connection to the fiber or cable. Likewise the printer needs power.
Not everyone likes so many wireless devices. For one thing, there's a risk of interference. For another, wired connections are almost always faster than wireless. You can keep 802.11n at a theoretical 248Mbps. I'd rather have SATA drives at a theoretical 3Gbps.
Well gee...if you don't like wireless devices why would you whine about having wires? You wouldn't. One extra cable to a dorbo or firewire enclosure isn't going to make much difference.
Unfortunately, I think many here will be moaning with whatever choice of trade-offs Apple chooses to bring to market.
Look, this is not a machine for the majority of people here, who, I assume, like me, have a professional Mac model with upgradable insides.
For everyone else, the Mini, and iMac is a fine choice. I just ordered two 30.6 GHz iMacs Sunday night for my daughter and my wife, both of whom are thrilled at the prospect of getting rid of their old machines.
We can argue this until the end of time, and not come up with an agreement.
But, remember, I was one of the first people on these boards to state my preference that Apple manufacture an xMac (preferably the one I designed).
I know many users (both Mac and Windows) who are content with their move from a modular desktop to an iMac.
These enthusiast sites really lose sight of what more mainstream users want. It is very similar to visiting audio enthusiast sites where people will accept nothing less than components even though the overall consumer market has long ago voiced their preference for receivers. The arguments are also similar - separate pre-amps (tower) allow adoption of newer formats without the need to replace perfectly adequate amps (displays).
So let's compare...
On the budget PC side, big internal HD.
On the mac side, time capsule or wireless NAS.
And sleek design in an AIO package or a tiny SFF computer with very low noise.
Is the wireless going to be as fast? I doubt it.
And isn't the wireless going to be more (way more?) expensive?
Even with the latest wireless tech, there still seem to be some disadvantages to whine about.
Not about WIRES. The whole point of Clive's whine is that OMG Apple designed this sleek AIO that I have to attach all these ugly wires to so i have neither performance or looks.
You can whine about performance of laptop parts vs desktop parts.
You can whine about the performance of 802.11n storage devices vs SATA.
You can whine about the non-upgradability of the iMac and Mini.
You SHOULDN'T whine about wires given that Apple provides a clear mechanism to avoid any beyond a power cord. Yes, wherever your cable modem is will have extra wires to connect drives and wireless access point. But it's not cluttering up your desktop unless you choose to make it so.
Look, this is not a machine for the majority of people here [...]
For everyone else, the Mini, and iMac is a fine choice.
So the MacMini is a computer for "everyone else?" Doesn't "everyone else" these days want Hi-Def content? Last I checked, the Mini is still incapable of natively decoding HD... and using software decoding requires more CPU power than its wimpy Core2Duo has to offer. Sad.
iMac + wireless keyboard and mouse + 802.11n to AEBS (or Time Capsule) with a NAS or airport drive + printer/scanner combo (like the Lexmark or HP) w/802.11 = 1 cord for power. Buy a 4 bay NAS or USB enclosure and attach to AEBS.
Translation: $$$ + $ + $$ + $$ = $$$$$$$$.
This computer for "everyone" certainly doesn't come with the simplicity that "everyone" can afford. After all, if it's Apple/Steve's vision to give us that kind of simplicity, why wouldn't they bundle wireless keyboards & mice? Verily, the BT KB & MM each wouldn't cost that much extra for Apple to include... So obviously Apple/Steve are obsessed with simplicity/"the future" only so far as they aren't missing out on a couple extra bucks.
Meanwhile, to expect each user to upgrade each of their components to the newest wireless equipment/toys is quite unreasonable. Keyboard, mouse, Time Cap, printer... Starts to add up, doesn't it? And let's not forget the batteries that frequently need to be changed to keep some of those devices powered.
The problem with some folks is that they don't upgrade to the latest wireless technologies but whine about wires anyway.
Do you honestly expect every single user to upgrade every component to every wireless technology? If you run out of HDD space, "just" buy another Time Cap, for example? Not quite as easy as you make it sound. Most folks aren't made of money.
-Clive
So the MacMini is a computer for "everyone else?" Doesn't "everyone else" these days want Hi-Def content? Last I checked, the Mini is still incapable of natively decoding HD... and using software decoding requires more CPU power than its wimpy Core2Duo has to offer. Sad.
There's no problem watching 1080p on a Mini. This issue was discussed here quite a while ago, and resolved. It's not an issue.
The whole point of Clive's whine is that OMG Apple designed this sleek AIO that I have to attach all these ugly wires to so i have neither performance or looks.
... and I don't sound like that. Just because we disagree about displays, optical tricks and reality... doesn't make me an oblivious (and superficial) teenage girl. I'm sorry you incorrectly interpret my valid counter-arguments as whining.
-Clive
There's no problem watching 1080p on a Mini. This issue was discussed here quite a while ago, and resolved. It's not an issue.
For "1920x1080 (1080p) video at 24 frames per second" H.264 HD playback, Apple recommends a minimum MacOS X system of a Power Macintosh G5/2.0 DP or an Intel-based Mac with a 2.0 GHz Intel Core Duo or faster processor, at least 512 MB of RAM, and at least a 128 MB video card.
All Intel-based Mac mini models shipped with at least 512 MB of RAM, and have an "Intel GMA950 graphics processor with 64 MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory".
This indicates that the Mac mini "Core Duo" 1.83, with a 1.83 GHz Core Duo processor, officially supports 1280x720 (720p) video, but not 1920x1080 (1080p).
Yes, there may be anecdotal evidence of 1080p functioning on a Mac Mini... but that certainly does not prove sufficient operability for all users... and certainly does not render it a non-issue.
-Clive
But seriously, folks, after seeing a friend's $800 quad-core machine overclocked to 3.2GHz per core with 4GB of RAM and 1.5TB of HD space, I'm seriously starting to look at Newegg for my next "Mac." Do I care that it won't be as small as a $799 Mac mini? Not a bit when it will have more than twice the speed, four times the RAM and over 12x the HD capacity at the same price. Do I care that it will have a couple of more cables than an unexpanded iMac? Nope. Do I care that it's not as sleek as an Apple machine (well, most are sleek except for the Mac Pro)? Not in the least. Do I care that its slow-turning 120mm fans will be a tiny bit louder than a Mac's? A little, but I can live with it.
You're not alone in those sentiments. I know people who are building hackintoshes (who have said they would otherwise buy from Apple if the product existed) and I'm looking at that route as well. And I give f**k-all for what anybody thinks about it too. As I've said, if Apple won't sell it to me, I'll buy it from someone else--and that coming from a Mac user going on 15+ years. Apple's line-up is just flat-out weak right now. There's a freakin' huge, untapped market out there for a Mac tower and people are clamoring for it. I hope like hell Apple doesn't put their hands over their ears and refuse to hear it.
The dark side calls...
I'll see you there.
You SHOULDN'T whine about wires given that Apple provides a clear mechanism to avoid any beyond a power cord.
If only we all lived in an Apple commercial.
Translation: $$$ + $ + $$ + $$ = $$$$$$$$.
Translation: My whine is now about money and not wires because the wire whine has been proven to be clueless.
Hey, here's a clue: whining that macs cost $$$ is dumb given that it's like given. Do I need to insert the usual auto analogy here?
This computer for "everyone" certainly doesn't come with the simplicity that "everyone" can afford.
Since when as the iMac been a machine priced for "everyone"? Ah, that's right. Never. Because not everyone can afford even a $599 computer much less an iMac.
After all, if it's Apple/Steve's vision to give us that kind of simplicity, why wouldn't they bundle wireless keyboards & mice? Verily, the BT KB & MM each wouldn't cost that much extra for Apple to include... So obviously Apple/Steve are obsessed with simplicity/"the future" only so far as they aren't missing out on a couple extra bucks.
Because not everyone cares about one usb cable connecting keyboard to iMac and one usb cable conecting with mouse to keyboard. If they ONLY provided wireless keyboards and mice I'm sure you'd be whining about that.
Personally, I prefer wired keyboards and mice.
Meanwhile, to expect each user to upgrade each of their components to the newest wireless equipment/toys is quite unreasonable. Keyboard, mouse, Time Cap, printer... Starts to add up, doesn't it? And let's not forget the batteries that frequently need to be changed to keep some of those devices powered.
So? If the wires bother you that much then upgrade. Or not. Either way it IS an option to go nearly wireless with the iMac and it was designed that way with 802.11N in every iMac.
Do you honestly expect every single user to upgrade every component to every wireless technology? If you run out of HDD space, "just" buy another Time Cap, for example? Not quite as easy as you make it sound. Most folks aren't made of money.
You CAN simply attach a dorbo or a USB drive to a AEBS. You can also stick your printer on there if you don't mind walking to wherever the printer needs to be at that point.
So the total investment for a "wireless" iMac is for a AEBS and the keyboard and mouse. All of which you get to reuse if you upgrade to a new iMac.
So yeah, it IS that simple.
Yes, there may be anecdotal evidence of 1080p functioning on a Mac Mini... but that certainly does not prove sufficient operability for all users... and certainly does not render it a non-issue.
-Clive
If we're talking about the older machines, then it might, or might not. But it's been tried on the 2 GHz Core duo and shown to work. The newer Core 2 machines do work.
EDIT: Forgot to add; I've seen it myself.
If we're talking about the older machines, then it might, or might not. But it's been tried on the 2 GHz Core duo and shown to work. The newer Core 2 machines do work.
There is plenty of evidence from a simple Google search to Apple's own Mac Mini spec sheet that clearly support 1080 playback. I think Clive won't believe it until he sets it up himself.
The company is being very open about the limitations. They are also being quite smart about everything. They have disabled automatic update for fear of Apple releasing a brick. You can still update manually and so far it works. Everything is on their site.
This computer is not for Joe Average consumer who won't know what to do if they got bricked in the first place. It's for people who know what they're getting into on the cheap. They even hint at the fact that for people who know where to "get stuff" these limitations aren't a problem. No iLife or auto updates? No problem, go get them you know where...The same place where most hard core Mac fans are getting their music from in the first place. *HINT* It's not the iTunes store.
Of course there are risks and limitations. What? You think you're going to get a Quad Core MacPro Clone for $500 bucks? Get real.
The company is publishing the limitations and has a good product.
You guys don't read much...
The company is being very open about the limitations. They are also being quite smart about everything. They have disabled automatic update for fear of Apple releasing a brick. You can still update manually and so far it works. Everything is on their site.
This computer is not for Joe Average consumer who won't know what to do if they got bricked in the first place. It's for people who know what they're getting into on the cheap. They even hint at the fact that for people who know where to "get stuff" these limitations aren't a problem. No iLife or auto updates? No problem, go get them you know where...The same place where most hard core Mac fans are getting their music from in the first place. *HINT* It's not the iTunes store.
Of course there are risks and limitations. What? You think you're going to get a Quad Core MacPro Clone for $500 bucks? Get real.
The company is publishing the limitations and has a good product.
Has anyone tried to update manually?
If not, we don't know.
What will Software Update make of the hardware, and firmware? If there's an OS update, it looks at those things too.
We do know that there is software that won't work, as well as hardware.
This isn't a real clone. It's, at best, a partial Mac.
This computer is not for Joe Average consumer who won't know what to do if they got bricked in the first place. It's for people who know what they're getting into on the cheap.
[...]
The company is publishing the limitations and has a good product.
If this is for people who know what they are getting into then why are they buying it from Psystar? More to the point, why would they spend $150 for a $129 copy of OS X Leopard that isn't even installed. What Psystar is installed is a hacked OSx86 copy that is freely downloaded from any newsgroup or torrent site. Why would someone who "knows what they are getting into on the cheap" want a machine that costs more money than and requires them to send their HDD back to Psystar with all their personal data on it for an update to 10.5.3.
The only people interested in this machine are some odd non-technical geek that thinks he knows but really doesn't. MacWorld spent $751 for a Psystar Mac that doesn't include any worthwhile warranty, a monitor, keyboard, mouse, or many of the "just works" features of OS X. OSx86 is for tinkerer's hobby machine that Psystar is trying to replace with a novice's nightmare.
In no way is this a good machine.