Your doubt would be wrong, but then I don't have your eyes and you don't have mine.
I've been doing this for a very long time. The differences between the better monitors when properly calibrated is very subtle. the new S-PVA panels have very good color. Where they differ is in viewing angle.
Your doubt would be wrong, but then I don't have your eyes and you don't have mine.
So you can tell between the various IPS and PVA panels types? I'm pretty sure that's a rare ability. As it is, it's hard finding people that can see the problems with TN.
I think that's his the generic stand-in for the computer a person bought that was probably assembled locally from off the shelf parts and sold locally.
Not quite, not too long ago you bought even name brand computers from a (way overpriced) independent dealer rather than an Apple store or a big box. They usually sucked when it came to selection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM
They had to do that some time ago, but they weren't retail for a good while. I think eMachines was online only for a while, shifted to Best Buy and such, and Gateway bought them too.
I think that's what he meant as being the retail landscape back then. Retail computer stores weren't as attractive and had a lot more mom-and-pop size stores than big box really hasn't begun to take away their business
Desktop sales are down because there are no longer any significant compromises involved in using a laptop as a primary machine for the majority of users, and they offer significant advantages for a lot more people as secondary machines. This is not a trend that will reverse, because the problem isn't power or expandability, it's portability. Even if Apple offered some wildly expandable desktop for $700 it would still be a big brick of a machine and a great many people would look at it and buy a MacBook: It's powerful enough, runs everything well enough, and you can throw it in your bag and take it with you.
That said, I would not be surprised if Apple reorganizes the desktop line to be somewhat parallel to the laptop line: White plastic with an adequate consumer-grade 20" display at the low end, aluminum with good 20" and 24" displays in the middle, and maybe pro-grade 8-bit displays at the top as the iMac evolves into a pro machine, chasing the Mac Pro farther and farther into its niche.
The only thing that is pushing the Mac Pro further into its nice is the $1200 in gradual price increases over the last 5 years. Having owned one, there is absolutely nothing pro about the iMac. If anything it holds them back and has frustrated a lot of traditional desktop buyers with all the things it couldn't do compared to their previous PowerMac. It combines all the disadvantages of both a desktop and laptop into one package for elegance and space saving.
If it does do one thing, that's drive up laptop sales. I don't see any point in owning it in lieu of a Macbook Pro with an external display. The Macbook Pro has a card reader, is (ironically) much easier to upgrade, and saves me the hassle of having to have two computers. If you're going to make a desktop that's as powerful as a laptop, just buy the laptop.
Not quite, not too long ago you bought even name brand computers from a (way overpriced) independent dealer rather than an Apple store or a big box.
Small independent shops is what I meant, but I don't know how many of them sold brand name computers, a lot of them did, but a lot sold of their own "white box" computers, as Mel called it.
That way of doing business is more expensive though, I don't know if it was necessarily overpriced, I don't think any of them made big profits. The big box stores barely manage to survive now, they make very low margins and the real profits are getting people to buy expensive services and accessories. Circuit City survived as long as they did only because of their extended warranties.
Many folks are waiting for Nehalem before buying either notebook or iMac. It represents a significant update. I've put off my MBP purchase until that time. I bought a mini because it represents a great value in Apple's line up.
Nehalem ??? Its not gonna happen fro many reasons most of all the heat . You will wait a long time .sorry
Small independent shops is what I meant, but I don't know how many of them sold brand name computers, a lot of them did, but a lot sold of their own "white box" computers, as Mel called it.
They were the only place I could (reliably) buy Macs until the Apple store showed up. Without direct web and retail sales, finding a Mac would still be a pain in the rear. Spindler and Amelio didn't believe in any of it.
The only thing that is pushing the Mac Pro further into its nice is the $1200 in gradual price increases over the last 5 years.
Or, declining sales had to be offset by a price increase, which Apple justified by turning the former desktop into a full-blown, no-compromises workstation (well, except for the lack of radiation hardening).
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig
If [the iMac] does do one thing, that's drive up laptop sales.
Actually, computer buyers are doing that across the board. The sales trends for companies that still make traditional desktops reflect this shift just as clearly. Apple has a long history of shipping their computers with more features on board than most PC companies did (standard ethernet, standard graphics, etc.), which made expansion less necessary. Now the whole industry is like that, and the traditional desktop exists more as a side effect of industry standardization than any actual need.
In fact, if it wasn't for enterprise sales propping up the old ATX box, the market might be even more heavily biased toward laptops and AIOs.
If a professional can pull an iMac out of the box, set it up, and do professional work on it without more than the usual number of compromises then it's a professional machine. It may not satisfy traditional desktop users, but people who actively prefer traditional desktops are rapidly becoming a niche.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig
I don't see any point in owning it in lieu of a Macbook Pro with an external display.
Then you're in luck: Apple offers both, and they will cheerfully sell them to you. You'll end up spending more money for less power, but if you need a laptop and the MacBook Pro is powerful enough, it's worth the extra expense.
They were the only place I could (reliably) buy Macs until the Apple store showed up. Without direct web and retail sales, finding a Mac would still be a pain in the rear. Spindler and Amelio didn't believe in any of it.
While I blame Spindler for Apple's problems back then, as I lived through it, I really think we dump on Amelio too much.
He was called in when Apple was going through a very difficult period, the most difficult period, and he made some very difficult decisions that have been acknowledged as having saved Apple from an unalterable dive.
Was he a "visionary" the way some others were and are? Maybe not, but he laid the foundation for Apple's come-back. He was the first to recognize the disaster of Copeland and end the project. He realized that Apple had to take the very bold step and look outside the company for a new OS.
He made the first major cut-backs before jobs came back and made more.
AND, he was responsible for buying NEXT. He could have bought BE instead, which would have been a disaster. That would have been a safer step for him, as Gassée would not have been in the position to challenge him the way Jobs did as the founder of the company. Gassée was too greedy, but Apple still spent what was a huge amount on NEXT. It was a bet the company decision, and unlike anyone before, he made it. The others, both Scully and Spindler, allowed Copeland to go on for too long.
Of course, Amelio was responsible for the cloning fiasco.
Instead of realizing that Apple needed to control hardware and software (and thus selling MacOS motherboards to the cloners) Amelio made the retarded decision of making Apple engineers responsible for certifying every outside motherboard in the Mac universe.
It was that stupid decision that was responsible for the inevitable cancellation of cloning, not Jobs.
If Amelio had kept the Apple brand for upmarket Apple computers, and made a generic motherboard for cloners, Motorola, Power Computing and Umax might still be in the Mac market.
A market that might be three times bigger than it is now.
Nehalem ??? Its not gonna happen fro many reasons most of all the heat . You will wait a long time .sorry
Well, this coming fall Nehalem chips are already rated at 45W, suitable for the iMac, and Q1 2010 Nehalem chips are rated rated in a range from 18W to 35W, suitable for the whole MacBook line (including the air).
Of course, Amelio was responsible for the cloning fiasco.
Instead of realizing that Apple needed to control hardware and software (and thus selling MacOS motherboards to the cloners) Amelio made the retarded decision of making Apple engineers responsible for certifying every outside motherboard in the Mac universe.
It was that stupid decision that was responsible for the inevitable cancellation of cloning, not Jobs.
If Amelio had kept the Apple brand for upmarket Apple computers, and made a generic motherboard for cloners, Motorola, Power Computing and Umax might still be in the Mac market.
A market that might be three times bigger than it is now.
That's not true. There was nothing wrong with the idea of cloning the way it was done. The problem was that Apple's legal team made some major mistakes. The kind of mistakes they made earlier when allowing MS to use Apple's windowing IP. So you could blame Jobs for that one. That was the biggest blunder ever made in Apple's history, and one of the biggest in all of computing other than IBM's.
Cloning could have been done properly if the rules were set down correctly.
Actually, computer buyers are doing that across the board. The sales trends for companies that still make traditional desktops reflect this shift just as clearly. Apple has a long history of shipping their computers with more features on board than most PC companies did (standard ethernet, standard graphics, etc.), which made expansion less necessary. Now the whole industry is like that, and the traditional desktop exists more as a side effect of industry standardization than any actual need.
I purchased my MBP with more or less the rationalization described above. So in early 2008 I was one of the across the board individuals buying a laptop. The problem is or was that I purchased an iPhone a few months later and now after almost a year of use, operating system updates and a multitude of apps I wonder if that was the smart path to take.
The reality is that the iPhone takes care of a good portion of my portable needs and I suspect the 2GS would do even better. Now combine that with the idea that a 24 inch screen would be real nice and I have to wonder if we might see a trend in the opposite direction. I can see iPhone altering this trend especially as software is fleshed out and improved (both third party apps and Apples mobile OS).
That is not to say it is there for everybody yet, but I can see devices like iPhone developing in a direction that enables a move back to desktops and a corresponding uptick in sales.
Quote:
In fact, if it wasn't for enterprise sales propping up the old ATX box, the market might be even more heavily biased toward laptops and AIOs.
I see a lot of this at work. Grossly oversized Dell boxes taking up acres of space on the production floor.
Quote:
If a professional can pull an iMac out of the box, set it up, and do professional work on it without more than the usual number of compromises then it's a professional machine. It may not satisfy traditional desktop users, but people who actively prefer traditional desktops are rapidly becoming a niche.
I'm not to sure I agree with this 100%. I think many people would prefer the large screen advantages in a desktop if it was offered up in conjunction with a mobile solution. There is a lot to be said about a large screen and the serviceability of a desktop box.
Granted "serviceability and desktop box" should not be used in a discussion about Apples. The thing is the portables give us the hope that they can do the same thing for the desktops. Yes this would mean a whole new generation of iMacs, Minis and hopefully xMacs, but shouldn't be seen as impossible.
Quote:
Then you're in luck: Apple offers both, and they will cheerfully sell them to you. You'll end up spending more money for less power, but if you need a laptop and the MacBook Pro is powerful enough, it's worth the extra expense.
The Mac Book Pro is a very nice machine, typing on it right now, but I've quickly realized that it does limit you. Frankly in ways that are survivable but at the very least inconvenient. The biggest problem with laptops in general is the limited space for data, that is secondary store. Other than swapping out the CD for a second drive there is no elegant solution to constantly running out of disk space, a laptop just doesn't pass the mustard as a media machine.
The Mac Book Pro is a very nice machine, typing on it right now, but I've quickly realized that it does limit you. Frankly in ways that are survivable but at the very least inconvenient. The biggest problem with laptops in general is the limited space for data, that is secondary store. Other than swapping out the CD for a second drive there is no elegant solution to constantly running out of disk space, a laptop just doesn't pass the mustard as a media machine.
Dave
Just to address this last part, a Mini is an excellent media machine. It's small and flat. You can easily get same size boxes that sit under the computer that contain more HDD's, and more connectors, thus, it's expandable for media applications, but still compact and neat. A wireless keyboard and mouse allow control from the couch.
Just to address this last part, a Mini is an excellent media machine. It's small and flat. You can easily get same size boxes that sit under the computer that contain more HDD's, and more connectors, thus, it's expandable for media applications, but still compact and neat. A wireless keyboard and mouse allow control from the couch.
This can certainly work well for some applications but it is not the same thing as connecting via a high speed interface internal to the box. As storage continues to advance in connection speed the cheap way to connect it will be internally via the interface of choice at the time. Especially if we start to see a lot of stuff moving to the faster PCI Express interfaces, which things like SSD should really do.
Note too that I've been a fan of the Mini for sometime, though it isn't suitable to my needs at the moment. I really appreciate it as a well designed SFF machine. I'd be more inclined to buy if the had a tall version with extra room for internal storage. That simply because my current habits have me going through storage at a good clip. A lot of that being iTunes media. Yes I realize external disks can serve the data up but it is not my preferred way to go. A media machine needs space internally in my opinion.
This can certainly work well for some applications but it is not the same thing as connecting via a high speed interface internal to the box. As storage continues to advance in connection speed the cheap way to connect it will be internally via the interface of choice at the time. Especially if we start to see a lot of stuff moving to the faster PCI Express interfaces, which things like SSD should really do.
Note too that I've been a fan of the Mini for sometime, though it isn't suitable to my needs at the moment. I really appreciate it as a well designed SFF machine. I'd be more inclined to buy if the had a tall version with extra room for internal storage. That simply because my current habits have me going through storage at a good clip. A lot of that being iTunes media. Yes I realize external disks can serve the data up but it is not my preferred way to go. A media machine needs space internally in my opinion.
Dave
For use as a media machine, the fastest connections aren't needed. It has a FW 800 port which is just dandy for this purpose.
I don't really see internal as a big deal. In fact, I think this way is better. It's easier to move drives around, and add to the total. The machine looks great with a box or two underneath.
Well I hope so, at least in the sense of a Nehalem -derived- processor. Honestly though I'm not feeling real good about what Apple has up it's sleeve. We may get less than we are expecting.
I'm thinking the upcoming update will be Penryn, at least that's my pessimistic prediction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by palple
Well, this coming fall Nehalem chips are already rated at 45W, suitable for the iMac, and Q1 2010 Nehalem chips are rated rated in a range from 18W to 35W, suitable for the whole MacBook line (including the air).
And don't forget to subtract about 10 W because of Clarksfield's integrated northbridge and Arrandale's integrated GPU.
Of course, Amelio was responsible for the cloning fiasco.
Instead of realizing that Apple needed to control hardware and software (and thus selling MacOS motherboards to the cloners) Amelio made the retarded decision of making Apple engineers responsible for certifying every outside motherboard in the Mac universe.
It was that stupid decision that was responsible for the inevitable cancellation of cloning, not Jobs.
If Amelio had kept the Apple brand for upmarket Apple computers, and made a generic motherboard for cloners, Motorola, Power Computing and Umax might still be in the Mac market.
A market that might be three times bigger than it is now.
On the other hand, Apple was so clueless in that period that the users it lost to the cloners might have gone to windows instead. Beige Apple had to die so that it could be reborn under jobs.
Comments
It's obvious that you haven't used those Eizo's then. They're pretty good.
Not everyone wants to spend the extra $100 for the small improvement the Hp will give. Once both are calibrated, I doubt you could see the difference.
Your doubt would be wrong, but then I don't have your eyes and you don't have mine.
Your doubt would be wrong, but then I don't have your eyes and you don't have mine.
I've been doing this for a very long time. The differences between the better monitors when properly calibrated is very subtle. the new S-PVA panels have very good color. Where they differ is in viewing angle.
In your opinion, which 24" monitor has the most bang for the buck?
Your doubt would be wrong, but then I don't have your eyes and you don't have mine.
So you can tell between the various IPS and PVA panels types? I'm pretty sure that's a rare ability. As it is, it's hard finding people that can see the problems with TN.
I think that's his the generic stand-in for the computer a person bought that was probably assembled locally from off the shelf parts and sold locally.
Not quite, not too long ago you bought even name brand computers from a (way overpriced) independent dealer rather than an Apple store or a big box. They usually sucked when it came to selection.
They had to do that some time ago, but they weren't retail for a good while. I think eMachines was online only for a while, shifted to Best Buy and such, and Gateway bought them too.
I think that's what he meant as being the retail landscape back then. Retail computer stores weren't as attractive and had a lot more mom-and-pop size stores than big box really hasn't begun to take away their business
Yep.
Desktop sales are down because there are no longer any significant compromises involved in using a laptop as a primary machine for the majority of users, and they offer significant advantages for a lot more people as secondary machines. This is not a trend that will reverse, because the problem isn't power or expandability, it's portability. Even if Apple offered some wildly expandable desktop for $700 it would still be a big brick of a machine and a great many people would look at it and buy a MacBook: It's powerful enough, runs everything well enough, and you can throw it in your bag and take it with you.
That said, I would not be surprised if Apple reorganizes the desktop line to be somewhat parallel to the laptop line: White plastic with an adequate consumer-grade 20" display at the low end, aluminum with good 20" and 24" displays in the middle, and maybe pro-grade 8-bit displays at the top as the iMac evolves into a pro machine, chasing the Mac Pro farther and farther into its niche.
The only thing that is pushing the Mac Pro further into its nice is the $1200 in gradual price increases over the last 5 years. Having owned one, there is absolutely nothing pro about the iMac. If anything it holds them back and has frustrated a lot of traditional desktop buyers with all the things it couldn't do compared to their previous PowerMac. It combines all the disadvantages of both a desktop and laptop into one package for elegance and space saving.
If it does do one thing, that's drive up laptop sales. I don't see any point in owning it in lieu of a Macbook Pro with an external display. The Macbook Pro has a card reader, is (ironically) much easier to upgrade, and saves me the hassle of having to have two computers. If you're going to make a desktop that's as powerful as a laptop, just buy the laptop.
Not quite, not too long ago you bought even name brand computers from a (way overpriced) independent dealer rather than an Apple store or a big box.
Small independent shops is what I meant, but I don't know how many of them sold brand name computers, a lot of them did, but a lot sold of their own "white box" computers, as Mel called it.
That way of doing business is more expensive though, I don't know if it was necessarily overpriced, I don't think any of them made big profits. The big box stores barely manage to survive now, they make very low margins and the real profits are getting people to buy expensive services and accessories. Circuit City survived as long as they did only because of their extended warranties.
I
Many folks are waiting for Nehalem before buying either notebook or iMac. It represents a significant update. I've put off my MBP purchase until that time. I bought a mini because it represents a great value in Apple's line up.
Nehalem ??? Its not gonna happen fro many reasons most of all the heat . You will wait a long time .sorry
Small independent shops is what I meant, but I don't know how many of them sold brand name computers, a lot of them did, but a lot sold of their own "white box" computers, as Mel called it.
They were the only place I could (reliably) buy Macs until the Apple store showed up. Without direct web and retail sales, finding a Mac would still be a pain in the rear. Spindler and Amelio didn't believe in any of it.
The only thing that is pushing the Mac Pro further into its nice is the $1200 in gradual price increases over the last 5 years.
Or, declining sales had to be offset by a price increase, which Apple justified by turning the former desktop into a full-blown, no-compromises workstation (well, except for the lack of radiation hardening).
If [the iMac] does do one thing, that's drive up laptop sales.
Actually, computer buyers are doing that across the board. The sales trends for companies that still make traditional desktops reflect this shift just as clearly. Apple has a long history of shipping their computers with more features on board than most PC companies did (standard ethernet, standard graphics, etc.), which made expansion less necessary. Now the whole industry is like that, and the traditional desktop exists more as a side effect of industry standardization than any actual need.
In fact, if it wasn't for enterprise sales propping up the old ATX box, the market might be even more heavily biased toward laptops and AIOs.
If a professional can pull an iMac out of the box, set it up, and do professional work on it without more than the usual number of compromises then it's a professional machine. It may not satisfy traditional desktop users, but people who actively prefer traditional desktops are rapidly becoming a niche.
I don't see any point in owning it in lieu of a Macbook Pro with an external display.
Then you're in luck: Apple offers both, and they will cheerfully sell them to you. You'll end up spending more money for less power, but if you need a laptop and the MacBook Pro is powerful enough, it's worth the extra expense.
They were the only place I could (reliably) buy Macs until the Apple store showed up. Without direct web and retail sales, finding a Mac would still be a pain in the rear. Spindler and Amelio didn't believe in any of it.
While I blame Spindler for Apple's problems back then, as I lived through it, I really think we dump on Amelio too much.
He was called in when Apple was going through a very difficult period, the most difficult period, and he made some very difficult decisions that have been acknowledged as having saved Apple from an unalterable dive.
Was he a "visionary" the way some others were and are? Maybe not, but he laid the foundation for Apple's come-back. He was the first to recognize the disaster of Copeland and end the project. He realized that Apple had to take the very bold step and look outside the company for a new OS.
He made the first major cut-backs before jobs came back and made more.
AND, he was responsible for buying NEXT. He could have bought BE instead, which would have been a disaster. That would have been a safer step for him, as Gassée would not have been in the position to challenge him the way Jobs did as the founder of the company. Gassée was too greedy, but Apple still spent what was a huge amount on NEXT. It was a bet the company decision, and unlike anyone before, he made it. The others, both Scully and Spindler, allowed Copeland to go on for too long.
I think the guy deserves a lot of credit.
Instead of realizing that Apple needed to control hardware and software (and thus selling MacOS motherboards to the cloners) Amelio made the retarded decision of making Apple engineers responsible for certifying every outside motherboard in the Mac universe.
It was that stupid decision that was responsible for the inevitable cancellation of cloning, not Jobs.
If Amelio had kept the Apple brand for upmarket Apple computers, and made a generic motherboard for cloners, Motorola, Power Computing and Umax might still be in the Mac market.
A market that might be three times bigger than it is now.
Nehalem ??? Its not gonna happen fro many reasons most of all the heat . You will wait a long time .sorry
Well, this coming fall Nehalem chips are already rated at 45W, suitable for the iMac, and Q1 2010 Nehalem chips are rated rated in a range from 18W to 35W, suitable for the whole MacBook line (including the air).
Of course, Amelio was responsible for the cloning fiasco.
Instead of realizing that Apple needed to control hardware and software (and thus selling MacOS motherboards to the cloners) Amelio made the retarded decision of making Apple engineers responsible for certifying every outside motherboard in the Mac universe.
It was that stupid decision that was responsible for the inevitable cancellation of cloning, not Jobs.
If Amelio had kept the Apple brand for upmarket Apple computers, and made a generic motherboard for cloners, Motorola, Power Computing and Umax might still be in the Mac market.
A market that might be three times bigger than it is now.
That's not true. There was nothing wrong with the idea of cloning the way it was done. The problem was that Apple's legal team made some major mistakes. The kind of mistakes they made earlier when allowing MS to use Apple's windowing IP. So you could blame Jobs for that one. That was the biggest blunder ever made in Apple's history, and one of the biggest in all of computing other than IBM's.
Cloning could have been done properly if the rules were set down correctly.
Actually, computer buyers are doing that across the board. The sales trends for companies that still make traditional desktops reflect this shift just as clearly. Apple has a long history of shipping their computers with more features on board than most PC companies did (standard ethernet, standard graphics, etc.), which made expansion less necessary. Now the whole industry is like that, and the traditional desktop exists more as a side effect of industry standardization than any actual need.
I purchased my MBP with more or less the rationalization described above. So in early 2008 I was one of the across the board individuals buying a laptop. The problem is or was that I purchased an iPhone a few months later and now after almost a year of use, operating system updates and a multitude of apps I wonder if that was the smart path to take.
The reality is that the iPhone takes care of a good portion of my portable needs and I suspect the 2GS would do even better. Now combine that with the idea that a 24 inch screen would be real nice and I have to wonder if we might see a trend in the opposite direction. I can see iPhone altering this trend especially as software is fleshed out and improved (both third party apps and Apples mobile OS).
That is not to say it is there for everybody yet, but I can see devices like iPhone developing in a direction that enables a move back to desktops and a corresponding uptick in sales.
In fact, if it wasn't for enterprise sales propping up the old ATX box, the market might be even more heavily biased toward laptops and AIOs.
I see a lot of this at work. Grossly oversized Dell boxes taking up acres of space on the production floor.
If a professional can pull an iMac out of the box, set it up, and do professional work on it without more than the usual number of compromises then it's a professional machine. It may not satisfy traditional desktop users, but people who actively prefer traditional desktops are rapidly becoming a niche.
I'm not to sure I agree with this 100%. I think many people would prefer the large screen advantages in a desktop if it was offered up in conjunction with a mobile solution. There is a lot to be said about a large screen and the serviceability of a desktop box.
Granted "serviceability and desktop box" should not be used in a discussion about Apples. The thing is the portables give us the hope that they can do the same thing for the desktops. Yes this would mean a whole new generation of iMacs, Minis and hopefully xMacs, but shouldn't be seen as impossible.
Then you're in luck: Apple offers both, and they will cheerfully sell them to you. You'll end up spending more money for less power, but if you need a laptop and the MacBook Pro is powerful enough, it's worth the extra expense.
The Mac Book Pro is a very nice machine, typing on it right now, but I've quickly realized that it does limit you. Frankly in ways that are survivable but at the very least inconvenient. The biggest problem with laptops in general is the limited space for data, that is secondary store. Other than swapping out the CD for a second drive there is no elegant solution to constantly running out of disk space, a laptop just doesn't pass the mustard as a media machine.
Dave
The Mac Book Pro is a very nice machine, typing on it right now, but I've quickly realized that it does limit you. Frankly in ways that are survivable but at the very least inconvenient. The biggest problem with laptops in general is the limited space for data, that is secondary store. Other than swapping out the CD for a second drive there is no elegant solution to constantly running out of disk space, a laptop just doesn't pass the mustard as a media machine.
Dave
Just to address this last part, a Mini is an excellent media machine. It's small and flat. You can easily get same size boxes that sit under the computer that contain more HDD's, and more connectors, thus, it's expandable for media applications, but still compact and neat. A wireless keyboard and mouse allow control from the couch.
Just to address this last part, a Mini is an excellent media machine. It's small and flat. You can easily get same size boxes that sit under the computer that contain more HDD's, and more connectors, thus, it's expandable for media applications, but still compact and neat. A wireless keyboard and mouse allow control from the couch.
This can certainly work well for some applications but it is not the same thing as connecting via a high speed interface internal to the box. As storage continues to advance in connection speed the cheap way to connect it will be internally via the interface of choice at the time. Especially if we start to see a lot of stuff moving to the faster PCI Express interfaces, which things like SSD should really do.
Note too that I've been a fan of the Mini for sometime, though it isn't suitable to my needs at the moment. I really appreciate it as a well designed SFF machine. I'd be more inclined to buy if the had a tall version with extra room for internal storage. That simply because my current habits have me going through storage at a good clip. A lot of that being iTunes media. Yes I realize external disks can serve the data up but it is not my preferred way to go. A media machine needs space internally in my opinion.
Dave
This can certainly work well for some applications but it is not the same thing as connecting via a high speed interface internal to the box. As storage continues to advance in connection speed the cheap way to connect it will be internally via the interface of choice at the time. Especially if we start to see a lot of stuff moving to the faster PCI Express interfaces, which things like SSD should really do.
Note too that I've been a fan of the Mini for sometime, though it isn't suitable to my needs at the moment. I really appreciate it as a well designed SFF machine. I'd be more inclined to buy if the had a tall version with extra room for internal storage. That simply because my current habits have me going through storage at a good clip. A lot of that being iTunes media. Yes I realize external disks can serve the data up but it is not my preferred way to go. A media machine needs space internally in my opinion.
Dave
For use as a media machine, the fastest connections aren't needed. It has a FW 800 port which is just dandy for this purpose.
I don't really see internal as a big deal. In fact, I think this way is better. It's easier to move drives around, and add to the total. The machine looks great with a box or two underneath.
Well I hope so, at least in the sense of a Nehalem -derived- processor. Honestly though I'm not feeling real good about what Apple has up it's sleeve. We may get less than we are expecting.
I'm thinking the upcoming update will be Penryn, at least that's my pessimistic prediction.
Well, this coming fall Nehalem chips are already rated at 45W, suitable for the iMac, and Q1 2010 Nehalem chips are rated rated in a range from 18W to 35W, suitable for the whole MacBook line (including the air).
And don't forget to subtract about 10 W because of Clarksfield's integrated northbridge and Arrandale's integrated GPU.
Of course, Amelio was responsible for the cloning fiasco.
Instead of realizing that Apple needed to control hardware and software (and thus selling MacOS motherboards to the cloners) Amelio made the retarded decision of making Apple engineers responsible for certifying every outside motherboard in the Mac universe.
It was that stupid decision that was responsible for the inevitable cancellation of cloning, not Jobs.
If Amelio had kept the Apple brand for upmarket Apple computers, and made a generic motherboard for cloners, Motorola, Power Computing and Umax might still be in the Mac market.
A market that might be three times bigger than it is now.
On the other hand, Apple was so clueless in that period that the users it lost to the cloners might have gone to windows instead. Beige Apple had to die so that it could be reborn under jobs.