It's no secret that mini sales have been down, and declining, while iMac sales (and all other mac sales) have been up.
Source?
You and others say that Mac mini sales have been down but since Apple doesn't report sales of individual Mac models; only desktop sales vs. portable sales, how do you know?
I do not have a source but will add the following observation. The Mac mini definitely is not getting the press/attention it did when first launched because it no longer has that "hot off the press" feeling to it. This might be one reason that the mini sales "appear" to be declining - people just aren't talking about it like they used to talk about it. For those replacing their computer all-together, the iMac is becoming more and more the option to choose especially with the price point/feature ratio set of the current iteration of the Mac mini going up, and the price point/feature set ratio of the iMac going down. Bottom line: today's mini gives you a little more computer for 10-20% more on the price tag compared with the PPC model and the new iMac gives a whole lot more computer (and monitor) for a the same/lower price than previous models.
I believe that Apple would like to see a world flooded with iMacs, not necessarily just any Mac. Apple has made the iMac, in my opinion, into the most attractive and relatively affordable Apple computer out there.
I like my mini lean, clean and mean. And I'd be glad to buy one every three years to keep up with technology. An iMac turnover rate like that would be way more expensive. I wish Apple kept a feature parity between iMac and the mini to satisfy both customer types. There are lots of people like me who never want to go back to the iMac.
You all are right, the iMac is probably selling much better than the Mac mini. It gets all the glitz; placement in TV shows and movies and more advertising. It is after all, Apple's flagship model. That doesn't persuade me that the mini is no longer selling well or that for those who prefer it, the mini is not the better computer.
I've read/heard plenty of complaints about the new iMacs and their unexpected freezes, poor quality (and ugh, glossy) displays, lousy GPUs, non-upgradability, etc. For those reasons the iMac isn't exactly the best computer on the market. And as the endless argument goes, you're forced to buy a display you might not need with an iMac, then buy a different one when it's time to move on to something else.
So forgive me if I react poorly to a comment that says "anyone with half a brain will buy an iMac or AppleTV instead of a Mac mini." Personally, I would feel like a fool if I bought either an iMac or an AppleTV, when the Mac mini suits my needs better than either one. (And a Mac mini shouldn't even be compared to AppleTV, which is not a Macintosh computer and doesn't even begin to do what a Mac can do.)
I've read/heard plenty of complaints about the new iMacs and their unexpected freezes, poor quality (and ugh, glossy) displays, lousy GPUs, non-upgradability, etc. For those reasons the iMac isn't exactly the best computer on the market. And as the endless argument goes, you're forced to buy a display you might not need with an iMac, then buy a different one when it's time to move on to something else.
.)
I like the looks and functionality of the iMac; however, as you point out, 'there will come a time when you will have to buy a new display'.
That resonates. Either the display or computer will eventually fail or become obsolete, forcing the user to upgrade and discard one or the other - maybe a perfectly good item. It would make me think twice at that point - should I put myself in that same predicament at some later date - having to dump the computer or display - again. When will this catch-22 end? If I decide to purchase an iMac, it will be with the understanding that catch-22 will be a factor as long as I continue to buy AIO's. Therefore, the AIO becomes more expensive than a headless computer - more expensive than the initial purchase price. We will have to take that into consideration and add some x factor into the cost. What you see is NOT what you get.
Another factor: monitors are becoming less and less expensive. Will the AIO's always have that reduction in cost? We'll be at the mercy of Apple's marketing, rather than the real world markets responding to their costs and the power of purchasers. Apple operates in a world of their own and does not necessarily respond to market pressure. That's evident in their arrogance in giving their loyal fans what Apple wants to foist on them and not what the fans want. I'm not going into that. That's been rehashed ad nauseam.
Apple displays are more expensive than their competitors and in some cases not as good.
Another factor: monitors are becoming less and less expensive. Will the AIO's always have that reduction in cost? We'll be at the mercy of Apple's marketing, rather than the real world markets responding to their costs and the power of purchasers.
Keep in mind, however, that instead of lowering the price of the iMac by x dollars to follow the falling cost of components, Apple will almost certainly keep the same price points (a price point which has worked well for years and years) and simply adopt newer and better technology: in this case, the LED display. With this strategy, Apple can always claim that they offer "the best personal computer" to its users at the same proven price point.
The trouble with the mini is that it was born at a price point of $499 and $599 for the two models, and after only minor upgrades has had its price raised - not because of higher quality parts or necessarily because it is a better computer now than what it once was (which is true - the mini has become stronger) but because it now fills more niches that its original intention.
The original mini was the ultimate "switching" tool, a tool that Apple was going to use to capitalize on the iPod halo effect and win over new users at a low and very competitive price. What has happened is that even lifelong and loyal mac users have taken interest in the mini because they have found opportunities to use the mini to meet their computing/entertainment goals (from business use to network server to home media/theater server).
Today the mini remains a nice computer; t is, after all, a mac, but Apple needs the attention of the media/masses on the iMac to continue the mind-share momentum.
The trouble with the mini is that it was born at a price point of $499 and $599 for the two models, and after only minor upgrades has had its price raised - not because of higher quality parts or necessarily because it is a better computer now than what it once was (which is true - the mini has become stronger) but because it now fills more niches that its original intention.
While many would disagree, I think the low-end $599 mini is still a pretty good deal. When comparing it to the original $499 model, for the extra $100 you're now getting Airport and Bluetooth, dual processors, a bigger hard drive, more memory and many more ports. Some might say that all of this could still be sold at the original price, but it's a decent value, for Apple.
The $799 mini on the other hand is overpriced by $100. All you're getting is a Superdrive, minimally faster processors and bigger hard disk. The value of that is $100 at best.
On future minis, I'd like to see HDMI (since so many people use it as a HTPC), N wireless, eSATA, dual-link DVI (with better GPU) and perhaps eventually, a Blu-ray option. It certainly doesn't need to be any smaller.
They should fuse AppleTV and Mini into the same machine.
Intel C2D 2.0Ghz, 1GB, 80GB, Intel GMA X3K.
Give it at least a Combo drive to watch DVD, CD and burn Audio CD.
Maybe even make a second HD capable model with a HD-DVD, Bluray Drive.
Display, KB and Mouse can remain optional as the purpose is to use it as a Home Media PC. Just include an Apple Remote.
Give it Component Video, Optical/Analog Audio IO, and HDMI connections.
Airport and/or Ethernet should find shared iTunes libraries across the network and be able to stream content.
Would be able to accept USB/BT KB/Mouse to use as a normal computer.
Mini: $299
Mini HD: $499
No they shouldn't and there are a few reasons why.
Number 1 = cost. Apple's current 40GB Apple TV costs $299. It uses a 1 GHz Pentium M Crofton Processor, and has a mere 256MB of RAM. How do you suppose Apple upgrades the current Apple TV to 80GB, the processor to a 2.0GHz, the RAM (X4) to 1GB, and gives it a combo drive, all while being able to magically sell the device at the same $299. They wouldn't be able to, and it's essential the Apple TV remains somewhat affordable if Apples it to sell in the millions.
2. How would they market the device, as a TV media streamer or as a small desktop Mac? It strikes me as very un-Apple-like to present a product like this. You'd be surprised how stupid some consumers can be.
No, I think they should make the Mac mini another bit more powerful, maybe replace the plastic with black glass, give it Superdrives across the board, and make the form factor even a little bit smaller. Possibly a dedicated graphics card too, but that's probably being a bit too ambitious.
The Apple TV? As I have been saying for a few months now; add a (read only, costs less) slot-load optical DVD drive, keep it as close to the original size as you can, even if that means re-engineering the whole thing to make the existing components even more compact. Add HD to the iTunes store and market the device as a replacement for your existing DVD player too. One device (hopefully very similar size), cleaner home media set-up, plays all your existing content as well as your future-downloadable content. Much more practical as your under-the-TV hub than version 1.0, and no confusion as it's 'not a computer'. Well it is inside, but the average Joe will never know .
All while keep costs down, and increasing the hard drives capacity. 80GB with DVD slot $299 (wont sell if it's any more expensive), & 250GB with slot DVD $399, conceivable given the rapid rate the costs of hard drives are coming down by, and the economy of scale it would get as a product as a result of being a much more useful.
Goes without saying they could do a slot-load Blu-Ray version of Apple TV in the future, but I suspect by the time they think about doing that, the momentum of the iTunes Movie store will stop them in their tracks, as it would have such a vast collation of HD movies, and bandwidth will be fast enough that people will prefer downloading movies over buying disks.
im wanting to buy the $799 Mac mini to hook up to my new TV in my room, i was wondering if there would be any changes, updates etc. in the next 6 months? also if there might be a price drop without loosing any fuctions. and also what is the n networking?
Apple miscalculated thinking mini buyers would migrate to iMacs. Conversely, we are staying put. Some badmouth the mini from afar (cheap graphics card, no n-wifi, whatever) but try and find real 'my mini died' critical stuff -- you can't. So here we are; PC Switchers are not going from mini to iMac and old iMac owners are taking a new look at minis. How will Apple deal with this? Obviously, they will keep mini's refresh cycle well behind their flagship for a while. Or just sink the mini.
...i was wondering if there would be any changes, updates etc. in the next 6 months? also if there might be a price drop without loosing any fuctions. and also what is the n networking?
The specs of the mini were just bumped slightly in August. So unless it's being discontinued or merged with AppleTV when Leopard is released, I wouldn't expect anything to change soon.
N-wireless is a faster version of 802.11 wi-fi which the mini does not have. All other Macs and even AppleTV have it. It's baffling why Apple left it out of the mini. Just one more way to keep it crippled, I suppose. Can't have it selling too well, you know.
N-wireless is a faster version of 802.11 wi-fi which the mini does not have. All other Macs and even AppleTV have it. It's baffling why Apple left it out of the mini.
No it's not, they make more money on their other computer, we know where Apple's interests lie.
The specs of the mini were just bumped slightly in August. So unless it's being discontinued or merged with AppleTV when Leopard is released, I wouldn't expect anything to change soon.
N-wireless is a faster version of 802.11 wi-fi which the mini does not have. All other Macs and even AppleTV have it. It's baffling why Apple left it out of the mini. Just one more way to keep it crippled, I suppose. Can't have it selling too well, you know.
Dave,
Do you know anything about the AirPort Extreme 802.11N Enabler. I got the following from the Apple Store site:
If you have a Mac with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor (except the 17-inch, 1.83GHz iMac) or a Mac Pro with AirPort Extreme, you can enable it to access an 802.11n wireless network using the AirPort Extreme 802.11n Enabler software.
Price: $1.99
Many Mac computers with an Intel Core 2 Duo and all Mac Pro computers with AirPort Extreme can be enabled to access 802.11n-based wireless networks. If you purchased one of these Macs, you can use the AirPort Extreme 802.11n Enabler software to activate this advanced wireless capability.
I have a friend (EE PHd) who claims that you don't need an N router to send to an N-wireless. He says that a G router/switch will do the job just as well. Since the G Airport is cheaper, why buy the N Extreme?
I have a friend (EE PHd) who claims that you don't need an N router to send to an N-wireless. He says that a G router/switch will do the job just as well. Since the G Airport is cheaper, why buy the N Extreme?
Any thoughts on this?
Whether he's an EE PhD is not so much of concern. What's of greater concern is how much he knows about 802.11n.
SInce n uses multiple channels, it's not going to be able to do its magic with a single-channel g router. They both use the same modulation and n is certainly backwards compatible with g routers, but you're not going to get the "MIMO." If you aren't concerned with that, then the g-router will be fine. However, if you have more than 2 or 3 devices on your wireless net, n will give you a nice performance improvement, especially if you're doing high-rate stuff, like data transfers or streaming A/V.
Do you know anything about the AirPort Extreme 802.11N Enabler. I got the following from the Apple Store site:
If you have a Mac with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor (except the 17-inch, 1.83GHz iMac) or a Mac Pro with AirPort Extreme, you can enable it to access an 802.11n wireless network using the AirPort Extreme 802.11n Enabler software.
Price: $1.99
Many Mac computers with an Intel Core 2 Duo and all Mac Pro computers with AirPort Extreme can be enabled to access 802.11n-based wireless networks. If you purchased one of these Macs, you can use the AirPort Extreme 802.11n Enabler software to activate this advanced wireless capability.
sequitur,
Thanks for the info. Apparently the Mac mini is excluded. I was quite interested after reading your post so I dug out the disc that came with my Airport Extreme "N" and ran the installer again. I then found the 802.11n Enabler in my library/receipts folder and tried to run it. At that point I got an alert that says my "computer does not meet the hardware requirements for this update."
So while some of the Mac hardware with C2D processors can be updated, the mini isn't among them. There's a comment on page 4 of the customer reviews for the enabler at the store, where someone has purchased the enabler for $1.99 and it doesn't work on his mini either. At least I didn't pay for it to find out it doesn't work.
Thanks for the info. Apparently the Mac mini is excluded. I was quite interested after reading your post so I dug out the disc that came with my Airport Extreme "N" and ran the installer again. I then found the 802.11n Enabler in my library/receipts folder and tried to run it. At that point I got an alert that says my "computer does not meet the hardware requirements for this update."
So while some of the Mac hardware with C2D processors can be updated, the mini isn't among them. There's a comment on page 4 of the customer reviews for the enabler at the store, where someone has purchased the enabler for $1.99 and it doesn't work on his mini either. At least I didn't pay for it to find out it doesn't work.
I didn't read past the first page. That'll teach me to read ALL the reviews.
Your post saved me some aggravation (if I buy a mini in January.)
Comments
It's no secret that mini sales have been down, and declining, while iMac sales (and all other mac sales) have been up.
Source?
You and others say that Mac mini sales have been down but since Apple doesn't report sales of individual Mac models; only desktop sales vs. portable sales, how do you know?
I believe that Apple would like to see a world flooded with iMacs, not necessarily just any Mac. Apple has made the iMac, in my opinion, into the most attractive and relatively affordable Apple computer out there.
I've read/heard plenty of complaints about the new iMacs and their unexpected freezes, poor quality (and ugh, glossy) displays, lousy GPUs, non-upgradability, etc. For those reasons the iMac isn't exactly the best computer on the market. And as the endless argument goes, you're forced to buy a display you might not need with an iMac, then buy a different one when it's time to move on to something else.
So forgive me if I react poorly to a comment that says "anyone with half a brain will buy an iMac or AppleTV instead of a Mac mini." Personally, I would feel like a fool if I bought either an iMac or an AppleTV, when the Mac mini suits my needs better than either one. (And a Mac mini shouldn't even be compared to AppleTV, which is not a Macintosh computer and doesn't even begin to do what a Mac can do.)
I've read/heard plenty of complaints about the new iMacs and their unexpected freezes, poor quality (and ugh, glossy) displays, lousy GPUs, non-upgradability, etc. For those reasons the iMac isn't exactly the best computer on the market. And as the endless argument goes, you're forced to buy a display you might not need with an iMac, then buy a different one when it's time to move on to something else.
.)
I like the looks and functionality of the iMac; however, as you point out, 'there will come a time when you will have to buy a new display'.
That resonates. Either the display or computer will eventually fail or become obsolete, forcing the user to upgrade and discard one or the other - maybe a perfectly good item. It would make me think twice at that point - should I put myself in that same predicament at some later date - having to dump the computer or display - again. When will this catch-22 end? If I decide to purchase an iMac, it will be with the understanding that catch-22 will be a factor as long as I continue to buy AIO's. Therefore, the AIO becomes more expensive than a headless computer - more expensive than the initial purchase price. We will have to take that into consideration and add some x factor into the cost. What you see is NOT what you get.
Another factor: monitors are becoming less and less expensive. Will the AIO's always have that reduction in cost? We'll be at the mercy of Apple's marketing, rather than the real world markets responding to their costs and the power of purchasers. Apple operates in a world of their own and does not necessarily respond to market pressure. That's evident in their arrogance in giving their loyal fans what Apple wants to foist on them and not what the fans want. I'm not going into that. That's been rehashed ad nauseam.
Apple displays are more expensive than their competitors and in some cases not as good.
Viva the headless computer!!
Another factor: monitors are becoming less and less expensive. Will the AIO's always have that reduction in cost? We'll be at the mercy of Apple's marketing, rather than the real world markets responding to their costs and the power of purchasers.
Keep in mind, however, that instead of lowering the price of the iMac by x dollars to follow the falling cost of components, Apple will almost certainly keep the same price points (a price point which has worked well for years and years) and simply adopt newer and better technology: in this case, the LED display. With this strategy, Apple can always claim that they offer "the best personal computer" to its users at the same proven price point.
The trouble with the mini is that it was born at a price point of $499 and $599 for the two models, and after only minor upgrades has had its price raised - not because of higher quality parts or necessarily because it is a better computer now than what it once was (which is true - the mini has become stronger) but because it now fills more niches that its original intention.
The original mini was the ultimate "switching" tool, a tool that Apple was going to use to capitalize on the iPod halo effect and win over new users at a low and very competitive price. What has happened is that even lifelong and loyal mac users have taken interest in the mini because they have found opportunities to use the mini to meet their computing/entertainment goals (from business use to network server to home media/theater server).
Today the mini remains a nice computer; t is, after all, a mac, but Apple needs the attention of the media/masses on the iMac to continue the mind-share momentum.
The trouble with the mini is that it was born at a price point of $499 and $599 for the two models, and after only minor upgrades has had its price raised - not because of higher quality parts or necessarily because it is a better computer now than what it once was (which is true - the mini has become stronger) but because it now fills more niches that its original intention.
While many would disagree, I think the low-end $599 mini is still a pretty good deal. When comparing it to the original $499 model, for the extra $100 you're now getting Airport and Bluetooth, dual processors, a bigger hard drive, more memory and many more ports. Some might say that all of this could still be sold at the original price, but it's a decent value, for Apple.
The $799 mini on the other hand is overpriced by $100. All you're getting is a Superdrive, minimally faster processors and bigger hard disk. The value of that is $100 at best.
On future minis, I'd like to see HDMI (since so many people use it as a HTPC), N wireless, eSATA, dual-link DVI (with better GPU) and perhaps eventually, a Blu-ray option. It certainly doesn't need to be any smaller.
They should fuse AppleTV and Mini into the same machine.
Intel C2D 2.0Ghz, 1GB, 80GB, Intel GMA X3K.
Give it at least a Combo drive to watch DVD, CD and burn Audio CD.
Maybe even make a second HD capable model with a HD-DVD, Bluray Drive.
Display, KB and Mouse can remain optional as the purpose is to use it as a Home Media PC. Just include an Apple Remote.
Give it Component Video, Optical/Analog Audio IO, and HDMI connections.
Airport and/or Ethernet should find shared iTunes libraries across the network and be able to stream content.
Would be able to accept USB/BT KB/Mouse to use as a normal computer.
Mini: $299
Mini HD: $499
No they shouldn't and there are a few reasons why.
Number 1 = cost. Apple's current 40GB Apple TV costs $299. It uses a 1 GHz Pentium M Crofton Processor, and has a mere 256MB of RAM. How do you suppose Apple upgrades the current Apple TV to 80GB, the processor to a 2.0GHz, the RAM (X4) to 1GB, and gives it a combo drive, all while being able to magically sell the device at the same $299. They wouldn't be able to, and it's essential the Apple TV remains somewhat affordable if Apples it to sell in the millions.
2. How would they market the device, as a TV media streamer or as a small desktop Mac? It strikes me as very un-Apple-like to present a product like this. You'd be surprised how stupid some consumers can be.
No, I think they should make the Mac mini another bit more powerful, maybe replace the plastic with black glass, give it Superdrives across the board, and make the form factor even a little bit smaller. Possibly a dedicated graphics card too, but that's probably being a bit too ambitious.
The Apple TV? As I have been saying for a few months now; add a (read only, costs less) slot-load optical DVD drive, keep it as close to the original size as you can, even if that means re-engineering the whole thing to make the existing components even more compact. Add HD to the iTunes store and market the device as a replacement for your existing DVD player too. One device (hopefully very similar size), cleaner home media set-up, plays all your existing content as well as your future-downloadable content. Much more practical as your under-the-TV hub than version 1.0, and no confusion as it's 'not a computer'. Well it is inside, but the average Joe will never know
All while keep costs down, and increasing the hard drives capacity. 80GB with DVD slot $299 (wont sell if it's any more expensive), & 250GB with slot DVD $399, conceivable given the rapid rate the costs of hard drives are coming down by, and the economy of scale it would get as a product as a result of being a much more useful.
Goes without saying they could do a slot-load Blu-Ray version of Apple TV in the future, but I suspect by the time they think about doing that, the momentum of the iTunes Movie store will stop them in their tracks, as it would have such a vast collation of HD movies, and bandwidth will be fast enough that people will prefer downloading movies over buying disks.
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/we...omments/15106/
i just found this article. it sounds just like what i would buy especially if it cost less than current mini!
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/we...omments/15106/
Not a very reliable website yet attractive idea. Smaller computer (Nano) = cheaper computer? 500 bucks with a Leopard inside. I'll jump on it!
...i was wondering if there would be any changes, updates etc. in the next 6 months? also if there might be a price drop without loosing any fuctions. and also what is the n networking?
The specs of the mini were just bumped slightly in August. So unless it's being discontinued or merged with AppleTV when Leopard is released, I wouldn't expect anything to change soon.
N-wireless is a faster version of 802.11 wi-fi which the mini does not have. All other Macs and even AppleTV have it. It's baffling why Apple left it out of the mini. Just one more way to keep it crippled, I suppose. Can't have it selling too well, you know.
N-wireless is a faster version of 802.11 wi-fi which the mini does not have. All other Macs and even AppleTV have it. It's baffling why Apple left it out of the mini.
No it's not, they make more money on their other computer, we know where Apple's interests lie.
The specs of the mini were just bumped slightly in August. So unless it's being discontinued or merged with AppleTV when Leopard is released, I wouldn't expect anything to change soon.
N-wireless is a faster version of 802.11 wi-fi which the mini does not have. All other Macs and even AppleTV have it. It's baffling why Apple left it out of the mini. Just one more way to keep it crippled, I suppose. Can't have it selling too well, you know.
Dave,
Do you know anything about the AirPort Extreme 802.11N Enabler. I got the following from the Apple Store site:
If you have a Mac with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor (except the 17-inch, 1.83GHz iMac) or a Mac Pro with AirPort Extreme, you can enable it to access an 802.11n wireless network using the AirPort Extreme 802.11n Enabler software.
Price: $1.99
Many Mac computers with an Intel Core 2 Duo and all Mac Pro computers with AirPort Extreme can be enabled to access 802.11n-based wireless networks. If you purchased one of these Macs, you can use the AirPort Extreme 802.11n Enabler software to activate this advanced wireless capability.
Any thoughts on this?
I have a friend (EE PHd) who claims that you don't need an N router to send to an N-wireless. He says that a G router/switch will do the job just as well. Since the G Airport is cheaper, why buy the N Extreme?
Any thoughts on this?
Whether he's an EE PhD is not so much of concern. What's of greater concern is how much he knows about 802.11n.
SInce n uses multiple channels, it's not going to be able to do its magic with a single-channel g router. They both use the same modulation and n is certainly backwards compatible with g routers, but you're not going to get the "MIMO." If you aren't concerned with that, then the g-router will be fine. However, if you have more than 2 or 3 devices on your wireless net, n will give you a nice performance improvement, especially if you're doing high-rate stuff, like data transfers or streaming A/V.
Dave,
Do you know anything about the AirPort Extreme 802.11N Enabler. I got the following from the Apple Store site:
If you have a Mac with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor (except the 17-inch, 1.83GHz iMac) or a Mac Pro with AirPort Extreme, you can enable it to access an 802.11n wireless network using the AirPort Extreme 802.11n Enabler software.
Price: $1.99
Many Mac computers with an Intel Core 2 Duo and all Mac Pro computers with AirPort Extreme can be enabled to access 802.11n-based wireless networks. If you purchased one of these Macs, you can use the AirPort Extreme 802.11n Enabler software to activate this advanced wireless capability.
sequitur,
Thanks for the info. Apparently the Mac mini is excluded. I was quite interested after reading your post so I dug out the disc that came with my Airport Extreme "N" and ran the installer again. I then found the 802.11n Enabler in my library/receipts folder and tried to run it. At that point I got an alert that says my "computer does not meet the hardware requirements for this update."
So while some of the Mac hardware with C2D processors can be updated, the mini isn't among them. There's a comment on page 4 of the customer reviews for the enabler at the store, where someone has purchased the enabler for $1.99 and it doesn't work on his mini either. At least I didn't pay for it to find out it doesn't work.
sequitur,
Thanks for the info. Apparently the Mac mini is excluded. I was quite interested after reading your post so I dug out the disc that came with my Airport Extreme "N" and ran the installer again. I then found the 802.11n Enabler in my library/receipts folder and tried to run it. At that point I got an alert that says my "computer does not meet the hardware requirements for this update."
So while some of the Mac hardware with C2D processors can be updated, the mini isn't among them. There's a comment on page 4 of the customer reviews for the enabler at the store, where someone has purchased the enabler for $1.99 and it doesn't work on his mini either. At least I didn't pay for it to find out it doesn't work.
I didn't read past the first page. That'll teach me to read ALL the reviews.
Your post saved me some aggravation (if I buy a mini in January.)