Really? They say "Eating our words"... I'd say that's a suggestion they were wrong. I don't think they really need to say more, it's not like they're reading all of our posts.
Hopefully the new mini redesign will adopt a more user-upgradable design, rather than stabbing it with putty knives!
If I was a betting man (I used to be - scratch cards - a mugs game) I would say the mini will have a similar specification to the macbook. That's a realistic forsight.
I cannot see the mac mini having a dramatic design change and will not be user upgradable.
When the new machine is released, I cannot see myself buying it unless it is user upgradable.
Sorry folks, I am hoping in vain for a machine (xmac) that fits in the middle of a mac pro and a mac mini.
Hopefully the new mini redesign will adopt a more user-upgradable design, rather than stabbing it with putty knives!
I don't find the putty knife thing to be any harder than removing a half dozen screws.
Obviously, upgrading a mini is much harder than upgrading a Mac Pro. Tiny components make it that way.
Unfortunately, I don't think Apple wants us upgrading our computers. They want us to buy new ones every year. The minis are much like the iMacs in that respect.
Unfortunately, I don't think Apple wants us upgrading our computers. They want us to buy new ones every year. The minis are much like the iMacs in that respect.
Ignoring the suggestion that Apple "wants" people to buy a new computer every year, how many people really buy a new computer every year?
Since 2001 I've owned both a laptop and a desktop Mac. I replace each about every two years so it ends up being approximately one new computer each year. The old ones are sold or given away.
If I was a betting man (I used to be - scratch cards - a mugs game) I would say the mini will have a similar specification to the macbook. That's a realistic forsight.
I am guessing (and hoping for) the same.
Quote:
When the new machine is released, I cannot see myself buying it unless it is user upgradable.
Agreed - a MacBook-like upgrade path and I will be sold.
Quote:
Sorry folks, I am hoping in vain for a machine (xmac) that fits in the middle of a mac pro and a mac mini.
Hmmm I can't say that I want more than a Mac Mini with user-upgradeable HD and memory (and possibly optical drive). This whole graphics card lark is not a worry for me. I'm not a game player any more (hence having a Mac...)
Agreed - a MacBook-like upgrade path and I will be sold.
Hmmm I can't say that I want more than a Mac Mini with user-upgradeable HD and memory (and possibly optical drive). This whole graphics card lark is not a worry for me. I'm not a game player any more (hence having a Mac...)
For me, it's down to the ease of every year or so upgrading the hard drive to a better model. For instance, my mark 1 macbook had a stock 60gb hard disk, which is laughable when you consider upgrading the operating system, then downgrading the operating system (vista with bootcampt), installing all you programmes etc, etc. Fairly soon, its going to be jam packed.
I recently changed that to a 200gb 7200gb 16mb cache seagate, and it makes a hell of a difference. I just wish people could see the benefits of having such convenience.
Okay, fair enough, the average person will buy a machine and probably won't upgrade it, because they won't know how, to the minority of people having a putty-knifeless entry method would be such a bonus.
For me, it's down to the ease of every year or so upgrading the hard drive to a better model. For instance, my mark 1 macbook had a stock 60gb hard disk, which is laughable when you consider upgrading the operating system, then downgrading the operating system (vista with bootcampt), installing all you programmes etc, etc. Fairly soon, its going to be jam packed.
Absolutely. I "future proofed" mine with 100GB HD. Laughable!
Quote:
Okay, fair enough, the average person will buy a machine and probably won't upgrade it, because they won't know how, to the minority of people having a putty-knifeless entry method would be such a bonus.
Agreed. And what you've described is exactly what the next Minis should (and hopefully will) have. Thing is, a lot of the xMac argument surrounds full-sized parts (3.5-inch HD etc) and a graphics card. These are not things which bother me in terms of upgrade path. All I'm concerned with - like you I believe - is upgradeable storage (RAM and HD).
But to be honest, even the stuff which you'd think isn't upgradeable in something like the MacBook, the wireless speed, can be upgraded if you don't mind getting your hands a bit dirty.
Absolutely. I "future proofed" mine with 100GB HD. Laughable!
Agreed. And what you've described is exactly what the next Minis should (and hopefully will) have. Thing is, a lot of the xMac argument surrounds full-sized parts (3.5-inch HD etc) and a graphics card. These are not things which bother me in terms of upgrade path. All I'm concerned with - like you I believe - is upgradeable storage (RAM and HD).
But to be honest, even the stuff which you'd think isn't upgradeable in something like the MacBook, the wireless speed, can be upgraded if you don't mind getting your hands a bit dirty.
Mind you jowie74:
From the point of view of Joe Blogs who would go into PC World or other computer retailers, to buy a computer and are confronted with the various machines i.e. emachine, ei system, hp, sony, packered bell (knackered bell) - an apple computer is becoming a more viable option.
One of the selling points to any pc is the ability to upgrade - to "futureproof" their computer (to quote yourself). People now-a-days are looking for a PC sized system in an apple where they can have multiple 3.5 inch hard disks and where they can swap out dvd drives for blue ray, and they most definitely want the ability to upgrade the graphics card without going to the lengths of a macpro size or money.
Then the old arguement "if you want to play games, buy a PC". That's all very good and well, however Apple have been working closely with EA Arts to release games and publisise this openly on the mac.
But who in their right mind is going to spend £1400 on a mac pro to play games, or £800 on an imac, which is reasonable amount for a good system, only to find six to eight months down the line their gaming system is out of date, and because of design limitations are snookered to upgrade.
Mac pro good machine, but too expensive. Imac, good machine, but not viable to keep up with the times.
Solution - make a machine in the middle - a cheaper alternative to the mac pro. Apple are over looking a large group of people who want to flexibility to upgrade their mac the same way they would upgrade their PC.
Come on Jobs don't overlook a valuable community of people.
Oh dear me, reading this over, I have to remember all this was over a mac mini!
Been doing some research, and have concluded that the Mac Mini should die.
mac mini £529
1gb
160gb
2.0 ghz
imac £800
1gb
250gb
2.ghz
Okay, thats £271 more expensive, and you get the following:
2600 HD Pro 256MB graphics card
20 inch monitor
Keyboard and mouse
90GB extra hard disk space
isight camera
Okay, so in comparison that's a good deal for an imac and I would rather pay that extra cash for an imac, rather than a mac mini. Only thing is, where am I going to put it????
Since 2001 I've owned both a laptop and a desktop Mac. I replace each about every two years so it ends up being approximately one new computer each year. The old ones are sold or given away.
OK, there's a difference in how we're considering it, I thought you meant replace a given computer every year, you're replacing a given computer every other year. Even so, replacing a given computer every other year is ahead of the curve. It looks like the peak replacement cycle is about three years, but most computers are used for longer than that before getting replaced.
The pictures start at page 42. Page 43 shows that the average time to replacement has been steadily increasing, 3.5 Years for high end, 4.5 years on low end computers, but that's only with the newest data being from 2004.
One of the selling points to any pc is the ability to upgrade - to "futureproof" their computer (to quote yourself). People now-a-days are looking for a PC sized system in an apple where they can have multiple 3.5 inch hard disks and where they can swap out dvd drives for blue ray, and they most definitely want the ability to upgrade the graphics card without going to the lengths of a macpro size or money.
Geeks do those sort of things, but not the average consumer customer. They do not add disks, and they do not even know what a graphics card is, except that it makes the iMac better than the mini.
I have maintained that if there was a market for the xMac, Apple's market research would have indicated so.
When the Macintosh II came out, and had six slots, more than 95% of the owners never added a card.
If Apple offered the xMac, and had customers weigh "expandability" versus the compact size and built-in monitor of the iMac, the consumer will choose the iMac the vast majority of the time. It can be ordered with a huge hard drive if that is a concern, and Apple does not want people buying the cheapest one and then shopping at NewEgg for a bigger disk - they want you to buy the big disk from them to begin with.
Geeks whose main criterion is expandability and swapping things in and out make up a very small segment of those who would want an Apple. Most geeks are gamers and would buy the PC.
As far as the Mac mini, one look at the pricing tells you that the idea is for you to spend the extra money and get the iMac instead. The reason the mini is $599 and $799 is so that it will be within reach of an upsell to the iMac.
Geeks do those sort of things, but not the average consumer customer. They do not add disks, and they do not even know what a graphics card is, except that it makes the iMac better than the mini.
Although I'm not a particular advocate of the xMac, I guess the point is perceived extra value. If Janet and John go to their local PC World, they'll look at the PC and think that for less money they can buy a machine and upgrade it when they have a bit more money. The fact they probably never will doesn't really matter.
Quote:
I have maintained that if there was a market for the xMac, Apple's market research would have indicated so.
I have a feeling Apple would like to break into that market, but it's a biiiig market already dominated by many PC manufacturers. They also dominate this market using cheap parts, which I'm sure Apple would not want to do. I guess this is the dilemma.
I'd be interested in finding out how many Mac Minis were bought by PC converts. From my own Apple-tinted-spec experience, anyone I know who has bought a Mac Mini has bought one as a second Apple machine, and usually as some kind of media server.
I'd be interested in finding out how many Mac Minis were bought by PC converts. From my own Apple-tinted-spec experience, anyone I know who has bought a Mac Mini has bought one as a second Apple machine, and usually as some kind of media server.
I have a mini at home, as a second machine hooked up to my TV.
At the office, we have a mini which is used for graphic design running QuarkXPress, InDesign and Illustrator all day long. So a Mac mini works great as a primary computer too.
Thanks for that link. Have tried to tell Lundy this for ages, but he didn't buy it. Good to have an unambiguous, indisputable quote direct from the horses mouth: "we do no market research".
Quote:
Originally Posted by lundy
As far as the Mac mini, one look at the pricing tells you that the idea is for you to spend the extra money and get the iMac instead. The reason the mini is $599 and $799 is so that it will be within reach of an upsell to the iMac.
Always thinking about it as Apple as an island, rather than the possibility of instead of the people being up-sold to the iMac, they piss-off and buy a decently-specified-for-the-money $699 PC. Or indeed, they never walk in to the Apple store in the first place because the already know that Apple don't offer anything worth the money under $1199.
Comments
Did AI eat humble pie? not really.
Really? They say "Eating our words"... I'd say that's a suggestion they were wrong. I don't think they really need to say more, it's not like they're reading all of our posts.
did AI apologize to all those who tried to point out in this thread - in vain - it made no sense for Apple to abandon this desktop market segment?
Killing the Mini does not equal abandoning this market segment. It only means that if the Mini were not replaced.
We all know there are plenty of people who think the Mini should die and be replaced with the xMac.
Killing the Mini does not equal abandoning this market segment. It only means that if the Mini were not replaced.
We all know there are plenty of people who think the Mini should die and be replaced with the xMac.
Not that low. Sub-$800 low end iMac, yes.
If I was a betting man (I used to be - scratch cards - a mugs game) I would say the mini will have a similar specification to the macbook. That's a realistic forsight.
I cannot see the mac mini having a dramatic design change and will not be user upgradable.
When the new machine is released, I cannot see myself buying it unless it is user upgradable.
Sorry folks, I am hoping in vain for a machine (xmac) that fits in the middle of a mac pro and a mac mini.
Hopefully the new mini redesign will adopt a more user-upgradable design, rather than stabbing it with putty knives!
I don't find the putty knife thing to be any harder than removing a half dozen screws.
Obviously, upgrading a mini is much harder than upgrading a Mac Pro. Tiny components make it that way.
Unfortunately, I don't think Apple wants us upgrading our computers. They want us to buy new ones every year. The minis are much like the iMacs in that respect.
Unfortunately, I don't think Apple wants us upgrading our computers. They want us to buy new ones every year. The minis are much like the iMacs in that respect.
Ignoring the suggestion that Apple "wants" people to buy a new computer every year, how many people really buy a new computer every year?
If I was a betting man (I used to be - scratch cards - a mugs game) I would say the mini will have a similar specification to the macbook. That's a realistic forsight.
I am guessing (and hoping for) the same.
When the new machine is released, I cannot see myself buying it unless it is user upgradable.
Agreed - a MacBook-like upgrade path and I will be sold.
Sorry folks, I am hoping in vain for a machine (xmac) that fits in the middle of a mac pro and a mac mini.
Hmmm I can't say that I want more than a Mac Mini with user-upgradeable HD and memory (and possibly optical drive). This whole graphics card lark is not a worry for me. I'm not a game player any more (hence having a Mac...)
I am guessing (and hoping for) the same.
Agreed - a MacBook-like upgrade path and I will be sold.
Hmmm I can't say that I want more than a Mac Mini with user-upgradeable HD and memory (and possibly optical drive). This whole graphics card lark is not a worry for me. I'm not a game player any more (hence having a Mac...)
For me, it's down to the ease of every year or so upgrading the hard drive to a better model. For instance, my mark 1 macbook had a stock 60gb hard disk, which is laughable when you consider upgrading the operating system, then downgrading the operating system (vista with bootcampt), installing all you programmes etc, etc. Fairly soon, its going to be jam packed.
I recently changed that to a 200gb 7200gb 16mb cache seagate, and it makes a hell of a difference. I just wish people could see the benefits of having such convenience.
Okay, fair enough, the average person will buy a machine and probably won't upgrade it, because they won't know how, to the minority of people having a putty-knifeless entry method would be such a bonus.
OY!!!! JOBS! YOU GETTIN THIS!!!!!
For me, it's down to the ease of every year or so upgrading the hard drive to a better model. For instance, my mark 1 macbook had a stock 60gb hard disk, which is laughable when you consider upgrading the operating system, then downgrading the operating system (vista with bootcampt), installing all you programmes etc, etc. Fairly soon, its going to be jam packed.
Absolutely. I "future proofed" mine with 100GB HD. Laughable!
Okay, fair enough, the average person will buy a machine and probably won't upgrade it, because they won't know how, to the minority of people having a putty-knifeless entry method would be such a bonus.
Agreed. And what you've described is exactly what the next Minis should (and hopefully will) have. Thing is, a lot of the xMac argument surrounds full-sized parts (3.5-inch HD etc) and a graphics card. These are not things which bother me in terms of upgrade path. All I'm concerned with - like you I believe - is upgradeable storage (RAM and HD).
But to be honest, even the stuff which you'd think isn't upgradeable in something like the MacBook, the wireless speed, can be upgraded if you don't mind getting your hands a bit dirty.
Absolutely. I "future proofed" mine with 100GB HD. Laughable!
Agreed. And what you've described is exactly what the next Minis should (and hopefully will) have. Thing is, a lot of the xMac argument surrounds full-sized parts (3.5-inch HD etc) and a graphics card. These are not things which bother me in terms of upgrade path. All I'm concerned with - like you I believe - is upgradeable storage (RAM and HD).
But to be honest, even the stuff which you'd think isn't upgradeable in something like the MacBook, the wireless speed, can be upgraded if you don't mind getting your hands a bit dirty.
Mind you jowie74:
From the point of view of Joe Blogs who would go into PC World or other computer retailers, to buy a computer and are confronted with the various machines i.e. emachine, ei system, hp, sony, packered bell (knackered bell) - an apple computer is becoming a more viable option.
One of the selling points to any pc is the ability to upgrade - to "futureproof" their computer (to quote yourself). People now-a-days are looking for a PC sized system in an apple where they can have multiple 3.5 inch hard disks and where they can swap out dvd drives for blue ray, and they most definitely want the ability to upgrade the graphics card without going to the lengths of a macpro size or money.
Then the old arguement "if you want to play games, buy a PC". That's all very good and well, however Apple have been working closely with EA Arts to release games and publisise this openly on the mac.
But who in their right mind is going to spend £1400 on a mac pro to play games, or £800 on an imac, which is reasonable amount for a good system, only to find six to eight months down the line their gaming system is out of date, and because of design limitations are snookered to upgrade.
Mac pro good machine, but too expensive. Imac, good machine, but not viable to keep up with the times.
Solution - make a machine in the middle - a cheaper alternative to the mac pro. Apple are over looking a large group of people who want to flexibility to upgrade their mac the same way they would upgrade their PC.
Come on Jobs don't overlook a valuable community of people.
Oh dear me, reading this over, I have to remember all this was over a mac mini!
mac mini £529
1gb
160gb
2.0 ghz
imac £800
1gb
250gb
2.ghz
Okay, thats £271 more expensive, and you get the following:
2600 HD Pro 256MB graphics card
20 inch monitor
Keyboard and mouse
90GB extra hard disk space
isight camera
Okay, so in comparison that's a good deal for an imac and I would rather pay that extra cash for an imac, rather than a mac mini. Only thing is, where am I going to put it????
I think we should all just buy a PC
I'm joking of course!
Who's to say you can't fit a 2600 HD Pro 256MB graphics card into a mac mini.
The other arguement not to buy a mac mini:
* specification VS price
Since 2001 I've owned both a laptop and a desktop Mac. I replace each about every two years so it ends up being approximately one new computer each year. The old ones are sold or given away.
OK, there's a difference in how we're considering it, I thought you meant replace a given computer every year, you're replacing a given computer every other year. Even so, replacing a given computer every other year is ahead of the curve. It looks like the peak replacement cycle is about three years, but most computers are used for longer than that before getting replaced.
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/facsemi...-04_Gordon.pdf
The pictures start at page 42. Page 43 shows that the average time to replacement has been steadily increasing, 3.5 Years for high end, 4.5 years on low end computers, but that's only with the newest data being from 2004.
One of the selling points to any pc is the ability to upgrade - to "futureproof" their computer (to quote yourself). People now-a-days are looking for a PC sized system in an apple where they can have multiple 3.5 inch hard disks and where they can swap out dvd drives for blue ray, and they most definitely want the ability to upgrade the graphics card without going to the lengths of a macpro size or money.
Geeks do those sort of things, but not the average consumer customer. They do not add disks, and they do not even know what a graphics card is, except that it makes the iMac better than the mini.
I have maintained that if there was a market for the xMac, Apple's market research would have indicated so.
When the Macintosh II came out, and had six slots, more than 95% of the owners never added a card.
If Apple offered the xMac, and had customers weigh "expandability" versus the compact size and built-in monitor of the iMac, the consumer will choose the iMac the vast majority of the time. It can be ordered with a huge hard drive if that is a concern, and Apple does not want people buying the cheapest one and then shopping at NewEgg for a bigger disk - they want you to buy the big disk from them to begin with.
Geeks whose main criterion is expandability and swapping things in and out make up a very small segment of those who would want an Apple. Most geeks are gamers and would buy the PC.
As far as the Mac mini, one look at the pricing tells you that the idea is for you to spend the extra money and get the iMac instead. The reason the mini is $599 and $799 is so that it will be within reach of an upsell to the iMac.
I have maintained that if there was a market for the xMac, Apple's market research would have indicated so.
Apple doesn't do market research.
Link
Geeks do those sort of things, but not the average consumer customer. They do not add disks, and they do not even know what a graphics card is, except that it makes the iMac better than the mini.
Although I'm not a particular advocate of the xMac, I guess the point is perceived extra value. If Janet and John go to their local PC World, they'll look at the PC and think that for less money they can buy a machine and upgrade it when they have a bit more money. The fact they probably never will doesn't really matter.
I have maintained that if there was a market for the xMac, Apple's market research would have indicated so.
I have a feeling Apple would like to break into that market, but it's a biiiig market already dominated by many PC manufacturers. They also dominate this market using cheap parts, which I'm sure Apple would not want to do. I guess this is the dilemma.
I'd be interested in finding out how many Mac Minis were bought by PC converts. From my own Apple-tinted-spec experience, anyone I know who has bought a Mac Mini has bought one as a second Apple machine, and usually as some kind of media server.
I'd be interested in finding out how many Mac Minis were bought by PC converts. From my own Apple-tinted-spec experience, anyone I know who has bought a Mac Mini has bought one as a second Apple machine, and usually as some kind of media server.
I have a mini at home, as a second machine hooked up to my TV.
At the office, we have a mini which is used for graphic design running QuarkXPress, InDesign and Illustrator all day long. So a Mac mini works great as a primary computer too.
Apple doesn't do market research.
Link
Thanks for that link. Have tried to tell Lundy this for ages, but he didn't buy it. Good to have an unambiguous, indisputable quote direct from the horses mouth: "we do no market research".
As far as the Mac mini, one look at the pricing tells you that the idea is for you to spend the extra money and get the iMac instead. The reason the mini is $599 and $799 is so that it will be within reach of an upsell to the iMac.
Always thinking about it as Apple as an island, rather than the possibility of instead of the people being up-sold to the iMac, they piss-off and buy a decently-specified-for-the-money $699 PC. Or indeed, they never walk in to the Apple store in the first place because the already know that Apple don't offer anything worth the money under $1199.