Wow, there's a number seemingly pulled out of thin air. I think the mini answers very little of that need, plus its design makes it impossible for it to compete on price versus performance. Even people who don't need a mini tower would be better off with one over a mini just because it would either be cheaper or have better specs.
80% is a common number used to convey a non-optimal but satisfactory solution. 78.456% would be a number pulled out of thin air. 80% is a generalization for folks not overly pedantic.
The mini primarily lacks GPU power to be a better PC. Most of the other desires of a mid-tower can be filled with external devices. Some of which could be remote to the machine (like a NAS).
Price/performance as a SFF the mini is actually pretty good. Just like an iMac is pretty good for an AIO. It does not directly compete in the tower market except for workstations...for good reason. Apple likes margins...so the odds of a mini-tower are rather small.
80% is a common number used to convey a non-optimal but satisfactory solution. 78.456% would be a number pulled out of thin air. 80% is a generalization for folks not overly pedantic.
The mini primarily lacks GPU power to be a better PC. Most of the other desires of a mid-tower can be filled with external devices. Some of which could be remote to the machine (like a NAS).
Price/performance as a SFF the mini is actually pretty good. Just like an iMac is pretty good for an AIO. It does not directly compete in the tower market except for workstations...for good reason. Apple likes margins...so the odds of a mini-tower are rather small.
Sure, 80% is a generalization. I'd describe it as 20%. But really any number is meaningless - it's just a number tacked onto an opinion to make it seem more like a fact or a statistic.
And it's good for SFF, but many buyers don't care about SFF and end up comparing the mini to PCs in the same price range (see Psystar for example). And that price/performance comparison is pretty bad.
Why would you want Apple to do away with their only consumer-level headless option? I don't get where this kind of attitude comes from. Most computer buyers don't want iMacs. Not because they're iMacs per se, but because they are desktop all-in-ones.
I know most of them don't want iMacs, myself included who actually owns one. But lets face, Ive is completely incapable of designing a practical desktop. The Mini is nothing more than a failed experiment in small form factor computing as currently designed. Unless Apple goes in, completely redesigns the thing for a 3.5" hard drive and memory that is actually accessible, the machine is a lost cause. Under the current circumstances, a somewhat competitive low end iMac makes a lot more sense than a completely uncompetitive Mini.
Quote:
Mac fans think Apple is justified in their current line-up because Apple's market share has doubled, but let's look at Dell's or HP's market share. Apple is living off their scraps. If Apple wants to take a serious shot at some real market share, they need to get off their high horses and produce the freakin' mid-range tower that demonstrably most PC buyers want. This is the time for it right now. Apple has never been the focus of so much positive attention, but they lack the thing that so many potential switchers want (and no, the $3000+ Mac Pro ain't it.)
I agree.
[quote]The iMacs are great machines, always have been. I own and still use to this day my G4 iLamp. But the all-in-one desktops are just too different from what the majority of the PC buying world out there wants. People want the CPU and monitor to be separate when they buy a desktop machine. That's simply what people are accustomed to, and no matter how compelling the iMac gets, it's never going to siphon off a significant number of PC users because it's just too different--at least when it comes to desktops. Apple's laptop line is doing better than the desktops. Why? People can relate to it. It's not too different from what they're used to as far as PC laptops.{/quote]
I agree here too.
Quote:
And the Mini is just a perpetual slap-in-the-face. It might be taken a little more seriously if Apple would update the thing a little more frequently than once a year and would actually give it some respectable specs when they do update it instead of hobbling it with leftovers from two years ago.
While I agree that the mini has become a boat anchor, I think the solution is to replace it with a headless machine built with desktop parts - an imac wouldn't really replace it.
It would be better, but I have no faith in Apple to build such a machine. They are into the less is more philosophy and unfortunately all the benefits of OSX are hijacked by that.
The mini answers 80% of the needs for a headless iMac.
No, not really it doesn't. It's not drawing a lot of buyers so I'm not so sure it's fair to estimate that it covers such a high percentage of needs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vinea
He wants it dead so there's no solution at all in order to force the creation of a mid-tower.
I don't want the Mini dead. I want the Mini line to be expanded upward to include a form factor of maybe twice the height with an accessible RAM slot and possibly an open PCI slot with enough room for desktop-level components that match the iMac. I would pay for that too. I'm not expecting Apple to do that at the current price points. Charge me $999 for it. I'm there. Hell, I'm first in line.
See, a lot of us want what's in the iMacs, but we also want to pick our own display(s). A high-end Mini (a.k.a. mid-range tower) would be a godsend for so many of us. Apple has nothing to lose with that move.
I don't want the Mini dead. I want the Mini line to be expanded upward to include a form factor of maybe twice the height with an accessible RAM slot and possibly an open PCI slot with enough room for desktop-level components that match the iMac. I would pay for that too. I'm not expecting Apple to do that at the current price points. Charge me $999 for it. I'm there. Hell, I'm first in line.
I'm right behind you.
Quote:
See, a lot of us want what's in the iMacs, but we also want to pick our own display(s). A high-end Mini (a.k.a. mid-range tower) would be a godsend for so many of us. Apple has nothing to lose with that move.
Absolutely. Why not offer that choice. I've got all the "stuff" to run with it... 23" monitor and all the keyboards and mice I can use, AND software.... But I don't need a Mac Pro
I don't want the Mini dead. I want the Mini line to be expanded upward to include a form factor of maybe twice the height with an accessible RAM slot and possibly an open PCI slot with enough room for desktop-level components that match the iMac. I would pay for that too. I'm not expecting Apple to do that at the current price points. Charge me $999 for it. I'm there. Hell, I'm first in line.
See, a lot of us want what's in the iMacs, but we also want to pick our own display(s). A high-end Mini (a.k.a. mid-range tower) would be a godsend for so many of us. Apple has nothing to lose with that move.
Intel maybe be planning just what the doctor ordered
I can't help but post the images themselves. For those who don't know mini-ITX is just a little bigger than the Mac mini: 6.75"x6.75" vs 6.5"x6.5" (overall)
Hopefully gone. The mini as it currently exists serves no meaningful purpose. With the 2.5" hard drive, the specs are down right insulting to any potential switcher and the lack of a keyboard and mouse set doesn't help the deal either. Better to just replace it with a 2ghz GMA iMac.
Sorry ben, but the mini is great. I have two. One is used by the kids as their main computing platform, they use it for writing term papers, creating videos for school, email, presentations, etc. The keyboard/mouse/monitor they use is from that crappy dell the mini replaced.
The other one I use as my MP3 server, perforce server. It sits quietly in the corner of my home office doing its job very nicely. No meaningful purpose?!? Hardly.
I can't help but post the images themselves. For those who don't know mini-ITX is just a little bigger than the Mac mini: 6.75"x6.75" vs 6.5"x6.5" (overall)
And force me to buy a screen I don't need? Adding a KB/Mouse was the easiest thing I had to do. Both of'em cost me $35.
Those that tend the bash the mini are the ones that don't own them. I have not regretted my decision to buy a Mini. I almost bought and iMac but at the time all I would have been able to afford would have been a 17" model. Now I'm in the market for an LCD and I'm looking at 22" and 24" models. There "is" something to be said for choice. I don't game so GMA graphics haven't hurt me at all.
I moved up from a 17" to a 22" MATT screen.. right there is one REALLY good reason NOT to go with an iMac
been considering moving to 24" over the last few days, but prices havent dropped quite just enough yet to justify it plus this 22" is plenty big enough really.
Unless Apple goes in, completely redesigns the thing for a 3.5" hard drive and memory that is actually accessible, the machine is a lost cause. Under the current circumstances, a somewhat competitive low end iMac makes a lot more sense than a completely uncompetitive Mini.
3.5" drive would be cool, but the mini would have to become the maxi so it won't happen.
as to the memory being inaccessible are you MAD? have you tried? its a complete piece of cake to upgrade the memory AND the HDD, and I, apparently unlike you, speak from experience.
OK next week I have some "stuff" to attend to so would likely not be in the house should a package arrive, other wise I'd order today.
so, next Saturday I plan on ordering the "seemingly rubbish" current mini.
WHY?
at the moment I'm dabbling in Logic Pro which is running just fine on my core (NOT 2) Duo believe it or not.
I plan on getting another mini with better specs as a main machine and running the current one as a Node and web browser/pages/itunes machine.
I predict that for me at least a quad core iMac is likely in the picture once it appears and I sell of some old studio equipment, I imagine it will be hard to get that to "top out" .. at least for a while, but I will have 2 minis I can run as nodes for those "just ONE more instance of space designer" moments
they may eventually end up doing server duties I don't know, but their small quiet form factor is the appeal.
--
there seems to be two non exclusive groups, those who want a redesign making it smaller, and those wanting a redesign making it 3.5" capable "because the 2.5" IS A JOKE."
What boiling barrel of pain are you going to feel when Apple announce a newly redesigned mini "Air" with a 1.8" drive?
just how exactly will that be a good thing for those of us wanting to upgrade the HDD?
THATS part of why I'm buying now.
The other part?
1.8Ghz mini from Apple £399
1.8Ghz mini a year old with Tiger from ebay £380 PLUS POSTAGE!
seriously whats the point in buying second hand?
PS the mini on the Apple store has been "shipping in 24 hours" for months, in the last few days it had been "shipping in 2 days" now its back to "24 hours" again, what that means I don't know, but it hardly seems like its gonna be out of stock.
OK next week I have some "stuff" to attend to so would likely not be in the house should a package arrive, other wise I'd order today.
so, next Saturday I plan on ordering the "seemingly rubbish" current mini.
There's a 2.0Ghz refurb on the US Apple Store for $679 w/Leopard.
Alas the T7400 processor is $339 from newegg so upgrading your current mini beyond memory and a HDD isn't cost effectve.
Personally I'd wait. There's likely to be a supply of the current mini's right after the next update. Apple could go with 1.8" drives but I don't see it happening if they have both DVI and HDMI outs as one might hope.
They'll most likely IMHO build a variant of that G45 MB a tad smaller and keep the current form factor or bump up to time capsule size with a Mini height for a 3.5" drive so it can fill the role of a home server with little additional effort on the part of Apple and everything would be the same footprint. Then if you wanted you could stack the mini under a TimeCapsule/AEBS if they happen to be in the same area anyway.
Comments
Wow, there's a number seemingly pulled out of thin air. I think the mini answers very little of that need, plus its design makes it impossible for it to compete on price versus performance. Even people who don't need a mini tower would be better off with one over a mini just because it would either be cheaper or have better specs.
80% is a common number used to convey a non-optimal but satisfactory solution. 78.456% would be a number pulled out of thin air. 80% is a generalization for folks not overly pedantic.
The mini primarily lacks GPU power to be a better PC. Most of the other desires of a mid-tower can be filled with external devices. Some of which could be remote to the machine (like a NAS).
Price/performance as a SFF the mini is actually pretty good. Just like an iMac is pretty good for an AIO. It does not directly compete in the tower market except for workstations...for good reason. Apple likes margins...so the odds of a mini-tower are rather small.
80% is a common number used to convey a non-optimal but satisfactory solution. 78.456% would be a number pulled out of thin air. 80% is a generalization for folks not overly pedantic.
The mini primarily lacks GPU power to be a better PC. Most of the other desires of a mid-tower can be filled with external devices. Some of which could be remote to the machine (like a NAS).
Price/performance as a SFF the mini is actually pretty good. Just like an iMac is pretty good for an AIO. It does not directly compete in the tower market except for workstations...for good reason. Apple likes margins...so the odds of a mini-tower are rather small.
Sure, 80% is a generalization. I'd describe it as 20%. But really any number is meaningless - it's just a number tacked onto an opinion to make it seem more like a fact or a statistic.
And it's good for SFF, but many buyers don't care about SFF and end up comparing the mini to PCs in the same price range (see Psystar for example). And that price/performance comparison is pretty bad.
Why would you want Apple to do away with their only consumer-level headless option? I don't get where this kind of attitude comes from. Most computer buyers don't want iMacs. Not because they're iMacs per se, but because they are desktop all-in-ones.
I know most of them don't want iMacs, myself included who actually owns one. But lets face, Ive is completely incapable of designing a practical desktop. The Mini is nothing more than a failed experiment in small form factor computing as currently designed. Unless Apple goes in, completely redesigns the thing for a 3.5" hard drive and memory that is actually accessible, the machine is a lost cause. Under the current circumstances, a somewhat competitive low end iMac makes a lot more sense than a completely uncompetitive Mini.
Mac fans think Apple is justified in their current line-up because Apple's market share has doubled, but let's look at Dell's or HP's market share. Apple is living off their scraps. If Apple wants to take a serious shot at some real market share, they need to get off their high horses and produce the freakin' mid-range tower that demonstrably most PC buyers want. This is the time for it right now. Apple has never been the focus of so much positive attention, but they lack the thing that so many potential switchers want (and no, the $3000+ Mac Pro ain't it.)
I agree.
[quote]The iMacs are great machines, always have been. I own and still use to this day my G4 iLamp. But the all-in-one desktops are just too different from what the majority of the PC buying world out there wants. People want the CPU and monitor to be separate when they buy a desktop machine. That's simply what people are accustomed to, and no matter how compelling the iMac gets, it's never going to siphon off a significant number of PC users because it's just too different--at least when it comes to desktops. Apple's laptop line is doing better than the desktops. Why? People can relate to it. It's not too different from what they're used to as far as PC laptops.{/quote]
I agree here too.
And the Mini is just a perpetual slap-in-the-face. It might be taken a little more seriously if Apple would update the thing a little more frequently than once a year and would actually give it some respectable specs when they do update it instead of hobbling it with leftovers from two years ago.
And here as well.
While I agree that the mini has become a boat anchor, I think the solution is to replace it with a headless machine built with desktop parts - an imac wouldn't really replace it.
It would be better, but I have no faith in Apple to build such a machine. They are into the less is more philosophy and unfortunately all the benefits of OSX are hijacked by that.
The mini answers 80% of the needs for a headless iMac.
No, not really it doesn't. It's not drawing a lot of buyers so I'm not so sure it's fair to estimate that it covers such a high percentage of needs.
He wants it dead so there's no solution at all in order to force the creation of a mid-tower.
I don't want the Mini dead. I want the Mini line to be expanded upward to include a form factor of maybe twice the height with an accessible RAM slot and possibly an open PCI slot with enough room for desktop-level components that match the iMac. I would pay for that too. I'm not expecting Apple to do that at the current price points. Charge me $999 for it. I'm there. Hell, I'm first in line.
See, a lot of us want what's in the iMacs, but we also want to pick our own display(s). A high-end Mini (a.k.a. mid-range tower) would be a godsend for so many of us. Apple has nothing to lose with that move.
I don't want the Mini dead. I want the Mini line to be expanded upward to include a form factor of maybe twice the height with an accessible RAM slot and possibly an open PCI slot with enough room for desktop-level components that match the iMac. I would pay for that too. I'm not expecting Apple to do that at the current price points. Charge me $999 for it. I'm there. Hell, I'm first in line.
I'm right behind you.
See, a lot of us want what's in the iMacs, but we also want to pick our own display(s). A high-end Mini (a.k.a. mid-range tower) would be a godsend for so many of us. Apple has nothing to lose with that move.
I agree, but I don't believe in miracles.
A high-end Mini (a.k.a. mid-range tower) would be a godsend for so many of us.
Right on.
Right on.
Absolutely. Why not offer that choice. I've got all the "stuff" to run with it... 23" monitor and all the keyboards and mice I can use, AND software.... But I don't need a Mac Pro
I don't want the Mini dead. I want the Mini line to be expanded upward to include a form factor of maybe twice the height with an accessible RAM slot and possibly an open PCI slot with enough room for desktop-level components that match the iMac. I would pay for that too. I'm not expecting Apple to do that at the current price points. Charge me $999 for it. I'm there. Hell, I'm first in line.
See, a lot of us want what's in the iMacs, but we also want to pick our own display(s). A high-end Mini (a.k.a. mid-range tower) would be a godsend for so many of us. Apple has nothing to lose with that move.
Intel maybe be planning just what the doctor ordered
Intel preparing a mini-ITX G45 mobo
I can't help but post the images themselves. For those who don't know mini-ITX is just a little bigger than the Mac mini: 6.75"x6.75" vs 6.5"x6.5" (overall)
Hopefully gone. The mini as it currently exists serves no meaningful purpose. With the 2.5" hard drive, the specs are down right insulting to any potential switcher and the lack of a keyboard and mouse set doesn't help the deal either. Better to just replace it with a 2ghz GMA iMac.
Sorry ben, but the mini is great. I have two. One is used by the kids as their main computing platform, they use it for writing term papers, creating videos for school, email, presentations, etc. The keyboard/mouse/monitor they use is from that crappy dell the mini replaced.
The other one I use as my MP3 server, perforce server. It sits quietly in the corner of my home office doing its job very nicely. No meaningful purpose?!? Hardly.
Intel maybe be planning just what the doctor ordered
Intel preparing a mini-ITX G45 mobo
I can't help but post the images themselves. For those who don't know mini-ITX is just a little bigger than the Mac mini: 6.75"x6.75" vs 6.5"x6.5" (overall)
it's needs a pci-e x16 slot
it's needs a pci-e x16 slot
No room.
it's needs a pci-e x16 slot
If you think that, then you're not the intended market. Looks like a hell of a machine... can't wait to buy the Apple version.
And force me to buy a screen I don't need? Adding a KB/Mouse was the easiest thing I had to do. Both of'em cost me $35.
Those that tend the bash the mini are the ones that don't own them. I have not regretted my decision to buy a Mini. I almost bought and iMac but at the time all I would have been able to afford would have been a 17" model. Now I'm in the market for an LCD and I'm looking at 22" and 24" models. There "is" something to be said for choice. I don't game so GMA graphics haven't hurt me at all.
I moved up from a 17" to a 22" MATT screen.. right there is one REALLY good reason NOT to go with an iMac
been considering moving to 24" over the last few days, but prices havent dropped quite just enough yet to justify it
Unless Apple goes in, completely redesigns the thing for a 3.5" hard drive and memory that is actually accessible, the machine is a lost cause. Under the current circumstances, a somewhat competitive low end iMac makes a lot more sense than a completely uncompetitive Mini.
3.5" drive would be cool, but the mini would have to become the maxi so it won't happen.
as to the memory being inaccessible are you MAD? have you tried? its a complete piece of cake to upgrade the memory AND the HDD, and I, apparently unlike you, speak from experience.
so, next Saturday I plan on ordering the "seemingly rubbish" current mini.
WHY?
at the moment I'm dabbling in Logic Pro which is running just fine on my core (NOT 2) Duo believe it or not.
I plan on getting another mini with better specs as a main machine and running the current one as a Node and web browser/pages/itunes machine.
I predict that for me at least a quad core iMac is likely in the picture once it appears and I sell of some old studio equipment, I imagine it will be hard to get that to "top out" .. at least for a while, but I will have 2 minis I can run as nodes for those "just ONE more instance of space designer" moments
they may eventually end up doing server duties I don't know, but their small quiet form factor is the appeal.
--
there seems to be two non exclusive groups, those who want a redesign making it smaller, and those wanting a redesign making it 3.5" capable "because the 2.5" IS A JOKE."
What boiling barrel of pain are you going to feel when Apple announce a newly redesigned mini "Air" with a 1.8" drive?
just how exactly will that be a good thing for those of us wanting to upgrade the HDD?
THATS part of why I'm buying now.
The other part?
1.8Ghz mini from Apple £399
1.8Ghz mini a year old with Tiger from ebay £380 PLUS POSTAGE!
seriously whats the point in buying second hand?
PS the mini on the Apple store has been "shipping in 24 hours" for months, in the last few days it had been "shipping in 2 days" now its back to "24 hours" again, what that means I don't know, but it hardly seems like its gonna be out of stock.
OK next week I have some "stuff" to attend to so would likely not be in the house should a package arrive, other wise I'd order today.
so, next Saturday I plan on ordering the "seemingly rubbish" current mini.
There's a 2.0Ghz refurb on the US Apple Store for $679 w/Leopard.
Alas the T7400 processor is $339 from newegg so upgrading your current mini beyond memory and a HDD isn't cost effectve.
Personally I'd wait. There's likely to be a supply of the current mini's right after the next update. Apple could go with 1.8" drives but I don't see it happening if they have both DVI and HDMI outs as one might hope.
They'll most likely IMHO build a variant of that G45 MB a tad smaller and keep the current form factor or bump up to time capsule size with a Mini height for a 3.5" drive so it can fill the role of a home server with little additional effort on the part of Apple and everything would be the same footprint. Then if you wanted you could stack the mini under a TimeCapsule/AEBS if they happen to be in the same area anyway.
An expresscard slot.
Oh, you know what I'd like to see on the next mini (but don't expect)?
An expresscard slot.
your needs, fair enough.
Mine? an extra Firewire slot (and not just a hub affair)
edit : just wondering what you want the express card for exactly?