VeeshanVault

Or at least a very real chance to increase their market share drastically..

http://www.apple.com/macmini/

http://www.apple.com/ipodshuffle/

Both those are very wow-worthy considering the pricing scheme.

Animalor wrote:Or at least a very real chance to increase their market share drastically..

http://www.apple.com/macmini/

http://www.apple.com/ipodshuffle/

Both those are very wow-worthy considering the pricing scheme.

What's so special about the ipod shuffle one? It's the same size as a zillion other USB flash MP3 players yet lacks their features. They're out of their minds to offer it without digital FM reception like all the other ones the same size offer along with nice displays and no need of option USB dock thing.

People get so caught up in "APPLE". It's a lame product. IPOD is nice because of it's interface. This new thing has nothing that is better than it's competitors and lacks key features that the others already have.

The shuffle thing wasn't the main point of the post I added it there cause the friend that sent me the info about the MacMini sent this along with it.

I agree that if I were interested in owning an mp3 player, then the regular iPod would be my choice as well.

I know very little about computer hardware so I find it difficult to comment intelligently, but:

So fucking what? Lots of companies have offered computers for that price or less for a long time, and they come with monitors, mice, and keyboards. I don't understand why a five hundred dollar computer is suddenly big news because it's small. How exactly is this an innovative product?

Because Apple is overpriced. To even step in to the $500 realm is a big win for the people that have been rammed in the ass by Apple's price gouging for years.

And that new ipod blows.

psnak is teh seggz~

Because it's a $500 UNIX workstation that can run both Mac OS and Windows applications. It's quite, sleek and super moble... I plan to pick up one ASAP myself as a second PC for my office.

Marb

Marbus wrote:Because it's a $500 UNIX workstation that can run both Mac OS and Windows applications. It's quite, sleek and super moble... I plan to pick up one ASAP myself as a second PC for my office.

Marb

sucker!

I can only imagine the awesome performance this machine will have on PC games.

If you need it to check emails, I'm sure it will work fine....after you buy a keyboard, mouse and monitor for it.

Fairly certain I can build a similarly sized PC that will run Linux and Windows and have more memory/storage/performance than the Mac for real close to the same price.

That said, I'm a big fan (never an owner) of Macs, and it looks nice for people who live and die by the Mac.

Edit: That said, it's arguable that the SW would put me over the price mark, and it's also arguable that the hardware for systems like these is just a commodity and the OS/installed applications are what you're paying for.

/shrug

Ok... macmini rules... i want one.

anyone want to buy my 15" titanium powerbook g4 550mhz*? heh.. $500.

* battery not included... it's dead.

$400?....

I see 2 USB plugs... my Dell has 10, not including the two on the monitor, and I definately use about half of them. Now I'm not very oriented with Mac's, so maybe I'm missing something here, but I need more than 2 plugs. Pass.

http://www.ahanix.com/ahanix_product.asp?pid=19

something similar...

Rellix wrote:I see 2 USB plugs... my Dell has 10, not including the two on the monitor, and I definately use about half of them. Now I'm not very oriented with Mac's, so maybe I'm missing something here, but I need more than 2 plugs. Pass.

There are these neat things called usb hubs, because you see usb is a chain, and many items can connect on one port. most apple keyboards and monitors come with at least one usb port on them, and small usb hubs that turn 1 in to 4 are cheap.

/dorksarcasm off

obviously a dell tower with 10 usb ports is targeted at someone like you, and this one is targeted on a marketing basis at people who either don't have a computer, or have a really old one and aren't real serious into it but it looks cool so ok sure lets go.

it'd make a nice computer to build into a car.

I hear the motherboard isn't included on those things. You just get the case.

I think the minimac would be pretty cool as an entertainment center but I think they've made some huge oversights. First, you'd want at least a 200+ GB Hard Drive for running MythTV or a similar Tivo type program. Of course, you couldn't run that anyway because they didn't add a TV-tuner or any means of video input.

I guess if you want a low end computer in a sardine can with no upgradability...

All form, no substance.

P.S. - Only if you paid for the software noel...

It will run WoW just fine but I didn't say I wanted it for a gaming machine. I have numerous Linux and Sun boxes but the Mac OS, IMHO, is far and beyond above everything else... even though I haven't owned one in like 6 years. I want my second work machine to be able to have access to servers via a programmable shell, run a few Win apps and have a sleek interface. I can almost do that with Linux but I can't do it a geeky as I could with a MiniMac

Marb

I'm not a big apple fan...that being said, comparing prices on 1 GB flash mp3 players, the $149/$139 student price is pretty competitive. I've been looking for one lately but just wasn't willing to spend $200 on a 256 meg player.

Yes. I bought one. Not because it's "apple" or because it's "cool." But because for once, apple has a product that I consider competitive.

Marbus wrote: I have numerous Linux and Sun boxes but the Mac OS, IMHO, is far and beyond above everything else...

Possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard anyone say. OS X is less stable than XP.

My take on Apple: I just can't bring myself to using a 1-button mouse--it would feel like redrafting my resume with the large crayons, as opposed to the regular sized crayons that I currently use.

thats why 2 button usb mice work properly... and only morons use the mouse that came with the computer.

Fash wrote:thats why 2 button usb mice work properly... and only morons use the mouse that came with the computer.

This one's Apple's fault. They have some sort of chip on their shoulder trying to show the world how "simple" things can be. Their standard one button mouse is a joke and should have been changed a long time ago.

I'll take all the fucking buttons I can on my mouse for ease of use...right-left-center buttons, four way wheel mouse, forward back thumb buttons, middle application switching buttons...some other button I don't even know what the hell it does.

Apple makes me sick. They know how to make "pretty" looking hardware but it's crap. Crap crap crap. I've hated them ever since my POS Mac Plus from 87. They're over priced, proprietary bullshit.

If I could go back in time, I'd destroy Apple and tweak Commodore to end up being the PC rival alternative for some serious competition.

Let me just quote a 5 year old kid i overheard in a computer/tv store after he been fooling around with an Imac for 5 min, he described Macs perfectly:

"But it cant do anything".

'Nuff said.

Depends on what you need your computer for. If you aren't tied down to a particular platform and you need to surf, email, use a word processor and a spreadsheet and maybe watch a movie on your computer, there's no reason not to buy an Apple product - except maybe the price.

The only other major points against a Mac have been the lack of games and the fact that upgrading the machine yourself has been all but impossible. If you're a non-tech savy person who doesn't care for gaming, why not buy it?

And in this market, the macs have a HUGE advantage over your average PC: They have an air of friendliness about them. They may not necessarily be more user friendly than a Win XP machine, but they seem like they are. They don't scare away the non-tech savvy. And that's a winning point.

Most of the Mac-hate just seems ridiculous to me. They aren't built to be gaming machines; they lost that race ages ago and they know it. For what they're designed for they are just as good as a PC and some times better.

Yeah, my parents need an upgrade bad...was going to suggest this to them. Anyone know if Apple's support people will be as nice to my old folks like Gateway is?

They're old, so they don't take kindly to mean customer service folk...and they have some dumb questions (tech-wise) that the Gateway people answered with a smile in their voice. I appreciate that beyond anything for my folks.

Drolgin Steingrinder wrote:Depends on what you need your computer for. If you aren't tied down to a particular platform and you need to surf, email, use a word processor and a spreadsheet and maybe watch a movie on your computer, there's no reason not to buy an Apple product - except maybe the price.

The only other major points against a Mac have been the lack of games and the fact that upgrading the machine yourself has been all but impossible. If you're a non-tech savy person who doesn't care for gaming, why not buy it?

And in this market, the macs have a HUGE advantage over your average PC: They have an air of friendliness about them. They may not necessarily be more user friendly than a Win XP machine, but they seem like they are. They don't scare away the non-tech savvy. And that's a winning point.

Most of the Mac-hate just seems ridiculous to me. They aren't built to be gaming machines; they lost that race ages ago and they know it. For what they're designed for they are just as good as a PC and some times better.

I agree with this wholeheartedly. The Mac OS is incredibly user friendly. My wife is vaguely techno-phobic; we had a huge fight when I insisted she swift from IE to Firefox because she was afraid that she wouldn't be able to use it! I was in an Apple Store a month or so back and sat her down in front of a Mac to tinker with it and she found the interface incredibly approachable and easy to understand. The target audience for Apple computers isn't the tech-savy gaming power user that could swallow silicon and shit out their own new motherboard: their consumer base is filled with the other 99% of people that use a computer to send email, write the odd letter, surf the internet, and occassionally do taxes or bookkeeping. Their professional audience is for those same people in their workplace where they need a word processing tool, an email client, a web browser, and spreadsheet tool to do their job. These users will profit from the more elegant, approachable interface that the Mac OS presents.

Incidentally, the Mac OS has "Unix" running underneath, so you can always open a command prompt and bash away at Unix commands that will run circles around using windows explorer and DOS for doing file movement and low level file manipulation, so there is substance behind the simple interface.

I would consider buying a Mac mini for my wife soon to keep her off of my gaming machine, but obviously wouldn't consider using it as my main home computer as I would grow frustrated by my inability to upgrade myself and play more graphics intensive games.


p.s. I will probably be buying one of these to send to my inlaws soon to replace their 6 year old PC!

Marbus wrote:...it's a $500 UNIX workstation that can run both Mac OS and Windows applications.

I can dual boot my XP box to Linux for free and it becomes a UNIX workstation.

Are there still relevant Mac OS applications?

Tenuvil wrote:Are there still relevant Mac OS applications?

My thoughts exactly. My boss was getting all excited about this yesterday, but I just don't see what the big deal is. Sure, Mac OS X *may* be superior in quality to other desktop OS's, but putting that aside, what can you do with a Mac that you can't accomplish with a PC?

the movie Cold Mountain was produced and edited entirely on a mac.

mac's are still the 'industry standard' for advertising agencies, and most graphic/video editing departments. even this all pc office I work at with 100 employees and a server farm has 1 mac in the marketing office.

XunilTlatoani wrote:

Tenuvil wrote:Are there still relevant Mac OS applications?

My thoughts exactly. My boss was getting all excited about this yesterday, but I just don't see what the big deal is. Sure, Mac OS X *may* be superior in quality to other desktop OS's, but putting that aside, what can you do with a Mac that you can't accomplish with a PC?

what can you do with a Mac that you can't accomplish with a PC? Nothing, they are competing technologies. You would use this in place of a PC. For those people that are using just email, web access, and word processing, why wouldn't they want to use what may be a superior, more user-friendly OS experience offered by the Mac? For those people that want powerful gaming computers, why wouldn't they want the control over computer that is offered by a PC? I really don't understand your question; this box is like buying a Dell (non-gaming) PC: you buy, plug it in, and start using it to surf the web, check your email, and write letters.

It seems like a shrewd strategic move on Apple's part to bring a more affordable Mac to the market. Considering the positive experiences I have had with Unix and the positive things I have seen of the Mac OS, I would seriously consider buying this for a second PC (non-gaming).

If this does help them acheive a greater market penetration over the next few years, then I would speculate that their next move should be to open up the manufactoring to a limited number of third party vendors (authorized Mac clones, if you will).


p.s. Isn't iLife a very nice suite of products? I don't have much experience with music/photo/video suites, but I was under the impression that it is a very good product, and it is difficult to compete with the price (free with computer).

When my folks upgrade their browsing box i'm going to suggest they get one of these.
I don't give a fig for usabililty or wtf ever but when they ring me with a problem I can tell them I "Don't know mac stuff"

Commodore (Amiga) kicked ass for Video applications. Video Toaster was the win back in the day.

I think think Commodore would have been a more interesting rival to the PC juggernaut.

Apple survives due to some savvy strategies early on their part. They corrupted us as kids in schools by flooding them with Apples/Macs. The problem is that Apple's greed screwed them over when they didn't allow Mac clones which limited their users and reduced the motivation of software developers to support the greedy bastards.

Depends on what you need your computer for. If you aren't tied down to a particular platform and you need to surf, email, use a word processor and a spreadsheet and maybe watch a movie on your computer, there's no reason not to buy an Apple product - except maybe the price.

The only other major points against a Mac have been the lack of games and the fact that upgrading the machine yourself has been all but impossible. If you're a non-tech savy person who doesn't care for gaming, why not buy it?

Well I am a non tech-savvy person who doesn't care for gaming. All I use my computer for is chatting on AIM, sending email, surfing the internet, typing documents and listening to music.

However, this minimac thing still costs more than a comparable PC, is more difficult to upgrade than a comparable PC, and might occasionally run into platform incompatibilities. A comparable PC is cheaper, easier to upgrade, and is assured of program compatability. The only advantage to the mac is a perceived ease of use which may or may not be true, and, if it is true, could probably be overcome by a week of practice on a PC. So it still seems pretty pointless to me.

Apple would have to offer me a more powerful computer for less money than a PC in order to tempt me to buy one because of all the inherent disadvantages when you purchase a Mac. It doesn't seem like they've done that.

Apple was set to opensource their platform a few years back. I remember the media talking about this.

Then Steve Jobs came back to the company and axed that plan completely.

There are advantages to Apple's closed-minded hardware approach though.



This is the inside design of a G5 Dual Processor. Those 2 big blocks with G5 written on them are liquid cooling for the processors. The whole thing is whisper quiet and very nicely uncluttered.

Sueven wrote:

Depends on what you need your computer for. If you aren't tied down to a particular platform and you need to surf, email, use a word processor and a spreadsheet and maybe watch a movie on your computer, there's no reason not to buy an Apple product - except maybe the price.

The only other major points against a Mac have been the lack of games and the fact that upgrading the machine yourself has been all but impossible. If you're a non-tech savy person who doesn't care for gaming, why not buy it?

Well I am a non tech-savvy person who doesn't care for gaming. All I use my computer for is chatting on AIM, sending email, surfing the internet, typing documents and listening to music.

However, this minimac thing still costs more than a comparable PC, is more difficult to upgrade than a comparable PC, and might occasionally run into platform incompatibilities. A comparable PC is cheaper, easier to upgrade, and is assured of program compatability. The only advantage to the mac is a perceived ease of use which may or may not be true, and, if it is true, could probably be overcome by a week of practice on a PC. So it still seems pretty pointless to me.

Apple would have to offer me a more powerful computer for less money than a PC in order to tempt me to buy one because of all the inherent disadvantages when you purchase a Mac. It doesn't seem like they've done that.

Take this into consideration. A normal PC upgrade costs about 500-1k$ for a decent upgrade. At the pricepoint they are selling this unit, by the time it's targeted userbase needs an upgrade, they can just buy the next model and do away with the current unit. Mac OS X also has a built in app that allows you to connect both computers through Fire Wire and it copies all your data from your old computer to your new one at the click of a button.

This isn't a machine aimed at powerusers. The userbase for this is the other 80-90% of computer users who want the internet, media apps and word processing/spreadsheets.

Animalor wrote:Apple was set to opensource their platform a few years back. I remember the media talking about this.

Back in the mid 90s Power Computing was the only company other than Apple that produced licensed Mac hardware, and from all accounts their Mac boxes with PC standard peripherals/storage/card buses blew the doors off what Apple was offering, and at a lower price to boot. IBM was set to release a Mac clone when Apple pulled the plug on licensing the hardware designs.

Take this into consideration. A normal PC upgrade costs about 500-1k$ for a decent upgrade. At the pricepoint they are selling this unit, by the time it's targeted userbase needs an upgrade, they can just buy the next model and do away with the current unit. Mac OS X also has a built in app that allows you to connect both computers through Fire Wire and it copies all your data from your old computer to your new one at the click of a button.

That is true. However, wouldn't you expect users to occasionally want a smaller upgrade (like an extra stick of ram or something? even my mom can install ram in a pc)?

Also, that doesn't change the fact that it's overpriced.

Sueven wrote:

Take this into consideration. A normal PC upgrade costs about 500-1k$ for a decent upgrade. At the pricepoint they are selling this unit, by the time it's targeted userbase needs an upgrade, they can just buy the next model and do away with the current unit. Mac OS X also has a built in app that allows you to connect both computers through Fire Wire and it copies all your data from your old computer to your new one at the click of a button.

That is true. However, wouldn't you expect users to occasionally want a smaller upgrade (like an extra stick of ram or something? even my mom can install ram in a pc)?

Also, that doesn't change the fact that it's overpriced.

I dunno. How many end users do you know have actually ever went "You know, I need a RAM upgrade." Most of the time, they talk to someone knowledgable and ask about ways to improve their performance.

Regardless, the site talks about some upgrades that need to be done in the factory while others can be done from an Apple Store(The latter to protect the warrenty most likely). I wouldn't be surprised that RAM would be one of the easy parts to upgrade, while the processor speed and CD-Rom/DVD Writer would need to be specified at the factory level.

DO NOT EAT IPOD SHUFFLE

Animalor wrote:Apple was set to opensource their platform a few years back. I remember the media talking about this.

Then Steve Jobs came back to the company and axed that plan completely.

There are advantages to Apple's closed-minded hardware approach though.

http://images.apple.com/powermac/images ... 082004.jpg

This is the inside design of a G5 Dual Processor. Those 2 big blocks with G5 written on them are liquid cooling for the processors. The whole thing is whisper quiet and very nicely uncluttered.

I think what you meant was, open up Apple's to the clone market. Steve Jobs did axe this, but it also did happen. There was a time when you could purchase a Mac clone. Fortunately, Jobs realized that impeccable hardware design and aesthetics are one of Apple's core competencies, and he stopped it.

There was never a place to make the Apple OS open-source.

noel wrote:

Animalor wrote:Apple was set to opensource their platform a few years back. I remember the media talking about this.

Then Steve Jobs came back to the company and axed that plan completely.

There are advantages to Apple's closed-minded hardware approach though.

http://images.apple.com/powermac/images ... 082004.jpg

This is the inside design of a G5 Dual Processor. Those 2 big blocks with G5 written on them are liquid cooling for the processors. The whole thing is whisper quiet and very nicely uncluttered.

I think what you meant was, open up Apple's to the clone market. Steve Jobs did axe this, but it also did happen. There was a time when you could purchase a Mac clone. Fortunately, Jobs realized that impeccable hardware design and aesthetics are one of Apple's core competencies, and he stopped it.

There was never a place to make the Apple OS open-source.

That is what I meant. Thanks for the clarification.

archeiron wrote:what can you do with a Mac that you can't accomplish with a PC? Nothing, they are competing technologies. You would use this in place of a PC.

That's what I thought. So to recap:

- A PC can pretty much do anything a Mac can do.
- Mac's have a friendlier UI (in some people's opinion)
- PC's are capable of running Windows, Linux, Solaris and other OS's.
- PC's have a much larger selection of software
- PC's have a much larger user base
- PC architecture is open and competition between manufacturers drives down the market price and gives consumers a vast array of choices for components.

Look, it's not that I hate Mac's, but their present marketing campaigns are about two decades too late to make much of an impact. Even if they opened their architecture, PC's will still outsell Mac's because they are too well penetrated at this point. To think that the mini mac is going to change anything is just rediculous.

Ok, not being an expert in this field, when I saw this on the news last night I wondered what the big deal is.

500 dollars for something that is not as powerful as a normal pc without any monitor or keyboard or mouse.
What a fucking ripoff.

You can get a reasonable PC here for like 300quid. thats about 500 dollars ish.

Just because it's an apple? Not much of a selling point imo.

However, I willfully acknowledge I know jack and shit about Apple or PC's in general.

XunilTlatoani wrote:

archeiron wrote:what can you do with a Mac that you can't accomplish with a PC? Nothing, they are competing technologies. You would use this in place of a PC.

That's what I thought. So to recap:

- A PC can pretty much do anything a Mac can do.
- Mac's have a friendlier UI (in some people's opinion)
- PC's are capable of running Windows, Linux, Solaris and other OS's.
- PC's have a much larger selection of software
- PC's have a much larger user base
- PC architecture is open and competition between manufacturers drives down the market price and gives consumers a vast array of choices for components.

Look, it's not that I hate Mac's, but their present marketing campaigns are about two decades too late to make much of an impact. Even if they opened their architecture, PC's will still outsell Mac's because they are too well penetrated at this point. To think that the mini mac is going to change anything is just rediculous.

Yet they continue to sell LOTS of units to lots of people. Does that mean lots of people are stupid? I know some really intelligent people that prefer Macs to PCs. Why is this? I also know that the iMac, and probably this new thing was HUGE with college students. Why is this?

Just because the people making negative posts on this thread (not singling you out, Xunil )aren't the target market for Apple's products doesn't mean they don't have a completely viable, and successful marketing campaign. It's not going to kill off the PC market anytime soon, but for their target audience media (all kinds) composers/editors, college students, or people who just are fed up with MS, Apple continues to turn out wonderful products.

Apple is also starting to get some fairly significant attention from the server market because of their UNIX based OS, and their clustering solutions.

Hey, I have a Mac at home...in a closet somewhere.

Really, I think Macs are decent machines (I just think the PC is better for reasons stated above). All I'm saying is that you're dreaming if you think Apple is going to rival the PC anytime soon. It's not that it's an inferior product, it just doesn't do anything special enough to warrant a significant market share increase.

XunilTlatoani wrote:Hey, I have a Mac at home...in a closet somewhere.

Really, I think Macs are decent machines (I just think the PC is better for reasons stated above). All I'm saying is that you're dreaming if you think Apple is going to rival the PC anytime soon. It's not that it's an inferior product, it just doesn't do anything special enough to warrant a significant market share increase.

The beauty is, they're not trying to do that anymore. Which lets them design a much better niche product that... wait for it... HEAVILY INFLUENCES THE PC MARKET... Honestly I'm just glad that Apple and Alienware are selling small form factor solutions. PCs have been far too big and too noisy for far too long.

Karae wrote:Possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard anyone say. OS X is less stable than XP.

By what measure?

Well it's a bit foolish to think OS X is bulletproof....

OS X has it's problems.. I know a girl who can ruin a fresh install of OSX Panther within a few days. recently a bad font made the graphical os nonfunctional.

XP is definately the choice for the main desktop, the gaming desktop.

apple is just one thing i do.


hmm that sounds like a good marketing line

sinari wrote:

Karae wrote:Possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard anyone say. OS X is less stable than XP.

By what measure?

Karae, I work in an environment with an equal number of G4 and G5 machines running OS X to the number of Windows boxes running XP. Since we've properly configured these 60 machines, I can't say as I remember the last time *any* of them crashed. I've been running Mac OS X (properly updated) for well over a year and a half on my G3 laptop and it's crashed on me maybe once.

By the same token, my Windows XP desktop doesn't crash that often either.

Besides, to be blunt, it's not the OS. It's the shitty piece of software that we install on top of the OS that was poorly written. The OS may be rock solid, but when you drop a POS app on top, it can wreak havoc.

Macintosh systems have their place in business. We find that the majority of our training customers are using it for either A) graphic arts or B) video editing. I personally like to use it for the latter. While it's been a couple years and a few improved revisions of the software later, Final Cut Pro and DVD Studio Pro are incredible tools that produce excellent output. If you're willing to invest the time and training, you can even go so far as to produce the data and structure for the glass master of a DVD with DVD Studio Pro.

I'm not a Mac fanatic. I'm not a Windows fanatic. Hell, I'm not a *nix fanatic. Just give me a machine that will do what I need it to do.

Say all you want about Apple. Yeah, I think they're arrogant sons of bitches but I do think their software has some pretty good redeeming qualities. But don't knock OS X until you've used it for an extended period.

Hell, I used OSX panther for just a few days while setting up a Dual-Proc 2.5 G5 for the graphic designer in my office(as well as learning the OS for troubleshooting purposes) and I seriously like OS X better than WinXP.

However, 99% of the stuff I use the PC for, I need Windows.