Everyone seems to deem the new mac mini as perfect... but...

[TrumanApple]

I dont see this machine haveing a significant impact on marketshare... yes 499 is cheap, but, compared to cheap PCs, its still expensive... Dont get me wrong, its a great machine... but i believe that airport and a keybored and mouse sohuld be included in that price... because after adding those on to the price you are up to 650 dollars for a computer that doesnt come with a monitor and has basicly 0 expandability and only a 1 year warrentee...

Basicly i think that this is a great computer, but it is nowhere near the machine that people seem to be hyping it as... with that being said... watch it fly off the shelves and poeple just eat it up so that i will have to eat my words... (like some poeple had to with the ipod mini)

PS: a cheap mac is a great idea... but did it really need to be that small? People seem to be fine with buying big bulky computers... and if they want smaller sleeker machines then they are probibly willing to spend the money it would take to get an imac...

[maya]

I dont see this machine haveing a significant impact on marketshare... yes 499 is cheap, but, compared to cheap PCs, its still expensive... Dont get me wrong, its a great machine... but i believe that airport and a keybored and mouse sohuld be included in that price... because after adding those on to the price you are up to 650 dollars for a computer that doesnt come with a monitor and has basicly 0 expandability and only a 1 year warrentee...

Basicly i think that this is a great computer, but it is nowhere near the machine that people seem to be hyping it as... with that being said... watch it fly off the shelves and poeple just eat it up so that i will have to eat my words... (like some poeple had to with the ipod mini)

PS: a cheap mac is a great idea... but did it really need to be that small? People seem to be fine with buying big bulky computers... and if they want smaller sleeker machines then they are probibly willing to spend the money it would take to get an imac...

Media Station maybe. :)

[sorryiwasdreami]

Basicly i think that this is a great computer, but it is nowhere near the machine that people seem to be hyping it as...


You are forgetting one teensie little thing. OSx doesn't get infected with viruses, malware, and spyware. Many will deem that worthy of $499.

[40167]

You are forgetting one teensie little thing. OSx doesn't get infected with viruses, malware, and spyware. Many will deem that worthy of $499.

True but you tell that to a PC user, hes going to think your full of it... My science teacher mentioned macs dont get viruses and everyone but me in the class was like... yeahhhh rightttttt!

[maya]

True but you tell that to a PC user, hes going to think your full of it... My science teacher mentioned macs dont get viruses and everyone but me in the class was like... yeahhhh rightttttt!


Amazing you 2 are the only bright ones in that classroom. :)

[dejo]

I dont see this machine haveing a significant impact on marketshare... yes 499 is cheap, but, compared to cheap PCs, its still expensive... Dont get me wrong, its a great machine... but i believe that airport and a keybored and mouse sohuld be included in that price... because after adding those on to the price you are up to 650 dollars for a computer that doesnt come with a monitor and has basicly 0 expandability and only a 1 year warrentee...

I wouldn't say 0 expandability. You can add more memory, larger hard drive, SuperDrive. Just limited expandability. Many cheap PCs are in the same camp.

PS: a cheap mac is a great idea... but did it really need to be that small? People seem to be fine with buying big bulky computers... and if they want smaller sleeker machines then they are probibly willing to spend the money it would take to get an imac...

Reasons for the small form factor may include significant cost savings in production (raw materials, etc.) and shipping (wasted space costs money).

[Les Kern]

You are forgetting one teensie little thing. OSx doesn't get infected with viruses, malware, and spyware. Many will deem that worthy of $499.

And another thing, it's not aimed at me or you per se. I'm a true power user. Rather it's target is windows users who have a PC, have had a horrible time with viruses and spyware (millions?), have a keyboard, mouse and monitor, and maybe an iPod (millions more?).
Five minutes after setting it up they will be smiling. I have FOUR PC-user friends that are ordering them. They have HAD it. My humble prediction: Mac Mini will FLY off the shelves, and MacRumors will have to upgrade their servers because of all the new users.

[nyprospect]

As a pc user im looking to buy one of these little cuties.A perfect computer?Well thats like saying i have the perfect wife.The new ipod and the mini has created a buzz.Steve said him self its a stripped down mac.I like the fact that if something goes wrong with it,i can toss it in my pocket and go to a mac store. :)

[dejo]

True but you tell that to a PC user, hes going to think your full of it... My science teacher mentioned macs dont get viruses and everyone but me in the class was like... yeahhhh rightttttt!

I think that demonstrates the group-think mentality of many PC users. If they experience it, so does everyone else. Because it's all the same.

[dejo]

As a pc user im looking to buy one of these little cuties.A perfect computer?Well thats like saying i have the perfect wife.The new ipod and the mini has created a buzz.Steve said him self its a stripped down mac.I like the fact that if something goes wrong with it,i can toss it in my pocket and go to a mac store. :)

This is the second time I've seen someone say it's "pocket-sized". How damn big are your pockets?! The thing is 6.5" square by 2" tall. That's way bigger than any of my pockets!

[cemorris]

I think you need to take a look at the whole package. Many have stated the advatages of no/little viruses and addware. But look at the software you also get. Factor in the price for equivalent PC software that comes standard and I think the price will equal out. The ilife applications alone would cost you $300 to find equivalant PC versions. People tend to focus on the hardware and ignore the software when pricing computers. This is a disadvantage for Apple as I wish they would draw more focus on the software they provide for free and the value of that. My 2 cents.

[Rod Rod]

I suppose the conclusion may be that the Mac mini is perfect for some and not for others... :confused: :)

I know it's perfect for my dad, so that's why I bought him one.

[raeble]

You are forgetting one teensie little thing. OSx doesn't get infected with viruses, malware, and spyware. Many will deem that worthy of $499.
Yeah and if this takes off like it's supposed to those hackers will start looking to make virus' that can affect osx. The only reason they don't bother is because hardly anybody uses it, but if you get between ten and twenty percent of people using it then it will start to look very attractive to them. :rolleyes:

I like it but I think that it's not going to look half as nice once all the cables and wires and attachments are attached to it. One good thing about my crt monitor is it hides all the cables. :D I also think that you won't be able to just use it as is without buying someother accessories either a new keyboard or a usb hub for starters, then add more ram.

[brap]

Yeah and if this takes off like it's supposed to those hackers will start looking to make virus' that can affect osx.
You really think that nobody has ever even contemplated writing a virus for OS X?

Fact is, people have tried, nobody has managed it yet. Maybe the big boys aren't playing yet, but it's a far cry from the Windows script kiddies writing virii in their warez copies of Visual Basic. Sure, maybe there'll be one or two creep out, but X is inherently more secure.

Yeah, this horse is dead, an' I'm flogging it like a b**ch...

[TrumanApple]

I understand that apple is trying to appeal to a new market... but is it really smart to make a PC users first experience of os x on a machine with only 256 mb of ram... i cant imagine buying anything with less than 512... its about time that apple gave up on 256 mb of memory to start out with... and since there is only one slot for memeory... expanding that becomes less attractive... (and it voids the warrentee)...

lets put it this way... is there anyone in this forum who would buy a NEW computer now and plan on leaving it with only 256 mb? if so i question your sanity...

[devwild]

You really think that nobody has ever even contemplated writing a virus for OS X?

Fact is, people have tried, nobody has managed it yet. Maybe the big boys aren't playing yet, but it's a far cry from the Windows script kiddies writing virii in their warez copies of Visual Basic. Sure, maybe there'll be one or two creep out, but X is inherently more secure.

Yeah, this horse is dead, an' I'm flogging it like a b**ch...

Actually people have tried, and done so successfully for longer than OSX has actually existed :) Start reading some books on the history of unix, hacking, the first worms, the first prosecutions.

OSX's main vulnerability lies primarilly in it's unix infrastructure. It doesn't make the headlines, but I have seen people's OSX boxes get hacked by script kiddies over broadband when an SSH vulnerability exists that hasn't been patched, for whatever reason.

It's a different kind of problem, which isn't as common or widespread or damanging on a global scale as an Outlook vulnerability, but it's still a vulnerability, invisible to the average user. And unlike what the virus companies would like you to believe, most worms/viruses on windows don't give over control of your box (though the potential exists). A root vulnerability in a unix service gives someone absolute control to do whatever they want to with your machine.

Security problems always exist and awareness is always an issue. OSX will probably never have the problems Windows has with viruses, but one cracker finds a hole tomorrow, and maybe it will. Such is life in the business.

[devwild]

lets put it this way... is there anyone in this forum who would buy a NEW computer now and plan on leaving it with only 256 mb? if so i question your sanity...

Absolutely not, and especially on OSX. My G5 and PC both have a gig. When I used a G4 500mhz previously it had 384 and swapped like crazy (making it more painful than it was naturally). I would not curse someone with that experience in this day and age :)

[stcanard]

Dont get me wrong, its a great machine... but i believe that airport and a keybored and mouse sohuld be included in that price... because after adding those on to the price you are up to 650 dollars for a computer that doesnt come with a monitor and has basicly 0 expandability and only a 1 year warrentee...

A lot of people are missing the Trojan horse here ... iLife.

Plus the huge amount of freeware that is available.

A few people will buy this system. Not the normal Macheads, but some of the Mac curious. They will play with it for a while, then one day when the friend asks "why did you waste money on that instead of a Dell" he'll point out that the Mac Mini was usable out of the box, he didn't have to spend $100's on software, and hours looking through torrents for the cracks.

He says "Everything I needed was right there. I didn't need to buy anything else! And look at this ultra-cool stuff that I can do with this music app called GarageBand, and look at these homemade DVD's!".

Then the friend's jaw drops to the floor, and he says "i gotta get me one of those".

[stcanard]

Security problems always exist and awareness is always an issue. OSX will probably never have the problems Windows has with viruses, but one cracker finds a hole tomorrow, and maybe it will. Such is life in the business.

IMNSHO the biggest current vulnerability in OSX is exposed by this:

1) My day-to-day user is not an Admin, for security purposes (that I can do this is good, Apple should push people to do this during the install so they only get so-so marks here)

2) I go to install an app, drag it into Applications, and get told I don't have permissions, do I want to authenticate (that's good, system files are protected)

3) I authenticate, and the Application is copied (that's good, make admin tasks easy enough from non-admin users, that they aren't tempted to just run as admin like many Windows users are)

4) --- THIS IS HORRIBLE -- the Application I copied over is still owned by me, not by the admin I authenticated as! I now have a huge hole where somebody that cracks my account can install a trojan. I know that every time I install an application I have to do a 'sudo chown -R root:admin MyApp', but this really needs to be automated somehow.

If Apple were to push people on install to create an admin and non-admin account, and get the ownership correct when authenticating, the problems caused by an SSH vulnerability would be greatly reduced to data loss only.

[brap]

Actually people have tried, and done so successfully for longer than OSX has actually existed :) Start reading some books on the history of unix, hacking, the first worms, the first prosecutions.Darwin's BSD leanings are exactly the reason I said:...but X is inherently more secure.Citing holes which have come and gone - been exploited and patched, really isn't relevant to the here and now... unless you're using them to reinforce the fact that X is fundamentally more secure through this trial and error.
Security problems always exist and awareness is always an issue. OSX will probably never have the problems Windows has with viruses, but one cracker finds a hole tomorrow, and maybe it will. Such is life in the business.Isn't that... what i said? :confused:

[TrumanApple]

A lot of people are missing the Trojan horse here ... iLife.

Plus the huge amount of freeware that is available.

A few people will buy this system. Not the normal Macheads, but some of the Mac curious. They will play with it for a while, then one day when the friend asks "why did you waste money on that instead of a Dell" he'll point out that the Mac Mini was usable out of the box, he didn't have to spend $100's on software, and hours looking through torrents for the cracks.

He says "Everything I needed was right there. I didn't need to buy anything else! And look at this ultra-cool stuff that I can do with this music app called GarageBand, and look at these homemade DVD's!".

Then the friend's jaw drops to the floor, and he says "i gotta get me one of those".

Yes your right, the software is the reason this computer can sell... but, why have all this great software on a computer that can barely run it... I know the min. req. for these programs is much lower than 256, but the apps will still run slow and sluggish... and will make the mac curious think that all macs are slow and sluggish... some people will not know that the lack of ram is why the computer acts sluggish... they will just look at the apple and associate it with apple computers... a person that knows alot about ram and performance will upgrade it anyway...

[Linkster82]

and since there is only one slot for memeory... expanding that becomes less attractive... (and it voids the warrentee)...

Since when does upgrading the RAM in the mini void the warrantee? You can upgrade the RAM in an iMac G5 without doing so. And just because Apple recommends you take your mini to an Authorized Service Provider to upgrade it doesn't mean you have to. They just want more money.

[G4scott]

I dont see this machine haveing a significant impact on marketshare... yes 499 is cheap, but, compared to cheap PCs, its still expensive... Dont get me wrong, its a great machine... but i believe that airport and a keybored and mouse sohuld be included in that price... because after adding those on to the price you are up to 650 dollars for a computer that doesnt come with a monitor and has basicly 0 expandability and only a 1 year warrentee...

Basicly i think that this is a great computer, but it is nowhere near the machine that people seem to be hyping it as... with that being said... watch it fly off the shelves and poeple just eat it up so that i will have to eat my words... (like some poeple had to with the ipod mini)

PS: a cheap mac is a great idea... but did it really need to be that small? People seem to be fine with buying big bulky computers... and if they want smaller sleeker machines then they are probibly willing to spend the money it would take to get an imac...

Well, I think this new Mac Mini already has Dell concerned. Yesterday, the cheapest dell you could buy was $459. Now, they have added an extra $50 rebate.

If you go build a Dell, you'll notice the low end models don't have actual "graphics cards." Instead, they have on-board graphics, and their lowest end systems have shared memory, whereas the Mac mini has an actual (although not extremely powerful) graphics card that tops pretty much any integrated gpu. There is no option for a DVD burner (at least on the models I checked), and to actually get the low, low price, you have to mail in a rebate.

Sure you have to have a monitor, keyboard, and mouse, but if you already have them (say, if you're replacing a computer), you won't be stuck with extra hardware that you won't use. If you don't need airport, why pay extra for it? If Apple included Airport, Bluetooth, and a mouse and keyboard in every box, it would add on at least $200. If you don't need airport or bluetooth, and you have the equipment, it saves you money. That was a complaint about the iMac. You were stuck with the screen. If you wanted a different screen, too bad.

The Mac Mini may not be perfect for you, but if Apple gave you any more with it, it wouldn't be as cheap as it is. I'd say it's a great computer, and I can think of lots of people who I know could use one. We'll just have to wait and see how it takes off...

[Linkster82]

Darwin's BSD leanings are exactly the reason I said:Citing holes which have come and gone - been exploited and patched, really isn't relevant to the here and now... unless you're using them to reinforce the fact that X is fundamentally more secure through this trial and error.
Isn't that... what i said? :confused:

The fact that holes have been cited, and will be cited, makes the OS vulnerable to attack. No operating system is entirely immune, though ours is better than the alternative. Additionally, it just isn't worth any hacker's time right now to attack OS X. If the market share was 90 percent, I can guarantee you we'd be in a similar, if not the same, place as Windows. We can continue to say there are no viruses or spyware for OS X until, god willing, we get that marketshare. Until then, we are fortunate to be overlooked.

[angelneo]

Security problems always exist and awareness is always an issue. OSX will probably never have the problems Windows has with viruses, but one cracker finds a hole tomorrow, and maybe it will. Such is life in the business.I, for one, hope that Apple will start doing more R&D on computer security as Mac is becoming more popular. Unike some companies who only act when the fire start burning at their feet.

[Mitthrawnuruodo]

I dont see this machine haveing a significant impact on marketshare... yes 499 is cheap, but, compared to cheap PCs, its still expensive... Dont get me wrong, its a great machine... but i believe that airport and a keybored and mouse sohuld be included in that price... because after adding those on to the price you are up to 650 dollars for a computer that doesnt come with a monitor and has basicly 0 expandability and only a 1 year warrentee...

Basicly i think that this is a great computer, but it is nowhere near the machine that people seem to be hyping it as... with that being said... watch it fly off the shelves and poeple just eat it up so that i will have to eat my words... (like some poeple had to with the ipod mini)

PS: a cheap mac is a great idea... but did it really need to be that small? People seem to be fine with buying big bulky computers... and if they want smaller sleeker machines then they are probibly willing to spend the money it would take to get an imac...

You cannot really compare it with the cheapest PCs out there. This is not a huge a*s case with all the cheapest PC parts you can find, that you have to build yourself and add a pirated Windoze XP, because you're to cheap to pay for it - that comparisment is just, plain wrong.

Try comparing it to the cheapest baseline BAREBONES PCs with the same functions, not forgetting a dedicated GPU. Just remember to add OS and additional software. Then add Airport (WiFi) and Bluetooth to both setups and check prices again, add wireless keybord and mouse, add superdrive, continue until bored...

Just remember: The Mac mini is fully functionally without any upgrades. People have been usin far less power too do much more than the mini is expected to do for the targeted buyers...

As to security: *nix setups are generally safer than Windows, you'll have to give away your root password for any virus/worm/script/trojan/whatever to do any real damage, and even then the differens in all systems makes it very hard for virus programmers to target a large portion of the systems. On Windows most systems are verie similar with a C:/Windows/whatever-you-want-to-mess-up for all occasions... Of course someone can find a major hole in the FreeBSD core tomorrow, but chances are it won't effect Linux or other flavours and vice versa... Most other components in the *nix world are Open Source and are tested daily by numerous developers around the world. Not just a handful based in Seattle or wherever Bill Gates has send them...

[hcuar]

Yeah and if this takes off like it's supposed to those hackers will start looking to make virus' that can affect osx. The only reason they don't bother is because hardly anybody uses it, but if you get between ten and twenty percent of people using it then it will start to look very attractive to them. :rolleyes:



You obviously don't understand hackers and virus writers. Being that people claim that OS X is well protected, it would create more notoriety to write one for a Mac. (Plus the challenge) Everyone knows that PeeCees can be infected with little effort. Imagine the uproar on Slashdot or some other tech site if a major OS X virus were to come into play. Most people don't run AV on their Mac, so it'd be easy pickings.

[sjpetry]

Nothing is wrong IT'S A Mac FOR 499USD! If you need more power get a PowerMac Dual 2.5 with 8 GBs of Ram and two 30" cinema displays. :D

Just a thought.

[deuceswilde]

OK, after reading all of this here's my two cents and a quick glimpse into the mind of the consumer.

Price: Face it, the price is good, and anyone claiming that a cheap PC is still cheaper should consider looking a little bit deeper into things. Remember that when Joe Consumer walks in to his local Circuit City to talk to the kids who couldn't tell a TV from a toaster, he will likely be shelling out $700 or $800 for a "low-end" PC and have to consider the hassles of three or four mail-in rebates. To most people this process is annoying, convuluted and fraught with frustration and simply not having to deal with it is a big plus. And as an aside it should be noted that the general "bargain" PC is a terrible piece of equiptment that made from sub-par components with no backing, or is marked up and under powered (Dell), at least with Apple you know you'll get a computer that does what it's supposed to and a retail network that can support it, this kind of accountability matters when considering some mystery brand PC and the Mac Mini

Capabilities: It won't work wonders but then again it doesn't have to. If you can make cool slideshows in iMovie, update little Susie's iPod, and still accomplish normal internet/school/work tasks then it's more than suited for 90% of the computer users out there. If you want something more capable you should be prepared to pay for it.

Add-ons: I think the BYODKM idea for this computer was perfect. Let's face it, the normal user does not need little glowing apples in every corner of there room, and the premium price of Apple equiptment is never more obvious than when looking at their periphrials. A simple LCD 15"-17" can be had for around $200 and a CRT monitor for less than $100, and frankly most people probably already have one. A decent optical mouse and keyboard can be had for around $30 or less so long as the buyer does not need everything to be Apple, and face it, most people don't. so the supposedly "hidden" costs of this computer aren't hidden, it gives poepl more options and who wouldn't like that.

iLife: iLife, this one should be obvious. Digital photography, cameras, music etc. is becoming a staple task for the home computer and iLife is hands down the best consolidated apporach to this out there. Coming free with every Mac should be a huge incentive to new users, like all things OSX it's intuitive, easy to use and forgiving for the average user. Similar programs come bundled with almost everything PC and I can tell you from personal experience that free media programs on PC are possibly the worst pieces of software ever to fall into the public's hands. Arcsoft and the likes turn slideshows into heart surgery for the average user and a capable program suite with features comparable to iMovie and iDVD alone would easily cost $150-$200. iLife is key to this effort becuase it offers what people want and how they want it.

OSX and Convenience: OSX is easier to use and understand than Windows hands down. People will be attracted by the security and the convenience of an operating system they can understand, and don't have to hassle with over zealous security procedures and constant bug-fixes downloaded by the dozens. it's hard to put into words but Apple is just easier to use for the average user and they know it, now that it's been put at a reasonable price point the switchers should come in droves I would expect.

Sorry I wrote a book about this but I think it helps to point out what the average consumer will be looking for. It represents a change to a more positive computer buying experience and for some people thats all they need. My dad is most likely going to give up Windows for this computer after having dealt with it since 3.1, in many ways this represents the average consumer and the average consumers needs and that can't be discounted.

[stcanard]

but, why have all this great software on a computer that can barely run it... I know the min. req. for these programs is much lower than 256, but the apps will still run slow and sluggish

I don't think you'll see nearly as many complaints as you think. I know a lot of people who are very happy with Panther on 256, and think of it as snappy.

The demographic of this forum tends spend a lot more time on computers than most people, tends to run a lot more programs at one time, tends to run a lot more memory intensive programs and tends to be a lot more demanding of their hardware.

This will do fine for surfing http://cnn.com with safari while listening to iTunes.

[Later you can hear my rant about the people who seem to think that anything less than a 2.5GHz G5 is a waste of money, when 99% of the world doesn't even maintain 30% processor utilization out of an 800MHz G4]

We have long ago hit the point where raw specs are unecessary except in the most specialized of applications. It's all about style and how it runs the software people are using.

[TrumanApple]

OK, after reading all of this here's my two cents and a quick glimpse into the mind of the consumer.

Price: Face it, the price is good, and anyone claiming that a cheap PC is still cheaper should consider looking a little bit deeper into things. Remember that when Joe Consumer walks in to his local Circuit City to talk to the kids who couldn't tell a TV from a toaster, he will likely be shelling out $700 or $800 for a "low-end" PC and have to consider the hassles of three or four mail-in rebates. To most people this process is annoying, convuluted and fraught with frustration and simply not having to deal with it is a big plus. And as an aside it should be noted that the general "bargain" PC is a terrible piece of equiptment that made from sub-par components with no backing, or is marked up and under powered (Dell), at least with Apple you know you'll get a computer that does what it's supposed to and a retail network that can support it, this kind of accountability matters when considering some mystery brand PC and the Mac Mini

Capabilities: It won't work wonders but then again it doesn't have to. If you can make cool slideshows in iMovie, update little Susie's iPod, and still accomplish normal internet/school/work tasks then it's more than suited for 90% of the computer users out there. If you want something more capable you should be prepared to pay for it.

Add-ons: I think the BYODKM idea for this computer was perfect. Let's face it, the normal user does not need little glowing apples in every corner of there room, and the premium price of Apple equiptment is never more obvious than when looking at their periphrials. A simple LCD 15"-17" can be had for around $200 and a CRT monitor for less than $100, and frankly most people probably already have one. A decent optical mouse and keyboard can be had for around $30 or less so long as the buyer does not need everything to be Apple, and face it, most people don't. so the supposedly "hidden" costs of this computer aren't hidden, it gives poepl more options and who wouldn't like that.

iLife: iLife, this one should be obvious. Digital photography, cameras, music etc. is becoming a staple task for the home computer and iLife is hands down the best consolidated apporach to this out there. Coming free with every Mac should be a huge incentive to new users, like all things OSX it's intuitive, easy to use and forgiving for the average user. Similar programs come bundled with almost everything PC and I can tell you from personal experience that free media programs on PC are possibly the worst pieces of software ever to fall into the public's hands. Arcsoft and the likes turn slideshows into heart surgery for the average user and a capable program suite with features comparable to iMovie and iDVD alone would easily cost $150-$200. iLife is key to this effort becuase it offers what people want and how they want it.

OSX and Convenience: OSX is easier to use and understand than Windows hands down. People will be attracted by the security and the convenience of an operating system they can understand, and don't have to hassle with over zealous security procedures and constant bug-fixes downloaded by the dozens. it's hard to put into words but Apple is just easier to use for the average user and they know it, now that it's been put at a reasonable price point the switchers should come in droves I would expect.

Sorry I wrote a book about this but I think it helps to point out what the average consumer will be looking for. It represents a change to a more positive computer buying experience and for some people thats all they need. My dad is most likely going to give up Windows for this computer after having dealt with it since 3.1, in many ways this represents the average consumer and the average consumers needs and that can't be discounted.


No dont get me wrong... this computer is a great deal... with 512MB of ram... The MINIMUM requirement for iLife 05' is 256MB... the fact that this computer is loaded with software that the computer barely meets the min. requirements for is sad... i think if anything they should have either made 2 ram slots... or offered 512MB standard... 256 is going to give people a bad taste of OS X, iLife and every other piece of software that made the purchase so attractive...

PS: i would never recommend anyone buying a new computer in the year 2005 with only 256 MB of ram... in fact i would call 512 the min. and suggest at least 1 gig... i would also tell people to never upgrade ram through the computer company if possible... and with the mini it isnt possible... so 512mb is really the only option (self installing ram WILL void the warrentee in this maching... it is not considered a user installable part in the mini)

[deuceswilde]

No dont get me wrong... this computer is a great deal... with 512MB of ram... The MINIMUM requirement for iLife 05' is 256MB... the fact that this computer is loaded with software that the computer barely meets the min. requirements for is sad... i think if anything they should have either made 2 ram slots... or offered 512MB standard... 256 is going to give people a bad taste of OS X, iLife and every other piece of software that made the purchase so attractive...

PS: i would never recommend anyone buying a new computer in the year 2005 with only 256 MB of ram... in fact i would call 512 the min. and suggest at least 1 gig... i would also tell people to never upgrade ram through the computer company if possible... and with the mini it isnt possible... so 512mb is really the only option (self installing ram WILL void the warrentee in this maching... it is not considered a user installable part in the mini)

I completely agree, if nothing else the biggest design flaw of this computer was including only one RAM slot. At least with two you have expandability down the line without having to be wasteful and not having to worry about spending the money on a 1GB RAM card when you could save a ton by going with 2 512's. I think Apple should seriously reconsider this and maybe double the video card memory to 64 just to make it more competitive when running the media applications Apple is known for.

[panphage]

4) --- THIS IS HORRIBLE -- the Application I copied over is still owned by me, not by the admin I authenticated as! I now have a huge hole where somebody that cracks my account can install a trojan. I know that every time I install an application I have to do a 'sudo chown -R root:admin MyApp', but this really needs to be automated somehow.

If Apple were to push people on install to create an admin and non-admin account, and get the ownership correct when authenticating, the problems caused by an SSH vulnerability would be greatly reduced to data loss only.

You shouldn't have root own your apps. You still have to give yourself execute permissions, and you'll still have a problem when someone cracks your box. You are confusing ownership with application privileges. They're different. Apps that are security conscious should run as a non-privileged user.

[tech4all]

I read this by someone in the Mac mini's thread at top of the forum regarding the keyboard. If people don't buy an Apple keyboard but rather use a keyboard they already have from a PC; well a Mac keyboard and a PC keyboard are slightly different. I'm not sure about the layout, but I do know that PC keyboards do not have the Apple/Command key. So will people be able to do simple keyboard shortcuts? Am I missing something? :confused:

[panphage]

I read this by someone in the Mac mini's thread at top of the forum regarding the keyboard. If people don't buy an Apple keyboard but rather use a keyboard they already have from a PC; well a Mac keyboard and a PC keyboard are slightly different. I'm not sure about the layout, but I do know that PC keyboards do not have the Apple/Command key. So will people be able to do simple keyboard shortcuts? Am I missing something? :confused:

You are missing something. The windows key on a "windows" keyboard works as a command key real good. It's just in the wrong spot.

[dswoodley]

I understand that apple is trying to appeal to a new market... but is it really smart to make a PC users first experience of os x on a machine with only 256 mb of ram... i cant imagine buying anything with less than 512... its about time that apple gave up on 256 mb of memory to start out with... and since there is only one slot for memeory... expanding that becomes less attractive... (and it voids the warrentee)...

lets put it this way... is there anyone in this forum who would buy a NEW computer now and plan on leaving it with only 256 mb? if so i question your sanity...

my girlfriend got her ibook shipped with only 256 mb and I put in a 512 mb after it shipped two weeks later. She had absolutely no problem with itunes, word, internet or iphoto during the time. When I put in the 512 stick, there was hardly no noticeable difference with those apps. She didn't even realize I had put it in until a few weeks later. 256 is fine for baasic stuff

[stcanard]

You shouldn't have root own your apps. You still have to give yourself execute permissions, and you'll still have a problem when someone cracks your box. You are confusing ownership with application privileges. They're different. Apps that are security conscious should run as a non-privileged user.

And you are confusing ownership with execution privilige.

If I, as an unpriviliged user, run an application owned by root, it runs under my unprivliged UID, and thus is secure. Only if I set the suid bit would it would run as root. That is dangerous, and setuid/setgid programs have to be carefully audited.

It is, however, much safer to be owned by root, because then you need super-user priv to modify them, and since you never allow a remote root login that can't happen, right?

[panphage]

And you are confusing ownership with execution privilige.

If I, as an unpriviliged user, run an application owned by root, it runs under my unprivliged UID, and thus is secure. Only if I set the suid bit would it would run as root. That is dangerous, and setuid/setgid programs have to be carefully audited.

It is, however, much safer to be owned by root, because then you need super-user priv to modify them, and since you never allow a remote root login that can't happen, right?

Maybe I've drunk too many Cokes tonite. ;)

[dejo]

OSX and Convenience: OSX is easier to use and understand than Windows hands down. People will be attracted by the security and the convenience of an operating system they can understand, and don't have to hassle with over zealous security procedures and constant bug-fixes downloaded by the dozens. it's hard to put into words but Apple is just easier to use for the average user and they know it, now that it's been put at a reasonable price point the switchers should come in droves I would expect.

While I agree OSX is nicer to use, there are people who will always think XP is better. For example, one guy on a News.com Talkbalk posting thought OSX is "harder to get around". Here's an example why he thinks so:

http://news.com.com/5208-1042-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=4124&messageID=23440&start=-128

I don't agree with him but he is entitled to his opinion.

[dejo]

I completely agree, if nothing else the biggest design flaw of this computer was including only one RAM slot.

Are we certain it only has one RAM slot? I haven't seen anything official in regards to this, although the memory upgrade options on the online Apple Store certainly seem to imply that to be the case. I'm not saying that it couldn't be true, just that I haven't seen any definite proof either way.

[devwild]

Citing holes which have come and gone - been exploited and patched, really isn't relevant to the here and now... unless you're using them to reinforce the fact that X is fundamentally more secure through this trial and error.

I wasn't contradicting you and I generally agree OSX is more secure in the here and now. I simply believe that it is naive of the community to believe they will always be secure because there aren't problems now, because they aren't a prime target yet, or even to believe they are truly safe as is. (You may not, but the general Mac community does) It's the difference between relatively safe, and truly safe (the myth, unless you airgap yourself from the world).

I will note this though on your comment: saying patched exploits are irrelevant is the same as saying the sasser virus is irrelevent because not only should everyone be patched (this in fact was a daemon vulnerability which was patched), but everyone should be running antivirus software which is up to date. Yet, it is still rampant on the net.

There are people who don't patch their boxes, there are people who never run software update or always click "quit" when it comes up because they don't want to be bothered. By the time a vulnerability is found and advertised by bugtraq folks, an exploit may already be in the wild. Exploits are never irrelevent, and risks are always real. The (wonderful) design of OSX, and the *lack* of presence of OSX in prime target areas of the market make it a significatly lower risk. If Apple truly takes off, the situation will get worse, not better, that is just something we have to deal with. Some security agencies already believe Apple isn't aggressive enough to deal with this effectively because of the way they downplayed serious vulnerabilities during this past year. I'm not saying that Microsoft hasn't downplayed and ignored their fair share...

Personally, if Automatic Updates had been turned on by default in Windows 2000/XP years ago, and if IE had never existed, at least as is (most of the mail vulnerabilities are actually IE engine vulnerabilities), I think your average user's XP box would be about as likely to catch a virus/worm as an average OSX box (assuming equal effort from the crackers out there). When you really get into it, you might be surprised how much NT/2000/XP are like Unix at heart. Well, maybe twice as likely as OSX, but not 10x like it is now.

Of course you have P2P trojans, but those could be a problem on OSX in the future too (you don't have to be an admin to run a daemon on a high port, even add it as a cron job to run at boot, that's enough to do plenty of damage).

But I ramble, as usual. I'm going to go back to figuring out how to fill the extra hard drive I just installed in my G5. :)

[deuceswilde]

While I agree OSX is nicer to use, there are people who will always think XP is better. For example, one guy on a News.com Talkbalk posting thought OSX is "harder to get around". Here's an example why he thinks so:

http://news.com.com/5208-1042-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=4124&messageID=23440&start=-128

I don't agree with him but he is entitled to his opinion.

I've talked to a number of people who feel the same way, it happens all the time where people just can't let go of what they're used to. I finally decided to make the switch from a lifetime of PC's to a powerbook about 6 months ago and I haven't looked back. I admit I was tenative about giving it up even to the point of buying Virtual PC, but the only use it really got was when I installed it. After a week I could do everything I could on a PC and then some, everything I couldn't figure out on my own was easily solved by going to the apple forums or various other resources. So I think if people want to learn then they can easily do it.

[devwild]

So I think if people want to learn then they can easily do it.

I agree, and going throught OSX the first time I agreed with the comment linked, the dock is a little clunky if you try to use it from a different mindset (well, it's a little clunky anyways, that's why there's so many alternative third party docks). I eventually changed my usage patterns and now I don't have a problem whatsoever on either platform, though I really wish I had expose on Windows sometimes. :)

I went through the same thing with twm, fvwm, and gnome when I used *nix as a primary platform for 4 years. They are all quite efficiently usable once you adjust your patterns. Blackbox/fluxbox are an even harder adjustment.

But, the same problem very much applies to Mac users switching to Windows. Where I work used to be all Mac and was switched to a Windows platform (for highly logical reasons) several years ago. There are people who still can't figure out what a start menu is. :) It's just human nature.

I'm glad I'm flexible, it means I get to play with more cool stuff :D

[iJon]

I read this by someone in the Mac mini's thread at top of the forum regarding the keyboard. If people don't buy an Apple keyboard but rather use a keyboard they already have from a PC; well a Mac keyboard and a PC keyboard are slightly different. I'm not sure about the layout, but I do know that PC keyboards do not have the Apple/Command key. So will people be able to do simple keyboard shortcuts? Am I missing something? :confused:
They will work just fine either way. Funny you mention it though. At my desk I have swapped keyboards. I liked my Microsoft wireless setup so much I put it on my Mac and put my Pro Keyboard on my PC. I actually love this Microsoft Keyboard on my Mac. I have full iTunes controls, buttons for all my important apps, it's quite nice.

jon

[stcanard]

Maybe I've drunk too many Cokes tonite. ;)

The coke's fine. It's that 120 proof rum in it that's causing the room to spin!

[Mechcozmo]

I wouldn't say 0 expandability. You can add more memory, larger hard drive, SuperDrive. Just limited expandability. Many cheap PCs are in the same camp.

True! Crack open a Dell, see what you can expand. RAM, maybe. PCI cards, if you have the IRQ's to use 'em. Optical drives are nailed in, only one hard drive bay... and that hard drive bay is a pain in the ass to get to!

[devwild]

True! Crack open a Dell, see what you can expand. RAM, maybe. PCI cards, if you have the IRQ's to use 'em. Optical drives are nailed in, only one hard drive bay... and that hard drive bay is a pain in the ass to get to!

IRQs haven't been an issue for a couple generations of PCs now thanks to some chipset changes. I have never seen a Dell you couldn't replace the optical drive in or add another hard drive to just fine. Except for some plastic, most Dells aren't that different from a self-built PC. That's one of the reasons they are popular. Now, if you want to look at a POS Sony Vaio... :)

Lack of PCI slots on the mini isn't too big of a deal though, since only the G5 has PCI slot, there are barely any Mac PCI cards on the market, I know, I spent a lot of time looking for mine. :rolleyes: As long as you have a USB hub or firewire hub, the mac mini is in the same camp as iMacs except on memory and hard drive capacity (I assume it uses a laptop hard drive). For most people that seems to be fine.

[mischief]

Yeah and if this takes off like it's supposed to those hackers will start looking to make virus' that can affect osx. The only reason they don't bother is because hardly anybody uses it, but if you get between ten and twenty percent of people using it then it will start to look very attractive to them. :rolleyes:

I like it but I think that it's not going to look half as nice once all the cables and wires and attachments are attached to it. One good thing about my crt monitor is it hides all the cables. :D I also think that you won't be able to just use it as is without buying someother accessories either a new keyboard or a usb hub for starters, then add more ram.

A few rebuttals... can't pass this up.

Have you ever met a "Hacker"? There are two basic camps...

1: Real, oldschool Hackers whose mischief is aimed at improving IT by exposing it's flaws. Methods are usually aimed at cracking security and/or causing a very specific system to loop, crash or revert to playing Pong.

2: What are now called "Data terrorists" who mainly write viruses.

This second camp, who are the "Hackers" you're referring to (and the media now sees as the only "Hackers" out there, although any real Hacker calls them Wankers).

Even these misfits know something you don't: NEVER WRITE VIRUSES FOR UNIX. Writing viruses to infect a 'nix system would effect so many truly essential systems that the thirty or so best hackers in history (who are now mostly admins in some very powerful places) would be through your firewall in about the time it takes you to upload your first Packet.

Add to this the fact that Windows is so easy to hack you can actually do it by accident... (did it this morning in fact.)

BTW: I most certainly can use a Mac Mini "as is" because it's replacing a FrankenBeige G3 with all USB accessories that just went tits up at the mobo level. I don't give a rat's ass how it looks, it'll do Golive 6 and Photoshop CS faster than my Beige ever could and keep me going long enough to get some $$ together for a G5 based machine.

[devwild]

Have you ever met a "Hacker"? There are two basic camps...

Not the person you were referring too, but I have met, and have been trained as a unix "hacker", and have worked with a whole crew of them. Now unfortunately I'm stuck on Windows, which is why I got a G5 at home. I miss Unix. :) In this case, a "unix hacker" is referred to as any real hardcore unix guru who takes the time to get down to the guts and really understand the system and gain the skills needed to do not only vulnerability testing, but open-source contributions, kernel tweaking, driver writing etc. Back in the early days of unix, basically anyone who could use the machine was a hacker out of neccessity.

"Cracker" was the term used to define someone who was a hacker, but did so towards malicious means. The media apparently thought hacker sounded better and went with that. :) So now we have admins, coders, hackers, script kiddies, etc. etc. both because of the media's twist on things, and because the field has brodened enough that people can speciallize and teenagers can get rootkits off p2p.

[stevietheb]

That was a complaint about the iMac. You were stuck with the screen. If you wanted a different screen, too bad.


Ahhh, but why would you want another screen!!!

This is the first LCD I've ever owned, beats the heck out of my old 19" flat CRT. I'm enamored of it.

[devwild]

Ahhh, but why would you want another screen!!!

This is the first LCD I've ever owned, beats the heck out of my old 19" flat CRT. I'm enamored of it.

Plenty of reasons, I use two Viewsonic 17" displays (vp171b) that visually and feature-wise outsine the previous generation Apple LCDs (which were what was available at the time), and together cost less than Apple's lowest current offering. From a usability standpoint the only Apple offering that would be a worthy replacement would be the 30" LCD, and that's a little out of 99.9% of the world's price range :)

In my opinion of course, but isn't that the point? People like myself find two desktop spaces more work efficient than one gigantic one. Gamers want something with lower response time/less ghosting. Designers want the best color and contrast available (which historically has not been Apple since the CRT studio display days). Parents buying a machines for their kids just want something cheap (hence the release of the mini).

Choice is good. :)

[stevietheb]

Choice is good. :)

Agreed! I was merely voicing my love of my iMac's 17" LCD. Even on the PowerMac G4 I had at work back when I was editing video I didn't have LCDs...two 21" flat Viewsonic CRTs. That was nice...

For me, I'm a fan of one big, widescreen display. Of course, I spent most of 2004 working solely from a 12" iBook--so I've gotten very used to not having huge amounts of screen real estate...

Currently, I'm attempting to convince my father-in-law that he should replace the families old Compaq with a mac mini. He's always complaining that they use his office computer...$499 fixes the problem.

[Vanilla]

Isn't the mini mac simply a niche product primarily created for helping Windows desktop users try out Mac OS X cheaply, utilising their existing accessories?

Apart from that I can't see how a mini mac beats for example a 12" iBook, which is also cheap & portable and comes complete with a screen and keyboard.

Vanilla

[madmaxmedia]

yes 499 is cheap, but, compared to cheap PCs, its still expensive...

No, it's really not. And either way it's a big step forward in affordability of Macs. No one is expecting Mac to overtake Windows, that is not Apple's goal. Right now, they would be more than content with increasing from 3% (or whatever it is) to say 6%. That's a drop in the bucket of Windows, but would be a great step forward for Apple.

We all know that adding just a couple of upgrade options will push that price about $700. But the main problem is one of perception. If PC's start at $399 (or whatever), and Macs start at $900 or so, Macs will seem more expensive regardless of the internals or features. The Mac Mini changes that. Whether you buy a PC or Mac, you will likely spend more than the minimum advertised price. But you start from there, and build up with whatever extra options you want. The Mac Mini is just like a PC in that regards, vs. say the iMac where you are paying for the LCD even if you don't want or need it.

PS: a cheap mac is a great idea... but did it really need to be that small? People seem to be fine with buying big bulky computers... and if they want smaller sleeker machines then they are probibly willing to spend the money it would take to get an imac...

Why not make it small? I don't think they would get any cost savings out of making it bigger anyways, so I'm not sure what your point is.

The one thing I wish they did was make it 3" high, and use a normal 3.5 HD instead of a 2.5 notebook HD. That makes it a PITA to upgrade (more expensive.) If they did that, they might have snuck in another RAM slot as well (so the built-in 256 stick doesn't go to waste if you upgrade, oh well that's what EBay is for.) But I guess adding a Firewire drive is fine for a non-notebook computer anyways...

[madmaxmedia]

Isn't the mini mac simply a niche product primarily created for helping Windows desktop users try out Mac OS X cheaply, utilising their existing accessories?

Apart from that I can't see how a mini mac beats for example a 12" iBook, which is also cheap & portable and comes complete with a screen and keyboard.

Vanilla

It's not supposed to beat a 12" iBook (which is what I have.) It's essentially the same computer (CPU/GPU/RAM), for a lot cheaper.

Let's say you were shopping for a budget Mac, and you really had no need for the mobility of a notebook. Which one would you buy? I'd buy the Mac Mini in a heartbeat. Even if the cost ends up similar if I buy a big LCD screen, that screen is way better than the LCD screen in the 12" iBook.

[tech4all]

You are missing something. The windows key on a "windows" keyboard works as a command key real good. It's just in the wrong spot.

So the Windows key will function as the Apple/Command key? I did not know that, thanks :)

[devwild]

So the Windows key will function as the Apple/Command key? I did not know that, thanks :)

Yes, and if you use logitech gear and install logitech's drivers it will actually swap alt/cmd so it's right. I'm sure some others out there do too.

Also, to answer the question about pc keyboards on macs that you don't realize till you need it and panic... holding on F12 ejects the cd-rom :)