PDA

View Full Version : The 'Mac mini lottery' is one dumb fiasco.


MacBytes
Oct 5, 2005, 08:50 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: Opinion/Interviews
Link: The 'Mac mini lottery' is one dumb fiasco. (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20051005095008)

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

Mitthrawnuruodo
Oct 5, 2005, 08:57 AM
Somebody's p*ssed because s/he got what s/he paid for... and not something better...? Get over it! :rolleyes:

Alex Cutter
Oct 5, 2005, 09:05 AM
Somebody's p*ssed because s/he got what s/he paid for... and not something better...? Get over it! :rolleyes:

Maybe you should read the article before posting. There's no mention of consumers complaining...only retailers. :rolleyes:

xli_ne
Oct 5, 2005, 09:47 AM
and it is bull... i can already see at work if people want to buy a mini, asking to open the machine up, boot it up to see which one the are buying. what a mess, hopefully that never happens.

Mitthrawnuruodo
Oct 5, 2005, 09:51 AM
Maybe you should read the article before posting. There's no mention of consumers complaining...only retailers. :rolleyes:I've read the article... and who do you think complains to the retailers... ;)

fixyourthinking
Oct 5, 2005, 09:57 AM
You get what you pay for - you may get a bargain ... the feature set is such a non issue that the upgrade is hardly noticeable ... in my mind ... this is the main reason for the non labeled boxes. The upgrade is more of a technology unification than an upgrade.

The only difference that I see this makes is to resellers. I would be more inclined to go to Apple directly, hoping I got a 1.5 or a 1.33 with more VRAM than to buy even a slightly discounted MacMini from a local reseller.

KREX725
Oct 5, 2005, 09:59 AM
Has anyone ever posted the basic cost of a Mini to Apple? How close does the cost come to the retail price? What I'm getting at is whether or not Apple doesn't want to disclose the bump because it would cause them to have to discount (unknown number) of stock at possibly an additional loss to Apple. By playing this sneaky-man routine, Apple doesn't guarantee a faster system and doesn't lose any additional money by people expecting a cheaper price for the leftover 1.42 models.

I still don't agree with the idea of not properly representing what's in the box, regardless of it maybe being a pro for the buyer, but I'd like to understand Apple's motive better.

RobHague
Oct 5, 2005, 10:03 AM
Is this maybe why the 'Test Drive' was pulled? :confused:

I mean you bought a Mac Mini then, and now there are 'better ones' shipping in the same box's - Wouldnt you return it and order another in the hope you would get the 1.5Ghz?

Maybe the test drive will return for the christmas season? That would surley give a big boost to sales.

Alex Cutter
Oct 5, 2005, 10:05 AM
I've read the article... and who do you think complains to the retailers... ;)

Maybe you should re-read it.

No one is complaining to the retailers. Retailers are complaining because "Customers who end up with only the advertised specifications may decide to return their product, knowing that better models exist."

"Somebody's p*ssed because s/he got what s/he paid for... and not something better...? Get over it!"

You're basically complaining about people who haven't yet complained.

Mitthrawnuruodo
Oct 5, 2005, 10:27 AM
Maybe you should re-read it.

No one is complaining to the retailers. Retailers are complaining because "Customers who end up with only the advertised specifications may decide to return their product, knowing that better models exist."

"Somebody's p*ssed because s/he got what s/he paid for... and not something better...? Get over it!"

You're basically complaining about people who haven't yet complained.Well if you really want to nitpick, then there hasn't even been any complaint from retailers, just journalists and an analyst who foresees that some retailers might get irritated...

Get over it... :rolleyes:

Edit: No need for a flame war over semantics... ;) (which the mods would strike down upon with vengeance, anyway.)

looklost
Oct 5, 2005, 10:48 AM
What a bunch of cry babies. If Apple sold these models for more money along side the others we be complaning that they increased the price of a bargain entry level computer. I'm in the automotive industry and the automakers upgrade componets in midyear for model all the time. Apple will know what componets are in your mac mini in case of needed repair even if it has the same model number the same way the auto industry does, by your serial number. It might not be the best way for Apple to clear out it's older inventory but it is by no means wrong. If your so worried about not getting a better spec computer then don't buy it.

nagromme
Oct 5, 2005, 11:19 AM
OK, so bloggers are complaining that retailers might complain that buyers might complain, on the off-chance that they heard that they might get a better machine than they bought, decided NOT to wait and be sure of that, but instead bought now and got exactly what they bought.

I'm not sure why--for the few buyers who even KNOW about this issue to be botheres--simply waiting would be impossible.

But if waiting is impossible, and if getting what you paid for while someone else gets luckier is intolerable, then my question is, how LONG will this even be an issue? Is this a months long transition? I doubt it.

Alex Cutter
Oct 5, 2005, 11:21 AM
Well if you really want to nitpick, then there hasn't even been any complaint from retailers, just journalists and an analyst who foresees that some retailers might get irritated...

Get over it... :rolleyes:

Edit: No need for a flame war over semantics... ;) (which the mods would strike down upon with vengeance, anyway.)
Who's the one nitpicking?

You're telling a bunch of non-existant complainers to "get over it".

solvs
Oct 5, 2005, 01:15 PM
I agree that this is all kinda silly, and probably a mistake, but I don't think it's as bad as people think. I mean, as bad as people think it will-might-maybe be. ;)

sjk
Oct 5, 2005, 04:44 PM
Before upgrading my iMac G5 I confirmed some were shipping with a Pioneer DVR-K?? burner (my preference) but mine came with a Matshita UJ-845 burner. If I didn't already have another Pioneer burner with upgraded firmware that difference could have been just as important for me as people objecting to the component differences with this "mini lottery". But would I have made a big public fuss about it? Nope. Maybe I'd have done what I could, calmly and patiently, to get the drive changed. In this case I accepted it and was satisfied. I'd gotten what I'd paid for even though there'd been some chance of the "better" model. In my experience similar sort of things have gone both ways, with a variety of different products and services.

The "mini lottery" fiasco (yawn) is yet another example of something I see as getting undeserved exaggerated attention and significance, causing unnecessary problems (e.g. creating an illusion of people being bait-and-switch victims) without any (or enough offsetting) benefits. Gee, let's pick today's news items for whipping into a frenzy and blathering about on the Internet! ;)

montex
Oct 5, 2005, 04:57 PM
I'm glad to see an update to the Mini and I'm set to buy one next month as a birthday present. However, I'll be chaffed if I get the "old" 1.42Mhz version instead of the new 1.5Mhz model. The person getting this Mac would never notice the difference -- but I sure would. I just hope the inventory channels clear out in the next few weeks and Apple officially announces the update so I won't have to play this stupid lottery game.