Not sure where you pulled that number from. But the single largest market is for mid range computers. Not entry level and not server class cpus, and not integrated monitors.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac Mini End Of Life?
- Thread starter Dont Hurt Me
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Not sure where you pulled that number from. But the single largest market is for mid range computers. Not entry level and not server class cpus, and not integrated monitors.
At least it's not Skulltrail. What do you mean by me not running Apple? I'm sorry for the lack of [sarcasm] tags.
As we already know, who buys Apple RAM?
Y'know, hate to be the grammar police or anything, but saying "As we already know" and then asking a question doesn't really make sense. We get it... but...
Otherwise, considering I don't want to spend 6 hours reading the thread, the mini is doomed if and when the xMac comes out, assuming it's a little teeny weeny tower.
But the single largest market is for mid range computers.
Another but though, is that Apple's market? Appears that Apple is content to let Dell and Gateway and Compaq/HP fight it out over that market, which includes a sizable business component which means slim margins, stiff payment terms and impossible customer service demands. Except for the Mac Pro, Apple is focused on the less demanding customer and those of us in this forum are generally not in that class, though we love our Macs, we have a more reasoned approach to their value, rather than they look pretty.
While this thread seems to be divided between those who think the MacMini is fine as it is and those who want a bit more (as well as a bit more from Apple), the truth is that all of us are likely in the minority as Mac Users and we're all expressing wishful thinking, that Steve Jobs would see the light and market a couple of machines that appeal to the aficionado with a small budget. I wished he would have before I plopped down my bucks for the Mac Pro, I may not need everything it's got under the hood, and I won't say that I regret the decision, nor expect to do so in the future, but truth be told a Mac Mini with a bit more more under the hood was more appealing and would have served my pocket book much better. I also think that Steve foregoes a few more dollars in the Apple pocket by ignoring this little area, i.e. those interested in tinkering under the hood, but then that seems to have been Wozniak's interest and not Jobs'. So all you can do is hope (I gave up and spent the money).
Another but though, is that Apple's market? Appears that Apple is content to let Dell and Gateway and Compaq/HP fight it out over that market, which includes a sizable business component which means slim margins, stiff payment terms and impossible customer service demands. Except for the Mac Pro, Apple is focused on the less demanding customer and those of us in this forum are generally not in that class, though we love our Macs, we have a more reasoned approach to their value, rather than they look pretty.
While this thread seems to be divided between those who think the MacMini is fine as it is and those who want a bit more (as well as a bit more from Apple), the truth is that all of us are likely in the minority as Mac Users and we're all expressing wishful thinking, that Steve Jobs would see the light and market a couple of machines that appeal to the aficionado with a small budget. I wished he would have before I plopped down my bucks for the Mac Pro, I may not need everything it's got under the hood, and I won't say that I regret the decision, nor expect to do so in the future, but truth be told a Mac Mini with a bit more more under the hood was more appealing and would have served my pocket book much better. I also think that Steve foregoes a few more dollars in the Apple pocket by ignoring this little area, i.e. those interested in tinkering under the hood, but then that seems to have been Wozniak's interest and not Jobs'. So all you can do is hope (I gave up and spent the money).
That was a guess of how often that I, in selling Apple machines, met a customer who would not be satisfied with one of the machines in Apple's current lineup. Many customers were enthusiastic to ditch the tower for a slim iMac.
Thanks for the encouragement. I've built a couple PCs for family and myself and am learning what brands to pick out that will mesh will together. I actually built a wishlist on NewEgg that will spank an iMac... 2.66 C2D Conroe, 4GB DDR2 800 RAM (2 x 2GB so there's room for 8GB), dual HDDs 500GB each (for easy Windows dual-boot), and even an 8800 GT. SLI-ready. (not equipped). Guess how much? Under $950.
Add a copy of Leopard, Win XP (say 'no' to Vista =P ), a copy of iLife and you're probably at $1300, depending on where you shop.
- Best - xMac - ever -
What a narrow-minded response.
Because I love Macs. I love OS X. I love iLife. I love Logic (R.I.P., emagic). I love the security. I've used Apples/Macs all my life. I just can't find the right hardware from Apple. I'd LOVE to have the simplicity of a machine I can just USE and its performance would be perfect for my needs, but Apple doesn't make it. I'm willing to sacrifice that one small detail for hardware that suits me.
Your near-insult calls into question your own knowledge of the computers. Say you loved Mercedes cars, but you needed a truck. For me to tell you to go buy a Toyota would be a huge insult. Likewise, your telling me that I should have no interest in Apple is an extremely uninformed comment/insult, though I believe you did not intend to insult me, so you are forgiven for doing so. You simply do not understand the situation.
-Clive
Perhaps. Then again, they have no alternative either. You'd not see me in your store as I know you don't have what I want.
For the record I own a MBP and 2 minis. I'll buy an iMac when hell freezes over. You can't say that if they offered a nice looking mini tower with reasonable specs that you wouldn't get swamped by switchers. Cuz it don't exist.
Thanks for the encouragement. I've built a couple PCs for family and myself and am learning what brands to pick out that will mesh will together. I actually built a wishlist on NewEgg that will spank an iMac... 2.66 C2D Conroe, 4GB DDR2 800 RAM (2 x 2GB so there's room for 8GB), dual HDDs 500GB each (for easy Windows dual-boot), and even an 8800 GT. SLI-ready. (not equipped). Guess how much? Under $950.
Add a copy of Leopard, Win XP (say 'no' to Vista =P ), a copy of iLife and you're probably at $1300, depending on where you shop.
- Best - xMac - ever -
What a narrow-minded response.
Because I love Macs. I love OS X. I love iLife. I love Logic (R.I.P., emagic). I love the security. I've used Apples/Macs all my life. I just can't find the right hardware from Apple. I'd LOVE to have the simplicity of a machine I can just USE and its performance would be perfect for my needs, but Apple doesn't make it. I'm willing to sacrifice that one small detail for hardware that suits me.
Your near-insult calls into question your own knowledge of the computers. Say you loved Mercedes cars, but you needed a truck. For me to tell you to go buy a Toyota would be a huge insult. Likewise, your telling me that I should have no interest in Apple is an extremely uninformed comment/insult, though I believe you did not intend to insult me, so you are forgiven for doing so. You simply do not understand the situation.
-Clive
You'd be surprised how many people buy Apple RAM. I'm always hearing people at the Apple Store getting an extra GB when they are with a salesperson buying a new iMac. Usually older people, though.
If they don't make any hardware you find acceptable, seems Apple just isn't right for you.
Wow. You just don't get it.
Are you aware that there's a difference between hardware and software?
-Clive
Really? I had no idea.
Considering Leopard won't work on a PC- at least not easily, and you don't find any Mac models which suit you, looks like you're stuck.
The Mini is what it is.
The same can be said of any hardware vendor and not just Apple. I'm sure you haven't ignore every hardware complaint thread here on MacRumors. The loveable headless iMac always manages to resurrect itself everyday.
I suggest getting a quad core. It's a nice hobbyist venture.Clive At Five said:
[sarcasm]digg can't be wrong![/sarcasm]
I've thought about it, but from what I read, there are more compatibility issues between boards, BIOS and Leopard with Quad Cores.
Depending on how long I wait to build the system, I may or may not go the Quad Core route.
I don't know if you read around, but installing Leopard, in many cases, is as easy as tinkering 2 or 3 BIOS settings (very simple if you've ever built a computer before, which I have several times), inserting the disc and installing.
And, no, the Mini is not where it's at. A Mini will hold me over for a year or two, tops, before it can no long run at the performance rate I need it to.
-Clive
Not necessarily the best place to make a profit...
The only way to ensure a profit when selling into the "largest market" is if its an untapped market. Once the market has matured, and the mid-tower market is certainly mature, then profit margins are thin due to the fierce competition. Purchasing decisions by customers are based on price.
Apple, IMO, seems to like being the big fish in the small barrel where they can stand out. They can drive this market with innovation. Here, their customer base is looking for "cool" rather than cheap. It seems they have decided to sell fewer units at a higher margins.
While I'm sure Apple is happy for the "switchers", I don't think the "switchers" form an important part of the market Apple is aiming for. People who use Windows are - and I'm generalizing here - more price sensitive because, in my experience, they tend to treat their computers more as a disposable item - upgrading their equipment every 1 or 2 years.
YMMV
Just my 2 cents
The only way to ensure a profit when selling into the "largest market" is if its an untapped market. Once the market has matured, and the mid-tower market is certainly mature, then profit margins are thin due to the fierce competition. Purchasing decisions by customers are based on price.
Apple, IMO, seems to like being the big fish in the small barrel where they can stand out. They can drive this market with innovation. Here, their customer base is looking for "cool" rather than cheap. It seems they have decided to sell fewer units at a higher margins.
While I'm sure Apple is happy for the "switchers", I don't think the "switchers" form an important part of the market Apple is aiming for. People who use Windows are - and I'm generalizing here - more price sensitive because, in my experience, they tend to treat their computers more as a disposable item - upgrading their equipment every 1 or 2 years.
YMMV
Just my 2 cents
The Mac Pro is a very cost-effective workstation. Honestly, I'd buy it even if I just ran 64-bit Windows on it because it's a great value for what you get. But I accept not everyone needs a workstation, but would like something with a bit more oomph then what the iMac has traditionally offered.
If the single-CPU Mac Pro was about $500 less then it is, I'd have bought it instead of a 24" Al iMac and I expect so would many others. But I understand it is a workstation with workstation parts and those are not inexpensive so such a price break is not possible with Apple's desired margins. And the main reason I say $500 is that would cover enough of the cost of a 23" ACD or allow me to buy a 24" from vendors like Dell or HP.
I've argued against a Mac "mid-tower" more then for it, but down the road, there should be a case for such a model using a Core2 Duo (not a Core2Extreme quad unless quads are the new entry-level) with a higher-end game-centric GPU to round out the family. Perhaps around OS 10.6 if that OS does become Intel-only and perhaps with applications tweaked to take maximum advantage of all those cores. So folks doing Photoshop for a living will want the Mac Pro, where those doing it as a serious hobby would be content with the "Mac Tower".
There will be enough CPU, memory and with non-game-centric GPU power to clearly differentiate the Mac Pro from the Mac Tower as well as clearly position the Mac Pro as the only "legitimate" machine for serious professional use. So the worries of cannibalization and fratricide will be effetively eliminated.
If the single-CPU Mac Pro was about $500 less then it is, I'd have bought it instead of a 24" Al iMac and I expect so would many others. But I understand it is a workstation with workstation parts and those are not inexpensive so such a price break is not possible with Apple's desired margins. And the main reason I say $500 is that would cover enough of the cost of a 23" ACD or allow me to buy a 24" from vendors like Dell or HP.
I've argued against a Mac "mid-tower" more then for it, but down the road, there should be a case for such a model using a Core2 Duo (not a Core2Extreme quad unless quads are the new entry-level) with a higher-end game-centric GPU to round out the family. Perhaps around OS 10.6 if that OS does become Intel-only and perhaps with applications tweaked to take maximum advantage of all those cores. So folks doing Photoshop for a living will want the Mac Pro, where those doing it as a serious hobby would be content with the "Mac Tower".
There will be enough CPU, memory and with non-game-centric GPU power to clearly differentiate the Mac Pro from the Mac Tower as well as clearly position the Mac Pro as the only "legitimate" machine for serious professional use. So the worries of cannibalization and fratricide will be effetively eliminated.
Wrong name!
I suspect Apple made a mistake calling the mini the Macmini. Why? Well because it undersells what is in effect a replacement for the vast majority windows computers in offices across the world.
The clever part is that you can throw away the old beige box, plug your existing monitor and keyboard into your Mac mini and have a powerful and reliable computer. For me Mini means a standard computer manufactured to the size it should be rather than one of those numb great boxes.
Unfortunately the marketplace out there think that "mini" means low specification.
The Mac mini doesn't need a redesign because of its practicality, it needs a new branding which does not undersell it's capabilities. The design is excellent but may have to change to create a new branding image.
At a professional level in an everyday working office using wordprocessing, accounts, database, spreadsheet and internet the Macmini is ideal and a low cost way of providing a Mac networked workplace.
I suspect Apple made a mistake calling the mini the Macmini. Why? Well because it undersells what is in effect a replacement for the vast majority windows computers in offices across the world.
The clever part is that you can throw away the old beige box, plug your existing monitor and keyboard into your Mac mini and have a powerful and reliable computer. For me Mini means a standard computer manufactured to the size it should be rather than one of those numb great boxes.
Unfortunately the marketplace out there think that "mini" means low specification.
The Mac mini doesn't need a redesign because of its practicality, it needs a new branding which does not undersell it's capabilities. The design is excellent but may have to change to create a new branding image.
At a professional level in an everyday working office using wordprocessing, accounts, database, spreadsheet and internet the Macmini is ideal and a low cost way of providing a Mac networked workplace.
Yeah, no kidding. I just realized today that the entry-level Mini has the same HDD capacity as the entry-level iPod Classic... and the upper-end model has MORE HDD space than the upper-end Mini. Come on, Apple, it's a COMPUTER. It needs more capacity than an iPod. Plus, last time I checked, 2.5" HDDs were cheaper than 1.8" HDDs.
Apple, do you think you could scale back on your 80% profit margins on the MacMini and make us a competitive computer? These people who keep saying that the Mini is a sinkhole for profits, I honestly don't think you know what you are talking about.
Just a survey of NewEgg:
80GB HDD: $55. 120GB: $70
Combo Drive: $40. SuperDrive: $45
2 x 512MB RAM: $25
1.83GHz CPU: $240. 2.0GHz CPU: $300.
Logic Board (I'm using a MicroATX with 800MHz FSB for the closest comparison I can find): $45.
That puts my bill at $405 for the entry-level and $485 for the upper-level.
On my NewEgg-built high-end Mini, Apple is already making 60% margins and we haven't even taken into account the huge discounts that Apple gets for buying in bulk.
Sure there's software in there too, but how the cost of that should be regarded, I am unsure. Certainly it costs them mere pennies to install it, and determining the actual value of it is impossible to do.
The fact remains, that Apple is making a killing on the Mini, no matter how you slice it.
-Clive
You forgot the casing and the power supply.
And the special sized (small) motherboards come at a large premium;
mini-ITX board (17x17cm) here cost about €200-250! ($300-350), deff not the standard micro-ATX (24.4x24.4cm)
you mention.
And the special sized (small) motherboards come at a large premium;
mini-ITX board (17x17cm) here cost about €200-250! ($300-350), deff not the standard micro-ATX (24.4x24.4cm)
you mention.
oh dude you so right on, this mac mini is toast, theres goona be this new computer thats goona nail the mini in its coffin, its called the 
iTube its a giant cylinder with cup holders. it has wii max and 3g and uses wirelesspower from aurora borealis.
iTube its a giant cylinder with cup holders. it has wii max and 3g and uses wirelesspower from aurora borealis.Wow, I think Al Gore is going to like that! (He will probably trade in his Mac Pro immediately!)
- Status