Mac mini sales predicted to rocket

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Jan 18, 2005.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
  2. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2005
    #2
    IT geeks looking to test the waters in OSX have no reason not to buy the Mac mini. If they love it, they hold the power to influence corporations to switch to OSX, not to Mac mini specifically, for it's security and robustness. Big business and creating mindshare among IT professionals is where the money is. Consumers will approach the Mac mini on strength of the iPod brand name.
     
  3. 24C
    macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    #3
    IMO consumer Macs have been getting cheaper all the time and have been reasonably competitive with quality branded Windows machines for some time. It's just with the arrival of the Mac mini, most mainstream commentators are picking on the Mac mini's perceived lower cost and it is going to be a big thing for Apple.

    One of the strengths of the Apple desktop consumer range was that it brought computing to people who weren't well served by existing products. It is not just about the physical hardware, it's also the interaction process, which normally Apple gets a very good hit rate on.

    The real measure of success for the Mac mini & Apple will be when they come to buy their next machine. If the Apple experience is good this will really bring on marketshare. I can't wait :D
     
  4. macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #4
    In other news air found to be a popular breathing medium among humans. :rolleyes: :D
     
  5. Moderator emeritus

    robbieduncan

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2002
    Location:
    London
    #5
    Without wanting to sound harsh sales of the mini are bound to rocket: before they were available they were zero!

    That said I think that the mini will be difficult to get hold of for a while as demand will outstrip supply.
     
  6. macrumors 603

    zelmo

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Mac since 7.5
    #6
    The Mac mini removes the illusion that the Mac is far too expensive. For years, Dell and their ilk have advertised cheap PC's to get people in the door. Once you equip that $399 computer with all the software and hardware, you always end up paying more. With the Mac, there was never the option to buy a cheap computer without bells and whistles, so there persisted the impression that the Mac was much more expensive.

    While the Mac does still cost a bit more than a comparable PC, recently, at least, the cost disparity has not been too great considering the quality of the build and the value of the OS.

    Mac mini will do extremely well. How much of a payoff there will be for Apple,, as far as market share, will not be known for at least a year. My conservative guess is a doubled share, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple leap to a 10% share within 24 months.
     
  7. macrumors 6502a

    macridah

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Location:
    Nor-Cal
    #7
    I with you on that powermac666.
     
  8. macrumors 603

    aswitcher

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    Location:
    Canberra OZ
    #8
    In 6 months or so I hope Apple update the Mac Mini and release a better graphics card (I assume it can handle the heat) option for those wanting better game and Tiger graphics performance.

    Also, I would like to see a "top end" Mac Mini with everything optional as standard and half a gig of ram made available but cheaper than the current sum of the parts, as the Mac Mini Deluxe (or Royale if your a Pulp Fiction fan). I actually think that such a configuration will be a sizable chunk of Apple's sales for the current release...being 80 gig, superdrive, wifi, BT. I would like them to cater directly for it and recognise that whilst the less markatable price point exists, on the other hand more will sell if its configured from scratch that way in the stores at a slightly cheaper price point.
     
  9. macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #9
    I think you are being WAY to optimistic. Apple has a history of not only underestimating demand year over year but also not being able to meet demand. I read somewhere that apple is expecting to ship 100,000 units a month. At that rate no way in heck are they going to snag 10%. They will be lucky to hit even 7% in a year at that rate. It all depends on two things:
    1. Creating the demand by creating buzz and that, like it or not, takes marketing. Something Apple hasn't done with their PC line in a LONG time.

    2. Meeting demand. If the market demands 250,000 units a month Apple should be asking who do I blow to get 250,000 units out ASAP. If that means eating some of the cost like they are obviously doing with initial shipments (Supposedly the first couple months they are actually air lifting the shipments to the US.) or looking to multiple manufacturers to meet demand then so be it.

    It boils down to this. Apple has a shot heard round the world on its hands. No one expected this. No one was ready for this. Before anyone else can respond with a cheap 'o knockoff they need to get their foot in the door, slap a jaws of life in there, and take some of that market share away from Dell and the like. This is the first time Apple has gone ball out against their PC competition. All I can say is don't sit there like a putz. If you are going after the PC market then do it in a big way!!
     
  10. macrumors 68020

    srobert

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    #10
    I personally don't think the mini "needs" a better graphic card. (But as you said, It would be nice having the option ^_^) It could stand some improvement though: A custom built Mini with 1 gig of RAM will cost almost double the base price. I know people can buy RAM from a less expensive source but Apple recommends the RAM be installed by a certified professional.

    This could look weird (if not fishy) for a switcher:

    Switcher: Hello sir, I'm interested in switching to mac. How much is that mini thing I've been hearing about?

    Clerk: It's only 500$ sir. A bargain. But I'd recommend boosting the RAM.
    Switcher: Nice! How much will that be if I want a Gig-O-Ram?
    Clerk: 925$
    Switcher: ...
    Clerk: ...
    Switcher: You had me for a second. Funny. No, seriously. How much?
    Clerk: ...


    It could also use a faster Hard drive. But since it's the entry level, stripped down mac, I guess it's OK. But I'm wondering how much more a faster drive would have costed... or is that a heat issue?
     
  11. macrumors 603

    zelmo

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2004
    Location:
    Mac since 7.5
    #11
    I get what you're saying, and agree with you. You ought to re-read my initial post. I said I thought they could achieve a 5% share in a year, and potentially see a share of 10% in TWO years (not one). IF they can meet the demand (not a given, as evidenced by their track record of late) this could be freaking huge for them. They made a splash with the mini, but it ultimately won't mean squat if they don't keep the pedal to the metal. I hope they take the iBook and PowerBook G5 soon, and have a G4 Book Mini in the wings, say for $699/799 price points. Crush Dell!
     
  12. macrumors 65816

    stcanard

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #12
    I doubt it will. The Mac Mini already has a better graphics card than the PC's it's supposed to compete with (an oft-missed point with the comparison to the Dell $500 PC is that they all use integrated cards).

    Putting a better card in would simply raise the price in an area where they are already ahead of the competition.

    <sigh> Why does everything have to be a game machine? I dont' play games. My wife doesn't play games. Why force us to pay an extra $500 for a bunch of junk we're not going to use? I like the fact that there are lines out there that I can buy without having to pay for all this hardware I'm not going to use.

    If you want a game machine go buy yourself an athlon with the lastest and greatest whatever-the-current-big-card-company is. Leave the Mac Mini for those of us who want a small, quiet computer to do day-to-day stuff on.
     
  13. macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #13
    Right NOW with Panther it doesn't need a better graphics card but the initial GPU specs that Apple listed on their site for support of Core Image didn't have the Mini's GPU listed. I have hope Apple is working on making it compatible since just before MW they yanked the list of supported graphics cards off of their site. I think every naysayer on the planet would be crying bloody murder if Apple didn’t ship a mini that wasn’t 150% compatible with Tiger when it ships on day one.
    I mean we are talking the company that is suppose to be the all in one, provide the total solution, purveyor of seamless integration here. We aren't talking a 4-year-old iMac here.
     
  14. macrumors 603

    SiliconAddict

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2003
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    #14
    Umm yah. Oops. Amazing what missing a word or two in a sentence can do to your interpretation of a post. :eek:
     
  15. macrumors 68040

    maya

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Location:
    somewhere between here and there.
    #15
    If Apple only made the Mac mini a tab bigger to fit in a cheap:

    Desktop Optical Drive
    Desktop HDD

    and a 2nd Ram slot this machine would be cheaper than the 499 price tag.


    Then again that is Apple, I mean who cares if it is 6.5x6.5x2" in dimensions, you are loosing a faster desktop HDD and optical drive for its size factor.

    I mean this is supposed to be a "Desktop" right, its not running off a battery. Since when did a desktop need to be mobile, how many times are your moving this thing around. It doesn't weight as much of a sack of bricks.

    This whole lets put notebook parts in a desktop is just foolish. No matter people will buy it since its a cheap, low end Mac offering. :rolleyes:


    Makes me wonder why they didn't go for 6.5x6.5x6.5 cube form factor. With built-in handle for transport. :)
     
  16. Moderator emeritus

    Mr. Anderson

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2001
    Location:
    VA
    #16
    Lets see what happens in a year or so and see if they do a G5 version. That will be a bigger market, I'm thinking. And they need to make it expandable (add on options that conform to the same design form).

    D
     
  17. 24C
    macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    #17
    That's the same thing that irked me about the design. I could understand it being small, in a Sony sort of way, but the components had to be more expensive as a result. As the price point was the number one issue, I couldn't understand the reason, as the difference in size is marginal, relative to the competition.

    Maybe there is something we don't know, like you could only get 100 in the new compact Apple retail stores, or it was getting too Cube like? :)
     
  18. macrumors 65816

    stcanard

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #18
    I have feeling aesthetics (making it stand out in an "Apple" way) were also a significant issue.

    A very small change in size can make a huge change in perception. My cell phone is only about 1/4" thicker, and less than a 1/4" longer than my old one, but you put them side by side and the bigger phone looks like a brick.

    The difference between 2 1/2" and 4" would probably do the same on the mac mini.
     
  19. macrumors 68040

    maya

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2004
    Location:
    somewhere between here and there.
    #19
    Again you are talking about a 2.5" HDD compared to a 3.5" HDD. What would this mean the mini size would be 7.5x7.5x2". I mean 1 " or maybe 1.5" who cares, you are using less expensive and higher performance drives. What matters more performance and cost for the mini or a smaller then a iPod mini in height. :confused:

    You are comparing a music player to a full computer, or a mobile to a computer.

    In which way are you going to carry this around with you. At best it will be moved about 2-6 times in your house and I am being generous towards that number. In reality it would be 1-2 times. How heavy is a 2.5" HDD and Optical drive to a 3.5" HDD and Optical drive. :confused:

    The 2.5" components loose on price and performance and only gain 1-1.5", for an Apple look. Get real you think There are many 7.5x7.5x2" computers out here that run on PPC. So if this thing was 1-1.5" more in size it will not be called a mini, why who defined what the name mini graces on what dimensions.

    The is another instance where Apple threw out cost and performance for size. :rolleyes:
     
  20. macrumors 65816

    stcanard

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #20
    That's exactly what I'm talking about. An extra 1" or 1.5" on paper may not seem like much, but when you look at it there's a huge difference on the perceived size.

    An extra 1" is almost 50% larger for this thing. That would make a huge perceptual difference.

    Don't think for a minute that the picture of it sitting beside an iPod Mini, with the iPod being taller is just a happy accident.

    snip...
    No, they made a design decision that balanced cost, performance, and aesthetics. Same thing that they've been doing since the original iMac and it's served them pretty well so far.
     
  21. macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #21
    must...resist... to make...gamecube...reference... ;)


    as for using laptop parts in desktop... if you sometimes would visit x86 user forums you would notice that there are a lot of people asking for small pentium-m motherboards
    i thing apple decided for laptop parts simply because of noise+heat reasons... a lot of people want such pcs (sure the imac is silent as well but chunk more expensive)

    and today getting more and more important: small power useage...

    edit: for me personally those are buying reasons as well, and i'm lugging around pcs regulary around 4-6 times a year for long distances and then even more so in the house and this all with a mid sized x86 case...
    putting my computer simply into my backpack will be much more easy...and going over to the friends hosue for copying some big files as well...
     
  22. macrumors 603

    aswitcher

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    Location:
    Canberra OZ
    #22
    I think the Mac Mini uses these laptop parts to keep the heat down as much as the size. Steve likes silent or near so (Cube) and I think this was a major reason for the use of laptop parts...
     
  23. macrumors 603

    aswitcher

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    Location:
    Canberra OZ
    #23
    A lot of people like to play games...or their kids do. Allowing the option to purchase a 64 meg card is not a big ask (assuming the heats ok) to allow those of us who from time to time play a few games.

    But its Core Image/Video and Tiger that I really want a larger video card for. If it does half of what we have had demoed then you'll want all the video ram you can get for eye candy and photo/video editing...and it aint that much more costly...
     
  24. 24C
    macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    #24
    I do think this is an issue as well. IMO, I think it's the reason for only 2 USB ports, plus the powerbrick is localised, so the Mac mini is simplified. Design is always a compromise, and if low cost was the only issue, then I think the Mac mini would have been different. As it is we can only guess what the priorities were, or the compromises the design team made.

    The other bit that I found confusing, the iMac G5 is very friendly to upgrade and troubleshoot. AFAIK this functionality is not part of the Mac mini wish list, although after watching the video, I'm not scared. ;)
     
  25. macrumors 65816

    stcanard

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2003
    Location:
    Vancouver
    #25
    And that's where you get upsold to an iMac or a PowerMac.
     

Share This Page