My theory is that Apple isn't really targeting switchers as much as they would like the Mac community to believe. I think Apple says their targeting switchers because it reinforces the belief that Apple hardware and software is better and that's why Mac users should pay more for it (and that's why others are "switching" to it). If Apple was really targeting switchers then why not advertise about the Mac not having any viruses? Instead they advertise Spotlight and Dashboard. My mother's eyes would gaze over if I tried to sell her on a Mac by saying, "With Spotlight, you can find anything on your computer as quickly as you type. Search your entire system from one place: Files, emails, contacts, images, calendars and applications appear instantly". But the second you mention, "completely immune to viruses" her ears perk up. Even if they've never dealt with a virus personally they've definitely heard about them on the news and at the watercooler. I've seriously tried to tell two very casual Panther users about Spotlight and why they should upgrade to Tiger and their eyes glazed over. I don't think Apple is stupid enough to not notice this phenomenon, I think they just aren't targeting switchers at all. Only Mac enthusiasts and users get excited over Spotlight and Dashboard. On people who are Mac fanatics because of their of "superiority complex" or people who are ginuwine Apple lovers (or Microsoft haters) would care about those Longhorn posters at WWDC 2004. Advertising "virus immunity" over Spotlight and "Introducing Longhorn" would have been much more beneficial to actually attracting switchers but not as good for reinforcing the ego of many Mac Fanatics. If the Mac Mini's lack of a keyboard and mouse is due to PC switchers already having keyboards then why does the Mini not come with a PS/2 adapter? The majority of PC users with keyboard and PC over 2-3 years old have PS/2 keyboards. I don't really think that Apple expects switchers to go to the store to pick up an adapter (they aren't that easy to find at brick and mortor stores) or even know that they exist. And why would Apple want a switchers first major experience with a Mac to be with a PC keyboard anyway? A few of the rather crucial keys are different, there's no eject button, and there usually aren't any USB ports on it. It's already hard enough to figure out that they option and shift keys on a Mac keyboard don't have the symobls on them that are used within the OS, now add the confusion of the Windows key being the Apple/Command Key and a few other inconsistencies. And PC keyboard don't usually have USB ports on them. That means the two USB ports on the Mini are swallowed by the mouse and KB. Do they really expect switchers to go out and by a hub too? So basically, they didn't include a keyboard and mouse because the people they were targeting (Mac users) already have keyboards and mice that work great with the Mini/Mac issues I mentioned above. Additionally, companies like Dell, HP, Compaq, and E-Machines have made a killing in the Mini's price range because they offer a ton of power and really high-specs for a LOW PRICE. The Mini doesn't offer that at all. It's not designed to target people who bought machines from those companies at all, it's designed to appeal to people who typically buy Macs for their design. I bet the Mini's sales primarily consist of people who had older Macs and wanted to upgrade but didn't want to fork over $1500 for an iMac or people who wanted to add another Mac to their collection but didn't want to spend that much either. I bet the Mini seriously ate into the sales of iMacs and that's why they won't see upgrades as fast as iMacs and other products. My prediction is that if Apple is really targeting switchers with Leopard and Mactel, then they'll put iLife back in it. The only reason they removed it was because the people they were targeting (Mac users) already had iLife and knew enough about it to buy a new version. What's the point of buying Leopard and installing it on a Dell if it doesn't come with any apps? Why is it that they advertise the iPod and iTunes everywhere (Superbowl ads) but they don't advertise OS X anywhere? Because the people they target their OS/Mac marketing toward already know about the Mac OS (because they already own Macs). How many switchers did Apple really target by keeping their new technology (G5) in a price range that was more than triple what the average PC user pays? Supposedly, G5's are much cheaper than P4's and A64's to make so Apple could make a $600-1000 headless box that competes with P4's and A64's in that range while still having enough money left over to make a compelling design-- but why do that when you can take the same technology double or triple the price and sell it to the extremely small user base that will buy nearly anything you sell? Apple knows that this is the only way to remain profitable in todays PC industry outside of out "Delling" Dell and they're going to milk it for all it's worth. Get a small user base that is extremely dedicated to you, keep them thinking everything you do is superior (that comment about other companies buying monitors that Apple rejects was complete BS BTW) so they'll pay outrageous prices for your products. Sony to an extent does the same thing with their PC's (although much less so than Apple) and it seems to work for them. What do you guys think?