Lacero said:
On the other hand, they'll likely need new hardware anyway, so it might be an excellent time to switch.
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.
iPod 'Halo' Effect, Mac Mini and More...
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
On the other hand, they'll likely need new hardware anyway, so it might be an excellent time to switch.
I would think that it's becoming a looming thought in Jobs' mind about the possibility of that dropoff in iPod sales (as Oppenheimer noted). I don't see nearly as many people looking at friends' iPods as I see them with their own. And I'm also glad that there isn't a huge jump in switchers -- modest gains are really all the company needs. People think that everybody needs a Mac (and while it might be true), the company doesn't need it. They just need more people to see the light.
Apple/Microsoft (my big mistake)
About 4 years ago I wanted to invest some money in Apple stock, but decided to hedge my bet by also investing in Microsoft stock.
Good move by buying the Apple stock.
Big mistake by also buying the Microsoft stock.
$20,000 I invested in Apple is worth $60,000 now.
$20,000 I invested in Microsoft is worth $10,000 now.
So overall $40,000 investment is now worth $70,000.
If I had put the whole $40,000 in Apple, it would be worth $120,000 now.
Microsoft's stock is just like it's products, you get what you pay for.
Gump said:
About 4 years ago I wanted to invest some money in Apple stock, but decided to hedge my bet by also investing in Microsoft stock.
Good move by buying the Apple stock.
Big mistake by also buying the Microsoft stock.
$20,000 I invested in Apple is worth $60,000 now.
$20,000 I invested in Microsoft is worth $10,000 now.
So overall $40,000 investment is now worth $70,000.
If I had put the whole $40,000 in Apple, it would be worth $120,000 now.
Microsoft's stock is just like it's products, you get what you pay for.
fawlty said:
Two counterpoints....
- Longhorn will run their existing software - with the Mac they'd need to buy new packages
- PCs tend to be much more expandable than most Macs - many PCs can be upgraded to Longhorn's recommended configurations (add memory, or better graphics,....)
- Longhorn will turn off the eye-candy and other effects on machines that aren't up to the recommended configurations, and perform just fine
OK, that's three. I've got that Pentium math error again....
ASP272 said:
I feel that mini market is the Windows techie that already has a 3.8 Ghz PC and always was curious about Macs but thought they were too expensive. They already have extra monitors, keyboards, and mice laying around. The moron salesman probably won't have much luck with these folks.
But you are right about the average PC buyer. They will do what CompUSA says without a doubt.
Mediacenter
Well I think Apple is missing the boot with their media center attitude. Why would someone want a media center?
Because it's the home-central computer from which you can record television programs, play DVD's, XviDs, online video, Mp3s, stream radio, play FM radio, look at your images etc etc.
I wouldn't want to do something on my mac to be able to view or hear something on my TV. The TV/or monitor is the medium and with a simple remote control I would want to be able to do all the things mentiones above. I just installed a Windows (yes I know the enemy) media center 2005. And I must admit that apple can learn from this. It's a complete userfriendly solution while Apple's streaming aproach isn't...
I was pretty stunned that there wasn't a MiniMac released with TV-in.
Jan
Well I think Apple is missing the boot with their media center attitude. Why would someone want a media center?
Because it's the home-central computer from which you can record television programs, play DVD's, XviDs, online video, Mp3s, stream radio, play FM radio, look at your images etc etc.
I wouldn't want to do something on my mac to be able to view or hear something on my TV. The TV/or monitor is the medium and with a simple remote control I would want to be able to do all the things mentiones above. I just installed a Windows (yes I know the enemy) media center 2005. And I must admit that apple can learn from this. It's a complete userfriendly solution while Apple's streaming aproach isn't...
I was pretty stunned that there wasn't a MiniMac released with TV-in.
Jan
On the subject of streaming, I distinctly remember in the keynote in which Airtunes was released, Steve Jobs mentioned it could output 5.1 surround. It wasn't implied, or subtly hinted -- he said it could be done.
There's also been a post in general music to the effect of "If you put in a surround DVD audio and play in iTunes, the surround signal gets streamed to the Airtunes intact."
The mind boggles to consider why they haven't explored this further, since streaming technolgy, and not the media centre is apparently Apple's next big thing.
There's also been a post in general music to the effect of "If you put in a surround DVD audio and play in iTunes, the surround signal gets streamed to the Airtunes intact."
The mind boggles to consider why they haven't explored this further, since streaming technolgy, and not the media centre is apparently Apple's next big thing.
I agree with jeeepeee, I want a media server ontop of my HD TV plugged in with DVI and sporting a rez as good as an older CRT (but much bigger screen size) . Or a comparable overhead projector setup... and hence I think apple is missing the boat too.
Mac Mini as HTPC
Check that out.. for a review of the Mac minis ability at this time to be a home theater PC or entertainment server.. same thing (basically).
Secondly I dont own a Mac, but I have two Windows based PC's, and a Linux box in my apartment, I own an iPod and I will be buying a Mac mini just to try out... they are going to score big with this... both PC enthusiasts and noob users will be attracted to the mini. So is there a Halo affect from the iPod.. I am sure...even for people who dont own one.. The name Apple is always in the news making it seem like more of a possibility when looking to purchase a computer. And I am willing to wager that more than 30% of iPods sold are going to PC users.
So why do I want an HTPC from Apple? When I could have Myth TV on my Linux or Media Center 2005 on my PC?
Cause I want an iCinema store, like my iTunes store that will let me rent and stream movies over the internet.. or buy and store on my HD.. (not a new idea its talked about around on the net) don't care... but the iTunes music store is brilliant... if they can replicate it for Movies I, (as a faithful PC user and DIY'er) have no doubt that Apple can invade living rooms...
But if they dont have the desire to move on this oppurtunity the boat will sail without them.
. Or a comparable overhead projector setup... and hence I think apple is missing the boat too.Mac Mini as HTPC
Check that out.. for a review of the Mac minis ability at this time to be a home theater PC or entertainment server.. same thing (basically).
Secondly I dont own a Mac, but I have two Windows based PC's, and a Linux box in my apartment, I own an iPod and I will be buying a Mac mini just to try out... they are going to score big with this... both PC enthusiasts and noob users will be attracted to the mini. So is there a Halo affect from the iPod.. I am sure...even for people who dont own one.. The name Apple is always in the news making it seem like more of a possibility when looking to purchase a computer. And I am willing to wager that more than 30% of iPods sold are going to PC users.
So why do I want an HTPC from Apple? When I could have Myth TV on my Linux or Media Center 2005 on my PC?
Cause I want an iCinema store, like my iTunes store that will let me rent and stream movies over the internet.. or buy and store on my HD.. (not a new idea its talked about around on the net) don't care... but the iTunes music store is brilliant... if they can replicate it for Movies I, (as a faithful PC user and DIY'er) have no doubt that Apple can invade living rooms...
But if they dont have the desire to move on this oppurtunity the boat will sail without them.
my opinion for the record
The whole "mac users are so loyal" thing began to die when apples marketing was born. the mac users from the 80s and 90s are not in play. the people in play are the idiots you see every day saying things like "I know I know macs are better for multimedia.." or people who buy one to work with their ipod. they buy a mac because it looks good at the front desk. basically they just buy the ad campain and the whisper campain.
what I'm trying to say is that the people in play are the fickle consumers not the die hard computer users.
if longhorn is either prettier, cooler, has a better brand/image,or more agressive business practices then people will go back.
apple is no longer a weak little computer company clenching to its taped glasses for dear life.
-matt
The whole "mac users are so loyal" thing began to die when apples marketing was born. the mac users from the 80s and 90s are not in play. the people in play are the idiots you see every day saying things like "I know I know macs are better for multimedia.." or people who buy one to work with their ipod. they buy a mac because it looks good at the front desk. basically they just buy the ad campain and the whisper campain.
what I'm trying to say is that the people in play are the fickle consumers not the die hard computer users.
if longhorn is either prettier, cooler, has a better brand/image,or more agressive business practices then people will go back.
apple is no longer a weak little computer company clenching to its taped glasses for dear life.
-matt
ASP272 said:
What are you two talking about -- the only problem with the Mini is that Apple can't make them fast enough. I go to the Apple Store Soho at least twice a week, and have seen a Mini in stock only once -- on the day iLife was released, in the middle of a major blizard.
I think that Apple's supply is a LONG way from catching up with demand. I bet that's the reason they aren't really advertising it is because they can't make enough of them as it is.
I think that Apple has a HUGE hit on their hands with the Mini.
Ted
Streaming and the need for a Home Theater edition Mini
Apple should start working on a Home Theater version of the Mini pronto. If they do it right, they could sell it for $1500 and still have a smash hit on their hands. It needs digital (optical) audio in/out, video in/out, FW800 for big storage, a good BlueTooth remote, and top flight DVI support for a wide selection of HD TVs/monitors. It would easily fit in a component rack -- it would be smaller than your DVD Player, which you could junk.
Ted
Is there a way to e-mail Oppenheimer or someone at Apple who would read the missive? The above is utter nonsense. You can't even send 5.1 DTS or Dolby Digital from the Apple DVD Player wirelessly via AirPort Express, much less anything from a third party app. It only works with iTunes, which is fine for music (so long as somebody's 2.4 Ghz cordless phone doesn't keep stepping on the connection), but what about everything from DVDs, to Internet streaming audio that's in WMA or Real format? And of course 802.11g doesn't have the bandwidth to stream HD- Video (1920x1080 at 60 Hz) anyway -- and according to Steve Jobs 2005 is supposed to be the year of Hi Def.
Apple should start working on a Home Theater version of the Mini pronto. If they do it right, they could sell it for $1500 and still have a smash hit on their hands. It needs digital (optical) audio in/out, video in/out, FW800 for big storage, a good BlueTooth remote, and top flight DVI support for a wide selection of HD TVs/monitors. It would easily fit in a component rack -- it would be smaller than your DVD Player, which you could junk.
Ted
Ted13 said:
check out Nicecast by Rogue Amoeba.
Ted13 said:
While this is the year of HD video, it will also be the year of Mpeg4 H.264, the compression technology used to store and stream high-def content. Even broadcast High Definition TV doesn't actually stream an uncompressed HD Video signal. H.264 will be much more efficient than Mpeg2 compression used now. Anyway, maybe you don't have to stream it directly to the television. You could send it to a set top box for viewing.
Ted13 said:
You want to raise the price from $500 to $1500 dollars and you still think it will sell to the market that the mini is aimed at? I can't see that happening.
If you really want those features, you can set up a PowerMac to meet all except for the size and price. If you really want the computer to replace several thousand dollars of qualty A/V equipment and include a full computer, don't expect it to cost even $1500.
Gump said:
Nice troll, newbie.
I'll give you the actual, current halo effect: people are actively looking for alternatives from Windows, because they're fed up with all the problems they're having with it.
Linux ain't ready.
Apple is the only real alternative and they're playing all their cards. The Mac mini is proof of this (and its sticker price).
Have fun with Longhorn, though. You'll have to wait mid-2007, however.
"stating they are happen with the company's rate of growth and with no plans to do such licensing."
typo!!!!
re: longhorn.
well last i heard it required a DUAL CORE 4ghz-7ghz computer.
at least apple can develop an OS for computers that currently exist.
typo!!!!
re: longhorn.
well last i heard it required a DUAL CORE 4ghz-7ghz computer.
at least apple can develop an OS for computers that currently exist.
AidenShaw said:Two counterpoints....
- Longhorn will run their existing software - with the Mac they'd need to buy new packages
- PCs tend to be much more expandable than most Macs - many PCs can be upgraded to Longhorn's recommended configurations (add memory, or better graphics,....)
- Longhorn will turn off the eye-candy and other effects on machines that aren't up to the recommended configurations, and perform just fine
OK, that's three. I've got that Pentium math error again....
1. If it's anything like the previous change (98SE -> XP), I wouldn't bet on that. I still see some software that won't run correctly on XP but runs just fine on 95/98SE. We need to push major companies to offer free/low-cost switching for their software (pay 20$ to switch from Photoshop Windows to Photoshop Mac OS X).
2. I can tell you from personnal experience that it's true only up to a certain point. My last PC upgrade ended up with an incompatible power supply and incompatible memory (from my previous to my new motherboard). In a lot of cases, people just buy a new computer (even if you want to do it yourself, you end up buying a new motherboard, CPU, RAM, power supply... Then you end up paying for another case, keyboard, mouse, HD, CD-ROM, etc. so you can keep/sell/give your old one as a complete system). The only real advantage a PC has over a consumer Mac is the ability to upgrade the videocard (and also, most PCs have more memory slots than most Macs). We need a "PowerMac mini" of some kind for that type of user (single G5, iMac G5 specs, but with AGP/PCI-Express slot, two HD drive bays, 4+ memory slots).
3. Knowing Microsoft, turning off the eye-candy will be the last thing to speed up your system. I believe all their "innovating" technologies will be stuff in areas like file system, indexing, etc. Stuff you can't turn off.
Gump said:
Ok, I know you're probably just trolling, but I'll bite. With Longhorn, people will upgrade because they have to. It's not like anyone will be excited about it, besides the freakish MS fanboys. Think about the XP release. Was anyone rushing to it? No. The only reason offices started migrating was because Microsoft started breaking apps unless you had XP (Word did not play nicely with both 2000 and XP).
So again, MS will use their market dominance to force people to upgrade. It's called a monopoly. So if your definition of "crush" is more units sold, then yes, Longhorn will crush Mac OS X, because of the monopoly MS has, and for no other reason.
When Microsoft says they have a good product, do you honestly think people believe them anymore? Virus, spyware, bugs, blue-screen-of-death is the norm for Windows users. For some odd reason, they put up with it. The rest of us here who use Mac or Linux have seen it, and have decided to use a better computing solution. At the end of the day, it's all about answering the question "How can I easily do the things I need to do on a computer?". For most people that means email and the Web. There's no reason they have to use MS products to do those things.
I know it's sad, but I really feel pity for Windows users.
I do love these grand sweeping statements, "Windows is all about BSOD, Viruses, spyware" etc, etc. My PC, running XP Pro, has never crashed, or given me any issues at all with hardware incompatibility (I built it myself). I have had problems with crap hardware itself, but any computer can do this, Mac's use standard parts too. I have used Mac's since 1988 so I can't be called a newbie, but I think the problems with PC's stem more from the user than the software or hardware in PC's. If people are dumb enough to click on a link or open an email and then launch the attachment, then there's nothing you can do to stop them.
Macrumors said:
I would tend to agree with him, BUT I am not all that happy with the AirPort Express streaming. When my wife streams the radio from her computer to the speakers connected to the Airport Express it bogs down the Airport Express something awful making browsing and mail not work. It is at its worst if she is connected to our other Airport Basestation which then sends the data over the Ethernet to the Airport Express. If I switch her connection to the Airport Express, as I just did, then it is not as bad but still patchy. Concept is good - Implementation needs work.