Mac Mini End Of Life?

[motoxpress]

OK, what if your friend's answer is: "I want to do some photoshop work, play the occasional Windows game, and also hook up a PS3 for games and blu ray movies."

You want to hook up a PS3 to a computer? Why? If you want to use the screen then you would be better off getting a cheap 32" LCD. I think they would be happier separating the PS3 from it.

Trust me, I can certainly be accused of trying to make a computer do far more than it should. I think one has to keep your goals in perspective.

I bet Dell could configure a PC more powerful than the Mini which would be fine for games and cost a fraction of what the Mac Pro costs. Plus he could get a monitor which supports HDCP and multiple devices.

...and what OS is it going to operate on? Kinda kills the whole point.

I would have no problem recommending an iMac to most anyone for home use. If they are a hard-core gamer then they need to just build a PC. A MacPro is not even that great of a gaming system because it's not tweakable. Otherwise, there is a solution for pretty much anyone.

-mx

 

[CWallace]

What your missing is that it means adding a whole new model which adds design overhead, new component overhead and inventory overhead all of which cut into the overall bottom line.

Again, I am not missing anything. Search my posts on this subject and I have consistently come out against a Mac mini-tower for all the reasons (and more) you have brought up.

But since some folks are adamant that Apple must release such a computer or be destroyed by the Windows PC ( ), I tried to show folks that such a computer, while less expensive then a Mac Pro, is not going to be priced like a Mac Mini or an iMac with the cost of the relevant ACD removed which seems to be a somewhat prevalent view (or, perhaps, wish).

I bought an iMac because I could not justify paying almost twice as much for an equivalent Mac Pro + ACD. In the end, however, I subsequently bought into the Apple philosophy 100% and now what I want to do requires me to get one. However, my iMac will have given me 18 months of solid service in the interim and the ACD would have ended up being the wrong monitor choice, anyway. So I don't begrudge the $2000 I sent Apple (especially since I should get at least half of it back via eBay).

And even if existed (or comes to exist), a "tMac" wouldn't work for me because I will need all eight-cores and four internal bays (preferably with 2TB HDDs in each).

Really, Psystar is the answer these folks are looking for. It's not as elegant as an Apple Macintosh and it requires more sweat equity to set up and maintain, but in return you get the "modability" they want.

 

[Genghis Khan]

apple NEED to refresh the mac mini

if they revise it to be on par with a MacBook, most people will be happy. even more people will be happy if they update it to MacBook Pro specs.

but the bottom line is that the Mac Mini needs upgrading.



P.S. this thread is so run on, it's not funny

 

[yadmonkey]

You want to hook up a PS3 to a computer? Why? If you want to use the screen then you would be better off getting a cheap 32" LCD. I think they would be happier separating the PS3 from it.

Trust me, I can certainly be accused of trying to make a computer do far more than it should. I think one has to keep your goals in perspective.

My point is that an all-in-one is not for everyone. Many people want to have more than one device on their desktop. So for anyone who wants to use a PS3, a 360, or a PC for gaming, the iMac is out because an all-in-one doesn't make much sense. So you're choices are the anemic mini or the Mac Pro. Can you not see the hole in the product line?

...and what OS is it going to operate on? Kinda kills the whole point.

That's a non-sequitur. We're talking about hardware here. You are the one who brought up Dell in a discussion about hardware lines.

I would have no problem recommending an iMac to most anyone for home use. If they are a hard-core gamer then they need to just build a PC. A MacPro is not even that great of a gaming system because it's not tweakable. Otherwise, there is a solution for pretty much anyone.

Exactly. No Mac is a great gaming system. So people want to use PS3s and Xbox 360s and even gaming PCs in addition to their Macs. That's why an all-in-one does not fit the needs of a great many people - they want an HD monitor which can handle additional HD inputs. An iMac can't and it would be ridiculous to buy an all-in-one if the plan is to use more than one device.

So assuming you don't have unlimited desk space, your only choice is an anemic Mini and an expensive Pro which is probably overkill for most people. Or there are those of us who just do not like glossy monitors, so again, the iMac is out.

Like I said, I respect product line simplicity and I understand well why this was an important change for Apple because I remember the 90s for Apple. But it's possible to err on the side of being too simplistic when there's a hole this large in their product line.

There's room for a mid-range tower. The could even get rid of the 4-core Pro, condense the Mini into a single SKU, and add the mid-range tower and the product line would still be plenty simple.

 

[marbles]

Bottom line is really that most of us don't want to shell out for a MacPro and almost as many don't want an AIO ,just something, anything that is up to par on the desktop that can have a degree( doesn't have to be massive) of modability AND is made by Apple (not some hackintosh ....fun for some ,but not me ).

 

[ihabime]

Again, I am not missing anything. Search my posts on this subject and I have consistently come out against a Mac mini-tower for all the reasons (and more) you have brought up.

I guess i misread your post then, but really it was just an excuse to keep the thread alive. Do we have a definitive answer yet on wether this is the longest lived/most posted to thread in macrumors history?

Long Live the Thread, the Thread Must Never Die!

 

[yadmonkey]

Bottom line is really that most of us don't want to shell out for a MacPro and almost as many don't want an AIO ,just something, anything that is up to par on the desktop that can have a degree( doesn't have to be massive) of modability AND is made by Apple (not some hackintosh ....fun for some ,but not me ).

Well said. There are enough people pining for it that it's simply bizarre that people are arguing against its merit. And on top of whatever demand there is in the Mac market, I believe there are a lot of potential switchers who are simply disenchanted with their options, yet would pounce on a solid mid-range offering.

 

[marbles]

I believe there are a lot of potential switchers who are simply disenchanted with their options, yet would pounce on a solid mid-range offering.

I don't really know too much about switching ( I only ever used mac OS) but I could imagine that people on windows or whatever are using peripherals which they have no desire to change in order to use the only real option that Apple offers in this bracket ..the iMac, as the mini is underpowered/overpriced & Macpro is overkill, all that's available is the iMac , it's a shame really because if the Mini became some kind of slightly upgradeable unit it would become the headless mac at the right price .

I personally feel that this is what will happen , the Mini will get a smaller version of the MacPro case and a lot less options for expanding, but just having a 'minified' Macpro case & up to date CPU/GPU(not integrated) would be enough for me to get the card out

 

[Clive At Five]

What your missing is that it means adding a whole new model which adds design overhead, new component overhead and inventory overhead all of which cut into the overall bottom line.

People forget that what almost bankrupted Apple in the 90s wasn't that they weren't selling a lot of computers, it was that they had to many models for sale. Each model you add cuts in to the overall profit because of design, component and manufacturing costs.

The way they got out of that was by drastically cutting their lineup and dividing it into very clearly defined areas. That funnels/forces people into buying one of those models, sometimes spending more than they'd like, Mac Pro/Macbook Pro and sometimes getting fewer features than they'd like, Macbook/Mac Mini.

I'm not saying that they'll never make a tMac, xMac or Mac Mini with discreet graphics, but I don't see it happening anytime soon because that 'funneling' strategy has led to huge profits for Apple.

In your tMac case, you'd be funneled into buying the low end quad core Mac Pro, which is only $2299, not a huge leap in price and if you can justify $2000 for a desktop then Apple figures you can handle the extra $300.

This is a picture of me not buying it.

While I certainly agree that simplifying their lineup was pivitol to saving the company and I can't deny that the funnelling strategy has worked wonders for their bottom line, they've taken the tactic way too far. In the mid 90s when they had 3% marketshare, it would make sense to scale back the product line to two desktops and two laptops (the infamous 1999 product matrix: iMac, PowerMac, iBook & PowerBook).

Since then, however, their market share has skyrocketed and all they've added was a crippled switcher machine and a rich-man's laptop. In addition to that, they've pushed the PowerMac/Mac Pro out of the prosumer range into the "professional only" range. For all intents and purposes, their lineup is actually SMALLER than it was in '99! People who could've previously used a low-end PowerMac are now forced to buy a high-end iMac to acheive the same comparable performance... which means sacrificing expandability, mandating a display purchase, and a greatly dilluted price/performance ratio.

Apple is well past the days of financial dread and easily has the capacity to meet more consumers' needs.

So many people are begging for an xMac. Apple knows the demand is there, but Steve's pride and Apple's corporate greed are stopping them from doing so. I say "Steve's pride" because he is a fanatic when it comes to his vision of consumer personal computing and if he had his way, every single person on the planet would be using an iMac. Unfortunately for him, there are people who DO know about computers and DO want to tinker and DO want to upgrade and DO want to play games... but since he finds all those things irrelevant, there's no Mac to support it. Unfortunately, this will also be Apple's undoing.

Until Steve wakes up to the rest of us who do not fit into his precious vision (or until he is replaced by someone who does), Apple will never reach its full potential.

I personally have needed a new computer since 2004 when I grew out of my G4 iMac (2002 edition). It is now 2008 and I have yet to buy a new Mac. Why? Because I refuse to allow myself to be funneled into a product segment of which I do not belong. If Apple does not provide a mid-range Mac before this fall, I will finally break down and build myself a hackintosh. I will buy OS X for certain (I am not a pirate), but I will not pay a dime towards hardware I don't want or need. I don't think that is an unreasonable philosophy.

-Clive

 

[marbles]

This is a picture of me not buying it.

While I certainly agree that simplifying their lineup was pivitol to saving the company and I can't deny that the funnelling strategy has worked wonders for their bottom line, they've taken the tactic way too far. In the mid 90s when they had 3% marketshare, it would make sense to scale back the product line to two desktops and two laptops (the infamous 1999 product matrix: iMac, PowerMac, iBook & PowerBook).

Since then, however, their market share has skyrocketed and all they've added was a crippled switcher machine and a rich-man's laptop. In addition to that, they've pushed the PowerMac/Mac Pro out of the prosumer range into the "professional only" range. For all intents and purposes, their lineup is actually SMALLER than it was in '99! People who could've previously used a low-end PowerMac are now forced to buy a high-end iMac to acheive the same comparable performance... which means sacrificing expandability, mandating a display purchase, and a greatly dilluted price/performance ratio.

Apple is well past the days of financial dread and easily has the capacity to meet more consumers' needs.

So many people are begging for an xMac. Apple knows the demand is there, but Steve's pride and Apple's corporate greed are stopping them from doing so. I say "Steve's pride" because he is a fanatic when it comes to his vision of consumer personal computing and if he had his way, every single person on the planet would be using an iMac. Unfortunately for him, there are people who DO know about computers and DO want to tinker and DO want to upgrade and DO want to play games... but since he finds all those things irrelevant, there's no Mac to support it. Unfortunately, this will also be Apple's undoing.

Until Steve wakes up to the rest of us who do not fit into his precious vision (or until he is replaced by someone who does), Apple will never reach its full potential.

I personally have needed a new computer since 2004 when I grew out of my G4 iMac (2002 edition). It is now 2008 and I have yet to buy a new Mac. Why? Because I refuse to allow myself to be funneled into a product segment of which I do not belong. If Apple does not provide a mid-range Mac before this fall, I will finally break down and build myself a hackintosh. I will buy OS X for certain (I am not a pirate), but I will not pay a dime towards hardware I don't want or need. I don't think that is an unreasonable philosophy.

-Clive

Just about says it all


* claps hands

 

[grannyjones]

This thread has been flogging a dead horse for 9 months now. Wow. I have a Hackintosh wishlist all ready to check out at the parts store. I'll give it to June 9th to see if they come up with something vaguely computerish not in the mobile me.com iCategory wrapped in all that design hotness.

 

[gwerhart0800]

I personally have needed a new computer since 2004 when I grew out of my G4 iMac (2002 edition). It is now 2008 and I have yet to buy a new Mac. Why? Because I refuse to allow myself to be funneled into a product segment of which I do not belong. If Apple does not provide a mid-range Mac before this fall, I will finally break down and build myself a hackintosh. I will buy OS X for certain (I am not a pirate), but I will not pay a dime towards hardware I don't want or need. I don't think that is an unreasonable philosophy.

-Clive

Let's assume for the moment that Apple is motivated to update their product line based on financial considerations. As such, one factor in their decision making will be the amount of profit they extract for a given product offering. The well known gap in the headless computer line (mini ==> mac pro) seems to lack the necessary financial motivation for Apple to respond. The Hackintosh efforts represent the hardcore market for such a system and I am not sure how large it really is. (How would anyone be able to tell ... including Apple.) The lack of public response to the Psystar offering seems to indicate that Apple are not concerned.

So, for Apple, they would look at the market size and motivation of customers that switch from Mac to PC, or at those that go the Hackintosh route and see enough $$$ being lost to feel a need to address the market segment.

JMHO ...

 

[saltyzoo]

I still say psystar is just a covert Apple operation to gauge the market.

 

[Clive At Five]

Let's assume for the moment that Apple is motivated to update their product line based on financial considerations. As such, one factor in their decision making will be the amount of profit they extract for a given product offering. The well known gap in the headless computer line (mini ==> mac pro) seems to lack the necessary financial motivation for Apple to respond. The Hackintosh efforts represent the hardcore market for such a system and I am not sure how large it really is. (How would anyone be able to tell ... including Apple.) The lack of public response to the Psystar offering seems to indicate that Apple are not concerned.

So, for Apple, they would look at the market size and motivation of customers that switch from Mac to PC, or at those that go the Hackintosh route and see enough $$$ being lost to feel a need to address the market segment.

JMHO ...

I still say psystar is just a covert Apple operation to gauge the market.

Psystar has the serious fatal flaw that clueless users won't be able to update their software and knowledgeable ones will build their own hackintoshes. Therefore, guaging the uptake of Psystar's units is neither helpful to observers nor Apple in trying to make the case for or against an xMac.

RE: financial guaging; Countless users on countless threads have shown that they can build killer x86 machines on $800 budgets. Apple - who doesn't buy their parts retail - could build one for much less and charge $1,499 for it (like the PowerMacs of yore) thereby guaranteeing their massive profits while giving prosumers the power, upgradeability, and native software updateability they want. However - like I said earlier - Apple is greedy. Without the unit, a user would be forced to buy a $2,200 iMac to get an equal amount of power. You see, higher margins don't always mean higher profits. The xMac interest is there - Apple knows it - but they're just dragging their feet to preserve the rolls of Benjamins they use as toilet paper in the Cupertino bathrooms.

And Steve could probably care less about the money... he just wants people to be in his ridiculous computopia land of ignorance.

-Clive

 

[gkarris]

And Steve could probably care less about the money... he just wants people to be in his ridiculous comp'utopia land of ignorance.

-Clive

It's better than being in the Bill Gates/Michael Dell Hell...

 

[Clive At Five]

It's better than being in the Bill Gates/Michael Dell Hell...

True, but as long as I have the knowledge to do so, I will revolt from both if they don't meet my needs as a user.

Apple - a company which I used to worship - is becoming a lesser of two evils... which is a sad realization for me.

-Clive

 

[Tilard]

finally pulled the trigger

After reading these forums for several months now and waiting for a new release of the Mac mini, I finally got myself a new Mac mini.

I use it as a HTPC attached to a Sharp Aquos 46" Full-HD LCD-TV with Bluetooth mouse and keyboard.

The little piece is really fun to use and I am really happy not to wait any longer. Especially the sleep feature is awesome!

In case Apple will release a new Mac mini I might sell the current mini again, lets wait if and when a new model arrive...

 

[marbles]

I've a feeling we are going to all get a buzz from what is coming ....some kind of laptop, possibly with a 2.4 or 3GHz CPU w integrated graphics , a touch screen , this machine will dock into a headless mac ~ that can be run headless , has dedicated graphics , quad CPU, loads of ports , 2 HD bays , and space for 16Gb....

... @macworld , within 2 years time .

 

[Kashchei]

Apple - a company which I used to worship - is becoming a lesser of two evils... which is a sad realization for me.

-Clive

Clive,

Everything you've written in this thread today is exactly what I've been thinking but have been incapable of expressing so clearly and forcefully. I must admit that I also agree with the sentiment above, which is sad since I've been an Apple owner since '84.

 

[gregorsamsa]

This is a picture of me not buying it.

While I certainly agree that simplifying their lineup was pivitol to saving the company and I can't deny that the funnelling strategy has worked wonders for their bottom line, they've taken the tactic way too far. In the mid 90s when they had 3% marketshare, it would make sense to scale back the product line to two desktops and two laptops (the infamous 1999 product matrix: iMac, PowerMac, iBook & PowerBook).

Since then, however, their market share has skyrocketed and all they've added was a crippled switcher machine and a rich-man's laptop. In addition to that, they've pushed the PowerMac/Mac Pro out of the prosumer range into the "professional only" range. For all intents and purposes, their lineup is actually SMALLER than it was in '99! People who could've previously used a low-end PowerMac are now forced to buy a high-end iMac to acheive the same comparable performance... which means sacrificing expandability, mandating a display purchase, and a greatly dilluted price/performance ratio.

Apple is well past the days of financial dread and easily has the capacity to meet more consumers' needs.

So many people are begging for an xMac. Apple knows the demand is there, but Steve's pride and Apple's corporate greed are stopping them from doing so. I say "Steve's pride" because he is a fanatic when it comes to his vision of consumer personal computing and if he had his way, every single person on the planet would be using an iMac. Unfortunately for him, there are people who DO know about computers and DO want to tinker and DO want to upgrade and DO want to play games... but since he finds all those things irrelevant, there's no Mac to support it. Unfortunately, this will also be Apple's undoing.

Until Steve wakes up to the rest of us who do not fit into his precious vision (or until he is replaced by someone who does), Apple will never reach its full potential.

I personally have needed a new computer since 2004 when I grew out of my G4 iMac (2002 edition). It is now 2008 and I have yet to buy a new Mac. Why? Because I refuse to allow myself to be funneled into a product segment of which I do not belong. If Apple does not provide a mid-range Mac before this fall, I will finally break down and build myself a hackintosh. I will buy OS X for certain (I am not a pirate), but I will not pay a dime towards hardware I don't want or need. I don't think that is an unreasonable philosophy.

-Clive

Whilst I agree with most of that, as a recent iMac owner let me make clear that the iMac (bar low-end 20" with HD 2400) is no slouch at gaming. They'll easily run well over 90% of the games out there (inc. PC titles) at fairly high settings, if not the highest. The exceptions being recent PC titles like "Crysis" & that won't even run properly on the vast majority of PCs out there as it's just not cost effective for most consumers to keep upgrading to the latest video cards just to play a few of the latest games.

In fact, the makers of "Crysis" have been so disappointed with sales on the PC that they've said in future they'll concentrate more so on producing games for consoles (they still will for the PC, but it'll no longer be a priority). - As a more than casual (but not hardcore) gamer, I must say that overall I'm more than pleased with my iMac, not least in the gaming department.

So while you may not like AIOs & I do think there ought to be a much-improved Mini, if not a so-called xMac, I think the iMac really is a quite excellent computer for most needs. - In fact, if Apple don't give me an xMac by 2011, by then I'll probably quite happily get another one.

 

[AndyClarke]

Whilst I agree with most of that, as a recent iMac owner let me make clear that the iMac (bar low-end 20" with HD 2400) is no slouch at gaming. They'll easily run well over 90% of the games out there (inc. PC titles) at fairly high settings, if not the highest. The exceptions being recent PC titles like "Crysis" & that won't even run properly on the vast majority of PCs out there as it's just not cost effective for most consumers to keep upgrading to the latest video cards just to play a few of the latest games.

In fact, the makers of "Crysis" have been so disappointed with sales on the PC that they've said in future they'll concentrate more so on producing games for consoles (they still will for the PC, but it'll no longer be a priority). - As a more than casual (but not hardcore) gamer, I must say that overall I'm more than pleased with my iMac, not least in the gaming department.

So while you may not like AIOs & I do think there ought to be a much-improved Mini, if not a so-called xMac, I think the iMac really is a quite excellent computer for most needs. - In fact, if Apple don't give me an xMac by 2011, by then I'll probably quite happily get another one.

I agree. My iMac runs games very well in OS X or bootcamp. My favourite being counter strike runs just as well as on an XPS in my opinion. I do not have the new 3.06 iMac but I am sure that will run them even better.

In my opinion I think I would prefer Apple to focus on keeping the iMac up to date instead of adding an midi tower that would be limited in upgrades and mods. The iMac is fast, takes up little space and you can add external storage as needed. If you really need more power then the Mac Pro is probably your answer not a midi mac.

 

[takao]

Whilst I agree with most of that, as a recent iMac owner let me make clear that the iMac (bar low-end 20" with HD 2400) is no slouch at gaming. They'll easily run well over 90% of the games out there (inc. PC titles) at fairly high settings, if not the highest. The exceptions being recent PC titles like "Crysis" & that won't even run properly on the vast majority of PCs out there as it's just not cost effective for most consumers to keep upgrading to the latest video cards just to play a few of the latest games.

In fact, the makers of "Crysis" have been so disappointed with sales on the PC that they've said in future they'll concentrate more so on producing games for consoles (they still will for the PC, but it'll no longer be a priority). - As a more than casual (but not hardcore) gamer, I must say that overall I'm more than pleased with my iMac, not least in the gaming department.

crysis sold more than a million world wide it's jsut that sales sucked in the US

my problem with the imac graphics card is that it might be able to run current games if you turn everything down but after a single year you won't be even able to run a new game and it's time for a replacement again

the problem is that on the PC side a 600.. no wait make that 500 euro PC can play crysis on high while on the mac side you need to pay 2000 minimum

a gt8800 for a PC costs ~125 euro and i can put it into nearly every desktop PC out there

sure currently apple is on a roll but that won't continue forever and a Steve Jobs attitude towards games is sicking ignorant

 

[gregorsamsa]

I agree. My iMac runs games very well in OS X or bootcamp. My favourite being counter strike runs just as well as on an XPS in my opinion. I do not have the new 3.06 iMac but I am sure that will run them even better.

In my opinion I think I would prefer Apple to focus on keeping the iMac up to date instead of adding an midi tower that would be limited in upgrades and mods. The iMac is fast, takes up little space and you can add external storage as needed. If you really need more power then the Mac Pro is probably your answer not a midi mac.

Since getting the iMac, it's difficult for me to disagree with Apple's general philosophy here. As you say, those wanting much more power than what the 3.06 iMac offers are in that relatively niche, prohibitively-priced market that Apple already caters for.

Also, though I'd like Apple to update the Mini as soon as possible, I really can't see any BTO discrete graphics card option (not even a low-end one) being offered at any point in the foreseeable future. That's why they've kept the cheapest 20" iMac with the HD 2400.

Interestingly, the OP of this thread, "Dont Hurt Me" was one of the biggest advocates of an xMac on this forum... that was until he bought an iMac (a 20" with HD 2600, same as I've got). His posts suggest that he's also an avid gamer & I've yet to read anything but the most positive comments from him about the iMac in this sphere & others.

Your right about the iMac's speed. Though I've had mine for only 2 weeks, I'm quite surprised at at how fast it really is & the general high quality it exudes in every department (including gaming ).

 

[gregorsamsa]

crysis sold more than a million world wide it's jsut that sales sucked in the US

my problem with the imac graphics card is that it might be able to run current games if you turn everything down but after a single year you won't be even able to run a new game and it's time for a replacement again

the problem is that on the PC side a 600.. no wait make that 500 euro PC can play crysis on high while on the mac side you need to pay 2000 minimum

a gt8800 for a PC costs ~125 euro and i can put it into nearly every desktop PC out there

sure currently apple is on a roll but that won't continue forever and a Steve Jobs attitude towards games is sicking ignorant

The problem with 1 million sales worldwide is that many console games sell far more & each individual sale is much more profitable for developers. Hence why the developers of Crysis are changing their focus.

This claim about having to turn everything down on the iMac really isn't borne out in reality. Like I said, over 90% of games out there will run on 3 of the iMacs at very high settings & most at the highest. For those wanting to run the typical PC/Mac generic games such as Total War (including the soon-to-be-released "Empire"), any iMac with HD2600 or higher will be more than good enough. Beyond that you're really looking at relatively niche markets or you're better off buying a console.

 

[takao]

This claim about having to turn everything down on the iMac really isn't borne out in reality. Like I said, over 90% of games out there will run on 3 of the iMacs at very high settings & most at the highest. For those wanting to run the typical PC/Mac generic games such as Total War (including the soon-to-be-released "Empire"), any iMac with HD2600 or higher will be more than good enough. Beyond that you're really looking at relatively niche markets or you're better off buying a console.

for 1500 euro i expect more than "good enough" .. for that much money i expect at least a 8800gt (which is cheap btw) .. and it's still a AIO

apple is charging a premium price for close to the bottom components which is something i simply can't accept


oh and i will be buying something else if apple doesn't release something between the mac mini (which forced me to keep a PC around anyway) and the mac pro (server chipset in a desktop, no thank you) and it's not gonna be a imac ... ever

edit: i simply have my requirements and know what i want and need in a PC .. for such customers apple has nothing