Several possibilities:
1. It never occurred to Apple that people would want a display cheaper than $999 for a Mac Mini. But Apple's not that stupid.
* Apple knows people would want one, but doesn't care to make money on it themselves. Nobody's that stupid
* Apple wants to sell them but can't due to an unexpected delay. Now THAT is possible, but seems unlikely. A low-end display could have been pre-announced even if it had to ship later. And it would have been easy to finish on time anyway--no engineering feat.
* Apple has some OTHER, intentional reason NOT to offer one.
One reason I can think of: if Apple had a display--even a 15" one--it would have Apple style and ergonomics, and would not be priced in the bargain bin. It would be low-cost, but priced in the middle. Two bad things would result:
1. People would feel like they HAD to get the Mac display. It would have such a psychological draw to get the "matched set" that it would turn people OFF of putting any old PC monitor on the Mini. It would turn off some of the very buyers who now want a Mini.
I know when I get a PowerMac, I'll want an Apple display to match. Maybe I'll get something cheaper, but on some level it will bug me that this super-cool, stylish thing in my life COULD have had a matching display, but I didn't get one. Choosing between that irritation vs. paying more isn't an incentive for me to buy. Sounds trivial, but now apply that to something cheap enough to be almost an impulse buy, and I think it could work against Apple.
Evidence that Apple wants you NOT to think of the Mini as a matched set: they show off a QTVR of the Mini BOTH with Apple display AND with a PC display. They don't just permit the PC display option out of necessity... they actually promote that with QTVR.
2. Reviewers would then price the thing as a set--much higher! They'd add an Apple display, mouse, and keyboard "because it's there." But since it's NOT there, they won't be as likely (at $999) to do that--they will see the Mini for what it is: something small and simple to slip into your existing computing life.
Any other theories? If Apple's neither too stupid to sell a low-end display, nor unable to build one... then what might the reason be?
I'm thinking they could sell a ton of cheap LCDs (and offer a decent 3rd-party 17" CRT if needed). By cheap LCD, I'm thinking the 15.2" widescreen 1280x854 from the PowerBook, with DVI (and a bigger backlight). That's not rock-bottom 1024x768 VGA, that's a nice screen--but low-end for Apple. To save cost, build in a USB hub but no Firewire--and maybe use white plastic with metal sides (the opposite of the pro displays).
Then offer a bundle of that, plus mouse and keyboard, at a discount. (Online, offer the same in a wireless version.)
1. It never occurred to Apple that people would want a display cheaper than $999 for a Mac Mini. But Apple's not that stupid.
* Apple knows people would want one, but doesn't care to make money on it themselves. Nobody's that stupid
* Apple wants to sell them but can't due to an unexpected delay. Now THAT is possible, but seems unlikely. A low-end display could have been pre-announced even if it had to ship later. And it would have been easy to finish on time anyway--no engineering feat.
* Apple has some OTHER, intentional reason NOT to offer one.
One reason I can think of: if Apple had a display--even a 15" one--it would have Apple style and ergonomics, and would not be priced in the bargain bin. It would be low-cost, but priced in the middle. Two bad things would result:
1. People would feel like they HAD to get the Mac display. It would have such a psychological draw to get the "matched set" that it would turn people OFF of putting any old PC monitor on the Mini. It would turn off some of the very buyers who now want a Mini.
I know when I get a PowerMac, I'll want an Apple display to match. Maybe I'll get something cheaper, but on some level it will bug me that this super-cool, stylish thing in my life COULD have had a matching display, but I didn't get one. Choosing between that irritation vs. paying more isn't an incentive for me to buy. Sounds trivial, but now apply that to something cheap enough to be almost an impulse buy, and I think it could work against Apple.
Evidence that Apple wants you NOT to think of the Mini as a matched set: they show off a QTVR of the Mini BOTH with Apple display AND with a PC display. They don't just permit the PC display option out of necessity... they actually promote that with QTVR.
2. Reviewers would then price the thing as a set--much higher! They'd add an Apple display, mouse, and keyboard "because it's there." But since it's NOT there, they won't be as likely (at $999) to do that--they will see the Mini for what it is: something small and simple to slip into your existing computing life.
Any other theories? If Apple's neither too stupid to sell a low-end display, nor unable to build one... then what might the reason be?
I'm thinking they could sell a ton of cheap LCDs (and offer a decent 3rd-party 17" CRT if needed). By cheap LCD, I'm thinking the 15.2" widescreen 1280x854 from the PowerBook, with DVI (and a bigger backlight). That's not rock-bottom 1024x768 VGA, that's a nice screen--but low-end for Apple. To save cost, build in a USB hub but no Firewire--and maybe use white plastic with metal sides (the opposite of the pro displays).
Then offer a bundle of that, plus mouse and keyboard, at a discount. (Online, offer the same in a wireless version.)