Is this Apple's Last Best Chance...MacMini $500

[Loopydude]

bah, not problem (though I think it exists ), "launch the product".

[Wrath]

so many programs that are not available for the Mac.

There are actually very few programs out there that are PC-only. The ones that are are usually high-end, so the user isn't likely to "keep a PC around", it's probably the major computer in the house.

Unless you're talking about games. Then that puts the PC on the same level as a PS2.

[pulykamell]

Originally Posted by Loopydude

OK, why should anyone switch to this? Is iLife really that much of a draw?

For me, specifically, yes. However, I don't think it would be for the average consumer.

[Loopydude]

Originally Posted by Wrath

There are actually very few programs out there that are PC-only.

I think, actually, the vast majority are,in fact, PC only. Any trip to CompUSA will allow you to see many shelves of examples. However, I would agree that most worthwhile or non-esoteric sorts of applications have at least one Mac version that allows the owner to do the same sort of useful things that PC users do. The major exception is indeed games, where virtually all of the big titles are either PC only, or can take anywhere from a few months to a little over a year to be released. As virtuall a non-gamer, I don't care about that myself, and I have all the other stuff I want and need (Office, Photoshop, a panorama stitcher, some data and image analysis software, MacVector, etc.).

I'd must say I pay a premium for those things plus the Mac experience, though. That's still true of the Mini. Hopefully enough PC users can be convinced by the lower price-point to give it a whirl, and increase Apple's market share a little.

[rjung]

Originally Posted by Loopydude

I think, actually, the vast majority are,in fact, PC only. Any trip to CompUSA will allow you to see many shelves of examples.

Funny, when I go to my local computer store, all I see are aisles of Mac software. Of course, it is an Apple Store, so they may have a vested interest in selling to their primary audience...

Seriously, though, aside from early releases of new games and esoteric, "niche-business" software (do you know there are programs just to track patients' payments for dental offices?), I can't think of any mainstream software application category that doesn't have capable titles on either platform.

As for the OP, if the geek feedback on Slashdot is any indication, the Mac Mini will sell like gangbusters -- either as a low-cost addition to someone's existing stable, or an entry-level "granny computer" for neophiles to do basic tasks without needing periodic maintenance.

And I have to ask, is this really a topic worthy of a "great debate"? More of an IMHO thing, if you ask me.

[Barbarian]

There's one other thing about the MacMini which should appeal to users with low amounts of technical skills: No internet viruses, no need to run Ad Aware and Spybot, no need to worry about that stuff. My parents can barely handle doing the minimum necessary to keep their PC running, and I'm sure there are millions of North Americans like them.

[iamthewalrus(:3=]

Originally Posted by Loopydude

So, essentially, iMovie and Garageband must be worth, at the absolute very least, about $500 to the PC user.

If this is true of a worthwhile number of people to launch the problem, great. If not, it's the Cube of the low end.

Don't think of it as somebody shelling out $500 to have an additional Mac. I think most of the market will be people who were planning to buy a new computer anyway, and can now get a Mac because it's more reasonably priced.

Plus, it just looks so cool.

[UncleRojelio]

Originally Posted by squeegee

I can see why the stock dropped $4+ today.

Yes, but considering that the stock has gone up about $40 in the last 6 months , it was already due for a correction. Its back up a buck today though. Gotta love those stock options!

[Wrath]

Originally Posted by Barbarian

No internet viruses, no need to run Ad Aware and Spybot, no need to worry about that stuff. My parents can barely handle doing the minimum necessary to keep their PC running, and I'm sure there are millions of North Americans like them.

I wonder if anyone could calculate the downtime loss in terms of money - downtime from viruses and installing and buying virus protection and spyware and firewalls. Add that to the cost of a PC and see how it compares to a Mac.

[UncleRojelio]

Originally Posted by Wrath

I wonder if anyone could calculate the downtime loss in terms of money - downtime from viruses and installing and buying virus protection and spyware and firewalls. Add that to the cost of a PC and see how it compares to a Mac.

The ENTIRE University of Texas System has to install the latest Windoze patch this week due to security problems. I don't know how many systems that totals up to but, it has to cost some coin.

I've had 4 Macs running full time at my house for years. I have two kids and a wife that are on the net constantly downloading all kinds of crap, and opening tons of spam. I have yet to catch a single virus, trojan horse, or worm. YMMV

[Loopydude]

Originally Posted by rjung

And I have to ask, is this really a topic worthy of a "great debate"? More of an IMHO thing, if you ask me.

Well, I think there may be some debatable analytical value to discussing the merits of a product, with the caveat that many will purchase that product for reasons both practical and utterly impractical. Just now you've provided something perhaps a market analyst would be interested in, which is the geeks love the Mini. That's not only good news (and speaks against my doubt), it provides some actual evidence that the Mini could indeed generate healthy sales. While I think the OP's question is predicated on the baseless "Mac Near Death! Apple's Doom Is Nigh!" meme, your info. may help put the lie to said meme.

[Wrath]

One of the long-standing arguments for the Mac was the lack of a requirement for a fully-staffed IT department. I recall hearing horror stories when large scale companies and universities IT departments decided to switch everyone over to PCs, or be PC-only. There's a cost in itself, if there's already an installed base of Macs.

The real reasons were that the IT departments only knew how to repair PCs and were not Mac-certified, so they needed to justify their jobs. All the while their real purpose is to support the computer systems, not dictate the tool!

When I worked at TWA back in the early 90's, I was the only Mac guy (graphic artist), but I knew the ins and outs of the Mac. The Getaway Vacations department was all Mac, but the rest of TWA was PC. I, the lowly graphics guy, was the de facto IT department for my group of 30 Macs.

[holmes]

Originally Posted by Loopydude

While I think the OP's question is predicated on the baseless "Mac Near Death! Apple's Doom Is Nigh!" meme, your info. may help put the lie to said meme.

Project much?

My OP is based on the question of whether or not Apple's inexpensive PC will finally convince wintel users to try it, now that cost isn't really a big excuse or is it too late to capture that market. I said as much in my OP.

yes?

[Merkwurdigliebe]

I think this move is ingenious.

Really folks, there are a lot of things you all are missing here. When Apple came out with the iMac, they had nowhere near the "coolness" factor (as a company) that they do now with the general public. I'll use myself as an example. I have always been a PC guy for the typical reasons. I always thought of Macs as something for very specific uses (like media stuff) and hardcore fans. I always knew they had good stuff, but I never knew the quality of their products. Then I got an ipod and now I use Itunes as my default player. I love all of the options and in a way, like a German luxury car, you can just sort of "feel" the difference. Everything is much more thought out. I am now interested in buying a mac.

Secondly, malware is really getting out of control. I am pretty good with computers, so I know how to keep my PC working, but a lot of folks have no clue at all. I have a friend who repairs computers and all he does all the time is remove spyware. The problem is seriously growning. People don't want to run adaware, and they don't wont to worry about any of that stuff. The majority use their computers for Internet, Music, and work (spreadsheets, etc.) Not too many people play intense computer games. Mac (because of market share and other reasons) has the advantage of beign the most hassle free computer at the moment. Hands down. People have bought the iPod for the coolness factor and now they know what the quality of a Mac is.

I'll give you an example. How freaking nice is it that your Ipod charges on a USB cable? That's the coolest thing in the world to me. The need for one less cord in my life really is worth a lot of money. Also, look at the new iPod shuffle. Sure it has its drawbacks, but it is cool too, and it will sell. How do you hook it up? It plugs directly into the USB port. How nice? And because it will sell like crazy there will be other peripherals that let you plug it into your stereo in your car or house, etc. Again, perfect. The Mac Mini will capitalize on all of these new people who love the functionality of the iPod and were impressed with Apple. I suppose the iPod was a little clever in how it enticed people to take a second look at macs. I think I may buy a Mac the next computer I get.

If they really wanted to have a chance at getting more market share, they would have to create a good counterpart to Microsoft Office. Maybe they have it? I don't know, but if and office program with the power of MS office could be implemented with Mac Friendliness, then you would have something really special.

Also, they should go for a PVR type system too as mentioned before. Microsoft has one, but Microsoft never manages to pull it off right in terms of comfort. Apple could make a box like that, and double the storage capacity, add a DVD burner, and add a tv encoder + remote and you'd have a tivo that could export and digitally encode to any format to be sent over the net or however. That sounds damn nice. Oh, and you have all of the other functions of a Mac included? Very very good. Market it for those nice new HDTVs that you see.

[UncleRojelio]

Originally Posted by Merkwurdigliebe

If they really wanted to have a chance at getting more market share, they would have to create a good counterpart to Microsoft Office. Maybe they have it? I don't know, but if and office program with the power of MS office could be implemented with Mac Friendliness, then you would have something really special.

The entire MS Office suite is available for the Mac. Works better on a Mac than it does on a PC, if ya ask me.

[TonyF]

Agh - bundled software? I could start a pit thread! The world needs no more Encarta, Mavis Beacon Teaches More Junk, and Photo-whatever Deluxe LE/SE/Plus. I recommend taking those CDs from their jewel cases and give them to nice CDRs that needs a sturdy home.

Honestly, I know no one who actually uses bundled software - less Word - and most abandon it or unistall it first thing.

I'd also like to add that the software does not add a cent of value if it, or a counterpart, can be found for free.

Of course, this isn't apple's "last best chance" - they'll keep trying as long as they have the money to do so, and they will be around for some time to come. But until they really open up and cut some prices, they'll never really be in the race.

[UncleRojelio]

Originally Posted by UncleRojelio

The entire MS Office suite is available for the Mac. Works better on a Mac than it does on a PC, if ya ask me.

And, if you are an open-source kinda guy,
OpenOffice is also available.

[Merkwurdigliebe]

Yeah, I knew that Office works on Mac, or at least it did, but I meant a version that Apple created from scratch to fill the void in the same way it has with Safari, etc. We all know that Microsoft really lags on the innovation. I mean, it wasn't apparent to me until Firefox came out to make IE look so bad. I kinda figured that Apple could do something to put office to shame. If they made it as friendly as their other stuff, I would probably convert in a heartbeat. Plus those little boxes are so cool

[Loopydude]

Originally Posted by holmes

Project much?

Oops. My apologies. I guess I took "or is it too little to late" to indicate something more dire than perhaps you intended. I guess you were saying, is it too little too late for Apple to increase it's market share? In my defence, market share, or lack thereof, is the biggest preoccupation of those infected by the Mac Is Dead meme. It is almost univerally recognized, it seems, that the Death of Apple follows naturally from its niche position.

[rjung]

Originally Posted by Merkwurdigliebe

Yeah, I knew that Office works on Mac, or at least it did, but I meant a version that Apple created from scratch to fill the void in the same way it has with Safari, etc.

Well, they are getting a start with their new iWorks "suite" (two programs don't make a suite, IMO). Keynote is already a proven winner, and Pages looks pretty impressive, at least according to the PR material.

On the other hand, I don't think Apple plans to go head-to-head with Microsoft just yet -- having a Mac version of MS Office makes it easier to sell the computers to corporate customers, after all, and Bill Gates is not known for his restraint in trying to destroy competitors. That's why Pages is only nibbling at the home user/small business side of the word-processing field for now. But the iWorks programs can get more and more features added later to improve their functionality, and Apple could slip in a database and/or a spreadsheet in the next revision...

[rjung]

Originally Posted by Loopydude

In my defence, market share, or lack thereof, is the biggest preoccupation of those infected by the Mac Is Dead meme. It is almost univerally recognized, it seems, that the Death of Apple follows naturally from its niche position.

Which is a silly notion, as the long-often-trotted-out car analogy demonstrates. Nobody looks at BMW's share of the auto market and call them "beleagured," for instance.

And considering that Apple just announced their highest quarterly revenue and net income ever, the notion that the company is in any sort of dire straits is outright laughable.

[Loopydude]

Indeed.

Well, I really do hope for the best out of this product, as I simply love Macs (and fully concede it can be an irrational thing), and anything that's good for Apple is good for me, I'm betting. I've my doubts about the Mini, but I'll be pleased-as-punch if I'm 100% wrong. There's been clamoring for a "headless iMac" for some time, and this is sorta it.

My advice, though? Wait a bit, if you can. The form-factor opens up some interesting possibilities. It is no exaggeration to say that the MacOS really shines brightest on multiprocessor machines. And for MP-aware apps., like Photoshop (which I rely on very heavily for processing, sometimes, hudreds of image files at a time), the impact of having that other processor can be jaw-dropping.

Fast-forward to the end of this year: Freescale has predicted they will be ramping up from sampling their 90nm dual-core system-on-a-chip (SOC), the MPC8641D, which is basically two G4 processors on one slice of silicon, including all the memory and bus controllers as well, and sporting an FSB that scales up to 667MHz. It will start at around 1.6-1.8GHz, drawing about 15W at that speed. Because all the controllers are on-chip, it can actually be a cost-saver in terms of price/performance, not to mention a space-saver. And that low power means it runs about as cool as the G4s in the Mini presently.

Now how effin' cool would that be, to see a Mini or some other headless brick, driven by one of those things and a decent GPU? Is Apple just going to ignore this product? I hope not. At the very least, the MPC 7448, which will get up to at least 2GHz, use even lower power, and sport a FSB that scales up to 200MHz (and hence the system can make true use of DDR memory) is expected to be available in bulk by the end of the 1st half of this year. It's 100% pin-compatible with the 7447 and 7447a, so if one wants, it's a simple drop-in. I don't know how Apple could resist using that. The Mini could probably be fanless, at lower speeds, like the Cube . Here's hoping Apple moves fast on these things. I'm predicting the Mini will grow, and maybe grow very fast.

[yosemite]

I am unloading an old G4 that wasn't getting enough use anyway, and getting a Mini. I am so there.

I called both ClubMac and MacMall and asked about free RAM upgrades (I want to get at least 512 megs). They said that they are almost positive that they will offer some sort of deal but until they actually see the Mini (which is coming out the 22nd), they aren't making any offers official. It is going to take a lot of intestinal fortitude for me to sit on my hands and wait that long to order. I want one so bad! (By the way, the MacMall and ClubMac people I talked to admitted that they'd been getting a lot of calls about the Mini. I seriously do not think that it will have trouble selling.)

I also checked out my favorite Mac message boards and most of them feel the same way I do. Many are going to buy one right off, or are going to "pick a few up" for family members or as "extras." If/when MacMall/ClubMac offers their free RAM upgrade, the price is right.

I've got an external DVD burner so all I really need is the RAM upgrade. (I'm going to get the $600 model so I can have the larger hard drive.) I'll use it on my LCD monitor and share it with my PC via a KVM switch. It should work out fine for me.

Since I've been using a 533 MHz G4 with a 16 MB video card for the last several years, the Mini will be a major step up—a major upgrade for me. I wish I could have more RAM, but I've run OS X, and apps like Photoshop, and Garageband (which I love) on an even slower G4 with 512 megs, and it did okay.

I watched Steve Jobs' Keynote speech last night (Quicktime movie—you can see it on Apple's site) and it was pretty cool—the crowd was waiting to hear about the Mini, and they were excited about it. Also, a preview of Tiger (OS 10.4), due to come out the first half of this year, looks great. There are some good improvements to iLife '05, too (iPhoto, iDVD, iMovie, Garageband). Since I'll be getting that bundled with the Mini, I'm all set there.

[Mr2001]

Originally Posted by rjung

As for the OP, if the geek feedback on Slashdot is any indication, the Mac Mini will sell like gangbusters -- either as a low-cost addition to someone's existing stable, or an entry-level "granny computer" for neophiles to do basic tasks without needing periodic maintenance.

That's a big "if". IIRC, the majority opinion on Slashdot was that the iPod would fail miserably, and look how accurate that prediction turned out to be.

[yosemite]

beagledave and I both thought the iPod was a bunch of hooey when it first came out. We were both wrong. I'm still amazed by its success. (Pleased, but amazed.) And we're Mac people.

I am going by my own reaction, and the reaction on the Mac communities I've seen. I think that things are different now, because of the iPod. The iPod has brought "brand recognition" to Apple in a very good way. This puts the Mini is a good light.

It's possible, however, that the Mini may sell well at first, and then taper off. But from where I'm standing, it looks good, at least for the short term. I suspect that the busy MacMall and ClubMac people think so too.

[edwino]

Originally Posted by Loopydude

As virtuall a non-gamer, I don't care about that myself, and I have all the other stuff I want and need (Office, Photoshop, a panorama stitcher, some data and image analysis software, MacVector, etc.)

Small hijack: how does MacVector work for you? We are a Sequencher lab but it is sooo expensive (I think it is about $2000 for a license). I use consed/phrap/phred for large scale assemblies (another benefit of using a BSD-based system is that all of that stuff works immediately on OS X) but for the day-to-day small-scale cloning confirmation, contig assemblies, primer design, etc. I use Sequencher. With a 15 person lab and two licenses, it is usually adequate. But sometimes I wish I had an alternative...

As with yosemite, I am typing this on a G4 500 MHz with 512 MB RAM that I inherited after I went to a dual 1.8 GHz G5 at work (convinced my boss I needed it to run processor-intensive genomic searches). I am running 10.3.7 on the G4, burning DVDs (with a $50 writer), using GarageBand and iMovie with no real slowdown, and using Photoshop with confocal TIFFs of around 150 MB without serious stress to the computer. $500 for a Mac Mini would also be a real step up for me, but I think I'm instead going to buy myself a Powerbook when/if I graduate in March. We use essentially the same machines at work (G4 iMacs with 512 MB RAM) and they are pretty quick.

The more I think about it, I do think that this could work symbiotically with the iPod. What would be an excellent marketing move is to offer a package deal: $900 for a 40 GB iPod and a Mac Mini for use as a specific music managment server. Throw in wireless capability and one of those Airport Express Base Stations with AirTunes and sell it all for under $1000 as a home audio solution. That way, people can manage their iPods and listen to their stuff at home through any stereo in one quick sitting.

What I think would be the perfect solution is for Apple to port OS X to an Intel machine. That would be the absolute bomb. It would make my life so much simpler in so many ways -- my wife and I have 3 desktop computers (Linux MP3 server, my primary Linux/XP dual boot, the old Mac) and they would all be effectively replaced if I could either afford a G5 for home or if they simply ported OS X to an PC compatible platform. But I suppose that would definitely tread on too many toes and Apple can't afford to have Microsoft yank Office from them.

[Loopydude]

Originally Posted by edwino

Small hijack: how does MacVector work for you?

It's awesome. I'd feel crippled without it. I know there are lots of alterhatives out there (many of them free), but they are a chore. We have a site licence, and the pisser is I can only use it at work, when I'm hooked to the network (due to the need for a KeyServer). I wish they would give us a USB dongle or something if we feel like doing some alignments or whatever at home, but no such luck. That's why I've looked at the free alternatives. I couldn't bring myself to use them. MacVector has totally spoiled me. It's hard to talk about what it does, because what doesn't it do? Well, I can't design TaqMan oligos with it; otherwise, all my other molecular needs are met. Building vectors, cutting vectors, mapping vectors, working with chromatograms, the usual genomic search tools, ClustalW aligment, Pustell matrix, translations, generating consensus sequences, predicting reading frames, I've used it to generate mRNA sequence from a stretch of genomic DNA, and it appears to have worked perfectly, nucleotide and peptide sequence motifs, some structural predictors, generate phylogenies (don't use that much, alas...haven't cloned anything new in a while, what with everything being sequenced), some pretty decent primer and probe tools (if you don't need fluorgenic PCR, like TaqMan or molecular beacons). I have so little experience with other commercial tools, I hesitiate to try to compare it. I used Sequencher long ago, but we're talking many years ago now, before I joined the biotech Borg, so it's probably evolved a lot since then. Both are pretty nice, and I think Sequencher may actually be better for the specific task of aligning sequences from a sequencing project, and handling all that info in an elegant way. But MacVector is servicible for those purposes.

[rjung]

Originally Posted by Mr2001

IIRC, the majority opinion on Slashdot was that the iPod would fail miserably, and look how accurate that prediction turned out to be.

Sure, but the difference is, this time the geeks are putting down their money for the mini.

(Now, if someone has a family-friendly way to turn the Mac mini into a home media server for my widescreen HDTV, I'll be there...)

[yosemite]

I decided not to wait for MacMall/ClubMac to decide what they were going to do with their free RAM deal. (Sometimes I see that they offer things for free--but it's a mail-in rebate. I hate mail-in rebates. Plus, the "free" RAM comes with a $40 installation fee.) Don't get me wrong, usually I love Club/Mall and I buy from them a lot, but I thought I'd get in the queue with the Apple Store now, since the cost probably won't be that much different in the long run. Woo hoo! It's the $500 model (1.25 GHz) with custom addition of 512 megs of RAM and the 80 GB HD. They predict 3-4 weeks to delivery.

I am definitely looking forward to it!

[Wrath]

Originally Posted by Loopydude

It is almost univerally recognized, it seems, that the Death of Apple follows naturally from its niche position.

If you ever have the chance to read The 10 Immutable Laws of Marketing, niche marketing is THE way to make a company profitable - one of the laws clearly states that ALL marketing is niche marketing. So I'm not really sure why so many armchair marketing wizards believe it's "universally recognized" that Apple is doomed.

[AHunter3]

Originally Posted by Loopydude

The reason Mac owners have the PC is because there are so many programs that are not available for the Mac.

translation: games

(There aren't that many Mac owners who keep a PC around so they can run Lotus WordPro or QuattroPro.)

[Hustle]

Originally Posted by rjung

Well, they are getting a start with their new iWorks "suite" (two programs don't make a suite, IMO).

It also includes iOpal.





I just spent $15 for that.

[WotNot]

Originally Posted by Hustle

It also includes iOpal.





I just spent $15 for that.

Money well spent. Talent like that should be encouraged.

Oh, and “LOL”.

[scabpicker]

I call into question that you need more than 256meg of RAM on one of these.

My wife has been using a G5 with 256meg for the last year, and she uses it to do graphics work that she brings home. More RAM would be nice, yeah. It would be nice if Apple would use el cheapo RAM, too. Need would be a bit strong of a word, IMHO. Swap works ok, you just need to wait a little longer sometimes. Speed is only really critical for real-time apps.

[Loopydude]

Originally Posted by scabpicker

I call into question that you need more than 256meg of RAM on one of these.

Well, you need it kind of like you need a car to get to work instead of your own two feet. Sure, both will get you there, but with the former it takes ten minutes, and with the latter it takes an hour. Virtual memory is not your friend. It's like the loan shark who will lend you fifty bucks at 100% interest, and then beats the crap out of you when you run out of time. A G5 with 256Mb is like is like strapping a propeller on an SR-71 Blackbird and refusing to use the jet engine. Buy the RAM. Do deny yourself this advantage. It will, like, triple the speed of some of the tasks your wife does, at least. That's not a joke. RAM is way, way faster than a hard disk, especially with the wicked-fast FSB in the G5. You're just starving the processor and wasting cycles by the bushel to go any other way. There's almost no point in having a processor that fast, if you're not going to give it the memory it needs. As said above, OSX eats that 256Mb without even trying, and wants more. There's practically nothing left for applications after that, so you're swapping stuff off the HD fast-and-furious pretty much all the time, especially with imaging tasks.

[Loopydude]

ehhh, "Do not deny yourself this advantage" I mean.

[UncleRojelio]

Two hours and 13 minutes till the market closes and AAPL is up $5.82.

Woo Hoo! I'm rich! I'm rich!

[scabpicker]

Yep, as I said, it would be nice. Just like a supercharger would be nice on my vehicle. The need is about the same, though. I never said it wouldn't be nice, I just said it isn't necessary, especially when you are talking about an entry level machine. When the money is there, the RAM will appear in her machine shortly therafter. Until that happens, she swaps.

[rjung]

While I agree MacOS X runs okay on 256MB (heck, I've only got 384MB myself), it's certainly not the kind of first impression I'd like to give for a new Mac user.

[Merkwurdigliebe]

About Niche Marketing...

You gotta admit, though, with Apple and PC its a little different because there's this niche market which apple caters to, and then theres's this gigantic abusive behemoth that actually picks on small companies for sport. But the monopolistic tendencies of Microsoft seems to be biting it in the arse right now, if you ask me. They seem to be pushing in directions that nobody really cares about. The media center PC? Sure, its cool if it could replace TiVo, but is it really that special? What the hell is the deal with tablet PCs? I never understood that one.

But Apple could really do some damage to Microsoft by making a version of MacOS run on PCs. Then they could say... See how well it runs on a Mac? Dump your PCs! All you have to lose is your chains! Of course that would never happen because Microsoft would jerk Office out as soon as possible, and probably make it incompatible with older versions or something equally sadistic. But if I were Steve Jobs, I would continue to develop a Macintosh Office Suite like Office, but make it every bit as good and functional. I imagine that the Mac version would be better, because lets face it, any interface I've seen on a Mac has been better than on a PC. Simple. It all sounds like a diabolical plot to get back at bill gates for stealing his ideas with the original Mac.

1 Indroduce iMac to step of the coolness factor. There are tons of hipsters willing to sink down money for something with a brand name that is labeled as the new cool. These kinds of people don't care whether or not Dell makes a similar one. Its gotta have that Apple on it.

2 Indroduce the iPod. This steps the cooless factor up another notch, plus all of the people get to use Mac software which is also very cool. Show them that not only does Apple represent cool and hip products, but a more evolved software design.

3. Indroduce the Mac Mini. Now this is where you really get the payoff. All of these people that thought Macs were for nerds or fanatics now have a soft spot for Mac. Plus its cool, remember that. Only 500 dollars? you say? Well, hell, I gotta get me one! Its funny, but this was most certainly designed to entice PC users. Its the closest thing Jobs could come to unleashing a PC version of Mac OS. Instead of software, its a little box that could probably fit inside your PC. I mean, Windows XP costs 100 Dollars, and for 400 more you get an entire computer with lots of software. And you have to remember that this is Apple software included, not Mavis Beacon teachs typing. You get iLife, etc... Nice stuff.

4. Introduce an Apple office suite. Tout the Mac Mini as the perfect computer for those who don't want to think about spyware or security. It just works, and it does what you need it to. This is certainly true now. Maybe because of market share? i dont' know, but its true at the moment, so it should be used as a selling point.

5. Put MacOS out for the PC. This is the final step in the ultimate battle against Microsoft. Sure, they'll never kill Microsoft, but I imagine that they could manage to at least gain a good bit of market share and shake Redmond up to the point to where they start innovating like they say they are doing.

[CaveMike]

Originally Posted by Mr. Moto

I think they really could have scored with this thing if they'd built in a PVR and a DVD burner. That, and a handheld remote for media playback.

The world needs a little box that can do it all, and do so over a network. That doesn't exist right now in any convenient form.

Agreed. And I strongly suspect that the Mac Mini is being positioned for this exact application. It has the right form-factor and price-point. It is a small jump to upgrade the DVD, add a remote, and PVR software. Apple might be looking to capture the PVR market in the same way they caught the MP3 player market.

[squeegee]

Originally Posted by CaveMike

Agreed. And I strongly suspect that the Mac Mini is being positioned for this exact application. It has the right form-factor and price-point. It is a small jump to upgrade the DVD, add a remote, and PVR software. Apple might be looking to capture the PVR market in the same way they caught the MP3 player market.

And it's missing:
- A large HD for storing videos
- A video encoder (video->digital)
- A video decoder (digital->video)
- A tuner or 2 (for HD/SD broadcast)
- Any connections for video (composite/s-video/component)
- A facility for obtaining a channel schedule

I think there may be a few pieces missing that you haven't accounted for. Not that Apple (or someone) couldn't do this, but the Mac Mini isn't that close.

Personally I do wish I could get a small desktop with these features.

[Loopydude]

Originally Posted by Merkwurdigliebe

5. Put MacOS out for the PC. This is the final step in the ultimate battle against Microsoft. Sure, they'll never kill Microsoft, but I imagine that they could manage to at least gain a good bit of market share and shake Redmond up to the point to where they start innovating like they say they are doing.

It may kill Apple, though. Let's face it: u$oft actually has had the greater challenge getting Window to run on the enormous variety of hardware configurations that constitute the PC/Wintel platform. That it doesn't always run very well due to conflicts caused by different components of PCs not playing well together is hardly a surprise. Mac OSX is, in no small part, the shining example of stability and usability we see now because Apple has kept tight control on the hardware, along with the software that runs on it. They can handle the permutations well because they're so few. If OSX was ported to the PC platform, my prediction is it would wreck the Mac experience. I think the only sensible route for Apple, if they ported to Intel and AMD processors, would be to only allow the OS to run on a limited set of PC configurations, so as to avoid the conflicts that dog Windows. Probably these would Apple-branded Macs with an Intel or AMD processor, and maybe a few licensees. Expect to pay a premium. And then what have you got? Well, native PC compatibility, which is nice. But essential? As many in the thread have asserted, the Mac has all the software the average user needs. In the end, what is there to be gained by porting?

[rjung]

Originally Posted by squeegee

And it's missing:
- A large HD for storing videos

External firewire hard drive.

Originally Posted by squeegee

- A video encoder (video->digital)
- A video decoder (digital->video)
- A tuner or 2 (for HD/SD broadcast)
- A facility for obtaining a channel schedule

You mean like these?

Originally Posted by squeegee

- Any connections for video (composite/s-video/component)

Here.

Originally Posted by squeegee

I think there may be a few pieces missing that you haven't accounted for.

No, I think CaveMike is close to the money.

I'm not really interested in TVR, myself, but I wouldn't mind using a Mac Mini as a media server/viewer. In which case, I think all I'd really need is an IR remote and the WiFi option...

[squeegee]

Rjung: So, I assume you agree that a iMac Mini isn't very close to being a DVR without quite a bit of enhancement? I can't see how my post disagrees very much with yours.

[rjung]

My interpretation of your earlier post was that the Mac Mini needed a number of not-yet-available components to be a TVR/HMPC, and I was simply showing that the stuff is already available on the market today.

In any event, I sorta like the "roll your own" approach that's available; instead of a one-size-fits-all(-poorly), you can simply add whatever features you want, and not buy the stuff you don't.

[even sven]

Originally Posted by rjung

In any event, I sorta like the "roll your own" approach that's available; instead of a one-size-fits-all(-poorly), you can simply add whatever features you want, and not buy the stuff you don't.

Kind of like what PC users have always done, but a bit more expensive?

[yosemite]

Originally Posted by even sven

Kind of like what PC users have always done, but a bit more expensive?

And with additional stability, and no spyware, viruses . . .

I'm just sayin' . . .

[Mr2001]

Originally Posted by yosemite

And with additional stability, and no spyware, viruses . . .

I'm just sayin' . . .

Ah, so it's like what Linux users have always done, but a bit more expensive.

[AHunter3]

Originally Posted by Loopydude

Originally Posted by Merkwurdigliebe

<snip>
... And then what have you got? Well, native PC compatibility, which is nice.

And then what haven't you got — in case y'all haven't figured this part out yet? native Macintosh compatibility! You've got an Intel-native version of MacOS X and nary a single application to run on it.

Well, OK, since "you're Apple" in this scenario, you port Safari and iTunes and the other software that Apple owns, but you still end up with a PC that can run the MacOS but not Photoshop, Acrobat, or Illustrator; not Word, Excel, or PowerPoint; neither Outlook (or Entourage) nor Eudora; no Firefox, no OmniWeb, no Opera, and even for Safari no Flash, no RealMedia, and nothing else that runs by the grace of third-party plugins; and no drivers for your digital camera, printer, scanner, display card, or infrared laser pointer-clicker, not unless Apple writes them all and bundles them with the OS.

I'm not saying that if they built it no one would come, but this is how it would start off, and Microsoft would be leaning all over companies to discourage them from porting their PowerPC Mac apps to the Intel Mac platform, while at the same time leaning all over hardware PC manufacturers to include Windows with the box but force customers to buy the Intel MacOS from Apple separately. And Microsoft might yank Office Mac entirely.

Meanwhile, to whatever extent the Intel MacOS did catch on among people who might otherwise buy a regular (PowerPC) Mac, Apple loses hardware sales. I suppose Apple could start manufacturing Intel PCs with MacOS Intel preinstalled, but that still means going head to head with Dell and Toshiba and Sony and so forth (if you can get a Dell much cheaper than an Intel Macintosh, you'd buy the Dell and install MacOS Intel on it).

So are you really seeing this as the ultimate Apple strategy for sticking it to Microsoft??