11 Jan 2005 | ek said...

I think the iPod mini and Mac mini are both awesome ideas, but the thing I'm most excited about right now is Pages.

FINALLY what looks to be a good, easy-to-use document creation package for people who care about their content and how it looks (and doesn't cost north of $500).

Every time I use Word I want to hurl — seriously, I hate it, whether I'm using it in Windows or the Mac OS.

11 Jan 2005 | f5 said...

aggreed. I really don't understand all the "There's no market" comments I'm hearing around the office. People have been complaining that Macs are overpriced for years and years, right? In fact, I'm seeing people actually struggling to understand what this is -- like they're baffled that it's not some crazy-unique solution that we didnt' see coming. It's a cheap mac, period. It's an affordable regular tower (allbeit small). It's the second generation Cube.

11 Jan 2005 | ek said...

Oops, meant iPod shuffle.

11 Jan 2005 | Brian Andersen said...

Wow. This is definetly it.

I haven't felt this excited about Apple since I first unpacked my Powerbook a few years back. This is so awesome - that Mac Mini, with the aptly named ipod effect, is going to go straight to homes the world over. Who needs 3Ghz monster machines? People want to surf, watch movies, listen to music, email and write documents.

Speaking of the documents...

Compare something like this to the bloated mess that is the Word toolbar today; Three rows, tonnes of icons.

My blood is rushing through my veins right now, I'm such a fanboy :)

11 Jan 2005 | ek said...

I hate to be post whoring, but on the Mac mini, they might as well have called it the Mom Mac, because every Mac fanatic in the world today is going to buy one for his mother (or father or guardian or pimp or whatever).

It is the absolutely, positively perfect parent machine and it's just lovely. Oh, and I love this comparo image.

Nails it square on the head. Even better, though, would have been showing the machines from behind. The gaggle of wires behind even the most basic of PCs is just ridiculous (this is coming from someone who just recently had to move and re-setup his mom's PC — guess what she's getting for Mother's Day).

11 Jan 2005 | JF said...

ek, you are right... Pages is a special application. And it's about time. Word processing for the masses is so underserved by bloatware like Word.

11 Jan 2005 | Brad Hurley said...

The "you've already got a screen at home for your PC" got me thinking:

Are there any monitors out there that can be connected to two computers at once and allow you to switch between them at the click of a button? I do most of my work on a Windows machine, and it would be great to be able to have a Mac mini on the side, connected to the same monitor. I have a PowerBook now, but it feels like overkill given that I only spend an hour or so per day on my Mac versus 8 to 14 on my PC.

11 Jan 2005 | lisa said...

This little machine looks great -- my only gripe is that it costs over 400 bucks to upgrade the ram to 1 gig...nearly doubling the price.

11 Jan 2005 | Benjy said...

Are there any monitors out there that can be connected to two computers at once and allow you to switch between them at the click of a button?

Yeah, my monitor here at work (a 22" Dell trinitron) has a togle that allows for switching between two computers. I've also seen external hubs that can do the same thing. I was thinking the same thing... get me one of these Mac Minis and hook it up with my PC. Or would it be better to spend the $999 and get an iBook instead and have both a portable and desktop?

11 Jan 2005 | LB said...

Are there any monitors out there that can be connected to two computers at once and allow you to switch between them at the click of a button?

I would imagine a standard KVM switch would do this? (you can just use the monitor bit and ignore the keyb/mouse connections)

11 Jan 2005 | Brad Hurley said...

Personally I don't have any problem with MS Word, though I'm always open to alternatives. But Pages seems to be missing the one feature that required me to switch from AppleWorks to Word in the first place: the ability to track changes in a document during the editing process. That pretty much relegates it to the home use bin; most editors and professional writers have come to depend on being able to track their changes.

11 Jan 2005 | daveg said...

Brad: you can get a KVM (keyboard video mouse) switch for like ~$30 that will switch all three when you hit some keyboard sequence.

11 Jan 2005 | daveg said...

n/m

11 Jan 2005 | pb said...

Apple's really dirving home the idea of switching by not even including a mouse and keyboard. Great approach. Schools will be able to just swap out all their boxes. I wonder if this means that Steve's coming around on two button mice?

11 Jan 2005 | ek said...

On the topic of Pages, just saw this little tidbit in Macintouch's overview of Jobs' keynote prezo: "[Pages] templates open with dummy text (in Latin) and images, not [a] "scary blank page"

*Sniff* — I love those people in Cupertino.

To Brad, yes, most of the mid-to-high range LCD displays available today come with two interfaces, though usually it's one digital (aka DVI) and one analog (HD15). This is probably the one major benefit to getting a non-Apple-branded display if you're a Mac person, as Apple's displays only come with one interface (though if you really want an Apple display and really need to share it between two or more computers, you could always get a video switch box like this one from Belkin).

If you look at displays from HP, Samsung and Sony, pretty much any that cost more than $800 will include two inputs. I have a 2+ year old Sony LCD at home that I use in this way.

Hope this helps!

11 Jan 2005 | Alex said...

I just spec'd a Mac Mini for an exhibit. Drives a wide format touch-screen. The small form factor is perfect.

11 Jan 2005 | Hagbard Celine said...

I just bought a 19" LCD monitor. It has a both a digital and a VGA connector in back, and you can switch between the two by pushing a button.

A Mac mini will fit behind it, in the space I saved by getting rid of my CRT monitor. I'll still need a switch for my keyboard and mouse, I suppose.

11 Jan 2005 | One of several Steves said...

I usually try to view all the Apple hype with an enormous grain of salt, but the Mac Mini is very smart solution, and the timing could scarcely be better. What's been the biggest item in the news about PCs lately? Windows' enormous security holes, vulnerability to spyware, etc., and many of the news articles point out that Mac has not yet been widely susceptible to these problems. Now, people can switch for $500 to do their most high-use things (browsing, email, etc.) and keep the PC around for other stuff if they need. I may be doing just that myself at some point.

11 Jan 2005 | Brad Hurley said...

Okay, thanks everyone for the monitor switching info.

I guess the ideal situation would be to have a bluetooth keyboard and mouse that could be recognized by both the Windows machine and the Mac mini...then you could have just one keyboard and mouse on your desk, one monitor, plus your PC and the miniMac. Ah, that's efficiency!

11 Jan 2005 | monkeyinabox said...

I think a KVM switch would probably work with this for having a true dual platform system. The Mac mini would be perfect sitting on top of your existing PC. :)

11 Jan 2005 | Brad Hurley said...

Ugh, never having seen a KVM switch, I don't think I quite grasped the concept. Forget bluetooth, this sounds great! I'm seriously thinking about going this route.

11 Jan 2005 | Sheldon Kotyk said...

I can't remember the URL but there is some software that allows you to use a keyboard monitor on one computer to control multiple computers as long as they are connected via a network. It worked across Operating Systems as well. It was open source and even allowed the desktop and screensavers to work across the board.

I just can't remember it's name. arg.

11 Jan 2005 | Mark said...

This little machine looks great -- my only gripe is that it costs over 400 bucks to upgrade the ram to 1 gig...nearly doubling the price.

Buying RAM from Apple is a ripoff...get it from a respectable 3rd party and save your money. I'm not sure how easily Apple will let you install ram in the Mac Mini but they have a pretty good track record for making it as easy as 1-2-3.

11 Jan 2005 | SH said...

"...Pages seems to be missing the one feature that required me to switch from AppleWorks to Word in the first place: the ability to track changes in a document during the editing process. That pretty much relegates it to the home use bin; most editors and professional writers have come to depend on being able to track their changes..."

Ding ding ding! That's the reason I use Word as well, but I've also found an odd solace in using Blogger for this same feature. So long as it doesn't *accidentally* erase entries...

11 Jan 2005 | seth said...

I guess I really have no excuse anymore for testing my web apps against Safari :x

11 Jan 2005 | David Ely said...

I like how they don't bundle a keyboard and mouse because switchers will already have them, but won't that mean that the keys will map wrong:

ctrl → ctrl
windows → option/alt
alt → command/apple

So alt and alt won't match up, right?

11 Jan 2005 | Rob said...

I can't wait to purchase the iPod Shuffle and Mini to replace my windows PC. I plan on using the 512MB iPod Shuffle as USB flash drive for my documents and carry some tunes. Can't wait to see them in person..Finally there is no excuse for not getting Mac, because price can no longer be the reason.

Apple Rocks!

11 Jan 2005 | steve said...

I hope this isnt another "cube in the pan"... the cube turned out to be nothing but a nice looking piece. this better work well if people are to switch from their beloved dumb PC's. They certainly inovated their butts off this year, shame they missed xmas with these hot new products.

11 Jan 2005 | SU said...

Does anyone else find it odd that the configuration screen at the Apple Store for the Mac Mini does not prompt you to select a display from Apple or even a third party? You have to add that to your cart by going back to the homepage of the Apple Store. Seems like a missed opportunity.

11 Jan 2005 | Ed Knittel said...

@David Ely

He brings up a good point. With that said, I have no doubt in my mind that someone will have printable labels available that you affix to a PC keyboard with the correct MAC commands...

But, I also think to myself "If these machines are being sorta 'pushed' to the moms of the world, how many of them use key commands?" Maybe they won't even notice.

It's a good point, nevertheless.

11 Jan 2005 | Scott M. said...

By most accounts the reason the Cube didn't do very well was the price point. At the time Apple's lineup was such that the Cube, given its specs, was just priced too high -- so people who were buying the Cube were really buying it strictly for the design (I got mine for cheap before it was discontinued). At the time all people could say was "If only the Cube were $999 etc"

The timing right now is so perfect given the iPod halo effect, a slowdown in the speedbumps in processor speed in the Intel/AMD, Windows' security issues, and OS X really coming into its own (the Cube shipped with OS 9).

This is going to be big.

11 Jan 2005 | Rimantas said...

SU, maybe Apple just counts on you to use your PC's display?
First they let for non Apple folks to taste apple with iPod.
People like the taste.
Then they say, hey, try this mini thingy - no big deal, you can try it using your keybord and display of your PC.
I guess they will suceed on this too.

Now we are not limited with the spee, RAM, o HDD space anymore.
And what comes next? Design, ease of use. Things that just work.
Softwares that just works.
This is the Apple's kingdom, so they must to take their share.

11 Jan 2005 | kev said...

"I hope this isnt another 'cube in the pan'"

This is a good point, but remember that the cube was very difficult to reconfigure, came with very limited BTO options.. oh, and it was $1,300. Higher than an iMac and barely lower than a tower at that time. The cubes were freaking beautiful, but I think the Mac mini does a good job of being nice looking and fitting in with the new Apple aesthetic without all the lucite pretension of the cube.

11 Jan 2005 | Brad said...

Does anyone else find it odd that the configuration screen at the Apple Store for the Mac Mini does not prompt you to select a display from Apple or even a third party?

I can't think of many reasons why anyone would want to buy a mini plus an Apple display when they can get the new iMac (display and CPU integrated in one) for less than the combined total of the two. I think most people who buy a mini will either already have a display or will buy a cheap one locally.

11 Jan 2005 | Jayme said...

The Mac mini will be a slam dunk for Apple. It's the right product, at the right price point, at just the right time to capitalize on their iPod momentum. Most of us Macheads have been waiting patiently for the iPod-PeeCee crowd to eventually move to OS X. The Mac mini will be the key that will unlock the gates of Windows users.

"We supply the computer, and you supply the rest," Jobs said. "We want to price this Mac so that people thinking of switching will have no more excuses."

I think they nailed this one.

12 Jan 2005 | Jason G said...

One glaring thing I see wrong with the Mac mini is the fact that there are only 2 usb ports. If you have an Apple keyboard this is not a huge issue, but for the target audience, bringing in their old PC peripherals, you might have a USB Keyboard and Mouse, and many USB keyboards do not come with built in USB hubs, like the Apple pro keyboard does.

So right there you have used both USB ports. No place to plug in a printer or digital camera or other USB devices. I would like to see 4 USB ports and one of those should be on the front for easy access (although, how hard is it to reach behind a 6-inch box).

12 Jan 2005 | Benjy said...

My biggest knock against the Mac Mini is the small hard drive size. It only comes w/ a 40GB or 80GB. Seeing as an iPod can hold up to 60 GB, this seems way too small.

While not intended as a workhorse computer, 80GB can fill quickly with just MP3s and digital photos. And having to add an external drive, well that just ruins the whole asthetic...

12 Jan 2005 | Jonny Roader said...

Good points there, Jason G. 2 USB ports is a paltry amount when you're requiring a USB KB/mouse. Deal breaker for me that.

12 Jan 2005 | Ian said...

It would make an awesome multimedia platform except for one thing. Audio output. A lone analoge headphone socket on the back doesn't cut it with all the other multimedia features (dvd/firewire for video camera/iTunes). If only there was optical out...

12 Jan 2005 | ek said...

Hey David Ely, it might vary from switch to switch, but my Belkin SOHO KVM switch automatically remaps the keys on my Microsoft keyboard when I switch between my Mac and PC.

The way it maps is:
ctrl → ctrl
windows → command/apple
alt → option/alt

It's a little weird as the location of the ‘command’ key differs from where it would on an Apple keyboard, but I think it makes sense in that the ‘windows’ and ‘command’ keys are logically equivalent.

To Jason and Jonny, I guess I think it would be rather strange for someone not to buy a Mac mini for lack of USB ports as USB hubs are readily available (I think they even sell them at the super market nowadays) and quite inexpensive.

I see your point that it's one more thing to add, but I certainly don't see this as being a deal breaker.

To SU (and J & J), this may not have been the case at the time you checked, but if you proceed beyond the customization page for the Mac mini, the next page (titled "Do you need anything else?") displays accessories and software, including Apple's 20" LCD (along with a link to other displays, including those from 3rd parties) and a Belkin 4-Port USB hub.

12 Jan 2005 | eliot said...

I'm surprised no one here is talking about a Mac Media Center. That's the first thing I thought of when I saw this little guy. I've been thinking of buying a Shuttle case with a mini-ATX mobo to use as my media center computer. But I can easily get a Mac mini with a DVD SuperDrive for not much more than that would cost. The only thing I need is video in and a nice app. I think that EyeConnect will be that app.

Wouldn't a Mac Mini be a beautiful addition to your home entertainment system?

12 Jan 2005 | ek said...

Ian, I think you're being a little unrealistic here. The whole point of the product is to provide the 20% of the features that 80% of the population uses so that the price can be kept down to under $500.

I don't hear a huge hue and cry amongst the general population for optical audio out, which, I think, explains why it's not on the machine.

But such is the beauty of standardized digital interfaces that you can, if need be, add on a USB-based digital audio output device such as M-Audio's Transit. Want true 7.1 Surround Sound output? Hey, you can add that too.

It's not as though you're not allowed to add on to this machine folks. And the Mac mini is actually more extensible than any other machine at or even near its price point in that it includes a Firewire interface.

12 Jan 2005 | Yvonne Adams said...

I already use a Logitech wireless keyboard/mouse combo on my desktop PC that's fully compatible with Macs.

The keyboard shows both commands (ie command/apple on the Alt key, alt/option on the Start key, etc.). Couldn't be easier. Also had standard PC connectors along with USB.

I'm waiting for the cases to be used for transport for commuters. Easy to transport between home and the office.

Also, it's roughly the size of a car radio. Hacks anyone?

12 Jan 2005 | Jonny Roader said...

"I see your point that it's one more thing to add, but I certainly don't see this as being a deal breaker."

'One more thing to add' kinda goes against the whole point of this box though, doesn't it? What's the point of a trimmed down, ultra-neat design if you immediately have to add an ugly box at the back?

12 Jan 2005 | ek said...

The point is that you might have to add that ugly box at the back, but your neighbor (who buys it with an Apple keyboard that has built-in USB ports) or your neighbor's neighbor (who buys it with the Bluetooth module and uses a Bluetooth keyboard and mouse) might not.

Either way, the machine works for you in a remarkably small footprint and at a remarkably low starting price. Really need more built-in ports? Guess what, Apple also makes a few other computers, including the eMac (3 USB ports on the machine, 2 on the keyboard, 2 Firewire starts at $799 with built-in CRT display), iMac (same port config starts at $1299 with built-in LCD display) and Power Mac (same USB config, 3 Firewire ports starts at $1499 with no display).

Then there are the Power Books and iBooks, which include "only" 2 USB ports, but since they have keyboards and pointing devices built-in, you won't be taking up any ports for them.

My long winded point is that maybe this machine isn't for you...and that's not a bad thing it's why companies like Apple make more than just one product.

12 Jan 2005 | Chris Woods said...

Two important points that have been missed:

1. Apple needed an entry model that they could wave as its $499 option. Every other computer manufacturer has a $499 model and it hurt Apple that it could not advertise the same.

Many are pointing out on this board and everywhere that it may not have enough USB ports, etc. In those cases, Apple will recommend and sell you an accessory--a tactic used by every consumer electronics company on the planet. This puts the decision in the hand of the consumer and allows Apple to still advertise the $499 computer.

2. The software that Apple is bundling on its entry model is far superior and provides substantially more utility to today's digital media consumer than the crap Dell, Sony and HP stick on their systems.

12 Jan 2005 | Brad Hurley said...

One thing that miffs me a bit is that Apple doesn't seem to be offering any upgrade pricing for the new version of iLife. I shelled out whatever it was for iLife last year, and now if I want to upgrade to version 2 I have to shell out another $100. Granted, that's not a lot for a major version upgrade, but even Microsoft offers upgrade discounts for people with earlier versions of their software.

12 Jan 2005 | Chris Woods said...

Brad,

Purchasing iLife, by default, is always an upgrade because it comes free with every new Mac. If it's valuable, buy it. If not, don't. Besides, when is the last time you got something really useful from MS for $80 (I hope you really didn't pay $100 for iLife '04).

12 Jan 2005 | Don Schenck said...

I'll be purchasing a Mac Mini ... but I wonder how long the waiting list will be.

12 Jan 2005 | Don Schenck said...

Question for all you Mac zealots:

I need wireless access to my 802.11b network. Is that the Airport option?

12 Jan 2005 | JF said...

Yeah, Don, Airport Extreme is 802.11b/g.

12 Jan 2005 | Brad said...

Don, if you already have a wireless network, then just order the AirPort card installed with your Mac Mini. It will recognize your existing network. If you have your 802.11b network protected with WEP (which you should), you will probably have to add a special character at the beginning of your WEP key when you're configuring your Mac...I can't remember the details and it was bloody hard to find in Mac help, but I figured it out eventually.

12 Jan 2005 | DaleV said...

To Brad Hurley: They are offering iLife upgrades for (I think) $29 if you bought it last year. I think you need a receipt, but usually Apple or a store has a record of the purchase if you didn't save receipt.

12 Jan 2005 | lisa said...

From apple's site:
If you purchased iLife 04 (M9364LL/A, M9466LL/A, M9364Z/A, M9466Z/A) on or after January 11, 2005, you are eligible to participate in this program.

Sucks b/c i finally bought '04 right before Christmas.

12 Jan 2005 | Darrel said...

and one of those should be on the front for easy access

For all the great design Apple pumps out, this is still the one design flaw that drives me nuts...they still have this aversion to putting ports on the front of the machines.

I bought an el-cheapo HP windows box a few months ago to do some programming and I absolutely love the fact that I have all the ports on the FRONT of the machine. Even my TiBook, with the ports on the back, can be a pain.

But, yea, the mini is going to be a great product. In some situations, I can see this replacing laptops. I can see students purchasing these for home use, then just waking to school and plugging them into the monitors at school. Smaller than a laptop!

12 Jan 2005 | Adam Gautsch said...

I promise I'm not being contrarian just for the sake of being contrarian. I simply don't get the buzz around either and figured this was to place to get a good explaination to my problem or at least a good place to rant for a second.

First, the good. It makes sense to have to dual mac/pc with monitor switch thang going on. Cool idea and helpful to people that need to test, develop, work on both platforms.

However, the rest I don't get. One cannot use the mini for the main reason most people buy Mac's (or so I'm told) and that is design. No one will be designing a billboard or high res magazine on it. So, it seems everyone in this post sees it as home computer or light duty office computer. No good either. The price point is still too high. You can get a full PC from Dell or Gateway (full meaning keyboard, monitor, and mouse) for the same price. If you want to use it just as check my email, surf the web machine how about buying a webtv device for $199 and still have money left over for TiVo while your at it. (I know webtv is made by Gates and all Mac people are program to hate him but really its cheaper)

So, final conclusion- still over price for the casual user and underpowered for the serious user. Nothing special in my mind.

And the shuffle. Flash players are a dime a dozen.

Thanks for space. I needed to get that off my chest. Mac heads of the world don't attempt to kill me, please.

12 Jan 2005 | Darrel said...

However, the rest I don't get. One cannot use the mini for the main reason most people buy Mac's (or so I'm told) and that is design.

Apple targets the pro-line (G5-towers and PowerBooks) to graphic designers. This box is targetted at the home user.

No one will be designing a billboard or high res magazine on it.

Why not?

So, it seems everyone in this post sees it as home computer or light duty office computer. No good either. The price point is still too high. You can get a full PC from Dell or Gateway (full meaning keyboard, monitor, and mouse) for the same price.

Sure, but your error is assuming that Mac competes solely on price. Apple is not going after the pure price-point shopper. They're expecting people to walk into an Apple store and go 'aha!'

And the shuffle. Flash players are a dime a dozen.

Yep. And apple wasn't in that market. Now they are. With something somewhat unique.

Mac heads of the world don't attempt to kill me, please.

Why would they? Like religion and politics, there's simply a lot of misinformation out there. ;o)

12 Jan 2005 | Brad Hurley said...

I think the mini is for all those people (and there are lots of them) who've been saying, "well, I'd really love to get a Mac, but I just can't afford it." Buying a Mac is more of an emotion- or fashion-based decision than buying a PC, there's a cachet associated with the Mac. The iPod is hot because of its design but also because it's an Apple product and Apple is perceived as cool. But I don't think for a minute that the Mac mini is going to sell like the iPod because it's not a fashion accessory; it's mostly going to sit on your desk.

The price point of the mini brings it into reach of those people who've always hankered after the Mac but didn't really need one. It's your computer on the side...most people probably wouldn't use it as their main machine, but after they use it for a while they may decide to migrate in that direction.

12 Jan 2005 | Jayme said...

No one will be designing a billboard or high res magazine on it.

Yeah, I'm a little miffed by this comment as well. There is nothing about the Mac Mini that would prohibit it from being used as a designer's machine. I've designed full-blown print campaigns for companies like Mercedes-Benz Canada and Sotheby's International Realty on far inferior Macs than the Mini. In actual fact, the Mini makes an attractive option for a graphic designer who has displays etc. at home and office and wants to commute with all of their files back and forth. The only thing disappointing about the Mini to me, is that this little 6-incher is now more powerful than my dual-800 Quicksilver bohemoth humming by my feet :-(

12 Jan 2005 | Don Schenck said...

Maybe ... perhaps ... people will buy it as a relatively inexpensive way to get an elegant operating system ... no?

That would be MY reason.

12 Jan 2005 | sloan said...

The mini will be a great way to get people into the stores if nothing else. But as it is, they need a minimum 512MB of RAM, then it is enough processing to do even DV video editing. It isn't anything to sneeze at really.

I see it targeting a couple different groups and having different uses (which is why it is going to do well):
1) People that want a cheap computer. This includes lower-tech people that want a computer, but not the hassle... parents, kids, students. Why a higher price than a PC? Well, first, it looks better, and then you have iLife, Mac OS X, Apple Stores where you can take classes, and very few security issues to deal with. Getting up on the internet is incredibly easy. The cost of the iMic isn't to beat a $400 eMachine, its to have a product under $500. They aren't trying to compete at the zero margin level, nor do they want to.

2)Schools will target them over iMacs or eMacs I think because they are modular, the screen is separate from the computer. It sucks to have a whole station out of commission because of a hard drive or a monitor and not being able to switch out just the CPU or the monitor as needed... this has been a pain for a lot of schools with low IT budgets. With turn-around times to get stuff fixed at up to a month, having just a couple extra iMac minis and monitors will keep them up and running. A lot of schools don't need a large hard drive, they make students and faculty use a network drive. These could even be used in a FCP class and have students bring in their own FW drives to edit on.

3) Developers and tech geeks. People that love Linux and want an extra, stable Unix flavor box to tool around with... for $500 they cant' go wrong. A developer with a KVM switch adds a tiny box to have full OS X to test on. It can make a great little web server with PHP, Apache and MySQL... it can really go back to the Apple I and II hobby ideals of messing around with a computer but at a much lower cost.

4) Edge of tech people. The kind that have a 40"+ HD flat screen TV already with disposable income. Upgrade the iMac mini with a DVD-R burner, WiFi and bluetooth, add an Eye TV and wireless keyboard and mouse. Don't know if you can still do this, but hook your Cable/DSL modem up to it and use its WiFi to act as a WiFi hub and you don't need an Airport Base Station. For under $1200 total (which isn't much to this type of person) you have in your living room a DVR with 80GB of room, CD/DVD player, DVD burner, WiFi basestation, and a full computer with iLife to do pictures, video, and music on. It won't compete with an XBox2 in price, but it does a hell of a lot more.

It is just a tiny computer at a low price (if only 512MB RAM!!!) so it is really adaptable to many different situations, personalities and needs. If they just bit the bullet on the margin and put in 512MB RAM they would be providing many new users a much better experience out of the box...

Will this Mac make a big dent in the marketshare numbers? Maybe not, but even a .5% increase for Apple is a huge increase for them: 25% or so increase in sales...

12 Jan 2005 | pb said...

but won't that mean that the keys will map wrong

I work on 4 different PCs and they all have fairly significant keyboard layout differences, primarily with the keys to the right and left of the space bar. This strikes me as a non-issue.

12 Jan 2005 | Benjy said...

Wow, did you see Apple's earnings this afternoon? Blew way past analysts' expectation -- earned 0.70/sh on sales of $3.49B vs. 0.49/sh expectations on $3.19B. Obviously, Apple has gotten very good at figuring out what the market wants.

12 Jan 2005 | One of several Steves said...

Maybe ... perhaps ... people will buy it as a relatively inexpensive way to get an elegant operating system ... no?

Don, I think you've hit the nail on the head. A lot of people are very tired of having to deal with constant security flaws, system updates, virus threats, spyware infestations, etc., that is part and parcel of working on a Windows box. They've thought about switching to a Mac to eliminate that hassle, but couldn't justify dropping over $1k on one when they could get a Windows box for several hundred less. Now they can get something to do their basic computing stuff - which takes up 80-90 percent of their time on the computer - that doesn't present nearly as many worries, and in the same price neighborhood they could get a PC for.

Part of Apple's strategy in making the iPod work was to reacquaint PC users with Apple, and eventually get them to switch. This is the machine they'll switch to. Not a G5.

12 Jan 2005 | Brad Hurley said...

A lot of people are very tired of having to deal with constant security flaws, system updates, virus threats, spyware infestations, etc., that is part and parcel of working on a Windows box.

I love my Mac, but I work all day on a Windows machine and have to say that none of that stuff has ever bothered me. Sure it's a minor nuisance, but it has never affected my productivity. As long as you have anti-virus software, set your Windows Update to automatic, and occasionally run a spyware destroyer, these inconveniences are barely noticeable. You do hear plenty of people complaining about Windows, but I think the majority of users out there don't hate it enough to abandon it.

Of course, I'm working at home, so I don't have all the headaches that a system administrator in a big company (or even a medium-sized one) has to deal with. But most of those big companies aren't going to switch to Macs. And I don't think most home PC users are either.

I think the Mac mini, for most PC users who buy one, is going to be like the second car, the performance car that you love to drive, but not the one you use every day for your errands and commuting.

12 Jan 2005 | ek said...

Brad Hurley wrote:
I love my Mac, but I work all day on a Windows machine and have to say that none of that stuff has ever bothered me. Sure it's a minor nuisance, but it has never affected my productivity.

You must be on a high-speed connection. I recently had to update my mom's Windows box via her dial-up connection (still very common if you can believe it ;-) and it was a HUGE time sink. I couldn't imagine having to do that every week, which is quite literally about how frequently critical patches to Windows and IE for Windows seem to come along.

Yes, you have to update Mac OS X too, but not nearly as often as XP (running both a Mac and an XP box at work, I speak from experience).

But most of those big companies aren't going to switch to Macs. And I don't think most home PC users are either.

I agree about the big companies, if anything, it looks like there may be a movement back to a mainframe-type model, except based on Linux boxes on the back end. I don't necessarily agree about home users though. It's becoming accepted wisdom now that Windows (used generically to describe any flavor of Windows) is full of viruses and exposes you to all of the baddies on the Internet, and once something like that sets into the popular consciousness, it can be exceedingly difficult to shake (just ask Apple — the "it's just for artsy types" stereotype is still a big barrier for them).

Remember that there's still a huge population of pre-XP users out there who are starting to think about replacing their rapidly slowing machines, and they're getting this negative message about Windows on a weekly basis (this is my mom's current situation).

I think Apple's timing on this is perfect because the Mac mini, for the first time really, provides people like that with a viable alternative to a Windows computer.

13 Jan 2005 | John said...

What about the power supply???

Nowhere have I been able to find a picture or description of the power supply for the Mac Mini. The Mini fits in one hand, does the power supply fit in your other hand?

Don't get me wrong. I was hoping Apple would build this machine. I currently use a G4 Cube but I want to buy a Mini and dedicate it to iTunes and nothing else. With the the Airport Express the Mini can interface directly into my audiophile stereo system. The perfect music server! compact and silent. Plug one of the fanless external firewire drives into it and you can have 10,000 tracks of lossless compressed audio.

I just wish they would be forthcoming about the external power supply. Surely it must have one?

13 Jan 2005 | sloan said...

Yup. The power supply would sit on the floor or something... you can see its size here:
http://www.apple.com/hardware/gallery/mac_mini_jan2005_480.html

13 Jan 2005 | Ivan said...

Let me just say that I am a Graphic Designer and my comp right now is a imac g3 600mhz. With a 1.25 Ghz mac mini you can bet that I'll be doing not only graphic work but 3D graphic work as well. My problem is with the no mouse and keyboard included, now that is a little far fetched. Still Im looking into monitors that I can use on the PC side cause mac is so damn expensive still. Come on apple why do I want to pay for a game that 50 bucks when the pc version is like 25 dollars. So mac hasn't gotten with the progam just yet and it still may take a while before they do. Still I think this Mac mini is definitely a great idea for consumers that are just starting out for the mac.

13 Jan 2005 | Paul said...

The Cube has a power brick as well, and although it's much ballyhooed it never bugs me. It's on the floor - I don't think about it. The Mac mini's power brick looks smaller, so that's good.

I really like the Mac mini, a lot. Right away I thought, "This is perfect for my in-laws." They have an old PC and are edging closer to Macdom. However, if they want a new monitor the mini doesn't make as much sense... but an eMac does, since it's nearly identical spec-wise. I think it's pretty smart on Apple's part to cover both aspects of the low-end.

13 Jan 2005 | Chris said...

I'm buying a Mac mini for my lounge. It'll run headless, to be used as a music server, controlled via Sailing Clicker. Oh, and I bought an iPod shuffle - to complement my existing iPod, and for business, iWork and iLife too.

13 Jan 2005 | Don Schenck said...

FYI:

Sailing Clicker.

13 Jan 2005 | Darrel said...

I love my Mac, but I work all day on a Windows machine and have to say that none of that stuff has ever bothered me.

I had my desktop PC set up last night to download some large files. I also left some work open that I was working on and a few web pages I was going to check in the morning.

Get up this morning, go to my machine and...WTF? It rebooted itself?

Well, lo and behold...this apparently is a FEATURE...windows downloads windows updates, installs, and REBOOTS your machine for you.

ARRRGGGHHHHH!

13 Jan 2005 | Arne Gleason said...

Few people want to use more than one OS (I used to be one of the kind that did --somehow I lost enthusiasm for it all over the years). My conjecture for the domination of MS is that people wanted to use everywhere what they or others were using for serious work (I think youd see some domain specific version of this for Apple with graphic designers). Im not sure the mini changes the landscape as much as apple fans would. I base this on my stated conjecture and on the guess that it wont make major inroads into peoples workspace. Note that purchasing decisions for portable MP3 players are not equivalent for personal computers, and that the iPod does work on Windows (I wouldnt be surprised if iPods were most often connected to Windows PCs). I look forward to the erosion of the dominance of MS, but I dont think the mini will do it (sorry not to join in all the Apple love I like to break up the movement towards group think even if its by being annoying and wrong).

13 Jan 2005 | Don Schenck said...

Arne, you're annoying. And wrong.

:-)

13 Jan 2005 | sloan said...

No one product from Apple is going to put a dent in MS marketshare. The low cost does make it a good machine for new computer buyers and low end users and many other types of users. For people that want email, web, photos, video, music, and basic word processing it is a really nice beginner box. All of those things are pretty platform independent... your email, web sites, photos, music and video camera don't care what machine you are using... that's where it can be really interesting. This isn't a gaming machine, this isn't a high-end workstation, but with 512MB RAM this can even do video editing and the iLife suite makes up for the higher price. Really the point isn't to win on price, it is to get the cost of the machine to the point where it doesn't "feel" like a huge investment. $100 difference between an iMac mini and low-end PC isn't much... and for the people that it does make a difference, this won't be the machine for them. But people have bought iPods in droves even though they were more expensive so it isn't a stretch to think that this mini won't do well too. Defeat MS? No. Make Apple money? Yes.

13 Jan 2005 | pb said...

Note that purchasing decisions for portable MP3 players are not equivalent for personal computers

If you net out all the corporate purchasing where the end user has no input into the decision then I think the purchasing decision is quite similar if not equivalent.

I wouldnt be surprised if iPods were most often connected to Windows PCs

It used to be about 50/50. The HP deal has probably given Windows a slight edge.

The 2% Mac share of the market is mis-leading beacuse the denominator includes a huge number of PC users who didn't choose their machine and don't purchase software or peripherals for them.

13 Jan 2005 | Darrel said...

The marketshare thing is also misleading because Apple competes mainly in the hardware sphere. It doesn't make a whole lot off of it's Operating system. As such, one needs to compare 2% to the hardware industry. Dell, for instance, the leader is only 17%...and a lot of those are commodity boxes sold as fancy typewriters...a market Apple isn't even concerned with.

13 Jan 2005 | Arne Gleason said...

If you net out all the corporate purchasing where the end user has no input into the decision then I think the purchasing decision is quite similar if not equivalent.

My key point was that corporate purchasing (PCs for serious work) was, and still is, a huge factor on how personal buyers make their purchasing decisions (most companies dont provide MP3 players for work and so that factor does not apply there). I guess you disagree.

The 2% Mac share of the market is mis-leading beacuse the denominator includes a huge number of PC users who didn't choose their machine and don't purchase software or peripherals for them.

Your case for Apple being better off than my statements suggest looks to rest squarely on a notion that PC users dont choose their machines (does it?). While I would agree it is true that people dont choose their work PCs, its not a factor that can simply be subtracted away in Apples favor because it would things seem better. I would also suggest youre wrong when it comes to home users they are free to choose, but likely influenced by what they use at work.

13 Jan 2005 | pb said...

I'm not saying it should be subsctracted away. I'm just providing some context on why iPod share between Windows and Mac users is split very evenly despite the Mac's suppsoed 2% market share.

Re home users, that's exactly the point. Mac market share in the home is much, much higher than 2%.

13 Jan 2005 | Darrel said...

they are free to choose, but likely influenced by what they use at work.

And one could easily argue if they're stuck using Windows at work, they'd likely be influenced to try a DIFFERENT OS given the chance. ;o)

13 Jan 2005 | Arne Gleason said...

And one could easily argue if they're stuck using Windows at work, they'd likely be influenced to try a DIFFERENT OS given the chance. ;o)

And I would go back to my original statement Few people want to use more than one OS. Do you disagree with this?

[extract from User Interface Design for Programmers - Joel Spolsky
Monday, April 10, 2000]

---

One day Pete's friend Gena asks him for some computer help. Now, Gena has a Macintosh iBook, because she loves the translucent boxes. When Pete sits down and tries to use the Macintosh, he quickly gets frustrated. "I hate these things," he says. He is, finally, able to help Gena, but he's grumpy and unhappy. "The Macintosh has such a clunky user interface."

Clunky? What's he talking about? Everybody knows that the Macintosh has an elegant user interface, right? The very paradigm of ease-of-use?

Here's my analysis of this mystery

---

To be continued: www.joelonsoftware.com/uibook/chapters/fog0000000057.html

14 Jan 2005 | ek said...

Hey Arne, having worked at a computer store back in the day that sold both Macs and Windows boxes, I know that there's definite truth in what you're saying.

If I had a nickel for every time I had someone who was considering a Mac ask me: "But I use Microsoft at work [that's how most would say it — all most people really knew was that they used Microsoft Office, they really didn't have much understanding of the fact that there was an underlying operating system], will I be able to use it at home if I have an Apple?" I'd be a rich man.

But, and this is coming solely from my own direct observations of family and co-workers — I have no data to back this up, this seems to be much less of an issue nowadays. The idea that a Microsoft Word document will work on a Windows machine or a Mac seems much more broadly understood. The main question I'm seeing now is interoperability with their employers' internal systems (I'm surprised by how many large corporations still use mainframe systems), which, surprisingly, are often Mac friendly.

To you other point:
And I would go back to my original statement Few people want to use more than one OS. Do you disagree with this?

I would have thought that as well, but I've found that most non-techie people really don't care. All they need to know is how to get to their Word or Excel doc and how to "open" Hotmail (or AOL).

This hang-up with operating systems seems to be much more of a geek thing than an Average Joe thing.

14 Jan 2005 | Arne Gleason said...

this seems to be much less of an issue nowadays.

I agree, but it used to be a crippling issue before (now degraded to a major pain).

This hang-up with operating systems seems to be much more of a geek thing than an Average Joe thing.

Im actually not referring to those having an OS hang-up (geek thing). I am thinking of how much the smallest departure from accustomed system behaviour drives the Average Joe to frustration.

My guess is the largest portion of minis will be bought by existing Mac users (as gifts for friends theyre trying to convert). The largest nubie segment will be teenagers with higher levels of disposable income (maybe a substantial segment now that I'm thinking about it).

14 Jan 2005 | Paul said...

You know, it's funny. Today my coworkers and I were checking out a few things and suddenly, a coworker's computer started the spyware game: pop up ads, mysterious "helpful" toolbar in IE, etc. At that point I mentioned the Mac Mini, in response to everyone's talk of what they need to do to keep things running (ie, dip in the friggin' Windows registry!) The discussion then led into what computers one coworker wanted to get for his kids. I suggested the Mini again, especially at the low price.

The response was, well, it's still a Mac. They'd actually rather hook their kids up with a cheap PC than a Mac. And frankly, that blew my mind. Just imagine if the spyware started launching, oh I don't know, porno stuff. On the kids' computer. While not using IE will definitely help the cause, why take any chance?

I'll be very curious to see how the Mac Mini sells, but I think it'll be like hotcakes.

14 Jan 2005 | Brad Hurley said...

Arne, I think you're assuming that most home computer owners use a computer at work. I haven't seen any statistics, but there must be many millions of home computer users whose work does not involve any (or at least minimal) computer use. Think nurses, auto mechanics, all the blue-collar trades, retired people, etc.

Sure, if my work involves heavy use of a Windows PC, I'm most likely going to want a Windows PC for home to ensure total compatibility for times when I need to work from home or bring work home with me. But if my work doesn't involve much computer use, I'll be more open to other possibilities. For example, I happen to know quite a nurses and all of them are Mac users (two switched to Mac from PC).

But I'm still skeptical that the Mini is really going to cause a lot of switching in the PC-user world...inertia is a really difficult thing to overcome. Once you invest time and money in a system and learn how to use it, you've got to be very dissatisfied in order to switch to a different platform. And while we certainly hear a lot of valid complaining about Windows, I still think the majority of Windows users feel that it works well enough for their purposes.

I've only been using Windows for 4 years now, having switched from Mac. I hated Windows at first, and even XP feels clunky compared with OSX, but both XP Pro and Windows 2000 Pro have been rock-solid for me, I've never had a system crash, and everything just works. I really have no serious complaints, and I think there are a lot of Windows users out there who feel the same way.

14 Jan 2005 | Arne Gleason said...

Arne, I think you're assuming that most home computer owners use a computer at work.

No, but I am assuming those who dont are still influenced by those who do (people wanted to use everywhere what they or others were using for serious work). Note: Serious work being a perceived notion by those who may not actually have any experience. Im also assuming that most that have had interactions with OSs (home or otherwise) have had them with Windows. Converting a user from one OS breed to another must presume a from OS and the potential for converts seems the biggest portion of the mini fanfare.

14 Jan 2005 | Darrel said...

And I would go back to my original statement Few people want to use more than one OS. Do you disagree with this?

I honestly don't think people care. Most people want to surf the web and check email.

The office drone who uses Word and PPT probably doesn't even know what the OS is. As far as they are concerneed their operating system is 'Microsoft Office' and the internet is that icon on their desktop.

The person using more OS-centric software WILL know what their OS is. They will either need to keep OS parity to handle specific software, or they won't. If they don't need that, they're going to be a user of sufficient skills that they would actually be able to compare and contrast OSes.

That's my expert opinion*

* = I just made it up like any industry pundit.

14 Jan 2005 | Darrel said...

Hmm...posted before I read EK's comment. What he said.

14 Jan 2005 | ak said...

To me the MacMini is not a computer but another piece of electronics. Bundled with iLife I can watch DVDs, burn CD, manage my photos, manage/buy music, email, web, play games, etc. I would purchase a tvtuner card and plug it into a large screen display. It would sit next to my stereo and TV.

I wouldn't tinker with the settings, I wouldn't use expose or apache. It would become something I would enhance my "digital" life style.

It's the hub. the content/fun is in the peripherals.

This coming from a guy who exclusively purchases laptops.

14 Jan 2005 | Arne Gleason said...

"To me the MacMini is not a computer but another piece of electronics."

That was the appealing aspect of it to me. I was hoping for a fuss free appliance that would bring some enjoyable ordinary-life computing to my living room (something Ive been thinking about for a while, but it always seems like more expense or effort than Id like). The fact that Id have to add stuff to it to plug it into my TV (I expected it to support HDTV) has dropped the mini from consideration (Im that lazy -- and the HD is pretty low capacity). What I wanted was not exactly what Apple had in mind. I think theyre looking for platform converts.

Maybe a miniII will be a better match for me.

14 Jan 2005 | Darrel said...

I expected it to support HDTV

Are any $500 PC boxes supporting that without having to add something yourself?

14 Jan 2005 | One of several Steves said...

Brad Hurley wrote:

Arne, I think you're assuming that most home computer owners use a computer at work. I haven't seen any statistics, but there must be many millions of home computer users whose work does not involve any (or at least minimal) computer use. Think nurses, auto mechanics, all the blue-collar trades, retired people, etc.,

There's a huge, huge flaw in your proposition here, Brad. The two specific examples you mentioned make heavy use of computers. While health care is behind the curve in technology, there's still a lot of computer use for patient records, chart-keeping, etc. Especially if one's a hospice or home-care nurse.

Auto mechanics make tremendous use of computers. All service manuals are now on DVD-ROM, not books. They use them to look up recalls, service bulletins. They enter the VIN to determine the maintenance history, etc.

Most blue collar jobs have moderate to significant computer usage. Many entry-level jobs do as well. It's a heavily flawed assumption that there are whole classes of people that don't use computers at work. They may use computers for very specific, limited functions, but they make use of them. And that's not really any different than a lot of white collar workers.

Arne's point about sticking with what's familiar is a valid one.I don't know how much of an effect it might have on shifting people to Mac, but it can't be discounted.

14 Jan 2005 | Arne Gleason said...

"Are any $500 PC boxes supporting that without having to add something yourself?"

Not that I've heard of, otherwise I would consider buying one (as long as the box wasn't too ugly or too loud and I didn't have to install or configure anything other than giving it a name -- though I'd guess Id have to go through the grief of providing email account info). That's just what I was just hoping for when I first heard of the mini (always hoping).

Why do you ask? Are you looking for something like that too? (Accept I would assume you'd insist on something that behaves like a Mac for your ordinary-life-computing-system)

15 Jan 2005 | pb said...

I think you're assuming that most home computer owners use a computer at work.

That might be part of it but there's a lot more going on:
1) Microsoft Office usage at work is going down being replaced by web apps, email, etc.
2) "knowledge workers" are more apt to have laptops that they can bring home
3) Apple is showing people that there's a lot more to do with your computer at home than your work.

I actually think Apple's going to sell a lot of minis to switchers who have several year old PCs at home. I can also see lots of schools replacing PC boxes. $500/head to switch a lab from PCs to Mac? Are you kidding?

15 Jan 2005 | josh said...

i am currently a year 12 high school student and have what i would say to be a decent PC system - 2.8ghz, ati 9600xt, 1gig ram etc...

i am very interested in purchasing a mac as a multimedia desktop (iMovie, iDVD, iPhoto etc.), but the only thing turning me off getting one was the large price tags that came with one.

the number one reason the mac mini appealed to me was first off by its size. this could now mean i could carry it to and from school very easy.

i will still use my pc as the primary computer, but for all internet and school work i will use the mac.

now that the mac mini is very affordable, im extremely interested in purchasing the mac mini.

would you see this as a decent decision?

15 Jan 2005 | Chris said...

A decent decision Josh? Oh yes. I started my web design company on a G3/266. You'll never look back :-)

16 Jan 2005 | Bingo said...

Bingo.

16 Jan 2005 | Edward said...

can you plug the imac monitor into the minimac?

16 Jan 2005 | Randy said...

can you plug the imac monitor into the minimac?

No. The iMac isn't a monitor, it's a whole computer. There's no video cable that comes out of the iMac.

16 Jan 2005 | Edward said...

but there is one (cable/connector) accessible on the inside which seems to got to the monitor stuff, i was wondering if there is an adaptor to take it from there into the mini. they do claim vga compatibility so if the conn inside is vga... a cheap way to get osx on the old imac until the monitor goes.

17 Jan 2005 | Kate said...

I just ordered my Mac Mini. I have been using Macs for about seven years now. I bought an iMac 400 in 2000 and have been running it all this time. My iMac has been good to me with only one repair in all these years. With the mini I am going from 10GB to 40GB and that is a huge leap for me. I got the 512 ram and that is it. Had to buy a monitor, but that was no big deal. I got a great deal on graceful looking monitor that will compliment the Mac Mini. For those of us with older iMacs this is a great way to take a step up and stay in budget.

I fought getting a Mac years ago, I had an IBM, but you couldn't make me go back now. Everything about PCs seemed to be a trial. Everyday I talk to someone that has their PC in for repairs, has a virus or is just sick of all the hassle. I always get these funny looks of disbelief when I tell them that my Mac has been trouble free for all these years.

I will confess that my son is a Mac Tech and I get good advice and all the help anyone could ask for from him. Still, Mac has been good for me and I have high hopes for this Mac Mini. I can't see why or how it would be lacking in ability, it has more than what I have now and I have been using my iMac for graphic design, all of my business purposes, music, movies ... everything!

If I can't have a Mac, then I would be better off with nothing.

I can't wait to get my Mac Mini.

17 Jan 2005 | Darrel said...

If you're talking about the older iMacs then, yes, you just need to pop off the 'access hatch' in back and pull out the monitor cable (standard PC connection).

17 Jan 2005 | Brad Hurley said...

While health care is behind the curve in technology, there's still a lot of computer use for patient records, chart-keeping, etc. Especially if one's a hospice or home-care nurse. Auto mechanics make tremendous use of computers.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in my experience most nurses and auto mechanics have been using terminals, not PCs. I guess when I say they're not heavy computer users I mean they're not spending most of their day working at a standalone personal computer, and they're not likely to be bringing work home with them.

Microsoft Office usage at work is going down being replaced by web apps, email, etc.

Is there evidence that this is really happening?

18 Jan 2005 | Stomaphagus said...

Two things I find funny about the responses to the Mac mini.

1. Not powerful enough for "real work". Eh? Guess I'll have to give back the money I made last year doing design work on my 500Mhz G3 iBook - with 384mb of RAM, 8MB of video RAM and a paltry 10mb drive. Yes, Photoshop worked fine with my 72dpi graphics and emacs ran like a charm as I coded HTML/CSS. But I suppose I could have done so much more with a faster machine.

(Turns out the developer I worked with went out and bought himself an iBook not long ago...)

2. Will fail to put Microsoft, Intel, Dell, et al. out of business. Look, folks, the Mac mini is not an ocean-boiling device, it's a cheap little computer (though not the cheapest) with some nice features, but not all possible nice features. Everyone points to eMachines boxes that come with more at the same or lower price. Yes, and Daewoo will be happy to sell you a car cheaper than Honda or Toyota will. But a $14k Toyota is still attractive when compared to an $11k Daewoo.

18 Jan 2005 | One of several Steves said...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in my experience most nurses and auto mechanics have been using terminals, not PCs. I guess when I say they're not heavy computer users I mean they're not spending most of their day working at a standalone personal computer, and they're not likely to be bringing work home with them.

It's been years since I've set foot in a hospital. But my mom works in one, and they've gone PC, if I remember correctly.

Some dealership stuff is still on terminal-based systems (mainly accounting software) but most stuff is done on PC now. As I mentioned, service manuals are now distributed via DVD-ROM, not books. Most of the old termianl vendors have moved their applications to PC.

And, yeah, they're doing things other than working on the computer. But so are most computer users. And even the ones who work all day often use them for a small number of specific tasks. My mom works on a PC, but simply works with billing records each day. She doesn't do much else, other than email. That's really no different than an auto mechanic who just uses it to look up service records and manuals.

Again, assuming that blue collar workers don't have the computer background that others do is inaccurate, and a little elitist.

20 Jan 2005 | sloan said...

A thought just occurred to me... when the iMac G5 was coming out a lot of rumors speculated that Apple's patent for wireless video transmission meant that the new iMac would be some sort of tablet or have those capabilities... Which now makes me wonder... Will the next Mac mini be just a keyboard?

Look at the iBooks and Powerbooks. Take off the screen and they are basically a keyboard with an integrated touch-pad and a computer built-in. With wireless video and some special adapter, couldn't the next "mini" be just the bottom half of iBooks? You could walk to any display with a hooked up adapter and set the computer up where ever you went... Instead of a wireless keyboard, you have a wireless display... Or is that just too different of an approach for most people?

23 Jan 2005 | Chris from Scottsdale said...

Sloan, that's a nice idea, but I see two drawbacks:

1. What happens when I spill soda on my keyboard?

2. What happens when my keyboard wears out? Can I get keys replaced easy?

24 Jan 2005 | sloan said...

Oh, I don't think its a good idea for many reasons, but it was just a thought... but there are plenty of ways to replace a keyboard or protect the computer... I was just thinking about ways of reducing a "computer" to its bare essentials, similar to the iMac mini. Maybe taking the idea of serving your "display" to anywhere makes it more like the idea of computing appliances.

25 Jan 2005 | Adrian said...

I'm not hugely impressed. Apple are not stupid of course and they will make money from this. But it won't really change anything apart from a temporary incremental increase in Apple's revenues.

Why not?

Because operating systems aren't commodities and the cost of switching is about far more than just money.

You can get into endless arguments about which operating system is "better"; they're meaningless. But once you've learned to use one _and_ all the apps that go with it, and all your documents are on one computer, moving to a whole new computer and a whole new operating system is hugely expensive, even if you've got the cash to cover the financial cost.

Apple say that PC/Windows users no longer have an excuse for not buying a Mac. If they're right, they're saying that their OS is a commodity - that it works in the same way and is equivalent to Windows (or whatever). It's not, and in fact the only reason Apple's in business at all is because it isn't. So they're being highly disingenuous here. The cost of switching isn't the dollars, it's the everything else and Apple know this only too well. When they say, "Now you can use this just like you use Windows because it's only $499", basically they're lying. Yes, good designers don't always tell the whole truth. Get over it.

This cost of switching is _higher_ for the typical home/casual user that the machine is aimed at. They have enough trouble getting their head around Windows. The last thing they want to do is throw out everything they know about "computers" (ie. Windows) and go back to square one.

Likewise, comments above about schools "swapping out their Windows boxes and replacing them with Mac Minis" are just totally off mark. If you think that swapping one physical box for another that has the same KVM connectors is just a manual job that doesn't take account of the software installed and the knowledge of your user base, you've obviously never done any sysadmin. Please don't come anywhere near any institution that I rely on in a managerial capacity.

And of course all the same arguments apply to switching from Windows to Linux. Switching isn't about the money, because if it were, we'd all be using Linux by now. (I love Linux, but I'm still amazed at the number of Linux users that are baffled as to why people still use Windows when Linux is so much "better" and "free".)

So there are three likely sets of customers:

1. Naive home users that the thing is apparently targeted at. I sense they will buy one, love it for the first weekend, hate it after that, and switch back to Windows in short order. They will never be Apple customers again (at least, MacOS customers) and will tell everyone they know how dreadful the Mac is, because they had trouble porting their mail or they lost five years of Word documents when they switched, or because they couldn't find the Start button, or they can't work out WTF the Finder isn't like Explorer, even though that baffled them too. If you think these things are cheap from Apple right now, they're going to be a whole lot cheaper on Ebay in a few months time. Cheap enough to build walls with, probably. Clicks and mortar, anyone?

2. The aforementioned techies who already know how to work a Mac or have plenty of cross-platform experience. They'll buy it as a second/third/tenth machine, tinker with it, eat the cost. But it's unlikely to convert many of them to primary Mac users unless they were going to do it anyway.

3. The aforementioned relatives and close friends of technical Mac users, that will buy Mac Minis on a personal recommendation, or even be given one by people like you that earn good money and would rather spend some of it to avoid having to support their family's Windows boxen. These people will probably keep their Macs, but only because of the huge effective subsidy that existing Mac users will underwrite the deal with. Add the cost of that to the $499 and it looks a lot more like $4999, but the rest of that will come out of your pockets, not Apple's or your relatives'.

If Apple really wanted to change the world for under $500 they'd do this:

- give you a Mac
- port all your documents
- retrain you to use the MacOS and the applications that replace Windows equivalents
- provide unlimited tech support for at least the first year
- bundle Microsoft Office.

That's what it would take, at a minimum, to put a significant dent in the Windows user base. But of course, you can't do that for under $500 and you probably never will be able to.

So don't worry, we all still have plenty of excuses not to use a Mac. The power of Apple's brand is about looking pretty and encouraging people to be contrary. They may also make good hardware and software, but that in isn't enough in itself. The bottom line is that the number of people that care most about looking pretty and being different, or even having a "technically superior" system, when it comes to their primary computer's OS, is about the same as the market share that Apple already has.

You might think that Apple is making a bold dash for the mainstream market. It looks to me like they're trying to raise some quick cash for the bank because they don't have any strategic advantage for the future. This is about trying to stay afloat, not about world domination. Ditto the iPod. Apple's long-term prospects are so dismal that they're better off making a quick buck and then investing their cash reserves in _other businesses_ than reinvesting it in their own.

Apple's only faint hope for the future is when the OS _does_ become a commodity. Then customers will have a straight choice between a $499 pretty Apple box and a $499 ugly Dell box. But then they'll be in direct competition with anyone else that can make pretty boxes, and despite what you may have heard, Apple doesn't own a monopoly on design talent. That's why 99% of the designers reading this would like to work for Apple but don't. It's not because you don't have the talent. It's because they can't afford to employ you and they never will.

Think for yourself. Free your mind. He's not the messiah, he's just another businessman flogging average computer kit. And doubtless, a very naughty boy too. Now which way's that Kool-Aid going?

26 Jan 2005 | sloan said...

They aren't trying to change the world for under $500. They are trying to break a stereotype that Macs are way too expensive. They aren't going to take a huge hit $$-wise to convert people. They are crimping their margins on other machines for higher sales, but they aren't taking a loss. They do have some tools that they advertise to help make the transfer to a Mac a bit easier:
http://www.apple.com/switch/howto/move2mac/

Unfortunately, OS X is more like windows today than it was in the past (I personally think neither is very good usability-wise). But anyone willing to spend a couple days on the Mac (or a PC from a Mac) can become comfortable pretty quickly. Some little nuances take some time, but there is no huge barrier to switch for a basic home user. For many users, it is simply about iLife, being able to use their digital tools on their computer easily and use the web and word processor. Will people like their Macs more than their old PCs? Depends on the person.