pure. sex.

[Acert93]

Acert93, you are kidding, right?

Not sure how to respond to that What are my options? Yes, No, Maybe, and Ni? I take "Ni!"

the sff is nowhere near the level of integration of the mini. the latter has less than half the volume of the former. the only piece of computing consumer electronics that has a comparable level of 'density' to the mini at the moment is the gamecube.

I understand that.

The SFF is bigger, but I never said it was smaller. If the ONLY reason to get a MacMini is size, then that is another issue. If you are comparing price, features, size, and expandability as a full PRODUCT, then yes, I am dead serious.

The average SSF Shuttle is 11.8" x 7.9" x 7.3". The MacMini is 6.5" x 6.5" x 2". The Shuttle is bigger (obviously), but it is not huge by any means--you are talking about the size of a stack of notebook paper. In most cases the size difference is negligable--and being bigger is not "less sexy" in this case. We are not talking Xbox versus a GameCube. Both systems have small footprints and look "sleek". Both are also small enough to hide away in most situations.

I guess what you are saying is that if the attractiveness is based on its size then the Mac Mini is hands down better. And yes it is small, and smaller than a SFF. But there is more to "sex appeal" than mere size. The Shuttle is not huge, and I _personally_ think looks sleeker. And when it comes to the band-per-buck, features, and so forth I would say the larger size is justifyable for most consumers--and that power and features is much sexier imo. Of course both of these are OUR opinions, so don't feel as if you have to agree with me Attractiveness is often a subjective thing... I was just trying to show that if it is the size + features + price + performance + looks = Sex Appeal, that there are PCs that compete well in this area. If Size = Sex Appeal, well hands down to the Mac Mini.

Anyhow some LCDs allow you to stack your SFF on the back So it is totally hidden away anyhow, so I am not sure the size difference is that important. I am not dissing the Mac Mini, I just think it is not revolutionary or even the sexiest HW I have seen (in my opinion). A SFF with a 3800+ AMD64, 2GB of DDR400 RAM, 300GB HDD, and a 6800GT is much more appealing in by book But that is neither here nor there!

 

[hey69]

ok guys this is the console forum not your average macwank forum


I don't see what you guys like in that overpriced piece of plastic . likeit is with the ipod. And the ipod shuffle....? that last one is just a simple 50$ mp3player painted white and they put a Ipod logo on it. the sucker doesn't even have a tiny screen. omg IT CAN SHUFFLE MUSIC! all other mp3players are surely doomed by now!

 

[cthellis42]

The Mac mini is cool mainly for lowering the price point and making the Mac an easy adoption (though you truly need more than 256MB RAM to use OSX well. I really wish Apple would stop essentially profiteering off RAM...). And while it IS a tiny little thing (and I loved the G4 Cube when it came out. Sadly, as with the Newton and PDAs, they pre-dated the SFF craze by too much and the Cube fell by the wayside), there's never THAT much of a beef with something that size or something two or even three times its size. Shuttle cases and the like definitely win out on price and options. The Mac mini's place, though, is to make it easy to just "get a Mac."

Now the iPod shuffle I actually find pretty sexy, as it's basically trumped the other flash players by not feeding the same problems that they do poorly anyway and usually makes them cost more/offer less storage. (And more than likely there'll be some third party screen-offering for those desperate for it.) It's not even a horrible price simply for a dependable USB drive all by itself, and in the meanwhile if you can get good sound play off it... Since most people are apt to randomly shuffle through the songs they bring with them on a flash player anyway, it made good sense to ditch the screen's expense (and the extra battery drain), keep it small and cheap, and finally get a good rechargable battery on one of these things. I'm sure they'll play more with the Shuffle/Autofill features iTunes can offer (and could enhance control features, like making a press-and-hold the skip buttons skip forward a Folder/Album if you keep yours organized), but for now it's just cheaper, larger, and more convenient with just the ONE trade-off. (And if one simply can't do without a display, there will of course be other options.) Heck, I was going to pick up a USB drive at some point anyway... I think my selection of one just got easy.

The one thing I wonder, though, is if they could have gone with something older-tech but still useful instead of an LCD screen that could have delivered some of the functionality of screen without making the other compromises. In this case, I'm thinking about--say--an LED field under translucent plastic that could show things through it (track numbers, album/folder headings, song titles, etc) in scrolling fashion. I'm not sure how much cost/compromise that would add, and it would still be slower and less convenient than an LCD screen of even marginal size, but it would be there.

 

[j^aws]

IMHO, Macs have always been about the OS and the MAC OSX is state-of-the-art and as good as it gets with the best of linux/unix/windows and the OpenGL hardware accelerated desktop/GUI is just kweeell! 8)

But don't expect a games machine (though it has it's fair share) but that's what consoles are for!

 

[[maven]]

I personally think the Mac mini is awesome. If I hadn't bought myself an iBook in November I would have ordered one by now.

But I am not sure how your comparison with the Shuttle works out in reality. It all depends on what you're looking for. If you want expandability (e.g. the fore-mentioned PCI-Express slot) there only is the shuttle, but that is not their target market. Adding such a slot would at least double the size of the thing. And to get the Shuttle as quiet as the Mac mini is going to be impossible.

All in all, I think that it is a very good deal (one needs to increase the memory to at least 512mb though), in particular as that includes the OS. I am going to argue that you cannot build a comparable windows system at that price-point (256mb, quiet, Radeon 9200 32mb, 40gb HDD, DVD/CD-RW, Firewire, DVI-Out, WinXP Pro).

 

[cthellis42]

I'll point out it's not just the OS but other software as well, as iLife and other apps are included as well. Depends on how much personal value you attrubute to them. ^_^

 

[Jabjabs]

Just found out about this 2 hours ago, I've already started saving. In australian dollars it will cost me $115 to put in 512MB RAM, so overall it will cost me $1065. US that is about $660.

Yes it's the 1.4Ghz model.

I am going to get TV out, just thinkg about. A cheap computer for your TV that is half the size of your cube! I like it.

 

[Tuttle]

Unless you know that you will be running programs that need the extra ram, OS X will run just as fast with 256 megs compared with 512 or higher if you are just running mostly just Mail, Safari/Firefox, iTunes.

Photoshop, Maya, movie editing, of course would need more.

 

[cthellis42]

Unless you know that you will be running programs that need the extra ram, OS X will run just as fast with 256 megs compared with 512 or higher if you are just running mostly just Mail, Safari/Firefox, iTunes.

Not of you really want to abuse Expose, you can't. I've played with the Macs from one shop to another, and it's very much better to go over 256. I mean, you can't hardly have 15 applications running and switch between them quickly otherwise!

 

[wco81]

Apple could put out an official hardware upgrade package after maybe 1.5 to 2 years, and would, a. have long-term satisfied customers that don’t feel "cheated" when a new product rapidly appears after the purchase, and b. they could sell the same hardware over a longer period of time, only with the official upgrade build in at due time.

Jobs doesn't believe in upgrades.

He can make more money by having you buy new units, not upgrades.

That is why it's a closed design with little or no upgradability.

Ecologically bad.

 

[Mulciber]

after looking at it for a while, ive decided the mini is hideous.

the motherboard design is awesome though.

 

[Brimstone]

Starcraft for Mac could run on this. It looks nifty to me.

I've built computers for people less technically inclined. The type of people that just want to do email and surf the web. I'd recommend one of these over going the x86 Windows route.

 

[Guden Oden]

-For the same cost you can get a similar/better SFF.

The people this thing is aimed at aren't going to go out and hunt for all the various components needed to build a PC and then put them together. You've completely misinterpreted the intended target audience.

 

[Acert93]

-For the same cost you can get a similar/better SFF.

The people this thing is aimed at aren't going to go out and hunt for all the various components needed to build a PC and then put them together. You've completely misinterpreted the intended target audience.

Hi Guden Oden

=> Shuttle offers competitive *complete/assembled* systems for $600 (better stuff in the box, of course $100 more).

=> I saw a better performing eMachine at Walmart for $500 today--with a monitor to boot. Of course this is bigger, but comes full assembled and equiped. Not sexy by any means, but still an option when looking at consumers who are looking to buy easy to setup computers.

I do not think I missed the point--my points in the thread are about the thread/thread title, not necessarily the product. The point of the thread was the "sex appeal" of the Mac Mini. If you want something sexy I think there are better options (if sex appeal is not arbitrarily limited to purely size). I myself noted that I thought this would be successful because it will have a lot of marketing behind it and is not a bad product but a good product--I just do not see this as a ground breaking device and I think there are better deals to be had. Of course the Mac Mini is a closed system you buy and use--no assembly required. This is great for MANY consumers. But so is the Shuttle direct from Shuttle

What I am saying is that I think there are sexier products out there (imo), and there are also competing products in this range when it comes to consumer ease of use (i.e. no assembly required). If these other products were marketed correctly (i.e. had a ton of money behind them like this will) they would do very well. The point you are focusing on--and you are correct--is that the Mac Mini is for consumers who want a small, "sexy" system that is easy to setup for a good price. That is a little outside my point of a "sexy" device, but I do believe there are PCs that do fair well in the main "target audiance" for the Mac Mini. Don't worry, I am not anti-Mac Mini It is a neat device, it will most likely do well. But I do not think Apple is doing something that is unheard of in the PC world.

[maven]: "I am going to argue that you cannot build a comparable windows system at that price-point" -- I already showed a comparable Windows system, with a part-by-part breakdown, at that pricepoint. You could even splurge and improve some. As a Apple consumer I think you have good reason to be excited, but the fact is you can build a comparable Windows system at that price point--even a small system. You could do a bit more with a standard box. And that does not even begin with weigh the advantages of a consumer having access to the broad Windows compatible software library.

To bring this back to the console arena, this is one of the reasons the PS/PS2 does so well. The HUGE software library is significant reason to buy a PS2. It means more consumer options and a lot of times great prices on older software. Hardware is only a delivery device, it has to have good software to be successful and be of good value to consumers. This is why systems like the Sega Saturn, Dreamcast, Game Gear, SegaCD, 32x (wow a lot of Sega systems there), Neo Geo, Virtual Boy, and even now the GCN/Xbox fall behind the market leader in their respective generation/market. Many of those systems had better HW than their market leader, but the support (and price) is what propelled the leader to the top. How else do you explain the GameBoy?!

Anyhow, the Mac Mini will do fine. It is a nice system and will have great marketing and support and already has a excellent name brand support. I am just providing some additional views on the subject

 

[Nappe1]

as coming from Commodore 64 background and having deal with PC "compability" about 12 years now, If I'd had the money, I'd buy Mac Mini instantly. No more windows every week updating hassles, no more x86 / Windows vulnerabilities, etc. Closed systems have their good sides too.

PC would most likely become my gaming platform. All the work that Mac would be suitable, would most likely to be done with Mac. Also, after so many years with just PC, I want to experience "something very different and new" effect again. (jump from C64 to 486/25 PC in January 1993, was quite big.)

besides, I like the design. I can easily imagine that thing under my 15" Philips TFT.

 

[Wunderchu]

I really like it, but I'm just not in the market they're going after.

same here

 

[McFly]

I just watched the keynote feed: http://stream.apple.akadns.net/

Andos part is at about 52 minutes. After he did his last joke, Steve Jobs sayd something about their cooperation in the HD market and then that maybe they will work together in the computer and the music market as well someday.

Damn, I would so love if the next high-end Mac features a cell processor, maybe as a co-processor.

Fredi

 

[Guden Oden]

=> Shuttle offers competitive *complete/assembled* systems for $600 (better stuff in the box, of course $100 more).

The people who are looking for a mac aren't going to buy a PC despite this.

The mac *is* percieved as easier to use, and its user interface and hardware looks better in general and is more consistent in design as well. The whole "1 mouse button and no more" thing, you know?

This appeals to certain people. It appeals to me too I might add, but as I'm as much a gamer as a computer user in general, I chose a PC instead. Most people see PCs more as a neccessary evil or a pain in the butt; they have one because everybody else have them or the programs they use is available for it (read: office suite).

It's rarely by direct CHOICE people in general have PCs, and ye typical PC user tends to have a box that doesn't work very well, crash a lot and may be spyware/virus-riddled as well, and the desktop or root of the C-drive tends to be full of crap as well as important stuff in an unholy mix. PCs aren't very user friendly, and when things go wrong with them it can be very hard to get good help unless the box was bought at a specialist store, or a place like Dell. If one asks the staff/tech support of ye average consumer goods megastore that sells computers you get answers that 9 times out of 10 are unhelpful or flat-out wrong, maybe even destructive.

That's another reason people look at apples instead. That PCs may be CHEAPER doesn't really help them in their situation, you know...

What I am saying is that I think there are sexier products out there (imo)

Yeah, so?

But I do not think Apple is doing something that is unheard of in the PC world.

I don't think apple ever tried to imply this, and even if they did nobody would believe it. In fact, they long resisted entering the budget market and only did so because it would fill a nice gap in the lineup of their apple stores. Apple may not sell anywhere near the number of units its competitors does, but the profit margin is much higher on their boxes.

This would be a nice extra computer or perhaps beginner computer, the fact it is so small adds to this impression. It can be squirreled away pretty much anywhere even in a cramped home.

 

[Dave Baumann]

=> Shuttle offers competitive *complete/assembled* systems for $600 (better stuff in the box, of course $100 more).

The people who are looking for a mac aren't going to buy a PC despite this.

This is an attempt to get into the mainstream "Cheap PC / Home Internet browser / Word processor" market, which previously only had PC's as an option.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Is the PSU inside the Mini Mac, or is it external ?