Encased in brushed metal, the new Mac mini features a square shape with rounded edges and is somewhat similar in appearance to an Apple AC power adapter. It features a slot-loading CD-RW/DVD-ROM Combo drive, USB 2.0, FireWire 400, DVI and VGA connectivity.
The Mac mini comes in two models -- a 1.25GHz, 40GB G4 system for $499 and an 80GB 1.42GHz G4 system for $599.
With XP Home, a far inferior 600 MHz processor, the same amount of RAM, a smaller 20 GB hard drive, a plain old CD-ROM, and having them build and test it, it costs $562.
Bringing it closer to spec with the mac mini, we leave it on XP home (though XP pro is more comparable to OS X), update the processor to a EPIA MII 10000 1GHz (probably not as fast, they're slow chips, but we're trying to be super-fair), bump the hard drive to 40 Gigs, and include a CD-RW/DVD, and of course keep the build and test, we reach $683.
There very well may be less expensive systems in this form factor, but it seems the mac mini is competitive in that market .
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
A config based off this could probably better match up with that, with a processor folks actually trust. But it's a great deal for mac users, especially the emac/imac set that want to get a monitor of whatever size they want.
Posts: 5422 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Personal preference. You can't put a different video card, scsi card, gigabit card, or what not in that MacMini. What happens if you want to get that fancy superdrive later? I'd prefer something a bit bigger that is a ton more flexible.
Edit: I consider the size class to be 'way smaller than a normal system'.
posted
But I'm not trying to compare based on things like that. Clearly, to some people how small the computer system is matters a lot, and the Mac mini has managed to bring fairly good functionality into the ultra-small range at a price I don't see anybody matching.
If the size of the computer system doesn't matter as much to you then of course a larger one with more features may well be more appropriate.
Of course, in the market apple's in, this is at a wonderful price point as the very lowest price machine by a wide margin. This is because the market apple's in is machines that run OS X. So in that market (as well as the really small size market), this machine should perform really well.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know it has a market, but I'm looking at it like this - what actual advantage is there to going THAT small? I don't want to move it every day. What's the benefit, other than getting to pick out what size monitor you have? And I hope it has a security lock slot (edit: it does).
posted
Does anybody else see that this is really a remarketing of the Cube?
The Cube was high end, and this is low cost. It just seems to me that they reevaluated their market, and reintroduced the same concept.
As far as size goes, there was a time when people upgraded their computers. Nowadays people just replace them as speed and new interfaces are introduced. There are some that want to install specialized cards and such, but this product just isn't for them. It's a disposable computer.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
1) People who want it to serve media for a TV or speakers
2) People who want to try Mac OS X on a new machine for a low price.
3) People who want to upgrade their old machines, but wouldn't mind using their old monitor/keyboard/mouse (I have a friend this would be perfect for).
4) People who care about aesthetics (see people who get spoilers on their cars, or luxury items in general).
5) People who need a medium-grade LAN machine for stuff like Starcraft or WC III.
posted
"2) People who want to try Mac OS X on a new machine for a low price."
And don't mind having it run very, very slowly.
Bear in mind, this is the old surplus G4 that they've repackaged into a really big, screenless PDA.
I'll keep my upgradeable small form factor machine, thanks. But, yeah, there's probably a Machead market for this, although I can't imagine who they'd be; why someone would want to buy a cheap, small, non-upgradeable machine that's slower than the rest of the stuff on the market doesn't make much sense to me, but it's been my experience that the products which make the least sense to me are the most popular with Apple's user base. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
since the specs are very similar to the iMac I have, I can say with much experience that Mac OS X 10.3 runs very smoothly on those specs.
I agree that one would prefer more ram, but for websurfing, Terminal, mail, and media-watching there's no need.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Somehow less than impressive when ya can get a PC with a faster CPU, a larger RAM, more disc memory, and a 17inch flat panel screen and an Epson photoprinter for $399 after rebates.
Really ticks me off too. All I want is a 17inch flat panel, and the cheapest one I can find is $275.
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, as I pointed out and nobody has contradicted, at that form factor and price the mac is significantly faster . Also, as OS X runs just fine on a 400 MHz g3, this'll run it more than fine, except for the RAM. The one thing I really wish about the new mac is that it would have 512 MB of RAM.
And Tick, there are some people who want a machine they can throw in a backpack, but don't want a laptop. However, as pointed out, the primary market is people who want to run OS X, and this is the only non-laptop mac in anything like that form factor And its faster than any laptop which comes anywhere near its price.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I might actually pick up a mac. TOO BAD THEY CANT PLAY GAMES . You can often get really good deals on dell for desktops in this price-range. I build the machines I use, so getting a mac would be an interesting journey for me, at least I don't have to spend 1k+ now.
Posts: 1132 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are we running into the old Pentium vs. PowerPC clock rate thing again? Remember, a 700MHz G4 performs more flops than a 1.2 GHz Pentium.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, just thought of a really good potential use for the Mac Mini. You know how pretty much all lecture halls at major universities have computers to handle what the professor wants to present?
Well, this seems ideally suited for the task. Cheap, small enough to be locked away in pretty much anything that's handy instead of requiring a large and special enclosure, has a DVI connector (essential and not found on many low end PCs which tend to have on board graphics), and is running an OS that means they don't have to worry too much about updates. Plus, OS X is darn good at hooking into all sorts of authentication systems.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah. I can build a computer this size, with more features and better stuff in it, for about the same price. Yes, I have to fashion my own case, but that's not all that hard. Okay, so it wouldn't look that great. Still, I can do it
edit: Out of curiosity, isn't the G4 about two generations old now? Wouldn't that be a pretty crappy processor? Come on, if it's exactly the same as the old G4, the Architecture is like 3 years old. That's ancient in computer time.
[ January 11, 2005, 11:15 PM: Message edited by: Boris ]
Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think you might be rather overestimating your ability to deal with heat (and size, for that matter). Tell you what, if you do it, as decided by a panel of, oh, Dagonee, someone of your choosing, and TomD, I will buy your computer off of you for $100 more than it cost you to make it.
Some basic rules: must have as much RAM, a CD-RW/DVD-ROM drive, the ability to have 802.11b and bluetooth installed (I use both), DVI out (my monitor uses it), firewire (I have external stuff that uses it), USB 2, and must be no more than 50% bigger in size by volume. In order to be considered successful, it must be able to run under normal usage indefinitely under some normal operating conditions. If the judges feel additional conditions are needed here, they are free to include them based on the specs of the Mini.
If the judges find it to be hard to decide if it meets those criteria, as a tie breaker how loud it is shall be used. If it is "annoying" under whatever criteria the judges use for that judgement, it fails. It should be noted that the Mac Mini is, as far as those who have seen it and checked know, completely silent absent a little hard drive noise, though none observed it long enough to know if a fan kicks in now and then.
edit: oh yes, and you must be within $25 on parts price including any shipping (the Mac Mini ships free, and any shipping of the parts to apple is clearly included in the price of the machine as a whole). If the judges feel the shipping condition is overly unreasonable they may amend or remove it, but I encourage them to consider it as many people consider shipping costs a very important criterion for product discrimination in shopping.
And Boris, that judging panel is extremely fair to you. I've owned one Mac, and I hated it. Actually, my company owned it so we could test out web apps on a Mac browser for an ad agency client.
posted
One thing the panel may wish to add on is some "penalty cost" to the PC for windows XP, as the mac will come with a comparable OS. It clearly shouldn't be the full retail price, but it might be good to have an amount comparable with OEM prices. I won't insist on it, though.
And of course, no really dinky PC processors. It has to be something the judge considers at least comparable to the G4 in normal daily activity.
Oh, and it needs to be capable of running windows, if you make it (and I thus purchase it), I'll be dual booting (I won't insist linux compatibility be verified at all, that's far too onerous, and will likely be true at least on the most part). I could use a decent dev computer for windows stuff.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, the only really unfair requirements there, AFAIC, are:
1) Bluetooth (which is far less common in the non-Mac world, and I don't consider it particularly essential as long as the machine has USB ports).
2) DVI-Out (which is, again, not necessarily common in PCs, and will limit the use of bargain PC video cards -- thus necessitating that Boris buy a custom video solution, dramatically increasing his cost, since he won't be able to negotiate a bulk rate like, say, Apple can).
3) Firewire. I'd consider USB2.0 to be more necessary -- but agree that the presence of at least one Firewire port would be a nice perk.
I'd also require 802.11g, which is a better protocol all-around.
posted
Throw it in a backpack? I hope the components are put together with that in mind like a notebook would be. And that only works when you are going to a place where you know there is a monitor, keyboard, mouse and speakers for you to use. I'm mostly yanking your chain here, I respect what Apple has done recently, I just don't think they are nearly as special as their marketing would have you believe.
Posts: 5422 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ah, but Tom, since fugu is asking that Boris actually build this computer, as fugu plans to buy it from him (assuming the specs are met), these criteria actually matter. This makes it more than just the intellectual exercise that these things usually are.
Posts: 1357 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Which is, as far as I can tell, why the Mac Mini also includes a Radeon 9200. But that rather severely limits your video card options. If you don't insist on a DVI-Out port, there are numerous better budget cards out there nowadays.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't insist on the particular video card, I do insist on DVI-out, as I use it. Really he should include a DVI to VGA connnector as well, as the Mac Mini comes with one, but that's up to the judges.
If he's building this for me, he needs to meet the specs I already use, though. And he was the one who said
quote:Yeah. I can build a computer this size, with more features and better stuff in it, for about the same price.
As I'm not even insisting on some of the conditions I consider important to Mac's appeal and marketshare (such as low noise), I think insisting on actual feature parity for the features I use is completely reasonable (he doesn't even need to install the bluetooth or 802.11b/g, as the mini doesn't come with them by default, though if he wants to outside of the judging I'd be willing to pay for them and a bit more for the convenience of the installation, assuming the computer will be bought by me under the terms I laid out).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and not only do I use DVI at home, but had I this system I would on occasion be bringing it into class to hook into the projection equipment there, which require DVI out.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, I would insist on low noise before I'd insist on DVI-Out. I'd permit him to include a VGA-to-DVI adapter.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really ask you not to, there's a reason DVI exists, and that's because on a really large screen VGA'll look crappy. I want to be able to use it in a classroom on projector screens.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
*nod* Okay. But you realize that by imposing that requirement you're severely limiting his ability to compete on performance, right? Because you can build a machine around that size and for that price that could seriously blow the Mini away on performance, provided you could use any one of the video cards you're not letting him use.
I'm thinking a machine built around one of the SFF NForce4 mobos might be competitive, since it comes with onboard GeForce graphics, Firewire, USB2, 5.1 Dolby, and wireless LAN. Heat might be an issue -- he'd have to rig some serious sinks and/or underclock everything to fit it into a slightly smaller chassis -- but otherwise it wouldn't take much engineering.
Requiring DVI-Out, sadly, instantly disqualifies most integrated motherboard solutions for the PC; I'm not aware of one that exists offhand. And so unless he wants to come up with his own integrated motherboard, he's going to have to escalate to an AGP-slotted board -- which will increase size and cost.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Best price I found from one source is $731 shipped. 10in x 5.8in x 2.8in size, Celeron 2ghz, 256mb mem, fw/usb2, TV out, slot load DVD/CDRW, etc. If I just get the case there and parts elsewhere I can do much better, maybe another $80 less. May be better deals out there though. Posts: 5422 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, Tom, absolute performance isn't what matters to me (or I'd imagine most computer users) at all. I need it to do what I want it to do, which means performing in those situations I want it to perform in.
And a DVI-out is central to a good number of those situations.
Similarly the possibility of bluetooth, and wireless.
I'm not shopping for a desktop computer, here, and that's not really what the mini is aimed at, I'm shopping for a really easy to transport computer that's not expensive, which is clearly one of the target markets of the mini. After all, if the places you're going have keyboards, mice, and monitors, the mini'll be a better fit than any laptop in the same price range (particularly as it'll be more portable than many of the laptops in the same price range).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tick, that's about twice the size by volume, but if the judges are feeling incredibly lenient they might allow it .
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and if Boris concedes the challenge, I'd be willing to let you give it a try, though, Tick. I really could use such a computer, and $625 or less (plus cost of bluetooth and wireless) isn't all that much for such a one.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, and if someone does take the challenge, please just put in a 512 stick of RAM; the judges should evaluate it as the price of a 256 stick, and I'll pay the cost of the 512 when I purchase. I just like my RAM, and it shouldn't make a meaningful different in the operating capacity of the system (regarding heat and such).
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
In all reality, the only hard part about building this computer is finding/building a case for it. Heat isn't an issue, really, since the case can be modified for extra heat expulsion, the CPU fan can easilly suck air straight from the outside with the size constraints, and I know a few tricks for putting a full-size video card into a system sideways using a AGP extension that could be fabricated for need and a reverse heatpipe/fan assembly that would move the fan from one side of the case to the other. I haven't done any real research on this yet, so I'm not 100% sure it can be done. I do know, however, that a computer that is comparable to a low-end dell (With much better performance and upgradability) can be built into a custom case. Lemme do some research and I'll see what I can do. And BTW, fugu, 100 dollars is less than the markup I could make on a Dell-speced budget system Posts: 3003 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
But this isn't a Dell specced budget system, one thing macs have going for them is design and solid build quality.
Plus, you're merely going to try to prove that you could make such a thing without any markup at a similar price. Remember, I could go out and buy one of these myself at $500, so markup above and beyond that is money I'm essentially spending on it being able to run windows and RHEL.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
And coincidentally, that first system you linked to is considerably more expensive (as well as about twice the size) of the Mac Mini.
I put in the minimum processor, XP Home (they don't even have OEM prices), 256 MB of RAM (the minimum), a 40 GB hard drive (the minimum), and a plain old CD-ROM (remember, the mac mini has a CD-R/DVD-ROM), plus building and testing (only $35, and apple sure does it), and it came to $696.
posted
The thing is, fugu's going to win this one. Why? Because a large PC market is not thought to exist for what is essentially a screenless laptop system. Ergo, you won't be able to find an equivalent case -- and even if you custom-mod one, which I agree is easier than it sounds, you won't be able to find a motherboard that will fit into a case the size of the Mini that also has DVI-Out.
In order for such a motherboard to exist, a hardware company would have to decide that a market for an integrated motherboard that meets that spec would justify the cost of developing such a motherboard. And since there are already several motherboard form factors within that general size/price range, it's unlikely that a NEW form factor is going to be developed. And until PC users start demanding DVI-Out on their systems, the motherboards already within this size range aren't going to include that feature.
What Apple has done is, from a technical standpoint, relatively trivial. I'm fairly certain that Russell will concede this. The risk and "innovation" here comes in aiming at a market that PC manufacturers do not recognize. If such a market exists, the short-term potential benefits are huge -- at least until PC manufacturers figure out that market exists and begin making motherboards to those specs. If such a market does not exist, we'll wind up with a Cube.
That said, the mere existence of this system -- http://www.oqo.com/ -- should indicate that we're talking about markets, not technology.
posted
Which is why I said that I could get it a lot closer by getting parts from other sources and putting it together myself (the memory, for one, is outrageous, and the proc and HD can be had much cheaper as well). Posts: 5422 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some people really enjoy spending several hours putting together a computer from scratch for fun. Others don't. Even if you charge yourself something low, like $20/hr for labor, it's going to be a major investment into the total cost of the machine.
How's the warranty like on those custom machines? If the video card wipes out, does the company cover the card even though you did the install work?
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
My Windows programmer friend wants one to "dabble" on!
I think for this crowd (which seems to really love PC hardware), the only reason to get the box is because you REALLY want Mac OS X and a native PowerPC is better than PearPC.
Someone at MacWorld said that the thing IS user modifyable, but Apple's policy is that it is "not". So you void the warranty if you mess with it. If you are familar with the MacMod crowd, that wont stop you:
posted
Tom's right on it with that. Heck, many of the existing mini-itx PC systems I've seen are geared toward installations in kiosks, cars, and the like. I just haven't seen a big home user push for a form factor that small. Maybe Apple will create one. Maybe it'll be another Cube.
Posts: 5422 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Lets see, we'll take your guesstimate, remove XP Home, and remove the build and test costs. That brings it to . . . about $420 before shipping, or $120 for 256 MB of RAM, a celeron 2GHz, DVD-ROM/CD-R. No DVI, and what appears to be a significantly worse graphics card:
Even were there a slot for it (I didn't see mention of one), you'd still have to fit shipping and a graphics card with DVI in for $105 or less. Possible, I grant, though we're still doubling the initial criteria's size expansion allowance. And of course, there isn't an internal slot.
posted
Yeah, someone's already gotten a look in one, and its just a standard RAM slot. They just don't want you taking it apart that far.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
But it's a great deal for mac users, especially the emac/imac set that want to get a monitor of whatever size they want.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Party]](graemlins/party.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
