Wither Mac Mini?
Apple may have finally decided to kill the Mac Mini, according to a report.
(Credit: CNET)After relegating it to the hinterlands of its Mac lineup for years, Apple might be finally ready to put the Mac Mini to sleep.
That's what Gizmodo thinks, having talked to two European retailers who say they can no longer order the $599 box from Apple. It's possible Apple could be getting ready to simply update the internal hardware in the Mac Mini, which has languished for quite a while with outdated chips, but Gizmodo reports that the retailers have been told that this is the end of the line.
The Mac Mini was an experiment in affordability and minimalism on Apple's part back in 2005. The small desktop was initially a hit with critics and consumers, but as the world's PC preferences tilted strongly in favor of notebooks over the last several years, Apple spent more time updating and promoting the MacBook and iMac all-in-one desktops than the cute little cube. And the Apple TV has fulfilled the desire of some for a small media server that fits snugly in an entertainment center, even though as designed it doesn't have nearly the flexibility offered by a real computer like the Mac Mini.
Rumors of the Mac Mini's demise have circulated for at least a year. The Mini could desperately use a hardware boost, but Apple may have concluded that it's simply not worth the effort at this point. The company has made it very clear that it considers mobile computing the future of its business, and the Mac Mini simply doesn't work in that context.
It would, however, eliminate the cheapest Mac from Apple's arsenal, raising the starting price of (officially, at least) entering the Mac OS X universe to $999. Analysts have been a little worried that the Mac is expensive in the midst of this year's economic turmoil, but consumers don't seem to have noticed, given Apple's market share gains of late.
Tom Krazit writes about the ever-expanding world of Internet search, including Google, Yahoo, online advertising, and portals, as well as the evolution of mobile computing. He has written about traditional PC companies, chip manufacturers, and mobile computers, spending the last three years covering Apple. E-mail Tom. 
In the end I chose to wait for the October Macbook event and then buy the previous-gen MacBook Pro for an $800 discount, and everybody is happy.
Also - BYODKM is, in some cases, an advantage. For those of us who want to use it in addition to other computers or for specialized tasks, being forced to take a computer with a built-in display is actually a drawback.
I don't blame them for not spending a huge wad of cash promoting a computer that doesn't make them much money. Maybe Apple knows best here, hunh? Or would you run a business by spending all your money promoting your lowest end products? Sounds like a Web 1.0 strategy to me: "Sure, we only make five bucks on each unit while spending six dollars on ads, but we'll make it up in volume!"
The choice to go from a Radeon 9200 with dedicated memory for graphics in the G4 variants to an Intel GMA 950 with shared memory in the x86 variants was the big mistake. It was like taking two steps forward and one back, and plenty of people noticed.
If the Mac mini is discontinued, it leaves Mac users with no way to choose their display without either hooking an external monitor to a laptop or choosing to buy the high end Mac Pro. Considering the fact that I already have good monitors and don't have the money for a Mac Pro, where does that leave me?
For years, clueless computer industry journalists and opinion-makers (looking at you, Reisinger) and brain-dead analysts have been chiding Apple to make a cheap machine. Apple did that, even though they knew that the Mac Mini wouldn't be a big seller and that it would mostly sell to existing Mac users.
I don't blame Apple for not spending a huge wad of cash promoting a computer that doesn't make them much money. Maybe Apple knows best here, hunh? Or would you run a business by spending all your money promoting your lowest end products? Sounds like a Web 1.0 strategy to me: "Sure, we only make five bucks on each unit while spending six dollars on ads, but we'll make it up in volume!"
The Mac mini has a pretty good niche to fill. It makes a great lower powered computer to handle home media tasks without taking up much room or making much noise. Apple does not have another computer that can take this role.
My Mac Mini starts in under a minute, can see my home network drives and I vpn in work far better than could with my Windows PC.
I never touch my main Windows PC now as I can finally see that it is just as bad as my old laptop even though its only 18 months old. After Christmas I intend to replace that machine too with, guess what...a Mac! If the Mac Mini served no other purpose it has been to finally show me how awful Windows can be to live with compared to other OS's.
When you have to support a decent number of Windows machines, you can understand why some people have problems with them.
http://news.cnet.com/Mac-Mini-makes-its-retail-debut/2100-1041_3-5546353.html?tag=txt
In fact people were lining up to buy the iPod shuffles...just shows that people will line up to buy anything, but the Mini! I'm looking at it now and for $600 I can have a three year old processor and 80 GB hard drive. No thanks! For $450 I can get an Acer laptop with a Core 2 Duo processor, more expandability and it's a freakin' laptop and not a headless desktop. Even Apple fanatics can't like something this gawd awful.
Sure, it's outdated, but could you point me to another retail PC that is the same size? I have yet to see anything you can buy in a store that is even similar.
It wasn't really a yawn it was met with, either. It was back ordered at the get go. I know. I ordered one.
KEEP THE MINI APPLE!
One advantage is it's price point. Especially with our current economic conditions, Apple really needs to have a model available at that price point... EVEN if they seldom sell one. It wouldn't be the first time a company was able to get the attention of a consumer by having a model at the price point a consumer wanted to spend, but then showed them how they'd get more value from a better model. Even if consumers don't buy the mini, just having the price point will help drive sales of other Macs. BTW, the Mac mini only *seems* to be much cheaper than an iMac. But if you check the specs (processor speed, memory, hard drive space, etc.) of a basic iMac, and then try to build up a Mac mini to similar specs you'll find that the iMac is a pretty good deal.
The other advantage is the mini's ability to be integrated into a "home entertainment / theater system". I have one specifically for this purpose. I'm not going to slide a laptop or desktop iMac into my rack with my TV, DVD, cable box, etc. but I _will_slide in a Mac mini. I realize Apple markets the Apple TV for this purpose, but the Apple TV doesn't have a DVD player and it's hard drive space is limited.
Sales may be in a slump for it, but probably only because they haven't refreshed this model in far too long.
Again with the loss-leader cheerleading.
Apple doesn't succeed by racing to the bottom - especially if it is to, as you suggest, make their other machines look better. Apple has to order and carry inventory in order to offer a product - and that costs the company and shareholders money if the products made from those parts don't sell. It makes no sense to have a "price point" product to make other, more expensive products look better.
it is a PowerPC G4 version...
it serves as the center of my home network. It is hooked up to a 32" Samsung HDTV, it has a 500 GB external firewire HD, wireless keyboard and mouse. It is the server. It is everything Apple TV is. It is sharing its printer. It is small out of the way but it does it all. And it did it for the house here in Florida and now is doing it for the apartment in Prague. And when my wife's PC Laptop had a HD failure, it became her computer to do her Internet work. It fits nicely between the Apple TV and the iMac/MacBook in Apples line up.
How well has your Mac mini G4 handled playing back HD video? Mine struggles, but I can't help but think an upgrade to a faster hard drive and 1 GB of RAM might help. I'm only talking 720p here...
That's the niche that the Mac Mini was perfect for...and if it disappears, a great number of folks who've been waiting for an update are simply going to jump ship to a PC solution. Which sucks.
What could such a machine be used for?
Perhaps a business computer replacement that is simple inexpensive small and clean with an expansion card slot if needed capable of running any operating system of choice.
A home entertainment extension for itunes music, video, web browsing, pictures, and if you want hardcore gaming by just purchasing and installing your own graphics card of choice. Perhaps video card creators might now consider it lucrative to port some of there products to a high volume and upgradeable devise and will in turn lead the way for game companies as well.
And If not a graphics card maybe a cable card would fit your needs
Now if you visualize such a Mac it may look very much like an elongated Mac Mini or a brick.
If such a Mac existed I think it may help sell some of those new 24" monitors with the integrated power usb and graphics cables and camera.
Such a product would surly cut into iMac sales and may even shave a hair from the Mac Pro numbers.
But in turn it would also most definitely cut into Dell and HP business machines along with some gaming pc's
and maybe even a gaming console or two.
We now have both a G4 and Intel Mini, plus a G4 MDD in daily use.
We need the flexibility of moving displays between Macs as we update our Macs more frequently than our displays as we move our Macs between different users in our house.
It isn't my desire to use OS X on a Win PC, but I may be forced to.
Nah, really, Apple just doesn't play to the low-end. 31% of the money spent on computers in the U.S. is going to Apple. **31%!** How much of that do you think comes from the Mac Mini? 0.25%?
Not that I wouldn't love to see an updated Mac Mini with the new Nvidia chipset and a faster bus. With processor speeds reaching practical manufacturing limits, and Grand Central coming out in Snow Leopard next year it'd be a nice final bow to the machine to give it one final update that could carry it for years. If they could do that, *and* have it support more than one display (like dual DisplayPort ports) it'd be just the thing to finally replace my aging G4 towers with their multiple displays.
I can understand why it may not make the best business sense for Apple, though. I know that as a person who does upgrades to existing hardware and swap out only pieces at a time (video, drives, main processor, etc.) that I'm in a niche off to the side of their primary market.
- by theunclesam October 21, 2008 1:51 PM PDT
- So if I owned a mac now and wanted a bigger screen, I'd have to buy a whole new computer?
- Reply to this comment
-
-
- by ddesy October 21, 2008 4:42 PM PDT
- Hello pot, this is the kettle.
-
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (64 Comments)Do any of you mac fans have brains? Or do you just like to donate to Steve Jobs?
$500 in hardware, a free OS (Ubuntu), and I get the best of both worlds (Mac and PC), with all the stability and security of Linux.
You ask if any of us Mac fans have brains? Have you read the comments?
We are complaining about that very problem of Apple moving towards not having any machines without integrated screens in their regular consumer line-up!
I love Linux as much as the next guy, but quite frankly I have grown tired of the lack of support from certain software companies (Hello Adobe! Flash on Linux is still not good!). That doesn't mean I cannot use it, but that it still doesn't cover all bases. It is getting pretty close, though.