Final verdict on $599 Mac Mini: That don't impress me much
After taking a hard look at the $599 Mac Mini, our OS-neutral assessment of the refresh is that its onboard features and performance benchmarks don't stack up to other budget PCs on the market, where you can spend $100 less and pick up a PC like the Acer Aspire X1700-U3700A, which provides a faster CPU clock speed, three times more RAM, and more than five times the storage space, not to mention a variety of superior internal expansion opportunities.
Apple's push toward environmental efficiencies deserves a shout-out here. Both of the new Mac Minis adhere to Energy Star's stringent 5.0 requirements and achieve the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT)'s highest "gold rating," where previous Minis only reached silver. We used our own Watts Up consumption tool, compared the Mini to a competing desktop, and found that Apple only uses 15.4 watts of power compared to the other system's 70.9 watts at idle.
Interested in our final rating and reading more?
Check out our full review of the low-end Apple Mac Mini.
Justin Yu covers desktop computers, printers, and peripherals for CNET. When he's not scouring eBay for useless ephemera or eating hot dogs for breakfast, he spends his time making fun of Internet culture every morning on The 404 podcast. E-mail Justin. 
Are there any other "Certified" Apple-compatibles that run MAC OSX? Not much, so I dont think you should compare the Mini to a Windows based PC. For the price for a "certified" product that runs Leopard, its the cheapest.
The Mac Mini *could* have been a pretty nifty HTPC if it had more HDD space (you can get a 500GB laptop drive for ~$100), more RAM (2GB minimum) and possibly a TV card. It would be even better if Apple would get their heads out of their ***** and support Bluray too...that would be the icing on the cake.
Bluray quality >>>> iTunes movie quality
It uses all the same internal components as a PC, so I'd say it's a perfectly fair comparison. And after looking that acer cnet pointed out, I would never get a mini. 2.4 ghz vs 2.0 ghz, 4 gb ram vs 1 gb ram, 7200rpm 640gb hdd vs 5400rpm 120gb, and $479 vs $599... the acer wins. Plus if I was going to use it for home theater, I'd prefer to have the hdmi, dvi, S/PDIF and 5 port audio output, esata, and card reader that the acer provides (rather than a pair of proprietary apple video ports plus a headphone jack). The only real advantage (home theater wise) that I'd give to the mac mini here is the wireless and bluetooth, but either those are easily added with a <$20 dongle.
No doubt someone is going to start ranting about how much vista sucks and such and how osx is worth the $120 premium (and minus all the performance), but to be honest, I've been using vista for 3 months now without a hitch. I use vista at home, and osx + xp at work, and out of the three, vista is certainly my favorite. It's a bit more of a performance hog (which will soon be remedied by windows 7. I tried the beta - much closer to xp in terms of resource usage), but that is easily made up for by the far superior hardware + lower price (as indicated in the test scores of the mini)
the mini will make life easier for people since it runs OSX
and since OSX isn't bloated like windows
these specs r more than enough for most consumers
I agree the HD is a bit small but other than that this is a good deal !
the ram comparison r retarded !
I'm sure it'll multi-task better than n e 4 GB vista machine
and with the 9400m it's got a decent graphics chip s well
people need to stop with the lame hardware comparisons
computers r more than hardware !
thats cause you been brainwashed by Microsoft -:
as you can see in the bechmarks the mini multi-tasks better than others
even though it's supposedly has slow hardware !
why do you think ?
@ducttape36, if you exclude the contract then technically the IPhone is the cheapest since it runs mac os.
@jag0, It still wouldn't compete with blu-ray even if it did have a standard laptop drive inside since the laptop 5400rpm wouldn't be able to cope with the transfer rate's, you need either a high-end desktop 5400 or a 7200, or an ssd if you want the extra space.
Hackintosh = FOOLING a PC to behave like a Mac. So why would I waste my time on it if its not an actual product that supports Leopard 100 percent "OUT OF THE BOX"?
Again, no point comparing a Mini to a PC. Yeah....PC's are alot more powerful, but which wins for Leopard compatibility from the get go? M-I-N-I
Different O.S different performance !
as the bechmarks have shown the Mini is certainly a capable machine
it even outscored the so called better bang for buck Pcs
in multi-tasking and It's not certainly bad in the others as well !
Plus with all the software shipping on the mini
and the fact that it runs a better O.S is completely ignored
Plus wat the Mini has going for it is size and performance per watt
a similar sized Dell costs 699$ and it has worse specs
It's simple if all you care about is hardwre specs and speed
then build a PC yourself it'll be cheaper and more powerful !
But if you want a 600$ Pc that is stable,
which also gets things done with fewer steps
and requires almost zero maintenance work
then the Mac mini is perfect !
a word on Macs when you see all the Mac vs Pc commercials
does Apple ever advertise it's computers as Nitro burning powerhouses
Macs r meant to get work done and think about performance later !
The reviewer is also missing the point - the Mac Mini is closer to an appliance than a computer. You don't upgrade your VCR do you? Or your toaster? You get the Mac Mini the same way you get a DVD player, choosing either the low-end model, or getting one with more bells and whistles. While it might not be as cheap as a netbook, it is aimed at people who are not going to upgrade their machines, and want something small and useful for more advanced tasks.
Please - if you're not happy with what Apple has to offer in terms of expandibility, then stick to pimping out your PCs like old-time hot-rodders.
Some of the newer "nettops" offer smaller form factor than Acer's ultra small form factor PCs or Dell Studio Hybrid. But these nettops (such as MSI Wind NetTop and Wind Box and Asus Eee Box) sport Atom/Celeron or similar low-power CPUs.
Of course, some of the nettops are a lot cheaper and do well as HTPCs so it really comes down to your needs. If a nettop would suffice a mini would be a splurge. If you need Blue-ray/HDMI the mini's not for you.
I also suspect that the kind of guy who writes computer reviews for a living have a bias towards performance and away from efficiency, space savings, and silence. When you consider all of these factors, I think the mini performed quite well.
1. Compare the Mac mini to another mini PC (similar sized form factor) and not with a regular sized PC tower. Apple does not make a low end tower and does not compete in this category. Yes the Acer is a bit smaller but it's still not what I would call a mini PC.
2. The Mac mini comes with 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM memory (Not the slower DDR2 like Acer and Dell), Slot-loading 8x SuperDrive with double-layer support (Acer and Dell are not slot loading), Gigabit Ethernet (Not slower 10/100 like the Acer and Dell), Wi-Fi (802.11n) and Bluetooth 2.1 (Acer and Dell do not have any wireless capability out of the box), One FireWire 800 port (Acer has 400 and Dell has no Firewire), DVI out (Dell only has VGA).
3. The Mini runs OS X plus Windows either in a Virtual machine or fully booted (Acer and Dell only Vista). The Mac mini running OS X does not need Antivirus software (that s a big one!). PC users need to spend money on Antivirus (renewing subscriptions yearly) and it will drastically slow down their machines and is a big waste of time running scans not to mention reinstalling the OS when you get infected beyond repair.
4. The Mac min uses a 2.5" hard drive and not a 3.5" hard drive like the Acer and Dell. Again this is because of the small form factor. It's harder to keep costs down on a large sized 2.5" drive. This is why you need to compare the Mac min to another mini PC similar in form factor size.
In the end potential customers will see the Mac mini's benefits instead of only going for the cheapest PC price without knowing what they are actually getting. Acer and Dell cut corners and use older dated technologies such as slower cheaper memory and networking (No Gb Ethernet and no wireless) to put up a smoke screen where a customer could easily overlook these shortfalls. Or in this case the cnet editor reviewing the new Mac mini.
Coupled with the fact that you can run both Windows and Mac on a Mini but can't run Mac on a Windows PC there are a number of advantages that a Mini has over similar PCs apart from the obvious graphics capability of the Mini. I personally like the Mac OS over Windows or Vista for everything except for Media Player. I prefer to use the Vista Media Center. For that, interestingly no small footprint PC like the Dell Hybrid Studio or any of the Acers come even close to the Mac Mini. It's a huge difference when it comes to graphics power.
Finally, the build quality and the look and feel of the Mac Mini when it is off is fantastic compared to any PC.
All in All cnet once again proves that they have a bunch of low IQ folks running around trying to show they know something about computers. They clearly don't know much!
"I agree the HD is a bit small but other than that this is a good deal !"
Sorry but to your own misspellings: "You r retarded"
@ionlyuseosx:
Ok buddy...a couple things:
(1) The speed differences between DDR2 and DDR3 for normal day-to-day use is neglible.
(2) Sorry but the slot drive thing is a novelty and nothing more. I've had a slot-fed DVD drive in a PC I built in the past and it was just a novelty.
(3) Gigabit ethernet (at this point) is only beneficial if you're actually using gigabit routers & the appropriate cables.
(4) Firewire 800 while fast (I've had it on a PC before) it is NOT a supported standard by most hardware devices on the market.
(5) The Acer has the options to add in DVI *AND* HDMI...so what's you're point?
(6) So a PC has to run an antivirus program...and you're point? When a platform owns the MAJORITY of the market it will have the largest target on its back. Plus there are FREE and very capable antivirus apps out there (AVG Antivirus Free Edition being one of them.)
(7) A *GOOD* antivirus program (even free ones) will not "drastically" slow down your computer.
To all you Mac fanboys...do yourself a favor and stop trying to act like you actually now something about hardware because you don't. EVERYTIME I see a Mac fanboy try to talk about hardware...they pretty much ALWAYS look like complete ignorant fools and 'ionlyuseosx' is proof of that (as is seven7dust.)
1. Speed of RAM IS IMPORTANT! Are you kidding me? Do you want yesterdays technology or today's best for your money?
2. A slot loading drive is called innovation. Again you want the best for your money.
3. GB Ethernet IS IMPORTANT especially in a zillion business, creative, video and educational environments where GB switches are now standard. 10 Gigabit Ethernet will be the new standard.
4. Firewire 800 IS IMPORTANT to Mac users and is backwards compatible with Firewire 400 devices and that is supported by many device manufacturers. Firewire 800 is supported by many mass main stream storage devices (a lot faster than USB 2) and even backup tape drives. Firewire also helps in cloning or repairing internal drives by using target disk mode used by many Mac administrators.
5. I said nothing about Acer's DVI output. I stated Dell only has VGA. Can you read?
6. Exactly my point. A PC user has no choice. They need to run an antivurus application. There are so called free antivirus applications but they have no support and have crippled features. And they DO use up resources and slow down your machine along with interfering with everything you do on your computer. And they may not even work at all to protect you.
It sounds like you are the one who needs some IT education. Drop by an Applestore sometime. You may actually learn something.
yr arguments r extremely retarded !
let me explain why
1)Your right DDR3 makes little difference now but in the future it will
2)Slot loading drive is not important but it makes life easier and prevents scratches atleast in my experience
3)as you said it's beneficial to some people
4)Firewire 800 or 400 have been used by many third party devices
so yes it is benificial, plus Firewire is more reliable than USB for data transfer
5)DVI HDMI etc r also present on the Mini via adapters so yr the one missing the point again !
6)again a retarted statement , just because something is more popular
I have to go out use it even though it clearly has problems
and you missed the point Anti-virus still slows down the system and makes you spend unwanted time on maintenance work
7)Plzz list a few cause n e program requires resources
since yr happy doing maintanence work and wasting CPU cycles on
yr bloated O.S and all the anti-virus/anti spyware system I guess it's ok for you but others have higher standards
All I See from yr comment is excuses and no real valid arguments
as far as my spelling goes thx for correcting them on a C.net comment section ,But do try to atleast make a Counter to my arguments
Instead of name calling or let me guess you probably you don't have any
or R u just busy running those Bloated Anti-virus Programs and other maintenance programs just to get yr Computer up and running !
Umm...hate to break it to you but a normal *NON* techie person (i.e. someone who would most likely buy the Mac Mini) won't notice the difference between DDR2 and DDR3 when they are browsing the web, writing documents, viewing pictures, doing basic photo editing, etc. Hell MOST systems on the market still use the DDR2 b/c it is the established tried-and-true standard. DDR3 is still a relatively new technology and as of right now it is only marginally "better."
Slot loading drives are not "innovative"...they're just another option for computer components & they are hardly "better."
As for Gigabit networking...you are talking about business, schools, companies, etc. that have a reason to use it but as of right now, the ONLY beneficial use in-home users have is if they are playing large video & music files across a network to other devices in their houses. And like I said, you have to have a router & networking cables that support gigabit and as of right now not very many people have them (usually only the tech savy have them.)
Great...but Mac users are also the minority of the entire computer industry so what's your point? Plus just doing a search on Newegg.com (a highly respected and pretty thorough supplier of computer components & accessories) only has ~90 items for Firewire 800.
I was just making a point about the Acer having more options then the Mac Mini...so what's your point? You don't need to sound like an ignorant ******.
Umm...I use PCs *EVERYDAY* and all of them have different Antivirus apps running on them (Symantec corporate version, AVG free edition, NOD32, etc.) and they all run perfectly fine and are quite fast. ANYTHING you run on a computer in the background (Mac or PC) will take up resources AND it does not interfere with anything I run on my system (i.e. Outlook, Firefox, IM clients, Yahoo Widgets oh yea...and GAMES.)
If I want "IT Education" I will go talk to someone who uses hardware & software that is used by most of the world...and that hardware & software isn't from Apple.
ii. Slot loading drives are better: less to break/snap off, easier, less space taken up on the front of the box, more aesthetically pleasing. Yeah, aesthetics matters. I don't have an ugly haircut, I don't wear ugly clothes, and I don't want an ugly computer (I'm typing this on my Air :-).
iii. Only businesses and schools have gigabit networking? Or the tech savvy? Or ... er ... me, with my Airport Extreme base station.
iv. "Paying a couple extra hundred bucks for an OS is down right stupid"? Like, er, Vista? Finally we agree. You're still an idiot. (And why would paying more for an OS be stupid, by the way, when that OS is far superior to the competition in almost every regard?)
[CNET editor's note: Prohibited personal attacks deleted.]
Suffice it to say that Acer's $480 box is hardly a comparison to a Mac mini. Even at the Acer's small form factor, the 6.5"x6.5"x2" Mini is half the size of the 12.4"x10.4"x3.9" Acer. (Plus the Acer is hideous.)
Size does matter, as does the efficiency, build quality and OS.
Every continued comment makes you look even more pathetic. Dude, its NOT A COMPARISON, GIVE IT UP. You lost before you hit 'post'- you lost when u thought up this drivel. I would make a point, but they have been clearly made already. Apple users barely respond to this flame bait garbage anymore- hence the amount of comments (yes im a contributor, helping make you better in front of your bossman, welcome)...so no big hits for you bud...just passerby's telling you how much your writeup stinks.
Disclaimer: im a mac user. shudder!
So why, my dear cnet writer, are apple users not beating done Acer's doors to buy this? Oh yeah, thats what we all thought....because IT DOESNT COMPARE, rofl. Keep the weaksauce coming, i have my popcorn ready. dude you are so raping the mini right now, like RAPING it. Be proud!
jag0: "shut up! its the SAME parts!"
readers: (close cnet page, open engadget)
I *DARE* you to try and some how explain how paying MORE for computer hardware that is *VERY* difficult to upgrade makes sense.
jag0 is a troll or working for cnet to keep the boards lively and to bring in more viewers. I would be very depressed with a job like that.
You sir...are an idiot.
- by bub9001 March 24, 2009 6:13 AM PDT
- streamline35 - Your right Vista isn't that bad, Now. When if first came out it sucked really, really bad. What makes you think that Windows 7 will be so much better on release then Vista? Micro$oft's track record with new OS's isn't good. XP when first released was bad, and Windows 7 will follow suit.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(32 Comments)I see why most people would not buy the Mac Mini, and I also see past specs to look at quality. I don't care how fast the Acer is, it is still an Acer. The real problem here is that there is no way that Apple will drop the price of the Mini to match most Budget PC's. It's like going to a Mercedes benz dealer and saying well this Honda has the same specs, why don't you drop the price? Apple builds PC's that fit a nitch, they won't build to make 1% of PC fans want to buy a Mac. The Mini is a Windows Switcher, nothing more. It is a way for PC lovers to see what Apple has to offer them. And from my point of view it isn't bad for the Form factor and price. If you already have a Display, keyboard, and mouse the Mini is for you. If not why not look at the iMac?
I have used Windows machines since the early days of Micro$oft. I really like XP, Vista and may even like Windows 7. My problem is the time it takes for these OS's to get running like they are attended to. A small percentage of Windows users have switched over to Mac's and use XP or Vista on their Mac's. It's just easier and less problematic.
I can't wait to see how good OSX 10.6 (Snow Leopard) and Windows 7 will be. Deep down I want to use both, but have a feeling Snow Leopard is going to be way better.