[kscherer]

So, something just occured to me. I was watching the 2005 Keynote (where Jobs introduced us to the Intel switch) and a statement he made hit me on the head. He said (and I am paraphrasing, here) "we will begin shipping Intel machines by June 2006, and the transition will be complete by the end of 2007." (emphasis mine).

Now, we all know that every machine was rebuilt (architecture wise) around Intel chips by WWDC 2006. That means that Apple hit their goal of shipping Intel machines by mid '06. But is the transition complete? Does this statement indicate that all of the hardware will be completely redesigned by the end of 2007? If so, what does that hold for the hardware not yet redesigned? The iMac, Mac mini, MacBook Pro and Mac Pro have not yet been completely redesigned. The only one that has is the MacBook. The Mac Pro is fine as is, but what about the rest?

I am probably reading too much into this, but it seemed odd the way he put it and then the way hardware arrived sooner than expected (quickly stuffed Intel crap into exisitng designs).

Anyway, something to yack about prior to the big show (sic).

[PB PM]

There isn't much hardware is in need of a new design, most likely just the MBP (IMO), and even that would be limited (mag latch). To be honest, you're reading too much into that statement. Remember that Steve also said that the transition was complete (cannot recall what event, but I recall him saying that).

[Moogs]

Yes reading way too much into it. Basically Apple stated a conservative goal and beat it with room to spare. The transition is over. Anything from this point is usual refresh / redesign stuff, that has no specific bearing to Intel, but rather just the needs of regular product cycles.

[kscherer]

Originally Posted by PB PM There isn't much hardware is in need of a new design…

I think most folks would disagree with that. The min, iMac and MB Pro are all outdated.

Originally Posted by Moogs Yes reading way too much into it. Basically Apple stated a conservative goal and beat it with room to spare. The transition is over. Anything from this point is usual refresh / redesign stuff, that has no specific bearing to Intel, but rather just the needs of regular product cycles.

That has been my feeling on the whole thing, but I had never really heard it said the way I heard it today. Most of the hardware is in need of big redesigns, but I am sure that is too much for one year.

[Robo]

The Mac mini only two years old...

And redesigns for the sake of redesigns don't seem to make much sense to me. Especially given Apple's minimalist stylings. How, exactly, would you simplify the Mac mini?

[LoganT]

Originally Posted by Roboman The Mac mini only two years old... And redesigns for the sake of redesigns don't seem to make much sense to me. Especially given Apple's minimalist stylings. How, exactly, would you simplify the Mac mini?

By getting rid of it. Or making it cheaper.

[kscherer]

Originally Posted by Roboman The Mac mini only two years old... And redesigns for the sake of redesigns don't seem to make much sense to me. Especially given Apple's minimalist stylings. How, exactly, would you simplify the Mac mini?

I'm not too sure I ever mentioned anything about simplification. I think I said redesign. Don't take that wrong, as I am simply making a point. Redesign can mean anything: bigger, smaller, flatter, thicker, invisible. Whatever.

The mini is a stupid design. Need more RAM? Get out your toolkit! We don't even stock base-models in our store because RAM upgrades for the average customer are expensive and hard to do. Keep in mind that I said average, not geeked-out do-it-yourselfer. The entire thing must be dissasembled in order to upgrade the RAM. That's bad design. And no, we don't want to do it in the shop because it takes too long for what we can charge. Thus, we order them in with 1GB of RAM ONLY, a stance that pisses off the 1-in-10 mini buyers that want to dump in their own RAM. Carry both, you ask? Well, when you sell 1 or 2 a month, even that makes little sense.

A redesign would mean easier RAM upgrades, at the bare minimum, and that would require ground-up newness!

As for age, well, just because it's only two years old doesn't make it a good design. Hell, the G4 model was easier to add RAM to than the Intel machine (yes, they went backwards). Pop the case, add a stick, put it back together. Intel minis require case-popping, wireless antanea removal and drive assembly removal (not to mention warranty voiding). For RAM? That's yuck!