Does anybody know if they'll upgrade the Mac Minis to an Intel Core 2 Duo processor? The current Mac mini's seems to still be lackig on performance test. A question I have though is how does the quality of the pictures look on the Mac mini, is it as crisp and clear as the other mac desktops? And if I'm just doing like general computer stuff will I notice that the mini is a tad bit slower, or will it not really matter since is just average home use. I've been wanting a Mac for quite sometime but I had to get a laptop for school before the Macbooks came out. So I need a good low-budget computer and I want a mac so badly

[kscherer]

This again? Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaachew, hack, cough!

Among others.

Minis will never be upgraded. Buhahahahah…buhahahaha!

[Anthem]

Sucks to be us.

Note to Steve: Chip prices just went down. Give me a Mini at $499 with a Superdrive (even a BTO option) and I'll buy one.

[turtle]

I'm thinking about finding a Core Solo and dropping a C2D in there. Is that possible? Are CS and C2D able to operate on the same chipsets?

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by turtle2472 I'm thinking about finding a Core Solo and dropping a C2D in there. Is that possible? Are CS and C2D able to operate on the same chipsets?

Yes, but it's not easy to install. The heatsink on the mini is held down by 4 disposable plastic push-pins that break very easily. Taking apart the mini itself is medium difficulty...tiny screws and connectors.

[turtle]

Originally Posted by Eugene Yes, but it's not easy to install. The heatsink on the mini is held down by 4 disposable plastic push-pins that break very easily. Taking apart the mini itself is medium difficulty...tiny screws and connectors.

Cool. I'm not opposed to taking apart the Mini, I have done mine already, but it's a G4 and not swapping CPUs. I'll have to look into those push-pins and see if I can acquire some from a GB friend.

Thanks!

[Anthem]

Still no word on Minis?

A friend of mine asked for computer advice yesterday... he needs a computer for email and kid's papers. He has a keyboard/mouse/monitor, so I jokingly suggested a mini. When I explained that the mini would be $600, and that the parts were a year old, he wasn't very enthusiastic (rightly so).

At $499, with reasonably up-to-date specs, he'd have gone for it.

[psmith2.0]

Was in a similar position just last week, talking to someone looking for an inexpensive way to switch to the Mac. I explained the various options to her, the good and bad of each decision. She was interested in the mini (already having a 17" LCD display and a mouse she's happy with). She's in no huge hurry, but I could tell she was leaning toward the mini but thought that it sounded "neglected" a bit by Apple.

[Mac+]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Was in a similar position just last week, talking to someone looking for an inexpensive way to switch to the Mac.

t, ftfy

[Robo]

I totally agree with pscates in the first thread kscherer linked to. The mini doesn't need to be a huge sales success - but it should be a valid option for people who want to try OS X. That's what it was designed for, with its small size and the "BYODKM" thing. But nobody's going to pay $600+ for an incomplete, year-old computer.

Apple, here's how to save the Mac mini:

Get it under $500. Make just one model for $499. You would still be able to sell essentially the same computer built into a 17" display with a keyboard and mouse for $799, and that'd be okay - that's not the point of the mini.

Give it a Core 2. You might have a history of using two processor families at once (the G3 and G4 coexisted peacefully, as did the G4 and G5), but PC users aren't used to that - nobody was selling Pentium III machines after the Pentium 4 came out (unfortunately ). People feel like they're getting an outdated machine if it has a Core 1 - and they're right.

Give it a gig of RAM. If you're giving prospective users a taste of your OS, you'd want to ensure that they got the best possible taste, right? Tiger sucks with 512MB (believe me, I should know) and I certainly can't see Leopard being any better. 1GB of RAM is the minimum. And I know you'd rather have people buy a "real" Mac than upgrade their Mac mini, but would it kill you to add a RAM door? Better yet, just make the whole top of the case pop off...without the use of a putty knife.

Push it. Make the beats go harder. I'm totally ripping this idea off from the aforemention pscates post, but he was right - there are still a lot of people who think that Macs are too expensive. (I live with a couple of them. ) Make an "I'm a Mac" ad about how you can try a Mac for $499, or something.

None of these ideas are revolutionary - they're just bringing the Mac mini back to what it was supposed to be all along: a cheap switcher machine. I'm not even saying that Apple should include a keyboard and mouse, because people who don't already have a keyboard and mouse (or, um, monitor) would be best served with an iMac (or new eMac or whatever). Basically, Apple would fix their problems if they just made the Mac mini a value again - and let people know that it was a deal.

[Anthem]

Right on, Roboman.

One base model makes a ton of sense, to me at least. Let everything else be BTO.

[psmith2.0]

I think so. When it first came out, and there was a model for $499, that just sounded so good. It hit that psychological "sweet spot" (less than $500). $499 sounds as good to people as $999. Both are important pricepoints that people, for whatever reason(s), like to feel they're coming in under ($500 and $1,000). I know I do, which is why I'm having a hell of a time settling on that 8GB iPhone, when, for six-plus months, I've had it in my head that I'm buying the $499 model.



I find it hard to believe Apple thinks that selling something for $799 that isn't that well-spec'd is doing anyone any good.



Make a modest - but respectful - offering for $499 with the good basics most everyone wants. If you want a SuperDrive or a significantly larger hard drive (or a keyboard or mouse), then you pay extra. But offer something that 85% of the people could go and pick up for $499, bring it home and be up and running soon after walking back in their front door. And yes, that means doing one of two things: making 1GB of RAM stock, even at $499 (I don't know or care how...figure it out, Apple ), or make after-the-fact RAM access/upgrading easy and not involving a putty knife, 300 screws or brackets, thermal paste, etc.



Put a little "backdoor" or whatever (like you did with the iMac DV eight years ago) if you're not going to sell it with 1GB of RAM stock. Tiger is enough of a hog. Wait until Leopard and all its capabilities. You do not want switchers and newcomers first impression of Macs tainted because you're taxing that stock 512MB RAM all to hell on your first weekend of owning a mini.

But yes, get a mini - somehow, someway (cut corners in packaging, I don't give a shit) - down to $499 again, and, as Roboman says above, give it a bit of push in the form of a new "I'm a Mac..." commercial (one that addresses the whole "Macs are too expensive" thing). They've done numerous ones on ease-of-use, the whole security/virus thing, etc. They should devote at least one to the longstanding (and still ongoing) impression out there that Macs are insanely pricey and that the "average Joe" can't get into one for less than $1,299 or whatever.

So many people think that. It's amazing how many people know nothing about the mini, or that Apple sells a computer for $599 (with $499 being ever better, like it once was).

[Kraetos]

2x512 sticks is $50 these days. It isn't that hard.

[psmith2.0]

I don't care how much it costs. To someone who isn't a geek or a bit of a tinkerer, and isn't comfortable with busting open such a closed, tight system, etc. it could be $18 for 2GB and it wouldn't matter. That's not the point.

If they're going to make - and target - a system like this, it's obviously going to find a home on the desks of those new to a) computers or b) Macs, and that is people like my Mom, sister, co-workers and friends...they aren't the type to go putzing around, installing memory. Maybe on a tower or notebook that opened up and provided easy, hassle-free access. But on a Mac mini?

Hell, I wouldn't even be enthused about doing that.

Apple is charging $75 to go from 512 to 1GB. I guess that's not too awful.

But for those who walk into a place and buy it on site (with not BTO option?), the above holds true...your average newbie or "non-geek/tinkerer" is going to be completely rattled by the process of getting into a mini. I know because I've heard the stories and tales of horror and worry. It might "not be that hard" to a bunch of us here, but you have to put yourself into the shoes of others. Not everyone does this, or is comfortable doing it.

Pricing aside, the main point is a) Apple should sell the things with a Tiger (and eventually Leopard) -friendly 1GB RAM, or b) redesign the thing on the next go-around so all that's involved in the process is the removal of a few screws and door/plate (like all their other Macs). Why make their most affordable, easy-to-buy system the absolute hardest for the very person buying them to get into to do something as common and helpful as increasing RAM?

Do one or the other...1GB RAM stock, or easier access for regular folks. That's all. That's not an unreasonable request, IMO.

[Luca]

I think Kraetos' reply was directed towards Apple, not you, pscates. You said "But yes, get a mini - somehow, someway (cut corners in packaging, I don't give a shit) - down to $499 again...," and Kraetos was pointing out that it wouldn't be hard for Apple to do that while also upgrading the RAM because RAM is so cheap.

My inclination is to scream at Apple to shit or get off the pot WRT the mini. Either kill it or upgrade it. Don't leave some overpriced, half-assed, year-old machine on the store page.

The whole Intel switch is just full of unfulfilled expectations. Remember, a year ago, people were saying that it would mean more frequent, minor updates? That Intel actually works on updating its processors (unlike Motorola) so Apple would be able to roll out slightly improved machines every 4-6 months? And that prices would go down too? Well, that's all gone. Apple's taking longer than ever to upgrade their computers, and they cost more than they used to. I think the success of the iPod has gotten to their heads, and they're just getting greedy with their computers.

[psmith2.0]

Ah, I see. I understand. I wondered about that at the time...I assumed he was talking to me (about letting people do it themselves). But it hit me this morning that maybe he was directing that at Apple, like you said.

Apologies all around, in that case.



As for your other points, I've noticed that as well. We're certainly not on the "sure and steady" update cycle I kinda assumed would take place. The iMac is on 300-something days. And the mini, we all agree, looks a bit silly with its current specs and pricing.

Yeah, this isn't much different from the Motorola days, with updates every 9-11 months in many cases (and then said updates not exactly being much to write home about).

Hope it's just an isolated, temporary blip.

I do think Apple has put so much time and resources into iPhone. Now that it's finally out, maybe they'll re-focus a lot of their energy and attention back to the Mac side of things. I know it shouldn't be an "either/or" thing (Apple's a big company, and should have plenty of people to tend to their various projects and lines), but I can't help but thing the entire company, throughout the first half of 2007, has been "all iPhone, all the time".

Not sure how else you can explain some of these update lapses, especially on their flagship desktop computer, and on their "get 'em in the door" Switcher bait machine as well.

[Luca]

Well, I was talking to a friend of mine online earlier today and he said he thought Apple may be moving towards downsizing their Macintosh line and focusing more on iPod, iPhone, and selling OS X to everyone (as in, making OS X a mainstream OS that can be installed on any computer). I know, everyone always says "Apple is a hardware company," but isn't it a possibility? His argument was that, if the iPhone grows as fast as Apple thinks it will, they'll be making a very large majority of their money from iPhone and iPod sales, so losing some low-margin iMacs and minis won't really hurt much. They'd keep their notebooks around, since those can still compete to some degree, but they'll quit trying to compete with their consumer desktops, keeping only the Mac Pro and Xserve around for their big margins and small, but loyal customer base.

I kind of agree. His main pieces of evidence to support this were that Apple Legal, notorious for sending cease and desists to scores of websites, hasn't killed the OSx86 project (even though it's very much illegal and against OS X's EULA). He also told me that Michael Dell said in a speech that Dell may be interested in licensing OS X for their computers.

It's a possibility. It would free Apple from having to spend any time working on the Mini and iMac, which don't sell very well anyway and probably have crap margins (as evidenced by the Mini's price staying at $599). Meanwhile, there are probably a lot of people out there who are interested in OS X but are put off by Apple's outdated, overpriced low end computers. If they sold OS X mainstream, they could probably make back a significant portion of their lost hardware revenues. I mean, everyone says that Apple's software sales are such a small portion of what they make, but that's because Mac users rarely need to buy OS X because they get it anyway with their computer. Start selling it to everyone and I bet they'd get a lot more buyers.

[MCQ]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Not sure how else you can explain some of these update lapses, especially on their flagship desktop computer, and on their "get 'em in the door" Switcher bait machine as well.

With the iMac, I can only assume it's because of a product redesign. We'll find out in a few months.

The mini was just a bad design from the start. It needed to be bigger to accept a 3.5" HD that allows for more storage. It was never really promoted, and was never given prominent display at an Apple Store. It's so small that the only way anyone would notice the mini is by placing it on one of the middle islands, where the laptops and iPods/iPhones are.

Luca - it's a possibility, but a pretty small one. The amount of hardware configurations to support would increase by an exponential factor.

[Luca]

That's where his OSx86 project argument came in. A year or two before the Intel switch, people were talking about how much of a nightmare it would be to do just such a switch, and here we are. He thinks (and I tenuously agree) that Apple's allowing OSx86 to live because they're basically doing free research for Apple into that area. I'm not sure Apple will actually do it, but they may be considering it, and that's why they haven't buried OSx86 in legal threats.

[psmith2.0]

I'll say this (and after these past few years, I truly believe it more than ever): I don't discount anything anymore.

I don't think I could ever again say "eh, it won't happen...Apple wouldn't do that, it's not their way."



Thinking about all the things that have come that we never would've imagined just five short years ago:

- Macs going to Intel (needed to happen, no complaints)
- iTunes, then Safari, going to Windows
- The return of the Newton (kinda, but even better) with iPhone
- Windows running on Macs, fully supported (and made easy) by Apple themselves
- A $499 Mac
- Apple selling TV shows (who ever thought that would happen, given some of Steve's comments about TV)
- Apple releasing a multi-button mouse

And quite a few other things we never thought we'd see (24" iMac, iSight cameras built into the iMac and notebooks, black hardware, an iPod smaller than a soda cracker, the removal of modems to go along with the floppy drive, etc.)

All that just makes me believe that damn near anything is possible. Taking in all the above...imagine what we'll know (and simply take for granted), or where things might be, in just 4-5 years from now?

The mind reels...

[Skaffen]

Originally Posted by Luca ....He thinks (and I tenuously agree) that Apple's allowing OSx86 to live because they're basically doing free research for Apple into that area. I'm not sure Apple will actually do it, but they may be considering it, and that's why they haven't buried OSx86 in legal threats.

The thing is, a lot of the effort of the OSx86 project goes into bypassing issues that Apple have created to prevent OS X being installed on a generic PC, or in tweaking things to make OS X properly talk to other hardware. If Apple were to release OS X for generic PCs they wouldn't need to do the first thing, and there would be a legitimate (financially and legally) reason for companies (or Apple) to provide drivers. From a market research point of view it doesn't really teach Apple anything either, because the number of people willing to do what's needed to get OS X running on a generic PC is fairly small. I just think Apple don't go after them because they don't see them as a threat at all.

[Kraetos]

Yep, that was definitely directed at Apple. Sorry pscates!

[Anthem]

Well, the BSDs have far better driver support than any previous Apple operating system (better stock drivers than Windows, for that matter).

[Robo]

Oh, and here's one more thing for you to do, Apple:

Get the Mac mini into stores. Quite frankly, the Mac mini will never grab much attention at Apple Stores - there's simply too many cooler things around - but that's okay. The Mac mini is for people who have never been inside an Apple Store before.

You have a stranglehold on the audio player market. Use it. Best Buy sells iPods, but they don't sell Macs. Target sells iPods, but they don't sell Macs. Wal-Mart sells iPods, but they don't sell Macs. "Negotiate" a deal where, to "ensure" their continued shipments of iPods, these places start carrying the Mac mini right next to their iPods. At $499, you're getting into impulse-purchase territory for some people. ("Hmm, I like my iPod. And my PC sucks. Maybe I should try this?")

Is that the "nice" thing to do? Probably not. Does it happen? Hell yes. (Why does everybody who carries the Xbox 360 seem to carry the Zune, I wonder?) Would it get Macs into stores where you can't buy them currently? You decide.

I'm not sure if Wal-Mart's new deal with Dell is exclusive or not (and believe me, Wal-Mart will fight like hell for those seven inches of shelf space). But there's really no reason why I shouldn't be able to buy a little Mac mini at, say, Target, when they practically have an entire aisle devoted to the iPod already.

[psmith2.0]

I like the way you think, Roboman.

Sounds good to me, and makes a lot of sense. Target does indeed have practically an entire aisle devoted to iPods and iPod accessories and add-ons (Apple and third-party alike). Having a few minis stacked below, next to the iPods and behind that glass, couldn't hurt...especially if they had a demo unit hooked up and running (like they do at the Apple stores, just a continuous loop of video, features, benefits, etc. but specific to the mini...BYOKDM, everything you need/nothing you don't, easiest and least expensive way to get into a Mac, etc.).

Have that demo playing, BUT have a way to quit out of it so people can actually get a feel for iLife, the OS, etc. (again, just like at the Apple Stores). After so many minutes of inactivity, the nice demo presentation kicks back in again.

Your teen girl (that's all I ever see in the Target iPod aisle...two 14-year-old friends with braces and flip-flops and their mom, every single time! ) standing there, looking at iPods and not completely happy with her Dell or HP at home (or her parents not happy with their PC) and they see this cute little mini.

"Oh, I didn't know Apple made something like this! Honey, look at this...".

Even if a spur-of-the-moment sale didn't occur right then, chances are they may go home and look up the mini at Apple's website and try to learn more about it (or look at their other Macs they offer). Might be a "push" type of item...one that lights a spark or gets them curious and researching the platform a bit?

Tie it in (by proximity and obvious highlighting of the Apple logo) to the iPod/iTunes (and iPhone now?) thing, and play up the whole "hey, if you love your iPod/iPhone, imagine a computer from the same people" angle (yeah, maybe say it cooler than that, of course...but you get the idea).



Apple used to sell Macs (as did Wal-Mart): those old beige Performa AIOs and towers, back in the early-mid 90's. I remember seeing them there when I was in SoCal (pre-iEra)

I've said this before, but it's more true now than ever: Apple is never going to get a retail store into every city, so if they truly want to take advantage of all this attention and good press they've been receiving the past couple of years (sparked by the iPod/iTunes), they're going to have to get people in towns like Chattanooga used to the idea of the Mac, and in places - Target, Best Buy, Circuit City and Wal-Mart - where real people, in real towns, shop and buy stuff.

They've done it in the past, I know. But we're talking 8-10 years ago, and it was pre-iPod Apple so maybe the timing wasn't right like it is now?

Something to consider, Apple...

[herodian]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 I'll say this (and after these past few years, I truly believe it more than ever): I don't discount anything anymore. I don't think I could ever again say "eh, it won't happen...Apple wouldn't do that, it's not their way." Thinking about all the things that have come that we never would've imagined just five short years ago: - Macs going to Intel (needed to happen, no complaints) - iTunes, then Safari, going to Windows - The return of the Newton (kinda, but even better) with iPhone - Windows running on Macs, fully supported (and made easy) by Apple themselves - A $499 Mac - Apple selling TV shows (who ever thought that would happen, given some of Steve's comments about TV) - Apple releasing a multi-button mouse And quite a few other things we never thought we'd see (24" iMac, iSight cameras built into the iMac and notebooks, black hardware, an iPod smaller than a soda cracker, the removal of modems to go along with the floppy drive, etc.) All that just makes me believe that damn near anything is possible. Taking in all the above...imagine what we'll know (and simply take for granted), or where things might be, in just 4-5 years from now? The mind reels...

one of the best post's ever IMO. you're 100% spot on with the 'taking for granted' bit. i looked back and actually thought, for the first time in a LONG time, 'wow'.

i like the mystery of what's to come, but i also like the Mini and I can't see how they would 'replace' it with some imac/mini hibred. the Mini is nice and compact and great as a media hub.

again, IMO, Mac Mini > Apple TV.

But, if they did a Mini / ATV hibred....

[Engine Joe]

Originally Posted by herodian again, IMO, Mac Mini > Apple TV. But, if they did a Mini / ATV hibred....

I have to agree with that - I've been setting up a 1000+ DVD server over our wireless network using two Minis - one for each TV - for the interface side (DVDpedia and RemoteBuddy doing the work). AppleTV doesn't cut it for me for two reasons: (1) on a 46"+ HD screen, the difference between working with VIDEO_TS and ripped video files is noticeable, even when I rip those files at insane quality levels. It's very close... but no cigar. And the audio dB levels end up varying too much from file to file. But the big reason, one that really could be solved with some clever coding in iTunes, is (2) I don't want to have a separate "entry" in my video list for every episode of a TV show. If I have, for example, every episode of I Love Lucy, I don't want to have to deal with 180 different items in my list. Especially when you add in all the other TV shows out there. Working with the DVD files allows that list to drop down dramatically (over 80%).

The first issue I could learn to live with if they come up with a workable solution for the second...

[Doxxic]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 I'll say this (and after these past few years, I truly believe it more than ever): I don't discount anything anymore.

Agree, Apple tended to like to have options, but these days they seem to absolutely love them.

Still I think the time to actually do license Mac OS X is far from here, even if it were just because licensing Mac OS X would require more of Apple's resources instead of less, as Luca suggested.

Neither do I think that Apple is going to put less effort in Mac OS X.
In absolute terms, the Mac line is growing. Mac OS X is at the core of all Apple's product lines. Apple loves Mac OS X.
I personally think that the delay in releasing Mac OS X 10.5 means that Apple takes the Mac product line very seriously, instead of the opposite.

About the 'Apple is a hardware company' argument: I think Apple is a software company using wonderful, full-featured but rather pricy dongles to protect their intellectual property.

About the mini: I think it's too much in the way of the MacBook (I'm assuming that buyers are not very concerned about keeping the screens they have). If I were Apple I'd tweak Apple tv and Airport Express a bit instead of selling minis.

[turbulentfurball]

Originally Posted by herodian But, if they did a Mini / ATV hybrid....

Leopard contains Front Row 2.0, which is TV's current interface. Therefore, a Mac Mini should be able to do everything an TV can do and obviously much more.

[Doxxic]

Which may mean that Apple TV could become a lot more like the Mini than it currently is, and replace it...