Between the Lines

Larry Dignan, Andrew Nusca and Rachel King
Home / News & Blogs / Between the Lines

Apple refreshes desktop lineup: Is the Mac mini irrelevant?

By | March 3, 2009, 6:53am PST

Apple on Tuesday outlined a refresh of its iMac, Mac Pro and Mac mini lineups and the headliners are the Intel Nehalem-based Mac Pro and the iMac 24-inch update. However, perusing the updates you have to wonder if the Mac mini is irrelevant. 

First, the highlights, which are outlined by Adrian Kingsley-Hughes, Jason O’Grady, Techmeme and Apple’s statements on its Mac Pro and consumer desktops. The Mac Pro starts at $2,499, uses Intel’s Nehalem Xeon processors and features the latest graphic chips from Nvidia and ATI. 

In the statement, Apple seems to be pushing price for value hard–a fact that isn’t surprising given the economy. Philip Schiller, Apple’s marketing chief, calls the Mac Pro a significant upgrade that starts at $300 cheaper than before. 

Gallery: Apple iMac, Mac Pro and Mac mini Feb ‘09 refresh

It’s a similar story on Apple’s consumer lineup where Apple touts its 24-inch iMac starting at the same price as its 20-inch predecessor.

Piper Jaffray analyst Gene Munster also notes Apple’s nod to pricing, but adds that the product refresh/pricing is consistent with historical standards at the company. However, Munster also adds that Apple’s desktop refresh comes amid what’s likely to be weak Mac unit sales for February. Munster writes in a research note:

Next Datapoint On Apple: Expect Feb NPD To Be Relatively Weak On 3/16. Month of February NPD is scheduled to be released on 3/16. Through the first month of March quarter (January), the Mac unit NPD data was tracking down 6% y/y. We expect month of February Mac unit data will be down ~12% y/y, given Feb-09 is a tough comp vs. Feb-08, due to Macbook Air launch. Street is modeling for Mac units down ~4% y/y for the March quarter.

The afterthought in this equation is the Mac mini, which doesn’t line up with better performance and seems priced out of its niche. The specs for the Mac mini are certainly better than before, but Adrian Kingsley-Hughes notes:

The Mac mini update really is little more than the bare minimum Apple could have done.

Good point indeed. And then you consider the price. The Mac mini has two prices–$599 or $799 depending on the memory you get. Now let’s acknowledge that the Mac mini has a neat design. It’s also green. But the value proposition of a Mac mini is questionable. Why?

  • Netbooks are much cheaper and have screens.
  • Non-Apple laptops will cost about the same as the Mac mini. 
  • You still have to account for a monitor (Apple’s store suggests the $899 24-inch Apple LED Cinema Display.
  • And it’s unclear what niche the Mac mini fills. It’s not quite a living room PC–think Apple TV and Sony Playstation–and it’s not an iMac. 

In other words, I have no idea what would convince me to buy a Mac mini even if I loved Apple. There are too many options that offer better value–even on Apple’s own store. If I really wanted a Mac I’d buy something other than the Mac mini. Hell, I’d even get an Apple TV over a Mac mini.

Add it up and it’s quite possible that a Mac mini buyer could eye the $799 version and go either two ways: A person spend another $400 and get an iMac or walk away for more value somewhere else. Apple obviously bets on the former, but you have to wonder why the company needs the Mac mini in its lineup at all. It’s a tweener that just doesn’t make a lot of sense these days.

Update: There are a lot of folks giving me Mac mini use cases now. A few use cases via email and the Talkbacks below:

  • Mini clusters as a cheap server set-up;
  • Rack them as computing power for audiophiles;
  • Cheap Mac desktops for those loaded with monitors and accessories.

Here are a few use cases:

Email 1: The music lover

You posed the question “I have no idea what would convince me to buy a Mac mini even if I loved Apple.”

May I share with you the general adoption of the Mac mini among audiophiles deploying digital music servers?

We all have our own interests, our own hobbies. One of mine is audio of the classical music flavor.

It’s impossible to pick up a serious audio magazine (”stereo” or “hifi” for us oldsters) and not come upon various discussions of digital music using the Mac mini as a server device.

In a classic “chicken and egg” situation, many serious digital music software systems are written only for the Apple OS.

Want to use a particular piece of software as your key ingredient? Buy an Apple PC–any Apple PC—because you’ve got no choice.

As you can appreciate, the cheapest and easiest Apple to deploy in a living room or on an audio equipment rack is the Mac mini.

Hey, happy to answer your question for you.

Email 2: Stack em club

For me, the MacMini is a valuable addition to my computer inventory. I use them for web servers.

  • They’re cheap, for a Mac.
  • The software I use is Mac-only.
  • I don’t need keyboards and screens.
  • I stack ‘em up.
  • Bottom line: The Mac mini fills a valuable  niche.

Email 3: Replacement for PCs

Interesting question about the Mac Mini.  I suspect I may be a good representative of the target market. Had a legacy XP system in my small office.  Bought a MacBook Pro a few years back for personal use.  Decided to swap my office over to Mac OS X, but didn’t want to lose my investment in five good monitors, keyboards, mice, etc., so I bought all minis.  Worked very well for me - fully Mac OS X now, and happy with the setup.

Email 4: Web TV redux

Wouldn’t it be nice to connect a Mac Mini to your wireless router and your big screen HDTV and sit back in your lounger with a wireless keyboard and mouse and surf the web?

My take: Good points made by all, but these end markets still sound nichey. In any case, the Mac mini wouldn’t be my first choice as a buyer–I’m not looking to stack minis, am not a huge music collector and don’t have a bunch of monitors to spare. Thanks for the education though.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “Between the Lines”

Topics

Apple Macintosh, Apple Intel Mac Mini, Apple Inc., Desktops, Hardware, Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic.

Disclosure

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan has nothing to disclose. He doesn’t hold investments in the technology companies he covers.

Biography

Larry Dignan

Larry Dignan is Editor in Chief of ZDNet and SmartPlanet as well as Editorial Director of ZDNet's sister site TechRepublic. He was most recently Executive Editor of News and Blogs at ZDNet. Prior to that he was executive news editor at eWeek and news editor at Baseline. He also served as the East Coast news editor and finance editor at CNET News.com. Larry has covered the technology and financial services industry since 1995, publishing articles in WallStreetWeek.com, Inter@ctive Week, The New York Times, and Financial Planning magazine. He's a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and the University of Delaware.

For daily updates, follow Larry on Twitter.

227
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Apple refreshes desktop lineup: Is the Mac mini irrelevant?
yvesmailhot 11th Sep 2010
I have one connected to my HDTV and I love it. I also have customers using it for kiosks with large screens using eCrisper (http://ecrisper.com).
View in thread
0 Votes
+ -
Mac Mini ...
Ludovit 3rd Mar 2009
... is perfect for a KVM situation - small foot print when considering it's sharing the KVM with a PC based machine ...

Ludo
0 Votes
+ -
Price Point!
rmcguire@... 3rd Mar 2009
Neat little box, but it seems to me a $399 price tag would get them flying off the shelves!
0 Votes
+ -
You can't even get a PC for that
sawatzky 3rd Mar 2009
If you said $600 instead of $400 I'd agree.

I've been looking at PC prices lately. Namebrand $399 PC's are still Core
Duo. with cruddy graphic cards. To get a Mac down to that level the Mini
would have to lose the NVIDIA GeForce 9400M, the Core 2 Duo 2Ghz, and
the Firewire port. I'd gladly pay an extra $200 for those features.

The jump from 2 to 2.26GHz and an extra 128MB Video RAM and and
extra 200GB in the hard drive for $220 is the part I have trouble
swallowing.
0 Votes
+ -
I don't know where you're living
Rubix_z 4th Mar 2009
But here my dad bought a Fujitsu Siemens computer with a Core 2 Quad CPU + 22" display, 2GB of RAM and a lower range graphics card with 256MB of VRAM for ?600,- about half a year ago. Looking at value for money that is a greatly better deal. Only the small form factor would make the Mac Mini worth buying. But placing the Fujitsu midi tower under the desk gave a clean desktop look as well wink
0 Votes
+ -
This is a very specialized scenario though ...
mwagner@... 3rd Mar 2009
(nt)
0 Votes
+ -
very true but still to expensive
tech_walker 3rd Mar 2009
I've considered the mini many times but for the little bit I'd use it, it should be no more than $399.
0 Votes
+ -
Small form factor tax
daengbo 3rd Mar 2009
I'm no Mac apologist, but SFF machines aren't cheap. The best you can do with a mini ITX is an Atom machine with Intel graphics for about $350. If you want to compare the Mini to Via machines, the prices will be virtually identical, and the graphics aren't even as good.

Most people don't need to pay for the small form factor. For them, the Mini is just wasted money. It's like buying a Miata.

Larry's e-mails have shown clearly what most of us have known for a long time -- that dedicated Mac users will justify any cost.
* Minis as real servers? Get real. You need RAID, hot-swap, etc. At least price a blade system. Geez. If you're going bottom end on your servers, you can get something for half the price and stick it in a closet.
* Replacing all the computers in your shop with Minis? That only makes convoluted sense if, as the business owner said, you've decided to become an OS X shop.

The Mini is a niche product, but Apple continues to sell them because many wannabe Macheads get one because it's the only thing Apple sells under $1000 and they have the peripherals (however ugly and un-Apple they are) already. It comes out of niche status only when filtered through the Kool-Aid colored Apple glasses.

Flame away, Mac-oids. I'm ready.
0 Votes
+ -
You'll never get it...
comp_indiana 4th Mar 2009
You guys all seem to think Windows is a viable platform. Wrong, it's
not, and if you had ever used a better one, you would not go back. Or
perhaps, like some of my friends, you have used a better OS, Linux, but
you can't stay there because there is no commercial viability.

Mac OS has it all. Always has, don't see it changing anytime soon.

Have fun in Windows-land, and keep the $50 and the ugly, el-cheapo
hardware while. You should be happy with this, I actually hope you are.
0 Votes
+ -
Thanks
daengbo 4th Mar 2009
Thanks for emphasizing my point.

Daeng
Windows-free since 1997
0 Votes
+ -
The Mini serves valuable markets
keel 3rd Mar 2009
People that have predicting the death (or uselessness) of
the Mini for years don't get it. They only compare its use
to other desktops. Instead they serve a valuable niche.
Many corporations run minis as small non-critical headless
servers, we have three and are buying more. Some
corporations have hundreds.
In education and kiosks, they serve as the ideal CPU that
can be connected to a variety of separate displays, fits in
almost any space, and boots into either OSX or Win. Don't
measure them against the typical home computer metric,
they are in a different class.
0 Votes
+ -
This is very interesting
techwriter@... 3rd Mar 2009
I hadn't actually thought of this use for the mini, and was more or less about to agree that it had outlived its usefulness in all areas but one: It's still a relatively powerful silent machine that makes it perfect, for example, for music performances and in other applications (acoustic testing, for example) where even low noise is unacceptable.

Lots of musicians use minis on the road (though they now also use mac book pros), but the use in kiosks and as non-critical servers strikes me as an extremely efficient and cost-effective reason to keep the mini in the lineup.

Question: Does Apple market it this way? If not, they're crazy.
0 Votes
+ -
But they are not marketed ...
mwagner@... 3rd Mar 2009
... to a niche audience. They are marketed to mainstream desktop users.
0 Votes
+ -
Are the minis marketed..
msalzberg 4th Mar 2009
at all? I've never seen a mini ad from Apple.
0 Votes
+ -
They're awesome as car computers as well. [nt]
olePigeon 3rd Mar 2009
[nt]
0 Votes
+ -
Uh, the Mac Pro is *more* expensive than before.
ye Updated - 3rd Mar 2009
The "$300 lower priced" Mac Pro is a single processor (4 core) system ($2,500). The reference system, from which Apple obtained the "$300 lower price" point was a dual processor (8 core) system ($2,800). To obtain an 8 core Mac Pro with this new generation release will set you back $3,300. That's a $500 increase over the previous generation dual core.

Likewise the "$300 lower priced" Mac Pro is crippled. Sporting a maximum of 8GB of RAM compared to the dual processors 32GB maximum (for some reason the single processor system supports 1 and 2GB modules where the dual processor system supports 1, 2, and 4GB modules. Whereas I believe the previous generation single processor system could support 16GB (though I'm not positive on this).

In the end you're paying more for these new systems. Gotta love the Apple RDF.
0 Votes
+ -
RDF?
dreslough 3rd Mar 2009
RDF? Resource Description Framework?
0 Votes
+ -
It's same thing that caused
jaypeg 3rd Mar 2009
VDF--the Vista Distortion Field (VD for short) that lasted for years.
Victims wouldn't shut up about how great and misunderstood Vista was.
0 Votes
+ -
Still confused about RDF
dreslough 3rd Mar 2009
Good point. But I'm still wondering ... what does RDF stand for in this context?
0 Votes
+ -
Reality Distortion Field (NT)
enduser_z 3rd Mar 2009
nt
0 Votes
+ -
Reality Distortion Field. (nt)
ye 3rd Mar 2009
.
0 Votes
+ -
Still over a year behind in graphics, as well.
BillDem 3rd Mar 2009
I thought this year was supposed to be the magic "catch up" year where the Mac Pro finally gets to use the latest generation of NVIDIA graphics cards. Where is my Mac Pro with a GTX 285 installed? As NVIDIA preps for the GTX 300 release, the new, more expensive Mac Pro includes the mid-level graphics card from the iMac. What's up with that? Even the 4870 upgrade is a card that is getting long in the tooth and chokes on current cutting edge games.

And the Mac Mini is barely upgraded at all, considering how long it took for it to happen.

After MacWorld, and now this, it's has been a disappointing year for Apple hardware releases. I was really looking forward to the Nehalem Mac Pro, but they basically shot it in the leg with those graphics cards.

Maybe Snow Leopard will save it by adding the ability to use regular PC versions of the GTX 285 on it. Who knows?
0 Votes
+ -
More expensive? Talk about not getting fact straight!
vulpine@... Updated - 3rd Mar 2009
Let's see here... $300 lower priced" Mac Pro is a
single processor (4 core) system... as was the quad-
core system it is spawned from. However, the new
processor is the Nehalim processor which Intel touts as
being more than twice as fast as its predecessor.

the "$300 lower priced" Mac Pro is crippled. Sporting
a maximum of 8GB of RAM compared to the dual
processors 32GB maximum ... This isn't crippled.
This is still more than twice what almost any Windows
PC can carry and almost three times what a Windows-
based PC can actually use. One of the ways that Apple
was able to reduce the price was to simply reduce the
number of apparently unused memory slots in the
more basic model. This still puts the base Mac Pro
significantly superior to similarly-priced Windows-
based machines.

Of course, over and above everything else, the
engineering and design of the new Mac Pro still makes
adding RAM and hard drives easier than any other
machine currently on the market. With any other tower
machine, you almost invariably have to remove
components in order to install the RAM or drives and
replace them after you're done. In the case of drives
you also have to install new cabling and make other
tweaks in the system for the new components to be
recognized. None of this is necessary in the Mac.
Simply plug it in, and you're ready to go; a five-minute
process for all but the most technology-phobic user.

As for your 'outdated' graphics; starting out with a
choice of five increasingly-capable graphics cards
from the nVidia and ATI stables makes the machine
very capable indeed. Add to this the fact that it can
utilize up to five of these cards at a time (depending on
RAID or non-RAID configuration) means that it should
be able to walk away from any other similarly-priced
computer.

No, you're not paying more for these systems; you're
getting much, much more for your money than ever
before.
0 Votes
+ -
32 bit OS limits memory use
pupkin_z 3rd Mar 2009
How is Win PC even relevant here? 64bit Win has not problems with more than 4GB address space. A clear case of RDF, indeed.
0 Votes
+ -
One small note
deowll 3rd Mar 2009
A lot of windows machines are selling with an os that is happy to use about as much ram as people can afford. 32 is dying. 64 is growing in market share. 32 isn't dead mind you but it isn't tomorrow either.

You many have gotten other facts wrong but that one is the most glaring to me.

I think the guy that wrote the article most likely did it on a machine with 16 gig of ram running in a virtual machine on a server? I think he shared that some time ago so he might have upgraded?

In other words he's a Geek or I've got him confused with somebody that is.

Right now I'm on pain killer after having a tooth removed.
0 Votes
+ -
More clueless? Talk about not getting the facts straight!
crazydanr@... 3rd Mar 2009
8 GB - This is still more than twice what almost any Windows PC can carry and almost three times what a Windows-based PC can actually use.

Windows PC's can "carry" as much as the hardware supports, just like an Apple. It's limited by slots and the max dimm size.

The OS does have a limit, and if you're going to compare Apples to Windows, so to speak, it's the latest OSX vs. Vista. Vista x64 has a limit of 128GB, and this isn't 2001. It can take advantage of all of it.

I just went online and built a mac pro and a comparable HP workstation, and the mac was $4549 vs $3989 for the HP. I'm not saying the mac is not a nice machine with good hardware, I'm saying I wouldnt pay a $500 premium. I can understand why some people like the machines, but the argument that Apple hardware is cheaper is similar to Vista being as good an OS as OSX. Let's face facts.
0 Votes
+ -
Yes, lets talk about getting your facts straight.....
middle of nowhere 3rd Mar 2009
Went to HP and guess what? I couldn't find a single workstation
class machine running a Xeon 5500 series processor, much less 2
of them.

So, exactly what machine were you comparing to these new Mac
Pros?

0 Votes
+ -
Dude,
comp_indiana 4th Mar 2009
Seriously, the Mac would be cheaper if you simply bought your own
RAM. Apple always charges extra to load up the RAM. They would
be stupid not to, they can easily get the money, unlike any of their so-
called 'competition'.

There is this stupid double standard, as if it's a good thing to be able
to mod your own PeeCee, but no one should mod their Mac. Get real,
you can geek out all you want on the Mac.

And, finally, it's EASILY worth the extra $500 to run OS X. I have
software packages that cost more than that, and I would guess many
of the rest of you do, too.
0 Votes
+ -
All facts I presented are correct.
ye 3rd Mar 2009
Let's see here... $300 lower priced" Mac Pro is a single processor (4 core) system... as was the quad-core system it is spawned from.

But the new price is relative to a dual processor (8 core) system. The second generation single processor (4 core), at a cost of $2,200, was less than the current single processor (4 core) system by $300. This isn't a price decrease it's a price increase.

However, the new processor is the Nehalim processor which Intel touts as being more than twice as fast as its predecessor.

And? How does this make the new system less than the old one?

the "$300 lower priced" Mac Pro is crippled. Sporting a maximum of 8GB of RAM compared to the dual processors 32GB maximum ... This isn't crippled.

Yes it is. The dual processor system can use 4GB modules where the single processor system cannot. Thus limiting it to 8GB instead of 16GB.

This is still more than twice what almost any Windows PC can carry and almost three times what a Windows-based PC can actually use.

Completely and 100% irrelevant as my comments are wrt the 2nd generation Mac Pro. But if you have to go there my $650 PC that I bought 18 months ago can accept 8GB of RAM. Throw Windows 64 bit on there (now becoming mainstream on systems with 4GB + of memory) and it's all available for use.

As for your 'outdated' graphics; starting out with a choice of five increasingly-capable graphics cards from the nVidia and ATI stables makes the machine very capable indeed.

I made no comment about the graphics in either system.

Please do get your facts straight. As it is this was a very poor showing on your part.






0 Votes
+ -
When is the last time you opened up
alaniane@... Updated - 3rd Mar 2009
a PC (desktop or laptop) to replace/add harddrive or RAM. I've never had to remove components to add a new drive or RAM on the PCs I've owned. Even on the stock models they have here at work don't require that you remove components (unless you're talking about the case cover) to replace/add drives or RAM. There maybe some models out there that require it, but I haven't run across them yet.
There's an old saying, "It's better to keep silent and let people think you're wise than to open up your trap and let everyone know how big a fool you are."

Before, you start making comparisons, you better verify your facts.
0 Votes
+ -
The saying goes:
ye 3rd Mar 2009
"It's better to keep silent and let people think you're a fool than to open
up your trap and remove all doubt."
0 Votes
+ -
Depends on which version you've heard.
alaniane@... Updated - 3rd Mar 2009
I'm old enough to remember several different versions. The saying was originally based on Proverbs 17:28 which according to one translation states:

"Even anyone foolish, when keeping silent, will be regarded as wise; anyone closing up his own lips, as having understanding."

or if you prefer the King James version:

"Even a fool when he holdeth his peace is counted wise"
0 Votes
+ -
Please note that the new Mac Pro...
msalzberg 4th Mar 2009
uses the Nehalem Xeon, not the Penryn Xeon that the older model used.
0 Votes
+ -
Price comparison
david_craig@... 7th Mar 2009
I Agree,
We were going to replace our HP workstations and I decided to make a
comparison of the Mac pro 2 x Quad core CPU?s and the HP equivalent.
The HP equivalent was coming in at $1400 more at the time. Apple
builds only a few configurations of their machines in comparison to the
likes of HP who do hundreds; this helps to push the cost to manufacture
a Mac down while giving a rock solid computer.

If only Microsoft had the option of only doing a OS for such a small
number of configurations you would see a lot less BSOD

0 Votes
+ -
A case for the mini
rag@... 3rd Mar 2009
Because of my job, I live in an apartment during the week and go home (73 miles) on weekends. I've been using a laptop running Ubuntu in the apartment, but I'd really like to get back to OS X. But there's not much room, so the mini will work great. I already have a monitor/mouse/keyboard to use.

I do think the price is a bit steep, but I do get a small discount with educational pricing.
0 Votes
+ -
The steep price is the problem.
mwagner@... 3rd Mar 2009
You are paying quite a premium for having an OSX environment. To you it is a viable solution but for many it is not a cost-effective one.
0 Votes
+ -
Cost effective? You are forgetting TCO.
8wintermute8 7th Mar 2009
If you factor in the cost of Anti-Virus/Anti-Spyware (and annual subscriptions)
and the resulting CPU and performance drain of these apps on a Windows
computer, and then consider the quality and build of the MacMini hardware in
comparison to a comparable Windows PC, then add to this the stability of the OS
and avoidance of downtime, the MacMini will cost you much less over time than a
comparable Windows PC.

The Total Cost of Ownership is something that people tend to forget when
looking at the Mini. Yes, you can get cheaper (a Dell) or you can get better (a
MacPro)... but you can't get cheaper AND better.

I am a system admin supporting several businesses that use both Mac and
Windows machines. While the Macs do have occasional problems, they are
normally fixed very quickly and rather simply.. that is not the case with Windows
machines which frequently have issues that typically are very time consuming to
repair and frequently involve workarounds or mucking about in the registry. Even
Mac Servers are easier to manage... you can easily create a bootable clone of a
Mac Server as a quick back-up... to do so with a typical Windows Server install on
dynamic volumes requires expensive and specialized software like Acronis. My
peers may hate me for saying this, but Windows machines are good for the tech
support business... they keep us busy and provide us with steady work/income.
All the time devoted to combating Confiker is costing many businesses a lot of
money... but not design and advertising firms since they use mostly Macs.
0 Votes
+ -
It is relevant to us at this time...
aeriden 3rd Mar 2009
We like the small footprint and the ability to use with external monitors that can be shared with other equipment. The iMac would force us to pay more for a screen that cannot be re-purposed for our needs. And for a Mac, it is a lower entry price point.
0 Votes
+ -
The Mac Mini makes sense for a lot of people.
dreslough 3rd Mar 2009
We bought a Mac mini to sit alongside a Windows PC. They share a monitor. It's a perfect choice for that situation.
0 Votes
+ -
The Mini is a great little machine ....
ramillegan 3rd Mar 2009
Hey Larry,

Most of us already have monitors, keyboards, etc galore. What we want is something Mac, that's cheap and works well.
Guess what? The Mini fills the bill. Simple.
Nice troll though.

Peace,
Kris Millegan
0 Votes
+ -
Ever see a stack of these?
ashbyjm@... 3rd Mar 2009
A stack of these works great for special dedicated apps (e.g. live streaming channels). Also a good choice for schools refreshing labs, where they already have reusable monitors. Some nice brackets are available for under-table mounting, too.
0 Votes
+ -
minis aren't really tuned to be servers
Clewin 5th Mar 2009
The mini may work as a server, but the OS isn't really tuned to be a server - you'd probably get better performance with a similar Linux stack.

That said, just because Apple tunes it as a desktop and not a server doesn't mean you can't do it yourself - I'd recommend starting with sysctl (use sysctl -a to see all) and tweaking net settings (and maybe some like maxproc and maxprocperuid despending on server load).
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Apple refreshes desktop lineup: Is the Mac mini irrelevant?
sbarman 3rd Mar 2009
One thing I hate about alleged tech pundits is that they
think that every company has to do what makes them
happy. The fact that you would not buy a Mac Mini does
not mean that it is not the solution for someone else.

It also shows your lack of understanding what Apple has
said about the Mini. Apple's marketing says that you can
use your existing monitor, keyboard, and mouse. They are
saying that you don't have to throw everything away to use
the Mac Mini, you use your existing hardware but swap out
your old box for their new box. However, if you don't have
a monitor, Apple will sell you a 24-inch cinema display for
$899.

If I was in this market, I would not buy the Apple cinema
display because of the price. You can get comparable
displays for a cheaper price. But if I was going from a PC
to Mac, I just dump the PC and replace it with a Mac. I
have the keyboard, monitor, and mouse which stays.

Besides, how many systems get replaced with all new
components and the old ones sit on a shelf or ends up in a
landfill.

Even though it is not a machine I would buy, the Mini has
its place and Apple's positioning is just fine for this
product.
0 Votes
+ -
Oh, apparently then this theory....
Crestview 3rd Mar 2009
only applies to Apple and not Microsoft. "One thing I hate about alleged tech pundits is that they think that every company has to do what makes them happy"
0 Votes
+ -
Even our old G4 mini...
arminw 3rd Mar 2009
connected to our 47 inch LCD TV and stereo, still makes an
excellent audio and video player. It plays back media content
of our DVD and CD collection stored on a 1TB HD connected
to our airport extreme wireless access point. It is also used to
play back Internet radio stations. Being small, the mini fits
unobtrusively among the other stereo components and it's also
completely silent. A Logitech wireless USB mouse is used for
control.

There is no way anybody can put together such a system using
any other computer made by anyone else. Everything else
available is either considerably larger or noisier or both. A
good used one can be found on eBay for between $300 and
$400.
0 Votes
+ -
Rubbish
Sleeper Service 3rd Mar 2009
Google Shuttle for heaven's sake!
0 Votes
+ -
Shuttle NOIZEEE
RyeCatcher 3rd Mar 2009
The shuttle's I have purchased have all been noisey. For audio applications like rhapsody and realplayer etc. I want an ABSOLUTELY quiet computer.
0 Votes
+ -
So get a D10 or an X27.
Sleeper Service 3rd Mar 2009
(NT)
0 Votes
+ -
D10 has a fan in it
RyeCatcher 6th Mar 2009
D10, from the pictures I've seen, has at least two fans in it...and is going to be audible when Beethovens Fifth is pianisimo.

The X27 is "reportedly humming at just 23 decibels"...again that is audible when the music is low...irritating when David Bowie starts strumming for Space Oddity.
0 Votes
+ -
As if that compares to a Mac
comp_indiana 4th Mar 2009
Get real.
0 Votes
+ -
Remember When
bmore_bro69@... 3rd Mar 2009
The Mini was supposed to convert a whole bunch of Windows users? Whatver happened to that? lol
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Apple refreshes desktop lineup: Is the Mac mini irrelevant?
yvesmailhot 11th Sep 2010
I have one connected to my HDTV and I love it. I also have customers using it for kiosks with large screens using eCrisper (http://ecrisper.com).

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix