Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

MDWeezer · Mar 13, 2005, 08:55 PM

I'm hoping Tiger will support the Mac Mini, I can't imagine why it wouldn't be.

Anyway, i'm a first time Mac owner and the Mini is my first

.

I'm really looking forward to Tiger, i'm kinda hoping Mini owners will get a discount of some sort but if not i'm still willing to pay for the upgrade.

Any other Mini owners out there ready to shell out the $129 for the upgrade and what are your expectations?

xandro · Mar 13, 2005, 10:30 PM

I don't think we'll get any "new mini buyer" discount, if history is any guide. I'll get the education discount, though. I always buy the new upgrades, but just because.

For most people, they're probably not worth the money.

bobx2001 · Mar 26, 2005, 12:35 PM

if mini owners dont get a decent discount people will just turn to P2P networks.

Mr Heliums · Mar 28, 2005, 04:38 PM

There won't be a discount. I'll still buy it. If I upgrade my mini later, the discs will have a decent resale value.

doopstr · Mar 28, 2005, 04:53 PM

Tiger is going to need to have something that is a must have for me to upgrade. A fancy search capability and widgets isn�t going to cut it.

zenatek · Mar 28, 2005, 05:55 PM

I will deffinetly be upgradin my Macmini as well as my iMac.

There are so many new features I am looking forward to.

DoFa · Mar 30, 2005, 03:56 AM

There are already a number of sites selling it for $94-100. amazon has a $35 rebate on it now

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...&s=pc&n=507846

nickw311 · Mar 30, 2005, 07:40 AM

If you are a student you should be able to get it for $69. I will probably wait untill 10.5 comes out seeing that I just ordered my Mini last week and I dont want to be putting money into it just yet.

zenatek · Mar 30, 2005, 03:43 PM

Wow you will be waiting a long time lol.

nickw311 · Mar 30, 2005, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by zenatek:
Wow you will be waiting a long time lol.

Probably... I think it is BS how much apple charges for updates to an operating system, I can understand if they only charged for every new revision IE OS 8, OS 9, OS X but not ever 10.1, 10.2, 10.3 and so on.... That makes it so if you want to have the most up to date OS, you have to shell out $129 ($69 Student) every 12 months or so.

Just my rant.... I will protest by not purchasing it

NYCFarmboy · Mar 30, 2005, 07:01 PM

I'm waiting on the mini to ship with Tiger before purchasing a mini to replace my old g4 400 mhz tower at my office, I wonder how long it will be?

sworthy · Mar 31, 2005, 02:32 AM

Originally posted by nickw311:
I think it is BS how much apple charges for updates to an operating system, I can understand if they only charged for every new revision IE OS 8, OS 9, OS X but not ever 10.1, 10.2, 10.3 and so on....

This is one of a few misconceptions in this thread.

First, each of the 10.x releases have been new revisions! The only reason we aren't on OS 14 yet is because 'Mac OS X' is good for marketing.

Next, to the original poster - Apple has historically been very good about including very old machines as compatible with new operating systems. In fact, since the 10.0 days, each new release has been *snappier*. Your Mac mini should be able to run the modern OS for at least another 5 years.

For people who don't want to upgrade yet: Apple has stated that it intends to slow down OS releases after Tiger, so it will probably be around 2-2.5 years until we see 10.5. I'd upgrade now as many new apps will likely require it, and if it's going to be the same price in a year, you might as well get as much use as possible out of it before the next rev.

Lastly, why should Mac mini owners get a discount? The current OS is more than capable, and the news of Tiger in "the first half of 2005" was widely publicized. Should all users who purchased a CPU since January be rewarded somehow?

nickw311 · Mar 31, 2005, 11:18 AM

There hasnt been a big enough change in the OS for us to be at OS 14 yet, maybe enough to be at 11 or so because there have been big changes and upgrades but definantly not enough to charge for four entirely new operating systems.

omar96 · Apr 5, 2005, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by nickw311:
Probably... I think it is BS how much apple charges for updates to an operating system, I can understand if they only charged for every new revision IE OS 8, OS 9, OS X but not ever 10.1, 10.2, 10.3 and so on.... That makes it so if you want to have the most up to date OS, you have to shell out $129 ($69 Student) every 12 months or so.

The enhancements from 10.2 to 10.3 (and probably from 10.3 to 10.4) are as significant (if not moreso) than the changes made from Windows 4.0 (Windows 95) to Windows 4.1 (Windows 98...if you don't believe me on version numbers, go to a Win9x machine, right-click on My Computer and choose properties...the version number will be there) and those were ~$100 a piece back 8 years ago...with inflation, $130 doesn't really seem all THAT bad.

The changes from 10.0 to 10.1 were pretty significant as well, and 10.1 was free...I think the difference is that 10.1 was an apology in binary form for the catastrophy that was 10.0, at least in my experience with the two.

nickw311 · Apr 5, 2005, 01:49 PM

I am starting to see that most people here are Apple Apologists but you are starting to convince me anyway

I am sure I will instinctively flock to get Tiger also especially with my Student siscount.

fleaplus · Apr 6, 2005, 12:18 AM

My beef with the release cycle is that Windows users have only had to upgrade once since 2002 or so (thats when XP was released, right?) while OSX has gone through 2 or 3 updates like this.

Right now anyone using recent programs don't really have a choice but upgrade either, most apps have 10.3.6 as a requirement.

Although I have seen friends PC's fall apart within a year and they would always buy a brand new one, paying for Windows again and all... that industry moves so fast it almost neccesitates the hardware upgrade cycle.

omar96 · Apr 6, 2005, 09:12 AM

Originally posted by fleaplus:
My beef with the release cycle is that Windows users have only had to upgrade once since 2002 or so (thats when XP was released, right?) while OSX has gone through 2 or 3 updates like this.

These things go in cycles, though...in the '90s, in successive years you had Windows 95B, Windows 95C, Windows98 first ed., Win98SE, and Windows ME (and if OS X development goes like Windows development, 10.5 would be WinME, and we're all in for some deep **** if that's true). All upgradeable from one to the next. And remember; Longhorn is now 2 years behind schedule (originally slated for release last year) so if MS had their way, Windows folks would have something different now, too.

OTOH, Some programs don't need upgraded every cycle...I tend to do every third cycle with MS Office, so I went from Office 97 (because I was on Windows at the time) to Office 2004 (Mac, but I'd have gone to Office 2003 had I stuck with the PC).

discotronic · Apr 6, 2005, 11:44 AM

Every release from 10.0 - 10.3 ( and soon to be 10.4) has been a major release. It hasn't been an update like so many people believe just because the number only went from .1 to .2 and etc. People need to change their mindset on the way Apple is doing things. Just because it isn't a different version doesn't mean that it really isn't.

If I had to stay at 10 or 10.1 as long as Windows XP has stayed where it is at I would be using Linux full time. Every "update" of OSX has been well worth the price. The extra features, stability, and speed increase have all been substantial.

Take a look at SuSE Linux. It is on a 6 month update cycle. You have to pay for every single upgrade if you want their latest and greatest. The initial cost is $99 plus $10 for shipping. To upgrade after that is $59 plus $10 shipping. Their "updates" also go up by .1 with every cycle just like OSX.

The price of a "Full Version/Non-Upgrade of OSX since 2001:

10.0 -- $129 (IIRC)
10.1 --free
10.2 -- $129
10.3 -- $129
10.4 -- $129

Total: $516

SuSE in that same amount of time with their 6 month update cycle would have cost $730.

The cost of a full version of Windows XP professional, if I remember correctly, was $399 when it first came out in 2001. When Longhorn is finally released I have no doubt in my mind that it will cost $399 or more. The total there is $798 or more.

With OSX we may have to pay more often but over time it is cheaper and the OS is getting better.

Since 2001:

SuSE when 9.3 is released this month -- $730
Windows when Longhorn is release -- $798
OSX when Tiger is released: $516

Apple could have another release before Longhorn and the cost would still not be as much as Windows. This is not coming from an "Apple Apologist." The truth is in the numbers.

nickw311 · Apr 6, 2005, 11:55 AM

The cost of a full version of Windows XP professional, if I remember correctly, was $399 when it first came out in 2001. When Longhorn is finally released I have no doubt in my mind that it will cost $399 or more. The total there is $798 or more.

With OSX we may have to pay more often but over time it is cheaper and the OS is getting better.

Since 2001:

SuSE when 9.3 is released this month -- $730
Windows when Longhorn is release -- $798
OSX when Tiger is released: $516

Apple could have another release before Longhorn and the cost would still not be as much as Windows. This is not coming from an "Apple Apologist." The truth is in the numbers. [/B]

What home user would buy XP Pro when XP Home is $99 and I am sure a Home version of Longhorn will be in the Hundred dollar range also. You need to redo your math. Believe me, I am not sticking up for Microsoft but I still think that $129 every year for a "new" (updated) operating system is excessive.

discotronic · Apr 6, 2005, 12:21 PM

Originally posted by nickw311:
What home user would buy XP Pro when XP Home is $99 and I am sure a Home version of Longhorn will be in the Hundred dollar range also. You need to redo your math. Believe me, I am not sticking up for Microsoft but I still think that $129 every year for a "new" (updated) operating system is excessive.

XP Home doesn't even come into the equation because it is a stripped down version of Windows. If a true comparison is to be made it would have to be between XP Pro and OSX.

Besides that the $99 price is for an upgrade. You have to have another version of Windows installed in order to use the $99 XP Home. The full price right now is $199 for a full version of Home. Also, OSX isn't doing a release on a 1 year cycle anymore and nobody is forcing you to buy it.

Redo your math

marhan · Apr 6, 2005, 02:22 PM

As far as I've heard, Tiger is supposed to run fine on the mini. More RAM would help, of course, but it's rumored to run fine on the default RAM.

nickw311 · Apr 6, 2005, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by discotronic:
XP Home doesn't even come into the equation because it is a stripped down version of Windows. If a true comparison is to be made it would have to be between XP Pro and OSX.

Besides that the $99 price is for an upgrade. You have to have another version of Windows installed in order to use the $99 XP Home. The full price right now is $199 for a full version of Home. Also, OSX isn't doing a release on a 1 year cycle anymore and nobody is forcing you to buy it.

Redo your math

I just checked Amazon and the full version of XP is $116 and the upgrade is $99, also XP Pro full version is $269, not the previously stated $399. I don't know why any home user would ever want to pay up to $200 more for XP Pro when they will never even see 95% of the features so for the average user, it is a moot point to compare XP Pro to X, even though that is a closer comparison.

If people are always going to be content with whatever Apple puts out, the quality will never get better.

XP Home $116

XP Pro $269

And don't bring up the fact that XP has been out for a while and the price has gone down. It is Apple's choice to gouge people on prices and have a stronghold on all the retailers pricing practices. If this is the end of the line for Jaguar, why isnt it at like $69 or less since everyone knows that Tiger will be out soon.

discotronic · Apr 6, 2005, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by nickw311:
I just checked Amazon and the full version of XP is $116 and the upgrade is $99, also XP Pro full version is $269, not the previously stated $399. I don't know why any home user would ever want to pay up to $200 more for XP Pro when they will never even see 95% of the features so for the average user, it is a moot point to compare XP Pro to X, even though that is a closer comparison.

If people are always going to be content with whatever Apple puts out, the quality will never get better.

XP Home $116

XP Pro $269

And don't bring up the fact that XP has been out for a while and the price has gone down. It is Apple's choice to gouge people on prices and have a stronghold on all the retailers pricing practices. If this is the end of the line for Jaguar, why isnt it at like $69 or less since everyone knows that Tiger will be out soon.

My first prices are going by the retail price. If you are playing the Amazon game here you go:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/se...917918-5559927

Also, with education discount, Panther can be had for $69.

At least with OSX a person doesn't have to deal with buying a stripped down version of an OS. They can get full features for less than the price of the competition.

discotronic · Apr 6, 2005, 04:53 PM

Originally posted by nickw311:

If people are always going to be content with whatever Apple puts out, the quality will never get better.

Just curious but what do you mean by this statement?

nickw311 · Apr 6, 2005, 05:52 PM

well when 10.0 came out it was not ready to be released and yet it still sold, their computers still come with 256mb of ram for the most part which is entirely inadequate for OS X, the video card in the Mini is not nearly powerful enough.... there is a lot of stuff that has room to improve IMO. Airport Extreme is still a BTO option on most of their computers, and IMO, I think it is pretty cheap that the Mini doesn't even come with a wired mouse and keyboard standard....

I still love my Mini but I just wish it would have come with a little more RAM and a better video card.

discotronic · Apr 6, 2005, 10:01 PM

Originally posted by nickw311:
well when 10.0 came out it was not ready to be released and yet it still sold, their computers still come with 256mb of ram for the most part which is entirely inadequate for OS X, the video card in the Mini is not nearly powerful enough.... there is a lot of stuff that has room to improve IMO. Airport Extreme is still a BTO option on most of their computers, and IMO, I think it is pretty cheap that the Mini doesn't even come with a wired mouse and keyboard standard....

I still love my Mini but I just wish it would have come with a little more RAM and a better video card.

I would really like to see Apple start making BT and AE standard on all their systems. They put AE with all the iBook models as standard without raising the price. You couldn't be more right about the weak showing in the RAM department. OSX needs at least 512MB to have an enjoyable experience.

The only way the mini's video will get upgraded to 64MB is if the iMac and PowerMac go standard 128MB. 32MB is better than shared video but it is the bottom of the line.

Look at it this way, if the mini came with a keyboard and mouse they couldn't put it in that really cool and really small box

nickw311 · Apr 7, 2005, 09:58 AM

Originally posted by discotronic:
I would really like to see Apple start making BT and AE standard on all their systems. They put AE with all the iBook models as standard without raising the price. You couldn't be more right about the weak showing in the RAM department. OSX needs at least 512MB to have an enjoyable experience.

The only way the mini's video will get upgraded to 64MB is if the iMac and PowerMac go standard 128MB. 32MB is better than shared video but it is the bottom of the line.

Look at it this way, if the mini came with a keyboard and mouse they couldn't put it in that really cool and really small box

You are right about the keyboard and mouse changing the box, but the video card and ram would take up no more room

BTW, I hope you don't think I am a troll or just starting to start an online battle... I love my Mini and am a long time Mac user, I just think there is always room for improvement.

Dog Like Nature · Apr 7, 2005, 10:24 AM

Originally posted by nickw311:
video card

The GPU is soldered directly onto the board -- there's no video card in the strictest sense.

power142 · Apr 7, 2005, 03:54 PM

From what's been written elsewhere, Tiger runs nicely on a mini, after being upgraded to 512MB of course. This is Apple's entry-level computer, but hey, Panther runs even on 5 year old Macs with a little patience. Now, I've seen Longhorn (admittedly, beta) running on a high-end PC with my own eyes and I won't be giving my any $s to MS for an upgrade from XP in a hurry....

discotronic · Apr 7, 2005, 06:14 PM

Originally posted by nickw311:
You are right about the keyboard and mouse changing the box, but the video card and ram would take up no more room

BTW, I hope you don't think I am a troll or just starting to start an online battle... I love my Mini and am a long time Mac user, I just think there is always room for improvement.

I never thought you where a troll so no worries

I feel the same about my iMac G5. I have been ranting about the noise issues since it was new. As Mac users I think we hold our computing experience to a higher standard. If the rest of the computing world would do the same I have a feeling that Apple would have a bigger chunk of the market.