[Hinson]

Hope this is good enough to be a new thread. I didn't quite see this discussion in others. So here goes...

---

Just wanted to throw out my thoughts on the Mac Mini for consideration/comment.


To let you know where I'm coming from, I've loved Macs since the late 80s, owned Macs since the early 90's, and have never owned a Wintel machine. Through much of the 90's I used a Mac at home and UNIX as a graduate student, and so OS X is a thing of beauty for me. I've recently bought a top-of-the-line PowerMac G5 and don't regret the purchase in the least....

...However, I don't like the fact that the Mac has always been a niche machine that only the faithful defend. It's obvious that one of the main hurtles Apple must overcome if it wants to advance the Mac user share is (and has always been) the pricing of a Mac compared to a comparably equipped Wintel PC. So, I see the Mac Mini and, though it's not the machine for me, I wonder how it might help the situation. Here's how it looks to me:


My first thoughts when I heard about the Mini and its specs were that it will be seen as a bit underpowered, even for a bare bones machine at its price point. This, I think, is more a product of the limited chip choices Apple has. It couldn't put a G5 in such a small, inexpensive machine, and the G4 was never able to push up the GHz beyond the 1.5 range. In Mac land, a 1.25 GHz G4 is a reasonable entry level processor because there's not much else to choose from, but in raw power, that chip just can't quite match up to what you find in the entry level PC world (2.8 GHz Pentium 4s with 533 or 800 on the FSB, for example). The only CPU Apple has that really competes in raw power against current Wintel machines is the G5. Again, this isn't a Mac Mini problem, this is a legacy G4 processor problem--but it�s a problem nonetheless.

Now I know the other argument--that a 1.25 or 1.42 GHz G4 is plenty of power for most entry-level users. Still, if I'm looking to convince a PC user to consider a Mac, then "it's not as powerful, but it's good enough for now" isn't quite the strong argument I'd like to be able to make.

As for the memory specs, we all know that for OS X, 256 MB is really bare bones. Starting at 512 would have been nice to see.


Next, let's look at price comparison for a Mini Mac vs. an entry level PC. I looked at every Mac lover's FAVORITE PC company--yes, I'm talking about Dell--and I put together an entry level 2.8 GHz machine with 256MB memory, 40GB HD, a combo drive, firewire, and threw in a SoundBlaster card. With monitor, keyboard, and mouse, it came to about $600 (after $50 mail-in rebate). You can add the same level of Dell monitor, keyboard, and mouse to the basic Mac Mini (OH, the horror) for about $200, bringing it's price to about $700 (no mail-in rebate required).

With a price difference of only $100, I thought, "man, that's not bad!" (even if that is a 17% increase over the Dell). Still, do you know how wonderful it would be to make such a comparison and find that the Mac Mini was actually the less expensive of the two rather than 17% more expensive? I know that the Mac is definitely worth the difference for someone like me, but again, the price has to be defended by the faithful, and a PC guy isn't going to just jump at the chance to spend more for a similarly configured (and in some ways less powerful) machine.



Next, what if you want a little more machine? Let's look at upgrade prices:

CPU (Can't upgrade mini without going to 80GB HD):
...Mini (to 1.42 GHz G4 w/ 80GB HD): $100
...Dell (to 3 GHz P4 w/ 80GB HD): $40 ($20 each)

Memory:
...to 512
......Mini: $75
......Dell: (oops, latest check = free upgrade to 512 but $65 or so usually)
...to 1 GH
......Mini: $425
......Del: $130 (started at 512, but still...)

HD to 80 GB (all you can do BTO on the Mini!):
...Mini: $50
...Dell: $20 (to 160 for $80)

Combo to CD/DVD Burner
...Mini: $100
...Dell: $41



Well, looking at the numbers, I'd generally say "ouch!" Let's say the entry-level guy wants some extra memory and hard drive space and would like to burn DVDs. He pays $225 on the Mini side, but he can get the same for $61 with the PC (or, even if you discount the free upgrade to 512MB it would only cost you about $126). Of course, if he wants to go to a cool 1GB of memory, he pays through the nose on the Mini (perhaps that's because of the type of memory needed for such a small case, but then we get into the notion of form over function, which is another discussion all together). Or let's say he wants more power and disk space. Then its $100 vs. $40, advantage PC, and that's as high as Apple lets you go on the HD from their BTO options--ugh.

So, if a user is happy buying the box as-is, then the Mac Mini is just a little more expensive. But with Apple's upgrade strategy, the more you add to your machine, the less attractive the Mini becomes in comparison.


In the end, I've come to realize what I'm sure many of you already did. The Mac Mini is a way to entice the kind of person who has (most likely) always wanted to try a Mac, can BYOMKM, and wants to take home a ready-made box without worrying about upgrades. I suppose there are also Mac lovers out there who might see this as a way to add to their Mac family or upgrade some legacy piece of hardware on the cheap as well. Those markets are basically where the Mini will find its sells, I think. The real hope, I supposes, is that some of those curious Mac Mini purchasers will be swayed to the Mac platform for the long run.



What the Mac Mini is NOT is an $899 bare bones G5 iMac or a PowerMac G5 starting at $999 or a top-of-the-line dual G5 with lots of BTO bells and whistles added for less than $3000. Those are the sorts of wild and crazy things I can only wish Apple was able to do. I know that we faithful Mac'ers can argue about why the Mac is worth more, but how much different would your conversations with PC uses be if Apple could pull of prices like that? No single product could change things THAT much, but perhaps the Mac Mini can carve out yet another nice little niche.




SO, here's hoping for plenty of curious PC users who will test out a Mac Mini and become one of the faithful! (But I'll still be dreaming the fantasy in which the average PC user can look at Mac pricing and see that it speaks for itself without a word being uttered from the faithful).




-Jason

<WearingFlameProtectionGear> ...

[discotronic]

I agree with most everything you said. I don't need one but if I had the extra cash I would pick one up without thinking twice. I could find a few different things to use it for. One thing I can point out is the G4 has made it up to 1.7GHz.

[iREZ]

What kind of VRAM did the Dull� come with, not to mention you get OSX with iLife included with the mini as oppose to XP and crappy microsoft software. It's still a killer deal for people that are sick of virus' and formating every other month. Mac mini even has a faster CPU (according to Xbench) than the G5 iMac, and the G4 is definetly not stuck at 1.5 there are 1.7 upgrades already out and rumor has it the next PB is still going to be a single G4 bumped up to something around 1.8. The mac mini's only problem is the slow HD and one RAM slot but that's still alot of computer for $500 or $600 accordingly (no keyboard, mouse or monitor included to the price because Apple is targeting people who already have the three). Great computer and great price in my book

[Hinson]

Originally posted by discotronic:
I agree with most everything you said. I don't need one but if I had the extra cash I would pick one up without thinking twice. I could find a few different things to use it for. One thing I can point out is the G4 has made it up to 1.7GHz.

I thought I might have had that wrong... Ah well. It would be nice to see the 1.7 in Mac land.


-Jason

[deboerjo]

You have Apple's obsession with asthetics to thank for that. Had they used standard desktop drives and a single-sided motherboard and made the system a 7 or 8 inch cube instead of a 2" thick 6" square, not only would the systems be cheaper for the same level of performance/storage they'd be more upgradable. Cooling a G5 would have been a possibility, too, for a higher price.

But on the other hand, try finding a Dell that's smaller than most external CD-ROM drives. They're all boring ugly bulky towers. Even more importantly, Dells all suck down 250+ watts of juice, I don't know what the Mini is rated at, but I'd be very suprised if it used more then 80 watts.

-Jon

[Hinson]

Originally posted by iREZ:
What kind of VRAM did the Dull� come with, not to mention you get OSX with iLife included with the mini as oppose to XP and crappy microsoft software. It's still a killer deal for people that are sick of virus' and formating every other month. Mac mini even has a faster CPU (according to Xbench) than the G5 iMac, and the G4 is definetly not stuck at 1.5 there are 1.7 upgrades already out and rumor has it the next PB is still going to be a single G4 bumped up to something around 1.8. The mac mini's only problem is the slow HD and one RAM slot but that's still alot of computer for $500 or $600 accordingly (no keyboard, mouse or monitor included to the price because Apple is targeting people who already have the three). Great computer and great price in my book

First off, I didn't know about that Xbench spec... a 1.25 GHz G4 is faster than a 1.6 GHz G5?

Second, you're making one of my points--the fact that the Mini comes with OS X and iLife is the sort of reason I would buy one rather than get a PC even at half the price. But that's the Mac faitful defending the Mac. The average PC user could care less what you or I think about the wonders of the Mac OS. They need to see that the price speaks for itself.

One of my PC using coworkers came in one day saying "man, Apple came out with a $500 Mac (without a keyboard and monitor)--not bad." The next day he was saying "oh, but it only has 256MB of memory, etc." I could say "BUT YOU GET A VASTLY SUPIEROR OS" all I wanted--it wouldn't have fazed him a bit. The raw numbers need to speak for themselves.

Now, the no-more-viruses thing... that could be a better argument. Considering those who want a nice way to surf the web and read email without worrying about viruses, the Mac Mini could be a hit with that crowd. Good point there.


-Jason

[Thade]

IMHO not good enough to be a new thread

[robco]

The G4 architecture is slow, there's no getting around that. Freescale does have improved G4s in the pipe that will run on a much faster system bus, but AFAIK, they haven't shipped yet. They'll also likely be reserved for the PowerBooks when they do. That, and not sure if they'll be much cheaper than the G5. And let's face it, how many consumers really tax their machines these days?

As for memory, you'll see that all of the Dells except for the two high-end machines come with 256MB standard. The cost to upgrade the mini to 512MB isn't too terrible. Most won't need the full 1GB. However, look at the fine print for the Celeron-based systems with regard to memory - (Performs at 266MHz for 400FSB systems). Sure, still faster than the G4, but not nearly as much as it would seem on first look.

The mini also comes with something that few entry-level PCs come with - a discrete graphics chip with dedicated memory. The mini will actually play most current games and older games quite well. It's no Doom 3 machine, but it won't choke completely. Intel Integrated "Extreme" graphics suck. And with the lowest Dell - there's no AGP slot to change that. You can't upgrade the GPU in the mini either, but it's a better start.

The form factor helps a lot actually. The mini isn't going to require a lot of space. It's not going to be another ugly block of black/beige plastic. There are trade-offs in the design however. Fatoring in the cost of iLife is important. Add comparable software to the Dell and it starts to add up. Much of the software on the Windows side well, sucks as well. Sure, the Dell comes with a cheap keyboard and mouse, and a cheap, crappy monitor. Ugh.

The best way to win people over is hands-on, which is why the Apple Stores are so very important. If the mini is perceived to be fast enough and people like interacting with OS X and iLife, that works much better than trying to compare on paper. Being able to kick the tires as it were, before making the purchase, is important.

It will be interesting to see what happens with Rev/B.

[Krusty]

Originally posted by deboerjo:
Even more importantly, Dells all suck down 250+ watts of juice, I don't know what the Mini is rated at, but I'd be very suprised if it used more then 80 watts.

Good guess. It's maximum wattage is 85

On a related note, MacTracker has just been updated to include the full list of Mac Mini specs (which is how I found the 85w number )

[hldan]

Originally posted by Hinson:
Hope this is good enough to be a new thread. I didn't quite see this discussion in others. So here goes...

---

Just wanted to throw out my thoughts on the Mac Mini for consideration/comment.


To let you know where I'm coming from, I've loved Macs since the late 80s, owned Macs since the early 90's, and have never owned a Wintel machine. Through much of the 90's I used a Mac at home and UNIX as a graduate student, and so OS X is a thing of beauty for me. I've recently bought a top-of-the-line PowerMac G5 and don't regret the purchase in the least....

...However, I don't like the fact that the Mac has always been a niche machine that only the faithful defend. It's obvious that one of the main hurtles Apple must overcome if it wants to advance the Mac user share is (and has always been) the pricing of a Mac compared to a comparably equipped Wintel PC. So, I see the Mac Mini and, though it's not the machine for me, I wonder how it might help the situation. Here's how it looks to me:


My first thoughts when I heard about the Mini and its specs were that it will be seen as a bit underpowered, even for a bare bones machine at its price point. This, I think, is more a product of the limited chip choices Apple has. It couldn't put a G5 in such a small, inexpensive machine, and the G4 was never able to push up the GHz beyond the 1.5 range. In Mac land, a 1.25 GHz G4 is a reasonable entry level processor because there's not much else to choose from, but in raw power, that chip just can't quite match up to what you find in the entry level PC world (2.8 GHz Pentium 4s with 533 or 800 on the FSB, for example). The only CPU Apple has that really competes in raw power against current Wintel machines is the G5. Again, this isn't a Mac Mini problem, this is a legacy G4 processor problem--but it�s a problem nonetheless.

Now I know the other argument--that a 1.25 or 1.42 GHz G4 is plenty of power for most entry-level users. Still, if I'm looking to convince a PC user to consider a Mac, then "it's not as powerful, but it's good enough for now" isn't quite the strong argument I'd like to be able to make.

As for the memory specs, we all know that for OS X, 256 MB is really bare bones. Starting at 512 would have been nice to see.


Next, let's look at price comparison for a Mini Mac vs. an entry level PC. I looked at every Mac lover's FAVORITE PC company--yes, I'm talking about Dell--and I put together an entry level 2.8 GHz machine with 256MB memory, 40GB HD, a combo drive, firewire, and threw in a SoundBlaster card. With monitor, keyboard, and mouse, it came to about $600 (after $50 mail-in rebate). You can add the same level of Dell monitor, keyboard, and mouse to the basic Mac Mini (OH, the horror) for about $200, bringing it's price to about $700 (no mail-in rebate required).

With a price difference of only $100, I thought, "man, that's not bad!" (even if that is a 17% increase over the Dell). Still, do you know how wonderful it would be to make such a comparison and find that the Mac Mini was actually the less expensive of the two rather than 17% more expensive? I know that the Mac is definitely worth the difference for someone like me, but again, the price has to be defended by the faithful, and a PC guy isn't going to just jump at the chance to spend more for a similarly configured (and in some ways less powerful) machine.



Next, what if you want a little more machine? Let's look at upgrade prices:

CPU (Can't upgrade mini without going to 80GB HD):
...Mini (to 1.42 GHz G4 w/ 80GB HD): $100
...Dell (to 3 GHz P4 w/ 80GB HD): $40 ($20 each)

Memory:
...to 512
......Mini: $75
......Dell: (oops, latest check = free upgrade to 512 but $65 or so usually)
...to 1 GH
......Mini: $425
......Del: $130 (started at 512, but still...)

HD to 80 GB (all you can do BTO on the Mini!):
...Mini: $50
...Dell: $20 (to 160 for $80)

Combo to CD/DVD Burner
...Mini: $100
...Dell: $41



Well, looking at the numbers, I'd generally say "ouch!" Let's say the entry-level guy wants some extra memory and hard drive space and would like to burn DVDs. He pays $225 on the Mini side, but he can get the same for $61 with the PC (or, even if you discount the free upgrade to 512MB it would only cost you about $126). Of course, if he wants to go to a cool 1GB of memory, he pays through the nose on the Mini (perhaps that's because of the type of memory needed for such a small case, but then we get into the notion of form over function, which is another discussion all together). Or let's say he wants more power and disk space. Then its $100 vs. $40, advantage PC, and that's as high as Apple lets you go on the HD from their BTO options--ugh.

So, if a user is happy buying the box as-is, then the Mac Mini is just a little more expensive. But with Apple's upgrade strategy, the more you add to your machine, the less attractive the Mini becomes in comparison.


In the end, I've come to realize what I'm sure many of you already did. The Mac Mini is a way to entice the kind of person who has (most likely) always wanted to try a Mac, can BYOMKM, and wants to take home a ready-made box without worrying about upgrades. I suppose there are also Mac lovers out there who might see this as a way to add to their Mac family or upgrade some legacy piece of hardware on the cheap as well. Those markets are basically where the Mini will find its sells, I think. The real hope, I supposes, is that some of those curious Mac Mini purchasers will be swayed to the Mac platform for the long run.



What the Mac Mini is NOT is an $899 bare bones G5 iMac or a PowerMac G5 starting at $999 or a top-of-the-line dual G5 with lots of BTO bells and whistles added for less than $3000. Those are the sorts of wild and crazy things I can only wish Apple was able to do. I know that we faithful Mac'ers can argue about why the Mac is worth more, but how much different would your conversations with PC uses be if Apple could pull of prices like that? No single product could change things THAT much, but perhaps the Mac Mini can carve out yet another nice little niche.




SO, here's hoping for plenty of curious PC users who will test out a Mac Mini and become one of the faithful! (But I'll still be dreaming the fantasy in which the average PC user can look at Mac pricing and see that it speaks for itself without a word being uttered from the faithful).




-Jason

<WearingFlameProtectionGear> ...

I honestly can't believe that you went to such great lenghts to match price for price. I am indeed a Mac User so I will try and not be so Mac defensive however your logic really stinks buddy!
Unbelievably I agree with you on only one aspect. A PC user with a reasonably high clocked machine will look at any Mac specs and think it's slower but that is not the case as we all should know by now why the P4's clock number is higher.
This speed comparison thing really needs to come to an end because if you really think long and hard about it, it really doesn't matter since we are dealing with two different computer systems. If a PC user wants a Mac then he buys a Mac for what it is, if he wants a PC then he buys a PC for what it is. And since you can't buy either one at a store with the chip manufacturer of your choice then buying one based on processor comparison is just plain ignorant and unnecessary. At this point you either want a Mac or a PC, period!

You make the processor specs on Mac sound like they run slow like Virtual PC. If you have a PC friend you need to convince just explain that the Mac is a different machine with different OS and different apps.

Now for your unreasonable price comparisons. You somehow forgot to include the fact that the cheap Dell lacks a lot of software and hardware that the user will have to buy just to use the conputer.
(1) Anti virus. Since Norton only wants to give an evaluation copy with XP Service Pack 2 that expires then that's money out of the PC users pocket. This is less money needed to spend on the Mac mini for obvious reasons.

(2) The Mac mini comes with a full suite of stuff out the box that requires no connection to the internet to download to get started. Out of the box the Mac user will have music, photo , movie editing, DVD authoring, calendar software, email, sync software and Microsoft Office evaluation. None of this will come out of the box with a low cost Dell.

(3) The low cost PC's ship with shared graphics memory which will slow down the machine when playing games or doing graphically intensive stuff. The Mac mini has it's own dedicated graphics chip with dedicated memory. Games and graphics software will run better and faster.
The Dell user would be forced to spend money for better graphics solutions.

Yeah, Apple could go lower on the Mac mini if they remove all the good software it ships with seeing as iLife 05 cost $79.00 but then what's the point you still have to buy it later as you already have to do on the PC side.

Since you are a Mac User as you say, all this should be a sermon to the choir to you, but you are not showing a reasonable comparison price for price.

[alphasubzero949]

Software bundling should also figure in to your comparisons. Most low-cost PCs hardly come with any decent programs. You have to remember that this thing is shipping with iLife. Not a single program on the PC comes close to any of those apps (well, except iTunes, obviously since it is already available).

[greenmeanie]

you also forgot to mention that you get a 7200 RPM drive in the dell machine compaired to 4200RPM in the mini
ilife isnt that great windows has windows movie maker ETC ETC there is alot of software included.

[typoon]

Yes but iLife on my powerbook with the same 4200 RPM drive works just fine. So far I'm pretty happy with my mini. it definitely needs more RAM

[hldan]

Originally posted by greenmeanie:
you also forgot to mention that you get a 7200 RPM drive in the dell machine compaired to 4200RPM in the mini
ilife isnt that great windows has windows movie maker ETC ETC there is alot of software included.

Gotta laugh at the Mac haters...

[intake]

Originally posted by greenmeanie:
you also forgot to mention that you get a 7200 RPM drive in the dell machine compaired to 4200RPM in the mini
ilife isnt that great windows has windows movie maker ETC ETC there is alot of software included.

Greaaat. Crappy Windows software. I'd take iMovie over Windows Movie Maker any day.

[typoon]

Originally posted by intake:
Greaaat. Crappy Windows software. I'd take iMovie over Windows Movie Maker any day.

Hell i would take a mini with 256 megs of RAM doing video editing over Windows Movie maker any day of the week.

[hldan]

Originally posted by typoon:
Yes but iLife on my powerbook with the same 4200 RPM drive works just fine. So far I'm pretty happy with my mini. it definitely needs more RAM

[Eriamjh]

I wonder if the mini will support 2GB DIMMs in the future? Many macs ultimately can support more than they are originally spec'd. I hope the mini is one of them.

I just did a check and it looks like 2GB PC2700 DIMMs only exist in ECC form. The mini does not support ECC registered dimms.

Keep your fingers crossed.

[hldan]

Originally posted by Eriamjh:
I wonder if the mini will support 2GB DIMMs in the future? Many macs ultimately can support more than they are originally spec'd. I hope the mini is one of them.

I just did a check and it looks like 2GB PC2700 DIMMs only exist in ECC form. The mini does not support ECC registered dimms.

Keep your fingers crossed.

Okay buddy, you just topped the craziest question on this forum. People are just finding places on the web that offer somewhat affordable 1GB dimms but for the average Joe they still can't fit into their household budget. Do you really think that people are caring about 2GB dimms? The prices will be completely out the question. Also the Mac mini is not for a pro user so 1GB max is enough for most mainstream users. It's bad enough that Apple is trying to force Mac mini buyers to spend $425 for a 1GB stick.

[pliny]

Originally posted by greenmeanie:
you also forgot to mention that you get a 7200 RPM drive in the dell machine compaired to 4200RPM in the mini
ilife isnt that great windows has windows movie maker ETC ETC there is alot of software included.

bwahhh hah hah

[osxisfun]

>great windows has windows movie maker ETC ETC there is alot of software included.


that was one of the funniest statements i read in a while.

you were kidding with us right?

good one.

[SmileyDude]

Originally posted by hldan:
Okay buddy, you just topped the craziest question on this forum. People are just finding places on the web that offer somewhat affordable 1GB dimms but for the average Joe they still can't fit into their household budget. Do you really think that people are caring about 2GB dimms? The prices will be completely out the question. Also the Mac mini is not for a pro user so 1GB max is enough for most mainstream users. It's bad enough that Apple is trying to force Mac mini buyers to spend $425 for a 1GB stick.

Doesn't seem so crazy to me -- sure, it would be silly to try to deck out a mini with 2GB today. But, hopefully by the end of the year, 2G sticks will be cheap enough to do it.

Not everyone who needs a lot of memory (i.e, more than 512mb) can really afford a G5. The mini made sense for me, though I would've preferred the G5. But, I could buy the mini today as opposed to waiting a year or so to get the G5.

[hldan]

Originally posted by SmileyDude:
Doesn't seem so crazy to me -- sure, it would be silly to try to deck out a mini with 2GB today. But, hopefully by the end of the year, 2G sticks will be cheap enough to do it.

Not everyone who needs a lot of memory (i.e, more than 512mb) can really afford a G5. The mini made sense for me, though I would've preferred the G5. But, I could buy the mini today as opposed to waiting a year or so to get the G5.

I'm not trying to be a pessimist but even 1GB dimms are not even in the fully acceptable price range for most people and since 2GB dimms are not out yet for mass production don't expect anyone but Michael Jordan to be able to afford them when they do.

The mini should run most apps perfectly with 1GB. If you need more then the Mac mini was the wrong purchase for you.

[Eriamjh]

I'm thinking more about the future, 1-2 years from now, when 1.25 or 1.42GHz G4s seem slow. 1GB is a decent amount of memory, but with 2GB (like in my wife's 20" iMac G4) it would definitely have more life.

It was just a question...

At least i wasn't asking if it was possible to put 16GB in a PM G5... (now there's a thought..)

[Too Artificial]

Originally posted by Hinson:
[B]Second, you're making one of my points--the fact that the Mini comes with OS X and iLife is the sort of reason I would buy one rather than get a PC even at half the price. But that's the Mac faitful defending the Mac. The average PC user could care less what you or I think about the wonders of the Mac OS. They need to see that the price speaks for itself.

This is an interesting statement. I wonder how and where you could draw the line between the average PC user who doesn't care about anything other than price, and the slightly more than average user who looks for a little more. Then I'd like to see what percentage of each would even consider the mini. Stat geek here if you couldn't tell.

[typoon]

Originally posted by hldan:
I'm not trying to be a pessimist but even 1GB dimms are not even in the fully acceptable price range for most people and since 2GB dimms are not out yet for mass production don't expect anyone but Michael Jordan to be able to afford them when they do.

The mini should run most apps perfectly with 1GB. If you need more then the Mac mini was the wrong purchase for you.

165 for a 1 GB stick is pretty acceptable to me. I'm sure in about 6months to a year it'll be MUCH cheaper but at this point that doesn't seem like a bad price for it. I went with the 1 GB chip for my mini.

[alphasubzero949]

Originally posted by greenmeanie:
you also forgot to mention that you get a 7200 RPM drive in the dell machine compaired to 4200RPM in the mini
ilife isnt that great windows has windows movie maker ETC ETC there is alot of software included.

[Dog Like Nature]

Originally posted by SmileyDude:
Doesn't seem so crazy to me -- sure, it would be silly to try to deck out a mini with 2GB today. But, hopefully by the end of the year, 2G sticks will be cheap enough to do it.

I think this is a good point. Although no-one would do it today (even assuming the product actually exists! ), but going beyond the spec can only be good for the longevity of your purchase.

[Andrew Stephens]

Originally posted by Too Artificial:
This is an interesting statement. I wonder how and where you could draw the line between the average PC user who doesn't care about anything other than price, and the slightly more than average user who looks for a little more. Then I'd like to see what percentage of each would even consider the mini. Stat geek here if you couldn't tell.

I'm pretty sure not all PC purchases are price lead. Sure Dell are always going to win this but I'm guessing that Sony has a better market share than Apple and they make some damn expensive kit.

I recon that more than a few Mini sales will go to people who were going to buy a mid range PC system, people who are looking for a cool box more than either the cheapest or the absolute fastest,both of which are just niches in the overall PC market. Compare the cost of a mini with a Sony PC and there's plenty of room to throw in a spanking display, mouse, memory etc etc and still feel you got a good deal!

[Michael1980]

True, the strengths of the mini are not just the value. Great design also counts.

[EricN]

Movie Maker is indeed terrible in comparison with iMovie. However, the point that the Dell has a 7200 rpm drive (as opposed to the Mac Mini's 4200 rpm drive) is pretty relevant. Not everybody knows about this though, and Apple makes no mention of the drive's speed on the website. (even under tech specs)

I think that with 4200 drive, one might be concerned about the ability to actually import DV movies from a camcorder. I'm sort of worried about that. I like my imports to be clean...

Here's an article that tests the mac mini in various ways.
http://www.macintouch.com/perfpack/comparison.html
Another on the innards of the mac mini.
http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/edit...side/index.php

There's a new Hitachi 7200 drive (60 GB). It's 150. You can get it installed without voiding the warranty for 150 from an Apple-authorized thingamajigger.