[PKRADD]

With minimal posted specs and two price points of a rumored product ($500 from TS and $600 from AI) it's amazing how many people can predict and change those specs to what they want and still expect to get a computer for the prices indicated. There is definately a field of unreality in Macheads minds. If Apple doesn't produce the product (or if they do) the same old whining will occur. It goes with the territory I guess.

[iDaver]

Much like the eMac, I'd expect two versions to be offered; a base model with combo drive and 40GB hard disk for $499 or higher end with Superdrive and 80GB disk for $699. There would likely be build-to-order options as well. I think it's very doable, as long as all other specs are basically the same as the eMac.

As for things like TV tuners, fast GPUs, Airport and Bluetooth, you're dreaming if you think these will be included at no extra charge.

[osxisfun]

and the $499 mac could be only available from apple the first 6 months increasing the profit margin and allow for a machine to be sold at that price point. look at dull. why do you think they have sales every 4 hours.

[Evan_11]

The iPod dock would mean less wires. Also the iPod is more than for music but essentially a portable media device. True I guess a lot of people already have docks. Since I have an older model I spend too much time plugging mine in.

Also those mini-towers are butt ugly and don't fit on most desks. That could be one of their selling points with this new Mac. Since Apple is so style concious I really don't see them putting out something big. I really expect something as thin as the current iMac but not nearly bulbous.

[osxisfun]

i am expecting a mac LC turned on its side with a case that mimics an ipod.

[chadseld]

There is a lot of confusion about the target market. Here is the market as I see it. Each of these categories have a lot of cross-over. A software engineer may need a high end G5 for work, but only need an eMac at home.

* The Low-Enders (think Mom, Dad, Grandparents)
* The Young and Uninterested (use their computer a lot for internet stuff, but couldn't tell you if it's running windows or Mac OS, don't know if their getting their internet from a modem or dsl, totally uninterested in the geeky stuff)
* The Enthusiasts
* The Gamers
* The Graphic Professionals
* The IT Professionals and Developers

The Low-Enders
Always buy the cheapest box they can find. These are the people who come to you with the sunday newspaper and a $299 emachines circled and ask if the machine is a 'good' machine. They are used to living with a pile of spyware, out of date software and hardware. They will buy what you tell them to buy and they will use what you give them as a gift. Their existing computer has integrated graphics (read no graphics accel). Low-Enders are great xMac candidates provided you set up their email for them.

The Young and Uninterested
They have really messy computers. They don't know what's going on, but they use the heck out of them. You resist the urge to clean up their systems and update their security patches because you know that if you make the slightest change, the entire system will fall into a twitching mound around your feet and you will have to re-install. They don't know what email program they use, but if you change it they will complain. They won't use firefox unless you change the icon to an IE icon. They Young and Uninterested are NOT good candidates for the xMac because they will never stop looking for the "Start" menu. They don't care if the new system is better, it's different so it's 'bad'.

The Enthusiasts
Buy as many computers as their budget allows. They like to take their computers apart and upgrade them. They like to play with new gadgets. They have installed linux at some point just for fun. Enthusiasts are great candidates for the xMac. They understand it's not a powerful computer, but they will pay $500 to play with Mac OS X and see what all the talk is about. If they really like it, they may buy a powerbook as their next computer...

The Gamers
Lousy xMac candidates. They want speed, they want upgradeability, they want green glowing fans, and they want the availability of Windows games.

The Graphic Professionals
Traditional Macintosh audience. Need big screens, big disk drives, and reasonably fast CPU's. Won't use an xMac at work, but might buy one for the kids.

The IT Professionals and Developers
These are IT admins and developers who work with Linux, Unix, or Mac systems as well as the standard quota of Windows machines. There is a huge need for low-cost servers in the market. The requirements for a low-cost server are cost, *nix system software, and build quality. The cheap dell/emachine towers are too cheaply built to trust with important data. The standard server machines are way to expensive. Enter the xMac. Assuming their environment is in some way mac related, they may pick up a few xMacs for low-cost server applications.

I fall in to the developer category. I can say for sure that if the xMac is a reality, I'll buy at least one to upgrade my aging linux source server. All I need in a server is a secure unix system that stays out of the way. Mac OS X is a lot easier to keep secure than Linux, and backups through Retrospect are a lot easier than custom shell scripts.

Anyway. I see the xMac having a large number of buyers from all corners of the marketplace. It's a low end computer, but it's sales won't be limited to low-end customers.

[osxisfun]

Give me distCC over a small farm of mini Macs!!!

[babywriter2]

Originally posted by chadseld:
There is a lot of confusion about the target market. Here is the market as I see it. Each of these categories have a lot of cross-over. A software engineer may need a high end G5 for work, but only need an eMac at home.

* The Low-Enders (think Mom, Dad, Grandparents)
* The Young and Uninterested (use their computer a lot for internet stuff, but couldn't tell you if it's running windows or Mac OS, don't know if their getting their internet from a modem or dsl, totally uninterested in the geeky stuff)
* The Enthusiasts
* The Gamers
* The Graphic Professionals
* The IT Professionals and Developers

The Low-Enders
Always buy the cheapest box they can find. These are the people who come to you with the sunday newspaper and a $299 emachines circled and ask if the machine is a 'good' machine. They are used to living with a pile of spyware, out of date software and hardware. They will buy what you tell them to buy and they will use what you give them as a gift. Their existing computer has integrated graphics (read no graphics accel). Low-Enders are great xMac candidates provided you set up their email for them.

The Young and Uninterested
They have really messy computers. They don't know what's going on, but they use the heck out of them. You resist the urge to clean up their systems and update their security patches because you know that if you make the slightest change, the entire system will fall into a twitching mound around your feet and you will have to re-install. They don't know what email program they use, but if you change it they will complain. They won't use firefox unless you change the icon to an IE icon. They Young and Uninterested are NOT good candidates for the xMac because they will never stop looking for the "Start" menu. They don't care if the new system is better, it's different so it's 'bad'.

The Enthusiasts
Buy as many computers as their budget allows. They like to take their computers apart and upgrade them. They like to play with new gadgets. They have installed linux at some point just for fun. Enthusiasts are great candidates for the xMac. They understand it's not a powerful computer, but they will pay $500 to play with Mac OS X and see what all the talk is about. If they really like it, they may buy a powerbook as their next computer...

The Gamers
Lousy xMac candidates. They want speed, they want upgradeability, they want green glowing fans, and they want the availability of Windows games.

The Graphic Professionals
Traditional Macintosh audience. Need big screens, big disk drives, and reasonably fast CPU's. Won't use an xMac at work, but might buy one for the kids.

The IT Professionals and Developers
These are IT admins and developers who work with Linux, Unix, or Mac systems as well as the standard quota of Windows machines. There is a huge need for low-cost servers in the market. The requirements for a low-cost server are cost, *nix system software, and build quality. The cheap dell/emachine towers are too cheaply built to trust with important data. The standard server machines are way to expensive. Enter the xMac. Assuming their environment is in some way mac related, they may pick up a few xMacs for low-cost server applications.

I fall in to the developer category. I can say for sure that if the xMac is a reality, I'll buy at least one to upgrade my aging linux source server. All I need in a server is a secure unix system that stays out of the way. Mac OS X is a lot easier to keep secure than Linux, and backups through Retrospect are a lot easier than custom shell scripts.

Anyway. I see the xMac having a large number of buyers from all corners of the marketplace. It's a low end computer, but it's sales won't be limited to low-end customers.

Great analysis. I would include one more category:

Mac users with old Macs that need retiring - it's interesting how many people are getting by with Macs that are five years or more old. A number of elementary and secondary school teachers, I think, fall into this category. They don't have much interest in the innards of the Mac, or in tweaking their system, but they love the Mac interface....they don't want to move to Windows...but they don't want to spend $1,300 on a new iMac. And the eMac is just too big and bulky. For them, a $500 mac will be a godsend.

-b

[meelk]

Well, having skipped here and there through this tread, and being new to this forum in general, let me bounce some things out there. I am an intelligent PC user. I say intelligent because I build my own systems, and those of family and friends, I can diagnose my own problems should they arise and fix them. I've never had spyware (aside from a few cookies) and have certainly never had trojans or viruses. I use my PC for a wide range of things including irc, small photoshop work, downloading tv shows and movies (yeah I know, naughty of me..but I do have over 350 real dvds so nyah!), gaming, and small word processing apps.
Macs have always held a certain allure for me, but I have never had one or even seen one in person (gasp). The nearest place that sells macs is several hours away and I just cant force myself to road trip just for a mac trial. I get lost in my own back yard anyway, just between you and me.
I feel Apple has squarely targeted this machine at me, I would dearly love to see what the whole "mac thing" is like without spending even emac price, this machine does that properly at a price I can leverage and not feel bad about. It will introduce me to the mac scene, and if I really like what I see I can give mine to someone in my family and upgrade. I NEED a taste test to be sure its right for me however, and this machine is that test.
All I want to do is run minor free apps, irc programs, newsreaders, surf the web, do mail, use iLife, and experience what using a mac is like. I need to see why the mac users are so gung ho without breaking the bank.
I also see this machine as a great little machine for someone headed to college, a mom and pop gift idea, and generally for people who want to do little more than browse the web and do email.
I dont know why certain people here want to fight this machine for being anything other than the introductory box it is, perhaps some of you are so immersed in the whole debate you cant bring yourself to picture it properly.
As a non mac user, I think Apple is making the right move here, and cant wait to get my hands on one.

[meelk]

Sorry if that posts runs together a bit much. I didnt realize the forum wouldnt keep proper paragraphing (which I used) when posting.

[Simon]

Meelk, indeed you sound like the kind of buyer Apple wants to target with this little box. $499 is maybe just low enough to get some people to pull the trigger, the bulky eMac's $799 is certainly too high. I'm anxious to see if this iMac mini really materializes; it's just 8 days...

[wallinbl]

chadseld is correct. The audience for this machine is huge.

I develop Windows software for a living, and need to have a PC. But, I'd like to have a Mac as well, and I don't want to spend $1500 for a PowerMac, and I'm not buying one with a built in monitor (it should just go on the KVM switch).

My wife's grandmother would like to be able to email her family members. I'm not going to give her a PC, because she can barely use an ATM (I'm not kidding), and she'd be loaded with spyware in no time. $1300 is a bit much to get an iMac just for emailing. But, $500 + a spare monitor (I have a few already) is just about right.

My cousin is in high school and really into computers. He has several PCs, and wants a Mac to play with. His parents aren't going to fork out the $$ for any of the models out there now, but they might do it for this model.

My parents' PC is starting to irk them. It's a few years old, and has been slowing down since they got in (the more you install/uninstall, the worse it gets). They're fighting off spyware now, and not too thrilled about it. They'd like a new computer, and I think a Mac would be good for them, but they wouldn't pay $1300 for an iMac.

I think that once you get these people to own a Mac, you convert some percentage of them over. Potentially, their next Mac is more expensive, but the first time $500 is right for the risk.

[Voch]

I agree the market for this machine, if it comes into existence, will be great. So order early, kids! I will get one immediately and possibly another for my Dad.

My great-aunt has one of those Mailstations that does a good job of sending simple e-mails. I think they're ~$100USD plus whatever monthly fee. Maybe your grandmother could use one of those (except the keyboard kinda sucks and a ~$500 Mac would be much more capable for attachment viewing and such).

Voch

[mitchell_pgh]

The iMac mini (or whatever it will be called) makes perfect sense. I've heard people make excuses for the Apple lineup for a long time... but I continue to feel that Apple is missing a wide audience.

For the sake of argument, say you have $1000 to buy a new desktop computer. Visit:
http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPL...ts/AppleStore/

Basically, you have three options... the eMac, buy a Wintel box... or buy nothing. Sure, you can make a good argument for the eMac... as I find it a solid machine... but in the end, some people don't like the all in one design. I'm one of those people.

I LOVE the specks (for a consumer machine)
- 1.25GHz PowerPC G4
- 256MB DDR333 SDRAM
- 80GB Ultra ATA drive
- SuperDrive

I just don't see myself every buying a computer physically connected to a monitor (that includes the beautiful iMac G4/G5). Sure you can make excuses (As I have in the past)

- Then save up your money for a G5
- Buy refurbished
- Buy the previous model

The fact is, if you have a grand to spend, you should have more options.

[dannyillusion]

I'm not an expert on computer tech so I'm not sure the following would be considered economical for apple but here goes:
So far most people has assumed that the "iMac Mini" will basically be an eMac sans display. This might be all fine but isn't the logic board with hd and optical drive pretty big? (I haven't seen it but compare to my old iMac)
What if Apple would use the same logic board as in the 12" iBook?
That would make for one heck of a small computer.
Even though portables are expensive to make they wouldn't have to bother with battery and 12" lcd which should be a large part of the manufacturing cost...
I read somewhere that the specs would be one firewire and two usb ports and this is exactly what you will find on the iBook.

Just a thought...

[discotronic]

I hope this is true. My brother is using a G3 B&W that he is thinking of upgrading. For the price of upgrades he could get this so called iMac mini. My father, who uses a PC because that is all I can afford to buy him, would be a great candidate for this system. Both already have a good monitor. My better half's little brother is using an iMac DV 500MHz. His parents don't want to spend the money for a new system. $500 might convince them to do so.

That is 3 systems that Apple will sell. As it stand right now all three of them will be without a new system for some time. My brother will upgrade. My father will keep what he has. My nephew will do the same.

All 3 of them use their systems for the same thing. Internet, email, music, basic pictures and etc. This would be perfect for their needs.

[swichd]

I think the CF-like RAM expansion card is a great idea. Most computer users are afraid of opening their computers. Putting in 1 pci or pc card slot wouldn�t hurt either. Internal Bluetooth would be good for many, but the average computer user can plug in a dongle. An AGP slot would be nice, but unlikely. The ports should include: DVI, VGA, several USB 2.0, two firewire, and an Ethernet port S-video I/O CIP, audio I/O CIP, tv tuner CIP. All CIP�s should be installable without removing the cover, similar to a pc card. There should also be Airport Extreme standard and an optional IR or RF remote control. Another important thing, IMO, is make this low power (electricity). I know that I don�t like a full-size computer running constantly, with its 500+ watt power supply costing tons of money to feed. A 100-150 watt external power supply should be good enough. Even those $299 computers have PCI slots. There was a $499 computer at one of the mega marts near me that had an AMD Athlon XP 3200+, 512 MB RAM, nvidia 5200 128 MB AGP graphics, integrated sound, a dual layer DVD drive, a standard DVD-ROM, a 200 GB hard drive, and a 7-in-one card reader. They were also selling 17� CRTs for $69 and a cheap Lexmark printer for $29. So someone could get a whole computer package for less than $600. Apple needs to make a machine that can compete with this. Even Apple�s top G5 doesn�t have a dual layer DVD-RW drive.

[ajprice]

OK then, I'm not sure where the flash card RAM idea came from, but if its for real it could be the source of the 'Apple buys flash memory cards' story/rumour from a few months ago that started the iPod flash idea. In other words, maybe the flash memory they bought stock of is the RAM for this thing, and not an iPod flash storage.

PS. How the hell is a flash memory card going to be fast enough to use as RAM anyway? Thinking about it, isn't flash card memory RAM a stupid idea?

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by swichd:
I think the CF-like RAM expansion card is a great idea. Most computer users are afraid of opening their computers. Putting in 1 pci or pc card slot wouldn�t hurt either. Internal Bluetooth would be good for many, but the average computer user can plug in a dongle. An AGP slot would be nice, but unlikely. The ports should include: DVI, VGA, several USB 2.0, two firewire, and an Ethernet port S-video I/O CIP, audio I/O CIP, tv tuner CIP. All CIP�s should be installable without removing the cover, similar to a pc card. There should also be Airport Extreme standard and an optional IR or RF remote control. Another important thing, IMO, is make this low power (electricity). I know that I don�t like a full-size computer running constantly, with its 500+ watt power supply costing tons of money to feed. A 100-150 watt external power supply should be good enough. Even those $299 computers have PCI slots. There was a $499 computer at one of the mega marts near me that had an AMD Athlon XP 3200+, 512 MB RAM, nvidia 5200 128 MB AGP graphics, integrated sound, a dual layer DVD drive, a standard DVD-ROM, a 200 GB hard drive, and a 7-in-one card reader. They were also selling 17� CRTs for $69 and a cheap Lexmark printer for $29. So someone could get a whole computer package for less than $600. Apple needs to make a machine that can compete with this. Even Apple�s top G5 doesn�t have a dual layer DVD-RW drive.

I respectfully disagree on a few items.

1) Upgrading RAM on a Mac is already as easy as it should be. If you don't feel comfortable opening a latch (like on a G4 tower) then you should really consider weather or not you should be installing additional RAM.

2) If the iMac/eMac doesn't have a PCI slot, this machine shouldn't have a PCI slot.

3) AGP... nice idea, but no way... This would kill iMac/eMac sales and that's not the intent of this system. This is a headless eMac/iMac.

I think the iMac mini should use the eMac everything sans monitor... nothing added, nothing taken away (minus the monitor).

[swichd]

Originally posted by ajprice:
OK then, I'm not sure where the flash card RAM idea came from, but if its for real it could be the source of the 'Apple buys flash memory cards' story/rumour from a few months ago that started the iPod flash idea. In other words, maybe the flash memory they bought stock of is the RAM for this thing, and not an iPod flash storage.

PS. How the hell is a flash memory card going to be fast enough to use as RAM anyway? Thinking about it, isn't flash card memory RAM a stupid idea?

Sorry, but you got it dead wrong. I ment to install the SODIMMs or whatever in a plastic shell that can just be popped in like a compact flash card. Your idea does bring a new idea, lose the hard drive and use only flash memory. Could be cool, "silent mac".

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
I respectfully disagree on a few items.

1) Upgrading RAM on a Mac is already as easy as it should be. If you don't feel comfortable opening a latch (like on a G4 tower) then you should really consider weather or not you should be installing additional RAM.

No, many people come back to me with dead dimms becuase they don't follow antistatic procedure

2) If the iMac/eMac doesn't have a PCI slot, this machine shouldn't have a PCI slot.

True, but it would be nice, like the PowerMac 6100 had a nubus slot, iirc.

3) AGP... nice idea, but no way... This would kill iMac/eMac sales and that's not the intent of this system. This is a headless eMac/iMac.

I was trying to compare it to the cheap system from my post. If Apple cannot match that level of hardware, the system is doomed to flop, IMO. The "average user" lookes at the numbers and will see that the PC has "better numbers".

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by swichd:
I was trying to compare it to the cheap system from my post. If Apple cannot match that level of hardware, the system is doomed to flop, IMO. The "average user" lookes at the numbers and will see that the PC has "better numbers".

PCI?

At the consumer level, PCI is as dead as the floppy IMHO.

Perhaps in 1990 you may have had a good argument, but with Firewire 400/800 and USB 1/2 and ethernet as standards (and space in most macs for an airport card)... PCI is all but a dinosaur at the consumer level in 2005.

[swichd]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
PCI?

At the consumer level, PCI is as dead as the floppy IMHO.

Perhaps in 1990 you may have had a good argument, but with Firewire 400/800 and USB 1/2 and ethernet as standards (and space in most macs for an airport card)... PCI is all but a dinosaur at the consumer level in 2005.

There are a few things wrong here:
1) A little nitpicky, but PCI was not invented until 1993
2) PCI is still used by many consumers. What if you want gigabit ethernet or the next gen WiFi? Many devices do not use USB/Firewire, and I'd personally have my devices inside of my comp, not taking up space outside of it. PCI is also faster than USB or Firewire.
3)Floppys are still used as the primary file transfer mode. Don't think sneakernet is dead yet. Most computers still come with floppy drives or have an cheap option.

[Skip Breakfast]

I don't believe that the memory sticks should be encased in some sort of plastic doo-dad like an old Atari cartridge. Memory is meant to be installed and left installed. I can just see people repeatedly pulling the RAM in and out and causing wear on the slots.

Also, I've seen MANY prospective switchers walk away from the eMac. The main objection has NOT been the $799 price tag. More often they balk at the size and weight of it and don't want to be tied down to the CRT.

[ajprice]

Ah right, I just got the wrong end of the stick with the flash memory thing then. RAM cards in plastic cases though, not sure. Only if the PC memory industry followed and made all PC motherboard RAM slots plug in types for plastic cased cards. Otherwise, the Mac would be using 'special' Mac memory that no one but mac suppliers would stock, and PC people would laugh at the stupid mac 'lego computer' proprietary parts. Not good.

[swichd]

Originally posted by ajprice:
Ah right, I just got the wrong end of the stick with the flash memory thing then. RAM cards in plastic cases though, not sure. Only if the PC memory industry followed and made all PC motherboard RAM slots plug in types for plastic cased cards. Otherwise, the Mac would be using 'special' Mac memory that no one but mac suppliers would stock, and PC people would laugh at the stupid mac 'lego computer' proprietary parts. Not good.

They could use standard SODIMMS and simply put them in plastic cases.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by swichd:
There are a few things wrong here:
1) A little nitpicky, but PCI was not invented until 1993
2) PCI is still used by many consumers. What if you want gigabit ethernet or the next gen WiFi? Many devices do not use USB/Firewire, and I'd personally have my devices inside of my comp, not taking up space outside of it. PCI is also faster than USB or Firewire.
3)Floppys are still used as the primary file transfer mode. Don't think sneakernet is dead yet. Most computers still come with floppy drives or have an cheap option.

A little nitpicky, but PCI is nowhere near as fast as firewire.
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/I/IEEE_1394.html <-- Firewire 400/800 Mb/s
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/P/PCI.html <-- PCI 133 Mb/s

My 1990 reference was just a generalization. But seriously... what "Joe Internet" is using it? Obviously it's not that that critical if the iMac/eMac has never had one.

Gigabit ethernet? Next Gen WiFi? Are you serious? It's a low end consumer machine. Most CURRENT users don't even approach saturating their 10 BASE-T Ethernet connection.

You also said that you wanted the device to be the size of a firewire device... isn't that a bit of a conflict of interest? An open PCI slot and a very small footprint?

Floppys are still the primary file transfer mode? That's news to me. I haven't installed an application via. floppy disks in 8+ years. When people hand me a floppy, the first thing out of my mouth is "just email it to me." because I don't own a floppy drive and have a few disks in a bin in my closet from my college years. We have the Internet/CD/CD-R/CD-RW/eMail... much more popular. If you think the floppy is still viable... I have some cassettes from my Commodore 64 I'll sell you.

I can't stress enough that this box wouldn't need to conform to the DVD like box. It's 2005. We have Gamecubes, XboX, PS2 and a million other gadgets. I don't see people freaking out if it doesn't conform to a 17" wide DVD player.

[ajprice]

Swichd, you corrected me on this because I didn't understand the idea at first:

I ment to install the SODIMMs or whatever in a plastic shell that can just be popped in like a compact flash card.

If your idea is to put normal RAM in a plastic case then why not use normal RAM? The memory as a card idea is to simplify RAM installation by having the memory as a plug in card into a slot or port, like putting memory card into a PS2 console, that simple. If you're going to keep the same latch mechanism and slot as PC RAM, then use PC RAM.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by swichd:
They could use standard SODIMMS and simply put them in plastic cases.

So who is going to sell these plastic cases? Apple?... because we know how inexpensive their RAM is. Also, Apple knows better then making nonstandard components. I think the idea is interesting, but only if it were the norm or up and coming in the RAM world.

[swichd]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
A little nitpicky, but PCI is nowhere near as fast as firewire.
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/I/IEEE_1394.html <-- Firewire 400/800 Mb/s
http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/P/PCI.html <-- PCI 133 Mb/s

Wrong! PCI is 133 Mb/s (megabytes per second) while Firewire is 800 mb/s (megabits). Divide the firewire rating by 8 to get it it megabytes per second.

My 1990 reference was just a generalization. But seriously... what "Joe Internet" is using it? Obviously it's not that that critical if the iMac/eMac has never had one.
Gigabit ethernet? Next Gen WiFi? Are you serious? It's a low end consumer machine. Most CURRENT users don't even approach saturating their 10 BASE-T Ethernet connection.

I've installed more gigabit Ethernet networks than anything else. People yell at me after I install 802.11g networks "'cause it's too slow". These are normal, non-powerusers. Also, PCI is used to install tv tuners and other analouge video capture devices.

You also said that you wanted the device to be the size of a firewire device... isn't that a bit of a conflict of interest? An open PCI slot and a very small footprint?

I never said this.

Floppys are still the primary file transfer mode? That's news to me. I haven't installed an application via. floppy disks in 8+ years. When people hand me a floppy, the first thing out of my mouth is "just email it to me." because I don't own a floppy drive and have a few disks in a bin in my closet from my college years. We have the Internet/CD/CD-R/CD-RW/eMail... much more popular. If you think the floppy is still viable... I have some cassettes from my Commodore 64 I'll sell you.

Why are floppys still selling like hotcakes then? "Joe Internet" likes them.

[swichd]

Originally posted by ajprice:
If your idea is to put normal RAM in a plastic case then why not use normal RAM? The memory as a card idea is to simplify RAM installation by having the memory as a plug in card into a slot or port, like putting memory card into a PS2 console, that simple. If you're going to keep the same latch mechanism and slot as PC RAM, then use PC RAM.

I say scrap the door, but keep the slot, but engineer it so it goes in like the ps2 memory or like the NES cartriges. Just plug n play. It is a bad idea...

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by swichd:
Wrong! PCI is 133 Mb/s (megabytes per second) while Firewire is 800 mb/s (megabits). Divide the firewire rating by 8 to get it it megabytes per second.


I've installed more gigabit Ethernet networks than anything else. People yell at me after I install 802.11g networks "'cause it's too slow". These are normal, non-powerusers. Also, PCI is used to install tv tuners and other analouge video capture devices.


Why are floppys still selling like hotcakes then? "Joe Internet" likes them.

My bad on the megabit/megabye issue, but still... WHAT PCI analog video card are you talking about? Also, you are kidding yourself if you think non-powerusers think 10/100 ethernet is too slow. It's not slow, it's obviously the backbone that's too slow. What consumer would complain... especially if they are on DSL or a Cable modem (which many aren't). They could NEVER saturate a 10Mb/s line over a cable modem.

Floppys selling like hotcakes? Perhaps in the backwoods... nobody uses them at my work (other then the 50 and over crowd)

Maybe in the backwoods they are used... but it they are so popular, why are you finding more and more PC laptops coming standard without a floppy drive?

Where on earth do you live where people complain about 802.11g being too slow AND floppies are selling like hotcakes!!!

[iDaver]

Originally posted by swichd:
Floppys are still used as the primary file transfer mode. Don't think sneakernet is dead yet. Most computers still come with floppy drives or have an cheap option.

Puhlease. Not on a Mac since 1998.

[swichd]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
My bad on the megabit/megabye issue, but still... WHAT PCI analog video card are you talking about?

TV Tuners

Also, you are kidding yourself if you think non-powerusers think 10/100 ethernet is too slow. It's not slow, it's obviously the backbone that's too slow. What consumer would complain... especially if they are on DSL or a Cable modem (which many aren't). They could NEVER saturate a 10Mb/s line over a cable modem.

I didn't say that. I said that I install lots of gigabit Ethernet cards and networks.

Floppys selling like hotcakes? Perhaps in the backwoods... nobody uses them at my work (other then the 50 and over crowd) Maybe in the backwoods they are used... but it they are so popular, why are you finding more and more PC laptops coming standard without a floppy drive?

Milwaukee, WI is not the "backwoods"! Floppies are still used by those who don't want to log on to their email server and download files. "Joe Internet" doesn't use FTP, and may not even know how to log into their email server from a computer other than their home. They use to floppy to transfer "office" type documents and small pictures. I still use floppys once in a while, when I need to give someone some files. "Joe Internet" doesn't want to spend time burning CD-Rs or RWs.

Where on earth do you live where people complain about 802.11g being too slow AND floppies are selling like hotcakes!!!

Milwaukee, WI is not the "backwoods", FYI. People complain when 802.11g drops out and it gets 20 mb/s max. Those "pre-N" routes/cards have real speeds over 100 mb/s and have much longer range. Look at my iBook: only 801.11b and no way to upgrade. You'd be suprised how many people want upgrades on their systems.

[Simon]

OK, great. But can we now drop this floppy disk bullsh!t? Apple will not use a floppy ever again. I think that's clear to anybody who has been following the company for the last few years. If you want a floppy, go buy it - if you can find one that is.

Back on topic, I'm wondering why there are no additional rumors about this product. TS broke the story about a week ago and the only follow-up was by AI, but from the way they wrote the article it seems clear they just copy pasted TS' article. There was no new or additional info. According to the original rumor "issues have arisen in production" which would suggest that initial production runs have already started. It's interesting that there have been no leaks from this production facility or other outsourced branches that would deal with this unit (wharehousing, shipping, PR, etc.). Of course we have seen this before, but it surely is amazing how Steve manages to keep everything covered up until the last moment. On the other hand, if the rumor were just the old hoax about a headless iMac it would explain why only one rumor source exists...

The product sounds extremely good and I'd prefer to see it before I get my hopes up. But of course, as always, I've already done so.

[Mr Heliums]

Originally posted by chadseld:
Anyway. I see the xMac having a large number of buyers from all corners of the marketplace. It's a low end computer, but it's sales won't be limited to low-end customers.

And that's exactly why Apple won't release it as a desktop machine. It would absolutely cripple sales of the iMac and even PowerMacs. Profits would tumble. It's in Apple's DNA to innovate, but it's also in Apple's DNA not to release cut-price machines that eat into its profit margins. And it's right to take that approach.

This has to merely some form of media server.

I guess we'll know for sure in a week, and I can eat humble pie...

[babywriter2]

I find it interesting that Apple has made several "professional-market" announcements quietly, under the radar, today:

- reduction of price on Cinema Displays
- XSan is now shipping
- speed boost for XServe

To me, that makes it crystal-clear that Macworld will be almost entirely consumer-focused, and that bigger things are in the works. There are some past Stevenotes (the content-poor ones, specifically) that would have made a big deal of at least the first two. The fact that Steve is slipping these in quietly is good news, IMHO.

Can't wait.

- b

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by swichd:
TV Tuners

So you think Apple should add a PCI slot (even though the eMac and iMac haven't ever had them) so that the 1% of the consumer level users that watch TV on their computer monitors can install a PCI card? IF anything Apple would/should build a tuner if in this is truly a "Livingroom Digital Device" otherwise, there are alternative options. Otherwise, I feel adding a PCI slot would be a colossal waste of time/money.

Originally posted by swichd:
I didn't say that. I said that I install lots of gigabit Ethernet cards and networks.

Then what WERE you trying to say? Are you installing numerous gigabit Ethernet networks in home environments? It's a consumer level machine. I don't see Dell/HP/Sony placing gigabit ethernet in their consumer level systems. My point is, there is ZERO need to add PCI to a modern consumer level computer. While your "Well, the Intel box builders are doing it" theory is true, it's because they don't inovate. Many of them still use PS/2 mice and serial keyboard connections.

Originally posted by swichd:
Milwaukee, WI is not the "backwoods"! Floppies are still used by those who don't want to log on to their email server and download files. "Joe Internet" doesn't use FTP, and may not even know how to log into their email server from a computer other than their home. They use to floppy to transfer "office" type documents and small pictures. I still use floppys once in a while, when I need to give someone some files. "Joe Internet" doesn't want to spend time burning CD-Rs or RWs.

Well, in these here parts, we just email attachments to our home computers. Some "less wealthy" people use such things as free Yahoo accounts, G-Mail accounts etc. I feel as though you are making excuses [QUOTE: "Joe Internet" doesn't use FTP, and may not even know how to log into their email server from a computer other than their home.] for the dying minority. Why would you need to log in to your email server from a computer other then your home?

Originally posted by swichd:
Milwaukee, WI is not the "backwoods", FYI. People complain when 802.11g drops out and it gets 20 mb/s max. Those "pre-N" routes/cards have real speeds over 100 mb/s and have much longer range. Look at my iBook: only 801.11b and no way to upgrade. You'd be suprised how many people want upgrades on their systems.

So now you are flipping to a laptop upgradability argument for a consumer desktop?

[macintologist]

I would want one of these to go to college. I can use it as my main desktop computer with an LCD and keyboard and mouse etc, and then I can use my current 12"PB for portability.

[NYK Ace]

i know honestly i would love one of these machines as a poor college student. i already have a monitor and my iBook i have now is a G4 800 (which it seems dog slow compared to my parents eMac at 1ghz)

a 1.25 even 1.33 Ghz G4 desktop would be a nice boost

[Altair]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
So you think Apple should add a PCI slot (even though the eMac and iMac haven't ever had them) so that the 1% of the consumer level users that watch TV on their computer monitors can install a PCI card? IF anything Apple would/should build a tuner if in this is truly a "Livingroom Digital Device" otherwise, there are alternative options. Otherwise, I feel adding a PCI slot would be a colossal waste of time/money.

There's a large number of very useful things to install in a PCI slot. For example many people would want a much better sound card with audio in (I doubt this machine will have a line-in). My current tv computer has an uber dvd decoder card in it that were very expensive to get in a dvd player at the time. I also have a tv card for tivo like features. Lastly what if the person wants a faster wireless than the one that's available? It also is very useful for installing secondary video cards to get more than 1 (or 2) monitors. My record has been a 3 monitor setup.

You need to calm down. These boards are especially good for NOT being inflamatory. Please keep it that way.

[swichd]

Originally posted by Altair:
There's a large number of very useful things to install in a PCI slot. For example many people would want a much better sound card with audio in (I doubt this machine will have a line-in). My current tv computer has an uber dvd decoder card in it that were very expensive to get in a dvd player at the time. I also have a tv card for tivo like features. Lastly what if the person wants a faster wireless than the one that's available? It also is very useful for installing secondary video cards to get more than 1 (or 2) monitors. My record has been a 3 monitor setup.

You need to calm down. These boards are especially good for NOT being inflamatory. Please keep it that way.

Thank's for keeping us in check.

[Simon]

Originally posted by Altair:
You need to calm down. These boards are especially good for NOT being inflamatory. Please keep it that way.

Why should he have to calm down? He wasn't flaming one bit.

Actually quite the contrary, he's arguing pretty reasonably with people who seem to have lost contact to the real universe.. No PCI in the iMac or eMac -> certainly no PCI in a $499 iMac mini. Period. End of story. And to drive it home, that's no flame, that's just common sense.

[jasonsRX7]

Originally posted by Simon:
No PCI in the iMac or eMac -> certainly no PCI in a $499 iMac mini. Period. End of story. And to drive it home, that's no flame, that's just common sense.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by Altair:
For example many people would want a much better sound card with audio in (I doubt this machine will have a line-in)

I've consistently stated that my idea for a headless sub $500 Mac should be based on the iMac/eMac foundation (motherboard+power etc.) I'm just amazed that "a much better sound card with audio in" would even be considered for such a machine or that PCI is even being discussed.

The eMac and iMac both have stereo inputs. I'll restate that they both have USB and Firewire inputs. If you need more then the following devices...
http://www.miglia.com/products/audio...dio/index.html
http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/powerwave/
then you seriously need to reconsider buying a $500 low end consumer level machine.

Even if it didn't come with an audio in... you could always use
http://www.griffintechnology.com/products/imic/

Originally posted by Altair:
My current tv computer has an uber dvd decoder card in it that were very expensive to get in a dvd player at the time. I also have a tv card for tivo like features. Lastly what if the person wants a faster wireless than the one that's available? It also is very useful for installing secondary video cards to get more than 1 (or 2) monitors. My record has been a 3 monitor setup.

I think you just made my point. You would not fit the target audience for this computer.

COMPUTER TV
For starters, you don't need a DVD decoder card in a modern computer. If you wanted to play a DVD through this unit it could already do it via S-Video Out.

I don't see Apple jumping in the Tivo competition just yet. Especially in a sub $500 computer. Again, I think you are missing the point. I would love to see a Media PC, but I'm not counting on it from Apple. Perhaps they will do it "the right way"

FASTER WIRELESS
For starters, I'm sure this would come AirPort Extreme ready. In the future... 3-10 years down the road, you always can connect a bridge to the computer via ethernet. If Built-in 10/100BASE-T isn't fast enough for your VERY heavy server like needs, perhaps you should consider a PowerMac.

DUAL MONITOR
If the iMac/eMac doesn't have it, this machine shouldn't have it. It's just that simple. I'm a dual monitor person and would love to see a second monitor option on this beast, but I don't see it happening.

THE FLOPPY ISSUE
In 1998, if you asked me if Apple jumped the gun a bit with removing the floppy drive, I would have said "probably." Today I would have to say "it was just about right." Considering you can pick up a 64 MB USB penn drive for less then $20 the floppy is DEAD. Sure people are still using them, but people are also still listening to music on records.

Originally posted by Altair:
You need to calm down. These boards are especially good for NOT being inflamatory. Please keep it that way.

Calm down? I feel I've maintained my composure in the face of rather unrealistic requests and/or expectations. I try to be as realistic as possible. If Apple offered a dual monitor, PCI enabled, advanced RAM installing option, it could cannibalize the iMac, eMac, and most likely the PowerMac.

I consider the simple eMac/iMac sans monitor the best solution. No PCI/Floppy/TunerCard etc.

What we really need are some punch card options

[power142]

I'm surprised that nobody else has picked up on this, but isn't the price point of this computer a little close to that of the iPod? I know they are wildly different markets, however consumers might envisage a computer as a more expensive item to buy generally than a portable music player.

[osxisfun]

Originally posted by power142:
I'm surprised that nobody else has picked up on this, but isn't the price point of this computer a little close to that of the iPod? I know they are wildly different markets, however consumers might envisage a computer as a more expensive item to buy generally than a portable music player.

true, but Dull Computers have sort of changed the perception of price points.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by power142:
I'm surprised that nobody else has picked up on this, but isn't the price point of this computer a little close to that of the iPod? I know they are wildly different markets, however consumers might envisage a computer as a more expensive item to buy generally than a portable music player.

I agree... that's why I'm guessing it would be more in the $600 range.

40 and 80 GB full size hard drives cost considerably less then an iPod mini Hard drive. If they "recycle" the eMac/iMac HD and power supply... really there isn't much innovation other then the design.

[anthonyvthc]

Does anybody else think this is gonna considerably lower the resale value of Macs? (e.g. G4 400 Mhz selling for $300 on ebay) If a 1.25 could be had for $500, I'm thinking most people are not going to be looking at the used market anymore.

Thoughts?

[iDaver]

Originally posted by anthonyvthc:
Does anybody else think this is gonna considerably lower the resale value of Macs? (e.g. G4 400 Mhz selling for $300 on ebay) If a 1.25 could be had for $500, I'm thinking most people are not going to be looking at the used market anymore.

Thoughts?

It will all have to do with expandability (of older towers) and whether Apple would decide to cripple this mini Mac with a slow front side bus, no cache, low memory ceiling, etc. I'm thinking I'll order one of these if they're introduced but I fear there will be something that will persuade me not to after I see the specs.

[Simon]

Originally posted by power142:
I'm surprised that nobody else has picked up on this, but isn't the price point of this computer a little close to that of the iPod? I know they are wildly different markets, however consumers might envisage a computer as a more expensive item to buy generally than a portable music player.

I could well imagine that the rumored $499 is the price tag of the lowest and "down-spec'ed" model. Kind of similar to the education version of the iMac, the $499 iMac mini model could offer a simple CDROM and small PATA disk w/o any APX or BT. If you BTO a Combo, APX card or BT module in there you probably will see at least $599 or $699.

Apple might show a certain change of paradigm by entering the entry-level headless market, but I doubt they will suddenly try to start a price war with PC makers. If it's too good to be true, it probably is.