Mac Mini $494

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: kki000
ram is not upgradeable.

This could change once ppl get them and they figure it out, but official word from apple is the 256mb u get is what u get.
I woulndt mind blowing 499 to play with this, but no ram upgrade is a dead deal.
U cant get do dick on os x with 256m.

And i agree g4=p3. But they had to gimp it or else it would have cannibalized even more of their higher end sales.
K

From the Amazon description above which I assume they copied from Apple but am too lazy to confirm.

It's all there. In fact, it's hard to believe that there's any place left for the rest of the computer. But squeezed in under that optical drive and behind all those ports lie a G4 processor, room for up to 1 GB PC2700 main memory,

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Jaxidian
Out of the 4 PCs I regularly use, I HATE using the 2 with 512MB RAM because they're so damned slow with all of the disk swapping (1GB minimum are my requirements for good productivity).
I'm talking about working or even just browsing the internet, email, IM, etc.

i'm calling shens. unlesss 'working' means 1 gb photoshop images or something. word processor, im, several browser windows, email, does not take up 512 megs.

 

[mra]

Needs moar RAM. 256 is NOT going to cut it with OS X and the thing is snapped together so you void the warranty if you upgrade the memory yourself. GG Apple.

 

[batmanuel]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Jaxidian
Out of the 4 PCs I regularly use, I HATE using the 2 with 512MB RAM because they're so damned slow with all of the disk swapping (1GB minimum are my requirements for good productivity).
I'm talking about working or even just browsing the internet, email, IM, etc.

i'm calling shens. unlesss 'working' means 1 gb photoshop images or something. word processor, im, several browser windows, email, does not take up 512 megs.

Agreed. Unless Jaxidan is using a Longhorn beta for day to day computing, 512MB is just fine for most office apps. For general office productivity, I barely feel a difference in responsiveness between my AXP 3200+ with 512MB and my wife's P4 550 with 1GB DDR2.

The lack of a keyboard and mouse on the Mac Mini really doesn't break my heart as the standard issue ones from Apple would have gone right into the trash in my house anyway - especially now that the Logitech MX Duo is under $70 at Newegg (and often it is as low as $55 when they run a special). I don't know how Mac users can deal with the lack of a scroll wheel on the Apple mice. Even if Steve hates the idea of a scroll wheel breaking up the clean lines of the mouse, you'd figure they'd at least have worked in a touchpad scroll wheel by now (like the Logitech V500 notebook mouse has).

 

[Kermy]

Originally posted by: CptObvious

Originally posted by: MIDIman
Curious what kind of noise this will produce.

It's advertised as 'whisper quiet' and I'm inclined to believe Apple since their other machines are well-built and have low noise.

I'm thinking about buying one for home recording. I currently have a SFF PC but it's still quite audible.

Heh, they also advertise "Whisper Quiet" on the iMac G5s, but my iMac sure ain't "whisper quiet." Check the apple.com forums for people complaining about the fans on the iMacs.

 

[vegetation]

Can you add a TV tuner to this?

 

[herkulease]

Originally posted by: mra
Needs moar RAM. 256 is NOT going to cut it with OS X and the thing is snapped together so you void the warranty if you upgrade the memory yourself. GG Apple.

really? I was hoping the would be some way for users to open it. do you have any sites that has up close pictures. like top/bottom. that's not apple's. hopefully once people get them someone will be willing to crack their's open.

 

[Macro2]

WTF? No keyboard or mouse? Will it take a PS2?

OK, no monitor but no keyboard or mouse?

 

[PCboy]

Hot Deals != General Hardware. I don't know about you guys but I'm just getting simply for bragging rights, especially since I'm a technogeek. Form over function, baby. If you can handle its mobility (bringing along a slim LCD/keyboard/mouse all the time), all eyes are gonna be on you.

Thanks OP for the offer.

 

[OzzieGT]

Originally posted by: PCboy
Hot Deals != General Hardware. I don't know about you guys but I'm just getting simply for bragging rights, especially since I'm a technogeek. Form over function, baby. If you can handle its mobility (bringing along a slim LCD/keyboard/mouse all the time), all eyes are gonna be on you.

Thanks OP for the offer.

While you are policing, maybe you should go ahead and point out that this isn't a hot deal...it's regular price. For a mac. Which == expensive.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Xionide

Originally posted by: HeroOfPellinor
I think this is a bit of a coup Apple just pulled off. I've never considered a Mac before and my current setup is way more powerful, but for my sister and anybody looking for a new computer, I may just have to recommend this instead of a Dell or BuiltByHero system. This is really something.

Why cause its small? its still a mac.

Yes, and a Mac is a ROCK STABLE system now that they've got OS 10 in the mix. The system is FAST, stable and all around an excellent platform. If the hardware wasn't so expensive, or if they would port the OS to, say, Athlon64, I'd switch OS's in a heartbeat.

Jason

 

[MIDIman]

Originally posted by: CptObvious

Originally posted by: MIDIman
Curious what kind of noise this will produce.

It's advertised as 'whisper quiet' and I'm inclined to believe Apple since their other machines are well-built and have low noise.

I'm thinking about buying one for home recording. I currently have a SFF PC but it's still quite audible.

I've been on a quest for a silent, good performance SFF for the exact same reason.

Check out what silentpcreview.com use for their sound level reading.

link

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: Baked
People, it's a freaking G4! It's like buying a PIII PC. Eh, whatever...

no, unlike the PIII, the G4 *still* holds up well against current processors, *especially* under OS X. Now, you will definitely want more RAM, but aside from that I am hard pressed to see any major problems with this.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: salsa086
this is golden

And when you want to take a break, play the 3D games Nanosaur 2 and Marble Blast Gold.

for the price of this system you can get a PC with REAL gaming potential


and if it's all about browsing the web securely on the cheap, all of the mac kool-aid drinkers would actually be buying a $200 lindows system from costco... instead they are drawn to the pretty lights and apple logos in all the movies.. and one wonders how the Koresh's of this world ever developed a following....

I used to think exactly as you do, but last year I had a Maya class with dual G4 macs (I think they were 1 gig or so) with 1gb of RAM and OS 10.2, as I recall. I'll tell you what: Those systems handled Maya better than ANY PC I have EVER seen. I'm currently running an Athlon 2800+ with 1.5GB of RAM and a 128MB Radeon 9800 pro, and I'll tell you what: It does NOT run Maya even CLOSE to as fast, smooth or stable as those Mac's did.

I'm still PC-boy because Mac's are generally too expensive, and plus I make my living with PC architecture hardware, but one thing has definitely become clear to me: Macintosh has a superior platform.

Jason

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: jagerk
I've used these: $1500 (now, must have been $2000+ then)
1.8GHz PowerPC G5
600MHz frontside bus
512K L2 cache
256MB DDR400 SDRAM
Expandable to 4GB SDRAM
80GB Serial ATA
8x SuperDrive
Three PCI Slots
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
64MB DDR video memory
56K internal modem

along with these:
Apple Cinema Display (20" flat panel) ($1000 now)
Apple Cinema HD Display (30" flat panel) ($3000)

and especially these, the worst computer part I've ever used:
Apple Mouse, One Button Optical ($30)

Consistently, throughout all these machines which I've used for graphical and audio work, movies, Photoshop, et al, the hype is not worth it. These machines are the most price inflated and cost ineffective machines I've had the displeasure to use. They have the worse faults than comparable (in price) Windows machines. Ask any Mac user who's been frustrated with the damn freaking pinwheel which shows your expensive processor is being utilized for some mundane task. In raw speed, yes, it does have it's ass kicked.

I'm not even talking about the discrepancy on paper, that these machines "only" have 1.5 ghz or so tops. The discrepancy is in raw, actual, power, because I'm an AMD user, and AMD has always been playing a catch up game to Intel's clock speed. AMD has always won, though, even though their actual clock speeds were lower than Intel- because of the effective architecture on the chips, with smaller bandwith pipelines allowing more work units to be processed than Intel's processors in the same time frame. Thus, the chips across the board on the PC market from Athlon consistently have lower clock frequencies than Intel chips, yet actually perform better than Intel chips with at least 30% higher clock speeds. It's the damn truth. Which is why, contrary to public opinion, the BEST processor right now is an Athlon processor - currently at a whopping 3800+ public relations speed, which only translates into 2.6 ghz actual clock speed, compared to Intel's highest Prescott processor, the 3.8 ghz actual clock speed. And the AMD chips kicks so much ass hands down - they actually implement 64 bit compatability before "the first 64 bit personal computer in the world - the G5"- it kicks Intel machines asses right now, and is ready for the next generation of 64 bit operating systems. Can you say that for a Mac, about having so much performance?

Hardly. The mac suffers from a parity of speeds, with EITHER Intel or AMD machines. There is no getting around that; either live with the cursed pinwheel, (which is SO damn annoying when you're using a machine touted for it's graphical and user superiority.. yeah right, what you're supposed to buy is the best HARDWARE you can afford- and only recently has actual current graphics cards have appeared for Macs. Either that, or you pay a ludicrous amount for price premium of Mac-compatible graphics cards from either Nvidia or ATi.) or you buy a more expensive Mac. Even then, the most expensive Macs pitifully fall short of the comparably priced Windows machines. And it doesn't matter what kind of mythical software benefits you'll have, you'll still have crappy hardware under the cover of your pretty Mac, which you will never have the opportunity to upgrade, except perhaps user-friendly RAM modules! RAM has nothing to do with anything once you're past a certain level, so that's a moot point anyway.

This same situation has already been shown to a LOT of college students within the past year - since the time Intel came out with the Centrino package for its laptop. There was confusion as to how a chip with "only" 1.3, 1.4 ghz could be equal to or better than Pentium 4 2.8 ghz machines. This is the exact situation AMD had been in, but fortunately for AMD, its supporters know that there is a way for chips running at those speeds to truly shine and repeatedly beat out higher-rated Intel 'equivalents'. Most of the time, the AMD chips were priced ridiculously cheaper than the 'equivalent' Intel chips, too- so an AMD buyer such as myself were in a win-win situation. This is definitely not the case with Mac. I can't even give a benchmark to compare the two systems. Look at the programs which are available for Mac. You get to pay a price premium for those which are actually available, just like everything else Apple sells. And that's the real bottom line, a Mac user who falls into the hype just increases Apple's bottom line. Shrug. You can go ahead now and purchase your Mini mac. I won't be, for the forseeable future.

That's all I have to say about that.

Huh. I had exactly the opposite experience with Macintosh last year. It was WAY faster than anything AMD or Intel had at the time, and yeah, I'm a systems engineer so I do know a bit about hardware and software

Anyway, Mac's are DEFINITELY overpriced as a rule, but to say they lag WAY behind is, IMHO, completely inaccurate. A 1.5Ghz Macintosh is EASILY the equal of a 3Ghz P4 for applications such as Maya, Final Cut (Premiere on a Wintel box) and Photoshop.

Jason

 

[motoxpress]

Couple of thoughts...

Quiet: I am sure this thing will be very quiet. I have a Dual G5 and had a shuttleSB75 and the G5 was much quieter than the shuttle which was not noisy per say. The noisest thing about either one was the video cards (G5:9800pro, shuttle:6800nu).

Keyboard,mouse: As a cross-platform kinda guy I have played around with keyboards, mice, etc and can tell you that they move back and forth very easily. I used my apple keyboard on the pc and vice versa. You could even hook up a PS2 keyboard via a ps2->usb adaptor. Apple also just halved the prices on their keyborads and mice as well.($30 each).

Mac mini -vs- Dell: This is a bit of an incompatible comparison as these two manufactures are not approaching things the same way. I think any persona who is not a power user would enjoy the mac over a Dell (winXP) because it is a very simple approach to the digital world. If you are a power user looking for a cheap computer just build a pc - don't mess with Dell. This little mini is something that will be perfect for so many people because of it's size, cost, and ease of use.

Mini for HTPC: This thing could be very interesting as an htpc. THe HD doesn't have to be huge - it has Firewire. THe airport technology is all about distributed audio. The DVI output is the best solution for HQ output and the video card will easily do HD. It is SOOO small that it could fit anywhere. It can be Bluetooth enabled which opens up a lot of possibilities. I just can't see why it would be bad for it. Even for tivo-like tasks you could have a couple of FW hds to rotate. no big deal. Then the iLife software - sheesh that stuff is cool. I do video/audio for living and have a hoot with this stuff.


I think it's awesome and I think it will be more popular than the iMacs. Will it put apple in front of any other H/W sellers? Not sure. It could in volume.

It's also a great way to make $$ off of all those extra G4s hanging around

mx

 

[cheesehead]

Originally posted by: OzzieGT
Actually, I won't recommend this for friends. If it included monitor, keyboard, and mouse I might. But for $600 you can get a pretty good system from Dell (for anything but games of course) WITH monitor, keyboard, and mouse.

Despite hardware difficulties, Macs are still superior due to the usage of OSX, which is a vastly superior OS to WinXP. Most of the hardcore programmers I know who are not using Linux use OSX due to all the ported assemblers from Unix. (OSX is really just a fancy GUI for Unix in many respects. You can even access a "terminal" function".) For 500$, you're getting a Mac, which entails the advantages of nill spyware/adware, almost no viruses, and of course, the remarkably quick turnarounds that AppleCare is so well known for. Also, consider the fact tha macs go out of date much slower than PC's due to better OS coding, and this is a pretty darn good deal.
I might get one of the motherboards myself (used, of course) to make a REALLY small Linux server (G4=PowerPC=IBM Linux Compatible) or perhaps a tiny TV to play movies and music over our home theater setup. Personally, I think that this would make an awesome home theater PC; just add a FireWire TV in and you have a system for 600$ (including TV bridge, wireless keyboard/mouse/trackball) you have a PVR.

Originally posted by: Baked
People, it's a freaking G4! It's like buying a PIII PC. Eh, whatever...

The P4 is not the world's best gaming processor, but it excels at tasks for which AltiVec are enabled; namely, DV editing and encoding, Mp3 encoding, and Photoshop. This computer is designed to run basic apps very well, and it should do a fine job of it. However, a 1.25ghz G4 can also edit movies in Final Cut Pro with authority and encode Mp3's at speeds that put my P4/3ghz Dell laptop to shame. (Actually, my old G3/800/640mb SDRAM encoded Mp3's at a similar speed to my laptop. The G4 is in a different class altogether.) Remember, a 9200/32mb can still beat the crap out of a Intel Extreme Graphics chip.
Also, consider the uses of this computer for programming. C++ does not require an uber-powerful graphics card, and many assemblers run at blazing speeds on PowerPC processors. If you're a fan of PERL or other UNIX goodies, this 500$ box can, with another 512mb of RAM, put to shame 1000$ computers from dell in terms of programming usefulness.

I personally think that this is a good omen. Apple is getting off their duffs and making computers for the masses-which is where the money is. These appear to be pretty decent systems at a very attractive price. I personally intend to reccomend these to prospective clients; the lack of spyware and viruses alone are enough to seal the deal. And remember, if they start making enough money, they can start to compete more with PC's, and the more market share they get, the cheaper they will become.
-SpasticTeapot.

 

[Macro2]

Does it come with any software?

 

[jpsmoney]

It comes with the iLife suite, which is pretty nice. I can't wait to pick one of these up later for ~$300 just to play with.

 

[pyaralii]

As far as performance, you can't even compare a lot of these intel/amd based processors to the apple processors. Most of them operate differently.

As far as OS, If you've ever looked at the OS market, you've probably seen Windows XP trying to be as intuitive and easy to use as Mac OS X. Mac has been the first to integrate some of the most cutting edge technologies to a lot of consumers, while Microsoft always remains sluggish and unrealiable. Mircrosoft wishes they could be the first to market with the brilliant ideas apple introduces.

Apple has failed at a lot of things, but they've been able to rebound and really gauge what customers want or wish they had. As far as an all purpose system a Mac will suffice.

In addition, Mac has some of the best support available. I think Apple products offer a lot and they are now being appreciated. They have higher pricing, but you get what you pay for (support and quality). Also, Apple is in business to make money, and if people are willing to pay for the product, then so be it. They work hard with maintaining their small market segment, so they need the added revenue (why they have high prices) to continue cultivating it. I think mainstream is just beginning to appreciate what apple has to offer, and i wouldn't be surprised if apple will become a powerhouse in the coming years. Staunch apple fans, who have stuck along when apple products really werent so great may not like the next door neighbors adopting apples, but that is something apple will have to overcome. The Mini is Apple's way of welcoming everybody to see what Mac OS X has to offer.

If most of the programs you use are very specific and only available on PC, then PC is your thing, but if you're a normal user who wants a hub for a digital lifestyle mac has it. Don't hate, appreciate.

 

[Bobartig]

The mac mini just doesn't have hardware to be a decent HTPC. You'd have to add (off the top of my head), an Elgato usb tuner+ tv in/out, M-audio pre-amp, and probably some external storage. I'm a big mac fan, I've worked for Apple, but I just don't see it.

The Mac Mini has plenty of decent applications tho'

- G4 Cube returns!!

- Low profile/small form factor computing

- Headless low performance server

- 2nd/3rd machine

- Toy (I personally like this one)

I had a programmer buddy (primarly win/linux pc guy) who was thrilled to to see the mac mini b/c it lets him play with OSX, and replace his budget linux box (running personal web/email servers or whatever) with something thats tiny, quiet, and not made of janky crappy hw.

 

[silent tone]

Originally posted by: Cheesehead
Most of the hardcore programmers I know who are not using Linux use OSX due to all the ported assemblers from Unix. (OSX is really just a fancy GUI for Unix in many respects. You can even access a "terminal" function".) For 500$, you're getting a Mac, which entails the advantages of nill spyware/adware, almost no viruses, and of course, the remarkably quick turnarounds that AppleCare is so well known for. Also, consider the fact tha macs go out of date much slower than PC's due to better OS coding, and this is a pretty darn good deal.

The vast majority of programmers don't write anything in assembler. After developing on .Net, I don't even like using the c++ STL.

Macs go out of date slower, because apple only updates their product line once or twice a year. Better OS coding doesn't mean a new $125 version every year. It also doesn't mean sluggish window resizing/moving after 4 major versions.

I can't see myself spending $500 for a lowend mac with a laptop harddrive.

 

[motoxpress]

Originally posted by: Bobartig
The mac mini just doesn't have hardware to be a decent HTPC. You'd have to add (off the top of my head), an Elgato usb tuner+ tv in/out, M-audio pre-amp, and probably some external storage. I'm a big mac fan, I've worked for Apple, but I just don't see it.

You would have to do the same for any computer you buy off the shelf. The potential is there and you get the great Apple tools to go with it. I still think it would make a great HT/Media PC.

mx

 

[vegetation]

Originally posted by: motoxpress

Originally posted by: Bobartig
The mac mini just doesn't have hardware to be a decent HTPC. You'd have to add (off the top of my head), an Elgato usb tuner+ tv in/out, M-audio pre-amp, and probably some external storage. I'm a big mac fan, I've worked for Apple, but I just don't see it.

You would have to do the same for any computer you buy off the shelf. The potential is there and you get the great Apple tools to go with it. I still think it would make a great HT/Media PC.

mx

So it can't have an internal tuner? Wont ever be in the run for HTPC then, as it totally defeats the purpose of having a sleek small box if you still have to have external (pricey) hardware connected to it. Until a tuner can be placed internally along with at least 2 drive bays, I'll stick with my Shuttle cube which can contain everything needed inside.

 

[bigpow]

Definitely not suitable for HTPC because:
1. not enough power to play WMV-HD smoothly,
2. No built-in TV Tuner w/ HW enc. ala Win MCE,
3. Where's the SPDIF/Toslink, DVI/HD/Component outputs again?

I believe that the term "HTPC" is being used too loosely on many occasions
I think proper terms should be used, i.e.: ghetto HTPC, HTPC wannabe, poorman's HTPC, HTPC with the noise of jet taking off, HTPC that goes to a 17" CRT monitor, etc.

For the same reason, I would never say that I have an HTPC (since my TV is a 3 years old 27" and my speaker set is a Logitech Z560)

Apple is way overpriced for such a low end (read: discontinued) specs - $200-$250 is a decent price for that kind of system.
& I don't care if you say it'd run some apps as fast as a PC - the rest of apps you'd still have run with Mac Virtual PC -> Lame!

BTW, Did you know that Mac virtual PC software is one of the best selling apps... wonder why?