Mac mini ‘could be Apple’s Trojan horse into the video entertainment world’

“Apple’s market share in computers is still small, but there are two reasons to believe its future is bright. The first is the iPod (along with the online iTunes store where users download songs for 99 cents), which showed that Apple can leverage its creativity and the hipness of its brand to enter and dominate new segments in the consumer electronics field. The other is that despite its own strategy, Apple is starting to benefit from enhanced PC compatibility, thanks to the Web. With all our computer brains increasingly being outsourced to the Internet, and with e-mail providing the easiest way to share documents, the days of trying to shuttle diskettes between incompatible machines is coming to an end,” The Los Angeles Times writes in an editorial.

“The iPod is a success that Apple can replicate on many fronts, which is why Jobs looked more than a little excited last week at the MacWorld show. The new mini-Mac he introduced, which retails at $499, could be Apple’s Trojan horse into the video entertainment world, which still doesn’t boast a dominant, all-encompassing hub that will link computers, TVs, digital recorders, stereos and — who knows? — sprinkler systems. And surely someone at Apple is thinking about an iPod that will gobble up your cellphone and personal organizer too,” The LA Times writes. “Getting all our machines to get along with each other, and seem cool while doing so. That is a job for Mr. Jobs.”

Full article here.

23 Comments

  1. mike wrote: “Booo to convergence”

    Please note that there is a difference between convergence and integration. You misuse the word for what you are trying to describe (integration).

    I am an advocate of convergence whereby disparate systems are able to work as one to multiply their individual potentials. The last piece of integrated technology I stood behind was a Swiss Army knife (which ironically has been used synonymously as something with a lot of crap built into it).

  2. edgeknight..

    that may be your opinion.. but convergence refers to the old TV/VCR combos. Taking two things that are very different and putting them together for the sake of convenience (think of the PSP). To do this, you have to make compromises due to differences in form factor.

    As a result, the repair costs go through the roof, and if one component breaks you have to chuck the whole thing (Imagine chucking an 500 dollar phone because the display cracked, as opposed to a 99 dollar phone that didn’t have full motion video and a camera and slick OS)

    The only people that want convergence are the producers.. duh.. that’s why we keep hearing about it. For consumers it totally sucks. Compromise, compromise, compromise.

    But for producers, imagine, if they only sold one good. Imagine if Sony just sold one good. And everyone who wanted a TV would buy this good.. everyone who wanted a VCR would buy this good.. if you want kareoke, you have to buy the good, because it’s the only way to get kareoke. So it’s basically a way to spike demand by offering consumers no choice. You can streamline production (one product), and drive costs way way down.

    That’s what convergence is.

    Convergence, as you describe it, is I guess you’re talking about iLife. THAT’S INTEGRATION!! The way the applications work/integrate together. Pffft.

    This is basic English.. hey Bono will back me up(SJ is the Dalai Lama of Integration or whatever)… Convergence implies things coming together, MERGING… Integration implies different systems getting along.

    This is basic English.

    As you said,.. with the swiss army knife, Convergence only works when the things being converged arent really that different.. just like how the PS2 has a game player and a movie player.. they’re just one DVD player with a software selector when you put the disc in. That’s not convergence. That’s two very similar technologies. That’s very little compromise (the function select screen is the compromise).

  3. NoMacForU

    Whether a Blue screen of death is hardware or software related does matter. What matter is you computer crashed. That’s why it is nice to have the same company produce the hardware and OS so that it works properly.

  4. I’m not talking about an MP3 player that can make an omelet. Even a modular device would suit me. Look at the peripherals available for the iPod. Why not have it be able to integrate a phone, with far more advanced contact management features, mayhaps even video-cell phone abilities down the road? Data is data, whether it’s music, contacts, video, etc… and I for one enjoy being able to consolidate where it is all stored and how it is managed. Also, an iPod and cell phone both utilize audio in/out. There are a lot of similarities between these two products and resources that they could both share to add more functionality (imagine having your mp3’s playing for whoever is holding while you’ve switched over to call waiting!!!) And if they are already selling vast quantities of the combination fo such disparate items as a cell phone and camera combo, I know there is a margket for convergence item that integrate well (which we all know apple can do masterfully)
    Brought to us by “data”… I really think MDN knows what we’re going to type before we do!!!

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.