“Apple’s new Mac mini certainly doesn’t break any new ground in technology; it’s basically just the same guts from a last-generation Mac portable, sans the screen, keyboard and cursor controller. From a technical point of view, the mini is pretty minimal. The basic configuration of a single 1.25-gigahertz G4 chip, 256 megabytes of system memory, a CD-R/W and DVD-ROM combo drive, and a 40-gigabyte hard drive would be considered ho-hum, if not slug-like, if one of the Windows-based box-makers had come up with the idea. In fact, one can easily find entry-level Windows-based PCs that offer faster processors, more memory, greater storage—plus a display, keyboard and mouse—for less money,” Peter Lewis writes for Fortune. “But wait: There are three exceptional and very important things about the Mac mini that render those gripes less significant: design, price, and software.”
“Sure, it’s a handy and relatively inexpensive way to add an extra Mac to a current Mac owner’s network, or to give the kids a Mac of their own so they’re not downloading bootleg software onto your machine. But I don’t think Apple really cares if current Mac owners flock to the mini; Apple would rather sell them iMacs and Power Macs and PowerBooks and iBooks,” Lewis writes. “The Mac mini is a Trojan horse. No, not the virus kind that turns your unprotected Windows PC into a porn- and spam-spewing zombie, but rather a sneaky way for Apple to get its secret weapon—creative software—in front of all those Windows users who are fed up with the other kind of Trojans—the worms, viruses and other scumware that feed on the Microsoft Windows operating system like vampires and leeches.”
“For an investment of less than $600, Windows users can see for themselves what all the Mac fanatics have been raving about all these years. No system crashes? No viruses? No network configuration nightmares? Being curious at $574 is a lot more attractive than being curious at $1,500, which for a long time was the opening ante for exploring the Mac mystique,” Lewis writes. “Windows users have probably read that the Mac operating system, OS X, is far more reliable and secure against online threats than Windows. What they may not know is that Apple’s iLife creativity programs—iTunes, iPhoto, Garageband, iMovie and iDVD, among them—are far more sophisticated and elegant than their counterparts in the Windows world.”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Another Mac mini article whose writer gets that it’s really all about the OS and the applications that come with the Mac mini rather than the hardware itself. But, have you seen a mini in person, yet? It’s really quite astoundingly small and, of course, beautifully designed. Good job, Apple!
Windows-only users, don’t be afraid. Sure, after trying Mac OS X and iLife and other included software, you will hate your Windows PC (if you don’t already). But, that’s okay, you and many others will have found a better way. Go for it!
magic word “efforts”, as in apple is on track to be rewarded for their efforts…yahoo!
yesssssssssss
Have you all noticed that these writers are all starting to fall in with the program? The public is actualy catching on. This is the start of the big climb. Let’s all enjoy the ride.
Have you all noticed that these writers are all starting to fall in with the program? The public is actualy catching on. This is the start of the big climb. Let’s all enjoy the ride.
I got an email stating that my mini will be even later than the already late ship date. Seems there’s an unexpected delay. Ordered it when there was a 2-3 week wait, but I’m now in my third week with another month to go. I starting to get impatient. Maybe they should just send me a Power Mac to compensate
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” /> !
It’s a Trojan PONY!
While I appreciate that this guy understands that the software is (and has always been) the best part of the Mac, I gotta call him on this:
” (the Mac mini) would be considered ho-hum, if not slug-like, if one of the Windows-based box-makers had come up with the idea. In fact, one can easily find entry-level Windows-based PCs that offer faster processors…”
When will these guys learn that you can’t compare x86 to PowerPC by *hz speed? They have two completely different architectures and comparing those numbers doesn’t tell an accurate story. What’s more, most PCs in that price range use a Celeron processor which is slower than a G3! The PowerPC chip was built to be efficient, while x86 chips are built to advertise big numbers.
How is it that the mhz (ghz) myth is being perpetuated even after Intel has come out and said it’s bogus?
I’ll say it again (and again credit someone on Slashdot for saying it first): Most comparisons to PCs don’t take in the whole picture. The Mac mini is inexpensive, small, full-featured, and quiet. Most comparisons to PCs only look at one or two of those factors.
He says “one can easily find entry-level Windows-based PCs that offer faster processors, more memory, greater storage … for less money”. Sure. But they’re enormous noisy towers.
You can find PCs that are just as small, but they cost an arm and a leg. No PCs compares favorably if you look at all four points.
“What’s more, most PCs in that price range use a Celeron processor which is slower than a G3! The PowerPC chip was built to be efficient, while x86 chips are built to advertise big numbers.”
Right….and the 603 is faster than an FX-53. For god sakes, you make all Mac fanatics look like idiots.