OSNews

This is my fileserver.

http://www.globalscaletechnologies.com/p-22-sheevaplug-dev-kit-us.a...

I have a 1TB USB drive on it.
I bought another 1TB drive that I periodically sync with it and then keep offline.

It's replaceable, just not user-replaceable. And it costs about the same as a new battery does anyway, so it's relatively moot.

Except you have no laptop until the battery is replaced.

Came here to say that, and also that I'm sure some vendor out there will offer a third-party solution that is user-installable. iFixit's teardown reveals that it is actually easier to replace the battery than the hard drive, with the latter officially user-replaceable according to Apple. Given that, I'd do it myself and save some downtime.

They replace it in-store, while you wait. Can you wait 15 minutes?

Begs the question though: If they do replace it in store while you wait, why are they trying to prevent us from just buying the darn batteries and replacing them ourselves? It doesn't make sense especially in a laptop. Plus, what about the people who like to have spare batteries available when they need them? Why all this battery replacement voids the warranty business if it's that easy to do for the Apple store? Are they just trying to force us to pay service and labor charges?

<p>The built-in battery lasts longer, which means less need for swapping batteries. The battery is also designed to last a lot longer. As for not allowing users to replace the battery, my guess is that Apple wants to replace the battery partially for environmental reasons. Users won't necessarily trade-in the battery so it can be recycled.

Begs the question though: If they do replace it in store while you wait, why are they trying to prevent us from just buying the darn batteries and replacing them ourselves? It doesn't make sense especially in a laptop. Plus, what about the people who like to have spare batteries available when they need them? Why all this battery replacement voids the warranty business if it's that easy to do for the Apple store? Are they just trying to force us to pay service and labor charges? "

The charge to replace a battery on a MacBook including labor and the battery itself is the same or less than it is to buy a battery from other companies.

If you need additional power, buy an external like this.

http://www.hypershop.com/HyperMac-External-MacBook-Battery-and-Car-...

Look, I can understand if people don't like the concept. If it bothers you that much, don't buy it. Simple. Windows 7 and Ubuntu are both fantastic alternatives.

I gave up last Monday (Using Champix) and the £6 per day that I'm saving will buy me a new toy in a couple of months too.

Holy smokes, that's a lot of money for smokes. It frightens me to think of what I'd have to do with out to take up smoking at that price. Quit. Quit Now.

How is the display on the 15" MacBook Pro not HD? Do you mean you want 1080p?

1080p is real HD, anything less is a scam. So yeah .. 1080p, of course.

HD generally means 1080 lines of resolution or 720. The 15" MBP is 900. I'd say that's decent.

I personally hate 16:9 on computers, as anyone who does real work on a laptop can attest to. Sure it's neat for watching movies, but for stuff like virtualization, Word, Excel, that kind of thing it's quite frustrating.

I believe nVidia is having issues with those newer parts failing prematurely... basically nVidia screwed up their engineering big-time, used parts that have far higher tendancy to break under the heat stresses they're subjected to, and have been scrambling to fix it before all OEMs give up on them. Apple's moving to ATI now.

No they are not.

I don't know that I'd call an ATI 4670 or 4850 "high-end". Decent, yes, but ATI makes better cards (even before the 5000 series came out).

The Mac Mini looks like it might make a nice MythTV frontend, though.

4850 is not bad at all. "Before the 5000 series" they had two chips that were faster (not counting crossfire and crossfire on one PCB0). It was certainly high end before Evergreen. It's still not bad now. It's an amazing jump over an nVidia 9400.

Disclaimer: I also compared the XPS vs the macbook a few years ago and chose the macbook.

What exactly is the value of iLife for most people? I haven't found a use for it yet. There may be many good reasons to buy a mac, but iLife isn't something I could sell as an advantage to most of my friends( Doesn't record music, edit movies, uses Google's picassa for pictures). One of which is trying to make a purchase decision in the next month.

Some people the apps, others don't.
Example - Me:
I personally don't use iPhoto because it is too basic and I shoot RAW; I use Aperture instead. I use iMovie rarely because I don't have a proper video camera and rarely take videos. I use iWeb sometimes because it's a nice tool for making simple but good looking web sites quickly, and it has no direct windows equivalent. I don't use iDVD at all.

However, I'm into music and I use GarageBand a lot. It isn't a "professional" application but it does a hell of a lot and has many interesting good quality synth sounds. I use it to record me playing my instruments, I use it as a guitar amp with tons of virtual stompboxen at my disposal, and tons of other stuff. It really is a great app, and it's a shame that most people ignore it.


What does your friend want to do with his computer?

She wants a computer to run traditional office productivity software, play music, movies & hulu, email, calendaring, basic stuff without too much hassle. I think price alone is going to push her to a non Mac.

I use all of them but iWeb. subjective, yes, but I'm not the only one.

While I'm sure that some people do, it would be interesting to determine the percentage of mac owners that actually use them.

If you bought it directly from Apple, they'll work with you to make things right.

Sho' nuff. They made it right. I had the choice between a discounted price on my purchased Mini, or upgrading to the brand new Mini. (I chose the former.)

It's not just nice for an entry into the world of Mac, it's nice for someone who doesn't need or want a large display. A mini plus a small display is cheaper than an iMac, even more so if one already has a monitor to connect to it. Me, I'm thinking that Mac Mini server looks very nice and might get one of those. For just a server a Linux machine would be cheaper, but I'm thinking a combination desktop/media center/file server, and it would be ideal for that. This should also put an end to the rumors that were going around about Apple phasing out the Mini and I'm glad, I really like the design and form factor of the mini.

As best I understand it, it's still a mouse in the end even though it has limited multitouch abilities. I'm disappointed too, as I was hoping it would be fully multitouch and support the gesture-based control that Voiceover offers in Snow Leopard. I have a Macbook 4,1 and so don't have a multitouch trackpad, and was hoping this new mouse could fill that place but unfortunately it won't. Very disappointing especially since I've come to love the touch interface of my iPod Touch.

My girlfriend is also vision impaired and is using the zoom in mac os x extensively. She "inherited" my logitech mx1000 mouse, on which i have mapped (using the logitech control panel software) the three thumb buttons to zoom in and out, and the last button toggles the color inversion. (Then the buttons on either side of the scroll wheel is used for back/forward)

She is very happy with this setup. The only annoying aspects for her, regarding mac os x and accessibility is that expose is useless while zoomed in (you can't pan while expose is active) and plugins, especially flash, has a tendency to flicker while panning the screen, which is really annoying as the screen pans every time she moves the mouse. (for some reason this is not a problem with firefox 2, but for all other browsers, including recent versions of firefox, we have tried, it flickers)

Please let me know of any decently priced 1Tb 2.5in HDD's out there?
The Mac Mini uses them you know.
AFAIK, 500Gb is as big as you can get at the moment without paying huge $$$, £££ etc

If the mini used 3.5in disk then I'd say you have a case especially as the iMac comes with a 1Tb drive.

You can get a 320GB 2,5" SATA disk for $65, which is only about $10 more than a 160GB one. A 500GB disk is $108, 750GB is $195 and a 1TB disk you can get for $280. These are the prices in Sweden, where tech stuff is usually quite a lot more expensive than in the US.

Apparently, the sole cost of a computer is the hard drive. You should let the industry know ;-)

There are also heat concerns, given how close together the components have must be in order to make the Mini, well, "mini." I'd be fairly nervous about putting a hot desktop 3.5" drive in one of those.

It is typical of Apple to put style over function. Why would you use a notebook HD in desktop machine when 3.5" HDs are much cheaper and much faster? A 320GB 2.5"HD would only cost a couple of bucks more for an OEM.

Have you, by any chance, had an actual look at the size of the Mini instead of just shooting off complaints about a product with which you clearly don't actually have any experience? Take that size, take the heat that a desktop hd generates (hint, 3.5 drives get quite a bit hotter than their 2.5 counterparts), and the reason for the 2.5 drive in the mini becomes more than obvious. In an enclosure that small, you need to be very careful when it comes to the temperature of the components as it can easily get out of hand. A little logic never hurts.

I think that one of the complaints here is that Apple tends to put style -- more particularly, the appearance of the hardware -- over practical considerations. They could have simply placed vents on the top of the Mini -- like many component manufacturers typically do (eg. hi-fi equipment, etc) -- but instead they opted to keep it completely enclosed in an aluminum case. So, I don't think that performance was prioritized sufficiently above appearance. But that's just my opinion.

It's likely that their desire to have complementary accessories was a large part of their plan, as there are stackable devices in a similar form factor which work with the Mac mini, just as there were stackable hard drive enclosures for the early Macs.

Again, that has more to do with style than substance, and it's the wrong design trade-off in my opinion.

There are valid practical reasons to use a 2.5" rather than 3.5" drive in a machine that small. You don't even have to look outside Apple's product line for examples - by many accounts I've read, the recent rash of dead 1st gen Time Capsules (Apple's router + network backup device) is due to a combination of a hot-running desktop HDDs + cramped enclosures + insufficient cooling.

How much would it cost to engineer a new convective path for all the extra heat to keep the current case and components from melting?

I suspect it would be more than a couple of bucks.

First, I have a feeling that Apple's profit on this device greatly exceeds the cost of an additional heat sink. Second, the perf boost of using a standard desktop HD would be well worth the extra cost versus the laptop drive. Third, Apple has a history of intentionally stunting their "low-end" hardware to make it unattractive and/or differentiate it from the "mid-level" stuff. Note: I don't blame them for trying to differentiate the hardware. I just wouldn't have made that kind of design tradeoff.

The price difference between a 320GB notebook HD and a 160GB version is $10. For an OEM the price would be less than $5. A 320GB HD isn't going to run any hotter.

Apple is either penny pinching, deliberately crippling the machine or both.

They have always done that.
Remember how long they put combo-drives in their machines? Well past their sell-by date.

I think it is now the first time in history that the entry level mac mini comes with enough ram (2GB) and a reasonable amount of storage that you don't have to upgrade immediately

Sure. I'm running a just-discontinued MacBook and with 2 GB, it's actually quite usable, compared to my late 2004 PowerBook with 512 MB that needed an upgrade to 768 MB right away.

No, its not a joke. You are getting something unique with the Mini: the ability to carry your computer around in your jacket pocket.

You may not need or want that, I don't, and I only know one person who seriously wants or needs to do that. But the Mini is about the only way to get it, and so it costs in terms of price and what hardware you get for it.

The only thing wrong with the Mini is that Apple markets it as an entry level general purpose machine, for which it is of course ludicrously overpriced and underfeatured. But if you are its target, jacket pocket, maybe portfolio or handbag, market, its superb, great value and has no real competition.

A small market, but a most grateful one.

That may have been unique to the Mini at one point, but not so much these days. Offhand I've seen lots of "nettops" in computer stores over the past year, there's cappuccinopc, and I remember reading an article years back that described building SFF PC using a RedHat retail box as the case.

There are machines even smaller than the Mini if you don't mind ARM or PPC. E.g., the LimePC's "X1" device - or the ARM-based Shiva Plug (a computer with the dimensions of a medium-sized power brick).

Edited 2009-10-22 00:34 UTC

Perhaps, but most nettops aren't even in the same league as the Mini when it comes to performance. Atom vs Core 2 Duo, you know. Now, whether you need to carry around a desktop with a reasonably powerful processor in your pocket is another matter, but hey some people might need to. Nettops and Mac Minis have a very similar form factor but are in completely different leagues in terms of performance. I don't see many Core 2 Duo nettops being sold at retail, although using a MiniITX board and case you can certainly build one yourself if you wish.

Of course, which is also why nettops are typically much less expensive. Your previous post only mentioned the form factor, so I didn't bother looking for machines which also had similar specs - that said, they DO exist.

E.g., there's the ASUS Nova, which appears to be fairly similar hardware-wise to the high-end Mini. Or there's the EVEREX gPC mini, roughly the same size and specs. Or AOpen's miniPC, which has a Core2Duo model as well. (etc)

And of course there's Stealth, they make a whole range of machines that are comparable to the Mini.



I can see the benefit in that, having several times transported full-size desktops using a backpack and bungee cables (drew some odd looks).

Don't get me wrong, I think the Mini is nice little machine, I've purchased 4 or 5 of the G4 models for simple digital signage installations. But unless you have a specific need for OS X, it's not the only option.

Yup there are smaller PC such the ARM etc

But they are not going to run your MAINSTREAM software and that greatly devalues it

The Mac Mins runs Linux, Windows and OS X. Seems like a lot of ppl forget abt this point

ASUS Nova P22. Or the EVEREX gPC mini. Or AOpen's miniPC. And a number of different models that Stealth offers. All use Core2Duo CPU and are no less capable of running mainstream software than a Mini.



With the examples I mentioned above, the only thing that a Mac Mini can do that they can't is run OS X... at least not without going the hackintosh/OSX86 route.

Computers which fit in one's jacket pocket were NEVER unique to the Mac Mini.

Apple did not invent miniaturization.

The Mac Mini first appeared in January 2005. The significantly smaller Nano-ITX form factor appeared two years earlier, in 2003.

The Mini-ITX form factor appeared four years earlier than the Mac Mini, and it is only a few millimeters bigger, on both dimensions.

Here's the Wikipedia page on computer form factors: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_form_factor Note that nine of these motherboard form factors fit well within the Mac Mini case.

Of course there have been scores of tiny computers with proprietary form factors over the last two decades that are much smaller than the Mac Mini.

Here is an article on "weeny PCs" from March, 2004: http://www.mini-itx.com/news/77544885/

Here is a computer which supports Intel Core 2 Duo and which is smaller than the Mac Mini (by .8mm on one dimension): http://global.aopen.com/products_detail.aspx?auno=2380

Whenever Apple releases new products, the RDF expands out of control, and a history-lesson/reality-check is usually necessary.



Do you mean this case mod from December, 2003?: http://www.mini-itx.com/projects/windowsxpbox/default.asp?page=4

Note that he used a tilt-switch so that the computer could automatically detect whether to boot Windows or Red Hat -- four years before Apple used tilt detectors.

Edited 2009-10-22 05:56 UTC

Do you mean this case mod from December, 2003?: http://www.mini-itx.com/projects/windowsxpbox/default.asp?page=4

Note that he used a tilt-switch so that the computer could automatically detect whether to boot Windows or Red Hat -- four years before Apple used tilt detectors. [/q]

That's the one, thanks! I'd lost the link long ago - and I'd forgotten about the tilt sensor being used to control the boot loader, that's pretty slick.

Yes, you can sort of do it with other systems that are sort of the same size. The Lex Lite, for instance, I got one of those for someone a few years ago. But really, its not comparable, there's no place else to get that performance in that form factor. Even if it does get a bit hot!

Critics of the Mini are absolutely right about one thing, it is ludicrous in terms of price performance if you are thinking of it as an entry level computer. For a third of the price you get far more performant hardware. The thing has been, from a configuration and performance point of view, crippled in order to get it into a DVD drive sized case. I concur with the poster who cannot understand why it has no vents, also. This is Apple's famous persistent desire to have the machines overheat rather than put in a few vents and make the machine look a bit less smooth. Though, what is so terrible about vents escapes me.

But if you think that for some reason which escapes the rest of us, they have deliberately targeted the coat pocket market, well, for this tiny and obscure segment, its a great product.

Of course, if you are prepared to go up a bit in size, you get a far better machine for far less money. What is wrong about the Mini is that its being sold to the uninformed as a reasonable entry level machine. It is not, either in price, or in performance.

But the one person I know who really does carry it around in a coat pocket is simply delighted. Money was really no object in that case. It runs Linux just fine.

It looks like the smaller, AOpen XC outdid the Mac Mini in specs until March of this year, when the Mac Mini got DDR3 memory.

However, the XC has expandable mini PCI slots, and, apparently, Blue-ray.

ASUS Nova P22. Or the EVEREX gPC mini. Or AOpen's miniPC. And a number of different models that Stealth offers.



I don't really have an issue with the cost, you pay a premium for the form factor - it's no different from a laptop. For that matter, my understanding is that the Mini's guts are essentially laptop components.



Perhaps they get kick-backs from the data recovery industry for sending so many dead drives their way



Possibly, but it's no worse-suited for that segment than most laptops.

.

Edited 2009-10-22 02:12 UTC

News at 11, Appe hardware is overpriced.

And here we go, cue the guy with the "I can build a cheaper PC" comments.

Yeah. We know. Apple's expensive. Welcome to 1997. And 1GB HD's are now standard issue? Wow, you got screwed. I had a 1GB drive back in the 90's.

1TB on the other hand is relatively recent, yes.



Er, because a 3.5" drive doesn't fit? Is this a trick question? Have you seen a Mini?

Edited 2009-10-22 02:49 UTC

The fact is that Apple are deliberately buying up outdated hardware for a pittance to save costs. The OEMs would sell outdated crap like 160GB HDs below cost just to clear their inventory.

I said a 320GB notebook HD would cost a couple of bucks more.

Apple is obviously approaching OEMs offering to buy their worthless old shit for 10 cents in the dollar.

Don't you see? Apple's not selling.. Apple's buying!

Well the mini uses notebook components so that relatives your statement!

I'd bet it is a wee bit noisier, and generates more heat than, and takes up more space than, the Mac Mini.

I've read through your various arguments about why you think these offerings are overpriced. It is OK that I don't agree on most of your points -- it's a free country. That also means no one is forcing you to buy a Mac Mini.

Because the macbook is a consumer-grade product.

Good point: If Apple is determined to phase out firewire as they seem to be, isn't it about time they made target disk mode work over USB?

target disk mode will never work over simple usb because usb is dumb. apple would have to develop some kind of hack.

Sorry, I call bullshit. Simple USB is dumb, but it would be no more difficult than including USB networking support in their EFI, and then using ahost-to-host USB cable. Or, even better, reverse the USB interface in target disk mode so it behaves as a slave rather than a host, a msc-complient device just like a disk. Hacks would not be needed at all, EFI is more than capable of this if Apple develops a module for it. We're not talking ancient, legacy PC BIOS here.

I was thinking something similar when I bought the previous version in the refurbished section for US$749. The brighter, LED-backlit display would be nice and the more rugged case would be nice, but FireWire, etc. fit my needs better.

I'm glad I bought a white MacBook for my girlfriend a couple of months ago. It has FW400, which is just too great to not have it.
Target Disk Mode has saved me a couple of times already. It also makes for really simple file sharing between two Macs.

But there are a lot of people, that can live without it. Most PC laptops don't have Firewire. Or if they have it, it's only the unpowered variant.

Well, at least Firewire is back on the aluminum MacBooks.

Windows 7 doesn't like really old hardware.
On my 2002 laptop vga and sound isn't supported anymore.
with xubuntu everything just works.

That's why Apple offers a FW800 raid system with four HDs to go along with the mini.