http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/08/03/21/eating_our_words_apples_mac_mini_to_rock_on.html

This would be most welcome if it pans out (and yes, I bet its mostly b/c Intel is EOL'ing the parts or Apple would just stick put...)

I've never understood why AppleInsider is so hellbent on the utter destruction of the mini. It's a great seller and the least expensive entry point for folks looking to make the switch.

The revival of the Mini is of course great news, but some of us are still hoping for the mythical Maxi -- simply adding Firewire 800 & dual link DVI would do the trick for me.

But it amazes me how the Mini remains utterly unchallenged by any other computer maker to this day. I just saw this Sony HTPC (http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665296592) reviewed and thought, wow, finally a Mini challenger, until I saw that it costs $3000(!!). There is a HUGE opening for Apple to market a high end Mini (call it Maxi) and still end up at least $1000 cheaper than the Sony.

The revival of the Mini is of course great news, but some of us are still hoping for the mythical Maxi -- simply adding Firewire 800 & dual link DVI would do the trick for me.

But it amazes me how the Mini remains utterly unchallenged by any other computer maker to this day. I just saw this Sony HTPC (http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10551&storeId=10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921665296592) reviewed and thought, wow, finally a Mini challenger, until I saw that it costs $3000(!!). There is a HUGE opening for Apple to market a high end Mini (call it Maxi) and still end up at least $1000 cheaper than the Sony.

Trust me, I'd love to see the Maxi even more.. I don't think its just AppleInsider that wants to kill the Mini.. Apple has done little more than keep it on life support.. and even this _may_ just be a move forced by the existing chips being deprecated for the newer ones (ie. Apple may not be doing this willingly, but only b/c they can't buy chips any older or slower :) )

But will be glad to see a new Mini.. do we have any good idea what the new graphics chipset can handle?

Well, according to AI, Apple has assigned some engineers to work on the Mini, so it the upgrade *might* be a bit more than a slightly less old MacBook motherboard.

It's a great seller

I have to disagree with that. Where are you getting your information?

If it's such a great seller, why wasn't there even one mini on display a few weeks ago at the Apple store in the Washington Square mall near where I work?

Plenty of Macbooks and Macbook Pros. The MacBook Air was on display, as was the Mac Pro. Plenty of iPods, iPhones, iTouches. An ATV was on display.

Either the mini is so wildly popular that they sold their display model (hard to believe for a product that's been available unchanged for this long), or they're just not that popular and so Apple doesn't even care if it displays them.

An alternative theory is that Apple is getting ready to annouce new models. But why pull the old model weeks ahead of the announcement? If it really is so popular Apple would want to keep selling it even while the replacement model is on its way.

If it's such a great seller, why wasn't there even one mini on display a few weeks ago at the Apple store in the Washington Square mall near where I work?


You weren't looking in the right place. EVERY Apple Store has a mini on display. I believe it's right next to the Mac Pros.

First... Why do people think AI has **any** care as to what happens to the mini... As I remember it, they simply reported what they were told by a source... If someone is so emotionally attached to the mini I could see getting mad at Apple (or the source who provided seemingly inaccurate information) but the person who reports the news shouldn't really enter into the equation and even the source could have been right (at the time they tipped off AI) but as with all things at Apple -- plans can change at any time for many reasons -- I think I even remember reading something (interview maybe?) where it was said that each and every month meetings are held about all of the major product lines and their current state of health and no product is immune from the chopping block or being scaled back attention wise if "the powers that be" don't like what they are seeing.

As for me I think the mini is an 'okay' product (I even purchased one a few years back) but if Apple were to come out with a price friendly 'xMac' with an upgradable video card and a 3.5" standard HD and a hand-full of USB ports and dare to dream an extra SATA port or two -- I'd sacrifice the mini in a heartbeat! :lol:

Dave

As for me I think the mini is an 'okay' product (I even purchased one a few years back) but if Apple were to come out with a price friendly 'xMac' with an upgradable video card and a 3.5" standard HD and a hand-full of USB ports and dare to dream an extra SATA port or two -- I'd sacrifice the mini in a heartbeat! :lol:

Dave

I agree. And since it would be between the iMac and the Mac Pro, I'd call it ... the Mac! But basically a mid-tower or micro-tower sized Mac Pro using iMac-level components. I'd buy one in a heartbeat!

If it's such a great seller, why wasn't there even one mini on display a few weeks ago at the Apple store in the Washington Square mall near where I work?

I have no knowledge about how well the Mac Mini sells. However I keep encountering the logic of "Mini not being promoted by Apple, therefore Mini not selling" and that is completely wrong.

Going back to release of the original $499 G4 Mini, Apple never gave the Mini prominent placement or any promotion in Apple Stores. At the time a shortage of the current iPods had recently ended, the Apple Store (Soho) had stacks of iPod boxes behind the cash registers, and they were flying out the door. I fully expected to find a stack of the not much larger and very attractive MacMini boxes next to the iPods. The price was almost the same as an iPod (heck the iPod Photo had been $599 - $100 more than the Mini), the Mini was priced for an impulse buy.

But the Mini boxes never materialized -- unless you asked for one there was no real indication they had gotten them in stock. Long story short, Apple NEVER seriously promoted the Mini -- no doubt out of fear of cannibalizing the iMac, MacBook etc. market.

Now, all things considered, I suspect the Mini sold well -- a lot of my flesh and blood colleagues and friends have one -- none of them are home theater aficionados. If Apple doesn't promote the Mini, it isn't because it isn't selling it is because they'd rather be selling something else.

Long story short, Apple NEVER seriously promoted the Mini -- no doubt out of fear of cannibalizing the iMac, MacBook etc. market.Ted, I agree with most everything you said, except this. When Apple first released the Mini, it promo'd the heck out of it. The Mini first came out as the "Switcher" box. BYKMM--Bring your own keyboard, monitor and mouse. It was a way to get the attention of the PC user: it was easy to switch, and you could use all your peripherals, and just needed to swap in the new desktop box (and a cute minimalist, unobtrusive one at that).

Of course, over the last few years, Apple has not needed to exploit the "halo" effect in such a subversive way, intending instead to sell mainstream MacBooks, MBPs, iMacs and MPs directly to the broader market in a cohesive fashion, taking Vista/XP head-on.

My current take on the Mini is twofold. As you mentioned with your friends who have one, people in the know will place a Mini where it can be best utilized inexpensively. The Mini is a gift from Apple to its faithful flock to be used wherever, however. At $479 for a 1.83Ghz C2D refurb, one can build up a great system for many uses on the cheap. I have two sitting in boxes in front of me right now waiting to get built into an OS X Server, and one for a Media100 workstation. A Mini also works great in the embedded space--running kiosks, for instance. The Mini also is very profitable, as it gobbles up last year's reduced-price components (though the move to 45nm Penryn cpu's will be pricey in the short term).

The second purpose is as a placeholder. Apple may intend a greater purpose for the Mini some day, as in a game machine, or dvr/Blu-ray TV adjunct for those who want more than the appleTV will ever offer. Bundled with the just-around-the-corner Apple Cinema TV series 42" LCD. Put your favorite pet project here. Why introduce a new form factor, to great fanfare (and inevitable criticism for what it does not contain), when there is a perfectly good one--the Mini--already in existence? If anything, the longevity of the Mini precludes the introduction of the xMac, or Maxi. Apple just likes to keep its product lines clean and simple.

I suspect Ted is right when he says that while the Mini isn't prominently displayed or promoted by Apple, that it is a decent seller. Apple just isn't known to keep a poor selling product, or a product without a future, around for very long. Jobsian marketing at its best.

Wildrock, I remember well that initial campaign -- but the failure to promote it as an impulse buy in Apple stores always had me convinced that they weren't too serious about it. Maybe they figured that anyone coming into an Apple store wasn't the target audience for the Mini -- they could be upsold.

It's a great seller and the least expensive entry point for folks looking to make the switch.

when I read this the other day I wondered how you knew it was a "great seller," but didn't want to seem too contrary right off the bat.

Well, according to AI, Apple has assigned some engineers to work on the Mini, so it the upgrade *might* be a bit more than a slightly less old MacBook motherboard.

well, the engineers would be needed merely to make sure "n" wireless worked...a continuing embarrassment, I'm afraid.

If Apple doesn't promote the Mini, it isn't because it isn't selling it is because they'd rather be selling something else.

If you subscribe to the theory that the mini exists mainly to upsell to the Macbook and iMac, making those models look good, as I do, then I think it wouldn't bee too much of a reach to say 1) the mini may not be selling well and 2) Apple doesn't care about promoting it because it's helping them to sell other Mac models extremely well.

I suspect Ted is right when he says that while the Mini isn't prominently displayed or promoted by Apple, that it is a decent seller. Apple just isn't known to keep a poor selling product, or a product without a future, around for very long.

Except, I can't really think of another Jobsian example where it seems a product has been kept around ostensibly to keep using up a rotating backlog of old or about to be discontinued parts, as the mini has. Seems reasonable to assume Apple is agreeing to buy massive amounts of these parts (massive for them) up front, and with the Intel roadmaps being laid right out there, what a great way to build in a little protection against market forces and shifts by keeping the stepchild around to dispose of table scraps. The dilemma for Apple, and I use that term loosely, is like you say very well wildrock: that even the under-spec and under-performing mini models still are quite nice little computers for most tasks at home, and for typical users. Even older Intel minis are able to handle what we throw at them reasonably well. There's really no incentive for Apple to keep upgrading the mini so it matches the Macbook, to further "muddle" the line with a new product, or to introduce a Maxi-mini--they have been a hugely profitable company selling tons o' iMacs and Macbooks keeping the Mini line just as it is--relatively unattended, just slightly under-performing, just slightly home-theater disappointing, and just slightly over-priced.

We have no idea how decent or poor a seller it is, do we? Apple never breaks it down by model. And we never knew how poorly the aTv sold in its first incarnartion and price point, either--I suspect it sold VERY poorly. Just as I suspect round 2 of the aTV at their new price points and revised software is now selling fabulously.

You know, I'm not sure how well the mini sells, but I bet it sells way more to the "adder" profile these days than a "switcher" or first time Mac buyer profile. In my circle of friends and acquaintances, as long as we're sharing anecdotal evidence, the "switcher" Mac models for the past year or two are overwhelmingly Macbooks and iMacs. Not the forgotten stepchild.

You know, I'm not sure how well the mini sells, but I bet it sells way more to the "adder" profile these days than a "switcher" or first time Mac buyer profile. In my circle of friends and acquaintances, as long as we're sharing anecdotal evidence, the "switcher" Mac models for the past year or two are overwhelmingly Macbooks and iMacs. Not the forgotten stepchild.I'd have to agree with this description. Switchers that I know are buying MacBooks and iMacs, mostly. A few MBPs. But I don't regard the Mini as either under-powered or over-priced for some niche market applications, like I described above--once you get out of the "switcher and add-er" markets. It may be easy to overlook all the other uses the Mini is being put to, but it still is incredibly cost-effective in some applications.

Noticed this, listed on techbargains for $229 (they are now out of stock)

http://www.techbargains.com/news_displayItem.cfm/116195

but that got me wondering.. so I poked around the company web pages and found:

http://us.shuttle.com/G2_3100.aspx#

that is along the ideas of the maxi I'd like to see... most importantly (to me), using 3.5" HDDs (for pricing) and 2 PCI slots for expansion (add your own graphics card, or maybe we'd finally be able to use some of the PCI HDTV cards).. the important idea being expandability

roughly 12"x8"x8"

the $229 version would have gotten me very tempted (if it had a built-in optical drive) to start investigating how to interface a linux system (with VLC) to my Mac upstairs (instead of using the Mini I am using now)...

I guess the flip-side of wish for an Xmac would be to wish that Apple would officially support running OS X on non-Apple hardware..

Anyway, this was just a random find on techbargains, and I found it interesting to see what else was out there.

Just give it a case like a tiny Mac Pro and I'm fully on board. :D

Noticed this, listed on techbargains for $229 (they are now out of stock)

http://www.techbargains.com/news_displayItem.cfm/116195

but that got me wondering.. so I poked around the company web pages and found:

http://us.shuttle.com/G2_3100.aspx#
.....
So if you price the "Shuttle" with a Core2Duo processor, it costs $1000+ (The out of stock $229 thing has a Celleron, not in any way comparable to a C2D equipped Mini.)

My point stands unchallenged -- unless we are talking about out of stock come-ons, nothing out there can touch the Mini in price/performance for a similar form factor. And who knows how loud something like the "Shuttle" is...

So if you price the "Shuttle" with a Core2Duo processor, it costs $1000+ (The out of stock $229 thing has a Celleron, not in any way comparable to a C2D equipped Mini.)

My point stands unchallenged -- unless we are talking about out of stock come-ons, nothing out there can touch the Mini in price/performance for a similar form factor. And who knows how loud something like the "Shuttle" is...

Not to pick nits too much, but I only got $968 as my price (no tax unless in CA) when I added the

- E4500 (Core 2 Duo) (2.2 Ghz)
- $10 for the DVDRW drive
- $59 for the wireless option

this would be roughly the same feature set as the $799 Mini ($853 if I have to pay tax) but with a 2.2GHz processor vs the 2GHz for the Mini (and I think we're talking desktop vs laptop in processor class, but I didn't have a strong enough interest to collect those details). Also has GMA3100 for graphics.

Idea being, I like accuracy if we're going to bash systems. And I'm not bashing the Mini, just dreaming about what could be.

But my point was not to say this was a better system. Better is always in the eye of the beholder. My goal was to point out that other interesting systems exist, and that a mini-tower with some expandability could be created in a reasonable price point.

I dare say if Apple were to produce a box with similar specs/form-factor for under $1k we'd be all over it and proclaiming what a great value it was :)

Better is always in the eye of the beholder. My goal was to point out that other interesting systems exist, and that a mini-tower with some expandability could be created in a reasonable price point.

That is not always true. The quality of Shuttles, both from what I have read on the Internet, in addition to my own experience, is that they are junk. The company (in my own experience) sees customer support as an option (on their part).

I agree with you that, by specs, the Shuttle looks like an interesting possibility, however, in the real world, it's strictly a gamble whether you get one that works or not.

Idea being, I like accuracy if we're going to bash systems.Then it's not fair to compare the new version of the Shuttle against the old version of the Mini. Let's see what Apple's up to with the rumored Mini update. Then you can put that up against the Shuttle.

From what I can tell, the only thing the Shuttle has going for it is the PCI and a custom vid chip. It still doesn't have FW800 or eSATA. Other than that, it looks to be the same platform the Mini should be built on. Given the Mini's pricing points, the top of the line model should run $799--$200 cheaper than the tricked out Shuttle. And it's a Mac. If you could shoe horn OS X onto the Shuttle, you'd have to add $129 to the cost.

LOL, I'd love to compare it to a refreshed Mini.. but its not Shuttle's fault if Apple continues to refuse to make any substantial updates to the Mini. :)

And even after the rumored udpate, unless there is a form-factor change, the shuttle will be expandable (pci cards for higher end graphics, dual monitor support, pci tuner cards, etc), the Mini will not. Given the rumors, one would expect them to be roughly equal on clock freq (tho again, not sure what performance differences exist in the desktop vs laptop chip at clock cycle to clock cycle comparison). So then one would simply need to decide if expandability is worth a price premium.

The GMA3100 is not a "custom" chip.. its the newer generation of the GMA950 from Intel that is already in the Mini.. If you want to bash the "custom" chip in the Shuttle, be sure to bash the "custom" (but older & slower) chip in the Mini. Lets at least be fair.

Now this will be a personal pref, but I'd prefer a 3'5" IDE drive vs. 2.5" sata... much cheaper to add faster and larger drives before being forced into external/add-on enclosures. I've be consistent on that point since the mini was first released. (with the PCI slots, you could always buy a $40 sata/esata card anyway)

Again, all I'm saying is that Apple could make a system in a similar form-factor for a similar cost. Not sure why pointing this out is getting everyone so defensive. We're all Apple fans here. I thought many of us agreed there is a gap in the product line.. I was simply pointing out an example of something I think would roughly fill that hole (or be a nice starting point towards that).

And yes, Apple's support is very good. I've had much better luck reporting bugs to them and quickly getting engineering support vs my experiences with the same process at others (Dell).

I simply wish we had more ability to control the HW contents of our Macs (short of taking out a new mortgage for a Mac Pro)

Mike

The GMA3100 is not a "custom" chip.. its the newer generation of the GMA950 from Intel that is already in the Mini.. If you want to bash the "custom" chip in the Shuttle, be sure to bash the "custom" (but older & slower) chip in the Mini. Lets at least be fair.I know the gma3100 isn't a custom chip. I was referring to the custom Radeon or Geforce they have listed. That is why having a PCI slot in the Mini would be grand.

Again, all I'm saying is that Apple could make a system in a similar form-factor for a similar cost. Not sure why pointing this out is getting everyone so defensive. We're all Apple fans here. I thought many of us agreed there is a gap in the product line.. I was simply pointing out an example of something I think would roughly fill that hole (or be a nice starting point towards that).Not getting defensive. We can look to the Shuttle for some comparisons, because it seems obvious that it and the Mini will share the same platform. And actually, Apple can probably build a similar platform at a cheaper cost (and greater profit) than Shuttle because of their economies of scale, and being able to leverage technology from other platforms onto the Mini, and only needing a minimal ROI to justify production.

I know the gma3100 isn't a custom chip. I was referring to the custom Radeon or Geforce they have listed. That is why having a PCI slot in the Mini would be grand.

Sorry, I misunderstood. Yes, I'd love to be able to select alternative/dual graphics options for the mini. It would be the HTPC dream as the one area it seems most folks worry about with regard to the Mini... the nice part being that Apple need not raise the machine cost to include better graphics for everyone, only that the machine architecture permit them to upgrade at their own cost.

Not getting defensive. We can look to the Shuttle for some comparisons, because it seems obvious that it and the Mini will share the same platform. And actually, Apple can probably build a similar platform at a cheaper cost (and greater profit) than Shuttle because of their economies of scale, and being able to leverage technology from other platforms onto the Mini, and only needing a minimal ROI to justify production.

Agreed the Bill of Materials for both companies would be roughly equivalent... and yes, Apple should have a nice advantage on the prices of those parts, tho some of that savings might be used for higher quality production or better support (tho better quality might result in less support being needed).

Its mostly a matter of someone convincing the great Steve that such a product merits production. I do imagine it would be a cannabalization(sp?) threat to the Mac Pro which can't help its chances of ever coming to be.

Regardless, any refresh to the Mini will be welcome. A re-design would be incredible (and unlikely).. tho I'm sure there is an equally adamant camp that find the compactness of the Mini as a plus that outweighs its lack of mini-tower features.

roughly 12"x8"x8"

so that's roughly 8 times the size of the Mac mini? (12 x 8 x 7 versus 2 x 6.5 x 6.5) Any idea how quiet this Goliath might be?

Small form factor and being whisper-quiet--two big selling points of the mini.

But my point was not to say this was a better system. Better is always in the eye of the beholder. My goal was to point out that other interesting systems exist, and that a mini-tower with some expandability could be created in a reasonable price point.

The X-mac, in other words.

Then it's not fair to compare the new version of the Shuttle against the old version of the Mini.

My gut reaction is this shouldn't be compared to any Mini version, refreshed or stale. The X-mac is a different animal--and numerous appealing options should be able to fit inside a space 8 times larger.

Again, all I'm saying is that Apple could make a system in a similar form-factor for a similar cost.

Sure, they could. But who would buy it? Seriously, who would buy it who isn't already buying other models in the line, dutifully "adding" newer Macs to their homes when they need newer, faster systems or features? That's the habit Apple wants its customers to embrace--it's very profitable. Do you think Apple is happy that I still have a dual 1.25 MDD/FW800 going strong, with no plans to upgrade? Is it much of a stretch to say that Apple learned it's lesson with those G4 PowerMacs--affordable, expandable--and will never make that same mistake again?

I do imagine it would be a cannibalization threat to the Mac Pro which can't help its chances of ever coming to be.


Ya' think? It would also impact sales of Macbook, MBPs and iMacs--how, we can argue about--but also, you have to wonder if adding the X-mac would weaken the clarity of the current line--and hinder sales merely by its presence?

Now, back in the real world, you could also boot that mini from a two or four 3.5" SATA disk RAID inside the leftover 587 cubic inches of space and still come out ahead volume-wise. The question is why? I know you prefer 3.5" drives, but there's nothing you need to be doing with an extender that a 2.5" 7200RPM SATA can't handle.

the nice part being that Apple need not raise the machine cost to include better graphics for everyone, only that the machine architecture permit them to upgrade at their own cost.

I don't think anyone's gonna challenge this point--an option of better graphics than the 950/3100 is something so valuable to us home theater-wise--but in the grand scheme of things--we're a miniscule segment. We have to be completely off Apple's radar. Don't you think Apple has already laid out its roadmap in the living room: buy an aTV and rent HD from iTS. That's why they're dragging their heels on Blu-ray, have held steadfast against any built-in PVR/DVR functionality in the Mac and why we'll likely never see a tuner plugged in via USB to the aTV, either.

Plus, if there was a "better graphics option for anyone" it would kind of crimp what they have going in most of their other models, which graphics-wise is more of the "no soup for you" and "you'll take what we give you and like it" approach.

They're still milking the "if you want to run OSX, this is what you'll run it on." It's been berry berry good for them.

Not sure why pointing this out is getting everyone so defensive.

Well, a re-tread of the X-Mac discussion, in weaker moments, might seem just a little bit tiresome, and we're forgetting our inherent charm and community spirit. We all know there's a hole in Apple's desktop line--a hole exacerbated by Apple's tendency to hold the mini behind even base Macbook standards. We also know Apple knows this--and chooses not to close the gap. Apple couldn't care less about access to a PCI slot at the lower end of the model line, hardly cares about firewire anymore, hasn't shown any interest in eSATA, and pretty clearly wants us buying whole new Macs when something momentous this way comes.

...That's why they're dragging their heels on Blu-ray,...
At this point I am convinced that we will see a release combining Blu-ray with new ACDs & video cards using Display Port, combined with Intel's Montevina a.k.a Centrino 2 chipset which provides Blu-ray decoding. The ACD/Display Port/Blu-ray combo is tied together.

Apple can't keep Blu-ray authoring/burning out of MacPro/MacBookPro -- they would alienate some of their best customers -- after gaining huge market share with Final Cut Studio, why would they want to give Avid & Adobe an opening (currently Adobe Premier can author Blu-ray). And if they released a Blu-ray drive incapable of playing commercial discs, customers would be furious. So they need an end to end solution, and HDMI is a joke for any pro user. Bottom line -- it's all coming in the second half of 2008. Firm prediction.
Do you think Apple is happy that I still have a dual 1.25 MDD/FW800 going strong, with no plans to upgrade? Is it much of a stretch to say that Apple learned it's lesson with those G4 PowerMacs--affordable, expandable--and will never make that same mistake again?
Then again my 1.25 MDD/FW800 is sitting under my desk gathering dust because my 1st gen Intel MacMini runs rings around it and it is too loud to run as a headless server.

Yes I know plenty of people using old machines (a pro photographer friend still uses a much older G4 tower -- not to mention an internet joint on Valencia in the SF Mission I saw over the weekend that had a dozen G3 iMacs, probably running OS 9), but so what? It is one of the things that makes Apple great. Ultimately along will come some piece of game changing software requiring Intel Core2Duo or better, and all the heel draggers will be forced to upgrade. Remember, Apple didn't sell enough G4 towers to make a difference -- they are selling orders of magnitude more machines now.

I don't think a MacMaxi will cannibalize MacPro sales. The people I know personally who have the MacPros run music/video production studios or are programmers who MUST HAVE THE MOST POWERFUL MAC IN EXISTENCE. Neither category is going to be satisfied with a Maxi. Many (most?) G3/G4 tower owners have upgraded to Mini/MacBook/iMac -- if they bought a Maxi instead they wouldn't be cannibalizing MacPro sales.

With iPhone 2.0 MS Exchange support & SDK there will be the first serious push of Apple branded hardware in "enterprise" in years. And when I look around my enterprise, every single person has a PC with dual monitors. What are the Apple options -- and iMac with a mismatched external display or a way overpowered/overpriced MacPro? The need a Maxi -- for gamers, for HTPC people, for dual monitor using desk jockeys. Any cannibalization will be minimal compared to the upside potential.

Now just because all this seems logical to me, doesn't mean that El Jobso, who said: "we are really proud of some of our unreleased products" will agree. Minimalism is Apple's road to success. But still...

Yes I know plenty of people using old machines...but so what? It is one of the things that makes Apple great. Ultimately along will come some piece of game changing software requiring Intel Core2Duo or better, and all the heel draggers will be forced to upgrade. Remember, Apple didn't sell enough G4 towers to make a difference -- they are selling orders of magnitude more machines now.

Exactly Ted, and those G4 Powermacs were the last somewhat powerful, affordable AND expandable Macs, you know, exactly the qualities most people are hoping for in an X-mac--something with a PCI slot, for instance.

The fact that they didn't sell enough of those towers to make a difference--and ARE selling orders of magnitude more machines now--just might mean we're not likely to see anything reasonably affordable and expandable again. My larger point isn't that the heeldraggers are still dragging their heels--it's that newbie and heeldragger alike are willingly buying lots of newer models, adding a G4 mini, adding an Intel mini or a C2D Macbook or better, instead of waiting.

Many (most?) G3/G4 tower owners have upgraded to Mini/MacBook/iMac -- if they bought a Maxi instead they wouldn't be cannibalizing MacPro sales.

Right, and what all of these machines have in common is being inherently limited--unlike those affordable G4 towers. Apple is very happy that every 2 years or so we're buying a new Mac just to keep up with the latest version and features of OS X. I totally agree the percentage of people buying Mac Pros (to all Mac sales) is small anyway--and few that end up buying a Mini/Macbook/iMac seriously considered a Mac Pro. So there's gotta be some other combination of factors at work here keeping an Xmac or Maxi concept out of the pipeline--it couldn't be that Apple's afraid an Xmac/Maxi owner would hold on to their machines for a very long time and not trade up every two years, could it? The inability to upgrade internal components, the planned obsolescence, if you will, has helped Apple become very profitable--just how willingly would you throw an affordable monkey-wrench into that mix?

So there's gotta be some other combination of factors at work here keeping an Xmac or Maxi concept out of the pipeline--it couldn't be that Apple's afraid an Xmac/Maxi owner would hold on to their machines for a very long time and not trade up every two years, could it? The inability to upgrade internal components, the planned obsolescence, if you will, has helped Apple become very profitable--just how willingly would you throw an affordable monkey-wrench into that mix?
Chef -- the crux of my argument is that with the help of a Maxi -- a low end aimed at business to take on the ubiquitous Dells head on and a high end aimed at the gamer/HTPC/serious photographer set, Apple can grow, grow, grow to the point where today's Maxi will be just as insignificant in numbers as yesterday's Powermac G4s. If growth is strong enough, there is no need for planned obsolescence. And so far as those high end Maxi's are concerned, they should come with a relatively high price tag -- so even if they last awhile Apple will have realized at least as much profit as from two Minis or Macbooks.

After all what keeps people away from the Mac Pros isn't just price -- it's size. And so far as growth is concerned sky is the limit. Apple could realistically go from 6% to 30% market share over the next few years. But in order to achieve that, it would need a Maxi -- indeed more than one new model. It should never aim to be all things to all people but it can be more things to more people without losing its soul.

I think you guys may be missing a key point. Apple has forever wanted to control, to as large an extent as possible, both the software AND hardware that makes up the end user experience. Obviously the Mac Pro is user-customizable (and therefore expensive), but I think profit and this desire to keep a "closed" system that keeps them from basically offering what would become an Apple case and OSX, and would be picked dry and reshaped at will (the Xmac).

SJ is very happy that they are the one company that offers (and controls) every aspect of the computer experience.

I think you guys may be missing a key point. Apple has forever wanted to control, to as large an extent as possible, both the software AND hardware that makes up the end user experience. Obviously the Mac Pro is user-customizable (and therefore expensive), but I think profit and this desire to keep a "closed" system that keeps them from basically offering what would become an Apple case and OSX, and would be picked dry and reshaped at will (the Xmac).

SJ is very happy that they are the one company that offers (and controls) every aspect of the computer experience.

I think that we have different visions of what a Xmac will look like -- Chef sees an equivalent of the PowerMacG4 -- a cheaper, but just as flexible version of the MacPro -- and I agree, Jobs will nix it. I am picturing an equivalent of the G4 cube -- a more powerful, real video card equipped, FW800 equipped, 1TB HD, but still whisper quiet, relatively compact and elegant. Another analogy would be a Mini == Macbook; Maxi == MacbookPro. There is no reason that this type of computer would go against the El Jobso philosophy.

The problem with the Cube was a poor performance/price ratio due to the puny G4 processor. A Maxi could have, at the high end, a dual or quad core Intel chip in the 2.8/3 GHz range -- in other words a high performance machine, in terms of processor/video/disk/ports, but still in the SJ mould of beyond a couple of BTO options, "we know what's best for you."

There is a legitimate argument for the closed system approach -- give 'em PCI slots and they will start having compatibility/stability issues. Not a problem with the Pros who will be yelling at DigiDesign or Avid -- not Apple -- if they have conflicts, but a definite AppleCare drain if the average user starts doing it. Bad for business -- lost goodwill and reputation, increased support costs.

Right, and what all of these machines have in common is being inherently limited--unlike those affordable G4 towers. Apple is very happy that every 2 years or so we're buying a new Mac just to keep up with the latest version and features of OS X.

the flip side to this argument is that I am keeping my G4 tower ONLY b/c Apple has yet to release an affordable replacement that has an flexibility. I don't think I'm all that less likely to be in the upgrade-cycle vs. the other styles of Mac.. if the Xmac were in the price range of the MacBook, then Apple isn't losing any $$ (from me), they are simply getting those dollars from what should be a cheap machine to produce.. all they have to change on the Mini is

- add a different case ($20 adder vs the Mini)
- use the MoBo version that has some PCI connectors (again, should be cheap adder over the cost of the Mini mobo.. newegg has a uATX for Core 2 DUO with 2 PCI slots for $90 retail)
- maybe a slightly beefier power supply ($10 more vs current supply)

(for the critics, I'm not saying the power supply is $10. I'm saying they are already paying for the power supply for the Mini and would need to invest $10 more than they already are to get the additional needed power)

They can recoup most of this cost by scrapping the 2.5" HD and use a 3.5" drive.. (ditto for the optical drive) and sell it for $1k vs. the $800 on the Mini. So it would be a more profitable machine.

I simply keep my G4 b/c

a) I can add cheap storage
b) I can use dual 1600x1200 LCDs

something which no other Mac (short of a Mac Pro) permits me (I could get dual 1650x1080s via the iMac, or 1900x1200, but real mac fans refuse to buy iMacs ;) :) )

So instead I have a G4 that is starting to drag, and a Mini that I've frankensteined (adding memory, 2 iterations of processor upgrades.. shame I don't work at Intel any more to get the internal discounts.. and most recently a HD upgrade)

The lack of an Xmac is a lost sale from my side. Heck I'll put the $1k in escrow if Apple is worried about customers not willing to commit :)

My G4 is huge... and I have to believe sucks enough power to be responsible for the global warming of at least a small country :) would love to upgrade, but have no clear path.

Edit: I've only ever owned 2 Apples with a built in screen
Apple II+
Mac+
IIsi
IIci
Centris 610
quadra 8500
PB 12"
G3/266?
G4/800?
G4/1.42 DP (still own)
Intel Mini (still own)

I think I missed 1 or 2 models in there.. but the idea being that if a machine was available to upgrade to.. I would, ~3 years. The G4 is still there only B/C Apple hasn't produced a headless upgrade path.

zim2dive -- if price is the only issue, you can BTO a MacPro for $2299. No, not a MacBook like price, but that ain't gonna happen. And think of all the money you've saved by not upgrading this long. The cheapest PM G4 was like what -- $1699? Considering what you are getting, this is not much of an increase.

zim2dive -- if price is the only issue, you can BTO a MacPro for $2299. No, not a MacBook like price, but that ain't gonna happen. And think of all the money you've saved by not upgrading this long. The cheapest PM G4 was like what -- $1699? Considering what you are getting, this is much of an increase.

The mini, PB, G3, and G4/800 were the only recent machines I bought new... but I figure me buying used enables others to buy new :) (I support their habit ;) ) and the PB12 was probably the one that cost the most... I got the dualie G4 for ~$700 (the beauty of craigslist)

That IIsi was ~3 grand (if I remember correctly.. it was the 1st time I had to ask for a credit line increase on my CC :) ).. but since then I've never considered paying 2k for a machine. Again, take the mini, make the rather minor (in the scheme of things) changes needed, and the cost adder is not very much. apple could stick with the laptop chipset if they wanted to cripple it a bit to keep it from hurting Mac Pro sales (tho I'm not sure if Intel sells mobo's using laptop chipset but including pci...)

And again, I want a smaller machine than a full tower.

Both the Shuttle machine I linked to further up, and the (very rought, but not unreasonable) cost analysis of the Mini would suggest that Apple _could_ do this in the neighborhood of 1 grand, and have a higher profit margin than on the Mini. But of course, I'm not holding my breath...

Oh, no, Ted, there were always affordable G4 towers < $1699, you could get a dual 1.25 MDD in 2003 for $1299 retail, there were always base models <$1699, and the key was you could expand at your pace as your budget increased or needs changed over time. These held their value used for a long time precisely because they were so special.

I am picturing an equivalent of the G4 cube -- a more powerful, real video card equipped, FW800 equipped, 1TB HD, but still whisper quiet, relatively compact and elegant. Another analogy would be a Mini == Macbook; Maxi == MacbookPro. There is no reason that this type of computer would go against the El Jobso philosophy.

Ted, I'm not sure we have different visions--there's no distinction between an Xmac and Maxi for me--the cube form factor analogy is exactly what "most" Xmac and Maxi-mini proponents have been hoping for--what zim2dive sees in a "shuttle" form factor--space for 1 or 2 desktop hard drives, real video card options, a single open PCI slot, something faster than just FW400 and USB2. At +/- $1500, that's precisely what goes against the "vision" and screws with the very profitable closed product matrix with built-in obsolescence. Higher end Macbooks and iMacs, very closed, are right there now on price; sure, MBPs have FW800 and ExpressCard but that club starts at $2K these days. I only mentioned those MDDs because they were the last affordable Macs with a PCI slot--I could care less about internal space for 6/7 drives. But if your vision starts at >$1500 base for the Maxi, like say $2K, well then there's no chance of this ever coming about--you can get Mac Pro refurbs for a couple hundred dollars under $2K now. Sure, no one wants to stick a Mac Pro in the home theater, but as we both know the home theater segment is tiny.

the flip side to this argument is that I am keeping my G4 tower ONLY b/c Apple has yet to release an affordable replacement that has an flexibility.

zim, understood, that's why I'm keeping two dual G4 MDD FW800s on my network, but my sense is you're in a very small market segment if you haven't ALSO picked up an Intel Mac or two already.

Apple has never offered a Mini remotely close to a base model iMac "just without the display." Hell, the Mini is such a stepchild that Apple rarely offers one close to a base Macbook "just without the display." Wouldn't you think that a much easier sell, a much more Jobsian message, would be for Apple to sell the Mini as a "Macbook" or "iMac" just without the display? If they haven't been able to do that--which would be an undeniably clear and very Apple approach--there's even less hope for a Maxi at MBP pricing.

Apple has never offered a Mini remotely close to a base model iMac "just without the display." Hell, the Mini is such a stepchild that Apple rarely offers one close to a base Macbook "just without the display." Wouldn't you think that a much easier sell, a much more Jobsian message, would be for Apple to sell the Mini as a "Macbook" or "iMac" just without the display? If they haven't been able to do that--which would be an undeniably clear and very Apple approach--there's even less hope for a Maxi at MBP pricing.

Agreed.. I'm not hopefully, but I haven't completely given up dreaming.

I've never looked in to PCI enough, but always wondered that they couldn't design some kind of expansion chassis... ie. sell a nice compact mini with an extra connector on the back that _could_ connect to a box holding 2 pci cards (and hey, while we're dreaming, toss 1-2 sata connectors on there too :) )

One wild-card in this will be the Displaylink vaporware (so far).. they've said end of March, but it seems like I've been seeing Mac support "coming soon" since last Fall... that will offer additional monitor support for the Mini, tho its performance will probably blow.... hopefully the GMA3100 will be a sufficient step up.. its not like we need gaming performance, since Apple has abandoned that market too... :( (the # of new games now vs years ago is miniscule.. but that doesn't mean I wouldn't enjoy seeing Call of Duty 4, or Halo 2/3? on my Mac at 1080p on my 42" display every once in a while...) edit: I got a 10' USB extension cable specifically for MAME games)

I can't really say if Apple would attract the "modder" market if they offer an X-mac.. ie. the many folks I know on the PC side that never have any fewer than 3 PC cases and mobo's lying around their house, mixing and matching... they are devoted fans and advocates to their platform. Apple could do worse than having some of them convert.. shrug.

Ah well, just a pipe dream.. I'm sure we'll simply get a new Mini as minimally-revised as Apple can get away with. (if I go out on a pessimist limb far enough, maybe I can get proven badly wrong :) which I would like)

If apple ever permits clones again, some of use will know what company to start :)

Oh, no, Ted, there were always affordable G4 towers < $1699, you could get a dual 1.25 MDD in 2003 for $1299 retail, there were always base models <$1699, and the key was you could expand at your pace as your budget increased or needs changed over time. These held their value used for a long time precisely because they were so special.
Chef, you are rewriting history a bit. The $1299 model was a complete aberration, which came about after the PowerMac G5 was introduced as an OS X only machine -- the dual 1.25 MDD was kept around as the last of the Classic capable (OS 9) machines in one cut price config.

I was correct about the $1699 -- that was the lowest possible price when the MDD was introduced, although some Jobs reign towers such as the original B&W G3, started $100 lower at $1599. See Apple History (http://www.apple-history.com/) for extensive model by model details.

So far as my idea for xMac/Maxi pricing, I see two models -- one aimed at business as a headless office computer -- having a 3.5" HD & and video capable of supporting 2 single link DVI monitors. Price: $800~$1200. (BTO models available to subtract features such as burners or any wireless capability that may be considered security risks).
Model 2, the high end gamer, HTPC, prosumer machine, capable of dual link DVI or Display Port equivalent, high end single CPU for the form factor, FW800 or better, Blu-ray, etc. Price: $1600 to $2000.

IMO Apple will have to produce something like this if they want to grow their market share into the 20-30% range. There is an excellent reason they haven't so far -- no interest in the business world and no game developer interest. However Apple is about to have a viable markets for these machines:

The iPhone is about to change the business world equation in a big way. Game developers are starting to come around based on the iPhone & growing Mac market share. Maybe some developers will finally figure out that Mac users pay for their software vs. PC users who, well, don't. As an example, my friend who develops the excellent Memory Miner (http://www.memoryminer.com/) tells me that he is selling far more copies of the Mac version than the PC version. Considering the disparity in PC/Mac market share, that's a very damning statistic for PC only developers to consider.

I was correct about the $1699 -- that was the lowest possible price when the MDD was introduced

True, at release. 10 months in, everything changed. From the very first MDD group:

G4/1.25 GHz dual 512/120/SuperDrive/Radeon 9000 Pro introduced 2002.08.13; reduced to $1,299 on 2003.06.23 as a 256/80/Combo model

From the second MDD FW800 group:

G4/1.0 GHz 256/60/Combo/GeForce4x introduced 2003.01.28 at $1,499; reduced to $1,149 on 2003.06.23

From the last June 2003 MDD group:

1.25 GHz 256/80/Combo introduced 2003.06.23 at $1,299, 1.25 GHz dual 256/80/Combo introduced 2003.06.23 at $1,599

These expandable & affordable high end Macs weren't aberrations; 10 months in these models stuck around a good long while and the fact that they shared the same number of PCI slots and drive bays meant that they remained tremendous values, that's why most of us did the fan and power supply mods to make them more quiet and why some of us have held on to them. There were so many articles comparing upgraded dual G4s to the G5s. The point is Apple hasn't offered anything close to this in terms of expandability and bang for the buck since--that's 5 years running. Wishful thinking that they are all of a sudden going to start to--again, market forces aren't demanding this--most of their customers have no interest getting inside and tinkering or care about upgrading anything--and Apple is incredibly profitable by actively discouraging any such option.

So far as my idea for xMac/Maxi pricing, I see two models -- one aimed at business as a headless office computer -- having a 3.5" HD & and video capable of supporting 2 single link DVI monitors. Price: $800~$1200. (BTO models available to subtract features such as burners or any wireless capability that may be considered security risks).
Model 2, the high end gamer, HTPC, prosumer machine, capable of dual link DVI or Display Port equivalent, high end single CPU for the form factor, FW800 or better, Blu-ray, etc. Price: $1600 to $2000.

I hope you're right about gaining new viable markets for those machines, as a way of breaking the inertia against such development, that's your strongest argument--and a relatively new one for the Xmac crowd. Because Apple hasn't even offered a mini competitively spec'd as an iMac or Macbook just without the display--let alone competitively priced--I suspect most of us will remain cynical a little longer.

Another article saying what I keep saying -- no Windows machine can touch the Mac Mini in the combination of price/performance/form factor/quiet function. See http://www.infrageeks.com/groups/infrageeks/weblog/fe0b4/

Another article saying what I keep saying -- no Windows machine can touch the Mac Mini in the combination of price/performance/form factor/quiet function. See http://www.infrageeks.com/groups/infrageeks/weblog/fe0b4/

You are making the flawed assumption that this is form factor we want "touched" :)

As they joke about statistics, torture #'s long enough and they'll tell you anything you want them to.

So the counter-point: Take the same configurator and switch to the Shuttle XPC form factor, and you can build a box that has expandabiity at better specs (2.13GHz Core 2 Duo) than the high-end Mini (2GHz) for ~$100 less (799 for the Mini vs 707 for a very similarly spec'd Shuttle)

Some of us would find that form factor more appealing. Others will not.

EDIT: nowhere am I trying to say Aopen is better (folks so like to mis-interpret here), just saying the article makes some favorable assumptions.

Apple could shrink the Mini until it was the size of a 9V battery.. As a geek, I would truly admire it, but that would not make it more appealing to me as an owner.

Ted, I'm not sure too many of us around here are trying to make the case that the Mini has fallen behind Windows PCs in its competitive niches, nor that the mini faces "imminent demise." That's the purview of rumor sites with nothing better to talk about, or those with little hands on experience.

We've been saying Apple is intentionally holding it back--and if it is a fact that its PC competition hasn't come close to its price/performance ratio--then that's also bad news for us, because that means there's even less incentive for Apple to either improve the mini a little more quickly or lower its price. What we've said, historically, is Apple allows the Mini to fall too far behind base model Macbooks, let alone iMacs. We don't mind that the mini exists to 1) upsell other Macs and 2) to use up old laptop parts in their supply chain--we just wish Apple would churn through those ancient parts more quickly.

"Alphageek" seems pretty knowledgeable, thanks for linking to his blog, and several points he makes I think are pretty astute. But, when he gushes that:

there's nothing that would bring any massive new benefits to the Mini without adding more cost for dubious benefit.

he's overlooking wireless "n" and probably has never tried streaming video over a "g" home network. Sure, the mini has gigabit, but not everyone can run wire. If Apple can include "n" on the aTV, a device which costs one-third of a Mini, surely it's neither dubious nor too expensive to do the same with the mini. Apple has been so remiss in this area, folks have resorted to hacking Mac Pro wireless "n" cards into their minis themselves. My "kit" cost $49, and I got it for my Rev. A Macbook, which shipped with a "g" card. That was a June 2006 model, and by Nov. 2006 Macbooks were "n" capable. Here it is, only 22 months after that first Macbook, and guess what? Apple's top of the line mini still ships with wireless "g."

It's harder to make a case that after 26 months on the market the mini shouldn't still have the same underpowered GMA 950 graphics, since the Macbook only got bumped up to the X3100 in October.

just saying the article makes some favorable assumptions.

No, the article respects an apples to apples comparison, and only assumes we're prepared to talk "like" form factors, well, at least to 4 times the volume. Hasn't the shuttle thing already been addressed: at 8x the volume, a different animal completely. (But as long as we are talking Shuttle--and living room niche--how loud are those things zim? Can they sit out next to the TV and not be heard from the couch?)

(But as long as we are talking Shuttle--and living room niche--how loud are those things zim? Can they sit out next to the TV and not be heard from the couch?)

Dunno, and not trying to be flip, I don't see it as relevant. Having spent much time inside my Mini doing processor and HD upgrades, there is not much to the "quiet" that is directly related to cost... and if you don't think the Mini can get loud, pop in a faster processor and push it hard for a while, trust me that fan will kick in, and can move some air and create some noise. For video use, that is unlikely to happen, for gaming (not that I do much), it will make itself heard.

But again, I'm not really talking about buying a Shuttle, only that such a machine can be produced at a favorable price point. As was rehashed before, given Apple's economies of scale on part pricing, they could likely produce it for less than many competitors, such that it could be very price competitive with the Mini, if they so choose to build such a machine. This last sentence is the only point I'm really trying to make.

We've been saying Apple is intentionally holding it back--and if it is a fact that its PC competition hasn't come close to its price/performance ratio--then that's also bad news for us, because that means there's even less incentive for Apple to either improve the mini a little more quickly or lower its price. What we've said, historically, is Apple allows the Mini to fall too far behind base model Macbooks, let alone iMacs. We don't mind that the mini exists to 1) upsell other Macs and 2) to use up old laptop parts in their supply chain--we just wish Apple would churn through those ancient parts more quickly.
Of course, I agree completely. Apple itself can do MUCH better -- which is why I keep asking for a xMac/Maxi, or at the very, very least an HT friendly MacPro and Apple Cinemas Display. Or at super minimum, a premium priced Mini which matches a top of the line MacBook.

That said, forgetting dubious small companies like the Shuttle makers -- there is a reason that a company with the resources of an HP or Dell hasn't produced a Mini competitor, and when Sony does it (mind you I haven't done a size comparison so it may still be Apple's to pineapples) they sell it for $3000. That reason is that all those companies have decided that it is impossible to make a profit selling a Mini matching computer (if they can build one) at Apple's prices. Maybe Apple can't make a profit either unless they use those old components. And Steve Jobs, post return, isn't interest in loss leaders (rightly so!).

As much as we may not likely -- there is also an argument to be made for the Mini to keep shrinking in size in the future (instead of getting more features):

1) Makes is very difficult for competitors to match, thus they don't even try.
2) Make the Mini more desirable for small spaces and or larger numbers -- think Mini server farms, where you could fit that many more servers in a small space, non-geek HT, someone's car glove compartment, etc.
3) Poor man's MacBook Air -- people will start noticing that it is lighter than a laptop and cary it back and forth between home and office.

Why do most people who buy a Mini, buy a Mini? I have no clue, but probably Apple does, and maybe they are hitting the sweet spot for them...

i mentioned in an earlier thread - I came across Apple selling minis to Resorts and Cruise ships for each room - can't be a huge market on it's own; but the point being, I'll bet they find a number of niche markets they couldn't play in without it; perhaps just enough to make it profitable, along with the switcher markets of course;

ken

That said, forgetting dubious small companies like the Shuttle makers -- there is a reason that a company with the resources of an HP or Dell hasn't produced a Mini competitor

Ah yes, smear the small company.. ok have it your way we'll look at a bigger company that you mention...

Dell XPS 210
- 2 PCI expansion slots
- internal room for 1 more drive than the Mini (and uses 3.5" drives for better economics, tradeoff vs. size)

Starting price $999.. remove the monitor (save $190) and well, they won't let you dumb it down to the Mini specs.. the smallest HD you can get is 320G, the slowest proc you can get is 2.13GHz, the smallest memory you can get is 2G, the worst graphics you can get is still one generation newer than the Mini, so for $10 more than the top Mini, you get a MUCH better spec machine.

In a HTPC system its "face" is 3.7" x 12.5", almost 4 times the front panel of the Mini, but within +/- 10% of the 1st 5 Blu-Ray players listed on the Best Buy web site (I figured if we were judging suitability as a HT component, what better as a comparison)

Again, simply proving a point that an acceptable HTPC size machine could be built, by Apple, at a Mini price point.

As for whether this "competes" with the Mini, that depends on whether the Mini meets your functional needs. If you judge the Mini as a HTPC, then yes, this competes with the Mini.. if you judge the Mini as the smallest good computer, regardless of whether it does what you need, then they are different niches. But since the title of this forum is HTPC Mac, it would seem that comparing them is very relevant.

Comparing machines by features and specs may be fun, however, that's almost like comparing women by their measurements. I bought a Shuttle before the Mini was invented and, even though the Mini is a fraction of the Shuttle size, which, btw, still has some "higher" specs than the Mini, the Mini works and the Shuttle doesn't. The Shuttle also has a fan that is always on and loud. It has technical problems that can only be solved if the company gives me a new motherboard. Shuttle's idea of customer service is that they don't send you a letter bomb.

Ah yes, smear the small company.. Shuttle's idea of customer service is that they don't send you a letter bomb.
This is why I'm calling Shuttle "dubious" -- not because of their size. Take Bruji (DVDPedia, et al.) -- they may be tiny, but they provide excellent customer service. And there are many other small companies that are excellent and I wouldn't hesitate to recommend. Shuttle -- not so much.

And yet another WWDC with nothing for the Mini :(

And yet another WWDC with nothing for the Mini :(
Well, considering no Mac hardware was discussed, hardly a surprise.

Well, considering no Mac hardware was discussed, hardly a surprise.

Intel killed that suprise a week ago.

Is there a new mini soon?

Is there a new mini soon?
Pure guess: some time after Apple finishes upgrading all of its other computers to Intel's Montevina chipset, it will upgrade the Mini to what currently resides in MacBooks. Currently Montevina is due in August. So maybe they get around to the Mini late 2008 or early 2009. Anything else would be a pleasant surprise.

I'd like a mini with BluRay... then I'd be willing to pick a player.
:)