Because of the close proximity to CES, I couldn't make it down to Mac World, which is a bit of a shame considering all of the interesting suff that was announced there. Now that some of the announcements have been made I thought I'd chime in on things:
Mac mini
The Mac mini is interesting, especially given how small it is. It's basically Apple's answer to the Shuttle XPC, except a lot smaller. The thing weighs 2.9 lbs and measures 6.5" on all sides (and is only 2" high), it's basically a laptop without the integrated display and reproportioned to maximize desktop space. The specs are quite similar to Apple's PowerBook line - offering either a 1.25GHz G4 or a 1.42GHz G4 as a CPU option. The CPU options are strong enough to be competitive with the Celerons that Dell offers in their equivalently priced systems, but definitely not strong enough to compete with something like a 2.8 - 3.0GHz Pentium 4. Honestly I think the CPU is powerful enough, but where Apple really dropped the ball is on the amount of memory. After extensively using the iMac G5 I found that even on the 1.8GHz 20" model the system is basically bound by memory size more than CPU performance (it only ships with 256MB). The move from 256MB to 512MB in OS X 10.3.7 results in a tremendous reduction in disk swapping, which is very important to the overall user experience and one area where the cheap PCs generally fall behind in.
The price points are higher than I would've liked to have seen them, but honestly $499 and $599 are still competitive. My main complaint here continues to be the memory size. I'd like to see at least the $599 model have 512MB of memory, although I wouldn't want to give up the faster processor for it. Unfortunately for $499 I don't think it will be cheap enough for PC users to pick up as a secondary system; an OS X experiment box if you will. I'd say the limit for that crowd would be $399, although then you could be compromising performance specs which would be detrimental to the idea of giving people a positive OS X experience.
I'm impressed by the integrated DVI output as well as the overall design of the system, which I think give it the edge over competing ultracheap PCs. The Radeon 9200 GPU isn't anything to get excited about, so it won't be a gaming machine, but then again Macs really aren't these days to begin with.
My only other complaint from a personal standpoint are the sizes of the HDDs, I'd like to see a massive HDD size option as this thing would make for a great personal server. It sounds like the Mac mini is using a standard 3.5" IDE HDD, if so, replacing that drive with a larger one shouldn't be a problem... :)
Overall, I think the Mac mini is a positive move for Apple and it looks to be a decent product. I was definitely skeptical of the "cheap Mac" at first, but I can say I'm quite impressed at this stage.
iWork
I've never used Keynote so Keynote 2 looks interesting to me, but there's not much I can talk about there. What truly interests me is Pages - finally a MS Word replacement for OS X. I'd do anything to replace MS Office and Dreamweaver with better native OS X applications on the Mac, while still retaining full functionality. While I'm not so sure about its HTML export capabilities, Pages does look like the application that could rid my Mac of MS Word.
iPod shuffle
I'm not as excited about the iPod shuffle because it is screenless and thus you lose one of the major strengths of the iPod - its interface. That being said, I think including a slider that lets you randomize your music or play it sequentially on the actual unit itself was a very smart move.
I'm not so sure how well organizing your playlists at sync time would work simply because I can see myself forgetting the order over time. That being said, I can also see the music itself being a reminder of the order I put the songs in while I'm actually using the unit.
I'm not much of a flash based MP3 player fan but the iPod shuffle is interesting.
The rest...
The iLife updates are also interesting, but I have yet to try iMovie or iDVD so I can't truly appreciate the updates.
Anyone else have any inputs on the announcements?
Mac mini
The Mac mini is interesting, especially given how small it is. It's basically Apple's answer to the Shuttle XPC, except a lot smaller. The thing weighs 2.9 lbs and measures 6.5" on all sides (and is only 2" high), it's basically a laptop without the integrated display and reproportioned to maximize desktop space. The specs are quite similar to Apple's PowerBook line - offering either a 1.25GHz G4 or a 1.42GHz G4 as a CPU option. The CPU options are strong enough to be competitive with the Celerons that Dell offers in their equivalently priced systems, but definitely not strong enough to compete with something like a 2.8 - 3.0GHz Pentium 4. Honestly I think the CPU is powerful enough, but where Apple really dropped the ball is on the amount of memory. After extensively using the iMac G5 I found that even on the 1.8GHz 20" model the system is basically bound by memory size more than CPU performance (it only ships with 256MB). The move from 256MB to 512MB in OS X 10.3.7 results in a tremendous reduction in disk swapping, which is very important to the overall user experience and one area where the cheap PCs generally fall behind in.
The price points are higher than I would've liked to have seen them, but honestly $499 and $599 are still competitive. My main complaint here continues to be the memory size. I'd like to see at least the $599 model have 512MB of memory, although I wouldn't want to give up the faster processor for it. Unfortunately for $499 I don't think it will be cheap enough for PC users to pick up as a secondary system; an OS X experiment box if you will. I'd say the limit for that crowd would be $399, although then you could be compromising performance specs which would be detrimental to the idea of giving people a positive OS X experience.
I'm impressed by the integrated DVI output as well as the overall design of the system, which I think give it the edge over competing ultracheap PCs. The Radeon 9200 GPU isn't anything to get excited about, so it won't be a gaming machine, but then again Macs really aren't these days to begin with.
My only other complaint from a personal standpoint are the sizes of the HDDs, I'd like to see a massive HDD size option as this thing would make for a great personal server. It sounds like the Mac mini is using a standard 3.5" IDE HDD, if so, replacing that drive with a larger one shouldn't be a problem... :)
Overall, I think the Mac mini is a positive move for Apple and it looks to be a decent product. I was definitely skeptical of the "cheap Mac" at first, but I can say I'm quite impressed at this stage.
iWork
I've never used Keynote so Keynote 2 looks interesting to me, but there's not much I can talk about there. What truly interests me is Pages - finally a MS Word replacement for OS X. I'd do anything to replace MS Office and Dreamweaver with better native OS X applications on the Mac, while still retaining full functionality. While I'm not so sure about its HTML export capabilities, Pages does look like the application that could rid my Mac of MS Word.
iPod shuffle
I'm not as excited about the iPod shuffle because it is screenless and thus you lose one of the major strengths of the iPod - its interface. That being said, I think including a slider that lets you randomize your music or play it sequentially on the actual unit itself was a very smart move.
I'm not so sure how well organizing your playlists at sync time would work simply because I can see myself forgetting the order over time. That being said, I can also see the music itself being a reminder of the order I put the songs in while I'm actually using the unit.
I'm not much of a flash based MP3 player fan but the iPod shuffle is interesting.
The rest...
The iLife updates are also interesting, but I have yet to try iMovie or iDVD so I can't truly appreciate the updates.
Anyone else have any inputs on the announcements?
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
51 Comments
View All Comments
killaz - Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - link
Haha I actually went ahead and did some Internet measurements. A CD-ROM drive is 5.75" x 1.63" x 7.48", a Shuttle SN41G2 is 7.87" x 7.28" x 11.8", and the Mac mini is 6.5" x 2" x 6.5"Are We There Yet? - Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - link
18: Heh. Hmmm, a dedicated host processor for the OS (mini+OSX) which calls an AMD/Intel processor to run tasks. All packaged neatly in a SFF with multiple monitors. Now that would be a feat of engineering.ksherman - Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - link
when i first read your post Mr. Smith (Agent Smith? :-) I thought you were crazy. But then i took a gander at the actual dimensions of the mini, and it seems do-able. Unforg=tunately, i dont have the money to play with such a thing, but it would certainly be an interesting article from this one Indian guy ive heard of ;-) (after it is disected for the review, of course!)David Smith - Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - link
Call me when someone mods the mini to fit in a CD drive bay.../me considers:
SFF PC
Remove the drive and replace with a mini
Add an extra enet card (They do typically have 1 PCI, slot right?)
route the mini's enet to the PC's
route the mini's DVI to a hole cut in the side of the PC, and then both machine's video output to a KVM
Share the mini's CD drive with the PC over ethernet
Share the PC's net connection with the mini over ethernet
Result: A SFF hybrid Mac/PC that can change at the flip of a KVM switch
Would it work? No idea. Would it kick ass? Yup!
I also want a stack of minis to do renders and compiles on...
Houdani - Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - link
I'm a wannabe PC enthusiast who has shunned Apple products because of the price barrier. The mini is attractive enough for me to dip my toe in the waters, now.This will be a really nice fit for my wife. She only uses computers for average tasks and the occassional music composition (she currently uses Finale).
If my Apple Experiment turns out well, I can easily envision myself convincing several family members to switch since they are unabashedly computer illiterate and would greatly benefit from a friendly UI.
DOACleric - Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - link
Obviously, 512mb RAM would have been ideal, and is pretty much required for a smooth OS X experience. But considering that Apple still ships a $2000 Dual G5 PowerMac with 256mb RAM, did you really expect them to stick 512mb into a $499 machine?Hell, i'm glad they didn't cripple the thing with 128mb!
sean - Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - link
I'm far from a die-hard Machead, but I was swayed by OSX to give it a shot a couple of years ago, and I wouldn't be without one now. The only arena where the Mac doesn't stand head-and-shoulders above Windows now is gaming--for everything else, I'd rather do it on my Mac. Especially for the kinds of tasks that everyone does--email, web, digital photos, music, word processing. $499 is a ridiculously reasonable price for this (seriously, spec out a usable small form factor PC, even a home-brew one, and see how much you can save, especially after adding software comparable to the included iLife suite).Anand is on target when he says it's not enough memory--that's a huge mistake, IMO, especially since the machine is not end-user upgradeable. OSX needs 512mb to run even the most basic apps without swapping frequently, and it will turn people off in a hurry. I expect to either see that the majority of machines in the retail chain are pre-upgraded or for Apple to change this spec promptly.
Assuming the memory issue is resolved, this will be very big for Apple (and, in 18 months, for Microsoft). I cannot imagine recommending anything else to any of the relatives/neighbors/friends who turn to me for home system advice. Could they get more performance from a PC for the same money? Maybe, but guess who would be providing the constant support for the thing? Right.
Pure self interest will incite tens thousands of geeks like me to encourage their less tech-savvy acquaintances to get a mini.
hopejr - Wednesday, January 12, 2005 - link
iLife '05 is sweeeeet as!! iMovie even supports HDV and widescreen SDV now!#10 - carbon comes from OS 9 and cocoa is derived from NeXT. From this, I would assume that cocoa would work better on OS X than carbon does. Anyway, carbon isn't properly integrated anyway. Can't use any of the stuff in the services menu from a carbon app. It's hard to drag and drop from carbon apps to cocoa apps and vice versa unless the coders have done extra work (I find this really annoying). I also find that cocoa apps are faster in my experience.
derek - Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - link
Anand...The one thing, i think, that lowers my appreciation for your work on the Macs is the fact that you have never used iMovie or iDVD. I would say that these are most definately 2 of the most significant reasons for switching to the Mac. They make tasks like video editing, that were once time consuming and difficult and has made them fast and FUN! The integration between the iLife sweet is what makes it great, not the individual programs. You can't truly appreciat iPhoto until you have made a movie or a DVD. I think you should seriously consider sitting down and trying them because they are such a big part of the mac experience..... and for many of us one of the single most important reasons we 'switched'.
Mephistopheles - Tuesday, January 11, 2005 - link
Apple are heading straight at Sony with these hardware products. Sony have charged a 15% premium for jewel like products. The sort of impulse buy you can't resist because it looks so cool.Apple has found that PC users are resistant but they also know that despite what they say about function over style PC users are not immune, they often still care about the car they drive & the clothes they wear. So Apple are ratcheting up the pressure...
Small, cool, impulse buy products... hmmm...
So, Anandtech PC diehards, how's Apple doing? Is that credit card burning a hole in your pocket yet?