ArtistSeries said:
Are your reality field distortion googles on?
1) Tom's Hardware did not post a review - it's only a "guide" - an overview
Are you on DRUGS? I would hardly call eight pages of information and TWELVE photos including the Mac Mini ripped down to its motherboard and determining its power consumption "an overview". And BTW, I did a text search on EVERY PAGE. The word "overview" is nowhere to be found. And the word "guide" is even what the entire site is named. So, does that mean to you that everything they post ion that site should be taken lightly?? others out there in the internet very well experienced would beg to differ. Also, this DEEP LOOK INTO the Mac Mini bears this summary:
"Its compact size, cool yet simple design and its attractive price set the Apple Mac mini apart from anything the competition has to offer." The conclusion states:
"On the whole, the Mac mini is a worthwhile investment, both for the home user and the corporate buyer. It becomes even more attractive once its depreciation in value is factored into the equation, which is much lower than that of the competition. Companies keeping a close watch on the long-term TCO will find this especially attractive. The bottom line is that in many respects, Apple's Mac mini is a real trend-setter in the small computer market.". Oh1 And let's not forget this one:
"Mac Mini: Tiny, Quiet, Energy Efficient, With Lasting Value"
To assert that this look into the Mac Mini is without merit is ludicrous.
2) Anandtech had some reservations about the the mac mini "The performance of the Mac mini in its standard form is unacceptable, even for a $499 machine.....here's a ton of stuttering when multitasking (not even heavy multitasking) and it's completely caused by disk swapping.*"
Dude,
we all know that Apple is dumb for shipping with 256Mb. I guess that's as good a reason as any to piss on Macs and get a Windows machine, huh? Be my guest! We ALL here recommend a minimum 512Mb RAM for any Mac (I'm getting that much with my Mac Mini). Some other comments parsed from the Anandtech REVIEW:
"if you aren't in the market for a notebook, then the Mac mini is the next best thing...*The performance of the Mac mini with 512MB of memory (or more) is more than enough for OS X and the majority of tasks involving the iLife suite... As a machine to recommend to the computer illiterate, you'll find that many will appreciate the styling of the mini and thus, will be more willing to give it a try...*Apple did a very good job with the mini. They effectively completed the transition of the entry-level computer into a commodity... As a second system for any PC user, the Mac mini can't be beat."
I see nothing delusional in assuming that Anand gives the Mac Mini an overall thumbs-up. Is the Mac Mini a pro media box? Of course not. Neither is a $500.00 Dell. Is the Mac Mini a gamer's paradise? of course not. Neither is a $500.00 Dell. The Mac Mini -- like a cheap Dell -- is intended for generic consumer use. But even that "overview" at Tom's hardware recommend mac Mini as an excellent network client. But what do they know over there?
3) Paul Thurrott may love his mini but does have reservations about it citing the Bare Feats article "The Mac mini is a credible performer when running "normal" productivity applications. Unless you are a speed fanatic with demanding, resource hungry applications, you should be very happy with your mini."
I'm snipping the rest of your quote for brevity, but we can read that it deals with his criticisms of the Mac Mini for 3D gaming, the hard drive speed and the RAM. And a $500.00 Dell would also not be considered for gaming, either. Nobody is spinning the Mac
MINI into some kind of PC slayer... but not everyone needs PC slaying performance, including many PC users.
Thurrrott (as you quoted) goes on to say:
"Of course, adding drives and memory can drive the price of the mini up quickly. If you don't have a keyboard, mouse, and display already, you can find yourself spending as much as the cost of an iMac G5/1.6 -- which is a faster machine"
He has a good point, one that anybody with half a brain would realize and can summarize thusly: the components of the Mac Mini combined together serve a very particular range of uses. Aside from minor, low cost modifications to the device to increase its capabilities, any uses beyond these would be better served with a different choice of Mac. But gosh, I'll bet that, with only 256Mb RAM, a 40Gb hard drive, a
CD-ROM only, no Firewire and no speakers, a US$499.00 (after $50.00 mail-in rebate)
Dell Dimension 3000 only serves a limited range of functions as well. As a matter of fact, without Firewire and ANY kind of writable optical drive, that Dell can't do what Mac mini can -- but the Dell has a MUCH faster processor and (free analog LCD) monitor. Is it overkill? For that system it sure is: a 2.8gHz PIV... with Intel Integrated Extreme Graphics that SHARES RAM with the system... and there's only 256Mb RAM?! Plus, no disk burning or Firewire. Gamers would really need such a fast processor, but they'd pass on integrated graphics. Media creators could use those CPU cycles... but there's no Firewire or DVD burning on the stock system. That leaves -- in its stock form -- casual web and Office users; all of whom a PIV of such speed would be overkill. A 2gHz Celeron would do well for such users just fine. That cheapo Dell is a poorly configured system for almost anybody. if anything, they should have reduced the CPU cpeed (oh... but what about the mHz Myth??) and added the CDRW stock for DATA BACKUP... like the bae Mac mini can offer. Pity the Windows user whose PC ges trashed by a trojan or virus with no data backup.
So, one can add the price of component upgrades to the base price of either system to make them more compatible. But even in the Dell's case, that's no reason to diss it. You're just not getting out of Dell for US$499.00 (after mail-in rebate), and
the reality is that you don't at Apple, either. But Apple HAS geared the Mac Mini for exactly the purposes it was designed for WAY better than Dell has. Regardless, I'm purchasing several additional components with my Mac Mini which will serve my needs of web, email, Quicken, Office and iLife: 512Mb RAM, 80Gb drive, DVDRW, Apple Pro Keyboard, MS optical Trackball Explorer, a printer and a DVI capable 17" flat panel. With the $150.00 in mail-in rebates I am using (printer and display), the total for the system is CAN$1,300.00. WOAH! WHAT HAPPENED US$499.00??! Only a moron would believe the $499.00 price at Dell or Apple -- but it would have been $400.00 cheaper for me without the KVM. I also WANT to burn DVDs. Should i have gone with a G5 iMac? it would have been nice to, but the 17" 1.8gHz with Superdrive $1,849.00... and a Dell system -- using a Celeron processor and a DVI connected 17" flat panel and everything else as equal as possible -- would have cost me CAN$200.00
more than my Mac Mini config. And a Superdrive eMac with 512Mb RAM would have cost $50.00. Same CPU, GPU, FSB, but faster drive... and a 17" CRT. I don't want a CRT. I have a honking 19" Sony CRT sitting in my basement and I want to get rid of it. So, given my needs, I think I got the right combination for my needs and desires at an affordable price -- and many tens of thousands (dare I say HUNDREDS of thousands) of casual users out there would be very well served by a Mac Mini with even LESS than what I got. Most of them need the cheaper one. but the Mac Mini
does provide a very flexible way to get systems in between the capabilities and prices of the eMac and iMac. That's what is nice about it... and i what people have been clamoring for years at Apple.