Apple Set to Launch $500 Mac

[bazooka]

I am not into graphic designing

That's 80s talk. I still don't see how a Mac is supposed to be better for design other than the stupid line about the machine looking nicer than a PC.

No, that is today's talk.

At the college I just graduated from, the graphic designers used nothing but Macs.

[Garibaldi]

I really don't hate them.

I just have no use for them.

I am not into graphic designing and I am not in cinematography.

They are obscure and parts for them are overpriced.

Plus any *NIX stuff you need to do you can do on linux.

is there much software out for macs do people make their own like they do for windows or is it only apple software
may be tempted at $500 for tower

Quite a bit of stuff has been ported to mac. Also you can run some windows programs in OS X with something like Virtual PC or Darwine, which actually emulates the windows API.

At the college I just graduated from, the graphic designers used nothing but Macs.

Yeah, as far as graphics Macs definitely are ahead... depends on what your into though.

[Nilfennasion]

Mac hardware has but one distinct advantage over PC hardware in that it is much less burdened by legacy issues. PC hardware could fix this up like a shot if Microsloth would pull the finger out and stop leaving QDOS or CP/M legacy code sitting around in their product for hackers to exploit. The USB system is already one step towards removing the burden of old technology slowing down the new. The problem being that the powers in this game do not want to move forward for reasons of commercial power. Their product is not good enough to compete in a fully open market and they know it.

Apple's big advantage is that it is less burdened by legacy issues, but their marketing and research department seems to be run and/or populated by high-functioning retards. They don't quite seem to get that when your average, semi-technical specimen looks at two machines, and sees one that has twice the RAM, twice the hard drive, and twice the processing power for 75% of the price, they will go for that machine. Commodore went bankrupt because it did not realise it was being killed by a relatively poor price-to-peformance ratio, and Apple is only still in business because of its potential in specialised multimedia applications. Indeed, I have heard it said here before that Apple's continued business is in direct defiance of its marketing strategy.

So this new machine claims to be compact enough to take from one location to another. As a former tech support employee who lifted many a mini or full ATA case to move from room to room, all I can say is "who cares?". A full-sized machine allows one to buy much better hardware for the same price. Which means this mini-mac will fail, pure and simple. Those who are fully tech-savvy will just save the extra 500-1000 and buy a laptop instead. The advantage there being you can use it whilst transporting it.

[vitualis]

For those people who think that the G4 is somehow magically 2 or 3 times faster than an equally clocked P4, I suggest that you have a look at non-Mac fanboy created numbers.

The G4 is faster than the P4 and P3 on some parameters. But it is slower in others. An equivalent clocked G4 is (overall) faster than a P4 or Athlon but not by a huge amount. And considering you can get a pretty cheap system with a P4 in the 3+ GHz range (and equivalent Athlon PR ratings), this system is vastly underpowered.

256 MB of RAM and a Radeon 9200 does not help either.

Comparisons:
Mathematica 4: http://smc.vnet.net/mathkarl4.html

Other comparisons: http://www.geocities.com/sw_perf/

Note that in these benchmarks at least, a 2 GHz Athlon 64 (3200+) is generally AHEAD of a 2 GHz G5. In one test where they had a dual 1 GHz G4, http://www.geocities.com/sw_perf/Lightwave.html , it was demolished by the Athlon 64.

As I state again, the Mac mini has inferior spec hardware in comparison to modern PC and Mac-land.

Will the Mac mini do well? I think that will be undisputed. The reasons is because Apple has created a really cool looking PC, it is "relatively" cheap (in absolute terms), and they have a great marketing machine and the world is full of people who want to believe in the myth that they are getting a great machine for cheap.

Regards.

[rumplestiltskin]

The real funny thing about this was the goofs that Bill did while Jobs went smooth on their keynote speeches.

Ah, would that only have been so. While Steve was attempting to show how a (Tiger) Spotlight search's results (some photos) could be transferred to iPhoto, the photos did not appear and iPhoto locked up. He switched to another Mac (there was a KVM on the table) and continued. Can't be too upset, though, as Tiger isn't set for release for about five more months. A few freezes of beta apps is to be expected. The balance of the preso went pretty smoothly.

I'm just surprised that Gates didn't have a backup unit ready. Is that arrogance or is he just losing it?

[BobV]

I can't think of one thing I can do on a $500 mac that I can't do already. My next buy is going to be a notebook from ebay.

[Conquest10]

No, that is today's talk.

At the college I just graduated from, the graphic designers used nothing but Macs.

Because they are told from the beginning that Macs are better for design work. It gets drilled into their head. And you know the line about a lie if told enough times.

Again, that's 80s talk. How are they better?

[Nilfennasion]

I'm just surprised that Gates didn't have a backup unit ready. Is that arrogance or is he just losing it?

Actually, given Windoze's well-known performance issues, that might have been the smart thing. If it locks up on one machine, you can just say this is a bug that will be ironed out before release. If you have it lock up consistently at the same point on two machines, people start to wonder.

[ViRaL1]

I real hate what the did about upgrading the ram. Come if you can upgrade a Laptop with ram then you should be able to upgrade this new MAC.

It is upgradeable to 1GB.

[vitualis]

But it isn't upgradable by the home user.

On just about EVERY PC and laptop and notebook, upgrading the RAM involves buying the appropriate RAM, getting out a screwdriver and following a manual if you are a newbie.

For the Mac mini, it will involve a trip back to the Apple store which means $$$.

Macs still have one advantage on Windows for graphics work which is an integrated colour management system. Relatively easy for them to do due to limited hardware variability.

Regards.

[rumplestiltskin]

Even Apple was surprised when GCC created an internal hard drive for the Mac Plus. The Apple engineers thought that was impossible.

As soon as a "take-apart" for the mini is published on the web, it will become "ho-hum" to swap the RAM. (I don't like the "one RAM module" design at all but I guess sacrfices had to be made in order to get it all as small as it is.)

BTW - A friend sent me a great link showing a mini-ITX project. Check it out:

http://www.mini-itx.com/projects/windowsxpbox/