Comments on: Why Apple’s current Mac Mini strategy is failing

By: 21 magic casino online

21 magic casino online — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 04:21:17 +0000

21 magic casino online…

hurry macros coated belies cultivating …

By: Ubuntu Rules!!!

Ubuntu Rules!!! — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 17:54:35 +0000

This is what the mac mini should be like for it to be a good deal:
2.0 core 2 duo (not much of an upgrade over the current one…)
1 GB of RAM (as it is now) (make it upgradeable to 2-4GB)
120 GB hard drive (7,200 rpm) (hard drives are cheap…)
newest intel integrated graphics (cheap…)
Superdrive DVD CD burner (cheap)
4 USB ports (as it is)
1 firewire 400, 1 firewire 800 (cheap)
apple remote (as it is)
apple keyboard and mouse (they rock!)
wireless draft n (essential these days)

with these specs…
and a price of $499…
i would buy this in a heartbeat and so would everyone else…
apple doesn’t need such a large margin for this since if they sell a lot…
they earn a lot…
and most people would buy a macbook or imac as their second comp since they see how good a mac is…

By: Jason

Jason — Fri, 23 May 2008 10:40:23 +0000

As a person who has a display (24″ 1920×1200) wants a mac and is ready to switch, the mini as well as the rest of Mac line is quite frustrating insofar as what Apple offers. While I really like the iMac, the display leaves something to be desired for me and more importantly there is no matte option for it and that glossy glass drives me crazy. The Mac Pro is overkill for what I need and too expensive. The remaining 2 computers in their line that can drive a 1920×1200 display is the 17″ hi-res MacBook Pro and the Mac Mini. Someone else said that Apple’s margins on the mini are low. I highly doubt that. It probably costs Apple somewhere around $100 at the most to make a Mac mini with most of that cost coming from the CPU. What Apple really needs is something like a mini pro. Something like this: 1 PCIe slot for a graphics card, rest of the expandability can be as a back panel of connections, at least 1 user replaceable hard drive, 1 superdrive, and up to 8 GB of RAM expansion, all in a micro/mini tower style enclosure . If they had that for around $1600, I’d buy it in a heartbeat.

By: macmini lover

macmini lover — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:00:36 +0000

1) Mac mini is very expensive
2) The low-end model does not have a superdrive

By: Daniel Koons

Daniel Koons — Tue, 22 Jan 2008 06:29:32 +0000

I like the Mac Mini, I completely agree what is stated above. My two sense… I bought the 15″ Macbook Pro which was my first Apple last week, then I wanted a way to access my external hard drive remotely and with leopard I could do that I wanted to switch completely to Mac and bam 2 macs in one week, my new home computer is a mac mini.

By: Ian

Ian — Sat, 24 Nov 2007 22:06:14 +0000

I agree the mini is my first mac ! So far it’s been a great experience! I could not see the need for a Quad or higher nor the price of the mac pro. I don’t like the imac’s as the mini is easy to hook up and transport to my 50′ TV. I would have liked to have seen a scaled down pro thats upgradable, video ram etc . The box could be much bigger than the mini and smaller than the Pro .

By: Nate

Nate — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 00:37:36 +0000

I think people are missing the point of the mac mini. It was designed to be a low cost mac, thats it. Someone in apple screwed up by increasing the price, which in effect puts them in a whole new category. LIke many people realized… a new mac mini with a decent monitor, keyboard, and mouse is about the same price as an iMac, but with less features and more mess. When it first came out though it really helped make the decision for a questionable switcher. My fiance used to play with my eMac (that was a while ago). When she wanted to buy her own computer, she origionally thought macs were way to expensive. The mac mini @ $499 was low enough for her to consider buying it. With a keyboard, mouse, and relatively cheap monitor we came in around 700 dollars; far cheaper than an iMac, and far better than a windows PC.

If it weren’t for the small price, she’d be using a dell. Now she’s hooked, and will buy a new mac coming january… which is where apple should be happy. The mac mini helped for the sole sake of a cheap entry point.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 04:29:20 +0000

I agree that there is no Mac that fits below the Mac Pro, and is not an all in one like the iMac. A headless Mac with dedicated video would fit in for the switchers who want a Mac, but still want games etc.

By: filipp

filipp — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 15:36:39 +0000

Does anyone have any numbers to support the claim that the minis are not selling well? Ofcourse Apple hasn’t made a big fuss about the mini - it’s such a low margin product for them, but that doesn’t mean that would be selling poorly.

The mini is in many cases the perfect switching machine for the PC user who walks into a Mac store to buy an iPod. It’s also perfect for office users. On the AV side, if you look around you’ll find many reviews and articles comparing Apple TV and Mac minis either recommending the mini for it’s flexibility and relatively low price.

By: Mongul

Mongul — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 05:32:34 +0000

In order to maintain decent margins, the Mac mini is sold without a display, a keyboard and a mouse; its components are fairly low-end and are rarely updated. The mini is not much different than the eMac, which was updated about once a year. Apple could include a display, etc, but the Mac mini would cost $999 like the 17-inch iMac. There is not much point.

If low-budgeted consumers can’t afford a Mac mini, Apple won’t lower its price. The goal is not to cater to the really low-end consumer nor to wage a price war with PC manufacturers. To do so Apple would have to cut their margins, and the gross margin on the Mac mini is already below Apple’s corporate average. For the same reasons, Apple won’t bump up its graphics and processing capabilities or the price would have to increase accordingly.

As it is, Mac sales are already growing way faster than the market. I don’t think that the mini will survive much longer, Apple will have to rethink its low-end desktop offerings. In a few months a stripped down 20-inch iMac could replace the 17-inch model, or Apple could introduce an aluminium 17-inch iMac, whatever. But I don’t think that Apple can compete in the below $800 price range. They don’t have to save the Mac mini, most of the growth is in notebooks anyway, and the MacBook is doing really well in the $1,000-$1,500 segment.