Print Story Did you ever wonder why we had to run for shelter?
Diary
By TheophileEscargot (Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 08:55:53 AM EST) (all tags)
Me. Articles. Web. Prediction: No Mac Mini killer till 2007.

Poll: prediction?



Me
Landlady came round with plumber to look at Mysterious Damp Patch the other day. Apparently an overflow pipe from the toilet was spilling into pipes from the previous boiler and spreading through the floor somehow. Apparently it will take a while for the floor to dry out though.

Articles
I'll be submitting Politics-Oriented Software Development to K5 some time next week, maybe Monday. Last chance to check...

Musical Genre Table is there. I won't be driving this one: feel free to take it over.

Web
ref="nofollow" attribute to beat comment spam. Sounds like a great idea to me: can't believe all the whining it's generated on Metafilter, K5 and the Register.

Euro fiscal squabbles continue.

Repeat: long but fascinating mocap analysis.

Mac Mini
Repeating what I've said elsewhere: might as well have it all in one place. This is the last section: you can skip straight to the comments if you like...

I'm not much of a Apple fan: bought an iRiver instead of an iPod, thought that the iMacs were mostly style of substance. But once in a while they do live up to their reputation, and the Mac Mini is a good example.

The advantage of the Mac Mini is the triple combination of quietness, cheapness and smallness. To compare you really need to think about a kind of NPV factor: multiply noise * price * volume. Nothing in the PC world currently comes close: we're talking factors of 100 or so.

People still seem to have the idea they can just sit a couple of months and there will be similar PCs around. Maybe sometime, but not soon.

Problem A is the processor design. For years now Mac have been concentrating on low clock-speed, low-power, cool-running processors. Also in the last few years Athlon, Intel and co have been concentrating on high clock-speed, hot-running processors. The result is that with the cooling fans you have desktops that sound like Lancaster bombers and laptops that sound like dentist drills.

This makes it a lot harder to cram all the PC parts into a similar sized box. The smaller a fan is, the faster it has to move and the noisier it gets. PCs have a relative disadvantage in producing small, quiet boxes.

Problem B is economies of scale: the more you make of something, the cheaper you can make them. In the past, that's helped PCs against Macs. But a MacMini-killer would have to start off with much lower production volumes: it's going to be harder to compete on price.

Naturally they'll be a bunch of wannabes on the market pretty soon. But they're going to be bigger and noisier, and probably to compete on price they'll have to sacrifice quality. Expect them to be prone to overheating problems, and hard to fix when they do.

TheophileEscargot's Mac Mini prediction:

No PC will come match the noise * price * volume score until 2007 or later.

The interesting question is what it will do the PC market. As I say they can still compete on price so, expect smaller, cheaper, lower-quality PCs. Now one obvious way to sacrifice quality for price is to install an open source OS: might see a few more along those lines. Microsoft may have to reduce their pricing too, if cheaper computers make their OS a bigger fraction of the price.

< crap, what a day | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' >
Did you ever wonder why we had to run for shelter? | 44 comments (44 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
Aaargh, editor! by TheophileEscargot (2.00 / 0) #1 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:00:30 AM EST
Can someone checkboxize the poll.

Can't believe I did it again. Maybe I should run for editor just so I can fix all my diaries myself...
--
Butch and Petey are harsh and unforgiving in their estimation of female beauty.


you'd get my vote by Dr H0ffm4n (2.00 / 0) #25 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:04:49 PM EST
Except you'd be expected to do other stuff too and that sounds too much like work.

[ Parent ]

Lancaster bomber by ENOENT (4.00 / 1) #2 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:16:40 AM EST
If it sounds anything like the B-17 that flies over my house in the summer, it's almost as loud as one of my home PCs.

Almost.


Life is just one damned thing after another.
Love is just two damned things after each other.




I have been wondering by whazat (4.00 / 1) #3 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:21:32 AM EST
How a Mac mini would compare to this sort of system.


--
The revolution will not be realised


Compare how? by blixco (4.00 / 1) #7 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:42:02 AM EST
The system you've linked to would: beat it performance-wise.  It's important in these mini systems to have, oh, your web site open 1/300th of a second quicker, no?

What is the primary use / market for the Mac mini?  If you can answer this, you'll see that your linked system is really like throwing a formula1 at a crowded freeway filled with stupid moron drivers.  The guy next to you in the Honda Civic gets there just the same, just the same time, and with far less fear of the engine exploding when the car is started.

But if you're after balls-out performance in a small package?  Then avoid the Mac mini (and any other Mac up to the dual G5's) at all cost.
---------------------------------
Journeying through the world
To and fro, to and fro
Cultivating a small field.
-basho
[ Parent ]

I agree (about the MacMini) by ucblockhead (4.00 / 1) #4 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:26:18 AM EST
A lot of people miss the core strengths. For one, it is a closed, fixed box, which means that all the peripherals are tested and rock solid on it, and the OS works damn well with it. Second, the OS is simply better for neophyte users.

It's easy enough to throw together a low-end PC that appears on paper to match the MacMini, but it will not have those core strengths.

The other issue (in terms of CPU speed) is that for the most part, the CPU has long outrun most user applications. There are very few truly CPU bound apps any more. At least, the sorts of apps that most people buy. (Short of games, but even those are less CPU bound then people think.)
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman


heh by tps12 (2.00 / 0) #6 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:50:19 AM EST
"Rock solid" and "damn well" are probably not things you can count on, with a new Apple line. In my second-hand experience, anyway.

[ Parent ]

core strengths by martingale (2.00 / 0) #17 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 02:41:34 PM EST
Those can also be seen as core weaknesses. See my other comment.
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]

In theory a Mac mini killer could be launched now by lm (4.00 / 2) #5 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:36:06 AM EST
The problem is the missing part of your equation: perceived utility. The majority of people interested in buying a Mac mini are most likely not interested in getting Linux on ARM, VIA, or Transmeta. Neither are they likely to be interested in a Palm OS box or a Pocket Windows (or whatever WinCE has been renamed to this year) on the desktop. I think you ought to add a perceived utility factor to your calculation so that it reads N * P * V * U where U is perceived utility.

One of the major manufacturers could launch a comparable product using mini-ITX on Via or Transmeta and be price competitive and be out the door in six months or less, but (unless I misread the performance of the VIA and Transmeta x86 chips) such a product would most likely sink in the marketplace as unusually slow. Enough RAM in the right mini-ITX case might alleviate this problem. But I don't think anyone in the Windows PC world is really interested in this right now. And that factor is why I think that your prediction is most likely to be correct.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic


So, by blixco (2.00 / 0) #8 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:49:16 AM EST
a certain large computer company makes a small, somewhat modular, x86-based PC that is tiny...not minimac tiny, but tiny by mainstream PC systems.  Say 6" by 8" by 3".

Celeron-crippled P4, up to 1 gig of ram, swappable media bays (borrowed from the notebook line....actually, much like the Mac mini which is a 12" iBook G4 folded in thirds, this system was a notebook folded in half).  This particular small system was small enough to mount to the back of a 17" LCD monitor (with included bracket), making it a bit of an iMac clone, except smaller.

Ran XP (and presumably several million flavors of Linux).

This particular company sold these for anywhere from 499 to 799, depending on the config, and included a mouse, keyboard, CRT-based monitor, speakers, and the aforementioned mounting bracket in the price.

They sold roughly 3000 of them.  This number (3000) represents the number of laptop computers this company sells every day in the US and EMEA markets....and that's a bad day; some days, that's one part6icular line of notebook.

PC users don't want small and aesthetic.  Not yet.  They used to not want anything but ugly beige cases.  They used to only want the biggest tower (the bigger the tower, the more powerful the computer).

So, yeah.  The capability is there, and it's been done!  But it won't be done again, probably not even if the Mc mini takes off.  Not for another four years or so.  Not until they get the Centrino to run fanless at 2GHz.
---------------------------------
Journeying through the world
To and fro, to and fro
Cultivating a small field.
-basho
[ Parent ]

What about Shuttle systems? by Rogerborg (4.00 / 1) #10 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 11:21:31 AM EST
Those things are selling like heat-pipe toasted hot cakes.  My next home PC is going to be circa Shuttle-sized.  I believe that the demand is there, the technology is nearly there, and the price is already there; what's lacking is the brand and marketing.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]

Who? by blixco (2.00 / 0) #22 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 03:11:41 PM EST
I didn't seee them in the top six companies in sales or in marketing reach.

Yeah, it's all there.  Why doesn't it sell when a large intel box maker does it?  No one seems to know.

But all this talk about minimac?  That fucking thing's gonna' sell.
---------------------------------
Journeying through the world
To and fro, to and fro
Cultivating a small field.
-basho
[ Parent ]

Of course it's going to sell by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #29 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:42:06 PM EST
Brand and marketing.  People will say that It Just Works, even if it doesn't.  If I had more money than sense, I'd get one myself.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.
[ Parent ]

You don't have by blixco (2.00 / 0) #43 Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 12:51:43 AM EST
more money than sense?

Sheeesh.  Catch up, man.  Bang your head against a wall four or five times, and get a job in marketing.
---------------------------------
Journeying through the world
To and fro, to and fro
Cultivating a small field.
-basho
[ Parent ]

Bro by johnny (2.00 / 0) #12 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 12:21:54 PM EST
I sent yz an email last night. Ja get it?

She has effectively checked out. She's an un-person of her own making. So it falls to me.--ad hoc (in the hole)
[ Parent ]

Nope. by blixco (2.00 / 0) #21 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 03:09:57 PM EST
I didn't get it....but I didn't check my blixco.net account.  Can you send it to my blixco at gmail dot com account?
---------------------------------
Journeying through the world
To and fro, to and fro
Cultivating a small field.
-basho
[ Parent ]

Just out of curiosity by lm (4.00 / 1) #13 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 01:07:45 PM EST
Can I walk down to the local retailer and buy one off the shelf, ready to roll?

If not, it probably isn't comparable.

Your point about the size of the tower being equated with the amount of power is well taken, but it seems to me that we're turning the corner on that one. The advent of PocketPC, small game consoles and multi-function phones, when combined with a new generation not nearly so techno-illiterate as past ones, herald a new outlook on size.

It just so happens that big beige cases are the number one complaint that I've been hearing lately about Windows PCs.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]

Heh. Exactly. by blixco (2.00 / 0) #20 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 03:08:30 PM EST
Apple has the right idea.  I hope they market it well.  The problem with this intel box...well, there were several.  But a Mac buyer or a new buyer?  They won't walk into this with the same prejudice.  They'll just want ti to do what it does, without the extra horsepower (none required, really, to do the Four Things).

In re: cases, we make small black cases.....but "small" and "mini" are two very different things.
---------------------------------
Journeying through the world
To and fro, to and fro
Cultivating a small field.
-basho
[ Parent ]

I forgot one point: perceived utility by lm (2.00 / 0) #14 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 01:12:34 PM EST
That figures into the equation just like I pointed out, no? If I'm wrong about Windows users wanting a Mac miniesque form factor and, in fact, believing that the bigger box makes a more powerful computer, then the U in N * P * V * U would keep the value very low on the Windows side of things.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]

I'd like to make some points by CwazyWabbit (2.00 / 0) #9 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:58:38 AM EST
about leaving proper changelog messages referencing bug tracking systems and such, but it's not that kind of article is it?

That said, I've found Bugzilla a great way to shake up your coworkers and get them to do stuff; any time I'm blocked on something, I'll create a new bug, assign it to whoever and use it block whichever bug I'm on. Personally it's been good for making my team aware of my needs in a positive way, but in the article as is you could mention using such systems to keep a record of how other people held you back at each stage ;) In something like Bugzilla, you would have to make sure you obnoxiously comment each tracking change with a "Blocked, pending team member xxxx fixing bug yyyy".

I feel dirty now.



Can I be the first to say it? by Rogerborg (2.00 / 0) #11 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 11:29:19 AM EST
"Karl Auerbach's prediction that the internet is balkanizing into groups of people who only accept traffic from each other took another step closer to reality today."

GOOD

Damn filthy apes, sending packets our way.  Piss off back where you came from.  Nobody wants your unicode packets around here.

-
Metus amatores matrum compescit, non clementia.


OMPI by martingale (4.00 / 1) #15 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 02:04:52 PM EST
M-$
PREDICTION is correct
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$


uh by martingale (2.00 / 0) #16 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 02:39:44 PM EST
Aren't you forgetting the main reason the PC won the personal computing wars? Modularity?

The IBM PC clones won because you can always open the case and replace all the bits you like. Small form factor is nice and all, but Apple has always been marginal precisely because they keep tight control of their hardware. That makes the experience better/easier/whatever, but it's not a good strategy for more than 5-10% of the market.

IMHO, if a PC tries to compete with the Mac Mini, it'll sink or sail depending on how much of it can be easily replaced/extended/upgraded. And *that* depends on the Asian manufacturers producing enough standard parts.

So in some sense, Apple isn't competing against a Dell or a HP, they're competing against the parts manufacturers in Asia. Different problem.
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$


Wars by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #18 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 02:47:31 PM EST
The PC won the war because of marketting. Apples were "game machines" while IBMs were for business. At the time that the PC won out, Apples were moduler and had a thriving hardware add-on industry. The PC beat the Apple ][, not the Mac. By the time the Mac showed up, Apple had already lost.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]

well by martingale (2.00 / 0) #19 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 02:59:31 PM EST
You're right on the business aspect. Once IBM entered the PC, it grew popular on the back of IBM's decade long reputation. I'd say in a fight between IBM and modularity, businesses chose IBM on brandname. But there were plenty of other factors, like 123. It's hard to really say that IBM and Apple were competing. They were homesteading virgin markets.

After the Mac, Apple never allowed clones to take a strong foothold, and by that time the initial IBM brand name was being diluted in the PC market. That was not necessarily bad business decision on the part of Apple. The PC clone market is much more risky than the Apple captive market. If Apple had let clone manufacturers take over, they might have gone out of business, as they nearly did anyhow.

Today, the computing markets are all tapped, however, so the environment is different from 25 years ago.
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]

open the case and replace by monkeymind (2.00 / 0) #26 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:10:50 PM EST
True and this is the functionality that hands on users want.

Only problem is that the great majority of pc's never have any components changed in their life.

So for a large chunk of the pc market today modularity is not high on their requirements list.


[ Parent ]

you mean... by martingale (2.00 / 0) #28 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:35:30 PM EST
Buying a graphics card to play a game? Upgrading a hard disk? Putting in a network card? Keep a computer for a few years and you'll want to do something like that.

In truth, USB has made progress, so perhaps things are substantially different. However, don't think people want to plonk $500 on a throwaway machine. If you're the kind of person who's happy doing that, then you're the kind of person who won't mind paying $2000.

A lot of people drive pickup trucks, minivans and family cars, and for the same reason people prefer having lots of software, and lots of hardware options.
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]

He might. That wasn't his point by Dr H0ffm4n (2.00 / 0) #31 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:53:06 PM EST
The average Jo Public user that the MacMini is aimed at is never going to crack open the case.

[ Parent ]

then why by martingale (2.00 / 0) #33 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:38:05 PM EST
...does the Joe Average user buy a peecee instead of a mac?
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]

Obvious by Phage (2.00 / 0) #34 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:43:59 PM EST
'Cos everyone else has one
They're cheaper


It's like magic realism, but not shit. - Scrymarch.
[ Parent ]

Oops by Phage (2.00 / 0) #35 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:45:00 PM EST
And you can play all the latest games.

It's like magic realism, but not shit. - Scrymarch.
[ Parent ]

and you can buy $300 PCs at wallmart [n/t] by martingale (2.00 / 0) #36 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:49:28 PM EST

--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]

It's all about inertia by Phage (2.00 / 0) #37 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:52:27 PM EST
The more PC's there are, the more elitist Apple becomes, the more people will buy PC's.

Sidenote - I fsking hate 'creatives' who try and evangelise me on their Apple.

It's like magic realism, but not shit. - Scrymarch.
[ Parent ]

what happened to your other argument, then? by martingale (2.00 / 0) #38 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:54:13 PM EST
You know, Apple's Minimac is cheaper?
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]

No by Phage (2.00 / 0) #39 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 11:13:49 PM EST
You mis-understand. PC is cheaper and more accessible.

It's like magic realism, but not shit. - Scrymarch.
[ Parent ]

are you on the same side as me? by martingale (2.00 / 0) #40 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 11:38:08 PM EST
I'm saying the minimac won't stay without competition for long.
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]

Yes by Phage (4.00 / 1) #41 Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 12:19:29 AM EST
With the added provisio that the MM is a product without a market.
Apple is elitest (read expensive and looks good). Offering a product that is more expensive than it's PC competition and less accessibility for the lumpen proles, means that I cannot see it selling except to the Apple acolytes.

It's like magic realism, but not shit. - Scrymarch.
[ Parent ]

have a 4 on me ;-) by martingale (2.00 / 0) #42 Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 12:26:09 AM EST

--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]

prediction is quite possibly correct by TPD (2.00 / 0) #23 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 08:38:23 PM EST
but by 2007 I expect we'll start to see some kind of convergence between ipod and the mac mini.

Rock Hard Abs are just a sw-sw-swivel away!


Open source bundles by nebbish (2.00 / 0) #24 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 08:59:01 PM EST
OK, I know bugger all about the world of open source software except that it's full of hippies, but aren't there legal issues with PC manufacturers bundling open source software with their products? I seem to remember from somewhere that there is licensing and user agreements of sorts with open source.

Don't really know what I'm talking about here, but you get the gist.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!


In general, no. by ambrosen (2.00 / 0) #44 Thu Jan 20, 2005 at 10:44:36 AM EST
The main reason it doesn't happen seems to be that it's not worth the bother of educating the user when Windows costs £40 and something like Smartsuite costs a tenner. Also, they have to pay for Windows for every PC they sell anyway, in many OEM agreements, & I guess non-office bundled software is essentially free.

[ Parent ]

Comparing Mac Mini with a PC by squigs (2.00 / 0) #27 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:26:41 PM EST
I chose the first site that allowed me to spec out a system in US$ (since we can assume there's going to be some rounding up when converted to pounds) And got this http://www.gxcomputer.com/minipc.html

Assuming the competition is preconfigured Windows systems, the price for an Asus case + P4 + Windows XP + same spec as Mac Mini means we're looking at a saving of US$17.  Although there's a shuttle for about the same price with keyboard, mouse and more disk space (not sure how it compares in terms of video).

Apple have the advantage that OSX is widely perceived to be a better OS than Windows, and Apple as a brand name is cooler in some areas.

I don't think productions volumes have quite so much of an influence here.  Firstly we're looking at hundreds of thousands of units, and there's only so far you can cut costs, and secondly, the production volumes are larger than most of the PC manufacturers.  Apple have a smaller range of models and zero competition in their niche.  Perhaps Dell produce more but most of the PC companies aren't going to.



Even so by R Mutt (2.00 / 0) #30 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 09:50:14 PM EST
That page talks about fan installation, and these cases are roughly ten times the size of the Mac Mini by volume.

Yes, with a mini PC you can save a few percent of the price factor... by increasing the other factors by 1000%.

Most of these comparisons tend to depend on the "you ought not to want that" factor: the assumption is that people should not want a computer that's so small, so quiet and so cheap. If people do want that though, the assumption is incorrect.

The whole thing seems very reminiscent of the introduction of the microcomputer itself, when the establishment couldn't see why anyone would want a computer that's smaller, cheaper and less powerful...

[ Parent ]

But how small do you want it? by squigs (2.00 / 0) #32 Wed Jan 19, 2005 at 10:31:24 PM EST
Small PCs are nice.  You can put them next to the monitor without them seeming to loom.  Or probably right next to the keyboard.  But how small?  Mini hi-fi systems seem to be quite popular even though nobody needs twin cassette decks anymore, and micros are smaller.  I think people just want "small enough".

That said, the form factor of a Mini is very good.  It's small enough and the right shape to stuff into a bag.  Not sure if most people want to do this, but I have done in the past.

It is nice to have something that's aiming for a "home PC" although I feel there's some way to go.

[ Parent ]

Did you ever wonder why we had to run for shelter? | 44 comments (44 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback