Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, iPod Family, Other Events, Mac mini
In Defense of Apple's Announcments
Apple doesn't need me to defend them, and this post isn't going to be a typical Apple fanboy defense. Some of my
fellow bloggers (namely Jan, Damien, and C.K.) were
unimpressed by the mini-Stevenote yesterday, and I was right there with them. Now, after taking some time to digest
just what was introduced I am far from disappointed (though I won't be getting a $99 iPod case).If you take at face value the products announced yesterday no doubt you would be bummed that there wasn't more 'stuff,' even though Apple never claimed that this was going to be a boffo announcement. However, if you look at the story that the products tell, then things begin to make a little more sense.
As I see it Apple was telling two stories yesterday: Intel and iPod accessories. Let's looks at each of them in turn.
The Switch to Intel
As of yesterday, as Steve pointed out, 50% of Apple's computer product line has made the transition to Intel, and in less than 60 days. This is amazing, and I am quite puzzled by people who say, 'Well the new Mac mini isn't that much different.' It has an Intel chip in it, for goodness sake.
Part of the blame for this attitude towards the switch can be attributed to Apple's great handling of it. They have made a conscious decision not to introduce new styles of Macs to mark the Intel transition. What does this mean? If you put an Intel Mac mini next to a Power PC Mac mini most people won't be able to tell the difference (though the IR port is a dead give away). Why do this? Because the manufacturer of the chip shouldn't matter to the everyday user. A Mac is a Mac whether it is running on a G5, a Core Duo, or a Dorito. However, by making this transition look so easy (when in fact it isn't from an engineering point of view) Apple is encouraging people to say, 'WHAT?! Nothing is new with the Mac mini... well other than Front Row and a complete change in system architecture.. but other than that nothing!'
The big yawn that the Intel Mac mini produced (unjustly I think) just proves that Apple is managing the Intel transition much better than anyone thought possible.
Apple's entry into the iPod economy
The iPod Hi-Fi is less of a product and more a signal to the Belkins and the Griffin Technologies of the world. Apple is saying, "There is a billion dollar iPod economy out there that we created and we want a piece of the action.' If I were in charge of iPod products for any third party company I would be very nervous about this.
This serious interest in iPod accessories was, of course, first seen at Macworld were Apple announced their new remote control/radio receiver for the iPod. That product, and the Hi-Fi, take advantage of Apple's control over the iPod to make interaction between the iPod and the accessory exceedingly smooth. With a software update Apple added a special menu item for the Hi-Fi on every iPod that is compatible with the product (and that has a screen). No other vendor can assure that their products will work as well with the iPod, and I am sure they aren't happy about it.
I expect to see more iPod accessories from Apple in the coming months, and I expect that they will sell well (based on the fact that Apple is making them and not some company the average Joe may not have heard of) and they will make Apple a tidy sum of money.
Conclusion
So, as you can see, even though there wasn't an iPod video with touch screen controls, or feature length films in iTunes, this announcement certainly was interesting.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Alex H said 11:19AM on 3-01-2006
Did you curiously forget intel intergrated graphics...
No-one can defend that. Its unacceptable.
Reply
Randy said 11:29AM on 3-01-2006
Unacceptable how? I heard it supports Core Graphics... that's a step up from my G4 mini.
On another note, I had a similar reaction: http://www.randyrants.com/2006/03/fumble_at_the_f.html - it's not that it didn't live up to expectations... it's just that there was nothing "good" in the mix.
Reply
LD said 11:30AM on 3-01-2006
Alex H, please explain your comment about the graphics. What's so bad about the chipset they are using? Or are you basing this off no information?
Reply
Patrick Bennett said 11:32AM on 3-01-2006
I couldn't agree with the POV of this post more. People were certainly missing the point... However, Apple could have simply released these products minus the (albeit medium sized) fanfare.
Personally, I've already purchased a new mac mini as it was 90% perfect for what I will be using it for (and I've been waiting for exactly what they put into it). I am also withholding a verdict on the graphics capabilities for every day activities (that the lowest tier Mac typically would be used for) web browsing, emailing, watching video, listening to music, etc. until I get that mini rig in my hands.
Too bad that even after some of the past MacWorld Steve-notes people still haven't learned not to expect what they see on all the rumor sites.
Reply
Jacob Varghese said 11:33AM on 3-01-2006
Good post, dude.
The MAC mini is a fairly good deal when you consider the small, clean form factor and that it is a product from a high-end computer company.
The iPod Hi-Fi is more of a let-down when you consider the high-price and how it compares to the cheaper Bose SoundDock. But as you mention, this is their first jab at it. I'm sure a Sonos-like system is not too far behind.
Reply
Drew said 11:36AM on 3-01-2006
Yes, little has changed on the mini... except the price. $599 & $799 are not extry-level computer prices and feed into the stereotype that Macs are overpriced (and comparitively underpowered). The $499 mini was the reason I made the switch nearly a year ago. At $599 I would have serious reservations.
And don't get me started on the $99 leather slip case or the $349 bookshelf speaker.
Reply
portorikan said 11:37AM on 3-01-2006
Maybe that new ipod leather case is to protect a new video ipod that will be announced later in the year.
It's kinda pricey and you can't see the screen... sounds like the right type of protection for something that plays video and full length movies.
Reply
Patrick Bennett said 11:37AM on 3-01-2006
The whole thing on the graphics is that they got rid of the dedicated video card and now have an onboard shared RAM setup. From apple.com:
"Intel GMA950 graphics processor with 64MB of DDR2 SDRAM shared with main memory"
Reply
Shashwat Parhi said 11:39AM on 3-01-2006
One problem I see with Apple's approach. How different is it from Microsoft not documenting it's entire Windows API so that they could have an edge over all the Borlands of the world. Shouldn't Apple open the firmware so that Griffin and others can also do what Apple can with the tight integration. After all they charge 10% of royalty to all those who want to take part in the Made for iPod program. That way Griffin does not need to kluge with the icon display features to get an FM transmitter to work. I have been thinking for a while about this, maybe Apple should implement some extension mechanism to the firmware. Or maybe an "Applications" folder that we can install third party applications. For all I care, someone could write a real web browser to display much more than what Notes can. My 2 cents for the platform I love.
Reply
Chris P said 11:41AM on 3-01-2006
I think the biggest statement that Steve Jobs made was that they want to integrate the iPod experience into the home. They want the iPod to be the center piece of your home audio system.
The Hi-Fi is just the tip of the iceberg. So what lies deep beneath the obvious?
Reply
NNTPgrip said 11:41AM on 3-01-2006
My yawn was the integrated intel with shared memory, oh, and the price increase. The dual at $800 should get me all the guts of the 17" iMac. The Single should have made the $500 mark.
They need to update some of they're other stuff too that is not so obvious. I run dual displays on my PC, so when I make the switch, you better believe I'm not gonna downgrade. As of yesterday, the mini is still disqualified for this, and many other reasons. However, when I went to get a 20" iMac, I found no MATCHING 20" display to connect. The 20" display that you can get has silver bezel, and most importantly, I would have to set it on top of a couple of books or something to line it up vertically to give me the side by side action. They need a special 17 and 20" that match. (Or a headless mac with the guts of iMac w/dual display connectors at $1000 so I can use my existing two monitors that match with a dual monitor KVM)
Reply
Steve said 11:44AM on 3-01-2006
Yes, as usual Scott brings some levity and logic to an otherwise emotional set of responses. I think the additions to the mini are great, whether you want to use it as a desktop (speed, more ports, gigabit ethernet) or as a set-top box (IR, remote, optical audio out, bluetooth, wireless networking). I'm disappointed like the rest at the price hike, but it's still a good deal compared to anything comparable.
The analysis of the Hi-Fi was right on the mark. It's not a big deal people. I bet Apple doesn't expect to sell a great deal of them.
Reply
Graham said 11:44AM on 3-01-2006
Okay, I guess I'll defend the Mini: Honestly how many PC's within such a small form factor have EVER had a dual core processor? None. The new Mini's are as Steve puts it: Screamers. They are as fast as MacBook Pro's and they are still being marketed as entry level Macs. To put this in perspective: If last year you told me I could get the power of a Powerbook G4 by just buying a $599 mini I would have wet myself! Imagine having a tiny little 5x5x2 cube that has more power than most PC towers? Sure, integrated graphics are a shame for the gaming crowd, but when it comes down to pure processing power the new Mini puts most PC's priced within the same range to absolute shame, It's like a little David and Goliath story unfolding in the hardware market. Actually quite exciting if you ask me.
Reply
LD said 11:52AM on 3-01-2006
Patrick, I know they share memory, but why is that necessarily bad for the Mini? Remember, this new Mini gets a huge jump in available RAM to 2GB.
Reply
Andrew Montgomery said 11:53AM on 3-01-2006
Hey guys,
I read the site often and I enjoy it, just to keep this in perspective.
You (collectively) spent the last two weeks making speculation after speculation, repeating rumor after rumor, even bringing up the "one more thing" conspiracy theory. Don't missunderstand me: I did it, too, in my own circles (except for the "one more thing" part... if that keynote wasn't enough for you, you're in the wrong business... try Hollywood).
By the time Tuesday rolled around, however, you guys had whipped yourselves into a very exciting frenzy about some really industry-changing ideas: a widescreen video iPod, a movie download service, a real, full-blown media center. There were so many different versions of this new iPod that it couldn't possibly have been real. It is not lost on me that the only reason I knew these fakes even existed was because I read your site. But by Tuesday morning, if you were still expecting a widescreen iPod, you were crazy.
But Apple's well-publicized invitation was specific: fun products. Steve even started out by saying that these were going to be "medium-scale" announcements (although I've only found one outlet that managed to reprint that jewel). It would be fairly absurd to call a movie download service through the iTMS "fun" and "medium-scale". That would be a little like calling the release of MacBook Pro's six months ahead of schedule "worth discussing". It's unarguably true. It's just comically understated.
It is important to separate your speculation from your expectation. Rampant speculation is fun. But if you are going to start off with "fun products", slowly translate that into "amazing new products", only to be disappointed when Apple actually release products that can be accurately described as "fun", you have only yourselves to blame.
Personally, I'd rather see Apple take the "media center" idea extremely seriously. Don't introduce a media center that's missing a bunch of features. Introduce a Mac Mini that has a bunch of new, cool features. Then, when that's field tested, debugged, and the reports are in: make a new one with all those features you should have put in but didn't think to. Call that your media center. Suddenly you have a new product that your competition can't touch because it's not really even new! It's a v.3.0 product (iMac, Mac Mini, new media center).
When it's important, it's important enough to do right. And setting expectations is essential. That's why Steve said the new Mac Mini was a "fun product", not a "industry defining product". Wait until Apple revs this. It won't be "fun" anymore. My point is: don't be dissapointed to find out that Apple released a slimmed down Media Center. We should be excited that Apple is taking strategic steps towards a real media center, rather than blowing it all before they've got the killer product. Remember the first Newton? If you're going to be defining an industry, you'd better do it right the first time. Because they won't be back a second time. They'll remember your initial failure and continuously look elsewhere... no matter what you do.
Reply
shamste said 11:55AM on 3-01-2006
I think there is a third story in the announcement that underlies the two stories mentioned and that is Apple slowly creeping into the Living Room. Notice that the Mac mini has all of the features you would want for an Apple PVR on an HDTV minus the tuner (and recording software but that is a simple update). Of course, you could just buy your episodes of "Lost" from iTunes and watch them through Front Row. Apple is also trying to replace home stereo with the iPod/HiFi combo. I think we see a slight tip of the hand with these. I'm not saying Apple will announce an Apple PVR come April 1st, I'm just saying they have acknowledged they have some interest in the Living Room. Just my 2 cents.
Reply
Jamie said 11:57AM on 3-01-2006
Good post, Scott.
I actually love the idea of iPod Hi-Fi, with one exception: If Apple wants me to buy all my songs and videos from them and put them on my iPod, making it my digital media hub in the home, why doesn't the Hi-Fi have s-video out? As of now, I keep my 5G iPod on my entertainment system in a Universal Dock, connected to both my stereo AND my TV.
How can I replace my stereo with the Hi-Fi -- as Steve clearly wants me too -- without video out from the dock? Am I supposed to play audio through the Hi-Fi, then when I get the urge for video move the iPod to my Universal Dock which is connected to my -- Crap, I got rid of my stereo, Steve!
Hope s-video out is coming soon, as I'm looking to trim down my gangly component system. I shouldn't have to buy the new Mini too just to get iTunes videos on my TV if I have the Hi-Fi, should I?
Reply
Oliver said 11:58AM on 3-01-2006
No, sorry, I still don't see it, Scott.
Reply
Joshua Ochs said 11:59AM on 3-01-2006
"They are as fast as MacBook Pro's"
Oh, bullshit. Only the top-end one has a dual core, it's slower than the MacBook's (by a fairly large margin), the integrated graphics are crap (http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1821806,00.asp), the hard drive is slower, etc.
No, these are not bargain MacBook Pro's. What they are, is Intel-designed low-end computers. The chipset is Intel from start to finish, with seemingly no Apple changes, which accounts for the strange featureset (no dedicated graphics, but gigabit ethernet?).
No, the reason people didn't like them isn't because they're ho-hum, but because they're more expensive and sacrifice one of their key advantages - graphics. To quote Apple's web site of last year:
"Go ahead, just try to play Halo on a budget PC. Most say theyre good for
2D games only. Thats because an integrated Intel graphics chip steals
power from the CPU and siphons off memory from system-level RAM. Youd
have to buy an extra card to get the graphics performance of Mac mini, and
some cheaper PCs dont even have an open slot to let you add one."
http://web.archive.org/web/20050401054016/www.apple.com/macmini/graphics.html
Reply
JT said 12:00PM on 3-01-2006
I'm still puzzled by the decision not to include FM tuner capability in the boombox, much like the FM remote. Seemed an easy thing, and could have been way more interesting for my daily usage.
Reply