Tell Me Something

It's costs $500 'cause that's how it adds up. You can't take the cost of two products, subtract one from the other and realistically expect that is what it should cost for the remaining part. An item costs what it costs in terms of parts/labor/marketing/shipping/profit. It has absolutely nothing to do with what the G5 costs. You are making the false assumption that the LCD panel in the 17" iMac costs just the same as an independent 17" LCD monitor. That is a fallacy. Take your own logic and stick it on an eMac, and it'll make a bit more sense, but it's still flawed logic.

Apple doesn't sell a 17" display. The $999 model is 20". Going by your flawed logic then the guts of a 20" G5 iMac would be "worth" around $900. You'll need a nice stylish case for the computer so... tack on another $100-$200. So figure the lowest Apple would ever consider charging retail for a "headless" G5 iMac is somewhere in the ball park of a grand.

Remember, Apple's out to make money, not to provide you with your dream computer for free. And they make more money per unit sale on more expensive items, so they're *always* going to design their product lines and pricing structures so there's incentive for the customer to *not* buy the entry level product. They made the decision when desiging the Mini that it was worth taking a possible hit on eMac sales to try expanding their market to people who would never by a machine cursed with a built-in CRT, but they were *exceedingly* careful to make sure that it wasn't going to be a factor for people looking at the G5s.

--Peace

. . . to protect high end sales. That's ALWAYS been the way things are done inside the RDF, heaven forbid they should actually try to make the high end worth the asking price by increasing its potential for expansion.

That said, I was VERY pleasantly surprised when they finally came out with a new "LC" line item . . .

. . . besides, LCDs SUCK!

Also the mac mini has a considerably more expensive 2.5" hard drive in it. (not $200 mind you). Due to the incredibly small size of the mac mini, the board liekly has considerably more layers on it than the iMac G5 as well, which could easily make it $200 more expensive.

Bobby, this is kind of off topic but what was the LCD you used with your Sparc ITX project? What size was it? What resolution was it? How much did it cost, and where did you get it? Seems it would be a good size for the mini too.

Hey, I was very pleased Apple released an affordable Mac! We are talking about a step in taking back Market Share. They are only missing one thing... Mass Marketing. I first started out on the Amiga 500 in the 80's, which was way ahead of its time, but the company, Commodore just didn't know how to market. I really hope Apple gets on the ball with marketing, I do love the Mac so...

BTW... Anyone know of any good used supplier on the 'Net besides eBay???

Cheers! Jay.

I bought an automotive LCD TV monitor. It connected to the composit output on the miniITX, and really didn't work very well. I couln't read it. I spent about $100 and it lasted about a year before it broke.

Last week I saw a slightly larger display that accepted VGA for about $300 that was readable though.

http://www.logicsupply.com/product_info.php?products_id=193

*edit, here's a place for $269:

http://www.case-mod.com/store/product_info.php?products_id=922

Complete 6-13" VGA LCDs sometimes sell on ebay for as little as $100, but you have to read carefully.

In response to the first question, you've also got to remember that the cost of an item is not always cost + fixed profit ratio. In the entry-level market, Apple is most likely a price-taker, not a price-maker (Apple has to accept the going market price for a computer, not set it's own, essentially). Classical economic theory doesn't hold as well here as it does in other markets, because the Mac Mini is different than the myriad of cheap PC's on the market, but just bear with me.

If you look at the cheap, entry-level PC market, the top end seems to be around $1000USD, give or take $100. Now, at the low end (~$300) you get a barebones system, usually with a Celeron, 256MB RAM and a 5400 RPM 40GB 3.5" drive, CD-RW in a case, with onboard video, lan and audio. Sometimes, even keyboards and mice are optional. Not a lot of muscle these days. In the upper end, you're looking at a faster processor, or perhaps an entry-level Pentium, with a little more RAM and perhaps a monitor.

Now, look at the Mac Mini: This is a 1.25 or 1.42 Ghz machine with 256MB RAM and a 60GB (IIRC) Hard drive and a CDRW or Combo Drive. However, the biggest selling feature for the Mac Mini is based on aesthetic reasons. It's not funky, it's not weird colours, it's small, it's light, it's compact, and it's tasteful.

The people in this market are 1 of 2 types: They want a replacement computer for their children to do homework/research/recreational web surfing, etc. and perhaps as a second computer for their less-computer literate spouse. Or, they may just want an entry level computer for light usage. For either of these reasons, the Mac Mini shines through very brightly. Think about it as the laptop-as-a-desktop-replacement market.

People in these catagories don't want an ugly PC case that clashes with everything, that takes up scads of space, and is noisy. They want a machine that is aesthetically pleasing, is quiet and out of the way.

Getting back to my main point: When you start to add a some-what attractive case to some of these barebone's machines, the price goes up substantially. You could easily get a comparible PC up to the price of the Mini by adding a pleasing case. Essentially, this is the going price for an entry-level, nice looking computer, and Apple, at this point at least, must charge a comparible amount if it hopes to be competitive.

Cheers,

The Czar

If you put the Mini in the SFF PC market, then it's an incredible deal. An entry-level Shuttle PC with XP Pro, combo drive, Pentium, a real GPU, modem, and MS Works costs about $800, doesn't include a keyboard or mouse either, and is still bigger than the Mac Mini. When computing the value equasion, it should be remembered that the G4 is not comparable to a Celeron. The G4 is comparable to a Pentium or Athlon XP, while a G5 is more of a Xeon or Opteron.

A lot of the very lowe-end systems do not have a burner or LAN. Most forgo a floppy drive and card slots. Ones that do include a 56k modem usually have only 1-2 slots open, and maybe a single RAM slot open. Some even use PC-133 RAM on 1Ghz+ processors. Bottom-end PCs suck. The Mac mini is comparable to a 12" PB less the LCD. Not bad for $499.