Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Desktops (Apple) Businesses Hardware Apple

Apple Upgrades Mac mini, Doesn't Tell Anybody 356

Posted by Zonk from the it's-like-christmas dept.
echomancer writes "Think Secret is reporting that Apple has released a slightly updated version of the Mac mini, but has failed to tell anyone. Some Mac minis may now include a 1.5GHz processor, 64MB of VRAM, and an updated 8x superdrive but these new machines are being shipped in boxes reflecting the original specs. 'The motivation behind this is to help clear current inventory without lowering prices. Essentially, customers are promised that the Mac mini they purchase will have specifications at least equal to the label, but that their system may exceed those.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Upgrades Mac mini, Doesn't Tell Anybody More

Apple Upgrades Mac mini, Doesn't Tell Anybody

Comments Filter:

  • Yup, got one here (Score:5, Informative)

    by Space cowboy ( 13680 ) * on Saturday October 08, 2005 @02:44PM (#13747470) Journal

    I bought one about a week ago. I can't say I've noticed it's faster in real-world use, but it does benchmark slightly faster (in accordance with the CPU speed bump). Since its main purpose is to look gorgeous in the living room, run email and web-browsing, I have no complaints, but then I wouldn't have had, anyway :-) The faster drive is noticeable though (once you get past the spotlight indexing, anyway)

    Having the extra VRAM seems to improve video performance a fair bit as well - subtly but noticeably smoother when doing the 'cube' switch using 'Desktop Manager [berlios.de]', for example. (Which is the *very* first piece of s/w I ever install on a mac). Yes I use expose too, but with DM I can dedicate one screen per task. Much nicer :-)

    Simon
    • ...the new model is much snappier?

      • Re:So what you're saying is (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Space cowboy ( 13680 ) * on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:33PM (#13747683) Journal
        Well, yes and no. There is still the occasional "what's it doing ?" pause when you start up something new (eg: System Prefs component). Spotlight is only marginally faster (pure "feel" rating there), but there are things that are noticeable as above. It's not a new computer, it's just marginally better.

        This still isn't a bad thing :-)

        Simon

    • Re:Yup, got one here (Score:5, Interesting)

      by misleb ( 129952 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:29PM (#13747666)
      I found Desktop Manager to be flaky and unpredictable. At least on Tiger. Applications would mysteriously close, windows would open up on the wrong desktop... and things like that. Overall, it doesn't really work quite like I am used to on Linux boxes. I wish it was better integrated.

      I started using a Mac on a regular basis about 2 months ago, and I am still finding it awkward to manage windows compared to the various Linux desktops I've used for nearly a decade. Yeah, I've tried Expose` too. Doesn't quite do it for me. Oh well, at least I have TextMate. If only I could port it to Linux... ;-)

      -matthew

      • Re:Yup, got one here (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Tony Hoyle ( 11698 ) <tmh@nodomain.org> on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:41PM (#13747713) Homepage
        10.3 is *much* more stable, and a fair bit faster on a Mini too.

        OTOH I never got into the Mac either... I use mine as a compile box but couldn't use it as my main machine, since Finder has a habit of falling over if the wind changes (it doesn't like my firewire hard drive... after about 10 minutes non use the driver locks up... the same drive works fine on Linux and Windows so it's definately an OSX bug. I once plugged the drive via USB... OSX threw a complete wobbly and died.. I guess nobody uses USB on the Mac).

        There are UI things I don't like - for example options missing from the context menu that are only on the main menu.. so you have to go hunting around for them instead of just getting on with what you want to do. Finder seems to have a problem shutting apps down too.. you can close them and they'll keep running. Not sure if that's a bug or if someone designed it that way (??).

        • ideas (Score:5, Informative)

          by hotsauce ( 514237 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @04:40PM (#13747971)
          there is a certain firewire chipset that is known to have a bug that causes freezes with os x. drive manufacturers have released fixes. check your manufacturers site

          context menus are supposed to have less options than the menu bar by definition. context menus only have options that are relevant to that context, and in addition ux people will tell you they should only have the most relevant ones, not the whole kit and cabodle. context menus wouldnt save you any time if you had to dig through as many options as the menu bar

          the close window control is supposed to close a window, and not shut down the application. you may be used to windows, where closing the last open window also shuts down the app, but many ux peeps will tell you this is not a good assumption to make: if you close the last window of a database server (say, a query window), do you want the database to shut down? if you close the last window to your mail app, do you want all mail services to shut down (i like still being able to see when ive got incoming mail)? the apple ux teams position on these things and others are well known (try google)

          im surprised you would trust development to a system you see as so flaky

          • Re:ideas (Score:5, Insightful)

            by Tjp($)pjT ( 266360 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @08:05PM (#13748635)
            the close window control is supposed to close a window, and not shut down the application. you may be used to windows, where closing the last open window also shuts down the app, but many ux peeps will tell you this is not a good assumption to make:

            Yet iPhoto closes when you close the window ... It is annoying that Apple chose to make single dialog apps behave different in this respect.

        • Re:Yup, got one here (Score:4, Informative)

          by Talez ( 468021 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @07:25PM (#13748545)
          There are UI things I don't like - for example options missing from the context menu that are only on the main menu.. so you have to go hunting around for them instead of just getting on with what you want to do. Finder seems to have a problem shutting apps down too.. you can close them and they'll keep running.

          Application Name --> Quit Application.

          Get into the habit of using it if you want to quit each time.

          There are perfectly good reasons for OSX maintaining this behaviour of not closing apps when the last window is closed. For something like iTunes you can either a) minimize the window which clutters up the dock, b) change it to mini mode which is still another window open or c) close the window and let iTunes run in the background anyway.

          Ditto for Mail.

        • Re:Yup, got one here (Score:5, Informative)

          by porcupine8 ( 816071 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @09:46PM (#13748893) Journal
          You've already had plenty of explanations of the close-but-not-quit thing, but I just wanted to say why I *love* this feature. If I have an application that is slow to startup (like, say NeoOffice/J, or anything that requires firing up Classic mode), if I close my last window and leave the app running the background I don't have that startup wait when I want to open another document. I HATE it in Windows, when I close a Word document, and then five minutes later when I open another one I have to sit though Word firing up again.

          But nobody's forcing me to leave things running. If I don't want to do that, I can Command-Q or quit from the menu. If I decide later that I've got too much open, I can quit from the dock.

          So, basically - you have more choice here than you do in Windows. If you want to quit every time you close the last document, you can do it - either with keyboard or mouse. If you don't want to, you don't have to.

    • me too. My wife's XP box took a dive and he needs her computer to do all her digital photography. So, I bought her a 1.42 mac mini, and I just checked it out. Sure as shit, it's a 1.5 with 64MB vram but the box does say 1.42 and 32MB vram.

    • Re:Yup, got one here (Score:3, Interesting)

      by TheGuano ( 851573 )
      From the transition effect videos at the Desktop Manager site, it looks like the focus of the window/application switches slightly after the transition completes. This sounds like it could essentially amount to a "lag" effect, where a hotkey or command pressed during or immediately after the transition gets applied to the active app on the previous desktop rather than the current, visible one. Might be a problem for those who want to do things on autopilot (i.e., if you want to quickly switch to the itunes

    • Re:Yup, got one here (Score:3, Interesting)

      by sl3xd ( 111641 ) *
      You know, I bought a mac mini about a week ago as well. Except that I didn't get the faster CPU, or more video memory, or the faster drive. I'm somewhat unhappy about it, but frankly, if I wanted a performance machine I wouldn't have gotten a Mac Mini to begin with.

      It's perfectly adequate for the things I am using my Mini for: iTunes, iPhoto, and having fun with my first Macintosh. I never intended to use the thing to play the latest/greatest video games with -- the Mac Mini isn't supposed to fill that

  • Dell one-ups Apple, sells whatever it feels like (Score:5, Funny)

    by AEton ( 654737 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @02:44PM (#13747472)
    Reported here: [macenstein.com]

    In a swift and decisive move, Dell Computers announced today that it will begin shipping all systems with intentionally mis-labeled specifications on the boxes. In what is being seen as an obvious attempt to play catch up with Apple computer's brilliant move to sell its Mac mini systems with specs that may "meet or exceed" those listed on their packing, Dell took the move one step further.

    "We feel the average consumer is becoming bored with the computer buying experience." says Dell's Chief Marketing Officer Mike George. "They no longer wish to choose an item, pay for it, and have that item arrive at their front door. It's predictable. It's what their parent's would want. Today's consumer needs the element of surprise to add a bit of excitement to the table."

    To that end, Dell plans to ship all of its consumer desktop models and its Inspiron 6000 and 1200 model laptop computers with wildly off-base specifications. "We've actually created a random number generator which is responsible for listing the model number and processor speeds. Even WE don't know exactly what is in those boxes. It really is exciting." says George.

    • Re:Dell one-ups Apple, sells whatever it feels lik (Score:5, Funny)

      by SCVirus ( 774240 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:01PM (#13747549) Journal
      In a new ad campaign Sun has said that they are '100% more random then dell' and has begun including only a random 12 parts in each box, you could get an entire server or 12 mice.
      • That was sure funny.

        A professor once explained that engineering requires advanced study by saying that even the task of assembling a television is not possible without some understanding - if one were to just put the TV parts in a box and shake the box, the result won't be a television.

        Random parts may be stretching things, but what about a different kind of delivery model for geek gear where the system is constructible at random? Put the parts in a box, push the box down the stairs a few times and the outp

  • It's like they always say (Score:5, Funny)

    by $RANDOMLUSER ( 804576 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @02:45PM (#13747477)
    YMMV

  • And? (Score:2)

    by Scoria ( 264473 )
    I'd say that is perfectly reasonable. It would be simply unethical for them to ship packaging with specifications reflecting a more powerful machine unless they were capable of providing one in every shipment.

    This method allows them to ethically clear unused inventory and provide additional value to the customer.

    • max(wtf); (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      are you retarded?! this is a way of bloating the price of old models. how is that ethical?

      dont look at it as "hey, im paying for a 1.4ghz box and i got a 1.5ghz box!"
      look at it as "hey i could have had the option of buying this 1.4ghz box for 100 bucks less or paying the $699 for a 1.5ghz box"

      by your logic apple can continue selling mac minis for $699 in 10 years advertised as a 1.4ghz machine and you dont know whether you are getting a 3ghz box or a 20ghz box.

    • Re:And? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Internet_Communist ( 592634 )
      You mean as opposed to how it's unethical to be selling people older products at the same price as the newer ones, on the off chance you MIGHT pick up the newer model?

      Yeah, perfectly reasonable. Sleezy bastards.

    • Re:And? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by nolife ( 233813 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @05:35PM (#13748198) Homepage Journal
      This method allows them to ethically clear unused inventory and provide additional value to the customer

      I know vocal Apple users have a hard time really understanding that what is good for Apple might not be good for youself but I'll post this anyway and take the hit.

      A lot of people attempt to keep up or do a little asking around and research before buying a product. In fact, it is really not hard for a lot of products because companies and sales folks will advertise up and coming products days, weeks, and maybe even months ahead of time. I would be not be the happiest person in the world or get a good feeling about buying a $500 product and find out 2 days later a new version was on the market. Add to the fact that the company is doing everything within its power to prevent me from knowing a better one was just around the corner and about to be released, including the very unusal step of keeping it quite after the fact and packaging the product in the old box. I know this is only a step upgrade and not a platform change like the difference between a Sony PS2 and a PS3 but it is not a small trivial change either.

      Mod as you wish but no one needs waste time explaining Apples position on why they did this. It is a simple to understand reason and already mentioned many times in other threads. My point is, there are two ways to introduce a new or improved product. As a person like many others who is actually buying the products, Apples method is not in my best interest and probably not in many others.

      • Re:And? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Midnight Thunder ( 17205 )
        The truth is in IT you are usually a lot better off than in most other technology markets. Most companies in this domain announce a new product, but there is no requirement for them to do so. I am basing this on the fact that you almost never hear about a company releasing a tweaked version of a TV or Hi-Fi. Major releases maybe, but certainly not a tweak, which is what this amounts to.

        You know when you are buying technology that it will be out of date before you even get it home. These people ordered somet

  • Is there a problem here? (no, not really) (Score:3, Insightful)

    by yagu ( 721525 ) * <yayagu.gmail@com> on Saturday October 08, 2005 @02:47PM (#13747488) Journal

    Just like on my Cheerios box: "..., though some settling of contents normally occurs during shipping and loading".

    I guess as long as the consumer gets at least what they're advertised to get I don't see this as any controversy, but maybe a decent approach by a seemingly decent company (don't know for sure, haven't done any real research into Apple). And as for any consumers of the "lower grade" Minis, again, I can't see there'd be any problem as long as they got what they paid for and was advertised.

    On the other hand, there are lots of examples where companies advertise one way but deliver less. I recently purchases a washer/dryer set -- won't name the company, but it sears in my memory. Anyway, in the picture in the Sunday circular, they were pictured side-by-side, doors open. The dryer's inside light neatly illuminated the clothing inside, exactly one of my criteria. When I got mine, no light. Whaaaaah? I looked inside, no problem, there's the recess where the light should be, it must be burned out, annoying but fixable. The more I pried around and tried to find where the socket was the more confused I became. There wasn't ANYPLACE to install a light bulb. I called the company for an explanation. Their explanation: "the pictures in the ads don't necessarily reflect what the actual product looks like". No apology, no offer to fix it. Guess what, I'll remember this experience for a long long time. (The inside light was one of my primary criteria in dryers as I shopped.... sigh.)

    • Did you not check out the floor model when you purchased it? Or did you simply buy online?

    • Yes, there might be a problem here. According to labeling laws when you specify contents of a package, you must specify the contents as closely as you can, and when you have to round, you round down. Just recently the nursery industry got in a lot of trouble for selling "gallon" pots that, if you have ever bought a pot know, never could measure much of a gallon. Pretty much what has happened is that the industry is being brought into compliance. While the computer industry may not be regulated quite like th
    • So you saw a well-lit picture and assumed it had a feature that was never mentioned anywhere else? You didn't check the manufacture's specs? You didn't do any research beyond looking at a well-lit picture? I'm sorry and not trying to troll here, but you bought a product that you really didn't know a helluva lot about.
    • Well, refer to my Pink Panther signature below:
    • The inside light was one of my primary criteria in dryers as I shopped.... sigh.

      Forget price, efficiency, speed, reliability or looks. No, I wash my clothes in an underground cavern, and if I can't eat my dinner by the light emanating from the ol' Kenmore, then I don't want it.

      Seriously, man, of all the features I've never desired in a consumer product, that's right up there. What on earth are your requirements that this seems like an important checkbox?

  • Why not update the video chipset? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by eagl ( 86459 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @02:48PM (#13747493) Journal
    Why stick with the 9200 video chip? That one part has kept me from buying from the day it was launched.
    • According to the article, they are attempting to clear inventory. I would guess that the extra VRAM is done by populating another 32MB on a currently unpopulated set of pads on the board. Switching to a new video chipset that is not pin for pin compatible with what they currently have (and use) will not relieve any overstock concerns.

    • Re:Why not update the video chipset? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by temojen ( 678985 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:10PM (#13747586) Journal
      Because the 9200 is good enough for what the Mac Mini is intended for, and it's what they're tooled to produce, and it's what fits on their motherboard. To use a different video chipset they'd likely have to re-design the motherboard, re-do several layers of PCB mask, and re-program several robots. To add 32MB Vram they just have to put different chips in one slot. Similar changes apply for the faster CPU and drive.

    • Re:Why not update the video chipset? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by leonbev ( 111395 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:12PM (#13747600) Journal
      Simple... Upgrading the video processor in the Mac Mini to a Radeon 9600 would make this $500-$700 computer dangerously close in performance to a $1,300 low-end G5 iMac. Apple probably doesn't want to risk cannabilizing their existing higher-end desktops with an upgraded entry level system.
      • Upgrading the video processor in the Mac Mini to a Radeon 9600 would make this $500-$700 computer dangerously close in performance to a $1,300 low-end G5 iMac.

        So the $700-$900 eMac with the Radeon 9600 is "dangerously close" in performance to the iMac G5? How about the $1000 iBook 12"?

        It probably would be, if they'd stuck with the G4 long enough they could start shipping low end Macs with the MPC8641, but the 166 MHz CPU bus on the 74xx series G4s is just too slow.
    • Probably because it is built into the system board. I imagine the CPU is slotted.

      -matthew

  • Smart move: delight customers & avoid unsold m (Score:5, Interesting)

    by G4from128k ( 686170 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @02:49PM (#13747496)
    Finally Apple has learned from some of their shipping problems of the past. This is a good move on three levels. First, it's better to surprise a customer with something better than expected. Second, it's also a great way to avoid a sales slump when updated models get announced. Apple has always feared the Osbourne effect, but hasn't been able to stop the rumor mill from letting people know when to stop buying old machines and wait for new machines. Third, its a nice way to ramp to volume production without the pressure of backorders on a new model.

    • Re:Smart move: delight customers & avoid unsol (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Jugalator ( 259273 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:13PM (#13747604) Journal
      First, it's better to surprise a customer with something better than expected.

      CNET News has a good point about this though, in that new owners hearing of this and being among the "unlucky" may complain about it, since they know there are betters setups out there, of the same model. And even if they don't, they certainly won't belong to the positively surprised crowd. I'm not sure singling out users on random with computers even using the same part number to confuse the retailers is such a good idea, especially when done silently from Apple's part.
      • You got what the box says it contains. Why should you have the right to complain? If you've heard there are boxes out there with beter specs, you also know that the others don't have the extra's.

        The same happens with CPU overclocking. If you get a specimen that cannot be overclocked enough, do you go complaining? Still, another CPU of the same type might be perfectly qualified for higher speeds, but dumped in the lower frequency "bucket" because of shortage.

        You could go complaining if you got the upgraded m
    • True. A few days after I bought my 12" iBook they sent me a mail stating that a) a new version of the 12" iBook was just released, b) my order automatically got upgraded and c) they even matched the hardware configuration to what they believed I would choose for the newer model (eg. I originally selected a 60 GB HDD and the new model now had 80 GB as the biggest size, so they gave me 80). And to top that all off, the newer model was cheaper than the old one. In the end I got 200 MHz and 20 GB extra and paid

  • Lack of publicity can be intentional. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by ngr8 ( 504185 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @02:51PM (#13747507) Journal
    Working for a telecom hardware company in the mid-90s, our team (burly xx and xy consultants all) came up with the strategy to enhance the software and packaging of their flagship product and *only* tell their trusted distribution channel.

    God bless 'em, they took the advice.

    Product launched. They ran out of manufacturing capacity in a couple of months; stuff flew off the shelves. Their competitors were in the "Michael Corleone without a gun in the restaurant" mindset for about 18 months.

    Of course, they thought the world was circuit switched big dial tone and divided themselves pretty well by zero by 2000.

  • Originals available? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by truesaer ( 135079 )
    If there are original spec minis still available, I would be pretty pissed if I ended up with one of them instead of the better ones. If thats the case Apple was probably just hoping no one would notice.
    • Why? You would be getting exactly what you played for.
      • Why? You would be getting exactly what you played for.

        If me and a friend walk into an apple store and buy Mac Minis, I expect that mine will be just as good as his. I doubt there is anything illegal about this since the machine isn't below the specs marked on the box. But if there are 2 mac minis available for X dollars, and one has better specs, I want the one with better specs.

        Apple should either discount the older model a few bucks, or keep them the same price and label the packages accurately. If th

        • Nah, it's like buying a box of Cracker Jacks. You and a friend may get different toys inside, but do you go crying to the company because your friends toy was better?

          • Re:Originals available? (Score:4, Funny)

            by truesaer ( 135079 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:30PM (#13747671) Homepage
            Worst. Analogy. Ever.
        • I wonder if they have different PLUs?
        • If me and a friend walk into an apple store and buy Mac Minis, I expect that mine will be just as good as his. I doubt there is anything illegal about this since the machine isn't below the specs marked on the box. But if there are 2 mac minis available for X dollars, and one has better specs, I want the one with better specs.

          Ah, but don't you see what's going to happen in a few months? Apple will clear it's own warehouses of the old units (you know they have a way of telling which is which) then they'll up
        • If me and a friend walk into an apple store and buy Mac Minis, I expect that mine will be just as good as his. (...) if there are 2 mac minis available for X dollars, and one has better specs, I want the one with better specs.

          Quite frankly, the standard procedure when your supply doesn't match your desired performance is to just limit it to the performance you want. That is why you have HDD controllers with RAID disabled, binned CPUs with lowered multipliers, GFX cards with locked pipes and so on and so on.
        • "If me and a friend walk into an apple store and buy Mac Minis, I expect that mine will be just as good as his."

          Why don't you just get a ruler and measure?

        • Then buy one with better specs. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Thu25245 ( 801369 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @06:57PM (#13748463)
          I want the one with better specs.

          Get out your wallet and buy something better. Do your research and get the best model, like you said. If a 1.42GHz mini is not what you need/want, then go buy a G5 or whatever. Or wait until Apple is willing to guarantee you a 1.5GHz unit.

          I can't believe you'd complain because there's a chance you might get more than you paid for. Do you get annoyed when you see those "20% More Cheez Doodles!" packages in the supermarket two days after you bought a regular-sized bag?
        • A tip for you.

          The next time you fly, never ask other passengers what they paid for their ticket and next April 15, don't ask the others in line dropping of their tax return how much they paid in taxes. I don't think you should know.

          The world isn't fair. Get over it.
    • I'm afraid that I fail to see the issue. They advertised an X, you decided that you could afford/use an X, and when it gets shipped, you might get an X+.2, but at the minimum, you're guaranteed to get an X. It's not like they have a problem where they have either 1.5GHz procs or 800MHz procs, so that you could get either an X+.2 or an X/2 when you order an X. The phrase here is "meets or exceeds", as opposed to "averages out to...".

      This is like the old days with underclocked processors, or cars not ma

  • My only question (Score:5, Interesting)

    by G3ek ( 589803 ) <iclintb@ m a c.com> on Saturday October 08, 2005 @02:51PM (#13747511) Homepage
    is when will Apple 'officially' update the mini? I am ready to buy the top model, but when I heard this I thought "well, hell, I'm not going to order now and risk getting the lower spec'd model."

    So, seeing as how this news has been around for about a week, I wonder if it's backfiring for Apple and no one is buying until they update 'officially'.
    • My guess is that they ran out of old inventory, and just started shipping the upgraded models early. Apple has some sort of announcement scheduled for next week (might be the week after), and it'll probably be announced then.

  • Kinda dated story (Score:5, Interesting)

    by kitzilla ( 266382 ) <paperfrog&gmail,com> on Saturday October 08, 2005 @02:53PM (#13747518) Homepage Journal
    This story broke at least a week ago.

    It's not that Apple is up-specing the Mini, which it needs, so much as they've run through their stock of low-end parts. It's also profoundly embarrassing to have the same 1.5 GHz processor in entry-level desktop as in your $2,500 Powerbook.

    Expect a final PPC-based Powerbook revision almost immediately. THEN they'll own up to the Mini upgrade.

    • t's also profoundly embarrassing to have the same 1.5 GHz processor in entry-level desktop as in your $2,500 Powerbook.

      You must mean your $2,000 Powerbook. The $2,500 Powerbook is 1.67GHz. Nitpicking, but it's a $500 difference. ;)

  • Dr. Strangelove says... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Caradoc ( 15903 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @02:56PM (#13747529) Homepage
    "Ze whole point of upgrading ze specs is lost if eet is kept secret. Vhy didn't zey tell ze vorld, eh?!?"
    • "Ze whole point of upgrading ze specs is lost if eet is kept secret. Vhy didn't zey tell ze vorld, eh?!?"

      "It was to be announced at the Apple congress. As you know the CEO loves surprises..."

      (God damn, this joke actually works like a charm)

  • You actually mean (Score:5, Insightful)

    by agraupe ( 769778 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:06PM (#13747575) Journal
    You actually mean that I could get more than what I agreed to pay for?! Those bastards, how dare they do such a thing! Honestly, people, it's not a bad thing.

    • Re:You actually mean (Score:4, Interesting)

      by bogie ( 31020 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:52PM (#13747761) Journal
      How about this then? You go to the bank and deposit your money. Some customers are getting extra money free from the bank, you don't. You both used the same service but others got better treatment.

      Don't you see why people are annoyed that some are getting free upgrades and some aren't? If I got a "non-upgraded" version I'd sure be tempted to return it. Only a fool wouldn't look out for his/her own interest.

      Apple certainly is within its rights to do this. In fact other companies have been doing this sort of things since before computer were even invented. So really this is a non-story and not a big deal. But you can't honestly be surprised at the reaction that some people are having.

      • Re:You actually mean (Score:2, Insightful)

        by SuprCzr ( 881969 )
        This happens in all industries to some degree or another.

        Some car engines just make more hp than others and there's nothing that the manufacturer can do about that. They're all sold with the assurance that there is "at least" the rated numbers (unless youre mazda [appearfirst.com])

        If you buy a mac mini right now. youre guaranteed that it'll have X specifications. buy it assuming youre gonna get that and all you can get is pleasantly surprised. theres no harm.

        The ONLY people that should be frustrated by this are people who

  • charity fund (Score:5, Funny)

    by zpok ( 604055 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:08PM (#13747579) Homepage
    I propose we all donate so that Slashdot story submitters don't have to live under a bridge and can get back on top of tech news (instead of two weeks behind)...

    • Re:charity fund (Score:5, Funny)

      by slapout ( 93640 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:13PM (#13747602)
      Maybe this was suppose to be the dupe and the orginal post didn't get put up for some reason.
    • If you don't like the timelyness of the stories, submit more timely stories.

      • "Google takes over world, Microsoft left to die."
        After google [Girl/Boy]-friend society stopped being [72.14.207.104] as it used to be cause noone had to get out to get dates anymore.

        Bill gates tried to bring out his own X-[Girl/Boy]-friend but bankrupted trying to compete with Google. Observers stated alot of software issues made the experience "too realistic" and resembling more like a "ex-experience" then a "eXperience" as Microsoft tried to market their last hope. Internal sources disclosed B. Gates would've "sworn

  • Damn you, corporate whores! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Fortyseven ( 240736 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:11PM (#13747588) Homepage Journal
    This is an outrage! This PROVES that Apple obviously has no respect for it's customers, and this is just another example of how the high and mighty have falle--

    Whoa, wait a minute...this is a good thing? Arrgh, goddamn it. I blew my rant load for nothing...

    What will I do now? ...

    Guess I could...maybe do a cliche? Let's see... In Soviet Russia, you upgrade Apple's specs? Nah. Upgrade Natalie Portman's specs? Nice idea, but no. Not after Episode 3.

    Hrm... ...shit, I give up. Carry on.

  • Some will be disapointed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by bender647 ( 705126 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:19PM (#13747629)
    A similar thing happened when I bought my Sharp Zaurus SL-5600 near its end of life. They ran out of the buggy PXA250 processors and started shipping the last units with the improved PXA255. It was even marked on the box, but since most people mail-ordered the units it was a crap-shoot what you got. I got the old unit, and was a bit disappointed even though I did get what I paid for. I suspect Mac Mini buyers who don't get the lucky upgrade will feel the same way. They may even return their units and try again.

  • Buy until you get a hi spec, resell lo spec. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Julian Morrison ( 5575 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:37PM (#13747696)
    The obvious counter game is: buy more than one, until you verify you have a hi-spec, then rebox the lo-spec mechines and resell them as "brand new unwanted" on ebay. You'll probably lose a small amount on the others, but it's offset against the cheap hi-spec machine, raising its effective cost only slightly.

  • This product may be returned...... (Score:4, Informative)

    by cl191 ( 831857 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @03:38PM (#13747703)
    Oh great....now Fry's is going to run out of return labels. Oh the slightly related note, I have a Toshiba Libretto 50 which supposed to only have a Pentium 75 on it. But by the time mine was built, Intel has stopped making P75 and Toshiba ended up putting a P120 in it and underclock it to 75mhz....didn't take long before someone noticed that and a few soldering later, we have P120 Libretto 50s :-)

  • Would be better.. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by kahrytan ( 913147 )
    This is one of those stories that should never been reported at all.
      1. Apple is one of the few companies who actually care about their customers (Probaly because of the low market share).
      2. If I bought a new mini mac and got unexpected got upgraded model, I would be happy. Since this story is released, few will buy Mini Mac out of fear of getting older model.

      News.com and Thinkgeek.com ruined the surprise.

  • Actually a good update (Score:4, Informative)

    by digitalgimpus ( 468277 ) on Saturday October 08, 2005 @08:15PM (#13748656) Homepage
    I got a mac mini, it's actually a prety powerful computer. And so insanely silent 99% of the time, I don't even know it's on. This is a great update because they fixed some of the key issues:

    - 512MB RAM is now standard (256MB isn't really very usable on OS X).
    - More VRAM! Sadly not upgrading the chipset yet, but it's still an improvement
    - 5400 RPM HD!!!! This is the biggest upgrade. The 4200RPM drive and minimal RAM makes this computer really slugish. Upgrade the RAM and the HD, and it's a whole new computer. That paging file will get you.

    The processor upgrade isn't a big deal. The DVDR isn't bad, but don't know how much I'd use it.

    It's a great computer. For anyone wanting to experiment on the Mac, or just want a cheap system, it's a steal. It's well engineered. The first time you hold it, you know it's well made. Solid, and good hardware.

    I personally like this upgrade they offer. Wish mine had more RAM and a faster HD out of the box.

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close