Anyone getting the new Mac Mini?

[ICEBERG]

Wow.. $629 for a good entry level computer. Is anyone going to order it?

[ICEBERG]

What do you think?

[ICEBERG]

2.

[ICEBERG]

3.

[ICEBERG]

4.

[Weapon_R]

Where's the rest of it?

[ICEBERG]

5.

[blinkme_210]

Not really a good "entry" level Mac if you ask me. 256mb is the bare minimum amount of ram you need to run OS X, couple that with an older G4 chipset, and it's not looking so good. Of course, it'll be just fine for people who are only going to browse the web and type documents with it.

Also, don't be fooled into the whole hype of being able to easily use all of your old peripherals with it. Last time I checked, all my "old" keyboards and mouses were still PS2, not USB. Even if you did have an USB keyboard & mouse, there are only 2 USB ports on it, do you wanna be unplugging either the keyboard or mouse everytime just so you can upload pictures from your digital camera?

For myself personally, the only thing attractive about it is the size of it, nothing more.

[ICEBERG]

Originally posted by Weapon_R
Where's the rest of it?

That's all of it. :D

[Weapon_R]

Wow.

A $600 dollar box. Where's the monitor/peripherals haha. Is there something i'm not getting here?

[blinkme_210]

Originally posted by Weapon_R
Wow.

A $600 dollar box. Where's the monitor/peripherals haha. Is there something i'm not getting here?

That's the point of it, for $600 it is suppose to be the first "affordable" Mac. It's Apples attempt at making PC users switch over to Mac. So the price is enticed to get users to throw out their M$ towers, and re-use all the periperhals with this Mac Mini.

For $699 I'd rather go over to the Dell website and get a 3Ghz P4, larger hard drive, that comes complete WITH a nice sized 17 inch monitor. Oh yeh, they also bundle a keyboard and mouse with their computers :rolleyes:

[ICEBERG]

Originally posted by blinkme_210


That's the point of it, for $600 it is suppose to be the first "affordable" Mac. It's Apples attempt at making PC users switch over to Mac. So the price is enticed to get users to throw out their M$ towers, and re-use all the periperhals with this Mac Mini.

For $699 I'd rather go over to the Dell website and get a 3Ghz P4, larger hard drive, that comes complete WITH a nice sized 17 inch monitor. Oh yeh, they also bundle a keyboard and mouse with their computers :rolleyes:

The Mac mini is not a replacement for someone who's been using a tower with multiple hard drives, PCI cards and support for more RAM. It's an entry level computer with limited upgradability.

So blinkme is not getting one. Anyone else.:)

[Superesc]

Going to be ordering one later this year for my siblings. I don't want them using a PC. :P

[Kamen]

At first I wanted to order one, but not anymore. The specs are way too crappy, plus I don't want to make the transition of using a mac everytime I'm away from home in university. I would rather spend that $749 (I never considered the cheaper one) on a shuttle upgrade.

[eblend]

what the hell is the point i seriously don't get it...u have this small thing...and u put it next you your monitor and it still takes up room...might as well get somthing thats actually capable

[/////AMG]

Why buy a crappy mac, might aswell goto memex and get some of these and buld from there w/ better specs

http://mirror.memoryexpress.net/ProductDetail.php?DisplayProductID=3623

http://mirror.memoryexpress.net/ProductDetail.php?DisplayProductID=3932

http://mirror.memoryexpress.net/ProductDetail.php?DisplayProductID=4540

[sputnik]

With only 256mb of RAM, a 40gb harddrive and only a CD-RW with no keyboard/mouse or monitor its not worth it.

Get it up to 1GB of RAM, 120gb harddrive, 802.11g and a DVD+RW and you will quickly realize that its not worth it anymore... and you STILL need a monitor keyboard an mouse.

[Khyron]

This is for people that want their computer to look cute. Just like the iMac (at least that did the job).

Khyron

[heavyD]

Such negativety and ignorance. Here is a comparison of the Mac Mini and the price to build an equivalent pc.

http://osviews.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=3243

That said I'm not getting one because I already have a G4. Mac's certainly are not crappy. I was a longtime PC user but got tired of having PC problems at work then going home to a PC that also had problems. Now I suffer through the same PC problems at work but go home to a computer that has never crashed in the entire two years I have owned it. The best thing I can say about Mac's is that they just work and my LCD display is so beautiful still.

[Khyron]

Originally posted by heavyD
Such negativety and ignorance. Here is a comparison of the Mac Mini and the price to build an equivalent pc.

http://osviews.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=3243
That said I'm not getting one because I already have a G4. Mac's certainly are not crappy. I was a longtime PC user but got tired of having PC problems at work then going home to a PC that also had problems. Now I suffer through the same PC problems at work but go home to a computer that has never crashed in the entire two years I have owned it. The best thing I can say about Mac's is that they just work and my LCD display is so beautiful still.

Your LCD is probably available for the PC, along with 100s of other choices.

You obviously don't play modern games. Also, modern PCs don't normally crash until the user starts adding 3rd party free-ware/garbage or bargain basement hardware. I've had plenty of MS machines that went years without problems including an NT machine that didn't get rebooted for a year.

Win2000 and XP have pretty much rendered the reliability arguement moot - just look at the Xbox if you want to see how reliable a PC can be when you lock down the hardware.

And that comparison is stupid - you can get a 40G for 59.99, but what he fails to mention is you can get an 80 gig for 69.99. Or get 200 gigs for a few more. Or go even bigger if disk space is what you're after. AND he plugs Windows XP PROFESSIONAL instead of HOME because what - home users that he's comparing to need to have a home domain? And a Radeon 9200 for 90 bucks? You can get a card twice as fast for less. Oh and a CDRW for 60 US - you can get a DVD burner for that much.

As for the Apple parts costing less - anyone who thinks a company that has a monopoly has smaller margins than cut-throat competition needs a lesson in economics.

That said, if I needed a legal multimedia video editor or some sort of desktop publisher, and nothing else, a Mac would fit the bill to a T. Or if I knew absolutely nothing about computers, a Mac would be fine.

But since I want my machine to do many different things a PC is usually a better fit. And cheaper.

Khyron

[heavyD]

Originally posted by Khyron


Your LCD is probably available for the PC, along with 100s of other choices.

You obviously don't play modern games. Also, modern PCs don't normally crash until the user starts adding 3rd party free-ware/garbage or bargain basement hardware. I've had plenty of MS machines that went years without problems including an NT machine that didn't get rebooted for a year.

Win2000 and XP have pretty much rendered the reliability arguement moot - just look at the Xbox if you want to see how reliable a PC can be when you lock down the hardware.

And that comparison is stupid - you can get a 40G for 59.99, but what he fails to mention is you can get an 80 gig for 69.99. Or get 200 gigs for a few more. Or go even bigger if disk space is what you're after. AND he plugs Windows XP PROFESSIONAL instead of HOME because what - home users that he's comparing to need to have a home domain? And a Radeon 9200 for 90 bucks? You can get a card twice as fast for less. Oh and a CDRW for 60 US - you can get a DVD burner for that much.

As for the Apple parts costing less - anyone who thinks a company that has a monopoly has smaller margins than cut-throat competition needs a lesson in economics.

That said, if I needed a legal multimedia video editor or some sort of desktop publisher, and nothing else, a Mac would fit the bill to a T. Or if I knew absolutely nothing about computers, a Mac would be fine.

But since I want my machine to do many different things a PC is usually a better fit. And cheaper.

Khyron

Junior,

Apple studio displays are among the best LCD's you can get and while you can hook them up to PC they look better via a DVI connection of a Mac.

I have three consoles so I don't need my computer to play games.

The whole idea of the mini is to get macs in the hands of people who normally couldn't afford an imac or G5, etc not to compete with low end pc's. Since pretty well everyone that buys a Mac doens't go back to PC, putting out an affordable unit like the mini enables Apple to reach more consumers and keep them.

BTW: OSX > any Windows operating system of your choice.

[doublepostwhore]

^

Isnt Khyron a computer designer or something?

I agree that macs are intensly reliable... but as is my athlon XP 2600XP this bitch has been O'cloked for 5 months @ 2.755 GHz...I have yet to reboot... I run Ares, KaZaA, and Newsbin 24/7 and I use this computer soley for games & Movies.

My Laptop Dell Inspiron 300m has been flawless not crashed in the 7 months I have owned it Use it as a webserfer/music node/watch DVD's and of corse school.

However I do have 2 PC's on the network that are constantly crashing (windows ME eats all sorts of anus) whereas the Imac (2004) that is on-loan to me from my buddy not only works faster/better/less problems then all my computers 100% of the time, but also looks cooler :P.
This is inpart due to the fact that I use it soley as a BF 1942 server but it still is beautiful.

Each computer has its upsides and its downsides...

No matter what anyone says Mac > PC in reliability PC > Mac in Compatibility/usefulness/popularity. Remeber that the amount of volume sold of a product is directly proportional to errors and failures among the product.

[Zero102]

I would only buy one to install linux on it, and use it as a terminal... That's about the only real use for it IMO.
I can't stand MacOS.

But, I have to say, that is damn small!
What do they do about cooling? Simply slow the clock rate, and reduce voltages until it no longer produces appreciable heat?

[heavyD]

Originally posted by doublepostwhore
^

Isnt Khyron a computer designer or something?

I agree that macs are intensly reliable... but as is my athlon XP 2600XP this bitch has been O'cloked for 5 months @ 2.755 GHz...I have yet to reboot... I run Ares, KaZaA, and Newsbin 24/7 and I use this computer soley for games & Movies.

My Laptop Dell Inspiron 300m has been flawless not crashed in the 7 months I have owned it Use it as a webserfer/music node/watch DVD's and of corse school.

However I do have 2 PC's on the network that are constantly crashing (windows ME eats all sorts of anus) whereas the Imac (2004) that is on-loan to me from my buddy not only works faster/better/less problems then all my computers 100% of the time, but also looks cooler :P.
This is inpart due to the fact that I use it soley as a BF 1942 server but it still is beautiful.

Each computer has its upsides and its downsides...

No matter what anyone says Mac > PC in reliability PC > Mac in Compatibility/usefulness/popularity. Remeber that the amount of volume sold of a product is directly proportional to errors and failures among the product.

I agree with most of your points. Part of the PC's bad rap is that any manufacturer can build PC hardware and the quality varies and alot of clones have cheap harware in them whereas Macs all have the same quality hardware. No arguments there.

No one can disagree that Microsoft has a spotty reputation when it comes to operating systems. The last few versions of OSX have been rock solid.

I disagree that a PC is more useful. A Mac can do anything a PC can do. PC gaming has been on the decline for years anyway as handheld and consoles is where most people play their video games nowadays so I don't buy the whole game thing. GTA SA sold more than HL2 and Doom3 combined in two months as did Halo 2.

BTW: I don't care if Khyron builds computers. He could have invented them for all I care.

[Xtrema]

This thing is sold on style, not power.

No PC can be this small, even with mini-itx platform. And building mini-itx system ain't cheap.

I thing this is could be the first mac I'll own. But I need a few more features:

- 7.1 surround sound
- HDTV/TV tuner with PVR software
- Resolution with HDTV compatability

[Khyron]

Originally posted by heavyD
[B] No one can disagree that Microsoft has a spotty reputation when it comes to operating systems. The last few versions of OSX have been rock solid.

Your error is lumping PC hardware and Microsoft together.

OS X is bsd with a gucci window manager. Anyone can put any flavor of linux or the BSDs or even Solaris on a PC. Or you can run Microsoft. It's up to you, not some company. You want a pimped out RAM hog with a tiny harddrive or maybe instead you want 1000 gigs of space and a base model processor? That's your choice.

Early MS oses were buggy only because of the vast variety of hardware and the huge amount of shitty programs. Sure 98 bluescreens make it look like shit now, but so were those fucking bombs (the Mac equivalent of a blue screen, and equally as frustrating). Again, give me a 95 box with a restricted list of software and proper supported hardware and it can rock solid.


I disagree that a PC is more useful. A Mac can do anything a PC can do. PC gaming has been on the decline for years anyway as handheld and consoles is where most people play their video games nowadays so I don't buy the whole game thing. GTA SA sold more than HL2 and Doom3 combined in two months as did Halo 2.

Ever tried to play an RTS on a console? Starcraft, Warcraft, Lord of the Rings Battle for Middle Earth? You can't. Same applies to any game with a lot of text like MMorgs like World of Warcraft or Everquest. Reading text on a TV sucks ass. Maybe once HDTV is standard we'll see some improvement, but by then who knows what the PC will have. Since the days of Atari, consoles are always weaker, older computers. They still are the best for fighting games, oddly enough.

If a Mac serves your purposes, then great - but to say it's as versitile as a PC just requires a walk down the PC hardware/software aisles at any Future Shop. Then browse the Mac section.

Edit: Btw what did you mean about your DVI port making your picture better? A lot of PC video cards have DVI, even some old P3 IBMs came with it.

Khyron

[heavyD]

Originally posted by Khyron


Your error is lumping PC hardware and Microsoft together.

OS X is bsd with a gucci window manager. Anyone can put any flavor of linux or the BSDs or even Solaris on a PC. Or you can run Microsoft. It's up to you, not some company. You want a pimped out RAM hog with a tiny harddrive or maybe instead you want 1000 gigs of space and a base model processor? That's your choice.

Early MS oses were buggy only because of the vast variety of hardware and the huge amount of shitty programs. Sure 98 bluescreens make it look like shit now, but so were those fucking bombs (the Mac equivalent of a blue screen, and equally as frustrating). Again, give me a 95 box with a restricted list of software and proper supported hardware and it can rock solid.



Ever tried to play an RTS on a console? Starcraft, Warcraft, Lord of the Rings Battle for Middle Earth? You can't. Same applies to any game with a lot of text like MMorgs like World of Warcraft or Everquest. Reading text on a TV sucks ass. Maybe once HDTV is standard we'll see some improvement, but by then who knows what the PC will have. Since the days of Atari, consoles are always weaker, older computers. They still are the best for fighting games, oddly enough.

If a Mac serves your purposes, then great - but to say it's as versitile as a PC just requires a walk down the PC hardware/software aisles at any Future Shop. Then browse the Mac section.

Edit: Btw what did you mean about your DVI port making your picture better? A lot of PC video cards have DVI, even some old P3 IBMs came with it.

Khyron

There you go with the games again. I have consoles as do the majority of households who choose console over PC gaming. High end PC games do look better than most console games but the gap is closing. Games like Halo 2 and Resident Evil 4 looks as good or better than most PC games running on an average or below average computer.which is what the majority of households have anyway. If you have ever played games on Xbox live you will have seen how streamiled the service is when it comes to friends and clans. Even though it is nothing that hasn't been done on PC before, it has been implemented so much better and user friendly on Xbox live. The next generation of consoles are one year away and they will come with technology not yet used in PC's like the cell processor and blue-ray DVD which will put another nail in the PC game coffin. PC vs console gaming isn't ever worth debating as the console games outsell PC games by such a wide margin most of the PC games coming out are being developed on Xbox and PS2 also because game developers know where the money is. You should get off this lame argument as you will always have the hardcore PC gamers but the casual gamer is where the money is and casual gamers play console games.

A lot of higher end PC video cards do have DVI but the other 95% of computers in households and business don't. Every Mac does.

[Khyron]

Originally posted by heavyD
There you go with the games again....how streamiled the service is when it comes to friends and clans. ... next generation of consoles are one year away and they will come with technology not yet used in PC's like the cell processor and blue-ray DVD which will put another nail in the PC game coffin.

First of all I have consoles. Both serve different purposes. Secondly, gross revenue is about 6-1 in favor of the console. However that's a bit misleading because consoles are sold at a loss, with the expected profit being made up in the games. Microsoft has said that Xbox would have been a failure if it wasn't for the Halo series. That's right, 1 game saved Xbox.

Xbox live is based on years of watching other online games get it right. Now that they have it you think it will stop? No, PCs are where all the development takes place. Voice coms in a game? Some guy with a PC did it.


PC vs console gaming isn't ever worth debating as the console games outsell PC games by such a wide margin most of the PC games coming out are being developed on Xbox and PS2 also because game developers know where the money is.

They said the same thing when the Nintendo came out. They said the same thing when the PS1/SuperNin came out. And they'll keep saying it. To say it's a smaller market is fine but it's still a billion a year industry, and still the best way to release new cutting edge stuff.

While you were playing Super Mario Brothers, I was playing Doom and Duke Nukem online. Sure I wasn't a "mainstream" gamer but it's the hardcores that push the new technology that trickles down. You praise Xbox live and how great it is - it's garbage. Mainstream, popular garbage, but garbage none the less.

Maybe 3 years ago it would be amazing, but again, anything you can do on Live the PC games have been doing for years. I've been playing Couter-strike with voice coms for years. And we don't have to pay 10 bucks a month on top of our internet connection to do it, and rely on a single company to provide the service.

I like console gaming - you can rent games, you can play with friends when they are over, they are usually simpler and they are cheaper. But PC gaming is far far far away from going away.

Cavaliers are mainstream and have huge market share. Should we get rid of all the higher end cars because Cavaliers have all the features you need? Should we only cater to Cavaliers? Those basic features were high end options at one point, and if you think the brand new cutting edge options will all of a sudden start appearing for Cavaliers instead of trickling down the chain, you're mad.



A lot of higher end PC video cards do have DVI but the other 95% of computers in households and business don't. Every Mac does.

Outdated statement. Even 69 dollar video cards come with DVI, but they don't force it on everyone because only people with LCDs get any benefit from it. If I have a CRT why should I pay for the feature?

Apple has a less than 2% market share with computers. They are not even on the top 10 computer vendors anymore. Yet they've been around for decades. That's called a bad business model, and until they change it they will remain a fringe option. Ipod helped, but after the battery debacle I question how long they will hold even that market.

Edit: Btw - do you drive manual or automatic?

Khyron

[Toms-SC]

Over priced POS

[ICEBERG]

Khyron, do you work for Dell?;) :D

I like both PC's and Mac's. I do lot of Video editing and QuarkExpress work so mac's work great for me. I would have to say they have the upper hand in that department.

Honesty i don't burn too much MP3's. I bet PC's are better at converting mp3's faster. Games better on PC's. Adobe is Optimized for PC. MS Office is great on PC.

For gaming i looked at Alienware, Woodoo ect. To me it really does not matter if your a PC person or a MAC fan. They both just work as good. Comes down to your preference in what you wan't to do with your PC.

Cheers,

:bigpimp:

[heavyD]

Originally posted by Khyron


First of all I have consoles. Both serve different purposes. Secondly, gross revenue is about 6-1 in favor of the console. However that's a bit misleading because consoles are sold at a loss, with the expected profit being made up in the games. Microsoft has said that Xbox would have been a failure if it wasn't for the Halo series. That's right, 1 game saved Xbox.

Xbox live is based on years of watching other online games get it right. Now that they have it you think it will stop? No, PCs are where all the development takes place. Voice coms in a game? Some guy with a PC did it.



They said the same thing when the Nintendo came out. They said the same thing when the PS1/SuperNin came out. And they'll keep saying it. To say it's a smaller market is fine but it's still a billion a year industry, and still the best way to release new cutting edge stuff.

While you were playing Super Mario Brothers, I was playing Doom and Duke Nukem online. Sure I wasn't a "mainstream" gamer but it's the hardcores that push the new technology that trickles down. You praise Xbox live and how great it is - it's garbage. Mainstream, popular garbage, but garbage none the less.

Maybe 3 years ago it would be amazing, but again, anything you can do on Live the PC games have been doing for years. I've been playing Couter-strike with voice coms for years. And we don't have to pay 10 bucks a month on top of our internet connection to do it, and rely on a single company to provide the service.

I like console gaming - you can rent games, you can play with friends when they are over, they are usually simpler and they are cheaper. But PC gaming is far far far away from going away.

Cavaliers are mainstream and have huge market share. Should we get rid of all the higher end cars because Cavaliers have all the features you need? Should we only cater to Cavaliers? Those basic features were high end options at one point, and if you think the brand new cutting edge options will all of a sudden start appearing for Cavaliers instead of trickling down the chain, you're mad.



Outdated statement. Even 69 dollar video cards come with DVI, but they don't force it on everyone because only people with LCDs get any benefit from it. If I have a CRT why should I pay for the feature?

Apple has a less than 2% market share with computers. They are not even on the top 10 computer vendors anymore. Yet they've been around for decades. That's called a bad business model, and until they change it they will remain a fringe option. Ipod helped, but after the battery debacle I question how long they will hold even that market.

Edit: Btw - do you drive manual or automatic?

Khyron

The PC game share of the pie gets smaller every year you can't deny it as it is true. It will never get extinct but it is becoming more irrelevant every year. Go to EB games and take a look at how much of their store is devoted to console games and how much to PC. End of story.

All consoles makers lose money on hardware because software is where the money is at. Nothing new there for sure. All console games are developed on computers and so is your car. What's your point?

Xbox live garbage? You lose credibility with statements like this.

You had no comeback for PS3 and its cell arcitechture (sony, toshiba, IBM developed) and blue ray dvd because you know PC doesn't have anything to rival it.

You can't win the pc game vs console debate so thet's leave it alone already.

Back to the original topic. No one ever said the mini was going to take over the market. If you read one of my other posts, the idea of the mac mini was to offer consumers a chance to purchase a mac that normally wouldn't fork out the $ for an imac or G5. Mac owns 7% of the market and the ipod has been a godsend for the company for sure but the future is looking brighter. They are in talks with IBM to further distribution of Macs as servers since the G5 uses an IBM processor (which will be utilized in the Xbox Next and Nintendo Revolution both using up to 3- 5 multiple 2+ ghz processors in parallel) as it has proven superior to anything Pentium or AMD which is why no new consoles will be utilizing a Pentium or AMD processor. The cell will further the gap once Mac start utilizing it then the real fun will begin. The PC will always have its place as a workstation but as far as entertainment goes the direction is shifting far away and it will the gap widens every year. Once everyone has a High Definition TV in their home (3 - 5 years), PC gaming will end up as a distant memory.

Oh and I drive a manual.

[Khyron]

Originally posted by ICEBERG
[B]Khyron, do you work for Dell?;) :D
I like both PC's and Mac's. I do lot of Video editing and QuarkExpress work so mac's work great for me. I would have to say they have the upper hand in that department.


Dell is ok, but they are getting too big, much like IBM did.

People think I hate Macs - I don't. I've advised a few people to get Imacs back in the day because they fit the bill. If I was making a home video editing workstation I would get a G5 with Final Cut Pro. And for image editing the OS X has superior image scaling than Windows XP. I only bitch when people claim Macs have the same flexibility and versatility as a PC. They don't.

Khyron

[Khyron]

Originally posted by heavyD
[B] The PC game share of the pie gets smaller every year you can't deny it as it is true. It will never get extinct but it is becoming more irrelevant every year. Go to EB games and take a look at how much of their store is devoted to console games and how much to PC. End of story.

All consoles makers lose money on hardware because software is where the money is at. Nothing new there for sure. All console games are developed on computers and so is your car. What's your point?

My point is that the next gen game consoles are going to be based on gaming computers of today. Sure it might not be called a P4 or a Radeon but if IBM comes out with some uber processor you think they'd put it in the consoles and just ignore the computer market? No. The consoles do not invent, they mass produce. But by the time they become mainstream, the average PC will be twice as fast. 18 months, computers double, Moore's law, been true for 20+ years. Xbox or PS3 isn't going to stop it.


Xbox live garbage? You lose credibility with statements like this.

Well since I've used both, I think I'm qualified. You have to already have an internet connection. You need to pay an additional monthly subscription. Other than extra lag, xbox live offers nothing you can't already do with a PC. There is nothing new except the monthly charge.

If your Xbox is older and you have a Thompson drive, chances are you'll need to buy a new drive (or Xbox) to play newer games. Sounds a lot like a PC.


You had no comeback for PS3 and its cell arcitechture (sony, toshiba, IBM developed) and blue ray dvd because you know PC doesn't have anything to rival it.

What are you talking about? Any technology that makes it into a mainstream console will be out for home computers before you get it in your living room, make no mistake. Blue Ray drives are already going to be the next DVD/RW replacement, and by the time the PS3 is actually on shelves, ATI and Nvidia will have home GFX cards that destroy the video processor. Cells look interesting but multi processor computers are not new. And home PCs are already closing in on 4 Ghz - until the thing is actually released you really can't compare, because the life cycle for a console is so much longer than a PC component, and so the PC components will always evolve faster. But I will guarantee that by the time the PS3 is on the shelves ready for you to buy, a home PC will still be far more powerful (unless of course the PS3 costs more than a home PC). This is dictated by cost economics, nothing else.


Back to the original topic. No one ever said the mini was going to take over the market. If you read one of my other posts, the idea of the mac mini was to offer consumers a chance to purchase a mac that normally wouldn't fork out the $ for an imac or G5. Mac owns 7% of the market and the ipod has been a godsend for the company for sure but the future is looking brighter. ... PC gaming will end up as a distant memory.

Apple closed 2004 at 3.2 percent market share, not 7.

http://www.itweb.co.za/sections/hardware/2005/0501190904.asp?S=Reuters&A=REU&O=FRGN

If you honestly believe that Intel and AMD have nothing up their sleeve to compete, I can't convince you. But the IBM/Apple fan-boys were saying almost the same thing when the PowerMac/PowerPC was announced. And we know how well that worked out. I'm sure if you search you can find similar claims made about the PS2.

If consoles shift enough that they can do most everything PCs can do, then yes you're right, console gaming will be the only game in town. But that will be because it became a PC. My Xbox is more PC than console now. It's a PC that can play Xbox games. And Nintendo. And Sega. And arcade games. etc...

Your definition of a console is something that is locked down and can't be modified?


Oh and I drive a manual.

Why? 90% of all cars sold in NA are auto, future developments all center around automatics, so why are you wasting your time with a manual? Guys were saying the manual would be dead back in the 80s. But yet it's still going, and enough to be considered a market. Same thing with PCs - it's about control.

You talk about PC gaming dying, but what it really is is console gaming becoming PCish. How long until a console has a keyboard standard? How long until you can download patches for games from the internet? Watch videos? You can already play music. When does it stop being a dumb console and instead become a PC?

I am not loyal to any brand or manufacturer. I'm a gamer (not a much as before though). If console gaming can replace my PC gaming, great, I will enjoy saving the money. But you seem to think that day is almost on us, if not already and I'm telling you it's not. Closer than it was 4 years ago sure, but they still have a long way to go. Just because the Cavaliers outnumber the Ferraris 1000 to 1 doesn't make them equal.

Khyron

[Rayme]

It's pretty stupid to say that PC gaming is "dying".

First of all PC has never been more affordable than now, and the 3d graphic card industry too has never been that much healthier than now.

The big thing in games right now is customization and multiplayer, PC here has a big advantage, because of that people still play half-life based game that dates back to 1999, and most are free. How much of you guys will still play GTA 3 when you just bought GTA3 san Andreas ? Or Halo 1 when you got Halo 2? Games on PC have way much more replayability. And you don't need to mod the hardware to play pirated games (ooops what did I say?).

And as far as control, I would never go and play a flying sim, RTS or first person shooter with a gamepad ! I pity you guys using gamepads to play halo, It just kills me, I hate it. BTW halo is so overrated, unreal tournament owns it in everyway and was there before. you are getting own3d by M$'s marketing power, haha. Just looking at counterstrike with millions of users and a word to mouth publicity makes you understand what a good multiplayer game can be.

That being said, the PC is best for gaming IMO, but more people owns consoles, yes.

oh and I hate macintoshes, I'm a graphic designers and been using them for 3 years, can't find a reason to switch to them :(

my .2$

[soupey]

*hugs khyron*

http://www.roosterteeth.com/archive/download.php/?id=499

hehehehe


mac = production pc's
pc = production/gaming/entertainment

u need something to get work done, get a mac, u want to play games, get a PC

as for the console debate...

pretty sure pc's were doing 3D b4 nintendo was (prolly most consoles but there were a couple not-so-good consoles out at the time that were capable but never made it big)....pc's constantly can be updated/upgraded...consoles somewhat can but alot more limited...consoles are in no way bad, but pc's will exceed console performance easily before the next generation console comes out...

anyways keep debating, its fun to read:D

[blinkme_210]

Hehehe that reminds me of this Switch parody. (http://members.cox.net/clyqz/macs.html)

[Khyron]

Yah, seen those a bunch - before OS X there was a lot more ammo for advocating PCs. Here's my favorite switch parody, and yes, bombs really happened back in the day.

Mac Switch (http://www.nexus-point.net/video/mac-apple.wmv)

Khyron