DealsOnTheWeb Daily Deal: 8GB iPod Touch: $229 Delivered
First on TMO - Consumer Reports: mini "Too Basic?"; Shuffle Given Good Marks
by , 7:00 AM EDT, April 18th, 2005
Apple's Mac mini is an "adequate" and "basic" personal computer while the iPod shuffle offers "appealing" performance, according to mini reviews by Consumer Reports magazine.
The independent, nonprofit consumer testing group reports in its May issue on two of Apple's newest products, announced in early January. Its conclusions were neither positive or negative toward the Mac mini, but primarily upbeat about the iPod shuffle.
Looking at their overall value, Consumer Reports testers questioned whether the Mac mini at either US$499 or $599 are "a little too basic."
While CR concluded the PowerPC G4 processor and its standard 256 megabytes of memory is "adequate for basic computing," the added expense of a mouse, monitor, and keyboard could "hike the mini's price past $1,000".
"Other upgrades, such as increasing memory or adding stereo speakers or a wireless network card, may well be a necessary added expense," CR testers said.
The magazine said the shuffle was "the lightest player we've seen" and offered "the performance that makes full-sized iPods so appealing."
CR ranked the shuffle's ear-bud headphones "among the best we've tested," but the subcompact music player not as good as some other competitors when it came to battery life before another charge.
"The iPod shuffle offers a very inexpensive and simply way to enjoy music on the go," reviewers concluded. "But choose it only if you value compactness and low price over versatility."
Observer Comments
Mon Apr 18, 2005 8:54 am Subject: Its the software, dummies
They're missing the main point, which is the softwre that accompanies the mini. Without that, it might be deemed just "adequate," but with it, the mini+s/w = an unrivalled package in terms of price/performance compared to a similarly priced PC with whatever second rate s/w they include
Mon Apr 18, 2005 8:58 am Subject: Consumer Reports Confirms - Mac Mini Overpriced Toy
Mon Apr 18, 2005 9:26 am Subject: Mini is a bargain any way you look at it
People always say that the Mini is only for people who already have equipment. It's not. It's a good buy even if it's your first computer. I bought my Mini + monitor + keyboard + mouse for less than the cost of an "equivalent" eMac. And I got a much nicer monitor, too - a 17" LCD with 16ms response time. If I had opted for a more "consumer-level" monitor, like the eMac's 17" CRT, it would have been $100-$200 cheaper.
However, I agree that perhaps the Mini is too "basic" for some people. The Mini is essentially a headless eMac; i.e., a low end machine. A headless iMac would make a nice addition. As it is now, there's a big gap in the lineup for people who don't want an all-in-one design. This should be corrected.
Apple used to have their 2x2 grid: Consumer/Pro, Desktop/Laptop. But now that's changed in the desktop space, and there are three columns: Consumer (eMac/mini), "Prosumer" (iMac), and Pro (PM G5). The consumer column has an all-in-one and a headless. The "prosumer" column should, too. The high-end pro column obviously doesn't need an all-in-one system, so it's fine as it is.
There's definitely room in Apple's lineup for a ~$1000 dollar headless machine.
Mon Apr 18, 2005 10:37 am Subject: Consumer Reports Confirms Budget PCs are Budget PCs
A mini could play all theese games well if fitted with no less than 512 MB RAM:
Diablo 2, Warcraft 3, World of Warcraft, Starcraft, Civilization 3, Dungeon Siege, NeverWinter Nights, Unreal Tournament 2004, Max Payne, Command and Conquer Generals, Return to Castle Wolfenstein, Medal of Honor, BF 1942, Homeworld 2, Icewind Dale, Freedom Force, No One Lives Forever 1 & 2, Fallout 1 & 2, LoTR Return of the King, Tiger Woods 2003, Nascar 2003, XIII, Stronghold, Undying, Jedi Knight 2 and 3, Age of Empires 2, Age of Mythology, Star Wars Galactic Battlegrounds, Everquest, Quake 3, Rise of Nations, Railroad Tycoon 3, Commandos 2 & 3, Sims, Sim City 4, Zoo Tycoon, Spiderman, ETC.
It could even play Doom 3 at lower resolutions with low graphics.
But sure, otherwise it sucks for gaming 
Mon Apr 18, 2005 11:25 am Subject: re: Mac mini overpriced toy
QuoteGuest wrote:
Only raging PC fanboys would suggest that even a $500 PC is a better deal than a $150 Playstation. With the Playstation, you'll still have plenty of $$$ left over to purchase quite a few games.
Purchase games? Ha! Don't most of them have a $2000 PC so they can pirate the games?
Mon Apr 18, 2005 12:08 pm Subject: Again, I'm here to inspire click-throughs for TMO
Mon Apr 18, 2005 1:24 pm Subject: Consumer Reports Confirms…
I wonder where people get this idea about the Mini having to do all the chores that a G5 does. Your comments hit it right on the nail! This is the message that Apple has been saying all along and somehow people and the so called experts just don't get it. This machine is just a intro to Macs for PC users and a second machine for us Mac users. Nothing else! It is not a replacement for heavy gaming and labor intensive editing!
Tue Apr 19, 2005 10:25 am Subject: Who would buy a mini?
If I didn't have an iMac I would. Of course Apple kind of shoots themselves in the foot by making 256k standard, which is guaranteed to slow the mini down too much, but then Apple doesn't want to cannibalize their iMac/eMac sales.
Give it 512MB of RAM and the mini could absolutely be the mainstream computer for most folks. I'm doing development work on an 800Mhz iLamp, the mini with 512MB of RAM would certainly be faster, assuming no heavy-duty disk I/O.
To make matters more interesting, long time readers will know I'm a dyed-in-the-wool PC user! 
The only reason I'm developing on the Mac is the project I have in mind (a Dungeons & Dragons uber-utility) needs to be cross platform anyway, so I might as well indulge myself and put the otherwise idle iMac to work.
By the way, I hear all the standard Mac cheerleading going on in these forums and I have to comment.
Yes, the Mac is a good platform. No, it isn't far superior to an XP box. Not in the OS, not in the tools.
Right now I'm using RealBasic, Gimp, and OpenOffice as my tools and I find myself pining for the simple pleasures Windows offers. Things I never even thought about.
For one thing it's very obvious the Mac designers are not keyboard junkies. There's no universal keystoke to take you to start of line or end of line, for example. Yes, certain applications allow you to Ctrl-left arrow/right arrow but it isn't consistent.
RealBasic's IDE is awkward as hell compared to VB's--much less the far more capable Access IDE. Don't get me wrong, it has a few gems among the rubble, I particularly love the way RB handles constants. But the IDE as a whole feels very much like a stripped down Kia compared to a nice Toyota Camry.
Gimp's OK but it isn't native and even the very nice way it's been integrated feels kind of clunky. OpenOffice is OK too, since all I'm using it for is a glorified TextEdit that can zoom text without altering the document. (My eyes aren't the best after 25 years of 8+hours/day of computer use!)
I'm not a switcher, I far prefer PCs to Macs. But the Mac isn't bad and it has its charms. But vastly superior? Not a chance.
Having said all that, I *still* like the mini. The form factor alone opens up all kinds of possibilities, and as a way to get your feet wet in the Apple world it's brilliant.
Now if only it came stock with 512MB...
Tue Apr 19, 2005 1:01 pm Subject: Re: I want to know who would buy a mini
QuoteIt's not designed for tech guys.Guest wrote:
Do you think any tech guy would suggest to their friends that they should buy this?
QuoteThen you're doing them a disservice. It's probably perfect for what they'd use it to do.Guest wrote:
I don't think I will suggest it to my family, friends or clients.
QuoteUpgrade what? Most people don't replace motherboards or optical drives (unless the drive stops working). RAM is upgradeable, so is the hard drive. What else do you need?Guest wrote:
I would be embarassed when they asked if they can upgrade this or that.
QuoteIt's eminently practical for people who want to do with it what most people do with a home computer.Guest wrote:
I think the mini is cool, but that is about it. Not very practical in the computer world.
Consumer Reports does fairly thorough testing of lots of things. But their research and general comprehension has long been lacking. Why else would they rate a Ford Escort or Dodge Neon as a good value? (My brother is a mechanic. His paycheck is made of Escort, Explorer, and Neon repairs. Good value indeed.)
Anyway, I would like to reiterate part of what Roger Plowman said above. The keyboard and mouse issues of the mac really do suck. If the ctl/command and arrows combination was more consistent I wouldn't mind. If there was a universal "delete" key, I'd be happy. I fly through windows with keyboard shortcuts faster than switching between the keyboard & mouse or using a combo of the two would ever allow me to. This isn't possible on the mac, as you have to drag things to the trash since there isn't a universal delete key, I can't switch between open documents in the same application without the mouse, and many more awkward interface design issues. Funny for a platform that prides itself on interface design.
That said, this doesn't make Windows better. OSX is still FAR SUPERIOR TO XP. Security and stability alone make it so. Other features, such as Expose, outweigh the awkwardness of the keyboard and single button mouse issues. (I know you can plug in a 3 button mouse, but not all programs recognize it, and those that do aren't consistent in their usage. Also, my PowerBook only comes with one button, so if I'm travelling light and didn't bring along a separate mouse I'm back to awkwardness.)
Seriously, Roger, how can you possibly prefer downloading weekly patches and daily virus definitions (not to mention paying for 3rd party virus software), and buying 3rd party registry checking/fixing software like Norton Utilities (or spending hours checking the registry yourself), more than the simplicity of OSX? Program crashes in Windows and you have to restart the whole system just to be sure it didn't leave any TSRs or corrupt any memory. Program crashes in OSX and you just restart the program. You can leave the machine on for weeks after a program crashes and the rest of the system still functions just fine.
I agree that the mouse & keyboard designs are ridiculously outdated, but OSX is still FAR SUPERIOR TO WINDOWS.
I'd rather slit my wrists than reformat my drive every few months because of infection or corruption by Windows or any renegade program it allows to take control. But, if that's your idea of fun, you just run with it.
- Jon
Wed Apr 20, 2005 12:45 pm Subject: RE: jonkun227
Hi Jon,
Not to flame you but you do seem to have some misundestandings about Windows XP.
On the subject of stability and security, OS/X is no better than XP. I haven't had XP crash on me since I've been using it--and I've been using it since it shipped. Nor have I had any virus problems, nor spyware, nor any other malware problems.
Of course I haven't had these problems on OS/X either.
That means 0 problems on both platforms, so how is OS/X better than XP in this regard?
By the way, my lack of XP problems isn't because I take extraordinary precautions. I have ADSL broadband, so I'm sitting behind a NAT router which is a pretty good defense, but that's just the nature of ADSL. I personally did nothing more than subscribe to ADSL...
I do run Norton's AV of course. And it did cost me $29. But note there are many free AV programs available in the Windows world (with FREE subscriptions) that are just as effective as Norton's.
I also have Microsoft's new antispyware program, the one they bought Giant Sofwtare to get. It's pretty nice (and free) but it's never found anything on my system.
"Other features, such as Expose, outweigh the awkwardness of the keyboard and single button mouse issues. (I know you can plug in a 3 button mouse, but not all programs recognize it, and those that do aren't consistent in their usage. Also, my PowerBook only comes with one button, so if I'm travelling light and didn't bring along a separate mouse I'm back to awkwardness.)"
Expose is nice, but the Mac has always encouraged SDI design (single document interface) and in my opinion that makes things far too cluttered. Of course some programs (like calculator) are SDI apps by their nature. But most are not.
I prefer the natural segregation that MDI applications provide. This is one reason I far prefer the Access IDE to VB's SDI based IDE--less clutter.
As for the mouse issue I use a cheap USB scroll-wheel mouse and I've had no program on the iMac that hasn't recognized it--except for the Gimp/OpenOffice crowd. Apparently OuroberOS/X has occassional trouble remembering the scroll wheel...
Oh, and have you tried Right-Click/Move to Trash? Very handy.
"Seriously, Roger, how can you possibly prefer downloading weekly patches and daily virus definitions (not to mention paying for 3rd party virus software), and buying 3rd party registry checking/fixing software like Norton Utilities (or spending hours checking the registry yourself), more than the simplicity of OSX?"
There are a number of misconceptions here:
A) MS releases patches monthly, not weekly. The critical and security patches are downloaded without intervention on my part, then Windows tells me patches are ready to apply. I tell it go ahead and that's the end of it. To get less important patches I occassionally log in as Administrator and run Windows update, click what I want and say apply it. This is onerous? Oh, yes, occassionally XP wants me to reboot. I do (takes about 30 seconds) and then log back in as myself.
On OS/X I do pretty much the same thing. The only difference is OS/X prompts me for the Admin password rather than having me log in as Administrator. Oh, and OS/X has that veeerrrryyyy long optimization step. But that's OK, I just go watch TV or something till it's done.
How then is OS/X any different from XP in regards to patching?
B) I don't own Norton Utilities nor any other registry checking program. I've been running XP (on several different computers) since it shipped and never had any registry issues. Ever.
Where did you get the idea you need such things? Besides, there are lots of free ones about if you should want/require such a thing.
For those who are appalled at my lack of testing before applying patches, I'll simply say I've never had a problem from either MS or Apple about patches breaking things (and yes I know both companies have occassional problems). Besides, these are my home systems.
C) Norton downloads its virus signatures on a regular schedule. I never have to do anything. Why then would its auto updates bother me? Likewise, MS Antispyware downloads and runs on a schedule, without my intervention. So where's the pain exactly?
"Program crashes in Windows and you have to restart the whole system just to be sure it didn't leave any TSRs or corrupt any memory."
Um,
TSRs have not been in use since the days of DOS 6.0--the days of Windows 3.1. Nor will a crashed program generally corrupt memory. XP, like 2000 and NT before it, are very good at memory segmentation.
What you WILL occassionally find is that a RUNNING program will have a memory leak and slowly consume free space. These kinds of programs are badly written--and OS/X is just as vulnerable to this, since a memory leak is just a program asking for more and more memory as far as (any) OS is concerned.
"Program crashes in OSX and you just restart the program. You can leave the machine on for weeks after a program crashes and the rest of the system still functions just fine."
The same is true for XP, and I speak from personal experience. I have two XP machines that run 24/7. The only time I reboot them is to patch--and that's only if XP asks me to.
"I agree that the mouse & keyboard designs are ridiculously outdated, but OSX is still FAR SUPERIOR TO WINDOWS."
Not really. As I've said above to me XP and OS/X are pretty equal. Put some of the more convenient navigation keys in OS/X where ALL applications use them and a lot of my irritation with OS/X goes away.
"I'd rather slit my wrists than reformat my drive every few months because of infection or corruption by Windows or any renegade program it allows to take control."
Funny, I've never had to reformat my hard drive. Ever. I've never gotten an infection in XP, nor data corruption. Nor, in point of fact, has a renegade program EVER been on my system.
Windows XP will occassionally slow down because of disk fragmentation issues. When it does I simply log in as Administrator and run defrag manually. Then I go to bed. In the morning I log off.
By the way I only have to do that every 3 months or so--less often if I haven't been creating/deleting large numbers of files.
One final note. Yes, I'm a computer professional. I make my living every day working with and on computers. But keeping a Windows computer happy isn't that hard!
1) Run defrag every few months. Makes a huge difference.
2) Don't run around on porn sites (which is where a lot of the virus stuff is to be found) unless you either A) know what you're doing and/or B) are at a site you trust.
3) Don't open spam.
4) Don't open spam.
5) Don't open spam.
6) Let XP turn on its firewall. It really is rather effective, at least in keeping stuff out.
7) For now, download MS Antispyware. It's going to become part of XP (for free) so you might as well. MSAS guards against 9 or 10 of most often used attack vectors.
8) If you like, get an AV program. Viruses are pretty passe these days but you never know. Lots of free AV programs out there too, including free subscriptions.
It isn't rocket science. For now OS/X isn't on the bad guys radar. But that won't last forever, especially if Apple ever manages to get a decent chunk of the market.
How is OS/X so much superior to XP? I'd say they're equivalent.
Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:57 pm Subject:
Actually, Roger, I found your post extremely well written. Thank you.
I am certainly not a fan of MS products, but do use them when they are appropriate.
I'm glad that you have not had problems with XP. It seems to me that there are two types of XP users: those like yourself that seem to have no problems; and those who have nothing BUT problems. Unfortunately, I hear from the latter group every day in my office (and I am not the IT guy). Generally I have had fewer problems with OS X than most around me have had with XP, but that is just my own limited sample set.
Again, thank you for the non-confrontational post.
Thu Apr 21, 2005 11:07 am Subject: My complments to Roger.
Roger,
That was a very thoughtful post. Thank you. I enjoyed reading it even though my own personal experience has differed greatly. I too work on both platofrms and I will say that WHEN IT IS WORKING PROPERLY, I enjoy my user experience with 2k and XP. Having said that, I do believe that you are more the exception than the rule. I (and the rest of the people on my workplace network) have ALL experienced repeated infections from virii, corruption of registries, and other "fun" effects of malware that has infiltrated the network. We have several full-time network "gurus", a content filter, and "enterprise grade" anitvirus/spyware software. Your situation is unique, or at least uncommon. This I believe is due in part to your knowledge of computers, and also from your computing habits regarding opening spam, surfing to particular notorious sites, and general maintenance. IF all Windows users followed those basic tenets of smart computing, the debate over Windows vs. OS X wouldn't be so heated I don't think. However when rubber hits the road, most users don't enjoy the benefits of both a hardware and software firewalls. Most users don't keep virus definitions up to date. Most users DEFINITELY don't exercise discipline about the sites they visit or the e-mails they open. Most users don't know the first thing about general maintenance of their PC. In this regard, I would have to say that OS X is far more forgiving than either XP or 2000.
Hi Intruder, Jonkun227,
Two things to note. I do indeed have no trouble with XP, but then I follow prudent computing practices--which are largely OS agnostic.
As for XP problem children, yes, I have one at my work. But then he doesn't follow prudent practices. For example he downloads software from god knows where, he's a sucker for IE toolbars, and other such spyware-bait.
Making matters worse he's fairly computer illiterate and is *proud* of the fact, refusing to learn anything about the most basic best practices.
And to put the cherry on top he's a corporate officer--and thinks he's qualified to instigate IT projects; which when they don't work I have to straighten out... Sigh. PHB's do live and breath, to be sure.
Even so, a nightly run of MSAS and Spybot S&D keeps his system fairly problem free.
Again, I do nothing extraordinary and yet manage to keep a nearly pure MS IT environment virus free and spyware free and it takes me only about an hour a day to be the system admin for 8 servers and over 50 PCs spread across a dozen offices scattered over a third of the US. Keep in mind that includes everything, including adding and deleting users, unlocking accounts when they forget their passwords, and all.
I'm the *only* IT guy in our company--yet my main responsibility is software development. I'm by no means a super-admin either.
I suspect my lack of trouble comes from some really, really, basic and simple ideas.
1. Have good hardware. We use Powerspec PC's (Microcenter's house brand) exclusively for desktops. They're very inexpensive (averaging around $700 per system sans monitor) but they're rugged, reliable and have pretty good performance. Our servers are Dell PowerEdge machines. We use Toshiba laptops. Again, nothing extraordinary.
2. Make sure the network cabling's good. The only problems I've had related to bad network cables and once a bad NIC card.
3. Run Norton AV on the mailserver. Eliminates 99% of the threat right there. It autoupdates, natch.
4.