“It’s finally arrived – the first Mac Mini clone. Our review system was supplied by Evesham, but the barebone chassis is manufactured by AOpen and has been known as the ‘Pandora’. Sadly this catchy name is gone – AOpen has re-named it the Mini PC, which is just plain boring. Anyhow, name aside, this is a really cool-looking little machine – it arguably looks even better than the Mac Mini, mainly due to its aluminium case.”
To me it looks like a thing from the eighties – from the peculiar font used right to the faux-minimalist power button style and the redundant ‘eject’ button.
… and the price makes one wonder how Apple can make it cheaper!
Arguably even if they’d cost the same the Mac would win anyway because of the software…
And for that money one could buy a notebook that’d run quieter and provide more power, and a screen too.
Edited 2005-12-24 22:18
ouch,
aluminum case or not, that hut’s.
Why would anyone buy the mini-pc? Linux works just fine on mac mini.
Why would anyone buy a mini-mac which runs OSX just fine, then install Linux?
To run linux?
To run linux?
“Installing linux is like piercing your tongue. It’ll impress your friends, but it’s stupid and painful and people without pierced tongues will laugh at you when you complain about it.”
I kid of course, but really there’s always OpenDarwin instead of Linux if you absolutely need a 100% open source OS.
Edit: spelling
Edited 2005-12-24 22:28
“I kid of course, but really there’s always OpenDarwin instead of Linux if you absolutely need a 100% open source OS.”
I wonder how many users out of a thousand absolutely need a 100% open source OS? Most of the people who believe they need the code for the OS, can’t read it, much less change it.
I wonder how many users out of a thousand absolutely need a 100% open source OS? Most of the people who believe they need the code for the OS, can’t read it, much less change it.
Open Sauce zealots “need” an open source OS, don’t ask me why, I think it’s a religious thing. I was just pointing out that the need for Linux on mini’s is minimal at best when great alternatives like Darwin are available.
BTW there are other advantages to an open source os, like it doesn’t die when the company dies/gets taken over/changes focus. Ask old Amigans and Beos users about that one.
As a former BeOS user, yes it sucks when the company dies. But that doesn’t mean I want my OS’s open source. I want a company behind it, and if it dies, oh well. At least while it lives there is something behind it.
Having an OS that works as I want it to work, and works nicely is vastly more important then it being opensource.
Anyways, this is so off track, this is about an overpriced computer, not about Linux or OS’s.
You are missing the whole point. When a company dies or bought by the competition to be only killed the customers are left with no choice but to throw away the hardware due to lack of support. They doo not have any choice but to bite the bullet and go with an expensive upgrade or change the platform just due to the lack of support. And in most of the cases the companies do not release the source due to various reasons after closing down.
If there are enough open source software for a platform, then some one can pick it and continue the development or you can pay some one to add these features to you.You some times just need some budg fixes to run a system.Hope that explains the point about the need for open source to you.
Its not always the case that the open source people are zealots as potrayed by some people in this forum.(BTW it is really sad when people make such statements)
sridhar
(…just bored to register in one more forum)
“You are missing the whole point. When a company dies or bought by the competition to be only killed the customers are left with no choice but to throw away the hardware due to lack of support.”
hmmmmm…. Should begin to worry about the future of Microsoft? Not anytime soon……
…not about Linux or OS’s.
Every. Frigging. Thing. Here. Is. About. Linux.
A conversation on polo ponies *will* be tied to linux and somehow prove that every OS in the world is somehow inferior to it.
> Every. Frigging. Thing. Here. Is. About. Linux.
> A conversation on polo ponies *will* be tied to linux and somehow
> prove that every OS in the world is somehow inferior to it.
Best. Post. Ever.
I will bookmark this and use it as an answer to the question “what’s this OSNews site?”.
To be fair, the editors are not totally Linux-Zealous nutjobs, but beware the comments, especially if it’s about *BSD, Windows or Mac. Or anything that’s not Linux. Or anything that is Linux…
Open Sauce zealots “need” an open source OS, don’t ask me why, I think it’s a religious thing. I was just pointing out that the need for Linux on mini’s is minimal at best when great alternatives like Darwin are available.
/*biased Linux user*/
Why would someone like to put Linux on macmini?
Some of us do like PPC arch. But you’re right, not many users do think like that. Most are quite happy with OSX.
Now, why would Darwin be so great?
1. It is too slow. I need *niX mostly for multitasking features. Threading on Darwin plain sucks
2. Supports very little selection of hardware. Some of us do like to change hardware for better, but not be bound to constraints
3. FreeBSD is way better on both occasions.
And no, it is not religion although some people do take it to that level.
1. It is too slow. I need *niX mostly for multitasking features. Threading on Darwin plain sucks
Yeah. Another one that doesn’t understand that Mac OS X hasn’t a Unix Kernel and took the Anandtech test for the truth.
Do your homework, the mach kernel doesn’t use “fork” for creating a thread just as all unix systems, it only uses it to create a process.
” In Unix, the only way to create a new process is through the fork system call (or variant). In Mac OS X, tasks and threads are created and manipulated using Mach calls. Now, user programs typically do not deal with Mach tasks or threads directly. The Pthreads package in the system library creates Mach threads, but no user-space code typically creates Mach tasks.”
http://www.kernelthread.com/mac/challenge/result/construction.html
why install Linux? It’s the apps dude! Thinking I’m crazy or trolling? Not at all. There are so many more apps for Linux . In fact I was really disappointed when I got a mac recently: unless you want to fork more money or “pirate”, on the net you are flooded with sharewares whose global quality is far below than what you got from a linux repository.
ok, I found neooffice and audacity. Garageband is sweet but where are the others audio apps (uh ah oh, heresy!!) ? On linux I have Amarok (best media player ever, download covers and lyrics, i won’t exchange with iTunes) xmms (fast and furious), rosegarden4, Jack-Rack and the ladcca audio plugins, ZynaSubfx synth, Qsynth, Qsampler etc…
Yeah I know there are professionnal grade audio apps for Mac. Stop and think again: the mac is expensive not because of the hardware (you can buy one at e-Bay) but because of what you need to buy to have a functionnal machine (a bit like windows).
I have a iMac for the family basic browsing-chatting. All fine. But I will stay with my GNU apps on Linux, thanks. Call me a cheapstake I don’t mind.
> why install Linux? It’s the apps dude! Thinking I’m crazy or trolling?
Yes, very much so. Why not build all these amazing apps under OS-X. It is Unix… You do understand that right? You know that those apps you mention are not made exclusively for Linux. Pull your head out of your Linux-Hole before posting again. You are just spreading ignorance.
So how do you like that mini-pc, BTW?
Sure, just show me how to get ALSA and Jack setup and I’ll get right on that…
“Linux-Hole before posting again. You are just spreading ignorance. “
I don’t get all this hostility all of a sudden. In a thread about some newly released piece of hardware someone mentions that Linux can be run on a differnet piece of hardware and all of a sudden everyone starts pulling out their guns to shoot anyone seen with a penguin. I’m sorry if I sound like I’m picking on you, It’s not just your reply that set me off, but following this thread from the point where Linux was mentioned through to the end shows nothing but the OS equivalent of racism towards Linux.
Why is it that people insist on taking a shit on everyone who likes Linux. “Ooh it’s that evil open source OS again, get the torches and guns quick”. Seriously people, you don’t see me slandering OS X or for that matter Windows. Why can’t you people act like adults.
Don’t dare complain about Linux folk being unpleasent when the lot of you conduct yourselves like this, these hostilities were unwarranted. Although some of what you people said might have been a little warranted, assuming you were replying to slightly outrageous claims, most of what I saw in this thread is no more than attacks that have gone way beyond the point if anti-linux neo-naziism.
Is it really that awful for you people that others like Linux, seriously does it really bother/scare/annoy you all that some people like Linux to the point where you have to go off on some unholy crusade against the OS and it’s users? Stop the hate crime and come to some sense, we have the right to use the OS we want without this kind of non-stop abuse!
Merry Christmas, I worked hard to get the score I did on OSNews, I posted honestly and I shut my mouth when it came to articles like this. Now your christmas gift is getting to watch my score go down for daring to take a stand and daring to point out the sad truth about several of you.
PS. I know I’ll get deluged with replies, no doubt they won’t be pleasant. I might read them but I won’t reply.
“Is it really that awful for you people that others like Linux, seriously does it really bother/scare/annoy you all that some people like Linux to the point where you have to go off on some unholy crusade against the OS and it’s users? Stop the hate crime and come to some sense, we have the right to use the OS we want without this kind of non-stop abuse!”
You are right. But as to why, consider that Stalin felt Trotsky was far more of a threat than Hitler….
> I don’t get all this hostility all of a sudden. In a thread about
> some newly released piece of hardware someone mentions that
> Linux can be run on a differnet piece of hardware and all of a
> sudden everyone starts pulling out their guns to shoot anyone
> seen with a penguin. I’m sorry if I sound like I’m picking on you,
I’ll explain it… Anyone that ties an OS with racism is an ignorant zealot. Simple as that. There tend to be a ton of Linux “advocates” that resort to extreme hyperbole and love to clutter non-linux threads with stuff like “…. could run Linux!”. No shit. Most computers can. We aren’t morons, we don’t need someone reminding us that more than one OS exists for most any platform you can imagine.
And the fool I replied to was just spreading FUD. OS-X IS UNIX even if it’s NOT OPEN SOURCE. Big Whoop. As such, you can build most “Linux” software on it. I know this, since I run OS-X and have for the last 3 years or so. The poster who went on the “Linux on Mini” rant obviously has not. Some other anon troll stepped up and said something about half-assed open source audio drivers to which I say: OS-X’s built in audio kicks their ass, so why bother?
> It’s not just your reply that set me off, but following this thread
> from the point where Linux was mentioned through to the
> end shows nothing but the OS equivalent of racism towards Linux.
I’m just including that because it is so absolutely f–king ridiculous I cannot believe someone would ever think such a thing, much less type it.
SInce it’s XMas, I’ll give you a free tip:
Get off the cross, we need the wood.
“And the fool I replied to was just spreading FUD. OS-X IS UNIX even if it’s NOT OPEN SOURCE. Big Whoop. As such, you can build most “Linux” software on it. I know this, since I run OS-X and have for the last 3 years or so. The poster who went on the “Linux on Mini” rant obviously has not. Some other anon troll stepped up and said something about half-assed open source audio drivers to which I say: OS-X’s built in audio kicks their ass, so why bother? “
I did say I wasn’t particularly talking about your post. I know that you were replying to someone who slipped off the edge a little. Your post just happened to be the parent post form my reply because by the time I had reached it I was finally frustrated enough to say something to the others.
“I’m just including that because it is so absolutely f–king ridiculous I cannot believe someone would ever think such a thing, much less type it.”
Actually it’s not ridiculous, it’s absolutely true. You just don’t want it said because it is a reminder that there is descrimination towards Linux users first and foremost.
“SInce it’s XMas, I’ll give you a free tip:”
If you won’t write it as Christmas why even bother with XMas? I’m assuming you wrote it that way to be “politically correct”. You might as well just call it “holiday time” and make the Liberal party happy.
“Get off the cross, we need the wood.”
So when someone has something worthwhile to say they’re on a cross eh? I wasn’t planning on being a martyr but I wasn’t just going to sit down and do nothing either.
Why would anyone buy a mini-mac which runs OSX just fine, then install Linux?
Because GNOME now gives you a better more intuitive GUI interface than you get with OSX 😉
>Because GNOME now gives you a better more intuitive GUI interface than you get with OSX 😉
Funny.
I think you can keep it for an april’s fool.
>Because GNOME now gives you a better more intuitive GUI interface than you get with OSX 😉
Funny.
I think you can keep it for an april’s fool.
A recent useability study at Birmingham Library in the UK showed that when a large sample of Library users were offered Win XP, KDE, GNOME and OSX desktops the majority found GNOME the most useable.
Yeah, there is ONE study on earth (no link ?) that said “some bunch of users found GNOME the most useable” and now you think that the majority of users on earth will find GNOME the most useable.
PS: What think Linus about that ? … mwhahahahahahaha!
Yeah, there is ONE study on earth (no link ?) that said “some bunch of users found GNOME the most useable”
OK here is the link:
http://www.computerweekly.com/Feeds/RS/Articles/2005/11/15/212909/B…
from the article:
“Timms said, “We had Mac, Microsoft Windows and best-of-breed open source configurations, including KDE and Gnome. We had 300 people using the PCs. The one they preferred was Gnome.”
PS: What think Linus about that ? … mwhahahahahahaha!
So you think Linus is a typical computer user ?
I don’t care what other users thinks, even Linus: *I* find GNOME more pleasant so *I* use it, others can use whatever they prefer…
Googlesaurus!! AAAGH!
People would do that because they like linux **MORE** than OSX.
Some non-homos actually don’t like an OS that looks like a little girl designed it and is so locked down and oversimplified that it is impossible to mess up but also impossible to do anything efficiently. I would use XP *any day* before I used OSX. Why? Because *I* don’t like OSX. Can you get your f–king head around that?
f–kING GODDAMN GAY CANADIANS!! Just jack off in your red VW beetles and stay north of the border!
“f–kING GODDAMN GAY CANADIANS!! Just jack off in your red VW beetles and stay north of the border!”
Stopped taking your meds again WE see. Do the people at the hospital know you are accessing the internet?
What it the world does Canada have to do with any of this?
ppc isn’t the best choice for linux, since it will disable you to use a lot of binary only software, like flashplayer, grafics drivers, etc. i heard the ibm ppc java has flaws as well, but i can’t realy say if thats true.
ppc isn’t the best choice for linux, since it will disable you to use a lot of binary only software, like flashplayer, grafics drivers, etc. i heard the ibm ppc java has flaws as well, but i can’t realy say if thats true.
Yep, roll on the pentium-m mac mini.
I would have said the x86-64 but much proprietary stuff isn’t supported under64 bits either.
Why would anyone buy the mini-pc? Linux works just fine on mac mini.
Funny how everyone went off arguing about Linux and Mac without considering the obvious (if rather unpopular) answer to that question. Windows anyone?
But this “mini pc” can’t touch the real deal (the review agrees) and the mini will probably be getting updated in januari which will mean it looses its only advantage, the faster cpu and the fact you can also run Windows on it (“advantage” is relative here)
£669? This isn’t a competitor to Mac Mini, it’s an entirely different market.
The Mac is a cheap student / first-mac user computer aimed to be adequate enough for internet/email/word needs. It is ultra silent, stylish and well built.
This mini PC isn’t any of those.
The reason they are doing this – they are not stupid people at all – is very simple. They think there is a market for a small Mini lookalike which is not a Macintosh.
Their target market will be able to buy a Mini for much less. But it will be a Mac. Even after the switch to Intel, it will be a Mac. They won’t buy one.
What this amounts to in marketing terms is a thorough test of the proposition that the Mac OS, in the market, is a key disadvantage of the Mini. The proposition being tested is that Apple could sell more at higher prices if it de-branded the Mini and removed OS X and replaced it with Windows.
Its not a matter of what Mac users like. Its a matter of what appeals to the market as a whole. It is quite wrong to see this as a competitor to the Mini. Its not intended to be that at all.
I have no idea if they are right or wrong, but they have not launched on this scale at this price point without having done a lot of homework. So they may well be right. Its going to be very interesting to see.
You seem to think that the largest portion of the market care, or even know what an OS is. This is not the case.
Its not what I think. I am trying to understand what the marketing strategy of the company is, and can think of no other explanation. As to the OS, and whether ordinary people know about it or not, I think they probably do at some very basic level – they know Macs are ‘not standard’, they know they are ‘different’. They will be told by anyone they talk to that they don’t run the same software.
I agree this is not a very sophisticated understanding, but its all built into the brand factor.
Incidentally, the result of this fascinating experiment also has implications for licensing the OS. We could say that if this works, then it will have shown something about the market and what it wants and will pay for, and it will suggest that opening X would not be a good marketing strategy. After all, if people turn out to pay more not to have it, why would one expect to be able to sell it either standalone or bundled with Dells?
We have to imagine the meetings which took place before they decided to launch. There will have been a product plan, which will have been incorporated into the business case. This will have included total sales and margin estimates, hence it will have had estimates of pricing and costs.
The price will have been at roughly the levels now being seen. So at some point in this, someone in business planning or accounting will have asked the product manager: what about the Mini? Surely the Mini is selling for around two thirds, maybe even one half, of what you are proposing to sell this for.
What did the product manager say, and why was it convincing? He must have argued that the customers for this particular product would never have considered buying a Mini. Now why would that be? The form factor is just about the same. The functionality is just about the same. The only real difference is, it comes with Windows pre installed. The product manager must have argued, even if the Mini is much cheaper, we don’t have to worry. They will not consider it as competition and a viable alternative purchase.
Now, he must have had evidence for that, to convince people. I have no idea what that evidence was, or whether it will actually prove what they must have thought it will. But it will be really interesting to find out.
If we find out that this argument is right, then we will also have found out something very interesting about OSX. The situation will then be, you can get a Mini with OSX preloaded, same processor, for far less. But the market will have elected to buy in preference a far more expensive mini-look-alike, with Windows preloaded.
That will tell us something. If this happens, Apple would really do better to sell the Mini with Windows on it.
This is going to be one of the most fascinating marketing experiments of the decade in our industry. OS News should report on it in detail.
Is it just me, or have there been numerous earlier announcements/arrivals of a PC Mac-mini clone?
For example:
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=27013
http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1040_22-5596629.html?tag=nl
http://news.zdnet.com/i/ne/p/2005/3205miniPCdemo380x354.jpg
Of course, it could be I’m just confused by the massive amount of pre-announcing AOpen has done.
Well, again, another maker screws up. Its not like this is a new concept, there have been computers the same form factor as the mini for a while, espresso PC or something like that (they sold them on thinkgeek).
What they keep missing is the driving force. The Apple mini is what it is because apple decided to make a cheap computer. Whereas everyone else looks at it as an attempt to make a small computer. Thus why apple succeeded and everyone else fails. No way in heck someone would buy this when they could buy 2 apple mini’s or really beef up one apple mini.
Apple did it cheap, they decided to repackage the already cheap ibook, use a cheap cpu, ditch everything they could, and then since they were already getting small, why not just use laptop drives and cdroms which arn’t that expensive but save them a ton on power draw, thus allowing a cheap power-supply, and then finally causing the whole thing to be small thus lighter and less material which brings down cost in manufacturing and shipping. Clearly they Apple wasn’t focused on being small, otherwise they would have jammed more features in it, and it would be on a size scale with the ipod. Much cheaper to have small be an out come, not a driving force.
Also apple knew they had a market, since every one was looking for a basic headless mac. So they delivered, and knew they would have volume, and new the mini would create new mac users who would upgrade in a few years to a higher profit Powermac, iMac, or Laptop.
Anyways. The computer doesn’t look to bad, a bit dull, minimal is good, but minimal has to have style with it, this just has minimal. And the logo/name has to go, looks awful.
For the ports, a few more USB ports would have been nice, and a eSATA port, since your going to need a external drive pretty soon with one.
Why would I buy a Mac Mini when I can get one of these which is almost as good for twice the price?!
Because it will run Linux……….
“Because it will run Linux……….”
And Yellow Dog is what now?
“Why would I buy a Mac Mini when I can get one of these which is almost as good for twice the price?!”
Man, you are just too funny! 🙂
/Love my iMac
//Even if it is only 800 MHz G4
///Want’s quad-core (two dual-core CPUs) PowerMac! 😉
I wonder why would one need to run osX on mac mini. It’s just like hitting oneself with a hammer on a head… Poor mac zealots …
Well, at least in Taiwan it’s the only option. I was considering buying one but then when I asked them if they would offer me one without bundling Windows, because that would save me NT$4600 out of NT$29900 (P-M version, US$1=NT$33), and I’ll just put my lovely Gentoo in. The bad news is they told me Intel and MS forced them to bundle Windows with the machines, so they had no choice.
A twice-as-expensive “clone” of the Mac mini that can’t run OS X. Wonderful. The Radio Shack project-box look is a major bonus. Where’s my checkbook…
> To me it looks like a thing from the eighties
Mmmmm. Yeah, like a Delorean.
like a Delorean
Does it fly, or travel through time?
After reading through these comments, I just couldn’t help pointing out to an article I came across which gives the PC manufacturers a few tips to take on Apple in the turf war in controlling the PC market in 2006.
Here is the link:
http://linuxhelp.blogspot.com/2005/11/5-point-program-to-beat-mac.h…
This makes a very interesting read. Though the author of the post has been flamed after he published this article.
Yeah, those are good points for a change as far as PC is concerned. But I am sure Apple has discounted such a possiblity and will take apropriate measures like say releasing a cheaper Apple Computer than the Mac Mini for instance ? Remember, Apple has gone on record that it finds Linux too a significant threat along side windows for the Mac OSX. So I don’t think they are sleeping on it. I just hope such a possiblity as have been said in this article becomes a reality. Then we can look out for cheaper Mac computers.
Customers should be the King !!
Both this machine and the mac mini only seem to have two usb ports: one for your keboard, one for your mouse. If one wants to connect any other usb device (eg camera, usb disk, audio player), one needs to get a usb hub.
This sounds quite inconvenient, and something with which other clones could improve upon.
Both this machine and the mac mini only seem to have two usb ports: one for your keboard, one for your mouse. If one wants to connect any other usb device (eg camera, usb disk, audio player), one needs to get a usb hub.
Apple Keyboards have an extra USB port (or at least they used to). And some Monitors have the same feature as well. Considering that you’ll need at least one monitor and one keyboard you could avoid having to buy a USB Hub.
The computer has PS2 port on it.
It does need more ports, but then again, how often do you find any new computer with more then 2 USB ports on the back. My mac doesn’t have more, even nice boxes like Shuttle XPCs have 2 USBs on most models.
In a ideal world all new computers would have at least 10 USB ports on the back, and probably 2 eSATA ports. But not how it is.
When I used to work at Staples, almost all of the models had 4 on the back, 2 on the front.
Yea , wait a bit and gnome will start forcing a 1 (an only one) button mouse on you because it is so much usable … not.
Wait a bit, when mac os X had forced anyone to only use one button mouse ?
The answer: never.
Mac OS X handles from the beginning multi button mouse, you just have to plug one…
Another product of the ‘PC’ market which is nothing more than a cheap knock-off of something else. Zero innovation. What a friggin boring world to be a part of.
This box does hawe one advantage over the minimac.
The cpu is atleast twice as fast
More like 20% faster…
Milk and cookies are to Santa Claus as:
OSNews articles are to trolls.
<makes mental note to browse comments at a higher rating from now on>
This would be a perfect pc for my mom. It’s small, easy to handle/service, runs windows, etc. I only wish that gaming rigs could be this small as well. Mini pc would be perfect for students moving in/out of doorms or for people on the move. Would be interesting if they could design a pc module to plug into a monitor in a standardized fashion. So you only have keyboard, mouse and monitor like that mac computer. Why not buy a notebook then? Because some folks prefer regular keyboard/mouse + large monitor on a table combo.
…they aren’t ‘clones’ to me. what shall i do with such a mini-pc if it does not run mac os?
“> Every. Frigging. Thing. Here. Is. About. Linux.
> A conversation on polo ponies *will* be tied to linux and somehow
> prove that every OS in the world is somehow inferior to it.
Best. Post. Ever.
I will bookmark this and use it as an answer to the question “what’s this OSNews site?”.
To be fair, the editors are not totally Linux-Zealous nutjobs, but beware the comments, especially if it’s about *BSD, Windows or Mac. Or anything that’s not Linux. Or anything that is Linux…
”
Exaggerate some more, why don’t you? Get over it. This is a site where the proponents of various OSes basically do battle. If you guys can’t handle it, then move on. Every OS has some fanatics here. Linux isn’t the only one.
Mark my words. This company will be sued by Apple for its blatant Mac mini design rip-off. And, once again, Apple will prevail, just as it did against eMachines a few years back.