World: r3wp

but overall, I am all for new technologies. I have to say I was REALLY 
scared of Intel's future. AMD just got better, and Itanium was really 
a fiasco ...

Now Intel is getting into more cores, home media convergence processors, 
etc. ... that is good. Companies should care about efficiency. I 
want my PC to be here instead of my DVD player, with all the codecs, 
but I don't want to HEAR it ... no single spinning cooler allowed 
... that is why I am looking into mini-itx stuff ...

graham, it's most likely OSX and not just raw benchmarks that they 
use to measure speed

and the powerbook was grossly underpowered

Of note, I WANT to NOT be on Windows.  I'm getting closer every day. 
 In fact the spell checker in Qtask means I don't use Word so much, 
but we need to add a scaling input box (I like to see more of what 
I'm writing). We are going to get the spell dictionary into AltME 
eventually.

it's important to consider that Apple aren't trying to compete with 
PC makers. they are competing with their own software department. 
it's easy for them now to create software that'll only run on highend 
macs. It's kind of silly for them to sell iMovie, tout its HDTV editing 
capabilities and only be able to run the application properly on 
high end macs.

pekr, Apple have been waiting to shift to Intel for the past 5 years. 
IBM gave them delivery problems and couldn't deliver mobile CPUs 
and it's been a fight to keep up on all levels. I suspect Steve saw 
the initial switch to PPC as a mistake and that gave them a lot of 
problems.

Pekr, "why I am looking into mini-itx stuff". I have been waiting 
for nano-ITX for the last two years ... and in that time Apple have 
released Mac mini and announced Mac mini for x86.


I've done the sums, even with the wholesale prices I can get on most 
of the PC components (Via board, laptop HDD, RAM, Case plus time/cost 
of assembly), and the current Mac mini still comes out cheaper and 
quieter even with all the Mac software pre-bundled.


If Apple can release the new Intel-based Mac mini at the same or 
better prices, with the same or better specs, then why would anyone 
wait for Via to get their act together when they can buy a cost-effective 
off-the-shelf solution today, even if it means ditching OS X for 
Linux or Windows?!

 even if it means ditching OS X for Linux or Windows?!

  - not understanding here.  You're saying that Mac hardware might 
  be cheaper then building it yourself.  And then you ditch OSX so 
  you can run windows/linux on the Mac ?

Yeah, that does not jive with the Mac Mini like hardware I have seen. 
 Perhaps I'm not clear on something.

Graham, yes. Reichart, the price comparison is:

	Mac mini 1.25GHz with 40GB Combo drive and 512MB RAM: AU$799

Mini-ITX equivalent:

	VIA EPIA-TC10000 (DC-DC onboard): AU$229
	OEM 40GB 2.5” 5400rpm HDD: AU$100
	OEM Slimline CD/DVD combo drive: AU$140
	512MB DDR333 SO-DIMM: AU$81
	Mini-ITX case (difficult to source): ~AU$150
	Cabling: ~AU$10
	Power supply brick: ~AU$15

which comes to AU$725 (wholesale), and excludes:

	Software
	DVI output
	Packaging
	Assembly


Look at other folks who are trying to do the same thing (with an 
emphasis on small and quiet):


 http://www.hushtechnologies.com/(starting at about 750 Euro (AU$1200))

 http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/01/evesham_aopen_minipc_win/
 ($499 pounds, so about AU$1,200 for me)


The Mac mini, for this class of device, wins hands down – even if 
you purchase it as a Linux or Windows (when re-released as an Intel 
Mac mini) box. It's smaller, quieter, cheaper, and more compatible 
(USB2, Firewire and DVI out of the box; and includes a DVI-Analog 
converter for PC folks still living in the 80's).


What's also telling is the noticeable increase in the number of folks 
asking me, “does your software run on Mac”, since its introduction 
– but this might also be the iPod halo effect at work. Regardless, 
I see a lot of them around these days and the general consensus is 
that “they're cheap” - and this from the Dell generation who only 
care about price! ;)

In this vein ... from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4600442.stm

Why don't Apple go the whole hog and run Windows XP on their laptops? 
That way their users could run some useful applications  

Is that new Mac Intel Chip 64 or 32 bit?

Interesting...

ashley, so you think I will not agree? well, wrong, I do agree with 
you :-)

I was too surprised, that the price of mac mini is acceptable - but 
nowhere near you assembling the via based pc! at least here ...

we used mini-itx with our kiosk systems and I was really rude to 
via and their qa .... I departured with them and told them to come 
back, once their stuff works properly ....

I have one contact in-there, and she was really polite .... so - 
it is now three years and situation is a bit different now - they 
opened their drivers etc.

cn700 chipset is also more powerfull ... but - thry to look at Commell, 
or others - there is now many mini-itx boards ...

and please - don't compare mac-mini with barebones - they are full 
featured multimedia stations, including ability to be server by remote 
control only, via display .... look at Shuttle or MSI ones ...

well - I have never used OS-X, but I am not scared - but - I need 
modern codecs - divx, xvid in codeck-pack or ffdshow, bsplayer ... 
just give me those sw on OS-x

and give me rebol/view there ;-)

I also fear - touching OS-X, as good unix based derivative, would 
mean no way back for me to crappy Windows, where still inserting 
the floppy may mean your OS is gonna block for few secs ;-)

modern PCs shouldn't need floppy

but the same thing happens with cdrom access :(

exactly, that was my point ...

Pekr. You are missing a lot, and Btw All the multimedia stuff you 
mention is already running in OSX.

How to make money from Open Source -- http://tinyurl.com/cnkza

pekr, of course all these things are already available for OSX and 
have been for a long time. One thing that kind of surprised me is 
how many apps surpass Windows equivalents in quality, simply because 
the underlying foundation with Cocoa is incredibly strong. You can 
tap into a lot of amazing functions and the OS itself can do things 
where Windows would need third party software to do the same.

For example, look at Jaime's presentation from the REBOL conference. 
It was done in Keynote which is a presentation program made by Apple 
which makes Powerpoint look like a silly joke. It uses full 3D hardware 
acceleration and can apply pixel shader effects to the presentation 
through Core Image. By having a very strong set of video functions 
as well, presentations can be exported to a lot of different videoformats 
from DV to H264 or MPEG4, etc. in any size or framerate. You can 
also convert parts of it to a PDF document or a bitmap image. All 
this is possible, because OSX does this in Cocoa and is available 
at the developer's fingertips. This is also what made apps like iMovie 
possible, because they integrate into OSX.


Often the wrong question to ask is "Does program X exist for OSX?", 
because the programs are different and often of much higher quality. 
A lot of programs don't even have Windows equivalents. The community 
reminds me a bit of what bedroom programmers did during the old days 
of the Amiga, when they used the hardware and made beautiful demos. 
There are a lot of small, free apps available that do 2-3 things.

I've also just rebooted my Mini with a 72 day uptime to install the 
latest update. It's an amazing little brick!

http://www.engadget.com/2006/01/11/creative-labs-pc-less-skype-internet-phoneplus/

Ah! Great news Reichart. This is what we are after. :)

Getting closer, I want wireless like a cell phone with headset though...I 
will keep looking.

what do you mean? you can have headset with each blue-tooth supporting 
cell phones today ... but you probably mean something different?

He wants the inexpensive services of Skype and the convenience of 
Wireless, and so do I.

hmm, wireless ip telephony?

there is usb blue-tooth stick which will catch your signal to 100m 
distance, but that is just for the headset and you have to have your 
pc running ....

BT sucks!

Exactly. There are WiFi VoIP phones already, but not WiFi Skype phones.

pda or smartphone with bt or wifi then?

then go with pda and install one, no?

Yeah, just give me a simple 802.11 box with a simple UI and a headset 
jack, that is all.  Make the software programmable even, so people 
can make it Skype (or what ever).  This would be the best selling 
hardware design, and open one.

Reichart - the support in Windows sucks :-) For short connections 
bt is ok - I use it every day in my car, as police already caught 
me on phone during my drive and I paid for that :-)

But you have the overhead price of a PDA, so we are talking 300 + 
just for 40 worth of hardware.

there is plenty of pdas out there, or smart phones, supporting wi-fi, 
no? should be fast enough to install skype and transfer it to your 
home network ...

yes, now I understand ... no easy solution then ...

BT Sucks! ................ I'm sticking with this statement, it has 
nothing to do with Windows.  I have a good friend who is THE GUY 
who writes al the BT drivers for HP.  After sitting with him for 
2 hours working through exactly how BT was designed, and alll the 
problems, there is only one statement.... BT Sucks!

I wonder why Skype themselves don't initiate such development ...

bt is in 1.1 or 2.0 version already? I wonder if they did not corrected 
their problems? by the way - no matter how it sucks, it will win 
for short distances ... it consumes 1/10 of wi-fi ... although there 
is one some low power wi-fi chipset, but dunno details ...

I also have bought now over 500 worth of BT Crap.  BT Mouse 500, 
BT Mouse from Microsoft, BT card for portables, BT headset from Jabber, 
Bt headset from Motorolla, BT PDA from Treo-Palm.  Every bit of it.................SUCKED! 
 I got rid of everything except the BT Headset and the Treo, and 
they are both going soon as well.