Mac mini vs. Dell, Round 3

And now, for Round 3 in our Mac mini vs. Dell debate.

Today, we'll compare Mac mini vs. the Chipper Chicken - the least expensive desktop model I could find on Dell's website. Our third Dell contender is the Inspiron 537s, and its specs (as compared to the mini) are as follows:

Item	Mac mini	Inspiron 537s
Price	$799	$269
Processor	2GHz Core2 Duo E7300	Celeron 450 2.2GHz
L2 Cache	3MB shared	512kB
Frontside Bus	1GHz	800MHz
Memory	2GB DDR3 1GHz	2GB DDR2 800MHz
HDD	320GB/5400rpm	320GB/7200rpm
Video	GeForce 9400M	GMA X4500
Network	Gigabit	100Mbit
802.11N Wireless	Included	Optional
PassMark CPU	1371 / 192	668 / 377

And here we go...

Mac mini vs. the Chipper Chicken

The first, most obvious thing we notice is that purchasers of the Insprion 537s save a whopping $530. That's quite a savings, no matter how you cut it. In fact, you could buy nearly three Inspirons for the price of the Mac mini!

But what do you get for your savings? The mini's processor is significantly faster, despite the Celeron's slightly higher base clock. This is due to the Core 2 Duo's inherently more powerful core and, of course, the fact that there are two of them. The mini also sports six times the L2 Cache, a faster memory bus, and the more efficient DDR3 memory.

In addition to the formidable processor and memory differences, the mini sports a significantly more powerful graphics processor, a faster network port, and built-in 802.11N wireless.

All of this points to the fact that, unlike Rounds 1 and 2, these two computers aren't really in the same class. It's like comparing a Yugo to a Mustang. Sure, they've both got four wheels, passenger seating and all the mandatory safety features, and sure, the Yugo is much cheaper, but they really don't compare.

That being said, a computer like the Inspiron will be a good choice for a surprising number of people, especially those on an extremely tight budget. It should do well for basic web browsing (though not, likely, with significant video content), text editing, and other such non-intensive activities.

Still, if you can afford them, any of the other reviewed machines would provide a far better long-term solution for most folks' computing needs.

Next Episode: Software! OS-X vs. Windows!

All of this results in a computer that isn't really even in the same class.

Mac mini vs. Dell, Round 2

Round 1 of Mac mini vs. Dell ended in either a draw or a slight lead on hardware to Dell. Of course, we have a long way to go.

Today, in Round 2, were go head to head on features. Our Dell contender this go round will be the Studio Slim, a trim midrange model that I found by using Dell's parametric search tool and searching on as close a processor match as I could find to the mini's Core 2 Duo processor.

For reference, here's a replication of the specs chart from Round 1:

Item	Mac mini	XPS630	Studio Slim
Price	$799	$799	$539
Processor	2GHz Core2 Duo E7300	3GHz Core2 E8400	2.66GHz Core2 Duo E7300
L2 Cache	3MB shared	6MB	3MB
Frontside Bus	1GHz	1.3GHz	1GHz
Memory	2GB DDR3 1GHz	2GB DDR2 1GHz	2GB DDR2 800MHz
HDD	320GB/5400rpm	500GB/7200rpm	500GB/7200rpm
Video	GeForce 9400M	Dual GeForce GTS 240	GMA X4500HD
Network	Gigabit	Gigabit	Gigabit
802.11N Wireless	Included	Optional	Optional (included)
PassMark CPU	1371 / 192	2156 / 99	1794 / 129

So, here we go...

Mac min vs. the Spec Match:

The Dell Studio Slim is one of Dell's fashionable midrange models. Weighing in at a slim $539 with the optional 802.11N wireless card added, it's significantly less expensive than the Mac mini. What other differences can we find between the two?

The mini is still by far the smaller machine. It also boasts the newer generation, faster DDR3 memory, running at a faster 1GHz bus frequency. This means the memory subsystem is about 30% faster than the Dell. It also has the somewhat more powerful NVIDIA GeForce 9400M graphics processor.

On the other hand, the Studio Slim boasts a somewhat faster 2.66GHz processor (PassMark at 1794 vs. 1371 for the Mac), a modestly larger 500GB hard disk, and - of course - more room for expansion.

The performance differences outlined above would be relatively minor at price parity, but factor in the $170 price difference and this is a significant win for Dell.

Here we see fairly clearly the cost tradeoffs of the Mac mini design. One of the core design principles for the mini is its extremely compact size. To reach that goal requires the use of more expensive laptop components vs. the Studio's standardized (and less expensive) desktop components. Dell is able to exploit this to a fairly significant value difference.

Keep in mind, though, this is only a hardware comparison, and as we will see in a later round, there are significant differences in the software load that may make this a closer match than it appears here.

Next up: Mac mini vs. the Chipper Chicken!

First Day of School Rant

Oooh... I'm going to get into SO much trouble for this post.

A lot of my friends and acquaintances have children who are attending school (usually Kindergarten) for the first time. My own two went off to third grade a few weeks ago, so it hasn't been all that long since I did the same with them. Plus, we spent a fair amount of time volunteering in the church nursery when they were little, and I saw a lot of parents dropping off their little ones for the first time - or the thirtieth time.

Folks.... GET A GRIP!

Your child is just FINE. Your child is where he (or she) is SUPPOSED TO BE. Your child is GROWING UP. Your child NEEDS to learn that it's perfectly normal to go away from mommy for the day and hang out with his friends and teacher.

Now, certainly, there are the rare exceptional case of a child who's particularly troubled in one way or the other, but I've seen FAR too many parents and children with separation problems!

Is that first day of school bittersweet for the parents? Yes. Is it a bit scary for the kid? Certainly... but only for the first five minutes or so before he meets Bobby in the chair next to him and starts chatting wildly about Bakugan. Then, usually, he completely forgets the issue until he gets home to his worried parent who, by expressing his/her concern and sadness, reminds him that going off to school is a scary thing.

My son HATES transitions. He doesn't like changing clothes. He doesn't like changing channels. He doesn't like leaving the house, the car, or anything else. And yes, the night before the first day of THIRD GRADE, he told me he didn't want to go to school. And guess what? The next morning, we got up, had breakfast, left the house and I dropped him off at school just like it was mid-November and he'd been in the routine for months. And when his mom picked him up that afternoon, guess what? He was all excited about the new friends he'd met and the old friends he'd reconnected with. Same reaction he's had every year since that first day of preschool.

I always cringed while doing nursery duty (on principle, we never watched our own kids unless it was unavoidable) when a nervous mom or dad (or both!) would make a big deal of dropping their kid off. The most well adjusted kids were always the children of parents who dropped them off, signed the papers, and casually said "see you after Church, honey!" while walking away like it was the most normal thing in the world. The children, almost inevitably, would saunter off, find a friend and/or a toy, and be happy as a clam until mommy returned. Even on the rare occasion when a child seemed traumatized, the vast bulk of time once mommy was out of sight the child would dry up, find a friend and/or a toy and play contentedly until mommy's return (at which time, promptly, the waterworks would be turned back on...). I could count on one hand the number of times a child was truly inconsolable - and most of those, the kid was probably ill.

I'm convinced that in the vast majority of cases, parents unwittingly project their own separation anxiety onto the children, who are usually much better adjusted to the situation than the parents. Those who teach their kids early on that it's normal to be apart for a while (church child care, occasional babysitters, preschool, then school) end up with self-confident kids who trot off to school like it's the most normal, everyday thing in the world - WHICH IT IS!

I made a rule when our kids started Kindergarten. I do not accompany them to school unless I have a need to (a) haul heavy stuff or (b) talk to the teacher. First day of school it's "Have a nice day, and watch the seatbelt when you shut the door!". Am I a mean daddy? Probably. Do my kids fret and cry over going to school? Nope. Not a bit. They usually hit the ground running.

Kids are supposed to grow up. They're supposed to go off to school, to be independent, to tie their own shoes, make their own beds and pack their own suitcases. Don't shed tears when they do these things. Laugh and clap for joy. Worry when they don't, or when they can't. But make sure they're not just picking up that vibe from you.

Go ahead... < puts on fireproof suit > Fire away...

Mac mini vs. Dell, Round 1

VS.

The top two complaints I hear about Macs from PC users are price and compatibility. In all fairness, Macs hold only about 10% of the market, and they at least appear quite expensive, bang-for-buck.

I'm very enamored with my new Mac mini, but to be fair, I thought I'd do a breakdown vs. some comparable Dell models. The intended use matters very much in choosing a "best" system. In this case, it's a typical home user who surfs the web, uses office apps, perhaps uses Netflix instant movies or Hulu, runs Quicken, and the like. Heavy duty gaming is saved for the Xbox 360 or PlayStation 3, not for the computer. No heavy video editing or graphic arts, either. I believe that this is the type of user Apple is targeting with the Mac mini. A significantly different use case would require a different selection of computers.

For comparison, I chose the $799 2GB/320GB mini model, and sought out three Dell models to compare it against: (a) the cheapest desktop they have, (b) the desktop their parameter searcher brought up as the same price ($799), and (c) as close as I could get on a feature-for-feature customization match.

I came up with the Inspiron 537s Slim ($269), the Studio Slim ($539) and the XPS630 ($799). Here's a chart of the specs:

Item	Mac mini	XPS630	Studio Slim
Price	$799	$799	$539
Processor	2GHz Core2 Duo E7300	3GHz Core2 E8400	2.66GHz Core2 Duo E7300
L2 Cache	3MB shared	6MB	3MB
Frontside Bus	1GHz	1.3GHz	1GHz
Memory	2GB DDR3 1GHz	2GB DDR2 1GHz	2GB DDR2 800MHz
HDD	320GB/5400rpm	500GB/7200rpm	500GB/7200rpm
Video	GeForce 9400M	Dual GeForce GTS 240	GMA X4500HD
Network	Gigabit	Gigabit	Gigabit
802.11N Wireless	Included	Optional	Optional (included)
PassMark CPU	1371 / 192	2156 / 99	1794 / 129

Item	Mac mini	Inspiron 537s
Price	$799	$269
Processor	2GHz Core2 Duo E7300	Celeron 450 2.2GHz
L2 Cache	3MB shared	512kB
Frontside Bus	1GHz	800MHz
Memory	2GB DDR3 1GHz	2GB DDR2 800MHz
HDD	320GB/5400rpm	320GB/7200rpm
Video	GeForce 9400M	GMA X4500
Network	Gigabit	100Mbit
802.11N Wireless	Included	Optional
PassMark CPU	1371 / 192	668 / 377

I'll explain the meaning and details of some of these values as we go along. All of these machines are easily obtainable from either Apple or Dell, and they're pretty much off the shelf configurations. I did add the optional 802.11N wireless to the Studio Slim since it was supposed to be as close to the Mac mini as I could make it. The wireless option is included in my price of $539. I did not include any tax or shipping costs. None of the prices include monitors, keyboards, mice or other peripherals either, just to keep things fair.

I've chosen the PassMark benchmark test suite results to compare the processors. These tests are an average of many user submissions, and is easily available.

The Dells, as priced, don't include any productivity software, and I'll hold off on comparing OS X vs. Windows until the end, since those comparisons are the same across all machines. However, these differences can be the deal maker/breaker, so hold on.

But first, the hardware comparisons!

General Observations:

A few general observations can be made about the mini vs. all the Dells. The mini is obviously much smaller than even the Studio Slim. It's also quite an attractive package.

On the other hand, because the Dells are all made with industry standard PC parts (except the Dell-custom motherboards), they are generally easily repaired and easily upgraded. This can result in more flexibility and a longer use life. The Mac mini is generally not user-modifiable, unless you're a "hacker" and don't mind voiding the warranty.

Mac mini vs. the Price Match:

The Dell XPS630 is marketed as the base model of Dell's gaming machines, which means it's supposed to have some serious horsepower. Also, note that the XPS630 is quite a bit larger than the mini.

The XPS630, at the same price, sports a significantly faster processor, a moderately larger hard disk (500GB vs. 320GB), and dual video controllers. Also, largely by virtue of its larger size, it provides several PCI and PCIe expansion slots, drive bays, and more USB ports. It does not, however, come with wireless, though this is a low-priced option. On price, I'd say the larger hard disk and lack of wireless are a wash - unless wireless is particularly important to you.

In short, if raw horsepower and expandability matter, and size doesn't, the XPS630 wins. On the other hand, for this type of user, too much horsepower is wasted, expansion ports often go unused, and size very well may matter, so I think the mini is still competitive here.

Next episode: Mac mini vs. the Feature Match!

Remembrance of Things Past

Driving to work this morning, I was reminded of some simple childhood fun.

When I grew up, I lived on the only road on our side of the river. The interstate had not yet been completed, so there were quite a few semi trucks driving by the house. We used to sit on the bank by the road and watch the traffic go by. When a truck would approach, we would stand up and make the horn-blowing fist-pump motion - upper arm straight out, forearm straight up, hand in a fist, pumping up and down, simulating pulling on the activation cord for the air horn. The truckers would usually reward us with a blast or two on their air horn in response.

Fast forward thirty years. On my way to work this morning, I was behind a semi truck passing a group of kids waiting for the school bus. One of them was making the motion, and the trucker responded in kind.

If you're reading, chime in with a favorite childhood memory or two...

Some things never change, I guess...

Mac mini - First Impressions

My trusty iMac G5 is finally getting long in the tooth and showing some erratic behavior after five years of nearly flawless performance. Since we use this as our family workhorse, especially tracking finances and communicating with others, we needed a quick, cost effective replacement.

Of course, our household is pretty sold on Mac products, Windows XP is old, Windows 7 is still vaporware, and I wouldn't touch Vista with the proverbial 10-foot pole, so we headed to the Apple Store (online) and considered our options.

Our original plan (before old Smaug started coughing a bit too much smoke) was to buy a MacBook Pro for mommy and daddy, and then follow up eventually with a Mac mini for the kids. However, sometimes plans have to bend to reality, and there was no way we were going to be able to bridge the iMac until the second computer purchase. So, instead, we went straight for the Mac mini and put off the MB-Pro.

Of course, the mini is a BYOKMD box (bring-your-own-keyboard-mouse-and-display), so we also added a nifty 24" widescreen display from Dell and dusted off an old PC keyboard/mouse combo I had laying around. We also, following the "buy the highest performance one you can afford so it won't go obsolete next week" line of thinking, picked the $800 2GB / 250GB mini instead of the cheaper $600 1GB/150GB model.

Here are my first impressions.

Ordering Experience:

First, the ordering process was very simple. Even the "cheap" Apple products are pretty well decked out, so there weren't a gazillion options to choose from. Upgraded processor (no), memory (no), hard disk (no), a few pre-installed applications (again, no), keyboard and mouse (not yet!), accessories, and service plan. Click a few radio buttons, hit the "Buy it" button, and on through the usual checkout process. One relatively nice thing (in the "this should be expected") is that a single click-through on the confirmation status took me to the "Order Status", and a single click from there took me straight to FedEx's tracking data. Very simple and clean.

By contrast, the Dell process was not quite so simple. Don't get me wrong - Dell has a very nice website and ordering system. Still, by contrast, it was harder to find and select the best monitor choice (partly because they have so many choices!), and the checkout process was a bit less clear, due in part to somewhat over-fancy graphics. Again, I'm talking a "9" or maybe a "9.5" vs. a "10" here. It really wasn't a big deal. Dell also shipped via FedEx, and the monitor arrived a full two days prior to the computer. Granted, they were shipping from Texas, not China, but they won the race there.

Where Dell really fell short was their shipping confirmation email. It was in plaintext (not a big deal), and had no less than 10 separate links pertaining to various aspects of my order (including definitions, terms & conditions, a copy of the order confirmation, service rebates, etc.). It was difficult to pick out which one would give me the one piece of information I really wanted - the tracking info! To make matters worse, the top link on the page went nowhere. It was a real letdown in an otherwise excellent ordering experience. To me, once I get the "your order has shipped!", the only question I care about is "Where is my package?". All the rest of the stuff should be in a separate email (maybe the ironically much cleaner order confirmation?) or relegated to clearly lower priority part of the email. I want a single, boldfaced, prominent link that says "TRACK YOUR PACKAGE".

Out Of Box:

Out of box, both products scored very well. I especially noted how they were securely packaged using a minimum - and a minimal variety - of packaging materials. I got the sense that both companies have put a lot of thought into how to safely ship their product with an absolute minimum of waste. And best of all - NO PEANUTS!

The monitor, at about 17lbs, shipped in a slim brown corrugated cardboard box with folded, corrugated cardboard "brackets" to suspend the display within the box. There were also two plastic bags (one for the screen and a second for the base) and a minimal amount of plastic scratch protection over shiny parts. One clever idea: a large paper sheet served double duty as protection for the screen face and as the quick setup sheet with only a handful of pieces of tape to hold it in place. Good thinking on someone's part. Why waste another piece of paper or plastic here? The accompanying "product guide" (legal / warranty mumbo jumbo) and documentation CD were also safely but minimally packaged. Well done, Dell!

As hard an act to follow in this sense as the Dell monitor was, the Mac mini certainly gave it a run for its money. I'll have to explain this one from the inside out, though. First, the computer itself is relatively tiny, at only 6 lbs (shipping weight!), 6.5" square and 2" high, with a separate power brick. The computer, power brick/cord, remote, CDs and paperwork are packaged in tight-fitting cardboard spacers (no styrofoam!) inside a cardboard retail box that is shrink-wrapped. The retail box is then suspended within a corrugated cardboard shipping box by a pair of formed pieces of what I can only describe as the paper equivalent of particle board. The only "downer" I can see here is a nearly excessive use of a cellophane-like plastic wrap around the computer, remote and power brick for scratch protection.

Installation:

Installation couldn't be much easier. The monitor, like virtually all monitors was quite simple: snap in the base, plug in power and video cables, and turn on. The computer was not much more complex. Power, video and keyboard cables (and all other cables) plug into the back. One minor complication was in the video cabling. Because the Mac mini is so small, there is no room for a standard DVI connector on the back. Instead, it provides both a mini-DVI and an Apple DisplayPort, along with a min-DVI to standard DVI adaptor in the box.

Unfortunately, this brings up the one serious downside I have found so far. Cable management is an important issue. Right now, I have five cables coming from the back of this small box: power, video, ethernet, keyboard and an external USB hub. The mini is sitting on my desktop and the cables dangle off the back of the desk. It presents a relatively clean appearance. However, none of the connectors provide more than simple friction to keep them in place. I have already accidentally unplugged the power and mini-DVI connectors more than once while messing around with my desk organization. Losing video is disconcerting, but the computer recovers happily. However, losing power will cause the computer to crash. While OS X is relatively robust to accidental loss of power, this is never a good thing for a computer. For this reason, a better design would provide a more secure power connection. However, it doesn't seem likely that once I get things settled I'll be moving the thing around and knocking the cables loose, and some careful cable management behind the desk will likely further protect things.

Initial User Experience:

Now that I've been using the new mini for a few weeks, I can comment on the user experience. First, this little guy is quiet! Our G5 iMac had a rather annoying fan control bug that caused it to be quite loud. Since my wife suffers from migraines, this did not endear her to the computer. Not so the Mac mini. It is sitting atop my desk at approximately chest level, and I have yet to hear a peep from it, except when loading a DVD. It is virtually silent.

It is also remarkably fast. For everyday tasks, it seems to run effortlessly, with very little wait time. I have a MacBook Pro at work with a 2.4GHz Dual Core processor and the same memory load, and frankly I can't tell the difference. I have yet to run any benchmarks, but I did compile the Apache 2.0 web server, and (compared to compiling it on the iMac) at first I thought the compile had failed, it finished so quick.

As for the operating system, right now it is running OS X 10.5.8 (Leopard), and I have pre-ordered OS X 10.6 (Snow Leopard), due out next month. The iMac was - and still is - running 10.4 (Tiger). Leopard has been out for a while now, and its usability on the Mac mini is much the same as any other Mac: excellent. I especially like the improved parental controls over Tiger. I can place more meaningful limits on the kids' computer use to match their age and maturity. The new features in iLife 09 are very handy (I'm especially enjoying the facial recognition and place marking in iPhoto!), and the look and feel is quite pleasant.

In short, I'm well pleased with my purchase. Macs are expensive computers, there's no doubt, and the Mac mini is no exception. All told, I'm just over a thousand dollars into this box, and a "comparable" PC might have cost half that. However, in my estimation, the overall experience is worth it. We're quite happy with our new little addition.

Quick Update on the Shaving Experiment

The Good:

My first razor lasted approximately twice as long as I estimated in the original analysis. That would cut the overall cost of disposable blade shaving in half, making it far more competitive with the electric razor on cost. Plus, with even a little practice, blade shaving is fast, certainly faster than the electric - or at least it seems so. It fits very conveniently in my routine between shower and tooth-brushing.

The Bad:

Turns out, you've pretty much gotta shave every day, or at most every other day. Otherwise the stubble gets into this messy range where it's too long to comfortably shave, but not long enough for the trimmers. That makes for an unpleasant shaving day. 5:00 shadow doesn't look so good at 9:00 am.

The Ugly:

My mug when it's not hiding behind a copious amount of facial hair. Ya gotta sport what the good Lord gave you, though.

Blogs on Blogs...

How fun is this... we're planning a birthday party for the Twins. We are having a movie themed party, and we had these nifty popcorn-box shaped cards to use for invitations. Unfortunately, the available print space is too small to put all the information we need...

Solution: Create a blog and put the URL on the invitation. The blog post includes all the party details, including a Google map of the theater. The embedded map can be scrolled and zooomed, and switched between map and satellite views. It's neat!

And, folks can RSVP by commenting on the blog!

Then, the same evening, I get the bright idea to start another blog to handle news and discussion for the Cub Scout pack we're trying to start at the school. Shazam! Blogger to the rescue. All of a sudden I'm managing a half dozen different blogs.

Ain't the interwebs great? :-)

On Cousins

Due to the recent additions to the extended family, I got curious and studied up on the whole naming convention surrounding cousins...

Apparently, the first/second/third thing is defined by the minimum number of generations separating one of the two people in question from their nearest common ancestor, while the "once removed / twice removed" thing is the difference in generation between the two people in question.

Easier explained by example (actually, easiest explained by the chart in the above-linked article!)

So, TwinGirl & TwinBoy and TwinCousin (my newly arrived nephew) are one generation away from their nearest common ancestor (TwinMamaw & TwinPapaw), so that makes them, naturally, first cousins. There's no "removed" because they are all of the same generation. However, assume for a moment, some time in the future, TwinGirl has a child named Fred. Fred and TwinCousin would be "first cousins, once removed" because again the common ancestor is TwinMamaw, one generation from TwinCousin ("first cousins"), but TwinCousin and Fred are a generation apart ("once removed"). Now, if TwinCousin has a child, named Mary, Fred and Mary would be second cousins because you have to go two generations back to a common ancestor, but not removed because they're both the same generation. However, Mary and TwinGirl would be first cousins once removed for the same reason Fred and TwinCousin are.

Now, let's look at a more complicated example.

Starting with TwinGreatGrandpa, there's TwinGrandpa, then me, then TwinBoy. Also, there's Uncle DH (who married TwinGrandpa's sister), Cousin DH (his son), Cousin JH (his son) and then cousin BH (his daughter).

Cousin DH and I are first cousins, JH and I are first cousins, once removed, and BH and I are first cousins, twice removed. Cousin DH and TwinBoy are first cousins, once removed, JH and TwinBoy are second cousins, and BH and TwinBoy are second cousins, once removed.

So basically, I am first cousins (+/- some removes) with every descendant of TwinGreatGrandpa because I am one generation away from the "start of the tree". My kids are first cousins once removed with TwinGreatGrandpa's grandchildren (because those grandchildren are one generation away), but second cousins (+/- some removes) with his great-grandchildren and their descendants (because the nearest person is two generations away from the common ancestor).

Confusing? Yes, but not so bad once you grok the pattern.

Welcome to the family, TwinCousin!!