Why isn't the Mac mini "Core" cheaper? Weren't Intel Macs supposed to cost less?

As acknowledged elsewhere in the Mac mini "Core" Q&A, it is certainly true the entry-level Intel-based Mac mini models have had a starting price of US$599. This compares to the PowerPC-based entry-level model, the Mac mini G4/1.25, which was available for as little as US$499.

It is worth noting that the "Core Duo" powered Mac mini models are slower than the Mac mini G4/1.25 when running applications using "Rosetta", and as also mentioned elsewhere, some may consider the "integrated graphics" in the Intel system, the lack of an internal modem, and the lack of "Classic" support to be disadvantages.

However, to compare, even if you disregard the potential increase in speed provided by the processor switch when running "Universal" applications, the faster frontside bus, larger level 2 caches, faster RAM, and faster Serial ATA hard drives; the Intel-based Mac mini models provide a remote control, larger hard drives, an extra RAM slot, built-in AirPort Extreme (802.11g), Bluetooth 2.0+EDR, Gigabit Ethernet, two additional USB 2.0 ports, and "optical digital audio input/audio line in" and "optical digital audio output/headphone" minijacks. Just adding AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth to the Mac mini G4/1.25 would have cost nearly US$100.

Even if you view the Gigabit Ethernet for modem "switch" as a wash, the entry-level Intel-based Mac mini models still have provided a reasonable amount of additional "value" for the extra money.

If you wish Apple offered an Intel-based Mac mini for US$499, perhaps with a smaller hard drive and without built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0+EDR and/or Gigabit Ethernet, you're certainly not alone, as many people have expressed this sentiment. Perhaps Apple will address this concern with an additional configuration in the future.

It's curious that many anticipated the switch from PowerPC to Intel processors would result in cheaper Macs. One can only imagine that those with this expectation never read the "Macintel" Q&A on EveryMac.com.

On June 20, 2005, in response to "Will the 'Macintel' systems cost less than today's Macs?", the "Macintel" Q&A provided the following [emphasis added]:

The "Macintel" systems probably will not cost substantially less than today's PowerPC-based Macs. Apple is already using a large number of industry-standard PC-compatible parts in its systems, and at least one EE Times columnist, Rick Merritt, notes that "Apple typically bought PowerPC chips for less than $65; X86 CPUs are likely to cost as much as twice that amount in round figures." On the other hand, a report from The Register, referencing In-Stat, notes that Intel's "average cost per die is a mere US$40", so it is possible that Apple may be able to negotiate a similar price for Intel processors. Nevertheless, it is doubtful that Apple would start making cheap generic-looking "Macintel" boxes to cut costs, so one can expect a similar pricing structure.

In a nutshell, it seems likely that the Mac mini "Core" systems are not cheaper because Apple is making an effort to offer additional functionality, possibly even with more expensive processors, while maintaining similar profit margins to those obtained from selling the Mac mini G4.