Apple warns of near-term iMac, Mac mini constraints - Page 2

The Mini won't be getting Blu-Ray, so you can uncross your fingers now.
If it appears it will either be in the likes of a high-end iMac, or it will be a BTO option (likely sold with a frown-inducing markup) on professional product lines and perhaps the iMac as well.

Right, the sooner Apple moves to other carriers the faster the price will come down for both the iPhone and the service. People like myself who can't justify it's high monthly cost or need it will buy one because they want one.

I can afford a iPhone easily, I can afford a Rolls Royce too (if I want to live in it), I just can't justify it's costs. $80 a month is INSANE and not a good value when I got one for $15 a month. That monthly $80+ bill coming in from AT&T just makes me sick, I didn't like it when I was with them before. I was so happy to quit and get a pre-paid phone instead.

I'd rather pay a upfront cost for the phone and service for a year and be done with it, not get soaked every month. It's like dealing with beggars "got some change?" over and over.

Perhaps if I paid someone to take care of all my bills, but then I got to pay them. Will someone work a year if I pay them up front? Or will they just take off with the money?

Apple should use any carrier and encourage a yearly "all you can eat" pre-paid plan.

That would make me happy. Less hassle. Less begging. Sell a hell of a lot of iPhones too.

No, please don't - or at least drop the price of the Mini and give it AppleTV ease-of-use before killing it off. We've had this conversation elsewhere, but I love my AppleTV. Granted it needs the added functionality the Mini would give it, but I don't think the Mini (as it is) would be the perfect replacement for those of us who primarily want a media client.

"I'd rather pay a upfront cost for the phone and service for a year and be done with it, not get soaked every month. "

So you'd rather that your provider make interest on a year's worth of fees, rather than you?

Does Apple ever do what we speculate? I am using a 1st gen MacBook as my HTPC... and really, my PS3 does a better job of it (especially with the companion, MediaLink) and it has Blu-ray. I can watch most all videos that I download (99% podcasts) as well as music, pictures, and Blu-ray movies.

Sony does make up some of the hardware costs with the sale of games, but surely Apple could put BR in a Mini... for being a part of the Blu-ray board, they have done 0 with BR. Maybe, that time is now.

The Core 2 Duo chips in the current Mini (P7350/P8400) have a TDP of 25 watts.
The i7 chips have a minimum TDP of 45 watts.

I don't think Apple can go quad core in the Mini until Arrandale chips are released in early 2010.

2.26ghz STD, 2.53 opt. 160gb HD in STD (120gb HD they are using costs more than 160gb, Thank you netbook makers). They already switched to the Pioneer slot loads (which are actually better than advertised since the FW update).

For a Mini the Arch. is already state of the art. in fact to get the same bus spd, graphics perf, cpu speed you need to spend a bit more with Dell or HP (if available).

HP is moving towards low-cost Low power CPU arch. in their consumer line of systems. You'll notice it more Oct 22nd with Win7 intro. They have a couple iMac look-a-likes and laptops that look like a Macbook coming out that day based on AMD's low-cost low power CPU's. THERE NOT BAD for a PC. I like HP's all-in-one better than the iMac in terms of design only because I like the chinless look. I also run their TS series monitors at the office and home. Love'em. - - - That's the mini's competition.

BR Slot load drives only come in 4x (not bad, useable) but cost just over 200 USD in lots of 1000+. It makes it to the Mini it will probably be a $299 BTO, maybe $399 depending on which drives they go with... Pioneer most likely.

Yea, i7 cpu's in a sub $1000 Mac... I'd bite my tongue but don't think so. Agree.

Yonah CPU's were 35w tdp though... Use copper and/or ceramic and up the min fan speed you could do 45.

$100 more is a bit much, even present $50 is too much for many.

But the option should be there, and those who know will pony up the extra bucks because matte screens make their computers all that much more usable in nearly any enviroment, especially laptops.

One would spend a lot more that $100 to darken their windows, cover the lights and paint the walls a dark color to eliminate reflections and glare. Or they can buy a cheap ass $20 anti-glare film, which has to be replaced as it will crack, yellow and peal from the heat of the monitor, sun etc.

What's the use in having a computer if you see your reflection all the time? A mirror is a better value.

Quoting this because you seem very sure of yourself. If macs get Blu-ray, I could easily see the mini getting it at the very least as a build to order option. Especially if they are announcing iMacs with Blu-ray on the same day.

The competing with Apple TV argument doesn't fly with me because the Mac mini already has the advantage of an optical drive, a Blu-ray drive would simply increase the price differential between the Apple TV and the Blu-ray equipped mini. Different strokes for different folks.

I'm also expecting a "video" event in January announcing the tablet and updating the Apple TV to 1080p (which would increase its value relative to the new mini). Maybe they would even release a 720p dock for the latest iPod touch and iPhone. They are more than capable of 720p. Of course, this is based on nothing but the fact that I think it makes sense.

I think The new iMac is going to look like the current LED Cinema Display. LIke, Identical.

The Mac mini, and the Macbook are the only two machines that are starting to stand out. I don't know how Apple would change the look of the mini, But, I think its about time they do. its been what? almost 5 years and the mini still looks the same....

Identical, as in no chin, but slightly fatter than the cinema display? That could look good.

I don't want the mini's look to change because airport stacks on it nicely and you can get external hard drives of the same shape.

There is little likelihood that Apple, at this time, will make substantial changes to the Mini. A speed bump, more memory, boosting the base model up to similar territory to the current top model, these are things to be expected. Going with a new chip set, not so much.

Really, what's Apple's motivation for making significant changes to an already capable machine. They're simply updating the hardware to ensure it remains current. Considering the reason for having the Mini is affordable computing, unnecessary changes are out.

This isn't a bad thing. A Mini with the 9400M, atleast 2gigs of RAM, and a reasonably capable processor is just what most of us need to get the job done. That's available now and all Apple needs to do is make some incremental upgrades to keep the Mini current.

I believe the mini will simply get a 2.26GHz processor (that's now the lowest one on the Intel price list), more RAM and a bigger HD.

I'm hoping the iMac gets a performance boost and anti-glare glass, but I'm not holding my breath. Apple doesn't seem to want me as a customer.

Yes if it means the carriers would compete on price and service alone and the net result is more overall annual savings for consumers.


I pay $180 a year up front for voice and text, then forget about it and never see a bill for another year.


It's sweet.

Arrandale will be a DUAL core chip. There are no low power quads in sight for a year.

If Apple isn't prepared to accommodate chips in the 45-60W range they have to stick with the current Penryn Core 2 Duo and that would be suicide.

Yes, that would be ideal so you could add a cinema display of the corresponding size and have the displays be visually identical from the business ends. Thinner is not as important as getting rid of the "chin". (Well, to some, thinner isn't important at all, but, personally, I'd like the computer to become like the Cheshire Cat, but not as chatty.)

The i7 would be nice, more Core 2 Duo would be a bit of a disappointment.

Blu-ray, I don't really care.

I agree.

If anything's getting the newest i7 notebook quads, it's the top iMac.

Anything other than a mild jostle for the Mini is probs. a long way off.

I'm still hoping for the xMac/headless iMac;

-which I know is about as likely as a Core i9 Mini.

Slightly less so, I would think.

Better to invest in Apple stock than put money into savings.

BlueRay is a "bag of hurt" according to Steve Jobs, I'm on my second PS3 because of a firmware update glitch that Sony is refusing to pay attention too, it's time to ditch mechanical devices anyway.

Now if a BlueRay device can be made without the moving parts, like some sort of flatbed scanner, that would be interesting. But some dumb dumb would burn their eyes out and that would be that.

Look at all the latest trouble with Superdrives, mine failed too, got it replaced under AppleCare. Time is over for these mechanical devices, trouble is there is no cheaper permanent storage medium to replace it.

Apple likes SD now, especially since capacities of up to 2TB are coming down the pipeline.

Blueray? Play it or burn it on a third party external device, that's going to make Hollywood happy and keep Apple out of the MIAA trouble.

Not that I disagree with your overall premise, but a scanner has moving parts too. I'd rather put my faith in a spindle with a laser moving in one axis on a pivot than a scanner which is full of way more moving parts. To your point, Flash is the way of the future and the AppleTV needs upgrading to stay current. Really it would be best to make the AppleTV the Hi-End of the digital HD universe.

Blu-ray was a "bag of hurt" a year ago. Things have changed, in particular, the licensing fee structure for Blu-ray and Blu-ray adoption rates. The time of mechanical devices may be over for you, but it is far from over for the general population. I'm sorry you have had bad luck with optical drives as of late.

As processors get progressively more capable, having the latest and greatest unit under the hood is rendered progressively less significant. My current Mini, a 1.87 Intel with a gig of RAM, does most things rather well. It has an issue handling HD video files in their native form. It can do it but struggles. Playback of the H.264 files coming from my hybrid camera was a problem but with the arrival of Snow Leopard, that has changed, so watching the files is fine now under the new Quicktime.

That suggests to me that with the right upgrades, the current architecture is capable enough. The latest Mini already is significantly upgraded relative to my Mini. The 9400M GPU alone represents a serious upgrade. Going up significantly in RAM would no doubt also pay huge dividends. Combine that with a jump up from 1.87Ghz to something in the range of 2.53 Ghz and I would be surprised if such a configuration had trouble processing HD files. The processor boost alone would mean a 36 per cent boost. No small thing. And the latest bits in the Mini are better able to take advantage of Snow Leopard advances.

Perhaps I'm naive but I honestly believe that if I opt for a 2.53Ghz Mini with 4 gigs of RAM, this configuration would comfortably handle whatever I throw at it. If that is the case, is there really much gain to be had from being able to say you've got the latest and greatest? Maybe we're coming to the point where all the tick tocking Intel will engage in will be more about marketing than impacting on our lives in a tangible fashion. It seems that there is always some new CPU coming up that blows away the current technology. But if you are going from great to really great to incredibly great, well, great is great. If the current generation of Core 2 Duos are not quite great, they're certainly very, very good. Hopefully they'll be good enough.

Also of possible interest, if the rumors pan out, may be the new "touch mouse", although, it's not clear to me what this may actually be: Mouse? Trackpad? Hybrid?

That is the most asinine comment I have ever seen on this forum — and that's sayin' a lot.




I'm thinking it'd be like the regular mouse but without a scroll ball/wheel — you just slide your finger(s) on it to do the multi-touch gestures.

I'm really good looking.

If your last point is correct, your overall argument might be right, but I'm skeptical that we've come to that point (or ever will). Perhaps more importantly, how can we ever know if we've come to that point? How can we know that there won't be "something new" in 6 months that is highly beneficial but requires the latest processor to make it usable? I don't think we can.

Historically, buying the low end of currently available processors hasn't been a good bet. I'm not sure I see evidence that we have reached a point where that no longer applies.

You know what would be neat. A Mini and iMac built on the NEW Atom CPU and nVidia ION chipset. They could build a low-price Mac, provide the experience and still make the profit margins they need. I've done a 330 based Mac just for giggles (INTEL GMA950 though) and it worked really well. The iLife apps responded nicely and everything had that "Feel". I wouldn't expect a 20' screen or FW800 but I would expect a price tag at $399 and $699 respectively. Something simple, something elegant and something "Mac-Like"... Something anyone could afford. That was the basis for the Mini in the first place...

Just throwing it out there because I think it could lead to a more appealing choice to budget buyers. Not Apple's foray but if it wasn't so to speak there Genre then we wouldn't have a shuffle.

Agreed, but no computer company can survive if it can't offer customers a reason to upgrade from their perfectly adequate old machines to something new. It's not about what customers need it's about making them want something new.

When new parts with higher performance per dollar are available there's an opportunity to use them as an incentive to upgrade. Failing to offer better performance per dollar leads to customers justifying the continued use of their existing hardware. As you said, most people would be well served by a 3 year old Mac mini. If everyone thought that way Apple would be in big trouble.

Earlier this year a hardware failure forced me to replace a loaded 2.7GHz G5 tower. Because I hadn't budgeted any money for a new computer I had to make do with refurbished Mac mini and a couple of external hard drives. Despite joining the Intel world and getting to enjoy Snow Leopard, I still want something better.

My wife gets headaches sitting in front of our display and I'm really hoping LED backlighting will reduce or eliminate the problem. Going to a high gloss display, however, could increase eye strain caused by the glare and reflections. It's bad enough on my iPod touch that I have to hold the unit at an angle. A 24" screen is 7 times as big and isn't nearly as adjustable.

I know I have high expectations for the iMac but because Apple doesn't sell a mini-tower it's the only machine I can pin my hope on. I'd go hackintosh in a heartbeat if my wife would let me.

Yeah that would be nice, but i'm not holding my breath.

Definitely. I don't understand why they aren't the same already. I guess the main difference being that you can't shop the store on the mini frontrow but you can on the apple tv. This is an issue if you are gonna use a mini as a htpc.

Now that's a bag of hurt.

Apple's UK website is down right now.

Think they're uploading the assets for the new line of products, ready to be revealed in the near future?

All of Europe and Australia seems to be too. I wonder if they are finally changing the ATV pricing to match the US change.

New Mac Minis is a little unexpected but I guess there's always a CPU increase for the same money. A 2.2 or 2.4GHz starting point would be quite nice.

Apple demonstrates again why Macs make no sense if you are in business. Imagine that you urgently need to acquire a couple more desktops. "Sorry," says Apple, "none available. Can't say when new models will be in stock. Just put your business on hold for a few weeks." No supplier to business can afford to behave that way towards its customers. Apple remains a consumer product.

I doubt the situation is as dire as you make it out to be. It's not like there are absolutely none in stock anywhere.

For the love of apple, apple: MATTE.

As for the updates: sweet.

And if now quad cores appear, please boys and gals, let's keep the nagging to a min. There's always a mac pro. It's not as if dual core cpus can't handle pretty much everything.

Get a crappy hp then. Enjoy your windows experience. You can take a horse to the water...

btw you've not really figured this thing out, it's not as if you can't find retailers to buy macs now...and of course all self respecting businesses never plan ahead, they just wake up on day and go, we need new computers....