or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Mac mini supply drying up, could signal Ivy Bridge update
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mac mini supply drying up, could signal Ivy Bridge update - Page 5

post #161 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

That's what they're doing now.

I don't see it. I really don't see how multitouch could be the primary interface for Man like devices. Multi touch just isn't conducive to computer operation for users seated at a desk. If anything is added to Mac OS it would be as a supplement so that those users that can leverage a touch interface can use it. The reality is though only a very tiny minority of Mac users could ever benefit from touch as it simply doesn't fit in with the sort of solutions (software) most users use.
post #162 of 169
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post
The reality is though only a very tiny minority of Mac users could ever benefit from touch as it simply doesn't fit in with the sort of solutions (software) most users use.

 

You're operating under the assumption that the software won't change to match the UI and UX.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #163 of 169
You cannot begin to believe how psyched I am for this and I may not even buy anything though I am just psyched for the update itself.

After that, the countdown begins for Haswell and the 2013 Mac mini of which I am equally if not more psyched.

Apple releasing products makes me feel like a kid on Christmas.
post #164 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfiler View Post

It is simply ludicrous to suggest that a battery powered, handheld device is a suitable replacement for consumer desktops. Some people need as much memory and processing power as possible given a particular budget. Some people need ports and input devices that don't make sense on a portable, handheld device.

 

It is simply ludicrous to suggest that a normal outlet powered, desktop device is a suitable replacement for a mainframe computer.  Some people need as much memory and processing power as possible given a particular budget.  Some people need card sorters and paper tape readers that don't make sense on a desktop device.

 

 

Quote:
Put simply, there will always be a market for non-battery powered and non-handheld devices.

 

This is a different statement and true.

 

From my perspective if the Time Capsule could act as a home file server then I could imagine getting by with just ARM powered devices.

 

When ARM devices can run iPhoto and iMovie sufficiently fast enough to process RAW and AVCHD and I can simply dump my pictures and movies onto Time Capsule so the iPad can process them my need for either desktop or laptop is greatly reduced.

post #165 of 169
I'm glad things are staying the way they are for now. When I heard Intel used cheap adhesive on the desktop IB processors instead of fluxless solder, I was a bit annoyed. I wonder how Apple dealt with it for the iMacs.
post #166 of 169

The new Mac Mini no longer  offer video cards to supplement the intel graphics processor? 

 

Is the 2.3 ghz i7 w/4000 graphics processing an improvement over the late 2011 offering? I interested in using the mini to do do Adobe Lightroom 4.2 post processing. The file sizes of the new high resolution digital cameras shot in raw are rather large.

post #167 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave92029 View Post

The new Mac Mini no longer  offer video cards to supplement the intel graphics processor? 

 

Is the 2.3 ghz i7 w/4000 graphics processing an improvement over the late 2011 offering? I interested in using the mini to do do Adobe Lightroom 4.2 post processing. The file sizes of the new high resolution digital cameras shot in raw are rather large.


I realize I'm replying to a now banned account. For anyone else in a similar situation, there's no real reason to go with a 2011 due to the discrete option for such usage. Even if they stick OpenCL in there, Adobe has minimum vram requirements for OpenCL processing, and 256MB barely made the cut this last time. During the CS6 beta, I recall the recommendations were 512MB minimum or 1GB recommended with support for at least OpenCL 1.0 and whatever OpenGL revision. The AMD option supports a maximum of 1.0 there. It won't support 1.1 later. It barely makes the vram requirement. The HD4000 does better there, but I'd have to look up if OpenCL 1.0 support was added to it for OSX. Either way worrying about offloading to the gpu if you're set on buying a mini is pointless here, as neither is a perfect match. I'd buy the newer one for the quad cpu and install a minimum of 8GB of ram as recommended by Adobe, which also allows you to hit their vram recommendation of 512MB, even though it's allocated from the primary ram.

post #168 of 169
Just a couple of points.

Not everyone interested in OpenCL is also a user of Adobe products.

Second, you rightfully point out issues with VRAM. One of the reasons many of us where waiting for the new Mini is that it was hoped that Apple would have addressed that issue in this years rev. A Mini with 512 MB to 1GB of VRAM would have made the machine far more useful to a far wider array of users.

Third, Intels integrated GPU is OK but OK is far from impressive. HD4000 is still weak in several areas. The point being that even though it will eventually be reasonable to buy a machine without a discrete GPU it really isn't that time yet. Maybe Haswell,will do it for use, I can't really say. Implement right (admittedly not the case on the Mini) discrete GPUs are still advantageous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post


I realize I'm replying to a now banned account. For anyone else in a similar situation, there's no real reason to go with a 2011 due to the discrete option for such usage. Even if they stick OpenCL in there, Adobe has minimum vram requirements for OpenCL processing, and 256MB barely made the cut this last time. During the CS6 beta, I recall the recommendations were 512MB minimum or 1GB recommended with support for at least OpenCL 1.0 and whatever OpenGL revision. The AMD option supports a maximum of 1.0 there. It won't support 1.1 later. It barely makes the vram requirement. The HD4000 does better there, but I'd have to look up if OpenCL 1.0 support was added to it for OSX. Either way worrying about offloading to the gpu if you're set on buying a mini is pointless here, as neither is a perfect match. I'd buy the newer one for the quad cpu and install a minimum of 8GB of ram as recommended by Adobe, which also allows you to hit their vram recommendation of 512MB, even though it's allocated from the primary ram.
post #169 of 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Just a couple of points.
Not everyone interested in OpenCL is also a user of Adobe products.
 

I know that. I was just responding to someone who mentioned them. Banned could mean it was a duplicate account, given the low post count. In that case they may still be a board reader. There's often a lack of understanding in some of these areas. When people just view suitability for such purposes as a question of whether or not a machine has discrete graphics, that to me shows a lack of comprehension. There are specific frameworks that are leveraged for highly specific things, so when you're looking at the low end and trying to determine whether this or that could be workable, it's important to understand things in context. If we were talking about a mac pro, rMBP, or 27" imac, this would not be much of a question for most users.

 

 

Quote:

 

Second, you rightfully point out issues with VRAM. One of the reasons many of us where waiting for the new Mini is that it was hoped that Apple would have addressed that issue in this years rev. A Mini with 512 MB to 1GB of VRAM would have made the machine far more useful to a far wider array of users.

 

I pointed it out there as in the case of Adobe applications, it's a directly stated requirement. Given that 256MB barely made it while still being feature limited, I suggest people avoid that given the potential transition to a faster update cycle by Adobe. I suspect those requirements will jump. Even if you can disable OpenGL drawing in Creative Suite 7, that would mean going back to the old tiled redraws (most people would hate this) on their machine, updating again, or paying Adobe without taking advantage of the update, due to their newer licensing policies. I know there's more than Adobe. It's just what I was responding to there.

 

Quote:

 

 

Third, Intels integrated GPU is OK but OK is far from impressive. HD4000 is still weak in several areas. The point being that even though it will eventually be reasonable to buy a machine without a discrete GPU it really isn't that time yet. Maybe Haswell,will do it for use, I can't really say. Implement right (admittedly not the case on the Mini) discrete GPUs are still advantageous.

One of your (least) favorite sites has been speculating on the topic of Haswell. I can't find the latest article on it at the moment for some reason.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Mac mini supply drying up, could signal Ivy Bridge update