Apple Mac mini as a new Platform - Page 2

Here's my vision for dance and electronic music... TranceFire

Slices are TranceFire modules based on very popular analog synths that give you that warm rush on the dance floor as the DJ drops the phat tracks and your pills kick in

The "breakout box" is the 2nd slice from the top, the one with at logo mod - that's right, that's the logo for Apple2 8)

The Apple2 TranceFire hub is the master module that translates all the FireWire inputs from the TranceFire synth modules and the one that sends the FireWire signal.

IMPORTANT: Why have the TranceFire modules?
1. they reduce CPU load, software-based synth chews up CPU
2. hardware synth sounds better, especially analog
3. all analog to digital conversion is done within the module,
so Mini gets nice clean separate digital tracks from all modules
4. this is a much lower cost and convenient alternative to wrangling
separate hardware synths of different form factors
5. reduces cable mess and noise significantly

This would go sweet with bluetooth MIDI controller keyboards (not shown) to enter notes and control the separate TranceFire modules

thanks aph
oh, and i've been off the pills for a year now... the music and people and sex and stuff do it for me nowadays

yeah i just went ultracore-minimalist with the graphix i was a bit lazy to put in any knobs and lcds and stuff but it seems to have worked out better in the end

Soooo... you're suggesting that I load 4 copies of Bryce into my single dual core PowerMac? Unfortunately, Bryce Lightning it won't interoperate that way. It only works on multiple independent machines, as I understand it.

Or, install multiple Photosops into one tower? So I could Batch process one while doing assembly with the other?

Would this work? Not so sure.

And, as the current high-end machine retails (base RAM) at about 3K, I could get 6 Minis for the same coin.

All I'm saying is, hmmmm...

Plus, as we keep forgetting, a G4 machine is a pretty powerful computer... or at least it was marketed as a Supercomputer when it debuted.

Check out latest Cringely article:

http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050120.html

While I have doubts, what I really like about the Cringley article, and why I think he "gets it" is because he specifically dismisses the TV fantasy. His speculation is the most compelling because he found a place for Apple to innovate (meaning to make accessible and compelling) in the HD delivery market. His point about no one having real control or momentum in that market is quite right. The usual cabal of companies control both TV and non-HD movie content, but everyone is really slow out of the gate with regard to this HD transition, particularly with movies, even cable PPV.

I can accept the guess/hope that H.264 makes both downloads of HD movie content (say, 2 hours playback of just 720p, not even 1080i) practical over consumer broadband, and that with QT 7, it can be played back on the Mac mini's current hardware. I wouldn't be surprised if that's just a bit too optimistic though.

It takes a dual G5 to play back 1080i/1080p? I think Apple is going to have to discuss video card decode assist with ATI and nVidia. The other two codecs being put into HD are much less resource hungry. With a Radeon, an 800MHz PC can decode 1080i coded as MPEG-2, without a Radeon, it is 1.6GHz. A 3GHz single CPU x86 system can play back 1080p WMV-HD without issue.

If my $200 STB can decode a 1080i HD signal, am I meant to believe that a decent G4 cannot? I can hardly believe that my RCA DirecTV HD receiver is that powerful...

ummm... not that your HD receiver is so powerful, but it has some dedicated chips designed to run those HD-decoding instructions. whereas the G4 is designed to run multiple kinds of instructions. dedicated hardware will normally beat out a computer CPU at a dedicated task

am i right guys?

Now, if only I could figure out how to adjust/eliminate the overscan on my Hitachi 50VS810 HDTV either via the set or through the Mac (ResolutionX; DisplayConfigX) I'd be a very happy camper.

Anyone? Beuller? Beuller?

For, that sort of thing you really need to get into the service menu of the TV. No Mac or PC is going to "fix" that without digitally downscaling the image, which can have negative impact on the picture. Using a computer to downscale doesn't fix the other inputs either.

If you aren't a tweaker, I don't recommend going into the service menu, but it will get you the best results.

is asteroid to be released at NAB or NAMM? if NAB, it's video related forr shurre, if NAMM, its an Audio breakout box that undercuts m-audio's very very popular boxes (m-audios gear is rock solid just works, frequently released drivers, excellent value for money)

http://www.m-audio.com

ummm... okay, NAMM just wrapped... and no sign of asteroid

...the plot thickenssss

Actually its a good sign that the signal being generated falls outside of the specification of the TV. There are all sorts of ways to control the timing for signal position, its not just image data in the stream. There is plenty of blank space used for horizontal and vertical timing.

Unfortunately I dont know how to edit that timing on a mac. On X11 its pretty easy, just edit the xconfig file.

Correction, for TVs, there is signal AND a fair bit of the image falls outside of the display area. Unlike computer monitors (specifically CRT), the vertical and horizontal scan sweep distances can't be controlled from the video card.


No, the image itself is actually overscanned by a significant margin, and there is significant blank area beyond the active image area for the timings.

The reasoning for overscanning is that the projected image on TVs shrinks as the TV ages. What happens is that 10% of the left edge of the image is off the screen, and the same goes for the right, top and bottom edges. If you've done any video editing or titling, this is what the "safe area" is about - to make sure what you write actually ends up on the TV.

In the service menu of many TVs, the scan width and scan hight can be reduced to minimize this. What a lot of computer TV cards to is use less of the image area, so an NTSC TV acts as maybe a 512x380 monitor unless this overscan is corrected in the TV and the video card's overscan compensation is turned off. Even if the video card *claims* it is outputting 800x600 it really is downscaling the image. When corrected, the TV stands a chance of being a real VGA monitor, though interlaced.


The person I replied to mentioned a couple things that might work. It is best not to assume a TV behaves well as a monitor, it needs to be tweaked. The HDTV standard has less overscan, but it is still a bit of an issue. Sadly, even fixed pixel displays (LCD, DLP, plasma) have overscan set into them when fed a TV signal, unless it is corrected.

I was thinking that maybe Apple could come up with an iRAID mini utilizing the Apple Drive Modules found in the "real" server hardware. Too bad, they did not implemt FW800 or external SATA (II) connectivity.

Does anyone know by chance what the measurements of an ADM are and what the neccessary backplane looks like?

I really dig the "slices" concept and hope that a lot of the peripheral makers hop on.

from macosrumours,com

i know they are, the cube reborn

This stackable mac is a great idea. Even if it was never the intent of Apple to create such a product, I think they'll quickly adopt the idea.

To truly accomplish the task, however, I would suggest two modifications to the Mini.

First, I'd redesign the bottom to allow secure stacking of "slices" while maintining some airflow. This modification would marginally increase the height of the mini, but wouldn't anticipate that an increase of 1/4 - 1/2 inch would detract from the mini's form factor.

The second modification should be the addition of firewire 800. With a purposely extensible platform, you want to ensure bandwith isn't a problem. If you're inputing video through one slice, moving it two a second slice, while copying files from a third slice, a little extra bandwith would be nice.

Are you sure this is needed (or could not be taken care of by the "slices'" manufacturers? Here are my reasons:

- the Mac mini is designed to ensure proper airflow when placed on a flat surface,
- to accomplish this goal, the lower edge does not touch the ground (see here for photos),
- a matching recess could be molded into the add-on case's top cover just deep enough to ensure that the mini stays in place and still leaving a gap high enough to ensure proper airflow.


So true, see my post above. How expensive might adding additional ports (just the interconnects) be? They could have added a port into the bottom that carries PCI (maybe even the express flavour) like they are used in notebooks to connect them to docking stations.

To illustarte: this is kind of what I am talking about. But I like the Mac mini's materials (aluminium and white polycarbonat) better than the acrylic.

What is wanted to express was that there the first matching add-ons are popping up.

How about a trough on the top of the "slice" that the feet of the mini fits into with an opening in the rear and walls on the front and side to disguise the gap.

It might look nicer, but I think that would cause an undesirable amount of air drag, overworking the built-in fan, and giving less air flow. Someone designing it this way could assist it by putting an intake fan into the slice in question.

i'm thinking a highly conducting "cheese grater" kind of cooling slice somewhere in there to draw all the heat out

now where's that PhD in Thermodynamics* i have... i'm sure i left it lying around here somewhere



*actually i have a bachelor's degree in biology and computer science

Ummm... Why? Why this "skirt" thing? I can understand the monitor stands they're selling, and even the side-mounting kit. But why would anyone want a "skirt"?

Here's an idea: cable keeper "skirt". Raises the mini a few inches and has an open back to tuck all your unsightly cables underneath the mini.

I don't know that there are fortunes to be made here, but certainly some profitable products.

With the PowerBooks being speed-bumped, it will be interesting to see how much effort Apple puts into keeping the mini form going. Hopefully, a lot. Speed bumped minis by WWDC? 512MB standard. No price increase. Hopefully better GPU.

- Jasen.

The skirt itself is irelevant. But it demonstrates how a proper airflow can be achieved when developing functional "slices" (e.g. hard drive, I/O hub etc. slices)

Done.

http://www.nanonation.net

They are kiosks, which is more or less the same thing as what you are talking about. POSes are generally used by staff, not customers. Yeah, it's a nomenclature thing.

Anyway, I'm peripherally invovled in the POS business, and this was the first thing I thought of when I saw the mini. (My company designs/builds/sells very vertically integrated access control/payment/information systems to entertainment venues.) Basically, you all of the sudden have a very cheap, very integrable device that runs the best version of UNIX in the world, particularly when you have to develop media-rich applications.

I don't have an NDA with nanonation yet. . . I just spotted them today since my company has to be very well informed of information devices that work with RFID. Even so, it looks like they put all of the info they have up on the web. Not only do they use minis, but they use XServes as Quicktime media servers.

I think it's really cool. Everyone knows already that OS X is the best OS out there for media-intense commercial applications. Now that Apple has a product that's applicable in a commercial sense, it should prove that the windows domination of the POS industry will begin to evaporate.

Funny thing is, the day the mini came out, I envisioned a nice, plastic POS that wears it like a backpack.

For a small-to-medium-to-large enterprise, i think the mini Tower is great (with a 512mb 1.25ghz 40gb Mac Mini)



1. lifts the mini slightly off the desk -- avoids dust, pens, miscellanous crap scratching and clogging the mini. also, if you spill your coffee/beer(!) on your desk your mini is safe from harm

2. reduces footprint to leave increase desk space for other important stuff like pictures of your loved one/pet/spongeBob

3. protects the mini from scratches, spills, footballs or other objects being thrown around the office (you think i'm kidding about this)

4. if i am not wrong, increases airflow for the Bottom part of the mini (the Left/Right face when placed in the Tower side up) (there are matching vents in the acrylic) - increased longevity and reliability in corporate always-ON environments

5. stylish, unique appearance can have a positive effect on employee morale and daily work experience

PS. i am liking the tower! assuming adequate quality/airflow/stability testing is done, i'd love to see 10-100-1000 of these babies in a corporate environment... wouldn't that be an inspiring, beautiful breath of fresh air from black or beige Dulls

...and just think of all the reduced clutter and savings on ethernet cable set ups with Bluetooth keyboard/mouse and 802.11g (Airport Extreme) on thse babies.... just a Power and monitor cable comin out the back....
[now i got to think up a business case for this second part -- the Bluetooth and Airport full wireless mouse, keyboard, network]

I think it would be a bad idea to have so many of these things in wireless mode for dense offices. For one, there's only so much spectrum, three usable non-overlapping bands for b/g networks and Bluetooth uses the same band too.

Wireless "g" has at best 20Mbps total transfer rate, and that is just for one AP and one client. More users cuts down on the grand total transfer rate and splits it down even further. Having so many people on a plain WLAN might not be so bad if all they do is access the Internet, but if too many try to move data the network will choke. For just one laptop, I've seen heavy WLAN activity slow down Bluetooth such that my mouse lagged over twice as much as usual.

Bluetooth is a lot better behaved with density, as it splits the available band into 79 slices, you mostly need to make sure you have fewer than that many systems within range, assuming there's no nasty channel-to-channel interference.

point noted. i was wondering about those points at the back of my mind... we wouldn't want something silly like poor wireless planning/engineering messin up any flagship corporate mac mini rollouts

It's been about a month since the last post to this thread.

This is something I made for my mini:



It's not done yet, but it is real. The final project's appearance will be only slightly different from what is shown. I will try to match the finish a little better. The top plate to the "slice" isn't there yet and I don't have a skid pad on the bottom, so it will look a little better and rise slightly higher than in the picture.

Jeff, you da man. That is the bomb! y'all......

Um why do you need so many USB and firewire ports? Nah scratch that, good idea, you need like a million free USB ports nowadays for everything from thumbdrives to your rechargeable shaver.

Hella sweet