or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple unveils Mac mini Core Duo
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple unveils Mac mini Core Duo - Page 2

post #41 of 782
A $7 graphics processor? C'mon Apple, I would rather have the 9200 back in the Mini that the POS Intel integrated graphics, at least it didn't take system RAM!!

Quote:
"Do you want to burden 90% of the market with 10% of the market's needs?" Katen Shah, a platform architect for Intel asked. "In general, we are not going after the discrete and high end where thermal [heat values], power and cost become real issues. Our per-unit [graphics processor] prices, for example, are now only $7."

Quote:
Intel's integrated graphics GMA 950 core supports DirectX 9 and offers up to 10.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, 667 MHz DDR2 and 1.6 Gpixels/s and 1.6 Gtexels/s fill rates. Despite this, the device still has far to go for acceptable game play, according to Mark Rein, vice president for Epic Games, the developer of the Unreal graphics engine and game series. "Before our release of Unreal 2007, we hope that Intel becomes competitive," Rein said. "But today's very popular games, which are not next-generation games, are virtually unplayable for anybody that cares about gaming. Our fingers are crossed."

I have a PC for playing serious FPS games, but they could at least put a GPU that can handle the occasional game, or HD video without choking!
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #42 of 782
Not sure what to make of this. The question I have is, why use intergrated graphics with such a powerful processor? If Apple was committed to controlling costs and using intel's integrated graphics, then why not use a cheaper CPU also? At least with the core duo, a dedicated graphics card seems logical. Curious to see what others think of this.
post #43 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Actually, the old model later on had 5400rpm drives too.

Not "Officially" Apple did a silent upgrade but no one was guaranteed a 54k drive. Now the base spec is 54k SATA. That's nice, plus I figure it'll be trivial to replace with a Perpendicular 160GB+ drive in a couple of years.

Quote:
at least it didn't take system RAM!!

They gave you another RAM slot. You guys act like the crappy graphics of the last generation Mac mini were special.

Quote:
have a PC for playing serious FPS games, but they could at least put a GPU that can handle the occasional game, or HD video without choking!

Playing HD is a CPU bound task not a graphics card task. Only the ATI 1XXX series with the latest catalyst drivers supports h.264 acceleration.

again for those that seem to thrive on misinformation

HD playback is CPU bound and not graphics card bound!!

Geez guys vent all you want but don't make stuff up.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #44 of 782
Well, I was really hoping for a "Gutless Mini" that pretty much only runs Frontrow and streams media from your computer to your TV. Maybe April 1, I guess.

But this new Mini, sure, it can hook up to your TV, but who's going to plop down $800 for it? If it's on your desk, you can't embrace the media center aspect of it. If it's in your entertainment center, all the computer aspects are a waste. I guess I just don't get it.
post #45 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
May as well save you the trouble. The next "ibook" will indeed have integrated graphics. That is the "standard" for PC notebooks at the sub $1499 pricepoint.

It's obvious to anyone with a brain. A fast majority of your computing task are limited by processing cycles and not graphics capability. Sorry to state the obvious but I hate when good Mac people jettison common sense logic.

Integrated graphics take power away from the CPU and memory away from the system. It slows things down considerably. This according to Apple by the way though I've had experience with integrated graphics. I had my Mac mini configured and was ready to order when I realized they hadn't mentioned graphics. I checked the specs and what an awful feeling to see that. So close.

Apple doesn't realize there are two very different markets for the Mac mini. They came up with something in the middle that doesn't appeal to a lot of people on both sides. Too expensive for the entry level and crippled graphics for the high-end.

So now I will wait for the MacBook (iBook) but I suspect the specs will be the same. At least with a 13" 1280x720 resolution the integrated graphics won;t be quite as bad. I wouldn't buy an iBook for the same reasons though.

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply
post #46 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by sharp_spot
Done. Elgato EyeTV 200/500 turns your Mac into a DVR, and use Equinux MediaCentral (freeware) instead of Front Row.

The downside: $5-600 for a Mac mini + $3-350 for the EyeTV.

The upside: no monthly fee (a la Tivo), also puts Mac OS X in your living room.

Sweet! Thanks. Anyone interested:

http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetv200

$350 is nasty, though.
post #47 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
Not "Officially" Apple did a silent upgrade but no one was guaranteed a 54k drive. Now the base spec is 54k SATA. That's nice, plus I figure it'll be trivial to replace with a Perpendicular 160GB+ drive in a couple of years.



They gave you another RAM slot. You guys act like the crappy graphics of the last generation Mac mini were special.



Playing HD is a CPU bound task not a graphics card task. Only the ATI 1XXX series with the latest catalyst drivers supports h.264 acceleration.

again for those that seem to thrive on misinformation

HD playback is CPU bound and not graphics card bound!!

Geez guys vent all you want but don't make stuff up.

Correct and if the CPU is throttled the system comes to a complete crawl. Unless you think I want to buy this system to just dedicate watching HD movies then I can see why you think its just peachy. If I want to watch HD movies I'll just buy a cheap DVD player.
post #48 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by rminkler
I don't understand all the whining about the integrated graphics. This is not a high powered machine - the intigrated graphics will be more than enough for core graphics functionality (something that can't be said for the 9200 in the G4 Mac Mini).

Somebody mentioned that with the intigrated graphics the Mini won't be able to playback HD video, and that's rediculous. The first Mac to use the video card to decode HD video streams (out of the box, there may have been PCI cards that did this) is the iMac core duo - all those G5s have been doing it strictly on the CPU, and guess what - the Core Duo can handle this no problem.

It's not a gaming machine, but for 99% of users it will be fine. Does your email download slower via intigrated graphics? Does office bog down? Maybe this isn't the mac for the mac enthusiast, but wake up people - it's a fine machine.

[edited for spelling]

We're not asking for top of the line GPU, just something more current on the market. Isn't core-duo supposedly state of the art for apple marketing dept.?... then why match up with third world class GPU?...

BTW, you're right about HD, but most CPU's don't stress over MPEG2, however, MPEG4 is the more processor demanding format and this integrated GPU doesn't support that. Smooth MPEG4 playback may or may not be possible at 1080p depending on how much core duo can handle by itself.... who knows....
always a newbie
Reply
always a newbie
Reply
post #49 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by age234
Well, I was really hoping for a "Gutless Mini" that pretty much only runs Frontrow and streams media from your computer to your TV. Maybe April 1, I guess.

But this new Mini, sure, it can hook up to your TV, but who's going to plop down $800 for it? If it's on your desk, you can't embrace the media center aspect of it. If it's in your entertainment center, all the computer aspects are a waste. I guess I just don't get it.


I went into the CompUSA in Tacoma Washington a couple of weekends ago. They had a Mac mini hooked up to a sharp widescreen TV. It looked great. You switched inputs depending on if you wanted to watch TV or do some computing. Thus the beginning of convergence was there with no delineation between TV monitor and computer monitor.

Front Row makes this even more powerful because I do the same thing on a larger scale. Hook up to a 65" screen for some living room surfing. Who says you have to have a desktop for your computer and a entertainment center for your TV? The two are converging and thus you must look from a different perspective.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #50 of 782
meh...
i'll wait for the mac book.
if i'm going to spend $800+ for a mac i'll get a portable at least.
my mac mini doing pretty damn well for me. i'll pass.
jtblq = jetblack in Ascarian
Reply
jtblq = jetblack in Ascarian
Reply
post #51 of 782
Quote:
We're not asking for top of the line GPU, just something more current on the market. Isn't core-duo supposedly state of the art for apple marketing dept.?... then why match up with third world class GPU?...

Price. Dedicated Graphics cost more money.

Quote:
BTW, you're right about HD, but most CPU's don't stress over MPEG2, however, MPEG4 is the more processor demanding format and this integrated GPU doesn't support that.

Graphics have nothing to do with whether a codec plays back smoothly or not. Final Cut Pro plays back uncompressed video if you have the CPU grunt. Trying to link GPU technology with HD playback is patently false and any video person can see through this.

faster graphics are always desired but outside of the gaming real most task are CPU intensive rather than GPU.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #52 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison



Playing HD is a CPU bound task not a graphics card task. Only the ATI 1XXX series with the latest catalyst drivers supports h.264 acceleration.

again for those that seem to thrive on misinformation

HD playback is CPU bound and not graphics card bound!!

Geez guys vent all you want but don't make stuff up.


And that is exactly the problem, especially since apple is pushing h264 for ichat, etc. A x1300 could have been a 100 dollar option.
post #53 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by aegisdesign
They do however leave themselves room to slot in a Celeron M 4xx model at about $100 less when Intel start shipping that chip. And don't say they won't do it. People were saying yesterday "No Integrated Graphics".

That's right, Apple could release (next apr/may) new versions:
$499 Mac mini 1.73GHz M430, GMA950, 60GB, Combo, AEP+BT2
$599 Mac mini 1.73GHz M430, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2
$699 Mac mini 1.67 Core Duo, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2
... back the old price points!

The MacBooks will then also look good this way:
$899 12" WS MacBook 1.73GHz M430, GMA950, 60GB, Combo, AEP+BT2
$1099 12" WS MacBook 1.67 Core Duo, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2
$1299 14" WS MacBook 1.67 Core Duo, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2

and the
$1599 13" WS MacBook Pro 1.83 Core Duo, X1600 GPU, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2, alu enclosure
post #54 of 782
MPEG2 at 720x480 is one thing. MPEG2 at 1920x1080 is another. I imagine a 1.66 GHz Core Duo could handle this. MPEG4 is far more processor intensive than MPEG2 and would require an ATI x1300 GPU. This could have been a $100 option.

I just wish Apple had offered true low-end and high-end models of the new Mac mini. They missed their mark on both counts.

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply

     197619842014  

     Where were you when the hammer flew?  

 

MacBook Pro Retina, 13", 2.5 GHz, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD

iPhone 5s • iPad mini Retina • Chromebook Pixel • Nexus 7

Reply
post #55 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by sharp_spot
Done. Elgato EyeTV 200/500 turns your Mac into a DVR, and use Equinux MediaCentral (freeware) instead of Front Row.

The downside: $5-600 for a Mac mini + $3-350 for the EyeTV.

The upside: no monthly fee (a la Tivo), also puts Mac OS X in your living room.

Well, great point, except you can get a Tivo with a lifetime subscription for like $350-$400, so you're spending all that extra money for its OS X in the living room, and that's nothing to crow about (sorry, but Tivo's interface is soooo much better than OS X or front row or the rest. Easy to use and deal with). Seems more sensible to get the tivo to me (plus, its designed to do the TV thing, as opposed to the mac).

And you missed an upside. You can copy your videos onto other storage devices for backup/archival.

On the downside, you can upgrade a tivo two two hard disks and really increase that storage. Can't add anything to a mini (and changing the hard drive is probably still a pain).
post #56 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by age234
Well, I was really hoping for a "Gutless Mini" that pretty much only runs Frontrow and streams media from your computer to your TV. Maybe April 1, I guess.

But this new Mini, sure, it can hook up to your TV, but who's going to plop down $800 for it? If it's on your desk, you can't embrace the media center aspect of it. If it's in your entertainment center, all the computer aspects are a waste. I guess I just don't get it.

You get it alright and Apple taking the middle row isn't ready to announce its complete intentions with this form factor system.

For me it's looking more and more the iMac or the upcoming MacPower Pro (whatever it will be call) will be what I'm going to look at.

This whole Media Center concept is still not there and I'm just not interested in sitting in front of my coffee table, at an uncomfortable ergonomic position to type with my television my display; and not to mention my television doesn't have the resolution of my workstation monitor. I don't sit around watching movies on my computer either.
post #57 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Louzer
Well, great point, except you can get a Tivo with a lifetime subscription for like $350-$400, so you're spending all that extra money for its OS X in the living room, and that's nothing to crow about (sorry, but Tivo's interface is soooo much better than OS X or front row or the rest. Easy to use and deal with). Seems more sensible to get the tivo to me (plus, its designed to do the TV thing, as opposed to the mac).

And you missed an upside. You can copy your videos onto other storage devices for backup/archival.

On the downside, you can upgrade a tivo two two hard disks and really increase that storage. Can't add anything to a mini (and changing the hard drive is probably still a pain).

External HDDs via third party are available for the Mac Mini.
post #58 of 782
Well... $799 CoreDuo Mac mini makes vaporware PS3 look might good. I'll wait for the vaporware than buy something that just doesn't support my spending habits.
always a newbie
Reply
always a newbie
Reply
post #59 of 782
Looks like the new Shuttle Mac mini competitor might suddenly be more attractive as well http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/...226223550.html
its bigger sure, but not by a lot, ATIX1400 graphics, 3.5 inch HD MCE support, seems a better option (depending on price)
Idiot, slow down....

- The Tourist, Radiohead
Reply
Idiot, slow down....

- The Tourist, Radiohead
Reply
post #60 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by 1984
MPEG2 at 720x480 is one thing. MPEG2 at 1920x1080 is another. I imagine a 1.66 GHz Core Duo could handle this. MPEG4 is far more processor intensive than MPEG2 and would require an ATI x1300 GPU. This could have been a $100 option.

I just wish Apple had offered true low-end and high-end models of the new Mac mini. They missed their mark on both counts.

I like this guy.
post #61 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by mdriftmeyer
External HDDs via third party are available for the Mac Mini.

Yeah, and with the GigE networking in the new mini it makes quite a nice little quiet network server too. Pity they've not got FW800 on there but for a home/small office server it's looking pretty good still.
post #62 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison

again for those that seem to thrive on misinformation

HD playback is CPU bound and not graphics card bound!!

Decoding may be CPU bound, but then your system is tied up decoding. I guess if you're looking at the mini as a tivo-like device, then it probably doesn't matter. If you want to do other things, something is going to start stuttering.

And as I keep hearing over and over on other subjects, even though decoding is CPU bound, putting that stuff on the screen is then limited by the power and ability of the video card itself. Faster cards would make Front Row and the UI flow better then an integrated solution.

Plus, some would argue that 512MB of memory is a good minimum for OS X, so now you have to go and upgrade your memory when you buy it (sort of like having to buy a USB hub when you buy any mac).

BTW, what's the deal with apple putting 4 USB ports on this machine, and yet there's only 3 ports total on the freakin' high-high-high end macs! That's just stupid to no end.

But anyway you cut it, its just like before, too much style, not enough substance. Would anyone really care if this thing was three inches taller so we could add an extra drive to it, or the like?
post #63 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison
2 memory slots- Finally you can upgrade the memory without removing the orginal memory.

Unfortunately, the computer comes stock with two 256 meg dimms. Which means you have to throw at least one away when upgrading.

By the way, does anyone have any idea if this case is as hard to open as the previous mini?

:d
post #64 of 782
On the surface dedicated graphics don't sound too great. But I would not buy a Mac mini expecting a performance machine.

Plus you guys don't know what Apple may have coming down the pipeline. They may have plans for a small tower that will have graphics card slot.

I don't know why anyone is disappointed about a Tivo killer. Apple has never stated it had any desire to enter the DVR market. You have to keep internet rumors seperate from reallity.

Quote:
Well, great point, except you can get a Tivo with a lifetime subscription for like $350-$400

That's for the life of the box not your lifetime. And Tivo boxes don't last forever.

Quote:
Apple doesn't realize there are two very different markets for the Mac mini.

Apple created the Mac mini market. I think they would have some idea of its direction.

The other market you speak of that Apple so stubbornly ignores is the market that wishes they could have a Power Mac for $599.
post #65 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by mjteix
That's right, Apple could release (next apr/may) new versions:
$499 Mac mini 1.73GHz M430, GMA950, 60GB, Combo, AEP+BT2
$599 Mac mini 1.73GHz M430, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2
$699 Mac mini 1.67 Core Duo, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2
... back the old price points!

The MacBooks will then also look good this way:
$899 12" WS MacBook 1.73GHz M430, GMA950, 60GB, Combo, AEP+BT2
$1099 12" WS MacBook 1.67 Core Duo, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2
$1299 14" WS MacBook 1.67 Core Duo, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2

and the
$1599 13" WS MacBook Pro 1.83 Core Duo, X1600 GPU, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2, alu enclosure

Who the hell really wants a WS 13.3" display? And with the RAM requirements of OS X continuing to climb who the hell wants the MacBooks to have GMA950?

Are we planning on having a standard 1.5GB of RAM for the lowend so the GMA can suck off 512MB for its needs and then have to share CPU time to deal with shader issues and all else that OpenGL 2 offers?

Leopard 10.5 will be OpenGL 2 enabled.

How much they require OpenGL 2 within Quartz 2D remains to be seen.
post #66 of 782
Quote:
Decoding may be CPU bound, but then your system is tied up decoding.

In what situation would you be watching HD and doing something else at the same time?

Quote:
(sort of like having to buy a USB hub when you buy any mac).

I've never used a USB hub. Partly because not every device uses USB, partly because I don't need to use all of my USB devices at the same time.

Quote:
BTW, what's the deal with apple putting 4 USB ports on this machine, and yet there's only 3 ports total on the freakin' high-high-high end macs! That's just stupid to no end.

Yeah, one more USB port on the mini is a tremendous advantage that Apple should have on Power Mac's (sarcasm).
post #67 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Louzer

But anyway you cut it, its just like before, too much style, not enough substance. Would anyone really care if this thing was three inches taller so we could add an extra drive to it, or the like?

Yup, Automobile enthusiast would phrase "All Show, No Go"
always a newbie
Reply
always a newbie
Reply
post #68 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by TenoBell
On the surface dedicated graphics don't sound too great. But I would not buy a Mac mini expecting a performance machine.

Plus you guys don't know what Apple may have coming down the pipeline. They may have plans for a small tower that will have graphics card slot.

I don't know why anyone is disappointed about a Tivo killer. Apple has never stated it had any desire to enter the DVR market. You have to keep internet rumors seperate from reallity.



That's for the life of the box not your lifetime. And Tivo boxes don't last forever.



Apple created the Mac mini market. I think they would have some idea of its direction.

The other market you speak of that Apple so stubbornly ignores is the market that wishes they could have a Power Mac for $599.

Apple created a niche in the mini-ATX market with their designs and it isn't something that wasn't foreseen by many players.

Apple gets kudos for design and always will.

To defend their decision: If they sell 1 Million Mac mini's, per quarter, with a $7 graphics subsystem their profit margins skyrocket.

This assumes the demand will be high.
post #69 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by jdbartlett
Hmm, FrontRow was expected. I'm disappointed there's no TiVo killer feature out the box and glad there's no built-in iPod dock.

It'd be neat if Apple built a TiVo killer, but a) they're just too damn politically correct and b) it's not in their best interest when they can get $2 a show from iTMS users.

If some other company develops a device and software that can be plugged into the Mac Mini to record shows then play them back in FrontRow, I might be interested in this. I'm not saying I'd buy it, but I might at least want it...

I think the Mac mini is a Trojan horse Tivo killer. There were no major content announcements today, and I've got to think Apple wants to have a few more studios on board before it goes big with a cable/satellite challenger. This probably makes the most sense to do in September when the new TV season starts and when holiday purchasing starts to kick into gear. Apple can announce new titles and higher quality encoding for TVs.

I was really expecting an iPod video, another major studio and a few movie titles today, but those things are obviously still on the table for Apple. As quckly and close together as Disney, Universal and Viacom came, I thought Apple would have had another major studio announcement by now.

I think Apple was late with the HiFi, which was probably scheduled to be announced at Macworld and then dropped for some reason, but the Mac mini media center is right on target.
post #70 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by TenoBell
[B]In what situation would you be watching HD and doing something else at the same time?



I've never used a USB hub. Partly because not every device uses USB, partly because I don't need to use all of my USB devices at the same time.



Yeah, one more USB port on the mini is a tremendous advantage that Apple should have on Power Mac's (sarcasm). [/B]

Compiling my projects.
post #71 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by Porchland
I think the Mac mini is a Trojan horse Tivo killer. There were no major content announcements today, and I've got to think Apple wants to have a few more studios on board before it goes big with a cable/satellite challenger. This probably makes the most sense to do in September when the new TV season starts and when holiday purchasing starts to kick into gear. Apple can announce new titles and higher quality encoding for TVs.

I was really expecting an iPod video, another major studio and a few movie titles today, but those things are obviously still on the table for Apple. As quckly and close together as Disney, Universal and Viacom came, I thought Apple would have had another major studio announcement by now.

I think Apple was late with the HiFi, which was probably scheduled to be announced at Macworld and then dropped for some reason, but the Mac mini media center is right on target.

Sorry, but the Trojan horse would have been to announce an exclusive deal with Dish and DirecTV that they would be using a Mac mini as an option for their DVR.
post #72 of 782
Quote:
Are we planning on having a standard 1.5GB of RAM for the lowend so the GMA can suck off 512MB for its needs and then have to share CPU time to deal with shader issues and all else that OpenGL 2 offers?

I'm sure Apple and Intel both know Apple uses Open GL and not Active X. I'm sure they worked this out.

Seeing as we have not yet seen the real performance of the mini, or how it uses its inegrated GPU, isn't it a bit premature to speculate.
post #73 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by TenoBell
I'm sure Apple and Intel both know Apple uses Open GL and not Active X. I'm sure they worked this out.

Seeing as we have not yet seen the real performance of the mini, or how it uses its inegrated GPU, isn't it a bit premature to speculate.

Let me put it this way. It's still not worked out yet. I'm speculating because I've sat in these meetings. Yes. I've sat in device driver meetings at Apple. Nothing is ever worked out until a week or two before showtime.
post #74 of 782
I love it.
The integrated graphics wouldnt be my first choice, but it is still better then the ATI 9200 that the old mini had.
When you look at it in context it is a much better machine.

The real problem I see with the new mini is that there isnt a 499 version. You can say all you want about not selling them, but the point of a cheap computer is to get people in the door so that you can upsell them. The cheapest machine _shouldnt_ be selling a lot.

As for high end graphics users, come on, get real. You are going to buy a mini and then drop a $700 monitor on it??? If so get an iMac, great value. If not, then dont try to tell me you are a high graphics user.

Personally, Im looking forward to having a stack of 3 minis running as servers ( thank you gigE ), one running OS X, one running Linux, and fingers crossed, one running Windows. There isnt a machine on the market that can offer that sort of server density on your desk. They will fit very nicely behind my 20" iMac.
post #75 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by bitemymac
Well... $799 CoreDuo Mac mini makes vaporware PS3 look might good. I'll wait for the vaporware than buy something that just doesn't support my spending habits.

Only because Sony will be selling the PS3 at over a hundred dollars below cost.

Quote:
Decoding may be CPU bound, but then your system is tied up decoding.

Correct and adding a faster graphics card isn't going to drastically change this.
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
He's a mod so he has a few extra vBulletin privileges. That doesn't mean he should stop posting or should start acting like Digital Jesus.
- SolipsismX
Reply
post #76 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac
Not sure what to make of this. The question I have is, why use intergrated graphics with such a powerful processor? If Apple was committed to controlling costs and using intel's integrated graphics, then why not use a cheaper CPU also? At least with the core duo, a dedicated graphics card seems logical. Curious to see what others think of this.

Building a small, (relatively) inexpensive computer is like coming up with a new recipe. You put some things in, and you have to leave some things out. You can't put everything you like in at the same time.

Apple has the problem of having decided upon this form factor. It is what it is.

It's also sold well.

A graphics chip with dedicated memory would have added another $75. Would you have been will ing to pay another $75? Enough people are already complaining that these cost too much. You should read the thread on Ars!

With a cpu costing Apple several times what the old G4 cost, the money wasn't there. Simple.

If you need another reason, it's also heat. A Core Duo 1.67GHz chip puts out more heat than a single core 1.42GHz G4 7447a.

They weren't about to place a Graphics chip W/memory into the 1.5GHz single core machine either.

These machines are much more powerful than the old ones were. You also get more (other than that graphics chip).
post #77 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by hmurchison


Geez guys vent all you want but don't make stuff up.

All too true!
post #78 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by TenoBell
On the surface dedicated graphics don't sound too great. But I would not buy a Mac mini expecting a performance machine.

Plus you guys don't know what Apple may have coming down the pipeline. They may have plans for a small tower that will have graphics card slot.

I don't know why anyone is disappointed about a Tivo killer. Apple has never stated it had any desire to enter the DVR market. You have to keep internet rumors seperate from reallity.



That's for the life of the box not your lifetime. And Tivo boxes don't last forever.



Apple created the Mac mini market. I think they would have some idea of its direction.

The other market you speak of that Apple so stubbornly ignores is the market that wishes they could have a Power Mac for $599.

I will just love it when all of those people who spent $350-$400 for a lifetime subscription (plus the box) find out, possibly sooner rather than later, that Tivo has gone out of business.

No, I wasn't saying that they have already done so (for those of you who think I did). But the expectation is there in the industry.
post #79 of 782
Not to mention it only comes with an 80gig drive with a max option of 120gigs. if this is going to be my media center, I'm going to need a lot more room than that. I have 70 gigs of music as it is. Add in any photos or video and I'm out of room on that thing.
post #80 of 782
Quote:
Originally posted by mmmpie
I love it.
You are going to buy a mini and then drop a $700 monitor on it???

Many people have good monitors from previous machines. Part of the appeal of the mini is being able to salvage 'parts' from your previous bad windows experience.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple unveils Mac mini Core Duo