Eating our words: Apple's Mac mini to rock on - Page 6

I own a Mini, which is almost perfect for my use and I will buy more in the next few months but, I won't buy until after WWDC. The Mini might not be upgraded but I just couldn't buy until after the conference.

Believe it or not, the Mini would be perfect for my use if it had an RS232 port! USB to RS232 converters are fine on OS X but a pain under Linux (Ubuntu) (and no - I am not expecting one).

I didnt realise there was a WWDC soon. I guess if they are going to annouce new upgrades then its going to be at the conference. I wonder if apple have any policy whereby they box swap if the mac is upgraded within a certain time period ? my other concern is that the mini receives an increase in price in addition to the upgrade in components ? what do you think ?

cheers

I am aware that I didn't really answer your initial question - sorry. This was mainly because I would not want to mislead you. The Mini is not the sort of computer I think that Apple would hold for a developer's conference, unless perhaps there was a serious change of direction coming for it. Alternately, the Mini might be phased out with a new system announced to cover its capabilities. If retained with much the same capabilities, I doubt very much that the price would go up. However, there might be a significant upgrade coming that would see a price hike but I am willing to risk that. Of course, if they included a revolutionary feature like RS232, I might be prepared to pay more...

Does the current system align well with you current or perceived need?

Hi the current system probably aligns well with what i need it for:


Watching ripped SD DVD
Viewing photos
Watching podcasts
Photo manipulation and creation using Iphoto and web gallerys
Create simple home movies with Imovie
Maybe create a few webistes using Iweb
I don't play games or use anything like final cut pro, or dual boot with Windows etc... so will be pretty much limited to use for iLife08 and general internet surfing, itunes library etc..

I would probably get the 1Gb of ram and upgrade this later myself as it doesnt look too difficult and will be a lot cheaper.

Do you think the current mini would hold up ok for what I have described

thanks

chris

I don't need mine for anything particularly graphics intensive but for streaming data from devices. The current system will perform each of your stated tasks but whether it would match your expectations I cannot say. \

Others could give more expert advice. However, Ubuntu runs fine on mine under VMWare. Perhaps getting your RAM up to a higher level would be a good idea. I know that some people here rail against having it factory installed and it looks quite doable yourself but if your time and peace of mind are more valuable, just get it done.

All the best.

http://developer.apple.com/wwdc/

I'm thinking that with an upgrade of ram the mini would be probably do everything i need. Its size is a big advantage for me as I will need to move it about quite a bit.

iLife 08 looks great (although im easily pleased as ive never owned a mac before) and looks nice and easy to produce some nice photo collections movies etc... I want something thats going to make life easy with regard to photos and home movies and iLife looks like it fits the bill perfectly.

Surely if the macs are sold with only 1GB ram that should be capable of running iLife but the extra ram will hopefully meake a difference and will be a good addition

thanks again for your help

chris

Oh sure, 1GB is fine. My Mini has that amount of RAM and as I said, runs Linux as well quite happily. Again, someone else might comment on this but if you keep very large numbers of images on the system under iLife, extra RAM might help.

I run all the iLife and iWork applications. I don't even have Office installed. However, I don't use a spreadsheet for much these days and so, can probably go without Excel. I do use MatLab however. I have found that the latest version of Pages plays very nicely with Word documents with the exception of some text boundaries, shadings and incompatible fonts. None of these is a show stopper for me.

It's great that you are buying your first Mac - well done. I have used Apple computers since before the first Mac. This wasn't always a comfortable experience but certainly is now! Your experience of the Mac will be a conjugate of your expectations and the system's capabilities but hopefully your research will lead you to a system that matches your requirements.

Regards

thanks mate I am really looking forward to getting a mac and using it for my pics/movies etc... hopefully it will simplify things a bit and help me organise my photos better and create nice home movies easily and quickly. On my windows PC ive never been quite happy with keeping my pics tidy, and the movie programs I have are down right rubbish compated to imovie.

thanks again

Is this what the new Mac Mini will look like?

I saw this on Anandtech and was thinking ... that MacBook Air Optical drive could be used for a machine like this. A small 'spare' Mac if you will.

Just a thought.

As far as looks go, you cannot beat the current Mini. Many would like better access to the guts but the current model has a functional, minimalist look that is not at all dated. Good looks anyway, are in the eye of the beholder - right?

I love my Mini and the form factor is awesome. I just hope Apple releases the new Mac Mini soon. I'm spending my '2008 Federal Stimulus' on a new Mac. Got keep the economy goin' LOL

It's an interesting phenomena, that as controversial as the system seems to be in forums, that you don't hear much complaint about the Mini from people who actually own one, apart perhaps from access to the workings. Any owners beg to differ?

(Sorry - not trying to promote the thread unduly but interested.)

I've been following this since it appeared on the 21st of March. After that intial drop of info about the uts being re-engineered with current generation components replacing the last generation ones currently sported, nothing has emerged o the Mac mini's 3rd Intel generation. The entire Apple rumours scene has gone dark on it. Apple Insider has had nothing, even 9 to 5 Mac (Who as we all know have recently proven very good at knowing things ahead of time) have nothing.

Meanwhile, Apple's UK Online Store insists the Mac mini has a new price on its product page (It doesn't) and Apple has not responded to customers questioning them about this, nor have they removed the label. What one arth is going on?

Furthermore, as we approach WWDC, Keynote Rumours increasngly point to a 3 point show: new iPhone, OS X touch Version 2 (I refuse to call it iPhone OS, I figured since it's Cocoa touch it could be OS X touch too) and MobileMe (.Mac).

And so, after spending the best part of 2 and a half months on this, I'm forced to conclude thus:

Apple is going to quietly update the Mac mini on June 2nd or 3rd - 1 week ahead of WWDC (ala Mac Pro ahead of MacWorld) - else the update will be waiting until August. The 3rd because Apple likes to update on Tuesdays.

With intel's delay I'm hoping either Apple can get the new GMA ahead of others or it gets pushed to August. X3100 or worse...the 950 would be a dissapointment given how long between updates for the mini.

I suspect AppleInsider is correct that the X3100 will be used.

That said, don't be surprised if Apple update the mini again in November. I don't know about you guys, but I'm expecting Apple to get back onto the regular update cycle this year, they got a pass last year for iPhone and Leopard.

Yah, but given how bad intel's drivers have been for the X3x00 you probably would want to skip it. The drivers for the X4x00 isn't likely to be worse and should have OpenGL 2.0 and HDCP support. HDCP would be somewhat important given how the Mini is often used and perhaps would allow HD rentals on the Mac.

I would be pleasantly surprised if the mini got updated in both June and November...even if I bought a X3100 model in June which is my plan if they release one.

Ditto. The November update I wouldn't buy (Unless it was way awesome, like had a Blu-Ray BTO or something), but I feel its important Apple get back to regularly updating all the lines.

Frankly, I don't mind the current hardware. I just plan to buy on June 18th and I don't want it updated in August if I do.

Exactly. I don't mind any updates that are outside say 4-6 months of a purchase. Even a 3X difference for the X4500.

Vinea, last year you were contemplating making [upgrading] your own Mini. Did you scrap that idea?

It wasn't mine and while I did upgrade the ram I chickened out from bricking it. When I get my own I'll go ahead and frankenmac it. Assuming I can get the parts. I have a feeling that there's a real risk in screwing up the PCIe and thereby rendering it wireless-less.

I can go with that. Sounds logical.

I certainly hope so.
I need an upgrade pronto.

I gotta say, I think the mini is woefully underestimated. I have had mine for two years, and the only thing I have done is give it 2 gigs of RAM. I run Quake 4, Halo, Doom 3, Prey, and CS:S (under crossover games), as well as Final Cut Pro, Motion, Compressor, and DVD Studio Pro. I duel boot to windows on occasion, and I used to use Parallels Desktop, which I stopped using simply because I did not need it. It can easily play 1080p video, without any framedropping, and I once even made a 10 minute 3D film on it in less then 18 hours. Apeture runs fine with 3000+ photos in it, and I still have room for 2500 songs in iTunes.

Granted, with a performance boost, i expect the Mini will be alot better, especially in CS:S, which runs at like 20 FPS, but my point is, Apple's Mac Mini is pretty powerful/useful for a budget machine


1.66 Core Duo, Superdrive, 80 gig internal + 320 external, 2 gig RAM

what are you running at 640x480 16bit in low res?

at it's price it needs a real video card.

Actually, at 800x480 16 bit, high res, but i agree that it should have a [EDIT]better[/EDIT] video card.

Anyway, my point was that the mini is better then people think

No it doesn't.

I just read an article that said that about 70% of all laptop computers have integrated video. As more laptops are being sold all the time, apparently, few people care. A good percentage of desktops have integrated video as well. I expect that a good percentage over 50% of all computers being sold have integrated video.

Most people aren't gamers, so that group can be cut out. Most people aren't pro's, so that group can be cut out.

The group that's left really doesn't care, or need, anything better.

This is a very compact machine, and it has its market. It's fine.

If Apple did what those who are demanding from them, it would be a very different, and much larger machine, and you are back to that mythical xMac.

This is what it is. If it's not good enough, then don't buy it. But it's good enough for its market, and that's what matters. The people who have them seem to like them just fine.

Desktops that are in the $600-$800 price range have real video cards system under $500 tend to come with on board video but you can add a card for $50 - $100+

amd / ati and nvidia have good on board video intel does not and you can add side port ram to amd on board video chips.

also the mini has a real old on board video chip set and only comes with 1gb of ram with laptop HD and a dvd /cdrw want a DVDRW pay $200 and still get only 1gb of ram.

Are you stating that 70% of all computers can't have integrated graphics because there are cheap desktops that have discrete GPUs? There are a lot more notebooks being sold than desktops and there are a lot more $300-$600 desktops being sold than the ones you quote.

with apple you need to pay $2200 to get a desktop with a real video card.

It doesn't matter what the price range is, it's the percentages that do matter.

Even if you want to consider the price, you do know that Apple sells 66% of computers over $1,000, at least in the US, which is their main market for computers.

Obviously having changeable video cards matters little to anyone. And, yes, I do know that iMacs have GPU's, but not nearly the best ones.

And of course, we're not talking about the Pro line of desktops, or laptops, as those cost much more. Though, Apple's high end laptops don't have interchangeable gpu's either.

Overall, you are paying for the compact form of the Mini. It's not for you, and that's fine. That doesn't mean your criticism isn't valid on one level, that is, Apple, perhaps SHOULD have an "xMac".

But, the Mini isn't it.

What you have to look at is whether Apple's business model is a success or a failure.

If it's a success, then you can't argue it with any sensible alternative.

If it's a failure, then we would be seeing that.

people want to be able to use there own screens and the mini is a poor system all around.

The screens in the imac are not that good the 20" ones are still the same old ones used the older imacs

Real old chipset, Small laptop hd,slow cpu, dvd / cdwr / 1gb of ram hard to open cases next to other systems for $599.00 add $200 get a little faster cpu, 40gb more hd space, and a dvd / rw. $799.00 with 1gb of ram and 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo?

The base imac at $1,199.00 with only 1GB memory is not that good at least it has a ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory.

You can take the $1,199.00 imac drop the screen put in desktop parts up the ram to 2gb and put in a ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory at the same price.

Alot of systems with video cards can run 2 screen even the low end ones.

Also systems in the percentages have better Intel on board video or a better ati / nvidia on board video chipset.

It's not a poor system all around. It's just intentionally hobbled to protect Mac Pro sales.

If there's a pre-WWDC update (which would come tomorrow, right? ) I would only want two things done with the Mini::

• add a 7200-speed hard drive (because 5400 is too slow for quick backup purposes.)
• give it 30" display capability (because the pricing on 30" screens is dropping drastically.)

If it can drive today's largest screen, whether Jobs superglues the video card in or not doesn't really concern me.

SOME people want to use their old monitors.

They're no worse than the large majority of monitors out there. Most people don't notice these things anyway. Only expensive graphics monitors are really any good. The monitor on the 24" is pretty good. I have two of them here.


Again, who cares? You're mentioning things that don't matter to most people. When most people go into a computer store, they don't know anything about any of this. If the salesman even bothers to mention it, they stare back, because all they want to know is whether it will be suitable for them.

And please stop with how "difficult' the case is to open. first, it's not difficult at all. But almost no one opens their computer to upgrade it. This is an old, and tired, issue.


Again. Who cares? you have no idea of what most computer buyers know about, or care about.

I've had a number of PC people buy iMacs after they looked at them. Three people I took to the Photo Expo here last year bought iMacs after seeing them at the show. I've had PC using friends over the past few years buy iMacs, and one buy a Mini.

You make the same mistake that other critics make, you equate what YOU think is important to what most consuers think is important.

Fortunately for Apple, most consumers don't agree with you. Otherwise Apple's desktop sales woudn't have taken such a large jump while those from PC makers are flat to down.

If Apple's OS was 100% compatible with Windows programs out of the box, Apple would already be selling 20 million machines a year.

AnandTech has a review of a prototype Eee Box which is pretty much a Mac Mini running XP or Linux but uses and Atom processor and has a much lower price point than the Mac Mini.

•

http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=3321

I'm more intrigued by the fact they're preparing an assault on iMac territory.

Wanna bet you'll be able to upgrade the hard drive yourself?

I love the EEE family.

Apparently Atom isn't a very good processor / platform compared to intel's usual suspects, check page 7:

http://anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=3321&p=7

It shows up as being slightly better than Dothan at 800MHz, except for one benchmark, maybe because there's new SSE instructions in Atom that Dothan doesn't have.

I saw that as well Jeff.

For Linux systems that still would be pretty responsive I think. XP would be a bit sluggish I would think but still ok. I don't think there is anyway you could run VIsta os on an Atom machine.

Makes me wonder how OSX would run on such a cpu. I don't think full Leopard would run on Atom. The mobile OSX would probably be ok though.

I wish they would have benchmarked a fast ARM11 and 1.6GHz C2D so we can a better comparison of speed and power consumption. I want to know how it compares to modern chipsets, not old ones.