or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › New iMacs and Mac minis confirmed to use NVIDIA chipsets
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New iMacs and Mac minis confirmed to use NVIDIA chipsets - Page 2

post #41 of 181
Hey I see a piece of code in the post on the main page, but I can't find anything about Minis in my Info.plist on MacBook5,1. What's wrong?
post #42 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

...all come with faster USB 2.0 ports (when compared to previous Macs), so the speed advantage of FW400 is negligible (which is the only thing most mainstream consumers care about).

However, if Apple had really wanted to kill Firewire entirely, they would have dropped FW800 from the new MacBook Pros too - they didn't. FW400's death has been a long time coming. I strongly doubt anything new from Apple will ship with FW400. FW800, yes, it's far better than USB 2.0, but not FW400.

How is FW800 not better than FW400? It's twice as fast as it and backward compatible with it provided you use a connector adapater or appropriate 400/800 cable. And FW 400/800 both blow USB 2 out of the water for performance.
post #43 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

...
While announcing its new notebook offerings in October, Apple had indicated that it would be using more of NVIDIA's technology in its Mac computer line going forward.

Please drop the hot-business-speak of "going forward."
... activate Cone of Silence please - AARRGGHH! ...

The sentence already states that Apple will be using more of NVidia tech. This can only happen in the future. Thus the sentence statement was already complete were it to end with "...in its Mac computer line. [full stop]."

Does the phrase "going forward" clarify anything? They cannot intend to use more of it in the past, nor could they use more of it 'going backward', neither can they alter the normal flow of time, which is forward -- with or without them (or us). So the phrase is totally pointless and needless.

OK, so I have an issue with nonsense business or technical news jargon... sigh. \
The Universe is Intelligent and Friendly
Reply
The Universe is Intelligent and Friendly
Reply
post #44 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

...But you just noted in your post that the MacBooks lost Firewire. Notice how the Air debuted with no Firewire at all, the iPhone debuted with no syncing (or even charging) over Firewire, all current iPods now lack Firewire syncing/charging, and the new 24" LED Cinema Display lacks the FW400 ports of previous iterations as well? The new MacBooks, Airs, and Pros all come with faster USB 2.0 ports (when compared to previous Macs), so the speed advantage of FW400 is negligible (which is the only thing most mainstream consumers care about).

However, if Apple had really wanted to kill Firewire entirely, they would have dropped FW800 from the new MacBook Pros too - they didn't. FW400's death has been a long time coming. I strongly doubt anything new from Apple will ship with FW400. FW800, yes, it's far better than USB 2.0, but not FW400.

Apple also included a non-standard USB port on the Air, does that mean they'll include this same non-standard port on all future Macs? The port puts out more power than the USB spec says in order to power the external optical drive. I wouldn't point to the Air as an example of standards-to-come due to the unique compromises it makes.

iPods lost Firewire long before the iPhone came along. The reason was because of the need to support PCs. Many older PCs didn't have Firewire. And while many newer PCs include Firewire, it's the 4-pin variety that doesn't supply power. So you wouldn't be able to charge your iPod and iPhone battery. Space constraints and cost forced Apple to choose either FW or USB, but not both (as the first several generations of iPods did).

A $10 FW chip in a $150 iPod is a significant % of the cost. A $10 chip in a $600 computer is a little easier to justify. As for the MB, space may have been a constraint, but I still think differentiation is was the main reason, and there is no way Apple would admit that publicly so instead the lame "all camcorders use USB" excuse was offered.

The mini may lose FW, but I don't think it's as forgone a conclusion as some would make it out to be. Apple would need to include some great new feature or benefit to make up for the loss of Firewire before I'd buy one.
post #45 of 181
One or two of the causes for dropping Firewire from the MB aren't really there for the mini. There wasn't much board perimeter on the MB, and the main board is very tight, possibly squeezed out the FW arbitrator chip, the mini in its current form has plenty of room for jacks on the back.

I suppose if Apple chooses to shrink the mini by a lot, that might be enough to push it out. If they thought that the mini with better graphics might cause people to use it with Final Cut Studio, maybe, but that's a considerable compromise, using software that costs twice as much as the machine, cheaping out on the machine seems pretty short-sighted.
post #46 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

No the iMac WILL have FW800. The Mac mini will likely drop FW. Apple is going to be positioning FW as a step up feature.

One way to entice Mac mini owners or potential owners to upgrade is going to be discrete graphics and FW800.

The next Mac Pro will likely have FW 3.2Gbps. We can't forget for the iMac is indeed suitable for running apps like Final Cut Pro and Logic Studio. You delete FW here and you're going to harm your sales.

MB > MBP is an enticing upgrade path.

mini > iMac is much less so due to the huge differences.... Let's see, buy a mini, get a monitor, upgrade to an iMac, throw out the monitor. Not very enticing if you ask me.

There really isn't a separate MacBook and MacBook Pro lines anymore. It's just one lineup of laptops, and Apple needed to differentiate to support the price difference between the "consumer" and "pro" offerings in the lineup. The iMac and mini are both consumer models, and are already very differentiated. Apple could eliminate FW in the mini, but it would be very petty of them to do so.
post #47 of 181
I'm hoping that Apple keeps FW in the mini but the Apple Pessimist in me thinks it's gone.

That's too bad if true because a Mac mini with a FW audio interface, Mic, iLife and a USB midi keyboard is like a Podcaster/Musician's dream.
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 #48 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

I'm hoping that Apple keeps FW in the mini but the Apple Pessimist in me thinks it's gone.

That's too bad if true because a Mac mini with a FW audio interface, Mic, iLife and a USB midi keyboard is like a Podcaster/Musician's dream.

I recall having trouble recording a podcast using the mini because of the internal hard drive. The drive isn't as fast as the larger desktop type. It worked fine with an iMac. I didn't try music. Maybe the new drives are better.
post #49 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

I recall having trouble recording a podcast using the mini because of the internal hard drive. The drive isn't as fast as the larger desktop type. It worked fine with an iMac. I didn't try music. Maybe the new drives are better.

The drives are certainly slow. I tell you a Mac mini with Nvidia, 4GB of RAM and a SSD will rock the house.
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 181
I prefer the Mac maxi
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
Citing unnamed sources with limited but direct knowledge of the rumoured device - Comedy Insider (Feb 2014)
Reply
post #51 of 181
OK, now that I got that (previous post) out...

I am happy to see evidence for a long-overdue revision to the Mac Mini (last release in Aug '07). Several of the folks I work with have bought them over the last several years, and I will be able to recommend them more strongly once they get this makeover. The Mini is a good choice for a large group of folks who (a) are not overly technically focused, (b) don't need the higher-end, (c) prefer to keep/get/use their own monitor, keyboard, (d) are switching from Windows.

As well, I hope for solid improvements in the iMac - my personal favorite.

And, dear Apple, Please Keep Firewire!

Oh how we pine, ache, wish, implore for our dear favorite computer maker to make new models without disenfranchising their loyal customers.

I (and many folks I know and work with) have many Firewire devices that would be practically (or totally) useless if Apple drop FW from yet another Macintosh. (I have posted to Apple Feedback, and to an online petition. We can hope... <http://www.petitiononline.com/MB1394/petition.html>)

And lastly, to the comment about making the Mac mini ever so slightly larger so it could hold a 3.5" full-size HD - Yes! What would it take? perhaps .75 to 1" wider and longer? Go from 6.5" per side to 6.9 or 7" square. And for that meager increase in desktop space, it would vastly improve HD performance and capacity, plus cut Apple supply cost. (but, IMO, it won't happen -- they already have the form factor size 'fixed' in their heads, and in all the after-market add-ons ...)
The Universe is Intelligent and Friendly
Reply
The Universe is Intelligent and Friendly
Reply
post #52 of 181
If the Mini doesn't have FW800 I'd be really bummed. I want to ditch my G5 (with crazy amounts of eSATA enclosures) for a new Mini with a Drobo so badly.
post #53 of 181
It doesn't make sense to me that Apple would include FW800 on the mini. My guess is that it will be a USB-only machine. Also, I doubt there will ever be a desktop HDD in the mini. Although performance would increase, so would heat, noise, and power requirements. In fact there's a good chance that the whole mini case would vibrate.

I think that an iMac without the chin is a certainty at some point, but maybe not this time round. I think the "chin look" will appear very dated once it finally disappears. Otherwise the iMac has a pleasing appearance, but the white cable and keyboard need to go. Considering it is the most physically-handled part of the computer, white is the most impractical colour possible for a keyboard. At least a white mouse is easily replaced.
post #54 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

The drives are certainly slow. I tell you a Mac mini with Nvidia, 4GB of RAM and a SSD will rock the house.

If the Mini gets fast HDD's, expect FW to be dropped all together.
Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #55 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

Because just like the MacBook, the updated iMac and Mac Mini will no longer have FireWire! There was originally a rumor on AI stating that these updates would be ready by November (in time for Christmas shopping season). Then Apple announce, no further updates for the year.

I think because of the large negative outcry over the lack of FW on the MacBooks these FireWire-less updates to the iMac and Mac Mini were put on ice... Until the Mac community cooled down some.

Dave

The iMac and Mini might have been scheduled for November, but I think they were delayed for the following reasons:

- Intel delayed introduction of their Nehalem Xeon (Gainstown) from Q4 2008 until Q1 2009 meaning that a new Mac Pro can't be introduced in January. Had the notebooks (iMac/Mini) that masquerade as Apple's desktop lineup been updated in November it would've left Apple with no hardware to show at Macworld.
- There were probably too many iMacs still sitting in the channel and they're counting on Christmas to clear them out at full price.
- Despite the fact that the Mini is essentially a MacBook, and in my opinion should use an identical logic board and thus be a MacBook minus the display, battery, kb, etc., Apple didn't want to dilute the new MacBook message by introducing a desktop variant.

As a side note I have to wonder what Apple's strategy is for the digital media revolution. They're one of the leaders in downloadable media yet they don't have a single product designed for storing and serving that content. If ever there was a business case for Apple to make a mini-tower this is it.
post #56 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

The fact a vocal minority complained about the loss of FW400

This isn't aimed directly at Wobegon, because I see it happening a lot on these forums:

Nothing like branding a group of people, whose opinions don't align with yours, a 'vocal minority'. How condescending?

A few years ago, the entire Mac user base could have been described as a 'vocal minority'.
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #57 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

As a side note I have to wonder what Apple's strategy is for the digital media revolution. They're one of the leaders in downloadable media yet they don't have a single product designed for storing and serving that content. If ever there was a business case for Apple to make a mini-tower this is it.

I'm surprised it's taken them this long to rip-off the Drobo...
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
OK, can I have my matte Apple display, now?
Reply
post #58 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post

The next Mac Pro will likely have FW 3.2Gbps. We can't forget for the iMac is indeed suitable for running apps like Final Cut Pro and Logic Studio. You delete FW here and you're going to harm your sales.

Do we have any evidence that camera makers are preparing to put FW3200 ports on their high end cameras?

I'm a huge FW proponent, but I'm really starting to think that Apple is knifing the baby.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #59 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Messiah View Post

I'm surprised it's taken them this long to rip-off the Drobo...

I like the Drobo but I think arrays dedicated to one computer are going down the wrong path. A bare case and Drobo Share is $700.

Apple has the the right idea with Time Capule. Add some bays, beefier proc and removable drives and you've got a burgeoning superstar

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Do we have any evidence that camera makers are preparing to put FW3200 ports on their high end cameras?

I'm a huge FW proponent, but I'm really starting to think that Apple is knifing the baby.

I know...the need for FW 3.2 Gbps is going to be limited to arrays mainly. Though in 3 years I expect that SSD in RAID configs will actually saturate the 3.2Gbs bandwidth easily.
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 #60 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad View Post

As a side note I have to wonder what Apple's strategy is for the digital media revolution. They're one of the leaders in downloadable media yet they don't have a single product designed for storing and serving that content.

Totally agree. Your primary desktop/notebook doesn't fill this need. Nor does Time Capsule. Essentially one needs a home server...
post #61 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gmac View Post

How is FW800 not better than FW400? It's twice as fast as it and backward compatible with it provided you use a connector adapater or appropriate 400/800 cable. And FW 400/800 both blow USB 2 out of the water for performance.

Haha, no no, that's not what I meant to imply at all. Let me see if I can clear this up using words in brackets.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Me View Post

I strongly doubt anything new [ie, computers or devices] from Apple will ship with FW400. [A] FW800[-equipped computer or device], yes [I could see them releasing a computer or device with FW800], [because] it [FW800] is far better than USB 2.0, but [I do] not [see any more] FW400 [computers or devices coming given that FW400 no longer has the substantial speed advantage it once held over USB 2.0 on Macs].

That better?
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #62 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

One or two of the causes for dropping Firewire from the MB aren't really there for the mini. There wasn't much board perimeter on the MB, and the main board is very tight, possibly squeezed out the FW arbitrator chip, the mini in its current form has plenty of room for jacks on the back.

The new 24" LED Cinema Display lacks the FW400 ports of past iterations. How do you explain away that? What new size restrictions were introduced there? And don't most pros use Apple's Cinema Displays? The new MacBook Pro lost FW400 too and there's more space to work with than the MacBook and it's targeted at affluent pros, just like the Cinema Displays, who tend to prefer Firewire over USB 2.0. Perhaps Apple came to the realization that serious pros prefer FW800 while just about everyone else doesn't know or care about FW400 and thus, use USB 2.0.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #63 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave K. View Post

a home server...

Did someone say Home Server?!?

I think that is the direction of the future; a home server to handle all of the media, portable user accounts, home automation, etc.

'Big iron' for the homefront data store & portables (laptops, netbooks, tablets, iPhones) for the end user. Need a larger screen at home? Get a 24" LED Cinema Display 'docking station'

Sweet
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
Late 2009 Unibody MacBook (modified)
2.26GHz Core 2 Duo CPU/8GB RAM/60GB SSD/500GB HDD
SuperDrive delete
Reply
post #64 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

Apple also included a non-standard USB port on the Air, does that mean they'll include this same non-standard port on all future Macs? The port puts out more power than the USB spec says in order to power the external optical drive. I wouldn't point to the Air as an example of standards-to-come due to the unique compromises it makes.

INSIGHTS
USB 2.0 IS TRULY FASTER -- BUT STILL NOT QUITE AS FAST AS FIREWIRE 400
Up until now, every time we tested a USB 2.0 storage device on a Mac, the transfer rate was about half that of FireWire 400 even though it had a higher theoretical speed rating (480Mbit/s). Though it's still not quite as fast as FireWire 400, it's close enough to explain why Apple did away with the FW400 port on all new MacBooks and MacBook Pros.

http://www.barefeats.com/mbpp10.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

iPods lost Firewire long before the iPhone came along.

I wasn't listing them in any particular order, just stating that all current iPods lack charge/sync over Firewire.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post

The mini may lose FW, but I don't think it's as forgone a conclusion as some would make it out to be. Apple would need to include some great new feature or benefit to make up for the loss of Firewire before I'd buy one.

The important thing to remember is that it's not simply Firewire that the Mac mini is (likely) going to lose, but the FW400 variety. It has never had FW800, just as Apple's Cinema Displays have never had FW800, just as the MacBook has never had FW400, so it's not really getting rid of Firewire in all its forms, just the largely unused FW400 (thanks to consumers who don't know better and use USB 2.0 and serious pros, who use the far faster FW800 spec on Apple's Pro machines). But who knows, maybe Apple will implement FW800 ports in future revisions of all their Macs to edge out USB 3 whenever it comes around.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #65 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Same thoughts here... Mighty Mouse would be an easy product to improve upon, and they should think about offering two quality levels of mice. Mighty Mouse and MousePro.

A mouse with pressure sensitive buttons would be really nice to use in Phototshop or Illustrator.
post #66 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Messiah View Post

This isn't aimed directly at Wobegon, because I see it happening a lot on these forums:

Nothing like branding a group of people, whose opinions don't align with yours, a 'vocal minority'. How condescending?

A few years ago, the entire Mac user base could have been described as a 'vocal minority'.

Ah, but I made a concerted effort to not sound condescending, which was lost by you taking my words out of context. Here's what I said in its entirety:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Me View Post

The fact a vocal minority complained about the loss of FW400 wouldn't be enough to affect Apple's decisions when the mainstream majority doesn't even recognize the few benefits FW400 had left over Apple's use of faster USB 2.0 buses on their new Mac laptops.

See, I didn't even identify myself as part of the mainstream majority, just that the mainstream majority is who Apple caters to. I also noted that FW400 did in fact have advantages over USB 2.0 (though I didn't list them as everyone knows what they are, particularly Target Disk Mode and daisy-chaining multiple FW devices).
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #67 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

A mouse with pressure sensitive buttons would be really nice to use in Phototshop or Illustrator.

Isn't a Wacom better for that anyway?

Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

The new 24" LED Cinema Display lacks the FW400 ports of past iterations. How do you explain away that? What new size restrictions were introduced there? And don't most pros use Apple's Cinema Displays? The new MacBook Pro lost FW400 too and there's more space to work with than the MacBook and it's targeted at affluent pros, just like the Cinema Displays, who tend to prefer Firewire over USB 2.0. Perhaps Apple came to the realization that serious pros prefer FW800 while just about everyone else doesn't know or care about FW400 and thus, use USB 2.0.

They also said that it was designed for the notebooks, two out of their three notebook models don't have Firewire.
post #68 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Isn't a Wacom better for that anyway?

Pressure sensitive buttons could also be used for games. But I forgot, this is a Mac forum.
post #69 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

They also said that it was designed for the notebooks, two out of their three notebook models don't have Firewire.

The new 24" LED Cinema Display? Yeah, so what? They also said all Macs going forward will have Mini DisplayPort, so that means four - Mac mini, new MacBook Pro, iMac, and Mac Pro - out of the six types of Macs, a majority, have FW400 compatibility.

Of course they're going to promote/equip the Cinema Display for notebooks - notebooks are the desktop computers of tomorrow and they don't want to overtly promote them for use with the desktop computers everyone already has nor for use with the Mac mini, which is their least profitable Mac; trying to promote it for use with their extremely profitable Mac Pro wouldn't work on most consumers who would see a computer entirely overpowered and overpriced for their needs.

*EDIT*

So your original "space restraints" argument doesn't explain why Apple has been killing off FW400 left and right.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #70 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Pressure sensitive buttons could also be used for games. But I forgot, this is a Mac forum.

Pet your virtual dog! Pet, pet, (sneeze) squish. oops.
post #71 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Young View Post

And lastly, to the comment about making the Mac mini ever so slightly larger so it could hold a 3.5" full-size HD - Yes! What would it take? perhaps .75 to 1" wider and longer? Go from 6.5" per side to 6.9 or 7" square. And for that meager increase in desktop space, it would vastly improve HD performance and capacity, plus cut Apple supply cost. (but, IMO, it won't happen -- they already have the form factor size 'fixed' in their heads, and in all the after-market add-ons ...)

and....

Quote:
Originally Posted by system6 View Post

Also, I doubt there will ever be a desktop HDD in the mini. Although performance would increase, so would heat, noise, and power requirements. In fact there's a good chance that the whole mini case would vibrate.

The form factor already exists at 7.7" X 7.7" for AppleTV and TimeCapsule so they don't have to break any new ground to give the mini a slightly larger footprint. Also, both of those devices have 3.5" HDDs so the question of heat and vibration caused by using a bigger drive *should* be moot.
post #72 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post

The form factor already exists at 7.7" X 7.7" for AppleTV and TimeCapsule so they don't have to break any new ground to give the mini a slightly larger footprint. Also, both of those devices have 3.5" HDDs so the question of heat and vibration caused by using a bigger drive *should* be moot.

Apple TV uses a 2.5" HDD:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/appl...ard-drive.html

You were right about the Time Capsule though, a 3.5" "server-grade" HDD.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #73 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Apple TV uses a 2.5" HDD:
http://www.everymac.com/systems/appl...ard-drive.html

You were right about the Time Capsule though, a 3.5" "server-grade" HDD.

Thanks for the correction!
post #74 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

The new 24" LED Cinema Display? Yeah, so what? They also said all Macs going forward will have Mini DisplayPort, so that means four - Mac mini, new MacBook Pro, iMac, and Mac Pro - out of the six types of Macs, a majority, have FW400 compatibility.

You mean use it with a desktop with a dangling magsafe connector? You're saying so what when Apple puts in very large text "made precisely for a MacBook" on their site?
post #75 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

You mean use it with a desktop with a dangling magsafe connector? You're saying so what when Apple puts in very large text "made precisely for a MacBook" on their site?

Hah, I just edited my original post like half a second ago. I'll repost my point (which I had left out) here :

Your original "space restraints" argument doesn't explain why Apple has been killing off FW400 left and right [considering the new Cinema Displays nor the new MacBook Pros have any real space restrictions, yet they both dropped FW400].
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #76 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

Hah, I just edited my original post like half a second ago. I'll repost my point (which I had left out) here :

Your original "space restraints" argument doesn't explain why Apple has been killing off FW400 left and right.

As far as I remember, the new LED cinema display is the only one that doesn't really fit the space constraint argument. Dropping FW on iPods supposedly allowed dropping a chip from the board. That might be reasonably said of the Air and regular MB, the circuit boards are pretty small. Maybe it's arguable that the port could have remained without making the products larger.
post #77 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

As far as I remember, the new LED cinema display is the only one that doesn't really fit the space constraint argument.

You forgot the new MacBook Pro, which also lacked a real space restriction yet dropped its FW400. I edited my post for clarity (but obviously was a bit slow on the draw again).

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post

Dropping FW on iPods supposedly allowed dropping a chip from the board. That might be reasonably said of the Air and regular MB, the circuit boards are pretty small. Maybe it's arguable that the port could have remained without making the products larger.

I'm even trying to argue that FW400 could have fit because that's not why it is (likely) being retired on all new Macs. FW400 advantages over USB 2.0 have gone unnoticed (and unused, for that matter) by the vast majority of people who buy new Macs and the only really important advantage that consumers would actually care about - speed - has now pretty much disappeared thanks to Apple's use of faster USB 2.0 buses that come close enough to matching FW400 that most consumers who might even give FW400 a try wouldn't see the difference. Target Disk Mode and daisy-chaining aren't even on their collective radar.

FW800, on the other hand, has a very obvious speed advantage, thus it lives on.
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
False comparisons do not a valid argument make.
Reply
post #78 of 181
Quote:
Also of interest is that the entries for the new iMac and Mac mini are dated 2008, which may provide evidence to support claims that these systems were originally targeted for a release in the November time frame but were pushed into the first quarter of the year due to unexpected delays.


Maybe, if we are heard, Apple will use the new Intel Core i7 quad-core desktop CPU which is 20% to 30% more powerfull than an Intel Penryn quad-core desktop CPU. Let's dream on and hope that Apple listens to its customers.

Intel has officially introduced its next-generation desktop microprocessor, the Core i7, mainly known under its code-name Nehalem, on November 17, 2008. See:

Intel unleashes Core i7, beats itself @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40213/135/

Core i7 PCs launch with prices from $1250 to $13,000 @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40227/135/


Intel is also planning to launch three 65W low-power desktop CPUs targeting small form factor (SFF) PCs and all-in-one PCs in the middle of January 2009. Intel will launch the Core 2 Quad Q8200s (2.33GHz/4MB L2), Core 2 Quad Q9400s (2.66GHz/6MB L2) and Core 2 Quad Q9550s (2.83GHz/12MB L2) with prices at US$245, US$320 and US$369, respectively in thousand-unit tray quantities. See:

Intel to launch 65W desktop CPUs for all-in-one PCs @ http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/40267/139/


post #79 of 181
I can't wait to see the upheaval when Apple drops Firewire from the mini and raises prices $200. You know that's what's going to happen if specs match the new MacBook. Don't you?
post #80 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by wobegon View Post

But who knows, maybe Apple will implement FW800 ports in future revisions of all their Macs to edge out USB 3 whenever it comes around.

Of all the scenarios I've heard, that's the worst one.

USB3 will outpace FW800 in speed, cost and popularity.
So if that's the case Phil should just come out at MWSF and kill Firewire outright.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › New iMacs and Mac minis confirmed to use NVIDIA chipsets