or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Photo of next-gen Apple Mac mini in the wild?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Photo of next-gen Apple Mac mini in the wild? - Page 2

post #41 of 222
So I guess reports of Firewire's demise were greatly exaggerated.

If the picture is real, there doesn't seem to be a physical redesign in size, shape or color. Which kind of makes you wonder what is taking them so long to release it.

I'm guessing the configuration will be based on the White MacBook. Namely 2GHz Core 2 Duo on a 1066MHz FSB, with the 9400M but using 2GB DDR2 667 memory instead of DDR3. Although the 2GHz P7350 has actually been replaced with the 2.13GHz P7450 so maybe Apple will be nice enough to use that instead, but I doubt it seeing they stuck with the 2GHz P7350 for the White MacBook.
post #42 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbw87 View Post

But you still need a mini-DVI to DVI adapter ANYWAY! There's no logic to this design, given they sell a mini-DP to DVI adapter. If they wanted legacy compatibility they'd have included a full-size DVI port, otherwise there's no logical reason to include anything other than mini-DP.

Even if they wanted two ports, it'd be more logical to have 2 x mini DP, for consistency.

DP can be daisy chained for multi-display support and quite frankly none of the Mini-DP adapters work very well according to the Apple store reviews.
post #43 of 222
The last fake mac pic I saw was a fake mac mini, a few months ago. I'd be very surprised to see white plastic. And why does someone who's taking a spy shot that is a big deal, make sure the photo is all blurry? My best is that the pic on this story is something someone photoshopped to look like just what appleinsider had rumored specs on. I expect to see a mini with those same specs, but an updated case. fw800 makes me happy. I'll order one on day 1. Unless there is a 9600 option on a high end mini, then i'll have to think about which i want.
post #44 of 222
Not only is that picture probably not a fake...I would bet that we'll see it announced this coming Tuesday or next Tuesday (March 3rd). In concert with the discontinuation of the 20-inch Cinema Display, I wouldn't be surprised to see the 24-inch Cinema Display design aesthetic applied to a new 20-inch Cinema Display announced at the same time as the new mini too.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #45 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post

DP can be daisy chained for multi-display support and quite frankly none of the Mini-DP adapters work very well according to the Apple store reviews.

That still doesn't explain the presence of the mini-DVI port.

And it doesn't seem Apple is supporting daisy-chaining on its DP display, so maybe two ports would be a safer hedge. Also allows someone to run one DVI and one DP monitor.

Point taken about the adaptors being crap, but I can't imagine Jobs/Cook getting up on stage and saying "yeah, our DP-DVI adapters are pretty crap, so we shoved a mini-DVI port on there for DVI users... those adapters work better."
post #46 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbw87 View Post

But you still need a mini-DVI to DVI adapter ANYWAY! There's no logic to this design, given they sell a mini-DP to DVI adapter. If they wanted legacy compatibility they'd have included a full-size DVI port, otherwise there's no logical reason to include anything other than mini-DP.

Remember when Apple made G5s that had both a DVI and an ADC port? (I do; I have one.)

Full-sized DVI ports are HUGE. The mini-DVI and miniDisplayPort take up LESS room than one full-sized DVI port.

This isn't unprecedented. And I'm not convinced that it's illogical, either. This way, there's legacy support, and you also have support for what they HOPE will be a new display standard but which could just as easily go the way of... the ADC port.
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
post #47 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmcalpin View Post

Remember when Apple made G5s that had both a DVI and an ADC port? (I do; I have one.)

Full-sized DVI ports are HUGE. The mini-DVI and miniDisplayPort take up LESS room than one full-sized DVI port.

This isn't unprecedented. And I'm not convinced that it's illogical, either. This way, there's legacy support, and you also have support for what they HOPE will be a new display standard but which could just as easily go the way of... the ADC port.

But it's not legacy support; it's an Apple-only port that requires an Apple-supplied adapter to be any use with legacy DVI. Same for Mini-DP. So why not just simplify things and have two Mini-DP adapters?

Why would Apple want to continue to have to manufacture Mini-DVI to DVI adapters?
post #48 of 222
In fact why any plastic at the back? Why wouldn't the rear be like the AppleTV with a seamless aluminium wrap around?

post #49 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatisgoingon View Post

Given that:
-the Mini is positioned a low-end consumer grade machine
-that Apple removed FW400 from the low-end consumer MacBook
-that Apple is still selling the previous model MacBook with FW400

I would say it is quite unlikely that Apple would upgrade the Mini from FW400 to FW800.

I think it would be more likely that Apple might lead the way to USB 3.0 (presuming there is a chipset available), and include a USB 3 port (and either have all USB 3 ports, which are backwards compatible with USB 2 or have several other USB 2 ports, depending on cost & chipset capabilities).

USB3.0 will be backwards compatible in signal and connector with 2.0 and 1.0, but it is not ready yet and we will surely see it in their mainstream machines first.

Apple removed FW400 from all their notebooks. Space constraints seem to be the reason as they didn't include an additional FW800 or USB2.0 in it's place. I see no reason for the Mini and iMac with their ample space to forego FW altogether, just because they are not prosumer machines.

PS: I call fake on the image.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #50 of 222
If this picture is real, I'll be a very happy owner.
post #51 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilM View Post

The FW800 is nice, but what the hell does anyone need five USB ports for on this level of computer?

I have the feeling that a large proportion of Mac users have the Stockholm syndrome: being held hostage by Apple at 2/3 USB ports for way too long.

I think people need to be reminded that the mini was never designed to be wire-free, like the iMac, so the aesthetic argument does not apply here. In addition, the mini is mainly marketed towards switchers, many of whom are used to 7+ USB ports, which are the norm on PCs. Also, this is a mere ONE port increase over the current Mac mini, so I fail to see how this could be classified as such a dramatic change. Finally, since when did USB port become associated with pro-level computing?
post #52 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbw87 View Post

That still doesn't explain the presence of the mini-DVI port.

The chipset probably has a single DisplayPort interface alongside the DVI interface. One of each is the best Apple can do. How much as mini-DVI -> DVI adaptors? Are there mini-DVI -> VGA adaptors? I would expect a mini-DVI -> DVI adaptor in the box, so that it can work with existing monitors.

Mini-displayport -> VGA adaptors are active, and more expensive.

Quote:
And it doesn't seem Apple is supporting daisy-chaining on its DP display, so maybe two ports would be a safer hedge. Also allows someone to run one DVI and one DP monitor.

Point taken about the adaptors being crap, but I can't imagine Jobs/Cook getting up on stage and saying "yeah, our DP-DVI adapters are pretty crap, so we shoved a mini-DVI port on there for DVI users... those adapters work better."

They'll just say it expands the options available to the user.
post #53 of 222
I won't repeat all the reasons given above, but this is obviously either a fake or a prototype configured for disinformation.
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
post #54 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbw87 View Post

But it's not legacy support; it's an Apple-only port that requires an Apple-supplied adapter to be any use with legacy DVI. Same for Mini-DP. So why not just simplify things and have two Mini-DP adapters?

Why would Apple want to continue to have to manufacture Mini-DVI to DVI adapters?

Because people that are using a Mini with their 3rd-party monitor may want to update their Mini without paying an additional 5% just for a new adapter?

PS: I really hope the Mini power input is MagSafe compliant so you can run the new Apple display more seamlessly. With a bracket to keep it gitmly in place, of course.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #55 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltcommander.data View Post

If the picture is real, there doesn't seem to be a physical redesign in size, shape or color. Which kind of makes you wonder what is taking them so long to release it.

I'm guessing the configuration will be based on the White MacBook. Namely 2GHz Core 2 Duo on a 1066MHz FSB, with the 9400M but using 2GB DDR2 667 memory instead of DDR3. Although the 2GHz P7350 has actually been replaced with the 2.13GHz P7450 so maybe Apple will be nice enough to use that instead, but I doubt it seeing they stuck with the 2GHz P7350 for the White MacBook.

What's the point of redesigning a machine whose design philosophy is to be almost invisible? Besides, I fail to see how the unibody style could be applied to the mini without making it look ugly. The mini is beautiful as it is.
post #56 of 222
5 USB ports lined up on the back.... it just looks wrong. Steve Jobs isn't about loading up on ports.

Not necessary and and easy cost saving measure. I call fake as well.
post #57 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

PS: I really hope the Mini power input is MagSafe compliant so you can run the new Apple display more seamlessly. With a bracket to keep it gitmly in place, of course.

Most people who purchase a mini are not in the market for a new ACD. Besides, there is very little risk of wire tripping with a desktop machine, so the main advantage of MagSafe does not apply here. Finally, I don't think the 23in ACD can supply enough power to run a mini.
post #58 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeilM View Post

The FW800 is nice, but what the hell does anyone need five USB ports for on this level of computer?

Some items don't work very well hooked up via a hub. For instance, I have found with my mini that an external DVD burner works more reliably connected directly to the computer and I was also having issues with my iPod Touch. Right now I'm sharing a port for those two because I haven't got enough of them to give them each one.

Not everyone who buys a mini does so with the notion of not hooking much up to it and just using the thing for low-level computing. I'm using mine for Photoshop, have assorted hard drives attached to it, etc.

A fifth USB port would be welcome by me and I'm sure others are well.
post #59 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugsnw View Post

5 USB ports lined up on the back.... it just looks wrong. Steve Jobs isn't about loading up on ports.

Not necessary and and easy cost saving measure. I call fake as well.

Well considering that the new 24-inch Cinema Display has USB to power the display's USB hub and iSight camera, I think Apple was thinking that many of their customers would reject losing a USB port if they kept the same number of USB ports as before.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #60 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbw87 View Post

So why not just simplify things and have two Mini-DP adapters?

Why would Apple want to continue to have to manufacture Mini-DVI to DVI adapters?

2) They have to continue making them anyway! The current white MacBook doesn't have mini-DP. (Considering they're still making ADC adapters, I think they're going to be making Mini-DVI adapters for a LOOOOONG time, regardless of whether their current machines still use it.)

1) I don't know! It's a valid question. Maybe for the customers who already HAVE mini-DVI adapters, or so that they can support DVI-D adapters, because the only Mini-DisplayPort to DVI adapter they make is DVI-I only.

(EDIT: MarceloR makes a really good point below, though.)
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
post #61 of 222
[QUOTE=Turin;1378922]5 Surely dual display ports if anything.


Display port can be daisy-chained so no need to have more than one. However, one Mini DVI and one display port means one or two of your display can be DVI.
post #62 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugsnw View Post

5 USB ports lined up on the back.... it just looks wrong. Steve Jobs isn't about loading up on ports.

Not necessary and and easy cost saving measure. I call fake as well.

The current mini already has four USB ports. I guess if I follow your line of reasoning, I would argue that the Mac Pro also have an excess of ports: 4 FW + 5 USB (excluding ports on the keyboard).

As for whether 5 USB ports are necessary, here is a typical switcher usage scenario:
1 port for keyboard
1 port for mouse
1 port for printer
1 port for external USB drive
1 port for iPod charging

So there you go: 5 USB ports are very necessary on the mini.
post #63 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turin View Post

In fact why any plastic at the back? Why wouldn't the rear be like the AppleTV with a seamless aluminium wrap around?


The Mac mini's rear panel would most likely be facing the wall, so I don't see how making it all aluminum would make any difference.
post #64 of 222
Apple canny be that daft to launch an ageing system with essentially the same dimensions as the inferior model.

Remember the Mac Mini and it's unchanged exterior has been out since the iMac G4 - I mind seeing them in PCWrld at the time.

That's pure ancient!

Okay - it's as good as read, the interior will mirror the spec of the macbook however......

I reckon - like I've said before, the exterior will be dramatically different. From as stylistic point of view (which Apple are quite up on) they have to change the look of it. Don't tell me they are going to keep the same measurements so it's easier to stack a dozen of them to create the cyberdyne system!

Nah, Nah, it's going to be wee'r and slimmer and...................... Bloody Hell Apple, just bring the flamin machine out!
post #65 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thinine View Post

Seems fake. Why would Apple leave a miniDVI port on there when they added mini-DisplayPort? And FW800 on the Mini? Why? Plus the design is too similar to the existing mini. After this long you'd think they'd revise it at least a little bit.

The Intel mac mini and the Intel iMac also used the same design as their PPC counterparts.
post #66 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by fezzasus View Post

The Mini DisplayPort is an open standard, there are already adaptors being made for it by third parties, unlike the previous port which was apple only.

Mini display port is NOT an open standard. It is a standard developed by Apple and approved by the DisplayPort folks. But it is not "open". Anyone who wants to use the standard must get Apple's permission (and I believe you have to let them authorize it as well).
post #67 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatever00 View Post

As for whether 5 USB ports are necessary, here is a typical switcher usage scenario:
1 port for keyboard
1 port for mouse
1 port for printer
1 port for external USB drive
1 port for iPod charging

Well... most people plug their mouse into the keyboard's USB port, but throw in a digital camera or a scanner, and your point stands.
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
Multiplex is an online comic strip about the staff of a movie theater.
Reply
post #68 of 222
I can understand the issue of style for a notebook, which will be used in public places, but not the mac mini, which will be for the most part tucked away under a desk/below a monitor. I, for one, would prefer Apple to deliver something of real substance and real value, rather than just another pretty shell.
post #69 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatever00 View Post

The current mini already has four USB ports. I guess if I follow your line of reasoning, I would argue that the Mac Pro also have an excess of ports: 4 FW + 5 USB (excluding ports on the keyboard).

As for whether 5 USB ports are necessary, here is a typical switcher usage scenario:
1 port for keyboard
1 port for mouse
1 port for printer
1 port for external USB drive
1 port for iPod charging

So there you go: 5 USB ports are very necessary on the mini.

If you're going to use that argument, should all macs have a multitude of USB ports? Or if a switcher is getting an iMac, it's not as important because they can be really messy about things and plug stuff into the keyboard?
post #70 of 222
This is off topic, however its not really worth its own thread as its just speculation.

isnt it about time for a iMac G6? i know it went from White to Aluminum. but the dimensions need to change, get thicker, and offer a larger screen size. they need to adapt to a market that requires hotter computers (therefor more roominside for cooling)

this would require a new redesign, ive been on the fence about getting a new iMac for a few years but they just keep getting further and further behind in power compared to PC's that cost $1000 less.

why not do a full redesign, make it a bit bigger, and offer at least the Core i7's?

anyway the real question is that if it would be unreasonable to think that the G6 could be coming out this year...?
post #71 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatever00 View Post

Most people who purchase a mini are not in the market for a new ACD. Besides, there is very little risk of wire tripping with a desktop machine, so the main advantage of MagSafe does not apply here. Finally, I don't think the 23in ACD can supply enough power to run a mini.

Acording to current Mini and 24" Apple display specs it can run it just fine.
Apple wants to upsell and slick, streamlined components that work better together than seperately is a good way to do it. Therefore eliminating an additional powerbrock and wires would be very Apple.
Im not sure why you mentioned tripping. While the MagSafe is designed for Mac notebooks it is just sending power, so why not use that same power for their small desktop. A latch would be needed to prevent it from popping out and cutting power to the machine if it or the cable was moved.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #72 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by gmcalpin View Post

Well... most people plug their mouse into the keyboard's USB port, but throw in a digital camera or a scanner, and your point stands.

We are talking about switcher and cheap old peripherals here, not the shiny Apple keyboards and mouse.

Notice that all of the peripherals I listed need to be attached to the computer for long periods of time.
post #73 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Acording to current Mini and 24" Apple display specs it can run it just fine.
Apple wants to upsell and slick, streamlined components that work better together than seperately is a good way to do it. Therefore eliminating an additional powerbrock and wires would be very Apple.
Im not sure why you mentioned tripping. While the MagSafe is designed for Mac notebooks it is just sending power, so why not use that same power for their small desktop. A latch would be needed to prevent it from popping out and cutting power to the machine if it or the cable was moved.

An upsell would be convincing the customer to buy a 24in iMac/Mac Pro. Not staying with a cheap mini and buy an expensive monitor.
post #74 of 222
1.) Why would anybody need 5 USB ports?

2.) In regards to the video connectors, it seems unlikely that Apple would invest the additional time and money to include legacy hardware, particularly when they've made such a to-do about their new standard, not to mention that they make an adapter for this purpose.

3.) Firewire 800 is not all that far-fetched, seeing as the current mini includes the FW standard already. Backed when I worked in TV, we used Minis exclusively to digitize DV tapes, which has to be done in real time and doesn't require all that much processing power. All our hard drives were FW, so I can see them including the standard just for good measure. I know it's been phased out o on the MacBooks, but those are in a slightly different category. If Apple wanted to, they could make the argument that anyone needing a mobile work station to do video work will also likely need the added grfx and processing power of a pro unit anyway. While I know it's possible, I've never actually *seen* anyone edit on a standard MacBook. The mini, however, can be used as a low-cost alternative to augment your post production facilities, as was my experience, so it *might* still serve a niche there.

My inclination - at least my hope - is that this is likely just a prototype and not the final revision. I'd also be somewhat surprised for the Mini not to support a black enclosure to match that of it's bigger siblings. It would make very little sense design-wise to do anything other wise. I'm sure the mini is forthcoming, but I hope it's a little more fresh than what we see here.
post #75 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmilinGoat View Post

This is off topic, however its not really worth its own thread as its just speculation.

isnt it about time for a iMac G6? i know it went from White to Aluminum. but the dimensions need to change, get thicker, and offer a larger screen size. they need to adapt to a market that requires hotter computers (therefor more roominside for cooling)

this would require a new redesign, ive been on the fence about getting a new iMac for a few years but they just keep getting further and further behind in power compared to PC's that cost $1000 less.

why not do a full redesign, make it a bit bigger, and offer at least the Core i7's?

anyway the real question is that if it would be unreasonable to think that the G6 could be coming out this year...?

The iMac won't be able to accommodate a Core i7, due to their TDP. The most it can accomodate is Clarksfield, which is due to be released at the end of the year. Oh well, at least it's a quad core chip and doesn't come with the atrocious intel integrated graphics.
post #76 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatever00 View Post

The iMac won't be able to accommodate a Core i7, due to their TDP. The most it can accomodate is Clarksfield, which is due to be released at the end of the year. Oh well, at least it's a quad core chip and doesn't come with the atrocious intel integrated graphics.

thats a step i suppose, they really need to do something though, as the performance difference is widening too much while the cost is staying just as far apart.
post #77 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbw87 View Post

Still illogical to include two different types of port when they could both be mini-DP: mini-DVI gains nothing here; they could just have 2 x mini-DP, which would make sense considering (A) they're trying to push their own mini-DP monitors and (B) going forward there are likely to be more and more DP-based monitors that mini-DVI just can't connect to, no matter what adapters you have... (depends on the monitor manufacturer)

Lots of places use the Mini to hook into analog output devices of various kinds. I'm assuming they kept DVI on board for these sorts of uses.
post #78 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louzer View Post

If you're going to use that argument, should all macs have a multitude of USB ports? Or if a switcher is getting an iMac, it's not as important because they can be really messy about things and plug stuff into the keyboard?

This argument does not apply for notebooks, because they come with input devices. They are also unlikely to be tethered to an external HD or printer due to their mobility.

Most switchers' keyboards are cheap old ones with no USB ports, which necessitate 5 USB ports on the mini. The iMac includes Apple's keyboard, which has USB port.

All of the devices I have cited are common devices that need to occupy USB ports for long periods of time. In particular, the external HD is used for Time Machine backups.
post #79 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by SmilinGoat View Post

thats a step i suppose, they really need to do something though, as the performance difference is widening too much while the cost is staying just as far apart.

Clarksfield is the Nehalem-based mobile chip. However, its TDP is too high to be included in Apple's notebooks, except maybe the MBP 17in.
post #80 of 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by Louzer View Post

Mini display port is NOT an open standard. It is a standard developed by Apple and approved by the DisplayPort folks. But it is not "open". Anyone who wants to use the standard must get Apple's permission (and I believe you have to let them authorize it as well).

Well, the design can be downloaded from Apple's website. The certification, I imagine, would be done by VESA now that it's part of their standard.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Photo of next-gen Apple Mac mini in the wild?