What hardware features? Apple can pick and choose what sort of hardware features to incorporate into their SoC. They can also leave out much that isn't relevant anymore. That frankly is Intels big problem, they spend a lot of transistors on backwards compatibility for features that don't mean much today.
I highly disagree. Compatabikity with all previous x86 software is a huge feature. I can currently run ANY OSX or Windows program on my MBA. If that changes, I'm moving back to Windows (no choice there). I'd love to stay with OSX but if the MBA goes ARM, I'm gone
From your perspective, Intel made a mistake, 'wasting those transistors' on backwards compatibility. Those transistors will keep me buying their product for many years to come (unless ARM can emulate x86 code faster, in real time, than an Intel chip can run in).
I use some software that is over 10 years old. It will never get recompiled.
I can currently run ANY OSX or Windows program on my MBA. If that changes, I'm moving back to Windows (no choice there). I'd love to stay with OSX but if the MBA goes ARM, I'm gone.
So your only options are an Intel-based MacBook Air or a WinPC? You wouldn't consider an Intel-based MBP?
So your only options are an Intel-based MacBook Air or a WinPC? You wouldn't consider an Intel-based MBP?
Actually, you somehow quoted me yet attributed it to the other person.
I would if I wanted the 13" MBA model. I use the 11" MBA instead because it is so much more portable. That is why I am especially excited about the rumored new 12" (assuming it is Broadwell).
Isn't the mini basically a laptop without a screen?
So why not an iMac without a screen?
Because if you can’t comprehend after 18 years of Apple explicitly refusing to make the product you want that they will never make the product you want, you don’t deserve yet another explanation for why no one cares anymore.
Isn't the mini basically a laptop without a screen?
So why not an iMac without a screen?
What is your point? The bottom imac ships with integrated graphics and a slower cpu than the quad minis. Calling it a notebook is pointless. You should be able to outline your desires in terms of performance/features/price. Otherwise you're merely arguing semantics.
Isn't the mini basically a laptop without a screen?
So why not an iMac without a screen?
The Mac mini is your iMac without a screen. Remember that Apple used mostly notebook-grade components for most of the iMac's existence. If you want anything more powerful that is headless queue up for a Mac Pro. I doubt Apple is gong to build a 3rd low-volume, headless desktop PC.
I highly disagree. Compatabikity with all previous x86 software is a huge feature.
For you it is. At work it is important to me also. However at home I don't care. I fact I can think of nothing at the moment that would keep me on Intel. As long as the platform is open and I can run brew as a package manager I'm all set.
I can currently run ANY OSX or Windows program on my MBA. If that changes, I'm moving back to Windows (no choice there). I'd love to stay with OSX but if the MBA goes ARM, I'm gone
Then the platform isn't for you. The fact is through smart phones and iPads people have discovered that they don't need i86 compatibility.
From your perspective, Intel made a mistake, 'wasting those transistors' on backwards compatibility. Those transistors will keep me buying their product for many years to come (unless ARM can emulate x86 code faster, in real time, than an Intel chip can run in).
It puts Intel In a tough position when it comes to power management and design flexibility. Much of that old functionality could be emulated these days. Just consider all the addressing modes Intel has to support.
I use some software that is over 10 years old. It will never get recompiled.
Believe me I understand this completely as I'm in a similar position at work. However you are mistaken to believe that Intel, along with MS can keep thing compatible forever. I've experienced more that a couple of cases where hardware or operating systems upgrades have madesoftware obsolete. That is the software becomes non functional due to upgrades. The reality is you are on borrowed time with this old software. In some cases we have had to replace entire systems because the manufacture refuses to upgrade software, doesn't exist anymore or specific hardware can no longer be purchased.
So don't misunderstand me I understand your issues completely but sometimes you need to bite the bullet. Further not every system Apple makes needs to be built for you and your needs. As it is I see Apple keeping Air and introducing an alternative platform loosely derived from iOS systems.
Because if you can’t comprehend after 18 years of Apple explicitly refusing to make the product you want that they will never make the product you want, you don’t deserve yet another explanation for why no one cares anymore.
The problem is the desktop market is in a wreck as it is. As such Apple has two choices really, drop the Mini or try to revamp in a way that spurs sales.
As to caring I'm pretty sure Apple cares about all product sales even if they don't publicly pay attention to those sales. One way Apple can address sales is to merge some of the Minis functionality with an AppleTV like device. However to dismiss the idea of a more general overhaul of the Mini is unfortunate as the new chips release schedules enable all sorts of possibilities for an entirely different Mac platform to replace the Mini.
In my case, it is either a refreshed mini or a Windows 8 machine. Poor eyesight. I have no choice. I want OS X and its speech ability. Foolish to purchase an iMac and an extra monitor.
For you it is. At work it is important to me also. However at home I don't care. I fact I can think of nothing at the moment that would keep me on Intel. As long as the platform is open and I can run brew as a package manager I'm all set.
Lol...like your need for brew is more mainstream than the need for x86 apps.
Lol...like your need for brew is more mainstream than the need for x86 apps.
For some it might be. I like the ability to install apps like InkScape through home brew instead of using the packages at the InkScape homepage. Granted there aren't a lot of user apps on the HomeBrew site and even fewer GUI based ones but I find HomeBrew to be the most convient to way to keep my machine up to date.
This also highlights why I said the system needs to be open. These days it is easy for people to install alternative software on the Mac. In fact Apple encourages it via XCode and the very high compatibility CLang has with GCC. Without the current ease of installing and running software that we see on current Mac systems an ARM based laptop would be of little value to me. Further I would want to be able to run my own scripts and programs.
In any event I wanted to point out that I86 compatibility isn't the big draw for the consumer market it use to be. It really is a different world. In the commercial world sometimes stupidity still has its day. I still maintain systems supported with DOS based apps. It isn't something I like but I'm not the manager making the decisions in this facility. At home where I do make the decisions it really doesn't matter if a laptop has an ARM based processor or not. Ideally I will get better performance than is seen in my old MBP but that is almost a given these days.
For you it is. At work it is important to me also. However at home I don't care. I fact I can think of nothing at the moment that would keep me on Intel. As long as the platform is open and I can run brew as a package manager I'm all set.
I just really really like the nerd factor behind this part of the post.
I REALLY want to see a new mini soon, if Apple doesn't come out with a new XServe. I've got some older servers that need to be replaced, the new Mac "Pro" is completely inappropriate (I don't need dual video cards in a server, I need redundant boot storage, and I don't like that being external. And a server shaped like a trash can is just stupid.) An iMac is a great workstation, and I'd love to see lower cost iMacs, spreadsheet jockeys, lawyers, legal secretaries, and medical assistants don't need a lot of power these days. I really couldn't care less about a retina screen, and thin does diddly for me once you get as thin as the first flat panel iMacs. But I need new servers, boxes I can stack up in racks in the equipment closet. Low power consumption is GREAT for servers, it cuts cooling costs. I'd prefer easier to replace hard drives, hot swappable would be even better.
It's getting to the point where I'm going to have to start building Hackintoshes just for the server room, and I really don't want to have to do that. But Apple doesn't seem to want to give me a choice.
I really hate to say this but I see zero chance that XServe will come back. I'm not even sure the coming Mini or its replacement will be suitable for server duty.
I REALLY want to see a new mini soon, if Apple doesn't come out with a new XServe. I've got some older servers that need to be replaced, the new Mac "Pro" is completely inappropriate (I don't need dual video cards in a server, I need redundant boot storage, and I don't like that being external. And a server shaped like a trash can is just stupid.)
I can't imagine the current Mac Pro passing for a server. However I can see a model being slightly revised to make a fairly decent server. You do that by deleting a video card and using that space for an SSD card or even several SSD cards. With an external RAIDed controller it ought to be very functional and low cost.
An iMac is a great workstation, and I'd love to see lower cost iMacs, spreadsheet jockeys, lawyers, legal secretaries, and medical assistants don't need a lot of power these days. I really couldn't care less about a retina screen, and thin does diddly for me once you get as thin as the first flat panel iMacs. But I need new servers, boxes I can stack up in racks in the equipment closet. Low power consumption is GREAT for servers, it cuts cooling costs. I'd prefer easier to replace hard drives, hot swappable would be even better.
I don't see that happening as an Apple product.
It's getting to the point where I'm going to have to start building Hackintoshes just for the server room, and I really don't want to have to do that. But Apple doesn't seem to want to give me a choice.
Where you can move to BSD or Linux. Write Tim Cook about the need for a more versatile server like product. For the most part I think you are out of luck running Mac OS server into the future. Is see the Mini as a server as a bit oF a joke
I wonder what's next for the iMac. It can't get much thinner. It can't get much bigger. They can throw a SSD drive in them to make them a little thinner, but then what?
I wonder what's next for the iMac. It can't get much thinner. It can't get much bigger. They can throw a SSD drive in them to make them a little thinner, but then what?
Comments
I highly disagree. Compatabikity with all previous x86 software is a huge feature. I can currently run ANY OSX or Windows program on my MBA. If that changes, I'm moving back to Windows (no choice there). I'd love to stay with OSX but if the MBA goes ARM, I'm gone
From your perspective, Intel made a mistake, 'wasting those transistors' on backwards compatibility. Those transistors will keep me buying their product for many years to come (unless ARM can emulate x86 code faster, in real time, than an Intel chip can run in).
I use some software that is over 10 years old. It will never get recompiled.
So your only options are an Intel-based MacBook Air or a WinPC? You wouldn't consider an Intel-based MBP?
Actually, you somehow quoted me yet attributed it to the other person.
I would if I wanted the 13" MBA model. I use the 11" MBA instead because it is so much more portable. That is why I am especially excited about the rumored new 12" (assuming it is Broadwell).
Get over it.
Why?
Isn't the mini basically a laptop without a screen?
So why not an iMac without a screen?
Isn't the mini basically a laptop without a screen?
So why not an iMac without a screen?
Because if you can’t comprehend after 18 years of Apple explicitly refusing to make the product you want that they will never make the product you want, you don’t deserve yet another explanation for why no one cares anymore.
Why?
Isn't the mini basically a laptop without a screen?
So why not an iMac without a screen?
What is your point? The bottom imac ships with integrated graphics and a slower cpu than the quad minis. Calling it a notebook is pointless. You should be able to outline your desires in terms of performance/features/price. Otherwise you're merely arguing semantics.
The Mac mini is your iMac without a screen. Remember that Apple used mostly notebook-grade components for most of the iMac's existence. If you want anything more powerful that is headless queue up for a Mac Pro. I doubt Apple is gong to build a 3rd low-volume, headless desktop PC.
iMac uses desktop chips now while the Mini still uses laptop ones.
Unless you mean ‘your’ as in actually his, in which case yes.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Believe me I understand this completely as I'm in a similar position at work. However you are mistaken to believe that Intel, along with MS can keep thing compatible forever. I've experienced more that a couple of cases where hardware or operating systems upgrades have madesoftware obsolete. That is the software becomes non functional due to upgrades. The reality is you are on borrowed time with this old software. In some cases we have had to replace entire systems because the manufacture refuses to upgrade software, doesn't exist anymore or specific hardware can no longer be purchased.
So don't misunderstand me I understand your issues completely but sometimes you need to bite the bullet. Further not every system Apple makes needs to be built for you and your needs. As it is I see Apple keeping Air and introducing an alternative platform loosely derived from iOS systems.
The problem is the desktop market is in a wreck as it is. As such Apple has two choices really, drop the Mini or try to revamp in a way that spurs sales.
As to caring I'm pretty sure Apple cares about all product sales even if they don't publicly pay attention to those sales. One way Apple can address sales is to merge some of the Minis functionality with an AppleTV like device. However to dismiss the idea of a more general overhaul of the Mini is unfortunate as the new chips release schedules enable all sorts of possibilities for an entirely different Mac platform to replace the Mini.
In my case, it is either a refreshed mini or a Windows 8 machine. Poor eyesight. I have no choice. I want OS X and its speech ability. Foolish to purchase an iMac and an extra monitor.
For you it is. At work it is important to me also. However at home I don't care. I fact I can think of nothing at the moment that would keep me on Intel. As long as the platform is open and I can run brew as a package manager I'm all set.
Lol...like your need for brew is more mainstream than the need for x86 apps.
For some it might be. I like the ability to install apps like InkScape through home brew instead of using the packages at the InkScape homepage. Granted there aren't a lot of user apps on the HomeBrew site and even fewer GUI based ones but I find HomeBrew to be the most convient to way to keep my machine up to date.
This also highlights why I said the system needs to be open. These days it is easy for people to install alternative software on the Mac. In fact Apple encourages it via XCode and the very high compatibility CLang has with GCC. Without the current ease of installing and running software that we see on current Mac systems an ARM based laptop would be of little value to me. Further I would want to be able to run my own scripts and programs.
In any event I wanted to point out that I86 compatibility isn't the big draw for the consumer market it use to be. It really is a different world. In the commercial world sometimes stupidity still has its day. I still maintain systems supported with DOS based apps. It isn't something I like but I'm not the manager making the decisions in this facility. At home where I do make the decisions it really doesn't matter if a laptop has an ARM based processor or not. Ideally I will get better performance than is seen in my old MBP but that is almost a given these days.
For you it is. At work it is important to me also. However at home I don't care. I fact I can think of nothing at the moment that would keep me on Intel. As long as the platform is open and I can run brew as a package manager I'm all set.
I just really really like the nerd factor behind this part of the post.
I REALLY want to see a new mini soon, if Apple doesn't come out with a new XServe. I've got some older servers that need to be replaced, the new Mac "Pro" is completely inappropriate (I don't need dual video cards in a server, I need redundant boot storage, and I don't like that being external. And a server shaped like a trash can is just stupid.) An iMac is a great workstation, and I'd love to see lower cost iMacs, spreadsheet jockeys, lawyers, legal secretaries, and medical assistants don't need a lot of power these days. I really couldn't care less about a retina screen, and thin does diddly for me once you get as thin as the first flat panel iMacs. But I need new servers, boxes I can stack up in racks in the equipment closet. Low power consumption is GREAT for servers, it cuts cooling costs. I'd prefer easier to replace hard drives, hot swappable would be even better.
It's getting to the point where I'm going to have to start building Hackintoshes just for the server room, and I really don't want to have to do that. But Apple doesn't seem to want to give me a choice.
I can't imagine the current Mac Pro passing for a server. However I can see a model being slightly revised to make a fairly decent server. You do that by deleting a video card and using that space for an SSD card or even several SSD cards. With an external RAIDed controller it ought to be very functional and low cost. I don't see that happening as an Apple product.
Where you can move to BSD or Linux. Write Tim Cook about the need for a more versatile server like product. For the most part I think you are out of luck running Mac OS server into the future. Is see the Mini as a server as a bit oF a joke
Multitouch.
I gotta wonder who is paying whom for all this exposure.