a) this is an ENTRY-LEVEL computer. its not even consumer-level, by apple's standards. apple's consumer level-computer is the imac. deal with it. the mini is meant to be a little computer for easy solutions, not hardcore gaming or whatever. yes, it'd be nice if it had better than a piece of crap for a video card, but for the people buying an ENTRY-LEVEL computer, i think they can handle it.
b) this was originally intended to be a second machine or a switcher for people who wanted a little bit more for cheap. again, if you really are upset about it, this isn't the computer for you.
Your comments make no sense to me. If this is BELOW "consumer-level", then what the heck is 802.11g and Bluetooth doing standard on most of them?
Apple made standard the things that I could have done for myself and left out the upgrades that only they can change. The bottom line is that this isn't an upgrade in any sense of the word, just a reconfiguration with a mild price drop. And let's not forget that it's not all that usefull to say that the biggest price drop was for setups that had all of the options. Until yesterday, an iMac was no more money (and maybe less) than a decked-out Mini plus a good DVI monitor.
I actually think the upgrade was good, I got a mini last month and it would have been nice to get bluetooth, airport, 512mb and superdrive for the same price.
This is true for Apple's American customers, not for the rest of the world, unfortunately here in the UK the price increased, so we're paying for the extra memory.
Probably has to do with the US Dollar getting stronger since the previous version was launched?
Your comments make no sense to me. If this is BELOW "consumer-level", then what the heck is 802.11g and Bluetooth doing standard on most of them?
They're in there because they're buzzwords and one of the few things apple could do to the mini without (a) dropping its price (heaven forbid!), or (b) spending money to redesign or re-engineer it.
i wouldnt buy that cinema display yet, i think apple will go with new styling for all of the new intel macs
stu
Well I'm ordering anyway, as soon as Apple sort out the glitches with trying to buy a Mac mini with a wireless keyboard. The 20" is great, looks lovely, and has a good spec, and since I need one now, I don't care if they update it in 6 months time. Even if the do update, who cares? It is only a monitor, so the specs aren't going to improve dramatically (if at all), and I like the styling as it is.
Um, excuse me but the iBook actually got upgraded today with a Core Image compatible GPU, a faster Superdrive and a 100GB hard drive option. The Mac mini got none of these things. The hardware shift to Intel didn't stop them from upgrading the iBook. That's my whole point.
yes, excuse you! might want to re-assess your whole point pal. the GPU in the "new" ibook is absolutely not core image compatible. take a look at the thread about it right here on AI:
NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! its heated over in the new iBook thread, folks are/were adamant that it is not supported. well, i'm an ass, thanks for clearing that up.
i was specifically waiting for a fully Core Image compliant GPU. i didn't want to buy a high end Mac just so i could check out what programming for Core Image was like.
I can program for Core Image (and run it) on my old 600 MHz G3 iBook with 8M VRAM. Core Image runs on ANY computer but chooses at run time what hardware units to execute on; it really is a nice abstraction. The requirement for Core Image is not hardware. It depends on whether you are running Tiger or not. So you can check out what programming for Core Image is like on any Mac running Tiger.
In fact, you could probably program for Core Image on an old Apple ][ if you really want (or paper and pencil). You just couldn't compile it and test it...
Those that need a modem aren't going to add one when they grab it off the shelf at the apple store, which is where most of these things sell anyway.
I don't think the problem with the modem is that it's no longer standard...although you did bring up an interesting point, but rather that we're charged $29 for it when it actually costs Apple a lot less. Remember the FW-cable issues with the iPod. By not including those cables, Apple saved $1 on each iPod, but the consumer had to pay $20 if they wanted it.
yes, excuse you! might want to re-assess your whole point pal. the GPU in the "new" ibook is absolutely not core image compatible. take a look at the thread about it right here on AI:
or mosey on over to apple's website before you go spouting off more misinformation.
As should you. The point is that the iBook got a much more significant upgrade than the Mac mini so your theory that the Mac mini got the shaft due to the move to Intel is flawed. The iBook is moving to Intel too but that didn't stop them from giving it a better GPU, faster Superdrive and 100GB hard drive option. A motion sensor and scrolling trackpad too but those features are limited to portables. If the 9550 is not core image compatible then it's not as good an upgrade than originally thought but still far better than what they did with the Mac mini.
It's just absurd to not include one after the introduction of Tiger. As time goes by more and more tasks will be offloaded to the GPU freeing up the CPU for other things. It's a one-two punch. This is not just about special effects. A core image GPU will be faster outright and the CPU will be faster since it will not have as many tasks to perform. By the time 10.5 is released you will really feel the difference. These are not expensive state of the art GPU chips either.
Comments
Originally posted by exhibit_13
ok, here's what i think.
a) this is an ENTRY-LEVEL computer. its not even consumer-level, by apple's standards. apple's consumer level-computer is the imac. deal with it. the mini is meant to be a little computer for easy solutions, not hardcore gaming or whatever. yes, it'd be nice if it had better than a piece of crap for a video card, but for the people buying an ENTRY-LEVEL computer, i think they can handle it.
b) this was originally intended to be a second machine or a switcher for people who wanted a little bit more for cheap. again, if you really are upset about it, this isn't the computer for you.
Your comments make no sense to me. If this is BELOW "consumer-level", then what the heck is 802.11g and Bluetooth doing standard on most of them?
Apple made standard the things that I could have done for myself and left out the upgrades that only they can change. The bottom line is that this isn't an upgrade in any sense of the word, just a reconfiguration with a mild price drop. And let's not forget that it's not all that usefull to say that the biggest price drop was for setups that had all of the options. Until yesterday, an iMac was no more money (and maybe less) than a decked-out Mini plus a good DVI monitor.
Originally posted by xflare
This is true for Apple's American customers, not for the rest of the world, unfortunately here in the UK the price increased, so we're paying for the extra memory.
Probably has to do with the US Dollar getting stronger since the previous version was launched?
Originally posted by Hudson1
Your comments make no sense to me. If this is BELOW "consumer-level", then what the heck is 802.11g and Bluetooth doing standard on most of them?
They're in there because they're buzzwords and one of the few things apple could do to the mini without (a) dropping its price (heaven forbid!), or (b) spending money to redesign or re-engineer it.
Probably has to do with the US Dollar getting stronger since the previous version was launched?
Well yes but... if they had kept the old price, they pre vat price (£288 ) was $501, but apple obviously wanted more money from us.
Combo drive -> Super drive = $100 (cost to Apple probably $5)
512Mb -> 1GB = $175 (cost to Apple probably $20)
Almost seems the don't want people to get these upgrades, if the upgrade prices were somewhat reasonable I'm sure more people would actually buy them.
As for myself, I bought a 1GB chip for like $75 and
installed it in 5 minutes and I still had the 256MB chip I could use for something else.
Originally posted by stustanley
i wouldnt buy that cinema display yet, i think apple will go with new styling for all of the new intel macs
stu
Well I'm ordering anyway, as soon as Apple sort out the glitches with trying to buy a Mac mini with a wireless keyboard. The 20" is great, looks lovely, and has a good spec, and since I need one now, I don't care if they update it in 6 months time. Even if the do update, who cares? It is only a monitor, so the specs aren't going to improve dramatically (if at all), and I like the styling as it is.
stu
Originally posted by markoh
...
Combo drive -> Super drive = $100 (cost to Apple probably $5)
...
So true, $100 more for a superdrive is to much!
Originally posted by 1984
Um, excuse me but the iBook actually got upgraded today with a Core Image compatible GPU, a faster Superdrive and a 100GB hard drive option. The Mac mini got none of these things. The hardware shift to Intel didn't stop them from upgrading the iBook. That's my whole point.
yes, excuse you! might want to re-assess your whole point pal. the GPU in the "new" ibook is absolutely not core image compatible. take a look at the thread about it right here on AI:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=56380
or mosey on over to apple's website before you go spouting off more misinformation.
Originally posted by Trans9B
yes, excuse you! might want to re-assess your whole point pal. the GPU in the "new" ibook is absolutely not core image compatible.
You missed perhaps this one.
Originally posted by PB
You missed perhaps this one.
NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! its heated over in the new iBook thread, folks are/were adamant that it is not supported. well, i'm an ass, thanks for clearing that up.
Originally posted by capiendo
i was specifically waiting for a fully Core Image compliant GPU. i didn't want to buy a high end Mac just so i could check out what programming for Core Image was like.
I can program for Core Image (and run it) on my old 600 MHz G3 iBook with 8M VRAM. Core Image runs on ANY computer but chooses at run time what hardware units to execute on; it really is a nice abstraction. The requirement for Core Image is not hardware. It depends on whether you are running Tiger or not. So you can check out what programming for Core Image is like on any Mac running Tiger.
In fact, you could probably program for Core Image on an old Apple ][ if you really want (or paper and pencil). You just couldn't compile it and test it...
Originally posted by Jay Contonio
Those that need a modem aren't going to add one when they grab it off the shelf at the apple store, which is where most of these things sell anyway.
I don't think the problem with the modem is that it's no longer standard...although you did bring up an interesting point, but rather that we're charged $29 for it when it actually costs Apple a lot less. Remember the FW-cable issues with the iPod. By not including those cables, Apple saved $1 on each iPod, but the consumer had to pay $20 if they wanted it.
Originally posted by Trans9B
yes, excuse you! might want to re-assess your whole point pal. the GPU in the "new" ibook is absolutely not core image compatible. take a look at the thread about it right here on AI:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...threadid=56380
or mosey on over to apple's website before you go spouting off more misinformation.
As should you. The point is that the iBook got a much more significant upgrade than the Mac mini so your theory that the Mac mini got the shaft due to the move to Intel is flawed. The iBook is moving to Intel too but that didn't stop them from giving it a better GPU, faster Superdrive and 100GB hard drive option. A motion sensor and scrolling trackpad too but those features are limited to portables. If the 9550 is not core image compatible then it's not as good an upgrade than originally thought but still far better than what they did with the Mac mini.
It's just absurd to not include one after the introduction of Tiger. As time goes by more and more tasks will be offloaded to the GPU freeing up the CPU for other things. It's a one-two punch. This is not just about special effects. A core image GPU will be faster outright and the CPU will be faster since it will not have as many tasks to perform. By the time 10.5 is released you will really feel the difference. These are not expensive state of the art GPU chips either.
http://www.tnt.com/webtracker/tracki...cons=320996720
Ordered it wednesday. In my hands in about an hour. Like two weeks before expected
Now for the holy hours of geekdom: The unpacking and setup of an Apple computer
Originally posted by Anders
Yay its here.
Now for the holy hours of geekdom: The unpacking and setup of an Apple computer
Congratulations. Well, will you post here your impressions or better start a new thread for that?
Originally posted by PB
Congratulations. Well, will you post here your impressions or better start a new thread for that?
New thread shortly.