Apple readying significant Mac mini update

2456789

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 174
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by 1984

    According to System Profiler and Apple's own website, the 9200 does not support Core Image. Also, the 9550 is dirt cheap and does not run too hot to be used in the Mac mini. It's used in the iBook which has even tighter space constraints. As usual, they are just crippling the specs so as not to take away sales from their other more expensive offerings.



    While these cards don't "support" CI, they are still CI "compatible".



    CI is a high-level hardware abstraction API set that will simply make the best use of available hardware. If you have altivec, it will make use of altivec. If you have such and such... it will use of such and such.



    The mini is CI "compatible" just as the mini is photoshop compatible.



    What you really mean to be talking about is whether the Mini has a GPU capable of lending additional processing power to CI API calls.
  • Reply 22 of 174
    gugygugy Posts: 794member
    Another Tuesday pass by without anything.
  • Reply 23 of 174
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dfiler

    While these cards don't "support" CI, they are still CI "compatible".



    CI is a high-level hardware abstraction API set that will simply make the best use of available hardware. If you have altivec, it will make use of altivec. If you have such and such... it will use of such and such.



    The mini is CI "compatible" just as the mini is photoshop compatible.



    What you really mean to be talking about is whether the Mini has a GPU capable of lending additional processing power to CI API calls.




    dfiler is right.



    If you don't believe him, download iMaginator or one of the other CI showcasing apps (I forget their names)...you can use all that CI can offer...you just won't be able to use them in realtime...but it's still fairly fast if you got a fast computer.
  • Reply 24 of 174
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gugy

    Another Tuesday pass by without anything.



    What is the significance of a Tuesday release? Why Tuesday rather than another day?
  • Reply 25 of 174
    gugygugy Posts: 794member
    I hope you are aware that Apple uses Tuesdays to release products and updates.

    At least they have been doing that in the past couple years. But it could be any day of the week.
  • Reply 26 of 174
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dfiler

    While these cards don't "support" CI, they are still CI "compatible".



    CI is a high-level hardware abstraction API set that will simply make the best use of available hardware. If you have altivec, it will make use of altivec. If you have such and such... it will use of such and such.



    The mini is CI "compatible" just as the mini is photoshop compatible.



    What you really mean to be talking about is whether the Mini has a GPU capable of lending additional processing power to CI API calls.




    The Mac mini (and every G4 machine for that matter) is CI compatible in the sense that it will accelerate the corresponding API calls using its Altivec unit. Now guess what, the ripple dashboard effect (which requires a CI compliant GPU) is completely disabled in the Mac mini. Who knows what other CI-based functionality of forthcoming applications will be disabled since the Radeon 9200 is not programmable. It is left to developer to decide if it is worth to use the Altivec unit in the case where there is not CI-capable GPU in the system.



    Apple's implementation of CI/CV/Quartz 2D Extreme creates something like a grey zone. It is absolutely inexcusable if this is what they intend to do with the mini's GPU.
  • Reply 27 of 174
    19841984 Posts: 955member
    Graphics/Displays:



    ATI Radeon 9200:



    Chipset Model: ATY,RV280

    Type: Display

    Bus: AGP

    VRAM (Total): 64 MB

    Vendor: ATI (0x1002)

    Device ID: 0x5962

    Revision ID: 0x0001

    ROM Revision: 113-xxxxx-133

    Displays:

    DELL 2001FP:

    Display Type: CRT

    Resolution: 1600 x 1200 @ 60 Hz

    Depth: 32-bit Color

    Core Image: Not Supported

    Main Display: Yes

    Mirror: Off

    Online: Yes

    Quartz Extreme: Supported

    Rotation: Supported
  • Reply 28 of 174
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Absolutely inexcuseable?



    Because it is a god given right to see the dashboard ripple effect...



    More like, no other company is offering a hardware abstraction layer for such high level effects. Apple should be commended for leaving everyone in the dust in architecting this next-gen imaging API.



    Oh wait, some people think it is "unexcuseable" to take advantage of pro hardware while still selling an entry level machine.

  • Reply 29 of 174
    19841984 Posts: 955member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dfiler



    What you really mean to be talking about is whether the Mini has a GPU capable of lending additional processing power to CI API calls.




    Um, that's what I said. The 9200 GPU does not support it.
  • Reply 30 of 174
    auroraaurora Posts: 1,142member
    Those are nice specs, a Macmini with 64mb video and a 1.5 G4 will make for a very solid all around computer. 5 out of 5 stars. Sweet.
  • Reply 31 of 174
    19841984 Posts: 955member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dfiler

    Absolutely inexcuseable?



    Because it is a god given right to see the dashboard ripple effect...





    If you think that's all there is to it then you are sadly misinformed as to what Core Image and Q2DE can do. Having the GPU do more frees up the CPU to do more... and faster. Consumer Macs can benefit greatly from this as their CPUs need all they help they can get. And yes, when every other Mac supports it then it's ridiculous not to with the Mac mini as well, especially this late in the game.



  • Reply 32 of 174
    19841984 Posts: 955member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kenaustus



    Unfortunately MWSF in January is probably the first opportunity for something new and that is only if Intel delivers, which I think they will.





    We're not going to see Intel PowerMacs until late 2006 when the proper chips are available. While a single core Yonah/Pentium M is okay for a consumer Mac and maybe even a dual-core version for the PowerBook, it will never see the inside of a PowerMac. There has to be at least one more PPC revision to the PowerMac before then.
  • Reply 33 of 174
    Why are people whining? Everybody complained for the longest time that there were no affordable entry level Macs to compete with Dell. Now the affordable entry level machine doesn't have a good enough graphics card? A significant portion of low end wintel systems don't even have dedicated video memory. What do want an affordable Mac, or one with a pimp graphics card?
  • Reply 34 of 174
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dfiler

    Absolutely inexcuseable?



    Because it is a god given right to see the dashboard ripple effect...





    If you paid attention to what I wrote, the ripple effect is just an example to show the idea behind. My concern is to have applications with disabled functionality on the mini just because the 9200 is not programmable. The ripple effect illustrates very clearly that this is a real concern.
  • Reply 35 of 174
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Mr Beardsley

    Why are people whining? Everybody complained for the longest time that there were no affordable entry level Macs to compete with Dell. Now the affordable entry level machine doesn't have a good enough graphics card? A significant portion of low end wintel systems don't even have dedicated video memory. What do want an affordable Mac, or one with a pimp graphics card?



    Exactly. A $500 PC almost invariably has shared memory.



    I'll probably grab the $599 Mac mini model with the larger graphics. It's looking to be the best deal.
  • Reply 36 of 174
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    The mini is an entry level computer with an entry level price and an entry level feature set.



    Yet it is still CI complient.



    Hardware abstraction was paramount in the design of CI. When effects can't be GPU accelerated or handled by the CPU, the program still functions as intended.



    While I wouldn't buy one with the current GPU, I'm not representative of it's target demographic.
  • Reply 37 of 174
    Quote:

    Originally posted by PB

    If you paid attention to what I wrote, the ripple effect is just an example to show the idea behind. My concern is to have applications with disabled functionality on the mini just because the 9200 is not programmable. The ripple effect illustrates very clearly that this is a real concern.



    It's not that the ripple effect doesn't work with your card...it's just that it doesn't work in real time and Apple disabled it for those that can't run in in real time because people like you would be complaining.



    Ripples, color transformations, filters, they all work...just not in real time.
  • Reply 38 of 174
    what a disappointment. No GPU update is just sad. How much more would it cost to place core graphic capable GPU in the macmini.



    It just doesn't make sense to roll out a new mac that is already absolete on the gpu department. It's not about speed, but it's about being able to use built in features in the current OS. I've been waiting for Core Graphic capable Macmini for some time and I just have to wait even longer now.



    I know some of the Core Graphic features aren't fully turned on at the moment, but when Apple claims this feature in Tiger and Tiger is factory installed on the Macmini, then the newly released mini should be capable of this feature. Am I being unreasonable?
  • Reply 39 of 174
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,509member
    My lord, such complications over such a simple story.



    Apple does what they can. You might as well be complaining because they didn't go to the 1.7GHz chip.



    Miniaturizing something always makes its cost higher. As no one here knows Apple's cost, no one can say what Apple should have put into the machine.



    You can say what you wish Apple had put into the machine.



    It's fine to say that the 9550 is "dirt cheap", but you don't know what Apple has to allow for the cost of the GPU. Every penny of the cost of a part in a machine adds twice that to the finished product.



    Also think about what it would require for Apple to replace a GPU. It's not a swap. It requires a mobo redesign because the parts are not pin compatible. Neither are the signals going to them.



    At this late stage in the Mini's development the question is whether it pays for Apple to redesign the computer. I don't think so. Apple would have to have a very good reason to do that.



    Would any potential sales increases from doing so make up for the expense of the redesign and the retooling of the factory lines making the product? Would this cost Apple more than it would earn them? With the Intel designs taking up more of their time and staff, does it pay to remove them from future product development that is Apple's future to redesign a machine that is selling well, but not spectacularly? Would most consumers of this machine care or even know or understand the difference?



    The answer is probably no on most counts.



    This is a nice upgrade with no increase in pricing. Take it for what it is.



    It has nothing to do with PB's either. Don't bother mentioning them here. It's a totally different subject, and Apple is surely doing all they can in that area.
  • Reply 40 of 174
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kim kap sol

    It's not that the ripple effect doesn't work with your card...it's just that it doesn't work in real time and Apple disabled it for those that can't run in in real time because people like you would be complaining.



    Ripples, color transformations, filters, they all work...just not in real time.




    That's exactly my point. Is it so difficult to understand? Any developer may disable some features of his software on a machine like the mini, since the 9200 is not programmable and the said feature may not work "good enough". I never said it will not work at all. I know very well that it can be made to work, just not in real-time, but it is up to the developer to decide if he will leave the feature on or if he will turn it off when a non-programmable GPU is in there. Apple already disabled something. Others may too.
Sign In or Register to comment.