Apple unveils Mac mini Core Duo

1356740

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 781
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Not sure what to make of this. The question I have is, why use intergrated graphics with such a powerful processor? If Apple was committed to controlling costs and using intel's integrated graphics, then why not use a cheaper CPU also? At least with the core duo, a dedicated graphics card seems logical. Curious to see what others think of this.
  • Reply 42 of 781
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,358member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by aegisdesign

    Actually, the old model later on had 5400rpm drives too.



    Not "Officially" Apple did a silent upgrade but no one was guaranteed a 54k drive. Now the base spec is 54k SATA. That's nice, plus I figure it'll be trivial to replace with a Perpendicular 160GB+ drive in a couple of years.



    Quote:

    at least it didn't take system RAM!!



    They gave you another RAM slot. You guys act like the crappy graphics of the last generation Mac mini were special.



    Quote:

    have a PC for playing serious FPS games, but they could at least put a GPU that can handle the occasional game, or HD video without choking!



    Playing HD is a CPU bound task not a graphics card task. Only the ATI 1XXX series with the latest catalyst drivers supports h.264 acceleration.



    again for those that seem to thrive on misinformation



    HD playback is CPU bound and not graphics card bound!!



    Geez guys vent all you want but don't make stuff up.
  • Reply 43 of 781
    Well, I was really hoping for a "Gutless Mini" that pretty much only runs Frontrow and streams media from your computer to your TV. Maybe April 1, I guess.



    But this new Mini, sure, it can hook up to your TV, but who's going to plop down $800 for it? If it's on your desk, you can't embrace the media center aspect of it. If it's in your entertainment center, all the computer aspects are a waste. I guess I just don't get it.
  • Reply 44 of 781
    19841984 Posts: 955member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    May as well save you the trouble. The next "ibook" will indeed have integrated graphics. That is the "standard" for PC notebooks at the sub $1499 pricepoint.



    It's obvious to anyone with a brain. A fast majority of your computing task are limited by processing cycles and not graphics capability. Sorry to state the obvious but I hate when good Mac people jettison common sense logic.




    Integrated graphics take power away from the CPU and memory away from the system. It slows things down considerably. This according to Apple by the way though I've had experience with integrated graphics. I had my Mac mini configured and was ready to order when I realized they hadn't mentioned graphics. I checked the specs and what an awful feeling to see that. So close.



    Apple doesn't realize there are two very different markets for the Mac mini. They came up with something in the middle that doesn't appeal to a lot of people on both sides. Too expensive for the entry level and crippled graphics for the high-end.



    So now I will wait for the MacBook (iBook) but I suspect the specs will be the same. At least with a 13" 1280x720 resolution the integrated graphics won;t be quite as bad. I wouldn't buy an iBook for the same reasons though.
  • Reply 45 of 781
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sharp_spot

    Done. Elgato EyeTV 200/500 turns your Mac into a DVR, and use Equinux MediaCentral (freeware) instead of Front Row.



    The downside: $5-600 for a Mac mini + $3-350 for the EyeTV.



    The upside: no monthly fee (a la Tivo), also puts Mac OS X in your living room.




    Sweet! Thanks. Anyone interested:



    http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetv200



    $350 is nasty, though.
  • Reply 46 of 781
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Not "Officially" Apple did a silent upgrade but no one was guaranteed a 54k drive. Now the base spec is 54k SATA. That's nice, plus I figure it'll be trivial to replace with a Perpendicular 160GB+ drive in a couple of years.







    They gave you another RAM slot. You guys act like the crappy graphics of the last generation Mac mini were special.







    Playing HD is a CPU bound task not a graphics card task. Only the ATI 1XXX series with the latest catalyst drivers supports h.264 acceleration.



    again for those that seem to thrive on misinformation



    HD playback is CPU bound and not graphics card bound!!



    Geez guys vent all you want but don't make stuff up.




    Correct and if the CPU is throttled the system comes to a complete crawl. Unless you think I want to buy this system to just dedicate watching HD movies then I can see why you think its just peachy. If I want to watch HD movies I'll just buy a cheap DVD player.
  • Reply 47 of 781
    bitemymacbitemymac Posts: 1,147member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by rminkler

    I don't understand all the whining about the integrated graphics. This is not a high powered machine - the intigrated graphics will be more than enough for core graphics functionality (something that can't be said for the 9200 in the G4 Mac Mini).



    Somebody mentioned that with the intigrated graphics the Mini won't be able to playback HD video, and that's rediculous. The first Mac to use the video card to decode HD video streams (out of the box, there may have been PCI cards that did this) is the iMac core duo - all those G5s have been doing it strictly on the CPU, and guess what - the Core Duo can handle this no problem.



    It's not a gaming machine, but for 99% of users it will be fine. Does your email download slower via intigrated graphics? Does office bog down? Maybe this isn't the mac for the mac enthusiast, but wake up people - it's a fine machine.



    [edited for spelling]




    We're not asking for top of the line GPU, just something more current on the market. Isn't core-duo supposedly state of the art for apple marketing dept.?... then why match up with third world class GPU?...



    BTW, you're right about HD, but most CPU's don't stress over MPEG2, however, MPEG4 is the more processor demanding format and this integrated GPU doesn't support that. Smooth MPEG4 playback may or may not be possible at 1080p depending on how much core duo can handle by itself.... who knows....
  • Reply 48 of 781
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,358member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by age234

    Well, I was really hoping for a "Gutless Mini" that pretty much only runs Frontrow and streams media from your computer to your TV. Maybe April 1, I guess.



    But this new Mini, sure, it can hook up to your TV, but who's going to plop down $800 for it? If it's on your desk, you can't embrace the media center aspect of it. If it's in your entertainment center, all the computer aspects are a waste. I guess I just don't get it.






    I went into the CompUSA in Tacoma Washington a couple of weekends ago. They had a Mac mini hooked up to a sharp widescreen TV. It looked great. You switched inputs depending on if you wanted to watch TV or do some computing. Thus the beginning of convergence was there with no delineation between TV monitor and computer monitor.



    Front Row makes this even more powerful because I do the same thing on a larger scale. Hook up to a 65" screen for some living room surfing. Who says you have to have a desktop for your computer and a entertainment center for your TV? The two are converging and thus you must look from a different perspective.
  • Reply 49 of 781
    meh...

    i'll wait for the mac book.

    if i'm going to spend $800+ for a mac i'll get a portable at least.

    my mac mini doing pretty damn well for me. i'll pass.
  • Reply 50 of 781
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,358member
    Quote:

    We're not asking for top of the line GPU, just something more current on the market. Isn't core-duo supposedly state of the art for apple marketing dept.?... then why match up with third world class GPU?...



    Price. Dedicated Graphics cost more money.



    Quote:

    BTW, you're right about HD, but most CPU's don't stress over MPEG2, however, MPEG4 is the more processor demanding format and this integrated GPU doesn't support that.



    Graphics have nothing to do with whether a codec plays back smoothly or not. Final Cut Pro plays back uncompressed video if you have the CPU grunt. Trying to link GPU technology with HD playback is patently false and any video person can see through this.



    faster graphics are always desired but outside of the gaming real most task are CPU intensive rather than GPU.
  • Reply 51 of 781
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison







    Playing HD is a CPU bound task not a graphics card task. Only the ATI 1XXX series with the latest catalyst drivers supports h.264 acceleration.



    again for those that seem to thrive on misinformation



    HD playback is CPU bound and not graphics card bound!!



    Geez guys vent all you want but don't make stuff up.






    And that is exactly the problem, especially since apple is pushing h264 for ichat, etc. A x1300 could have been a 100 dollar option.
  • Reply 52 of 781
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by aegisdesign

    They do however leave themselves room to slot in a Celeron M 4xx model at about $100 less when Intel start shipping that chip. And don't say they won't do it. People were saying yesterday "No Integrated Graphics".



    That's right, Apple could release (next apr/may) new versions:

    $499 Mac mini 1.73GHz M430, GMA950, 60GB, Combo, AEP+BT2

    $599 Mac mini 1.73GHz M430, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2

    $699 Mac mini 1.67 Core Duo, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2

    ... back the old price points!



    The MacBooks will then also look good this way:

    $899 12" WS MacBook 1.73GHz M430, GMA950, 60GB, Combo, AEP+BT2

    $1099 12" WS MacBook 1.67 Core Duo, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2

    $1299 14" WS MacBook 1.67 Core Duo, GMA950, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2



    and the

    $1599 13" WS MacBook Pro 1.83 Core Duo, X1600 GPU, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2, alu enclosure
  • Reply 53 of 781
    19841984 Posts: 955member
    MPEG2 at 720x480 is one thing. MPEG2 at 1920x1080 is another. I imagine a 1.66 GHz Core Duo could handle this. MPEG4 is far more processor intensive than MPEG2 and would require an ATI x1300 GPU. This could have been a $100 option.



    I just wish Apple had offered true low-end and high-end models of the new Mac mini. They missed their mark on both counts.
  • Reply 54 of 781
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by sharp_spot

    Done. Elgato EyeTV 200/500 turns your Mac into a DVR, and use Equinux MediaCentral (freeware) instead of Front Row.



    The downside: $5-600 for a Mac mini + $3-350 for the EyeTV.



    The upside: no monthly fee (a la Tivo), also puts Mac OS X in your living room.




    Well, great point, except you can get a Tivo with a lifetime subscription for like $350-$400, so you're spending all that extra money for its OS X in the living room, and that's nothing to crow about (sorry, but Tivo's interface is soooo much better than OS X or front row or the rest. Easy to use and deal with). Seems more sensible to get the tivo to me (plus, its designed to do the TV thing, as opposed to the mac).



    And you missed an upside. You can copy your videos onto other storage devices for backup/archival.



    On the downside, you can upgrade a tivo two two hard disks and really increase that storage. Can't add anything to a mini (and changing the hard drive is probably still a pain).
  • Reply 55 of 781
    Quote:

    Originally posted by age234

    Well, I was really hoping for a "Gutless Mini" that pretty much only runs Frontrow and streams media from your computer to your TV. Maybe April 1, I guess.



    But this new Mini, sure, it can hook up to your TV, but who's going to plop down $800 for it? If it's on your desk, you can't embrace the media center aspect of it. If it's in your entertainment center, all the computer aspects are a waste. I guess I just don't get it.




    You get it alright and Apple taking the middle row isn't ready to announce its complete intentions with this form factor system.



    For me it's looking more and more the iMac or the upcoming MacPower Pro (whatever it will be call) will be what I'm going to look at.



    This whole Media Center concept is still not there and I'm just not interested in sitting in front of my coffee table, at an uncomfortable ergonomic position to type with my television my display; and not to mention my television doesn't have the resolution of my workstation monitor. I don't sit around watching movies on my computer either.
  • Reply 56 of 781
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Louzer

    Well, great point, except you can get a Tivo with a lifetime subscription for like $350-$400, so you're spending all that extra money for its OS X in the living room, and that's nothing to crow about (sorry, but Tivo's interface is soooo much better than OS X or front row or the rest. Easy to use and deal with). Seems more sensible to get the tivo to me (plus, its designed to do the TV thing, as opposed to the mac).



    And you missed an upside. You can copy your videos onto other storage devices for backup/archival.



    On the downside, you can upgrade a tivo two two hard disks and really increase that storage. Can't add anything to a mini (and changing the hard drive is probably still a pain).




    External HDDs via third party are available for the Mac Mini.
  • Reply 57 of 781
    bitemymacbitemymac Posts: 1,147member
    Well... $799 CoreDuo Mac mini makes vaporware PS3 look might good. I'll wait for the vaporware than buy something that just doesn't support my spending habits.
  • Reply 58 of 781
    Looks like the new Shuttle Mac mini competitor might suddenly be more attractive as well http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/...226223550.html

    its bigger sure, but not by a lot, ATIX1400 graphics, 3.5 inch HD MCE support, seems a better option (depending on price)
  • Reply 59 of 781
    Quote:

    Originally posted by 1984

    MPEG2 at 720x480 is one thing. MPEG2 at 1920x1080 is another. I imagine a 1.66 GHz Core Duo could handle this. MPEG4 is far more processor intensive than MPEG2 and would require an ATI x1300 GPU. This could have been a $100 option.



    I just wish Apple had offered true low-end and high-end models of the new Mac mini. They missed their mark on both counts.




    I like this guy.
  • Reply 60 of 781
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mdriftmeyer

    External HDDs via third party are available for the Mac Mini.



    Yeah, and with the GigE networking in the new mini it makes quite a nice little quiet network server too. Pity they've not got FW800 on there but for a home/small office server it's looking pretty good still.
Sign In or Register to comment.