again for those that seem to thrive on misinformation
HD playback is CPU bound and not graphics card bound!!
Decoding may be CPU bound, but then your system is tied up decoding. I guess if you're looking at the mini as a tivo-like device, then it probably doesn't matter. If you want to do other things, something is going to start stuttering.
And as I keep hearing over and over on other subjects, even though decoding is CPU bound, putting that stuff on the screen is then limited by the power and ability of the video card itself. Faster cards would make Front Row and the UI flow better then an integrated solution.
Plus, some would argue that 512MB of memory is a good minimum for OS X, so now you have to go and upgrade your memory when you buy it (sort of like having to buy a USB hub when you buy any mac).
BTW, what's the deal with apple putting 4 USB ports on this machine, and yet there's only 3 ports total on the freakin' high-high-high end macs! That's just stupid to no end.
But anyway you cut it, its just like before, too much style, not enough substance. Would anyone really care if this thing was three inches taller so we could add an extra drive to it, or the like?
On the surface dedicated graphics don't sound too great. But I would not buy a Mac mini expecting a performance machine.
Plus you guys don't know what Apple may have coming down the pipeline. They may have plans for a small tower that will have graphics card slot.
I don't know why anyone is disappointed about a Tivo killer. Apple has never stated it had any desire to enter the DVR market. You have to keep internet rumors seperate from reallity.
Quote:
Well, great point, except you can get a Tivo with a lifetime subscription for like $350-$400
That's for the life of the box not your lifetime. And Tivo boxes don't last forever.
Quote:
Apple doesn't realize there are two very different markets for the Mac mini.
Apple created the Mac mini market. I think they would have some idea of its direction.
The other market you speak of that Apple so stubbornly ignores is the market that wishes they could have a Power Mac for $599.
$1599 13" WS MacBook Pro 1.83 Core Duo, X1600 GPU, 80GB, Superdrive, AEP+BT2, alu enclosure
Who the hell really wants a WS 13.3" display? And with the RAM requirements of OS X continuing to climb who the hell wants the MacBooks to have GMA950?
Are we planning on having a standard 1.5GB of RAM for the lowend so the GMA can suck off 512MB for its needs and then have to share CPU time to deal with shader issues and all else that OpenGL 2 offers?
Leopard 10.5 will be OpenGL 2 enabled.
How much they require OpenGL 2 within Quartz 2D remains to be seen.
Decoding may be CPU bound, but then your system is tied up decoding.
In what situation would you be watching HD and doing something else at the same time?
Quote:
(sort of like having to buy a USB hub when you buy any mac).
I've never used a USB hub. Partly because not every device uses USB, partly because I don't need to use all of my USB devices at the same time.
Quote:
BTW, what's the deal with apple putting 4 USB ports on this machine, and yet there's only 3 ports total on the freakin' high-high-high end macs! That's just stupid to no end.
Yeah, one more USB port on the mini is a tremendous advantage that Apple should have on Power Mac's (sarcasm).
But anyway you cut it, its just like before, too much style, not enough substance. Would anyone really care if this thing was three inches taller so we could add an extra drive to it, or the like?
Yup, Automobile enthusiast would phrase "All Show, No Go"
On the surface dedicated graphics don't sound too great. But I would not buy a Mac mini expecting a performance machine.
Plus you guys don't know what Apple may have coming down the pipeline. They may have plans for a small tower that will have graphics card slot.
I don't know why anyone is disappointed about a Tivo killer. Apple has never stated it had any desire to enter the DVR market. You have to keep internet rumors seperate from reallity.
That's for the life of the box not your lifetime. And Tivo boxes don't last forever.
Apple created the Mac mini market. I think they would have some idea of its direction.
The other market you speak of that Apple so stubbornly ignores is the market that wishes they could have a Power Mac for $599.
Apple created a niche in the mini-ATX market with their designs and it isn't something that wasn't foreseen by many players.
Apple gets kudos for design and always will.
To defend their decision: If they sell 1 Million Mac mini's, per quarter, with a $7 graphics subsystem their profit margins skyrocket.
Hmm, FrontRow was expected. I'm disappointed there's no TiVo killer feature out the box and glad there's no built-in iPod dock.
It'd be neat if Apple built a TiVo killer, but a) they're just too damn politically correct and b) it's not in their best interest when they can get $2 a show from iTMS users.
If some other company develops a device and software that can be plugged into the Mac Mini to record shows then play them back in FrontRow, I might be interested in this. I'm not saying I'd buy it, but I might at least want it...
I think the Mac mini is a Trojan horse Tivo killer. There were no major content announcements today, and I've got to think Apple wants to have a few more studios on board before it goes big with a cable/satellite challenger. This probably makes the most sense to do in September when the new TV season starts and when holiday purchasing starts to kick into gear. Apple can announce new titles and higher quality encoding for TVs.
I was really expecting an iPod video, another major studio and a few movie titles today, but those things are obviously still on the table for Apple. As quckly and close together as Disney, Universal and Viacom came, I thought Apple would have had another major studio announcement by now.
I think Apple was late with the HiFi, which was probably scheduled to be announced at Macworld and then dropped for some reason, but the Mac mini media center is right on target.
I think the Mac mini is a Trojan horse Tivo killer. There were no major content announcements today, and I've got to think Apple wants to have a few more studios on board before it goes big with a cable/satellite challenger. This probably makes the most sense to do in September when the new TV season starts and when holiday purchasing starts to kick into gear. Apple can announce new titles and higher quality encoding for TVs.
I was really expecting an iPod video, another major studio and a few movie titles today, but those things are obviously still on the table for Apple. As quckly and close together as Disney, Universal and Viacom came, I thought Apple would have had another major studio announcement by now.
I think Apple was late with the HiFi, which was probably scheduled to be announced at Macworld and then dropped for some reason, but the Mac mini media center is right on target.
Sorry, but the Trojan horse would have been to announce an exclusive deal with Dish and DirecTV that they would be using a Mac mini as an option for their DVR.
Are we planning on having a standard 1.5GB of RAM for the lowend so the GMA can suck off 512MB for its needs and then have to share CPU time to deal with shader issues and all else that OpenGL 2 offers?
I'm sure Apple and Intel both know Apple uses Open GL and not Active X. I'm sure they worked this out.
Seeing as we have not yet seen the real performance of the mini, or how it uses its inegrated GPU, isn't it a bit premature to speculate.
I'm sure Apple and Intel both know Apple uses Open GL and not Active X. I'm sure they worked this out.
Seeing as we have not yet seen the real performance of the mini, or how it uses its inegrated GPU, isn't it a bit premature to speculate.
Let me put it this way. It's still not worked out yet. I'm speculating because I've sat in these meetings. Yes. I've sat in device driver meetings at Apple. Nothing is ever worked out until a week or two before showtime.
The integrated graphics wouldnt be my first choice, but it is still better then the ATI 9200 that the old mini had.
When you look at it in context it is a much better machine.
The real problem I see with the new mini is that there isnt a 499 version. You can say all you want about not selling them, but the point of a cheap computer is to get people in the door so that you can upsell them. The cheapest machine _shouldnt_ be selling a lot.
As for high end graphics users, come on, get real. You are going to buy a mini and then drop a $700 monitor on it??? If so get an iMac, great value. If not, then dont try to tell me you are a high graphics user.
Personally, Im looking forward to having a stack of 3 minis running as servers ( thank you gigE ), one running OS X, one running Linux, and fingers crossed, one running Windows. There isnt a machine on the market that can offer that sort of server density on your desk. They will fit very nicely behind my 20" iMac.
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.
Only because Sony will be selling the PS3 at over a hundred dollars below cost.
Quote:
Decoding may be CPU bound, but then your system is tied up decoding.
Correct and adding a faster graphics card isn't going to drastically change this.
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.
Building a small, (relatively) inexpensive computer is like coming up with a new recipe. You put some things in, and you have to leave some things out. You can't put everything you like in at the same time.
Apple has the problem of having decided upon this form factor. It is what it is.
It's also sold well.
A graphics chip with dedicated memory would have added another $75. Would you have been will ing to pay another $75? Enough people are already complaining that these cost too much. You should read the thread on Ars!
With a cpu costing Apple several times what the old G4 cost, the money wasn't there. Simple.
If you need another reason, it's also heat. A Core Duo 1.67GHz chip puts out more heat than a single core 1.42GHz G4 7447a.
They weren't about to place a Graphics chip W/memory into the 1.5GHz single core machine either.
These machines are much more powerful than the old ones were. You also get more (other than that graphics chip).
On the surface dedicated graphics don't sound too great. But I would not buy a Mac mini expecting a performance machine.
Plus you guys don't know what Apple may have coming down the pipeline. They may have plans for a small tower that will have graphics card slot.
I don't know why anyone is disappointed about a Tivo killer. Apple has never stated it had any desire to enter the DVR market. You have to keep internet rumors seperate from reallity.
That's for the life of the box not your lifetime. And Tivo boxes don't last forever.
Apple created the Mac mini market. I think they would have some idea of its direction.
The other market you speak of that Apple so stubbornly ignores is the market that wishes they could have a Power Mac for $599.
I will just love it when all of those people who spent $350-$400 for a lifetime subscription (plus the box) find out, possibly sooner rather than later, that Tivo has gone out of business.
No, I wasn't saying that they have already done so (for those of you who think I did). But the expectation is there in the industry.
Not to mention it only comes with an 80gig drive with a max option of 120gigs. if this is going to be my media center, I'm going to need a lot more room than that. I have 70 gigs of music as it is. Add in any photos or video and I'm out of room on that thing.
You are going to buy a mini and then drop a $700 monitor on it???
Many people have good monitors from previous machines. Part of the appeal of the mini is being able to salvage 'parts' from your previous bad windows experience.
What do you mean? How do you know they don't need Gigabit or Optical Audio In? What you want is Apple to create a bland box for %20 cheaper. Wrong platform if that's the case.
Quote:
Gigabit- Do you know what happens when your NAS is connected via 100T? You get a max of 12MBps throughput theoretically and less in real world. The network is the limiting factor here. Gigabit gets rid of that and other network line bottlenecks.
I know that the average ENTRY level computer probably won't even have a 100 Mbit network, they will just plug their 10 Mbit cable modem right into their computer. Or they'll just use dial-up. I also know that the average computer user doesn't use any audio input divices. How do I know these things? I talk to people, I guess.
Sure they should be OPTIONS, but Apple is doing themselves over by excluding themselves from the sub-500 market.
And I DO want Apple to creat a cheap computer beause, amazingly, it is the OS that makes a Mac a Mac, and the OS runs just fine on my Snow iMac G3, which costs a lot less than $500.
Lastly, this has been said before, but this revision sucks most of all because it has a complete disregard for BOTH the low end AND the media center markets. It's higher priced... but it STILL doesn't have real media center capablities. For those you have to spend ANOTHER $350 for some third party soultion.
I really wish Apple would split the line into 1) a sub-500 barebones computer for people that appreciate the OS but don't need a bunch of features and 2)a Mac media with REAL media capablities.
Comments
Originally posted by hmurchison
again for those that seem to thrive on misinformation
HD playback is CPU bound and not graphics card bound!!
Decoding may be CPU bound, but then your system is tied up decoding. I guess if you're looking at the mini as a tivo-like device, then it probably doesn't matter. If you want to do other things, something is going to start stuttering.
And as I keep hearing over and over on other subjects, even though decoding is CPU bound, putting that stuff on the screen is then limited by the power and ability of the video card itself. Faster cards would make Front Row and the UI flow better then an integrated solution.
Plus, some would argue that 512MB of memory is a good minimum for OS X, so now you have to go and upgrade your memory when you buy it (sort of like having to buy a USB hub when you buy any mac).
BTW, what's the deal with apple putting 4 USB ports on this machine, and yet there's only 3 ports total on the freakin' high-high-high end macs! That's just stupid to no end.
But anyway you cut it, its just like before, too much style, not enough substance. Would anyone really care if this thing was three inches taller so we could add an extra drive to it, or the like?
Originally posted by hmurchison
2 memory slots- Finally you can upgrade the memory without removing the orginal memory.
Unfortunately, the computer comes stock with two 256 meg dimms. Which means you have to throw at least one away when upgrading.
By the way, does anyone have any idea if this case is as hard to open as the previous mini?
:d
Plus you guys don't know what Apple may have coming down the pipeline. They may have plans for a small tower that will have graphics card slot.
I don't know why anyone is disappointed about a Tivo killer. Apple has never stated it had any desire to enter the DVR market. You have to keep internet rumors seperate from reallity.
Well, great point, except you can get a Tivo with a lifetime subscription for like $350-$400
That's for the life of the box not your lifetime. And Tivo boxes don't last forever.
Apple doesn't realize there are two very different markets for the Mac mini.
Apple created the Mac mini market. I think they would have some idea of its direction.
The other market you speak of that Apple so stubbornly ignores is the market that wishes they could have a Power Mac for $599.
Originally posted by mjteix
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
Who the hell really wants a WS 13.3" display? And with the RAM requirements of OS X continuing to climb who the hell wants the MacBooks to have GMA950?
Are we planning on having a standard 1.5GB of RAM for the lowend so the GMA can suck off 512MB for its needs and then have to share CPU time to deal with shader issues and all else that OpenGL 2 offers?
Leopard 10.5 will be OpenGL 2 enabled.
How much they require OpenGL 2 within Quartz 2D remains to be seen.
Decoding may be CPU bound, but then your system is tied up decoding.
In what situation would you be watching HD and doing something else at the same time?
(sort of like having to buy a USB hub when you buy any mac).
I've never used a USB hub. Partly because not every device uses USB, partly because I don't need to use all of my USB devices at the same time.
BTW, what's the deal with apple putting 4 USB ports on this machine, and yet there's only 3 ports total on the freakin' high-high-high end macs! That's just stupid to no end.
Yeah, one more USB port on the mini is a tremendous advantage that Apple should have on Power Mac's (sarcasm).
Originally posted by Louzer
But anyway you cut it, its just like before, too much style, not enough substance. Would anyone really care if this thing was three inches taller so we could add an extra drive to it, or the like?
Yup, Automobile enthusiast would phrase "All Show, No Go"
Originally posted by TenoBell
On the surface dedicated graphics don't sound too great. But I would not buy a Mac mini expecting a performance machine.
Plus you guys don't know what Apple may have coming down the pipeline. They may have plans for a small tower that will have graphics card slot.
I don't know why anyone is disappointed about a Tivo killer. Apple has never stated it had any desire to enter the DVR market. You have to keep internet rumors seperate from reallity.
That's for the life of the box not your lifetime. And Tivo boxes don't last forever.
Apple created the Mac mini market. I think they would have some idea of its direction.
The other market you speak of that Apple so stubbornly ignores is the market that wishes they could have a Power Mac for $599.
Apple created a niche in the mini-ATX market with their designs and it isn't something that wasn't foreseen by many players.
Apple gets kudos for design and always will.
To defend their decision: If they sell 1 Million Mac mini's, per quarter, with a $7 graphics subsystem their profit margins skyrocket.
This assumes the demand will be high.
Originally posted by jdbartlett
Hmm, FrontRow was expected. I'm disappointed there's no TiVo killer feature out the box and glad there's no built-in iPod dock.
It'd be neat if Apple built a TiVo killer, but a) they're just too damn politically correct and b) it's not in their best interest when they can get $2 a show from iTMS users.
If some other company develops a device and software that can be plugged into the Mac Mini to record shows then play them back in FrontRow, I might be interested in this. I'm not saying I'd buy it, but I might at least want it...
I think the Mac mini is a Trojan horse Tivo killer. There were no major content announcements today, and I've got to think Apple wants to have a few more studios on board before it goes big with a cable/satellite challenger. This probably makes the most sense to do in September when the new TV season starts and when holiday purchasing starts to kick into gear. Apple can announce new titles and higher quality encoding for TVs.
I was really expecting an iPod video, another major studio and a few movie titles today, but those things are obviously still on the table for Apple. As quckly and close together as Disney, Universal and Viacom came, I thought Apple would have had another major studio announcement by now.
I think Apple was late with the HiFi, which was probably scheduled to be announced at Macworld and then dropped for some reason, but the Mac mini media center is right on target.
Originally posted by TenoBell
[B]In what situation would you be watching HD and doing something else at the same time?
I've never used a USB hub. Partly because not every device uses USB, partly because I don't need to use all of my USB devices at the same time.
Yeah, one more USB port on the mini is a tremendous advantage that Apple should have on Power Mac's (sarcasm). [/B]
Compiling my projects.
Originally posted by Porchland
I think the Mac mini is a Trojan horse Tivo killer. There were no major content announcements today, and I've got to think Apple wants to have a few more studios on board before it goes big with a cable/satellite challenger. This probably makes the most sense to do in September when the new TV season starts and when holiday purchasing starts to kick into gear. Apple can announce new titles and higher quality encoding for TVs.
I was really expecting an iPod video, another major studio and a few movie titles today, but those things are obviously still on the table for Apple. As quckly and close together as Disney, Universal and Viacom came, I thought Apple would have had another major studio announcement by now.
I think Apple was late with the HiFi, which was probably scheduled to be announced at Macworld and then dropped for some reason, but the Mac mini media center is right on target.
Sorry, but the Trojan horse would have been to announce an exclusive deal with Dish and DirecTV that they would be using a Mac mini as an option for their DVR.
Are we planning on having a standard 1.5GB of RAM for the lowend so the GMA can suck off 512MB for its needs and then have to share CPU time to deal with shader issues and all else that OpenGL 2 offers?
I'm sure Apple and Intel both know Apple uses Open GL and not Active X. I'm sure they worked this out.
Seeing as we have not yet seen the real performance of the mini, or how it uses its inegrated GPU, isn't it a bit premature to speculate.
Originally posted by TenoBell
I'm sure Apple and Intel both know Apple uses Open GL and not Active X. I'm sure they worked this out.
Seeing as we have not yet seen the real performance of the mini, or how it uses its inegrated GPU, isn't it a bit premature to speculate.
Let me put it this way. It's still not worked out yet. I'm speculating because I've sat in these meetings. Yes. I've sat in device driver meetings at Apple. Nothing is ever worked out until a week or two before showtime.
The integrated graphics wouldnt be my first choice, but it is still better then the ATI 9200 that the old mini had.
When you look at it in context it is a much better machine.
The real problem I see with the new mini is that there isnt a 499 version. You can say all you want about not selling them, but the point of a cheap computer is to get people in the door so that you can upsell them. The cheapest machine _shouldnt_ be selling a lot.
As for high end graphics users, come on, get real. You are going to buy a mini and then drop a $700 monitor on it??? If so get an iMac, great value. If not, then dont try to tell me you are a high graphics user.
Personally, Im looking forward to having a stack of 3 minis running as servers ( thank you gigE ), one running OS X, one running Linux, and fingers crossed, one running Windows. There isnt a machine on the market that can offer that sort of server density on your desk. They will fit very nicely behind my 20" iMac.
Originally posted by bitemymac
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.
Only because Sony will be selling the PS3 at over a hundred dollars below cost.
Decoding may be CPU bound, but then your system is tied up decoding.
Correct and adding a faster graphics card isn't going to drastically change this.
Originally posted by backtomac
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.
Building a small, (relatively) inexpensive computer is like coming up with a new recipe. You put some things in, and you have to leave some things out. You can't put everything you like in at the same time.
Apple has the problem of having decided upon this form factor. It is what it is.
It's also sold well.
A graphics chip with dedicated memory would have added another $75. Would you have been will ing to pay another $75? Enough people are already complaining that these cost too much. You should read the thread on Ars!
With a cpu costing Apple several times what the old G4 cost, the money wasn't there. Simple.
If you need another reason, it's also heat. A Core Duo 1.67GHz chip puts out more heat than a single core 1.42GHz G4 7447a.
They weren't about to place a Graphics chip W/memory into the 1.5GHz single core machine either.
These machines are much more powerful than the old ones were. You also get more (other than that graphics chip).
Originally posted by hmurchison
Geez guys vent all you want but don't make stuff up.
All too true!
Originally posted by TenoBell
On the surface dedicated graphics don't sound too great. But I would not buy a Mac mini expecting a performance machine.
Plus you guys don't know what Apple may have coming down the pipeline. They may have plans for a small tower that will have graphics card slot.
I don't know why anyone is disappointed about a Tivo killer. Apple has never stated it had any desire to enter the DVR market. You have to keep internet rumors seperate from reallity.
That's for the life of the box not your lifetime. And Tivo boxes don't last forever.
Apple created the Mac mini market. I think they would have some idea of its direction.
The other market you speak of that Apple so stubbornly ignores is the market that wishes they could have a Power Mac for $599.
I will just love it when all of those people who spent $350-$400 for a lifetime subscription (plus the box) find out, possibly sooner rather than later, that Tivo has gone out of business.
No, I wasn't saying that they have already done so (for those of you who think I did). But the expectation is there in the industry.
Originally posted by mmmpie
I love it.
You are going to buy a mini and then drop a $700 monitor on it???
Many people have good monitors from previous machines. Part of the appeal of the mini is being able to salvage 'parts' from your previous bad windows experience.
Originally posted by hmurchison
What do you mean? How do you know they don't need Gigabit or Optical Audio In? What you want is Apple to create a bland box for %20 cheaper. Wrong platform if that's the case.
Gigabit- Do you know what happens when your NAS is connected via 100T? You get a max of 12MBps throughput theoretically and less in real world. The network is the limiting factor here. Gigabit gets rid of that and other network line bottlenecks.
I know that the average ENTRY level computer probably won't even have a 100 Mbit network, they will just plug their 10 Mbit cable modem right into their computer. Or they'll just use dial-up. I also know that the average computer user doesn't use any audio input divices. How do I know these things? I talk to people, I guess.
Sure they should be OPTIONS, but Apple is doing themselves over by excluding themselves from the sub-500 market.
And I DO want Apple to creat a cheap computer beause, amazingly, it is the OS that makes a Mac a Mac, and the OS runs just fine on my Snow iMac G3, which costs a lot less than $500.
Lastly, this has been said before, but this revision sucks most of all because it has a complete disregard for BOTH the low end AND the media center markets. It's higher priced... but it STILL doesn't have real media center capablities. For those you have to spend ANOTHER $350 for some third party soultion.
I really wish Apple would split the line into 1) a sub-500 barebones computer for people that appreciate the OS but don't need a bunch of features and 2)a Mac media with REAL media capablities.