I gotta say, I think the mini is woefully underestimated. I have had mine for two years, and the only thing I have done is give it 2 gigs of RAM. I run Quake 4, Halo, Doom 3, Prey, and CS:S (under crossover games), as well as Final Cut Pro, Motion, Compressor, and DVD Studio Pro. I duel boot to windows on occasion, and I used to use Parallels Desktop, which I stopped using simply because I did not need it. It can easily play 1080p video, without any framedropping, and I once even made a 10 minute 3D film on it in less then 18 hours. Apeture runs fine with 3000+ photos in it, and I still have room for 2500 songs in iTunes.
Granted, with a performance boost, i expect the Mini will be alot better, especially in CS:S, which runs at like 20 FPS, but my point is, Apple's Mac Mini is pretty powerful/useful for a budget machine
I gotta say, I think the mini is woefully underestimated. I have had mine for two years, and the only thing I have done is give it 2 gigs of RAM. I run Quake 4, Halo, Doom 3, Prey, and CS:S (under crossover games), as well as Final Cut Pro, Motion, Compressor, and DVD Studio Pro. I duel boot to windows on occasion, and I used to use Parallels Desktop, which I stopped using simply because I did not need it. It can easily play 1080p video, without any framedropping, and I once even made a 10 minute 3D film on it in less then 18 hours. Apeture runs fine with 3000+ photos in it, and I still have room for 2500 songs in iTunes.
Granted, with a performance boost, i expect the Mini will be alot better, especially in CS:S, which runs at like 20 FPS, but my point is, Apple's Mac Mini is pretty powerful/useful for a budget machine
I just read an article that said that about 70% of all laptop computers have integrated video. As more laptops are being sold all the time, apparently, few people care. A good percentage of desktops have integrated video as well. I expect that a good percentage over 50% of all computers being sold have integrated video.
Most people aren't gamers, so that group can be cut out. Most people aren't pro's, so that group can be cut out.
The group that's left really doesn't care, or need, anything better.
This is a very compact machine, and it has its market. It's fine.
If Apple did what those who are demanding from them, it would be a very different, and much larger machine, and you are back to that mythical xMac.
This is what it is. If it's not good enough, then don't buy it. But it's good enough for its market, and that's what matters. The people who have them seem to like them just fine.
I just read an article that said that about 70% of all laptop computers have integrated video. As more laptops are being sold all the time, apparently, few people care. A good percentage of desktops have integrated video as well. I expect that a good percentage over 50% of all computers being sold have integrated video.
Desktops that are in the $600-$800 price range have real video cards system under $500 tend to come with on board video but you can add a card for $50 - $100+
amd / ati and nvidia have good on board video intel does not and you can add side port ram to amd on board video chips.
also the mini has a real old on board video chip set and only comes with 1gb of ram with laptop HD and a dvd /cdrw want a DVDRW pay $200 and still get only 1gb of ram.
Desktops that are in the $600-$800 price range have real video cards system under $500 tend to come with on board video but you can add a card for $50 - $100+
amd / ati and nvidia have good on board video intel does not and you can add side port ram to amd on board video chips.
also the mini has a real old on board video chip set and only comes with 1gb of ram with laptop HD and a dvd /cdrw want a DVDRW pay $200 and still get only 1gb of ram.
Are you stating that 70% of all computers can't have integrated graphics because there are cheap desktops that have discrete GPUs? There are a lot more notebooks being sold than desktops and there are a lot more $300-$600 desktops being sold than the ones you quote.
Desktops that are in the $600-$800 price range have real video cards system under $500 tend to come with on board video but you can add a card for $50 - $100+
amd / ati and nvidia have good on board video intel does not and you can add side port ram to amd on board video chips.
also the mini has a real old on board video chip set and only comes with 1gb of ram with laptop HD and a dvd /cdrw want a DVDRW pay $200 and still get only 1gb of ram.
It doesn't matter what the price range is, it's the percentages that do matter.
Even if you want to consider the price, you do know that Apple sells 66% of computers over $1,000, at least in the US, which is their main market for computers.
Obviously having changeable video cards matters little to anyone. And, yes, I do know that iMacs have GPU's, but not nearly the best ones.
And of course, we're not talking about the Pro line of desktops, or laptops, as those cost much more. Though, Apple's high end laptops don't have interchangeable gpu's either.
Overall, you are paying for the compact form of the Mini. It's not for you, and that's fine. That doesn't mean your criticism isn't valid on one level, that is, Apple, perhaps SHOULD have an "xMac".
It doesn't matter what the price range is, it's the percentages that do matter.
Even if you want to consider the price, you do know that Apple sells 66% of computers over $1,000, at least in the US, which is their main market for computers.
Obviously having changeable video cards matters little to anyone. And, yes, I do know that iMacs have GPU's, but not nearly the best ones.
And of course, we're not talking about the Pro line of desktops, or laptops, as those cost much more. Though, Apple's high end laptops don't have interchangeable gpu's either.
Overall, you are paying for the compact form of the Mini. It's not for you, and that's fine. That doesn't mean your criticism isn't valid on one level, that is, Apple, perhaps SHOULD have an "xMac".
But, the Mini isn't it.
people want to be able to use there own screens and the mini is a poor system all around.
The screens in the imac are not that good the 20" ones are still the same old ones used the older imacs
Real old chipset, Small laptop hd,slow cpu, dvd / cdwr / 1gb of ram hard to open cases next to other systems for $599.00 add $200 get a little faster cpu, 40gb more hd space, and a dvd / rw. $799.00 with 1gb of ram and 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo?
The base imac at $1,199.00 with only 1GB memory is not that good at least it has a ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory.
You can take the $1,199.00 imac drop the screen put in desktop parts up the ram to 2gb and put in a ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory at the same price.
Alot of systems with video cards can run 2 screen even the low end ones.
Also systems in the percentages have better Intel on board video or a better ati / nvidia on board video chipset.
people want to be able to use there own screens and the mini is a poor system all around.
SOME people want to use their old monitors.
Quote:
The screens in the imac are not that good the 20" ones are still the same old ones used the older imacs
They're no worse than the large majority of monitors out there. Most people don't notice these things anyway. Only expensive graphics monitors are really any good. The monitor on the 24" is pretty good. I have two of them here.
Quote:
Real old chipset, Small laptop hd,slow cpu, dvd / cdwr / 1gb of ram hard to open cases next to other systems for $599.00 add $200 get a little faster cpu, 40gb more hd space, and a dvd / rw. $799.00 with 1gb of ram and 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo?
Again, who cares? You're mentioning things that don't matter to most people. When most people go into a computer store, they don't know anything about any of this. If the salesman even bothers to mention it, they stare back, because all they want to know is whether it will be suitable for them.
And please stop with how "difficult' the case is to open. first, it's not difficult at all. But almost no one opens their computer to upgrade it. This is an old, and tired, issue.
Quote:
The base imac at $1,199.00 with only 1GB memory is not that good at least it has a ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory.
You can take the $1,199.00 imac drop the screen put in desktop parts up the ram to 2gb and put in a ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory at the same price.
Alot of systems with video cards can run 2 screen even the low end ones.
Also systems in the percentages have better Intel on board video or a better ati / nvidia on board video chipset.
Again. Who cares? you have no idea of what most computer buyers know about, or care about.
I've had a number of PC people buy iMacs after they looked at them. Three people I took to the Photo Expo here last year bought iMacs after seeing them at the show. I've had PC using friends over the past few years buy iMacs, and one buy a Mini.
You make the same mistake that other critics make, you equate what YOU think is important to what most consuers think is important.
Fortunately for Apple, most consumers don't agree with you. Otherwise Apple's desktop sales woudn't have taken such a large jump while those from PC makers are flat to down.
If Apple's OS was 100% compatible with Windows programs out of the box, Apple would already be selling 20 million machines a year.
AnandTech has a review of a prototype Eee Box which is pretty much a Mac Mini running XP or Linux but uses and Atom processor and has a much lower price point than the Mac Mini.
AnandTech has a review of a prototype Eee Box which is pretty much a Mac Mini running XP or Linux but uses and Atom processor and has a much lower price point than the Mac Mini.
It shows up as being slightly better than Dothan at 800MHz, except for one benchmark, maybe because there's new SSE instructions in Atom that Dothan doesn't have.
It shows up as being slightly better than Dothan at 800MHz, except for one benchmark, maybe because there's new SSE instructions in Atom that Dothan doesn't have.
I saw that as well Jeff.
For Linux systems that still would be pretty responsive I think. XP would be a bit sluggish I would think but still ok. I don't think there is anyway you could run VIsta os on an Atom machine.
Makes me wonder how OSX would run on such a cpu. I don't think full Leopard would run on Atom. The mobile OSX would probably be ok though.
I wish they would have benchmarked a fast ARM11 and 1.6GHz C2D so we can a better comparison of speed and power consumption. I want to know how it compares to modern chipsets, not old ones.
Desktops that are in the $600-$800 price range have real video cards system under $500 tend to come with on board video but you can add a card for $50 - $100+
amd / ati and nvidia have good on board video intel does not and you can add side port ram to amd on board video chips.
also the mini has a real old on board video chip set and only comes with 1gb of ram with laptop HD and a dvd /cdrw want a DVDRW pay $200 and still get only 1gb of ram.
Anyone know of Mac software that can help this poor fellow string words together correctly?
Comments
I need an upgrade pronto.
Granted, with a performance boost, i expect the Mini will be alot better, especially in CS:S, which runs at like 20 FPS, but my point is, Apple's Mac Mini is pretty powerful/useful for a budget machine
1.66 Core Duo, Superdrive, 80 gig internal + 320 external, 2 gig RAM
I gotta say, I think the mini is woefully underestimated. I have had mine for two years, and the only thing I have done is give it 2 gigs of RAM. I run Quake 4, Halo, Doom 3, Prey, and CS:S (under crossover games), as well as Final Cut Pro, Motion, Compressor, and DVD Studio Pro. I duel boot to windows on occasion, and I used to use Parallels Desktop, which I stopped using simply because I did not need it. It can easily play 1080p video, without any framedropping, and I once even made a 10 minute 3D film on it in less then 18 hours. Apeture runs fine with 3000+ photos in it, and I still have room for 2500 songs in iTunes.
Granted, with a performance boost, i expect the Mini will be alot better, especially in CS:S, which runs at like 20 FPS, but my point is, Apple's Mac Mini is pretty powerful/useful for a budget machine
what are you running at 640x480 16bit in low res?
at it's price it needs a real video card.
what are you running at 640x480 16bit in low res?
at it's price it needs a real video card.
Actually, at 800x480 16 bit, high res, but i agree that it should have a [EDIT]better[/EDIT] video card.
Anyway, my point was that the mini is better then people think
what are you running at 640x480 16bit in low res?
at it's price it needs a real video card.
No it doesn't.
I just read an article that said that about 70% of all laptop computers have integrated video. As more laptops are being sold all the time, apparently, few people care. A good percentage of desktops have integrated video as well. I expect that a good percentage over 50% of all computers being sold have integrated video.
Most people aren't gamers, so that group can be cut out. Most people aren't pro's, so that group can be cut out.
The group that's left really doesn't care, or need, anything better.
This is a very compact machine, and it has its market. It's fine.
If Apple did what those who are demanding from them, it would be a very different, and much larger machine, and you are back to that mythical xMac.
This is what it is. If it's not good enough, then don't buy it. But it's good enough for its market, and that's what matters. The people who have them seem to like them just fine.
No it doesn't.
I just read an article that said that about 70% of all laptop computers have integrated video. As more laptops are being sold all the time, apparently, few people care. A good percentage of desktops have integrated video as well. I expect that a good percentage over 50% of all computers being sold have integrated video.
Desktops that are in the $600-$800 price range have real video cards system under $500 tend to come with on board video but you can add a card for $50 - $100+
amd / ati and nvidia have good on board video intel does not and you can add side port ram to amd on board video chips.
also the mini has a real old on board video chip set and only comes with 1gb of ram with laptop HD and a dvd /cdrw want a DVDRW pay $200 and still get only 1gb of ram.
Desktops that are in the $600-$800 price range have real video cards system under $500 tend to come with on board video but you can add a card for $50 - $100+
amd / ati and nvidia have good on board video intel does not and you can add side port ram to amd on board video chips.
also the mini has a real old on board video chip set and only comes with 1gb of ram with laptop HD and a dvd /cdrw want a DVDRW pay $200 and still get only 1gb of ram.
Are you stating that 70% of all computers can't have integrated graphics because there are cheap desktops that have discrete GPUs? There are a lot more notebooks being sold than desktops and there are a lot more $300-$600 desktops being sold than the ones you quote.
Desktops that are in the $600-$800 price range have real video cards system under $500 tend to come with on board video but you can add a card for $50 - $100+
amd / ati and nvidia have good on board video intel does not and you can add side port ram to amd on board video chips.
also the mini has a real old on board video chip set and only comes with 1gb of ram with laptop HD and a dvd /cdrw want a DVDRW pay $200 and still get only 1gb of ram.
It doesn't matter what the price range is, it's the percentages that do matter.
Even if you want to consider the price, you do know that Apple sells 66% of computers over $1,000, at least in the US, which is their main market for computers.
Obviously having changeable video cards matters little to anyone. And, yes, I do know that iMacs have GPU's, but not nearly the best ones.
And of course, we're not talking about the Pro line of desktops, or laptops, as those cost much more. Though, Apple's high end laptops don't have interchangeable gpu's either.
Overall, you are paying for the compact form of the Mini. It's not for you, and that's fine. That doesn't mean your criticism isn't valid on one level, that is, Apple, perhaps SHOULD have an "xMac".
But, the Mini isn't it.
with apple you need to pay $2200 to get a desktop with a real video card.
What you have to look at is whether Apple's business model is a success or a failure.
If it's a success, then you can't argue it with any sensible alternative.
If it's a failure, then we would be seeing that.
It doesn't matter what the price range is, it's the percentages that do matter.
Even if you want to consider the price, you do know that Apple sells 66% of computers over $1,000, at least in the US, which is their main market for computers.
Obviously having changeable video cards matters little to anyone. And, yes, I do know that iMacs have GPU's, but not nearly the best ones.
And of course, we're not talking about the Pro line of desktops, or laptops, as those cost much more. Though, Apple's high end laptops don't have interchangeable gpu's either.
Overall, you are paying for the compact form of the Mini. It's not for you, and that's fine. That doesn't mean your criticism isn't valid on one level, that is, Apple, perhaps SHOULD have an "xMac".
But, the Mini isn't it.
people want to be able to use there own screens and the mini is a poor system all around.
The screens in the imac are not that good the 20" ones are still the same old ones used the older imacs
Real old chipset, Small laptop hd,slow cpu, dvd / cdwr / 1gb of ram hard to open cases next to other systems for $599.00 add $200 get a little faster cpu, 40gb more hd space, and a dvd / rw. $799.00 with 1gb of ram and 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo?
The base imac at $1,199.00 with only 1GB memory is not that good at least it has a ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory.
You can take the $1,199.00 imac drop the screen put in desktop parts up the ram to 2gb and put in a ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory at the same price.
Alot of systems with video cards can run 2 screen even the low end ones.
Also systems in the percentages have better Intel on board video or a better ati / nvidia on board video chipset.
people want to be able to use there own screens and the mini is a poor system all around...
...Real old chipset, Small laptop hd,slow cpu, dvd / cdwr / 1gb of ram hard to open cases
It's not a poor system all around. It's just intentionally hobbled to protect Mac Pro sales.
If there's a pre-WWDC update (which would come tomorrow, right?
• add a 7200-speed hard drive (because 5400 is too slow for quick backup purposes.)
• give it 30" display capability (because the pricing on 30" screens is dropping drastically.)
If it can drive today's largest screen, whether Jobs superglues the video card in or not doesn't really concern me.
people want to be able to use there own screens and the mini is a poor system all around.
SOME people want to use their old monitors.
The screens in the imac are not that good the 20" ones are still the same old ones used the older imacs
They're no worse than the large majority of monitors out there. Most people don't notice these things anyway. Only expensive graphics monitors are really any good. The monitor on the 24" is pretty good. I have two of them here.
Real old chipset, Small laptop hd,slow cpu, dvd / cdwr / 1gb of ram hard to open cases next to other systems for $599.00 add $200 get a little faster cpu, 40gb more hd space, and a dvd / rw. $799.00 with 1gb of ram and 2.0GHz Intel Core 2 Duo?
Again, who cares? You're mentioning things that don't matter to most people. When most people go into a computer store, they don't know anything about any of this. If the salesman even bothers to mention it, they stare back, because all they want to know is whether it will be suitable for them.
And please stop with how "difficult' the case is to open. first, it's not difficult at all. But almost no one opens their computer to upgrade it. This is an old, and tired, issue.
The base imac at $1,199.00 with only 1GB memory is not that good at least it has a ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory.
You can take the $1,199.00 imac drop the screen put in desktop parts up the ram to 2gb and put in a ATI Radeon HD 2600 PRO with 256MB memory at the same price.
Alot of systems with video cards can run 2 screen even the low end ones.
Also systems in the percentages have better Intel on board video or a better ati / nvidia on board video chipset.
Again. Who cares? you have no idea of what most computer buyers know about, or care about.
I've had a number of PC people buy iMacs after they looked at them. Three people I took to the Photo Expo here last year bought iMacs after seeing them at the show. I've had PC using friends over the past few years buy iMacs, and one buy a Mini.
You make the same mistake that other critics make, you equate what YOU think is important to what most consuers think is important.
Fortunately for Apple, most consumers don't agree with you. Otherwise Apple's desktop sales woudn't have taken such a large jump while those from PC makers are flat to down.
If Apple's OS was 100% compatible with Windows programs out of the box, Apple would already be selling 20 million machines a year.
Wanna bet you'll be able to upgrade the hard drive yourself?
AnandTech has a review of a prototype Eee Box which is pretty much a Mac Mini running XP or Linux but uses and Atom processor and has a much lower price point than the Mac Mini.
Apparently Atom isn't a very good processor / platform compared to intel's usual suspects, check page 7:
http://anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=3321&p=7
It shows up as being slightly better than Dothan at 800MHz, except for one benchmark, maybe because there's new SSE instructions in Atom that Dothan doesn't have.
Apparently Atom isn't a very good processor / platform compared to intel's usual suspects, check page 7:
http://anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=3321&p=7
It shows up as being slightly better than Dothan at 800MHz, except for one benchmark, maybe because there's new SSE instructions in Atom that Dothan doesn't have.
I saw that as well Jeff.
For Linux systems that still would be pretty responsive I think. XP would be a bit sluggish I would think but still ok. I don't think there is anyway you could run VIsta os on an Atom machine.
Makes me wonder how OSX would run on such a cpu. I don't think full Leopard would run on Atom. The mobile OSX would probably be ok though.
Desktops that are in the $600-$800 price range have real video cards system under $500 tend to come with on board video but you can add a card for $50 - $100+
amd / ati and nvidia have good on board video intel does not and you can add side port ram to amd on board video chips.
also the mini has a real old on board video chip set and only comes with 1gb of ram with laptop HD and a dvd /cdrw want a DVDRW pay $200 and still get only 1gb of ram.
Anyone know of Mac software that can help this poor fellow string words together correctly?