I don't like the Mac Pro design much but in the small enclosure, I think it works well. It's practical, attractive and a good size.
I'd love it if they could make a Core i7 desktop version of that but also make the flat style Mini shown before.
I don't think it would be a good idea to put a 130W cpu in such a small enclosure. But for the upcoming 65W quad-core cpus on a "mini-ITX" motherboard, it would be nice. Intel's G45/Q45 or nvidia desktop 9400 integrated graphics + one PCIe slot for a small dedicated video card (ATI radeaon HD 4550, for example) or anything else the customer might need/want.
I don't think it would be a good idea to put a 130W cpu in such a small enclosure. But for the upcoming 65W quad-core cpus on a "mini-ITX" motherboard, it would be nice. Intel's G45/Q45 or nvidia desktop 9400 integrated graphics + one PCIe slot for a small dedicated video card (ATI radeaon HD 4550, for example) or anything else the customer might need/want.
You're right. There is a rumor about a lower TDP Core i7 but probably much later on in 2009:
Even that will likely just drop to 95W or thereabouts. The Core 2 Quad Yorkfields at 65W coming out in Q1 certainly look like they'd be a much better option:
I doubt they can fit those in an iMac. The 3.06GHz Core 2 Extreme is the highest up processor the iMac has and is only 44W.
This is pretty much ideal as it's more than an iMac can offer but the Core i7 Mac Pros will be a good deal faster so it won't cut into sales. It should be a more cost-effective quad than the single Xeon Mac Pro too and would then mean that the Mac Pro can go 8-core across the lineup.
Given that the current quad Mac Pro is £1430 with an ATI, they could have the quad cube in the range £900-1200. The Nvidia integrated at the lower end and dedicated card in the PCI slot at the higher end.
You'd get 4GB Ram and a higher end dedicated card than the current quad Mac Pro at a lower price.
I doubt they can fit those in an iMac. The 3.06GHz Core 2 Extreme is the highest up processor the iMac has and is only 44W.
This is pretty much ideal as it's more than an iMac can offer but the Core i7 Mac Pros will be a good deal faster so it won't cut into sales. It should be a more cost-effective quad than the single Xeon Mac Pro too and would then mean that the Mac Pro can go 8-core across the lineup.
Given that the current quad Mac Pro is £1430 with an ATI, they could have the quad cube in the range £900-1200. The Nvidia integrated at the lower end and dedicated card in the PCI slot at the higher end.
You'd get 4GB Ram and a higher end dedicated card than the current quad Mac Pro at a lower price.
The C2D in the current iMacs are custom cpus with a TDP of 55W, they are not the regular penryn/montevina bunch. So stretching it to 65W cpus, if possible, would be a really nice upgrade. I can't see most of Apple'S line-up with dual-core cpus and just the Mac Pro with probably all dual-quad-core cpus with hyperthreading (16 threads) AND Snow Leopard probably released late Q1 or even late Q2.
I wish Apple would offer a larger desktop line-up, for example:
- Mac mini mobile-based dual-core (2 threads)
- iMac desktop based quad-core (4 threads)
- Mac Pro single cpu nehalem quad-core (8 threads)
The C2D in the current iMacs are custom cpus with a TDP of 55W, they are not the regular penryn/montevina bunch. So stretching it to 65W cpus, if possible, would be a really nice upgrade. I can't see most of Apple'S line-up with dual-core cpus and just the Mac Pro with probably all dual-quad-core cpus with hyperthreading (16 threads) AND Snow Leopard probably released late Q1 or even late Q2.
I wish Apple would offer a larger desktop line-up, for example:
- Mac mini mobile-based dual-core (2 threads)
- iMac desktop based quad-core (4 threads)
- Mac Pro single cpu nehalem quad-core (8 threads)
- Mac Pro dual cpu nehalem quad-core (16 threads)
Bear in mind that Intel's use of TDP is absolutely meaningless. They just use different tiers- 35W, 65W, 95W, etc. to create segments. Those figures are not the actual power consumption/thermal output of the CPU.
For example, the E8400, a 3.0GHz desktop CPU, is "65W TDP" according to Intel, when its actual maximum power consumption is somewhere in the neighborhood of 35-40W.
Given that the current quad Mac Pro is £1430 with an ATI, they could have the quad cube in the range £900-1200. The Nvidia integrated at the lower end and dedicated card in the PCI slot at the higher end.
You'd get 4GB Ram and a higher end dedicated card than the current quad Mac Pro at a lower price.
*nods. That price range...maybe £795-£1295 is about right. Oh for a 8x8x8 Cube. I think the mini was not intended to replace the Cube. It's too limited and it can't really be upgraded.
An Alu and black themed Cube like the Macbook/Pros would be a nice addition to the black hole in Apple's desktop.
latest rumors say that, the "new-MacMini-Day" should be on Jan. 6, 2009 at the Macworld Expo and I feel the newMini will be a "Pocket-Slim" version with Docking Station(s) for home/office use: http://newgoos.blogspot.com/
latest rumors say that, the "new-MacMini-Day" should be on Jan. 6, 2009 at the Macworld Expo and I feel the newMini will be a "Pocket-Slim" version with Docking Station(s) for home/office use: http://newgoos.blogspot.com/
.
So basically you are expecting a screenless iPhone?
Edit: I guess this is where the iPhone's video-out/Open CL features may cross into your proposed "mini's" territory.
The problem there is that every time you want to change the roll, it's going to take about 10 minutes to get the thing open. This is one thing Apple really need to address with the Mini.
Comments
I still think the Cube was fine; the redesign into the mini worked, of course, though Sanada's designs are pretty good!
If you mean these:
http://www.slashgear.com/maccube-con...sanada-191701/
I would disagree. I think those mockups are the most impractical and pretty ugly Cube designs I've seen.
This on the other hand would be a great design:
http://cybernetnews.com/2006/08/29/t...a-mini-macpro/
I don't like the Mac Pro design much but in the small enclosure, I think it works well. It's practical, attractive and a good size.
I'd love it if they could make a Core i7 desktop version of that but also make the flat style Mini shown before.
If you mean these:
http://www.slashgear.com/maccube-con...sanada-191701/
I would disagree. I think those mockups are the most impractical and pretty ugly Cube designs I've seen.
This on the other hand would be a great design:
http://cybernetnews.com/2006/08/29/t...a-mini-macpro/
I don't like the Mac Pro design much but in the small enclosure, I think it works well. It's practical, attractive and a good size.
I'd love it if they could make a Core i7 desktop version of that but also make the flat style Mini shown before.
I don't think it would be a good idea to put a 130W cpu in such a small enclosure. But for the upcoming 65W quad-core cpus on a "mini-ITX" motherboard, it would be nice. Intel's G45/Q45 or nvidia desktop 9400 integrated graphics + one PCIe slot for a small dedicated video card (ATI radeaon HD 4550, for example) or anything else the customer might need/want.
I don't think it would be a good idea to put a 130W cpu in such a small enclosure. But for the upcoming 65W quad-core cpus on a "mini-ITX" motherboard, it would be nice. Intel's G45/Q45 or nvidia desktop 9400 integrated graphics + one PCIe slot for a small dedicated video card (ATI radeaon HD 4550, for example) or anything else the customer might need/want.
You're right. There is a rumor about a lower TDP Core i7 but probably much later on in 2009:
http://www.tweaktown.com/news/10379/...009/index.html
Even that will likely just drop to 95W or thereabouts. The Core 2 Quad Yorkfields at 65W coming out in Q1 certainly look like they'd be a much better option:
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...0660&Itemid=35
I doubt they can fit those in an iMac. The 3.06GHz Core 2 Extreme is the highest up processor the iMac has and is only 44W.
This is pretty much ideal as it's more than an iMac can offer but the Core i7 Mac Pros will be a good deal faster so it won't cut into sales. It should be a more cost-effective quad than the single Xeon Mac Pro too and would then mean that the Mac Pro can go 8-core across the lineup.
Given that the current quad Mac Pro is £1430 with an ATI, they could have the quad cube in the range £900-1200. The Nvidia integrated at the lower end and dedicated card in the PCI slot at the higher end.
You'd get 4GB Ram and a higher end dedicated card than the current quad Mac Pro at a lower price.
I doubt they can fit those in an iMac. The 3.06GHz Core 2 Extreme is the highest up processor the iMac has and is only 44W.
This is pretty much ideal as it's more than an iMac can offer but the Core i7 Mac Pros will be a good deal faster so it won't cut into sales. It should be a more cost-effective quad than the single Xeon Mac Pro too and would then mean that the Mac Pro can go 8-core across the lineup.
Given that the current quad Mac Pro is £1430 with an ATI, they could have the quad cube in the range £900-1200. The Nvidia integrated at the lower end and dedicated card in the PCI slot at the higher end.
You'd get 4GB Ram and a higher end dedicated card than the current quad Mac Pro at a lower price.
The C2D in the current iMacs are custom cpus with a TDP of 55W, they are not the regular penryn/montevina bunch. So stretching it to 65W cpus, if possible, would be a really nice upgrade. I can't see most of Apple'S line-up with dual-core cpus and just the Mac Pro with probably all dual-quad-core cpus with hyperthreading (16 threads) AND Snow Leopard probably released late Q1 or even late Q2.
I wish Apple would offer a larger desktop line-up, for example:
- Mac mini mobile-based dual-core (2 threads)
- iMac desktop based quad-core (4 threads)
- Mac Pro single cpu nehalem quad-core (8 threads)
- Mac Pro dual cpu nehalem quad-core (16 threads)
The C2D in the current iMacs are custom cpus with a TDP of 55W, they are not the regular penryn/montevina bunch. So stretching it to 65W cpus, if possible, would be a really nice upgrade. I can't see most of Apple'S line-up with dual-core cpus and just the Mac Pro with probably all dual-quad-core cpus with hyperthreading (16 threads) AND Snow Leopard probably released late Q1 or even late Q2.
I wish Apple would offer a larger desktop line-up, for example:
- Mac mini mobile-based dual-core (2 threads)
- iMac desktop based quad-core (4 threads)
- Mac Pro single cpu nehalem quad-core (8 threads)
- Mac Pro dual cpu nehalem quad-core (16 threads)
Bear in mind that Intel's use of TDP is absolutely meaningless. They just use different tiers- 35W, 65W, 95W, etc. to create segments. Those figures are not the actual power consumption/thermal output of the CPU.
For example, the E8400, a 3.0GHz desktop CPU, is "65W TDP" according to Intel, when its actual maximum power consumption is somewhere in the neighborhood of 35-40W.
Given that the current quad Mac Pro is £1430 with an ATI, they could have the quad cube in the range £900-1200. The Nvidia integrated at the lower end and dedicated card in the PCI slot at the higher end.
You'd get 4GB Ram and a higher end dedicated card than the current quad Mac Pro at a lower price.
*nods. That price range...maybe £795-£1295 is about right. Oh for a 8x8x8 Cube. I think the mini was not intended to replace the Cube. It's too limited and it can't really be upgraded.
An Alu and black themed Cube like the Macbook/Pros would be a nice addition to the black hole in Apple's desktop.
Lemon Bon Bon.
latest rumors say that, the "new-MacMini-Day" should be on Jan. 6, 2009 at the Macworld Expo and I feel the newMini will be a "Pocket-Slim" version with Docking Station(s) for home/office use: http://newgoos.blogspot.com/
.
.
latest rumors say that, the "new-MacMini-Day" should be on Jan. 6, 2009 at the Macworld Expo and I feel the newMini will be a "Pocket-Slim" version with Docking Station(s) for home/office use: http://newgoos.blogspot.com/
.
So basically you are expecting a screenless iPhone?
Edit: I guess this is where the iPhone's video-out/Open CL features may cross into your proposed "mini's" territory.
So basically you are expecting a screenless iPhone?
the iPhone hasn't an Intel Core i7 inside it
.
but what to do with your old mac mini?
but what to do with your old mac mini?
The problem there is that every time you want to change the roll, it's going to take about 10 minutes to get the thing open. This is one thing Apple really need to address with the Mini.