Photo of next-gen Apple Mac mini in the wild?

1678911

Comments

  • Reply 201 of 221
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Hudson1 View Post


    Well... that's certainly interesting. I guess it boils down to whether it's real as in "to be produced and sold" or real as in a prototype of unknown status and future. Inquiring minds want to know.



    I suspect it's a prototype with new logic board. But apparently it's an old one, around the time the unibody MacBooks came out. It would explain the use of an old slow CPU. The thermal dissipation capabilities of the current mini case may not handle anything faster MHz wise and a newer redesigned case is called for in order to take faster processors. The exhaust vents in the back are tiny.
  • Reply 202 of 221
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by macxpress View Post


    Some of the items you mentioned should be in the new Mac Mini. It would be silly not to include the new NVIDIA chipset with the 9400M graphics. Possibly DDR3 RAM (wouldn't be surprised if it stayed DDR2 which will make people bitch), 5 USB and 1 FW800 port should also be in there. I didn't say FW should be eliminated, I said USB ports are more important to its target audience than FW. Making people use hubs isn't the way to go.



    The other items such as a 7200RPM drive, blu-ray, HDMI port, eSATA, Solid State HDs, you won't see in a low budget Mac. The MacMini uses a notebook hard drive and Apple isn't going to spend the extra money to install a 7200 RPM notebook hard drive. It just isn't going to happen on a $599 Mac. Apple doesn't make much off the MacMini as it is anyways. HDMI would require a licensing fee, same goes with blu-ray. Again a low budget Mac here isn't going to have these extra cost items installed.



    I think the should offer SSD drives as options and charge accordingly. Same with 7200rpm drives, but to a lesser degree.



    Blu-ray? Not for a while fo rthe reasons you listed (licensing, cost of a slim BR drive)



    HDMI port will not come to the mini with the Apple TV still around. Unless they discontinue the Apple TV and roll those features into the mini platform. I don't see that happening but know knows for certain? Not me.
  • Reply 203 of 221
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Outsider View Post


    It's real.



    If its a fake, its the best one of all time!
  • Reply 204 of 221
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    True!
  • Reply 205 of 221
    Observations:



    1) 2 video ports? Why? Seems sloppy.



    2) I would expect the white plastics to be black now to follow the newer Apple aesthetics found on the iMacs, monitors and MacBooks. White seems so old school now.



    3) I would have guessed that the form factor might be likely to have the same footprint of the Apple TV. Manufacturing would be cheaper. Just a guess. Make 'em stackable etc.



    4) A single FW800 port makes sense. Apple is moving FW800 down in rank through its hardware lineup in preparation for FW3200 in its future pro computers. FW400 is deprecated.



    5) What happened to the rumor of replacing the optical drive with a 2nd SATA drive?
  • Reply 206 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dstranathan View Post


    2) I would expect the white plastics to be black now to follow the newer Apple aesthetics found on the iMacs, monitors and MacBooks. White seems so old school now.



    Have you stopped and considered how ugly that would look? If they are going to redesign the mini, I would say an all aluminum design is the way to go.



    Quote:

    3) I would have guessed that the form factor might be likely to have the same footprint of the Apple TV. Manufacturing would be cheaper. Just a guess. Make 'em stackable etc.



    Why would you need both devices in your living room?



    Quote:

    4) A single FW800 port makes sense. Apple is moving FW800 down in rank through its hardware lineup in preparation for FW3200 in its future pro computers. FW400 is deprecated.



    It's quite possible that Apple is planning to enable FW3200 support in a future update. After all, FW3200 uses the same port as FW800 and is defined in the same spec (IEEE 1394b) published many years ago. Last year's FW spec was really just an update on the original spec to clarify some aspects of the spec.
  • Reply 207 of 221
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,305member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Outsider View Post


    I think the should offer SSD drives as options and charge accordingly. Same with 7200rpm drives, but to a lesser degree.



    Blu-ray? Not for a while fo rthe reasons you listed (licensing, cost of a slim BR drive)



    HDMI port will not come to the mini with the Apple TV still around. Unless they discontinue the Apple TV and roll those features into the mini platform. I don't see that happening but know knows for certain? Not me.



    Yeah I'd go for making SSD an option, but definitely not standard. I guess you could throw 7200 RPM drives in there too, but I wouldn't hold my breath. Apple isn't going to make every combination possible. It creates more cost down the road so you have to cut somewhere and thats a reasonable thing to cut.
  • Reply 208 of 221
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by whatever00 View Post


    It's quite possible that Apple is planning to enable FW3200 support in a future update. After all, FW3200 uses the same port as FW800 and is defined in the same spec (IEEE 1394b) published many years ago. Last year's FW spec was really just an update on the original spec to clarify some aspects of the spec.



    I am under the impression that there are internal changes that have to be made to get more than 800Mbps from FW.
  • Reply 209 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    I am under the impression that there are internal changes that have to be made to get more than 800Mbps from FW.



    S3200 likely requires firmware upgrades, but it is still just a higher speed mode for 1394b. However, I wonder why didn't Apple jump straight to S3200 when the spec was first published. While FW800 had always been fast enough for single hard drives, we also have to consider the eyeball factor.
  • Reply 210 of 221
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by whatever00 View Post


    S3200 likely requires firmware upgrades, but it is still just a higher speed mode for 1394b. However, I wonder why didn't Apple jump straight to S3200 when the spec was first published. While FW800 had always been fast enough for single hard drives, we also have to consider the eyeball factor.



    It seems to me that your assertion that no new HW is required, simply a firmware update, is because they both use the same 9-pin port. If you have any info stating that only a firmware update is required please post a couple links.
  • Reply 211 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    It seems to me that your assertion that no new HW is required, simply a firmware update, is because they both use the same 9-pin port.



    No, but because S3200 is part of the original IEEE 1394b spec that was released in 2002. It does not simply share the same connector and cable, but also the same signalling.
  • Reply 212 of 221
    Duplicated post. Please delete
  • Reply 213 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    It seems to me that your assertion that no new HW is required, simply a firmware update, is because they both use the same 9-pin port. If you have any info stating that only a firmware update is required please post a couple links.



    To quote from IEEE Std 1394b™-2002 :

    Quote:

    3.10.2 Faster and further



    IEEE Std 1394b-2002 supports the regular DS signaling modes and speeds of IEEE Std 1394-1995. Additionally, IEEE Std 1394b-2002 extends bus speeds to S800 and S1600 and has architectural support for S3200—although insufficient technical data were available when IEEE Std 1394b-2002 was prepared to specify the signaling parameters for S3200. Silicon devices that operate in both the DS signaling mode and the Beta signaling mode are called border nodes because they are at the border of the two different signaling bus segments.



    IEEE Std 1394-1995 recommends a maximum cable length of 4.5 m. Many applications find this length too short a cable run for their needs. IEEE Std 1394b-2002 supports optical cable lengths of 50 m for POF and 100 m for GOF. Additionally, IEEE Std 1394b-2002 supports S100 operation over lengths of CAT-5 up to 100 m. This extra run length permits new applications for IEEE 1394 buses, such as home networking.



  • Reply 214 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by whatever00 View Post


    To quote from IEEE Std 1394b?-2002 :



    True, but these go to Eleven!
  • Reply 215 of 221
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kasper View Post


    There is only one monitor on the market with Mini DisplayPort.



    K



    And how many monitors on the market have Mini DVI?
  • Reply 216 of 221
    haggarhaggar Posts: 1,568member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sdfisher View Post


    If it was going to be a dual head system (not likely!) it would use the same connector for both.



    DisplayPort is supposed to support daisy chaining monitors off a single port on the computer. If Apple wants to make a big deal about supporting DisplayPort, then Apple should fully support all the DisplayPort functionality, rather than just providing the absolute minimum token support.
  • Reply 217 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Thinine View Post


    Seems fake. Why would Apple leave a miniDVI port on there when they added mini-DisplayPort? And FW800 on the Mini? Why? Plus the design is too similar to the existing mini. After this long you'd think they'd revise it at least a little bit.







    I think what a lot of noob posters here forget is that the business market is what is keeping the MacMini alive. This thing has a huge market as a small business cash register and in low end hosting and server farm markets. Read your previous AppleInsider articles about the MacMini. In this light the FW800 and maybe even the XS of USB ports makes more sense.



    Personally I will be buying one to use as the hub of my media center, along with a Drobo or the like.
  • Reply 218 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by threedaysatsea View Post


    You guys are stupid.



    Current Mac Mini:





    Good catch! There are a lot of dopes here. But I usually find a nugget in the pile of turds.
  • Reply 219 of 221
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by whatever00 View Post


    To quote from IEEE Std 1394b?-2002 :



    While 2002 supported S1600 I don't believe it was ever realized in silicon. A quick check with TI's web site indicates that they only have chipsets up to S800 speed. Of course this doesn't mean prerelease silicon isn't available or that Apple hasn't done its own chip.



    Part of the issue revolves around the issue of finalization of the standard, even though S1600 was considered years ago I think it is just recently that the 1394 people have nailed the parameters for S1600 & S3200. At least I remember something coming across my desk last year indicating that these are now part of the official standard. It appears that S1600 was wishful thinking in 2002 and is now firmed up.



    Dave
  • Reply 220 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    I remember something coming across my desk last year indicating that these are now part of the official standard.



    I do too. I think the next leap will be Firewire 3200..whether this debuts with the next iteration of the Mac Pro or the MacBook Pro...I hope it will be debuted and in an Apple product before USB 3.
Sign In or Register to comment.