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

16791112

Comments

  • Reply 161 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post


    As I understand it, FW800 ports need only the new 3200 cable to give full FW3200 speeds.



    No, FW3200 uses the cable, same connector and is in fact part of the same spec. But I am guessing the FW800 chips that are on the market today do not implement the full IEEE 1394b spec.
  • Reply 162 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BenRoethig View Post


    The 9400M outperforms the 2400XT in the iMac. It gives you near parity with dedicated solutions at the entry level. Anything higher you wouldn't be seeing in a Mini anyway.







    Wireless-N devices were on the market before support for it arrived in Macs.



    My usage: XGrid and OpenCL/OpenGL where I can leverage as many streams/cores from the best GPUs possible.



    That slot gives me options.



    Wiithout it's useless to me for any serious development as an extra node on a budget.



    Give me a rack of 10 Mac Mini systems all being clustered as nodes for rendering and leveraging OpenCL is far less expensive than 10 Mac Pros.
  • Reply 163 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Because people that are using a Mini with their 3rd-party monitor may want to update their Mini without paying an additional 5% just for a new adapter?



    Nope. The current mini doesn't use mini-DVI, it uses full DVI. So those folks will need an adapter anyway.
  • Reply 164 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Good CPUs they may be but the performance differential is to huge to ignore. Using your logic a Pentium would be good enough, but you really don't see much demand for old Pentium hardware on the desk top.



    The other thing is that you are going to want a processor with lots of threads once Snow Leopard comes out.



    It wouldn't be much better than the current machine that everybody complains about.





    Well if you say so. I just don't think the majority of the people waiting on a new Mini would agree with you.





    Dave



    Fair enough. But I think then the majority of people waiting on a new Mini, who do not agree with me, are really setting themselves up for dissapointment. I thought I was getting disillusioned, and was willing to settle with a Core 2 2ghz, 9400M, 2GB RAM Mac Mini. If most people want even more in that form factor, well, then there could be the mid-tower Core i7, but wow, we're all starting to expect a heck of a lot from Apple. Apple could deliver, but I personally ain't going to have these expectations because I can't handle the dissapointment. It would piss me off too much.



    As for me, well, I'll continue saving my cash, enjoy looking at that number in my bank account, and when my AppleCare on my white Core Duo MacBook (running Adobe CS4, Logic Pro 8 ) ends in May... Hopefully Apple would have sorted this desktop stuff out and made the MacBook and MacBook Pro more price competitive.



    This Mac Mini/ iMac thing is really starting to annoy people, I understand...
  • Reply 165 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chelgrian View Post


    There is a very simple reason that Apple may want to put a real DVI port on a revised Mini. This is that the current DVI to DisplayPort adaptor cannot pass through HDCP. Combined with the fact that there are next to no DisplayPort monitors and TVs on the market this would mean that the machine would be unable to play HD content (downloaded from iTunes etc.) with the vast majority of displays on the market.



    Ah, cheers. That's the only plausible reason I've heard so far.
  • Reply 166 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Wiggin View Post


    Second, miniDP supports DRM, and my understanding is that the miniDP adaptors won't work to put DRM'd content on a legacy display. Including the miniDVI would be a way to avoid obsoleting your display if/when Apple activates the DRM (for HD movie rentals, for example). For the MB/MBP this isn't as big a deal because you'd still be able to view the content on the built-in display if not an external monitor. But for the mini, you need a connector that's always going to work with older displays.



    If the DRM doesn't support output to legacy displays over DisplayPort, why should it support output over legacy ports at all? It doesn't make any sense.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by whatever00 View Post


    If I'm not mistaken, HDCP allows downgrading to SD to support legacy displays.



    And again, the ICT is an AACS feature. It could be implemented in the FairPlay DRM, but it's not in HDCP.
  • Reply 167 of 221
    The new Mac mini to be successful in the market must have:



    1. New chipset architecture with higher system bus & faster memory for HD 1080p capabilities (Montevina or Calpella).

    2. Better graphic card with PCIe bus, more graphic memory & 3D acceleration capabilities (Nvidia)

    3. 7200rpm Hard Disk drive.

    4. WiFI 802.11n

    5. Firewire 800

    6. HDMI output

    7. Bluray disk drive

    8. Revolutionary new design.



    Would be nice also to have if the cost can stay at relatively low levels.



    1. CPU with at least 2,33GHz clock speed & 4MB cache memory.

    2. Bluray recorder disk drive

    3. eSATA interface

    4. Solid State hard disk

    5. WiMAX wireless interface

    5. Smaller dimensions



    5 USB ports are not that important to have, since you can use an external USB hub and upgrade the number of ports to anything you want. Mini DVI is useful to save space for other ports but not necessary. Mac mini is an entry level machine after all, but should have good enough HTPC capabilities and mobility.



    I don’t think that the Mac mini on the picture is going to gain a big market share.
  • Reply 168 of 221
    If that's it...then why did it take so long? Similar enclosure and a mere spec bump? It doesn't look racidal enough for me.



    Shrugs*.



    It sure has to be quad core? :I



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 169 of 221
    nceencee Posts: 857member
    Unless, Apple has plans to announce that "New" product at the same time, and then folks will better uns=derstand why so many ports.



    Skip
  • Reply 170 of 221
    If Apple releases a machine that has a dedicated GPU AND FireWire, with a low end price point, Jobs isn't at the helm anymore.



    .
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by click View Post


    The new Mac mini to be successful in the market must have:



    1. New chipset architecture with higher system bus & faster memory for HD 1080p capabilities (Montevina or Calpella).

    2. Better graphic card with PCIe bus, more graphic memory & 3D acceleration capabilities (Nvidia)

    3. 7200rpm Hard Disk drive.

    4. WiFI 802.11n

    5. Firewire 800

    6. HDMI output

    7. Bluray disk drive

    8. Revolutionary new design.



    Would be nice also to have if the cost can stay at relatively low levels.



    1. CPU with at least 2,33GHz clock speed & 4MB cache memory.

    2. Bluray recorder disk drive

    3. eSATA interface

    4. Solid State hard disk

    5. WiMAX wireless interface

    5. Smaller dimensions



    5 USB ports are not that important to have, since you can use an external USB hub and upgrade the number of ports to anything you want. Mini DVI is useful to save space for other ports but not necessary. Mac mini is an entry level machine after all, but should have good enough HTPC capabilities and mobility.



    I don?t think that the Mac mini on the picture is going to gain a big market share.



  • Reply 171 of 221
    Wh ydoes it need to be atleast 2.3 ghz? Intels upcomming Lynnfield processors have some processors with intergrated gpus and memory controllers and are less then 2.3ghz.



    Why should they be atleast 2.3? IF you can get great performance with less ghz and less heat generated then why not?



    This is a mac mini not a full blown mac pro.
  • Reply 172 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by majortom1981 View Post


    Wh ydoes it need to be atleast 2.3 ghz? Intels upcomming Lynnfield processors have some processors with intergrated gpus and memory controllers and are less then 2.3ghz.



    Why should they be atleast 2.3? IF you can get great performance with less ghz and less heat generated then why not?



    This is a mac mini not a full blown mac pro.



    I agree with you. I didn’t say it has to be 2,33GHz, I said It would be nice to be. If a Lynnfield quad-core CPU is going to be used, then there is no need for high speed clocks. But since I don’t think so, as price in such a case is going to increase much, I think it would be nice to have a double core processor with performance at least close to the smallest iMac model.
  • Reply 173 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TheKid2020 View Post


    How are people doing with the new GPU chips in the macbooks while playing games?



    All the games that I play run perfectly well in my new MacBook (4GB RAM, 500GB WD Scorpio HD, 9400M card). I get 45 frames per second in X-Plane 9.3 in full screen and medium settings, Sims 2 plays perfectly. Spore rocks. Civ IV and Pirates run like a dream. Call of Duty 4 plays well. And I've got CrossOver Games installed and run Orange Box in an XP bottle flawlessly. I'm more than happy with my purchase a week ago.



    If the new mini has a 2.0 GHz chip, 9400M card and 2GB of RAM standard, my 11 year old son has his money all saved up for it. I'll buy a monitor for it and he'll be brilliantly happy (he's on an old G4 laptop right now with the screen hinge failing).
  • Reply 174 of 221
    The iMac better at least get a top of the line MOBILE graphics card. its understandable that the Mini wouldnt.
  • Reply 175 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NeilM View Post


    The FW800 is nice, but what the hell does anyone need five USB ports for on this level of computer?



    if not using BT keyboard/mouse, that's 2, plus a printer, 3, that leaves only 2 left for cameras/card readers/etc.
  • Reply 176 of 221
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NeilM View Post


    . . . but what the hell does anyone need five USB ports for on this level of computer?



    Let me see on my Mac media center I need...



    1) Radio receiver for my gyration (wave you hand in the air) mouse

    2) Printer/Scanner

    3) USB 2 Backup Drive (cheap than firewire and don't need the extra speed for backups)

    4) Camera dock with Card reader built in

    5) open port for pluging in the occasional flash drive or iPod



    Pretty easy to see how an average "digital hub" user could want 5 ports
  • Reply 177 of 221
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    After thinking about it for a bit, if this photo is legit, it can redeem the mini in a lot of people's (the people here, at least) eyes. It indeed looks like a prototype and Apple regularly sticks it's new secret machines in old cases, especially for prototypes out in the wild. That means that this could be a placeholder enclosure, but it also means the motherboard will be pretty much the same dimensions and therefore the case will likely be about the same size, maybe a bit bigger but at least the same as the current size.



    Other thoughts:

    5 USB ports is perfect. The 3 on my iMac are always filled and I could use an extra or 2 all the time.



    It should support 802.11n wireless.



    It should have the same chipset in the MacBook/MB Pro 15 & 17, a variant of the MPC79 series.



    RAM should be upgradable to 8GB, like the MBP 17". DDR3 and running at 1333MHz using SO-DIMMs.



    The 2.0GHz C2D is just a filler for the prototype. Processors should start at 2.4GHz with an option for 2.66 and 2.8GHz.



    It'll still utilize 2.5" HDDs and slim optical drives.



    Wish list:

    Discreet graphics options using an MXM card like the iMac.



    Larger enclosure to support LGA775 processors.



    Quad core option (either mobile or LGA775).



    Keep the DVI port along with the miniDP.
  • Reply 178 of 221
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Outsider View Post


    After thinking about it for a bit, if this photo is legit, it can redeem the mini in a lot of people's (the people here, at least) eyes. It indeed looks like a prototype and Apple regularly sticks it's new secret machines in old cases, especially for prototypes out in the wild. That means that this could be a placeholder enclosure, but it also means the motherboard will be pretty much the same dimensions and therefore the case will likely be about the same size, maybe a bit bigger but at least the same as the current size.



    Other thoughts:

    5 USB ports is perfect. The 3 on my iMac are always filled and I could use an extra or 2 all the time.



    It should support 802.11n wireless.



    It should have the same chipset in the MacBook/MB Pro 15 & 17, a variant of the MPC79 series.



    RAM should be upgradable to 8GB, like the MBP 17". DDR3 and running at 1333MHz using SO-DIMMs.



    The 2.0GHz C2D is just a filler for the prototype. Processors should start at 2.4GHz with an option for 2.66 and 2.8GHz.



    It'll still utilize 2.5" HDDs and slim optical drives.



    Wish list:

    Discreet graphics options using an MXM card like the iMac.



    Larger enclosure to support LGA775 processors.



    Quad core option (either mobile or LGA775).



    Keep the DVI port along with the miniDP.



    I think you'll be disappointed.



    I really doubt the mini will support more than 4gbs of RAM. Anything over 4 is encroaching on pro territory.



    I really doubt there'll be an option for dedicated graphics. But the 9400m is really pretty good and not such a terrible alternative IMO. At least from what I've read.



    Actually the photos look real but I've a hard time believing that Apple will be so generous with the ports. I hope they will be but color me skeptical.
  • Reply 179 of 221
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,740member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cbw87 View Post


    You're missing my point. They don't have to buy ACDs, they can buy any, and use mini-DP to DVI adapters. Yes, having to buy adapters sucks, but even with mini-DVI they need adapters, so there's no point in having two different connectors on the back. It adds nothing.



    And if monoprice, etc. can make an adapter, they could make a 6'/2m cable with mini-DVI or mini-DisplayPort on one end and HDMI, DVI-D, etc. on the other.
  • Reply 180 of 221
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,824member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by NeilM View Post


    The FW800 is nice, but what the hell does anyone need five USB ports for on this level of computer?



    Keyboard, printer, scanner, external hard drive and an open slot for the occasional flash drive. Assuming mouse plugs into keyboard.
Sign In or Register to comment.