Why don't we talk about what the mini could be within it's own design parameters, rather than a product that Apple hasn't shown any interest in making.
Mac Mini's Design Parameters in full:
1 - No monitor (headless imac).
/End of Parameters.
So this could be anything, it could be a bit taller, a bit wider and a bit fatter if Apple wanted.
It could also go the other way and become as small as an ATV. There is no design parameters that I am aware of that specify it must remain the same shape as the current models.
I have said that I do not care about 3.5" drives as for me MacMini is a media server and all my media are on externals anyway, only the OS runs on the hard drive (or did before my poor little mans demise). But I can understand that the people who use the Mini as a computer would want desktop drives, they are far more likely to last out.
So Apple could and should make this thing twice as tall, what is the driving force for keeping it small? Who cares how small it is?
Just make it a little bigger, stick a 3.5" drive in it, stick a Blu-Ray drive in it, stick a HDMI in it and get it in your stores asap.
If Apple comes out with a larger, better equipped Mini, wouldn't that BE the xMac?
Nope don't think so. The key to the xMax is that it would be a low cost expandable Max. The key to the enhanced Mini would be that it offers up Mac features at the lowest possible cost.
The only reason I argue that the Mini needs to expand slightly is to bring its cost down. At this end of the performance spectrum you wouldn't expect high performance disk drives be they desktop or notebook, you would expect low cost though. Same thing with the DIMM, though I'd have to admit that the price/volume ratio isn't as large. Also by going to a larger enclosure you relax demands on the motherboard, which could also mean having room for a real GPU.
Frankly though a real GPU would kill one of the Mini's bigger advantages which is very low power usage. It is seldom mentioned but is a real advantage. The bigger disk drive is a negative here, when running, but still is lower power than having an external drive attached. Which to come full circle is why there is considerable demand for a slightly larger Mini and that is simply because it is the best way to very large internal storage.
NOW NOTE:
This doesn't mean that most of us wouldn't accept an even smaller Mini. Apple could do this simply be implementing a large SSD on a pc board mounted parallel to the motherboard. This could lead to an even thinner Mini. I just don't think Apple wants nor has the desire to make the Mini a leading edge platform. AIR has demonstrated fairly smartly what one can do if you move away from the conventional with respect to PC hardware. Does a Mini really even need a DIMM slot or a conventional "disk" slot. I'd say no myself, that is if Apple implements the unit properly. AIR demonstrates that they can get very close to having a proper configuration but at the same time mis important functionality.
I would say the mini could go smaller, provided there was something to fill in that wider gap just created.
However, I'd buy the next mini if it had:
- ability to support 4GB of RAM
- Intel GMA X3500 or X4500 graphics
- Fast 2.5" drive over 320GB
It's quite possible I believe, although the price point would remain the same I fear.
What I'd like to see:
- ability to support 4GB of RAM
- iMac level graphics
- 3.5" drives
- same pricepoints
I can see the advantage of using Intel provided graphics chips though. And in a move inspired off the MacBook AIR, it would be nice to have 2GB of RAM soldered on the board and still allow for 4GB expansion via SO-DIMM.
Frankly though a real GPU would kill one of the Mini's bigger advantages which is very low power usage. It is seldom mentioned but is a real advantage.
Not with Montevina, it has a hybrid graphics feature where it switches off the GPU and uses integrated graphics to save power:
Also, they have an 8800M GT in the MBP so I doubt the power drain of that can be significant enough to keep it out of a desktop when they use it in their laptops already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
The bigger disk drive is a negative here, when running, but still is lower power than having an external drive attached. Which to come full circle is why there is considerable demand for a slightly larger Mini and that is simply because it is the best way to very large internal storage.
Yeah, large storage doesn't need physically large drives these days so 3.5" drives aren't really necessary. You can get 320GB 2.5" drives for £60 - they go up to 500GB now. You get 200GB 7200rpm ones for £80.
Apple's upgrades aren't terrible as they now give you a 5400rpm 160GB option for £60 but they could be better and a 7200rpm option would be nice considering they give you one in the MBP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69
The key to the enhanced Mini would be that it offers up Mac features at the lowest possible cost.
In a way but I reckon an upgraded Mini with the following would be enough to keep most people happy:
Even if it's an option. Have two Minis, a budget model and a higher end model with the 8600M GS and allow the same Ram and HD upgrades in both. The higher end model could have ExpressCard and not the lower one.
So we get:
option 1:
2.2 GHz Penryn
2GB Ram
X4500
120GB HD
DVD burner
£399
option 2:
2.4GHz Penryn
2GB Ram
8600M GS 256MB
120GB HD
DVD burner
ExpressCard
£499 or even £599 - I'd pay £599 for this machine easily.
Add a BTO for a 200GB 7200rpm drive for £99 and this way I'd be paying £699 for the machine and I can pick up a really nice 1680 x 1050 display for £120 so I'm just over the price of the entry-level iMac. I really think that would keep a lot of xMac people happy - I'm one of them and that machine would make me very happy indeed.
Also, they have an 8800M GT in the MBP so I doubt the power drain of that can be significant enough to keep it out of a desktop when they use it in their laptops already.
Yeah, large storage doesn't need physically large drives these days so 3.5" drives aren't really necessary. You can get 320GB 2.5" drives for £60 - they go up to 500GB now. You get 200GB 7200rpm ones for £80.
Apple's upgrades aren't terrible as they now give you a 5400rpm 160GB option for £60 but they could be better and a 7200rpm option would be nice considering they give you one in the MBP.
In a way but I reckon an upgraded Mini with the following would be enough to keep most people happy:
Even if it's an option. Have two Minis, a budget model and a higher end model with the 8600M GS and allow the same Ram and HD upgrades in both. The higher end model could have ExpressCard and not the lower one.
So we get:
option 1:
2.2 GHz Penryn
2GB Ram
X4500
120GB HD
DVD burner
£399
option 2:
2.4GHz Penryn
2GB Ram
8600M GS 256MB
120GB HD
DVD burner
ExpressCard
£499 or even £599 - I'd pay £599 for this machine easily.
Add a BTO for a 200GB 7200rpm drive for £99 and this way I'd be paying £699 for the machine and I can pick up a really nice 1680 x 1050 display for £120 so I'm just over the price of the entry-level iMac. I really think that would keep a lot of xMac people happy - I'm one of them and that machine would make me very happy indeed.
I haven't forgotten the Cube. This time pricing will be more in line. Remember Blu-ray and El Gato are in the wings.
Here's an interesting little dimensional factoid.... The Apple TV and the Cube have an identical footprint (7.7" X 7.7"). The difference is obviously the height (1.1" vs. 9.8"). By contrast, the mini's footprint is 6.5" X 6.5". It's height is 2".
Pure speculation of course but one might be led to conclude that if you marry the Apple TV's/Cube's footprint with something more like the mini's height (or certainly less than the Cube's), you could end up with a small and attractive computer that isn't forced into the compromises that currently exist in the mini.
The Airport base station has the same footprint. If they expanded the mini to 7.7x7.7, and added maybe half an inch to it's height, it could hold a real hard drive and probably a desktop-class processor. That would be very nice.
I haven't forgotten the Cube. This time pricing will be more in line. Remember Blu-ray and El Gato are in the wings.
Sigh, I miss the Cube. It's true that's what I really want.
If the parts mentioned above couldn't fit in a Mini then a Cube is the next step up.
I reckon Apple probably could fit those parts in a Mini (even a Blu-Ray drive as you get mobile versions) but there will always be limits due to the size.
Mini, Cube, iMac, Mac Pro
The Cube is the lost Mac and it needs to be found again. It would be hard to get dual display support on a Mini the way it is and that's one thing I forgot to put on the upgrade list.
It would be good if Apple gave out more info on these things though. Like an official letter on the Apple site saying, the Cube isn't forgotten, we're still working on Phenomenon. No details are needed, just some assurance that there is hope round the corner.
The issue is that many of us have interests in software that demands a lot of disk space. For example iTunes and Aperture. The latest and greatest laptop disk isn't going to make a huge difference in the machines acceptability.
Which is why I noted an eSATA port would be great.
Quote:
By the way no an external disk is not an option to a reasonably size primary disk. For one thing an external disk should be focused on back ups.
Tell that to folks with multi-TB raid arrays. Or heck even single TB raid arrays and NAS.
The Airport base station has the same footprint. If they expanded the mini to 7.7x7.7, and added maybe half an inch to it's height, it could hold a real hard drive and probably a desktop-class processor. That would be very nice.
I believe that Time Capsule is the same footprint and not the Airport. I don't have a problem with going to the TC/aTV footprint (at 2" height) for 3.5" drives although it DOES look much bigger than the mini when parked side by side. I just don't INSIST on it.
Heck, gigE is probably about as fast as anything else for single drive transfer rates using netcat (ftp or nfs a bit slower). I believe need a half decent array before I see gigE as the overwhelming bottleneck.
Which is why I noted an eSATA port would be great.
Maybe that would help some but it does not forgive the machine not being suitable as sold. Worst not suitable for the sorts of applications that many now use the Mini for.
Quote:
Tell that to folks with multi-TB raid arrays. Or heck even single TB raid arrays and NAS.
Well yeah if the Mini is going into corporate networks, storage on servers is very common. But back to the home user where I suspect a lot of Minis go and you have to ask is that viable.
Mind you I have my own Linux server at home with a mirrored RAID, but I hardly consider myself normal. Frankly it isn't a big RAID either.
In any event I do believe that Apple will address the Mini shortly. What we are likely to get is unknown at this time. I'm just hoping that they reconsider the use of laptop storage products and if not get some state of the art storage into the machine as is.
Maybe that would help some but it does not forgive the machine not being suitable as sold. Worst not suitable for the sorts of applications that many now use the Mini for.
In what way would the addition of an eSATA port render the Mini unsuitable for current applications?
Quote:
Well yeah if the Mini is going into corporate networks, storage on servers is very common. But back to the home user where I suspect a lot of Minis go and you have to ask is that viable.
Mind you I have my own Linux server at home with a mirrored RAID, but I hardly consider myself normal. Frankly it isn't a big RAID either.
You said that external disks should only be about (focused on) backups. I would say that most uses are to hold media libraries whether they are single drives, JOBD enclosures or RAID arrays.
Apple has helped a lot with TimeMachine but backing up a 1TB drive via TM is nuts. You're better off with a RAID1 or RAID 10 enclosure of some kind.
Comments
And what size defines this mythical xMac? Please be specific in width, depth, and height.
Why don't we discuss what the mini could be within it's design parameters?
Why don't we discuss what the mini could be within it's design parameters?
Only if you tell us what those parameters are. To my knowledge, Apple has never publicly disclosed the design parameters for the mini.
Why don't we talk about what the mini could be within it's own design parameters, rather than a product that Apple hasn't shown any interest in making.
Mac Mini's Design Parameters in full:
1 - No monitor (headless imac).
/End of Parameters.
So this could be anything, it could be a bit taller, a bit wider and a bit fatter if Apple wanted.
It could also go the other way and become as small as an ATV. There is no design parameters that I am aware of that specify it must remain the same shape as the current models.
I have said that I do not care about 3.5" drives as for me MacMini is a media server and all my media are on externals anyway, only the OS runs on the hard drive (or did before my poor little mans demise). But I can understand that the people who use the Mini as a computer would want desktop drives, they are far more likely to last out.
So Apple could and should make this thing twice as tall, what is the driving force for keeping it small? Who cares how small it is?
Just make it a little bigger, stick a 3.5" drive in it, stick a Blu-Ray drive in it, stick a HDMI in it and get it in your stores asap.
We've never had that discussion here before.
I'm out of here.
<hits unsubscribe button>
Hope you people enjoy agonizing over the xMac.
We've never had that discussion here before.
I'm out of here.
<hits unsubscribe button>
Well, I guess if you don't want to define what a mini "is" and what an xMac "is" then I suppose it's best you pick up your marbles and go.
Well, I guess if you don't want to define what a mini "is" and what an xMac "is" then I suppose it's best you pick up your marbles and go.
If Apple comes out with a larger, better equipped Mini, wouldn't that BE the xMac?
If Apple comes out with a larger, better equipped Mini, wouldn't that BE the xMac?
Nope don't think so. The key to the xMax is that it would be a low cost expandable Max. The key to the enhanced Mini would be that it offers up Mac features at the lowest possible cost.
The only reason I argue that the Mini needs to expand slightly is to bring its cost down. At this end of the performance spectrum you wouldn't expect high performance disk drives be they desktop or notebook, you would expect low cost though. Same thing with the DIMM, though I'd have to admit that the price/volume ratio isn't as large. Also by going to a larger enclosure you relax demands on the motherboard, which could also mean having room for a real GPU.
Frankly though a real GPU would kill one of the Mini's bigger advantages which is very low power usage. It is seldom mentioned but is a real advantage. The bigger disk drive is a negative here, when running, but still is lower power than having an external drive attached. Which to come full circle is why there is considerable demand for a slightly larger Mini and that is simply because it is the best way to very large internal storage.
NOW NOTE:
This doesn't mean that most of us wouldn't accept an even smaller Mini. Apple could do this simply be implementing a large SSD on a pc board mounted parallel to the motherboard. This could lead to an even thinner Mini. I just don't think Apple wants nor has the desire to make the Mini a leading edge platform. AIR has demonstrated fairly smartly what one can do if you move away from the conventional with respect to PC hardware. Does a Mini really even need a DIMM slot or a conventional "disk" slot. I'd say no myself, that is if Apple implements the unit properly. AIR demonstrates that they can get very close to having a proper configuration but at the same time mis important functionality.
Dave
However, I'd buy the next mini if it had:
- ability to support 4GB of RAM
- Intel GMA X3500 or X4500 graphics
- Fast 2.5" drive over 320GB
It's quite possible I believe, although the price point would remain the same I fear.
What I'd like to see:
- ability to support 4GB of RAM
- iMac level graphics
- 3.5" drives
- same pricepoints
I can see the advantage of using Intel provided graphics chips though. And in a move inspired off the MacBook AIR, it would be nice to have 2GB of RAM soldered on the board and still allow for 4GB expansion via SO-DIMM.
Frankly though a real GPU would kill one of the Mini's bigger advantages which is very low power usage. It is seldom mentioned but is a real advantage.
Not with Montevina, it has a hybrid graphics feature where it switches off the GPU and uses integrated graphics to save power:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2325571,00.asp
Also, they have an 8800M GT in the MBP so I doubt the power drain of that can be significant enough to keep it out of a desktop when they use it in their laptops already.
The bigger disk drive is a negative here, when running, but still is lower power than having an external drive attached. Which to come full circle is why there is considerable demand for a slightly larger Mini and that is simply because it is the best way to very large internal storage.
Yeah, large storage doesn't need physically large drives these days so 3.5" drives aren't really necessary. You can get 320GB 2.5" drives for £60 - they go up to 500GB now. You get 200GB 7200rpm ones for £80.
Apple's upgrades aren't terrible as they now give you a 5400rpm 160GB option for £60 but they could be better and a 7200rpm option would be nice considering they give you one in the MBP.
The key to the enhanced Mini would be that it offers up Mac features at the lowest possible cost.
In a way but I reckon an upgraded Mini with the following would be enough to keep most people happy:
Easy upgrades for Ram and HD.
Comes with 2GB standard, upgradeable to 4GB
minimum 120GB HD, offer BTO 200GB 7200rpm models and 320, 500GB 5400 rpm drives
dedicated GPU
DVD burners in all models
ExpressCard for possible future expansion - it would allow things like eSATA
For a dedicated card, something like the 8600M GS:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...GS.3707.0.html
To compare to the 8600M GT:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...GT.3986.0.html
The one that's coming with Montevina is the X4500 and it's not bad but it's not that good:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-G...HD.9883.0.html
Even if it's an option. Have two Minis, a budget model and a higher end model with the 8600M GS and allow the same Ram and HD upgrades in both. The higher end model could have ExpressCard and not the lower one.
So we get:
option 1:
2.2 GHz Penryn
2GB Ram
X4500
120GB HD
DVD burner
£399
option 2:
2.4GHz Penryn
2GB Ram
8600M GS 256MB
120GB HD
DVD burner
ExpressCard
£499 or even £599 - I'd pay £599 for this machine easily.
Add a BTO for a 200GB 7200rpm drive for £99 and this way I'd be paying £699 for the machine and I can pick up a really nice 1680 x 1050 display for £120 so I'm just over the price of the entry-level iMac. I really think that would keep a lot of xMac people happy - I'm one of them and that machine would make me very happy indeed.
Not with Montevina, it has a hybrid graphics feature where it switches off the GPU and uses integrated graphics to save power:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/...2325571,00.asp
Also, they have an 8800M GT in the MBP so I doubt the power drain of that can be significant enough to keep it out of a desktop when they use it in their laptops already.
Yeah, large storage doesn't need physically large drives these days so 3.5" drives aren't really necessary. You can get 320GB 2.5" drives for £60 - they go up to 500GB now. You get 200GB 7200rpm ones for £80.
Apple's upgrades aren't terrible as they now give you a 5400rpm 160GB option for £60 but they could be better and a 7200rpm option would be nice considering they give you one in the MBP.
In a way but I reckon an upgraded Mini with the following would be enough to keep most people happy:
Easy upgrades for Ram and HD.
Comes with 2GB standard, upgradeable to 4GB
minimum 120GB HD, offer BTO 200GB 7200rpm models and 320, 500GB 5400 rpm drives
dedicated GPU
DVD burners in all models
ExpressCard for possible future expansion - it would allow things like eSATA
For a dedicated card, something like the 8600M GS:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...GS.3707.0.html
To compare to the 8600M GT:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-...GT.3986.0.html
The one that's coming with Montevina is the X4500 and it's not bad but it's not that good:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-G...HD.9883.0.html
Even if it's an option. Have two Minis, a budget model and a higher end model with the 8600M GS and allow the same Ram and HD upgrades in both. The higher end model could have ExpressCard and not the lower one.
So we get:
option 1:
2.2 GHz Penryn
2GB Ram
X4500
120GB HD
DVD burner
£399
option 2:
2.4GHz Penryn
2GB Ram
8600M GS 256MB
120GB HD
DVD burner
ExpressCard
£499 or even £599 - I'd pay £599 for this machine easily.
Add a BTO for a 200GB 7200rpm drive for £99 and this way I'd be paying £699 for the machine and I can pick up a really nice 1680 x 1050 display for £120 so I'm just over the price of the entry-level iMac. I really think that would keep a lot of xMac people happy - I'm one of them and that machine would make me very happy indeed.
I haven't forgotten the Cube. This time pricing will be more in line. Remember Blu-ray and El Gato are in the wings.
Here's an interesting little dimensional factoid.... The Apple TV and the Cube have an identical footprint (7.7" X 7.7"). The difference is obviously the height (1.1" vs. 9.8"). By contrast, the mini's footprint is 6.5" X 6.5". It's height is 2".
Pure speculation of course but one might be led to conclude that if you marry the Apple TV's/Cube's footprint with something more like the mini's height (or certainly less than the Cube's), you could end up with a small and attractive computer that isn't forced into the compromises that currently exist in the mini.
The Airport base station has the same footprint. If they expanded the mini to 7.7x7.7, and added maybe half an inch to it's height, it could hold a real hard drive and probably a desktop-class processor. That would be very nice.
I haven't forgotten the Cube. This time pricing will be more in line. Remember Blu-ray and El Gato are in the wings.
Sigh, I miss the Cube. It's true that's what I really want.
If the parts mentioned above couldn't fit in a Mini then a Cube is the next step up.
I reckon Apple probably could fit those parts in a Mini (even a Blu-Ray drive as you get mobile versions) but there will always be limits due to the size.
Mini, Cube, iMac, Mac Pro
The Cube is the lost Mac and it needs to be found again. It would be hard to get dual display support on a Mini the way it is and that's one thing I forgot to put on the upgrade list.
It would be good if Apple gave out more info on these things though. Like an official letter on the Apple site saying, the Cube isn't forgotten, we're still working on Phenomenon. No details are needed, just some assurance that there is hope round the corner.
The issue is that many of us have interests in software that demands a lot of disk space. For example iTunes and Aperture. The latest and greatest laptop disk isn't going to make a huge difference in the machines acceptability.
Which is why I noted an eSATA port would be great.
By the way no an external disk is not an option to a reasonably size primary disk. For one thing an external disk should be focused on back ups.
Tell that to folks with multi-TB raid arrays. Or heck even single TB raid arrays and NAS.
The Airport base station has the same footprint. If they expanded the mini to 7.7x7.7, and added maybe half an inch to it's height, it could hold a real hard drive and probably a desktop-class processor. That would be very nice.
I believe that Time Capsule is the same footprint and not the Airport. I don't have a problem with going to the TC/aTV footprint (at 2" height) for 3.5" drives although it DOES look much bigger than the mini when parked side by side. I just don't INSIST on it.
Heck, gigE is probably about as fast as anything else for single drive transfer rates using netcat (ftp or nfs a bit slower). I believe need a half decent array before I see gigE as the overwhelming bottleneck.
Which is why I noted an eSATA port would be great.
Maybe that would help some but it does not forgive the machine not being suitable as sold. Worst not suitable for the sorts of applications that many now use the Mini for.
Tell that to folks with multi-TB raid arrays. Or heck even single TB raid arrays and NAS.
Well yeah if the Mini is going into corporate networks, storage on servers is very common. But back to the home user where I suspect a lot of Minis go and you have to ask is that viable.
Mind you I have my own Linux server at home with a mirrored RAID, but I hardly consider myself normal. Frankly it isn't a big RAID either.
In any event I do believe that Apple will address the Mini shortly. What we are likely to get is unknown at this time. I'm just hoping that they reconsider the use of laptop storage products and if not get some state of the art storage into the machine as is.
Dave
It would need a larger HD
expandable memory
Thats it, really. Apple could put the latest integrated graphics in and I'd be happy.
Maybe that would help some but it does not forgive the machine not being suitable as sold. Worst not suitable for the sorts of applications that many now use the Mini for.
In what way would the addition of an eSATA port render the Mini unsuitable for current applications?
Well yeah if the Mini is going into corporate networks, storage on servers is very common. But back to the home user where I suspect a lot of Minis go and you have to ask is that viable.
Mind you I have my own Linux server at home with a mirrored RAID, but I hardly consider myself normal. Frankly it isn't a big RAID either.
You said that external disks should only be about (focused on) backups. I would say that most uses are to hold media libraries whether they are single drives, JOBD enclosures or RAID arrays.
Apple has helped a lot with TimeMachine but backing up a 1TB drive via TM is nuts. You're better off with a RAID1 or RAID 10 enclosure of some kind.