5 USB ports lined up on the back.... it just looks wrong. Steve Jobs isn't about loading up on ports.
Not necessary and and easy cost saving measure. I call fake as well.
The current mini already has four USB ports. I guess if I follow your line of reasoning, I would argue that the Mac Pro also have an excess of ports: 4 FW + 5 USB (excluding ports on the keyboard).
As for whether 5 USB ports are necessary, here is a typical switcher usage scenario:
1 port for keyboard
1 port for mouse
1 port for printer
1 port for external USB drive
1 port for iPod charging
So there you go: 5 USB ports are very necessary on the mini.
Apple canny be that daft to launch an ageing system with essentially the same dimensions as the inferior model.
Remember the Mac Mini and it's unchanged exterior has been out since the iMac G4 - I mind seeing them in PCWrld at the time.
That's pure ancient!
Okay - it's as good as read, the interior will mirror the spec of the macbook however......
I reckon - like I've said before, the exterior will be dramatically different. From as stylistic point of view (which Apple are quite up on) they have to change the look of it. Don't tell me they are going to keep the same measurements so it's easier to stack a dozen of them to create the cyberdyne system!
Nah, Nah, it's going to be wee'r and slimmer and...................... Bloody Hell Apple, just bring the flamin machine out!
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.
The Intel mac mini and the Intel iMac also used the same design as their PPC counterparts.
The Mini DisplayPort is an open standard, there are already adaptors being made for it by third parties, unlike the previous port which was apple only.
Mini display port is NOT an open standard. It is a standard developed by Apple and approved by the DisplayPort folks. But it is not "open". Anyone who wants to use the standard must get Apple's permission (and I believe you have to let them authorize it as well).
I can understand the issue of style for a notebook, which will be used in public places, but not the mac mini, which will be for the most part tucked away under a desk/below a monitor. I, for one, would prefer Apple to deliver something of real substance and real value, rather than just another pretty shell.
The current mini already has four USB ports. I guess if I follow your line of reasoning, I would argue that the Mac Pro also have an excess of ports: 4 FW + 5 USB (excluding ports on the keyboard).
As for whether 5 USB ports are necessary, here is a typical switcher usage scenario:
1 port for keyboard
1 port for mouse
1 port for printer
1 port for external USB drive
1 port for iPod charging
So there you go: 5 USB ports are very necessary on the mini.
If you're going to use that argument, should all macs have a multitude of USB ports? Or if a switcher is getting an iMac, it's not as important because they can be really messy about things and plug stuff into the keyboard?
This is off topic, however its not really worth its own thread as its just speculation.
isnt it about time for a iMac G6? i know it went from White to Aluminum. but the dimensions need to change, get thicker, and offer a larger screen size. they need to adapt to a market that requires hotter computers (therefor more roominside for cooling)
this would require a new redesign, ive been on the fence about getting a new iMac for a few years but they just keep getting further and further behind in power compared to PC's that cost $1000 less.
why not do a full redesign, make it a bit bigger, and offer at least the Core i7's?
anyway the real question is that if it would be unreasonable to think that the G6 could be coming out this year...?
Most people who purchase a mini are not in the market for a new ACD. Besides, there is very little risk of wire tripping with a desktop machine, so the main advantage of MagSafe does not apply here. Finally, I don't think the 23in ACD can supply enough power to run a mini.
? Acording to current Mini and 24" Apple display specs it can run it just fine.
? Apple wants to upsell and slick, streamlined components that work better together than seperately is a good way to do it. Therefore eliminating an additional powerbrock and wires would be very Apple.
? Im not sure why you mentioned tripping. While the MagSafe is designed for Mac notebooks it is just sending power, so why not use that same power for their small desktop. A latch would be needed to prevent it from popping out and cutting power to the machine if it or the cable was moved.
? Acording to current Mini and 24" Apple display specs it can run it just fine.
? Apple wants to upsell and slick, streamlined components that work better together than seperately is a good way to do it. Therefore eliminating an additional powerbrock and wires would be very Apple.
? Im not sure why you mentioned tripping. While the MagSafe is designed for Mac notebooks it is just sending power, so why not use that same power for their small desktop. A latch would be needed to prevent it from popping out and cutting power to the machine if it or the cable was moved.
An upsell would be convincing the customer to buy a 24in iMac/Mac Pro. Not staying with a cheap mini and buy an expensive monitor.
2.) In regards to the video connectors, it seems unlikely that Apple would invest the additional time and money to include legacy hardware, particularly when they've made such a to-do about their new standard, not to mention that they make an adapter for this purpose.
3.) Firewire 800 is not all that far-fetched, seeing as the current mini includes the FW standard already. Backed when I worked in TV, we used Minis exclusively to digitize DV tapes, which has to be done in real time and doesn't require all that much processing power. All our hard drives were FW, so I can see them including the standard just for good measure. I know it's been phased out o on the MacBooks, but those are in a slightly different category. If Apple wanted to, they could make the argument that anyone needing a mobile work station to do video work will also likely need the added grfx and processing power of a pro unit anyway. While I know it's possible, I've never actually *seen* anyone edit on a standard MacBook. The mini, however, can be used as a low-cost alternative to augment your post production facilities, as was my experience, so it *might* still serve a niche there.
My inclination - at least my hope - is that this is likely just a prototype and not the final revision. I'd also be somewhat surprised for the Mini not to support a black enclosure to match that of it's bigger siblings. It would make very little sense design-wise to do anything other wise. I'm sure the mini is forthcoming, but I hope it's a little more fresh than what we see here.
This is off topic, however its not really worth its own thread as its just speculation.
isnt it about time for a iMac G6? i know it went from White to Aluminum. but the dimensions need to change, get thicker, and offer a larger screen size. they need to adapt to a market that requires hotter computers (therefor more roominside for cooling)
this would require a new redesign, ive been on the fence about getting a new iMac for a few years but they just keep getting further and further behind in power compared to PC's that cost $1000 less.
why not do a full redesign, make it a bit bigger, and offer at least the Core i7's?
anyway the real question is that if it would be unreasonable to think that the G6 could be coming out this year...?
The iMac won't be able to accommodate a Core i7, due to their TDP. The most it can accomodate is Clarksfield, which is due to be released at the end of the year. Oh well, at least it's a quad core chip and doesn't come with the atrocious intel integrated graphics.
The iMac won't be able to accommodate a Core i7, due to their TDP. The most it can accomodate is Clarksfield, which is due to be released at the end of the year. Oh well, at least it's a quad core chip and doesn't come with the atrocious intel integrated graphics.
thats a step i suppose, they really need to do something though, as the performance difference is widening too much while the cost is staying just as far apart.
Still illogical to include two different types of port when they could both be mini-DP: mini-DVI gains nothing here; they could just have 2 x mini-DP, which would make sense considering (A) they're trying to push their own mini-DP monitors and (B) going forward there are likely to be more and more DP-based monitors that mini-DVI just can't connect to, no matter what adapters you have... (depends on the monitor manufacturer)
Lots of places use the Mini to hook into analog output devices of various kinds. I'm assuming they kept DVI on board for these sorts of uses.
If you're going to use that argument, should all macs have a multitude of USB ports? Or if a switcher is getting an iMac, it's not as important because they can be really messy about things and plug stuff into the keyboard?
This argument does not apply for notebooks, because they come with input devices. They are also unlikely to be tethered to an external HD or printer due to their mobility.
Most switchers' keyboards are cheap old ones with no USB ports, which necessitate 5 USB ports on the mini. The iMac includes Apple's keyboard, which has USB port.
All of the devices I have cited are common devices that need to occupy USB ports for long periods of time. In particular, the external HD is used for Time Machine backups.
thats a step i suppose, they really need to do something though, as the performance difference is widening too much while the cost is staying just as far apart.
Clarksfield is the Nehalem-based mobile chip. However, its TDP is too high to be included in Apple's notebooks, except maybe the MBP 17in.
Mini display port is NOT an open standard. It is a standard developed by Apple and approved by the DisplayPort folks. But it is not "open". Anyone who wants to use the standard must get Apple's permission (and I believe you have to let them authorize it as well).
Well, the design can be downloaded from Apple's website. The certification, I imagine, would be done by VESA now that it's part of their standard.
Clarksfield is the Nehalem-based mobile chip. However, its TDP is too high to be included in Apple's notebooks, except maybe the MBP 17in.
would it be unreasonable to think that a new iMac would release as the chip was released?
i'd like to have a new computer (either PC or Mac) by November at the very latest, preferably by September. Would it be unreasonable to think that the a new iMac with the new Chip sets would be released by then?
this is one issue i do have with apple, its hard to know when to buy their products as they tend to keep everything a secret until it is released (which is also good in some ways) it would be nice however to know if waiting is worth it.
what times during the year do they normally have these releases? or is it just whenever they have a product to put out they have a conference and then sell it shortly after?
Comments
5 USB ports lined up on the back.... it just looks wrong. Steve Jobs isn't about loading up on ports.
Not necessary and and easy cost saving measure. I call fake as well.
The current mini already has four USB ports. I guess if I follow your line of reasoning, I would argue that the Mac Pro also have an excess of ports: 4 FW + 5 USB (excluding ports on the keyboard).
As for whether 5 USB ports are necessary, here is a typical switcher usage scenario:
1 port for keyboard
1 port for mouse
1 port for printer
1 port for external USB drive
1 port for iPod charging
So there you go: 5 USB ports are very necessary on the mini.
In fact why any plastic at the back? Why wouldn't the rear be like the AppleTV with a seamless aluminium wrap around?
The Mac mini's rear panel would most likely be facing the wall, so I don't see how making it all aluminum would make any difference.
Remember the Mac Mini and it's unchanged exterior has been out since the iMac G4 - I mind seeing them in PCWrld at the time.
That's pure ancient!
Okay - it's as good as read, the interior will mirror the spec of the macbook however......
I reckon - like I've said before, the exterior will be dramatically different. From as stylistic point of view (which Apple are quite up on) they have to change the look of it. Don't tell me they are going to keep the same measurements so it's easier to stack a dozen of them to create the cyberdyne system!
Nah, Nah, it's going to be wee'r and slimmer and...................... Bloody Hell Apple, just bring the flamin machine out!
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.
The Intel mac mini and the Intel iMac also used the same design as their PPC counterparts.
The Mini DisplayPort is an open standard, there are already adaptors being made for it by third parties, unlike the previous port which was apple only.
Mini display port is NOT an open standard. It is a standard developed by Apple and approved by the DisplayPort folks. But it is not "open". Anyone who wants to use the standard must get Apple's permission (and I believe you have to let them authorize it as well).
As for whether 5 USB ports are necessary, here is a typical switcher usage scenario:
1 port for keyboard
1 port for mouse
1 port for printer
1 port for external USB drive
1 port for iPod charging
Well... most people plug their mouse into the keyboard's USB port, but throw in a digital camera or a scanner, and your point stands.
The current mini already has four USB ports. I guess if I follow your line of reasoning, I would argue that the Mac Pro also have an excess of ports: 4 FW + 5 USB (excluding ports on the keyboard).
As for whether 5 USB ports are necessary, here is a typical switcher usage scenario:
1 port for keyboard
1 port for mouse
1 port for printer
1 port for external USB drive
1 port for iPod charging
So there you go: 5 USB ports are very necessary on the mini.
If you're going to use that argument, should all macs have a multitude of USB ports? Or if a switcher is getting an iMac, it's not as important because they can be really messy about things and plug stuff into the keyboard?
isnt it about time for a iMac G6? i know it went from White to Aluminum. but the dimensions need to change, get thicker, and offer a larger screen size. they need to adapt to a market that requires hotter computers (therefor more roominside for cooling)
this would require a new redesign, ive been on the fence about getting a new iMac for a few years but they just keep getting further and further behind in power compared to PC's that cost $1000 less.
why not do a full redesign, make it a bit bigger, and offer at least the Core i7's?
anyway the real question is that if it would be unreasonable to think that the G6 could be coming out this year...?
Most people who purchase a mini are not in the market for a new ACD. Besides, there is very little risk of wire tripping with a desktop machine, so the main advantage of MagSafe does not apply here. Finally, I don't think the 23in ACD can supply enough power to run a mini.
? Acording to current Mini and 24" Apple display specs it can run it just fine.
? Apple wants to upsell and slick, streamlined components that work better together than seperately is a good way to do it. Therefore eliminating an additional powerbrock and wires would be very Apple.
? Im not sure why you mentioned tripping. While the MagSafe is designed for Mac notebooks it is just sending power, so why not use that same power for their small desktop. A latch would be needed to prevent it from popping out and cutting power to the machine if it or the cable was moved.
Well... most people plug their mouse into the keyboard's USB port, but throw in a digital camera or a scanner, and your point stands.
We are talking about switcher and cheap old peripherals here, not the shiny Apple keyboards and mouse.
Notice that all of the peripherals I listed need to be attached to the computer for long periods of time.
? Acording to current Mini and 24" Apple display specs it can run it just fine.
? Apple wants to upsell and slick, streamlined components that work better together than seperately is a good way to do it. Therefore eliminating an additional powerbrock and wires would be very Apple.
? Im not sure why you mentioned tripping. While the MagSafe is designed for Mac notebooks it is just sending power, so why not use that same power for their small desktop. A latch would be needed to prevent it from popping out and cutting power to the machine if it or the cable was moved.
An upsell would be convincing the customer to buy a 24in iMac/Mac Pro. Not staying with a cheap mini and buy an expensive monitor.
2.) In regards to the video connectors, it seems unlikely that Apple would invest the additional time and money to include legacy hardware, particularly when they've made such a to-do about their new standard, not to mention that they make an adapter for this purpose.
3.) Firewire 800 is not all that far-fetched, seeing as the current mini includes the FW standard already. Backed when I worked in TV, we used Minis exclusively to digitize DV tapes, which has to be done in real time and doesn't require all that much processing power. All our hard drives were FW, so I can see them including the standard just for good measure. I know it's been phased out o on the MacBooks, but those are in a slightly different category. If Apple wanted to, they could make the argument that anyone needing a mobile work station to do video work will also likely need the added grfx and processing power of a pro unit anyway. While I know it's possible, I've never actually *seen* anyone edit on a standard MacBook. The mini, however, can be used as a low-cost alternative to augment your post production facilities, as was my experience, so it *might* still serve a niche there.
My inclination - at least my hope - is that this is likely just a prototype and not the final revision. I'd also be somewhat surprised for the Mini not to support a black enclosure to match that of it's bigger siblings. It would make very little sense design-wise to do anything other wise. I'm sure the mini is forthcoming, but I hope it's a little more fresh than what we see here.
This is off topic, however its not really worth its own thread as its just speculation.
isnt it about time for a iMac G6? i know it went from White to Aluminum. but the dimensions need to change, get thicker, and offer a larger screen size. they need to adapt to a market that requires hotter computers (therefor more roominside for cooling)
this would require a new redesign, ive been on the fence about getting a new iMac for a few years but they just keep getting further and further behind in power compared to PC's that cost $1000 less.
why not do a full redesign, make it a bit bigger, and offer at least the Core i7's?
anyway the real question is that if it would be unreasonable to think that the G6 could be coming out this year...?
The iMac won't be able to accommodate a Core i7, due to their TDP. The most it can accomodate is Clarksfield, which is due to be released at the end of the year. Oh well, at least it's a quad core chip and doesn't come with the atrocious intel integrated graphics.
The iMac won't be able to accommodate a Core i7, due to their TDP. The most it can accomodate is Clarksfield, which is due to be released at the end of the year. Oh well, at least it's a quad core chip and doesn't come with the atrocious intel integrated graphics.
thats a step i suppose, they really need to do something though, as the performance difference is widening too much while the cost is staying just as far apart.
Still illogical to include two different types of port when they could both be mini-DP: mini-DVI gains nothing here; they could just have 2 x mini-DP, which would make sense considering (A) they're trying to push their own mini-DP monitors and (B) going forward there are likely to be more and more DP-based monitors that mini-DVI just can't connect to, no matter what adapters you have... (depends on the monitor manufacturer)
Lots of places use the Mini to hook into analog output devices of various kinds. I'm assuming they kept DVI on board for these sorts of uses.
If you're going to use that argument, should all macs have a multitude of USB ports? Or if a switcher is getting an iMac, it's not as important because they can be really messy about things and plug stuff into the keyboard?
This argument does not apply for notebooks, because they come with input devices. They are also unlikely to be tethered to an external HD or printer due to their mobility.
Most switchers' keyboards are cheap old ones with no USB ports, which necessitate 5 USB ports on the mini. The iMac includes Apple's keyboard, which has USB port.
All of the devices I have cited are common devices that need to occupy USB ports for long periods of time. In particular, the external HD is used for Time Machine backups.
thats a step i suppose, they really need to do something though, as the performance difference is widening too much while the cost is staying just as far apart.
Clarksfield is the Nehalem-based mobile chip. However, its TDP is too high to be included in Apple's notebooks, except maybe the MBP 17in.
Mini display port is NOT an open standard. It is a standard developed by Apple and approved by the DisplayPort folks. But it is not "open". Anyone who wants to use the standard must get Apple's permission (and I believe you have to let them authorize it as well).
Well, the design can be downloaded from Apple's website. The certification, I imagine, would be done by VESA now that it's part of their standard.
Clarksfield is the Nehalem-based mobile chip. However, its TDP is too high to be included in Apple's notebooks, except maybe the MBP 17in.
would it be unreasonable to think that a new iMac would release as the chip was released?
i'd like to have a new computer (either PC or Mac) by November at the very latest, preferably by September. Would it be unreasonable to think that the a new iMac with the new Chip sets would be released by then?
this is one issue i do have with apple, its hard to know when to buy their products as they tend to keep everything a secret until it is released (which is also good in some ways) it would be nice however to know if waiting is worth it.
what times during the year do they normally have these releases? or is it just whenever they have a product to put out they have a conference and then sell it shortly after?