I actually really like that design. I would buy one! It would match the new LED Cinema displays nicely. Good job! Wishful thinking on the $499 thing though.
The single large rubber foot it has now works better for sitting on top of a TV etc. Also, if the base is aluminum that means the back is too and it has to have the ports cut out of it, which adds expense to the manufacturing.
It has a white light.
Considering Apple spend a billion dollars (i presume) setting up the unibody manufacturing process, I don't think its out of the question to see a "unibody" mac mini: it could be what is taking so long (and also could explain that the video that surfaced could be a prototype that got dumped b/c they went "solid block").
I agree it adds to the cost, but at the current price points i think the margins (which must be damn near 100%) could absorb it. I'm not sure of the real advantages, except aesthetics (i suppose it could be a little lighter/sturdier?)
Considering Apple spend a billion dollars (i presume) setting up the unibody manufacturing process, I don't think its out of the question to see a "unibody" mac mini: it could be what is taking so long (and also could explain that the video that surfaced could be a prototype that got dumped b/c they went "solid block").
I agree it adds to the cost, but at the current price points i think the margins (which must be damn near 100%) could absorb it. I'm not sure of the real advantages, except aesthetics (i suppose it could be a little lighter/sturdier?)
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
For PC cases, they are quite a handsom duo.
Those aren't bad cases, but seem much bigger that the mini now ... which i don't see Apple doing (although i would prefer a bigger case that allowed better hardware).
One thing that an all-alu body would also do is cut down on plastic, which would make it "the greenest mini ever" - something Apple has been doing recently.
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
For PC cases, they are quite a handsom duo.
They look like they're sticking their tongues out at me.
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
I like the them both. Esp' the black one. A cheap, plastic cube...Apple could do it. That's what the mini should be in my opinion. 8x8 and fit a Nehalem in there with a decent gpu.
I like the them both. Esp' the black one. A cheap, plastic cube...Apple could do it. That's what the mini should be in my opinion. 8x8 and fit a Nehalem in there with a decent gpu.
Lemon BOn BOn
Actually it's only half plastic. The front and back are aluminum and U shapped, while the top and sides are also U shaped and fit interlocked with each other. They have an external power supply and fit standard mini ITX motherboards, one full sized hard drive, and room for a (short) graphics card.
The single large rubber foot it has now works better for sitting on top of a TV etc. Also, if the base is aluminum that means the back is too and it has to have the ports cut out of it, which adds expense to the manufacturing.
It has a white light.
Oh yeah ... weird. I swear I saw a pic with a green one!
Quote:
Originally Posted by joelsalt
Considering Apple spend a billion dollars (i presume) setting up the unibody manufacturing process, I don't think its out of the question to see a "unibody" mac mini: it could be what is taking so long (and also could explain that the video that surfaced could be a prototype that got dumped b/c they went "solid block").
Unibody FTW!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outsider
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
For PC cases, they are quite a handsom duo.
They're nice, but they're huge! (Looking at the size of the CD for reference...)
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
For PC cases, they are quite a handsom duo.
Is it me, or do they look like his and her toasters???
Me, I want the video going to the display (TV), and the audio going through the TOSlink to the receiver/amp to the 5.1 setup. I do *not* want to have audio routing to some crappy tinny little speakers on my TV.
Mini-DisplayPort -> HDMI is a no-brainer $12 cable.
As is Mini-DisplayPort -> DVI.
As is Mini-DisplayPort -> DisplayPort.
DisplayPort is the new computer display interconnect, that is quite a bit beyond HDMI, yet has backwards-compatibility with HDMI. This is what is known as Good Thing(tm).
The speculation surrounding the Mini-DVI connector being included as well leads me to believe that it will handle the analog (ie, non-HDCP) signals, and the Mini-DP will handle all digital (ie, HDCP capable) signals. No more of that funky "will this protected media play on that monitor/tv/display device"? One port it will (Mini-DP), one port it won't (Mini-DVI). Note also that Mini-DVI -> VGA is quite possible this way, giving you the gamut from the oldest to the newest display connections, and everything in between, with two tiny little ports.
HDMI is... well... just HDMI.
You may as well be asking for a full sized VGA port.
DisplayPort isn't a superset of HDMI functionality. Display port doesn't do the new high-def audio formats, doesn't do the extended color space, and doesn't use the same control signal standard for connected devices. Granted, this only really matters in a home theater or when the mini is attached primarily to a TV. The following doesn't really apply to office workers and email only users.
I can't wait for a blu-ray equiped mini. That would make an excellent HTPC. HDMI would be sorely missing from such a product.
Also note that HDMI doesn't necessitate using "crappy tinny little speakers on [your] TV". It is the preferred method for running audio to an amp/receiver. Toslink can't handle the bandwidth delivered by blu-ray.
In theory I prefer displayport. In the real world i'd still opt for hdmi on a mini if given a choice.
DisplayPort isn't a superset of HDMI functionality. Display port doesn't do the new high-def audio formats, doesn't do the extended color space, and doesn't use the same control signal standard for connected devices.
I was under the impression that the chipsets would detect the presence of the DP to HDMI cable and send HDMI compliant signals rather than DP packets. Whether they are able to be HDMI 1.3 compliant I dunno.
I would also expect that high end TVs will start showing up with display port sooner or later just like some sported DVI for computer use.
I was under the impression that the chipsets would detect the presence of the DP to HDMI cable and send HDMI compliant signals rather than DP packets. Whether they are able to be HDMI 1.3 compliant I dunno.
Bingo.
dfiler, you are correct that DP is not a superset of HDMI - I wasn't trying to state that it was with 'quite a bit beyond' - it has taken the idea of a display standard in a very different direction, including such things as daisy-chaining, negotiated bandwidth, suitability for internal connectors on laptops, etc. HDMI can be considered DVI++, while DP is a different philosophy altogether - but one that still maintains that backward signal compatibility with HDMI. A DP port can sense what is on the other end, and output the proper legacy signal.
HDMI does have support for more professional AV-oriented features such as color spaces and high end audio specs, but it isn't really suitable for a computing environment. In some ways it's overkill, and in some ways it's lacking compared to DisplayPort.
I wouldn't be shocked to see the pro AV support come in a later spec revision of DP, for professional cinema use.
(Considering that there's absolutely no evidence of Blu-Ray support in a mini, I can't really consider that alone a reasonable justification for HDMI inclusion. OTOH... a mythical AppleTV w/ Blu-Ray that is geared directly at media use... *that* I would expect HDMI on.)
Quote:
I would also expect that high end TVs will start showing up with display port sooner or later just like some sported DVI for computer use.
No, it does not. You need an audio cable too mate. I can't wait to see the actual mini get a HDMI slot too, and people around here eating their words.
I would be shocked if they did so. The mini is a general purpose computer.
Now, I'd be surprised if the next revision (assuming there is one) of the AppleTV didn't have HDMI, since it is *designed* as a piece of AV equip, but I really don't see the design reasoning behind slapping one on the mini.
Replacing the Mini-DP with HDMI would be phenomenally stupid.
Replacing the Mini-DVI with HDMI would mean that this general purpose computer designed for people who already have legacy monitors... couldn't hook up to analog monitors. Again, blindly stupid.
The only option is to *add* an HDMI... think there's room?
So we have stupid, stupid, and probably not possible without serious redesign. All to eliminate a $12 cable adapter.
No, it does not. You need an audio cable too mate. I can't wait to see the actual mini get a HDMI slot too, and people around here eating their words.
People still doubting the actual video of the Mini that was posted?
First came the images, so called Photoshop 'experts' claimed it was a mockup then the video came and disproved that.
Now we have a proper video of the ports on the Mini and people still think it's somehow fake and this person has drilled the holes out to make the mockup.
HDMI is for TVs and the Mini is not a TV device. Apple don't want you to use it for that purpose as they have the ATV and it quite rightly has HDMI.
I would be shocked if they did so. The mini is a general purpose computer.
You're right. I just wish Apple would (officially) realise it also makes a very good home theater machine. A rough analogy might be: AppleTV is to Mac mini, as iPhoto is to Aperture.
Quote:
Replacing the Mini-DP with HDMI would be phenomenally stupid.
Yes.
Quote:
Replacing the Mini-DVI with HDMI would mean that this general purpose computer designed for people who already have legacy monitors... couldn't hook up to analog monitors. Again, blindly stupid.
No, assuming there was both Mini-DP and HDMI, legacy monitors are taken care of, in exactly the same way that the new unibody MacBooks provide DVI and VGA.
Maybe Apple would even provide the Mini-DP to DVI and Mini-DP to VGA adapters in the box, like they do the DVI to VGA adapter for the current Mac mini (and unlike the unibodys).
Quote:
The only option is to *add* an HDMI... think there's room?
It's not the only option, and in terms of plug space, Mini-DP and HDMI side by side would take no more room than a single (full) DVI connector, which is what it used to have. In terms of chip space and internal wiring, I don't know. I'm sure the circuitry is pretty miniaturized by now.
Quote:
So we have stupid, stupid, and probably not possible without serious redesign. All to eliminate a $12 cable adapter.
As posters above have mentioned, there is more benefit to having HDMI than just eliminating an adapter. My PS3 integrates very well into my home theater setup because it has HDMI. It feeds the sound into a Bravia screen, which is then routed optically to an amp. So, I can simply change the input using the remote to get a change of both picture and sound. The Mac mini is more cumbersome to change the input(s) to.
However, as you've said, Apple doesn't see the Mac mini as a home theater machine. That's a shame.
You're right. I just wish Apple would (officially) realise it also makes a very good home theater machine. A rough analogy might be: AppleTV is to Mac mini, as iPhoto is to Aperture.
I see it completely the opposite - the Mac mini is a general purpose machine that happens to do okay as a media server. An AppleTV *IS* a media device, first foremost and only. It's dedicated to that one task, and it should do it better than any other device in that arena, in theory. That means full HDMI, 1080p, 5.1, 7.1, whatevva, it should do it, no compromises. (Yes, I realize it's 720p now, which is why I not only said 'should', but haven't purchased one yet.)
The fact that Mac mini makes a pretty darned good media device is ancillary - it's not the primary purpose.
Quote:
No, assuming there was both Mini-DP and HDMI, legacy monitors are taken care of, in exactly the same way that the new unibody MacBooks provide DVI and VGA.
Except for one thing - remember the confusion/uproar over DRM'd media not playing on external monitors?
The Mini-DP port can take care of DRM'd media through HDCP and... crud, what's the official lettersoup on DP? DDCP? Anyhow, the mini-DVI can handle the analog signals, the ones that can't carry the DRM. One port is protected, one isn't. That's pretty simple, and not likely to cause much confusion on the part of the user. The laptops don't have the luxury of the room for two ports, so double-duty is called for.
I agree that the port specs should allow for the analog signals over Mini-DP, but I've been racking my noodle to come up with a justification for the inclusion of Mini-DVI as well as Mini-DP, and that's what I've been able to come up with.
Quick Q: is the 9400M, the GPU suspected of being in this beast, capable of the additional bits of HDMI that folks are interested in such as the color spaces? Is the audio circuitry in the mini capable of handling the advanced audio on HDMI? If no to these, then what good would a license-fee-adding HDMI slot add? \
Quote:
Maybe Apple would even provide the Mini-DP to DVI and Mini-DP to VGA adapters in the box, like they do the DVI to VGA adapter for the current Mac mini (and unlike the unibodys).
I think the 'unlike' is the direction they'll go, to be honest. You buy what you need, period. I'll be happy to be proven wrong on this though.
Quote:
It's not the only option, and in terms of plug space, Mini-DP and HDMI side by side would take no more room than a single (full) DVI connector, which is what it used to have. In terms of chip space and internal wiring, I don't know. I'm sure the circuitry is pretty miniaturized by now.
Problem is it keeps getting more demanded of it.
Quote:
As posters above have mentioned, there is more benefit to having HDMI than just eliminating an adapter. My PS3 integrates very well into my home theater setup because it has HDMI. It feeds the sound into a Bravia screen, which is then routed optically to an amp. So, I can simply change the input using the remote to get a change of both picture and sound. The Mac mini is more cumbersome to change the input(s) to.
However, as you've said, Apple doesn't see the Mac mini as a home theater machine. That's a shame.
Eh, I think they see the AppleTV as filling that segment. *shrug*
Kickaha, I think we basically agree on the merits of DP. But I had to chime in to counter what seems like overly zealous, near hatred of HDMI.
Like it or not, HDMI has become the new standard for the living room. Not might be, but is. It isn't just for professional audio formats. Instead it is the connector found on pretty much every TV and piece of living room AV equipment sold today.
So the question is... is the mini better off with a theoretically superior port for computing, or a port that people use in their living rooms today? A very valid trade-off to analyze for sure. Especially now that computer-TV convergence is close to fruition. I'll admit that this all comes back to how minis are actually used by consumers.
A couple minor asides: Complaining about licensing seems a bit of a stretch when that licensing is 4 cents per port. And the mini most certainly does have the processing power to output the enhanced color space and high bit-rate audio of blu-ray media. But admittedly this is doesn't matter until equipped with a blu-ray drive.
In the meantime, convenient AV interconnection alone is enough motivation for me. I'm not a fan of adapters and multiple cords.
Add the HDMI port and let Apple f-off and let us use the damn computer where the hell we want to. It's only a port, and they can add it on, we'll pay the extra $10, or whatever the heck the cost will be if any. Sick of it.
And yes, I think the mini video is fake, that's my viewpoint.
Comments
The single large rubber foot it has now works better for sitting on top of a TV etc. Also, if the base is aluminum that means the back is too and it has to have the ports cut out of it, which adds expense to the manufacturing.
It has a white light.
Considering Apple spend a billion dollars (i presume) setting up the unibody manufacturing process, I don't think its out of the question to see a "unibody" mac mini: it could be what is taking so long (and also could explain that the video that surfaced could be a prototype that got dumped b/c they went "solid block").
I agree it adds to the cost, but at the current price points i think the margins (which must be damn near 100%) could absorb it. I'm not sure of the real advantages, except aesthetics (i suppose it could be a little lighter/sturdier?)
Considering Apple spend a billion dollars (i presume) setting up the unibody manufacturing process, I don't think its out of the question to see a "unibody" mac mini: it could be what is taking so long (and also could explain that the video that surfaced could be a prototype that got dumped b/c they went "solid block").
I agree it adds to the cost, but at the current price points i think the margins (which must be damn near 100%) could absorb it. I'm not sure of the real advantages, except aesthetics (i suppose it could be a little lighter/sturdier?)
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
For PC cases, they are quite a handsom duo.
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
For PC cases, they are quite a handsom duo.
Those aren't bad cases, but seem much bigger that the mini now ... which i don't see Apple doing (although i would prefer a bigger case that allowed better hardware).
One thing that an all-alu body would also do is cut down on plastic, which would make it "the greenest mini ever" - something Apple has been doing recently.
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
For PC cases, they are quite a handsom duo.
They look like they're sticking their tongues out at me.
Originally Posted by Outsider
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
I like the them both. Esp' the black one. A cheap, plastic cube...Apple could do it. That's what the mini should be in my opinion. 8x8 and fit a Nehalem in there with a decent gpu.
Lemon BOn BOn
I like the them both. Esp' the black one. A cheap, plastic cube...Apple could do it. That's what the mini should be in my opinion. 8x8 and fit a Nehalem in there with a decent gpu.
Lemon BOn BOn
Actually it's only half plastic. The front and back are aluminum and U shapped, while the top and sides are also U shaped and fit interlocked with each other. They have an external power supply and fit standard mini ITX motherboards, one full sized hard drive, and room for a (short) graphics card.
The single large rubber foot it has now works better for sitting on top of a TV etc. Also, if the base is aluminum that means the back is too and it has to have the ports cut out of it, which adds expense to the manufacturing.
It has a white light.
Oh yeah ... weird. I swear I saw a pic with a green one!
Considering Apple spend a billion dollars (i presume) setting up the unibody manufacturing process, I don't think its out of the question to see a "unibody" mac mini: it could be what is taking so long (and also could explain that the video that surfaced could be a prototype that got dumped b/c they went "solid block").
Unibody FTW!
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
For PC cases, they are quite a handsom duo.
They're nice, but they're huge! (Looking at the size of the CD for reference...)
Jimzip
If it went unibody, it would be for purely cosmetic reasons. The mini is not a portable or have moving case parts like a laptop. It's generally left where it is; on a desk. I home it has the same dimensions as the Psile from Nexus:
For PC cases, they are quite a handsom duo.
Is it me, or do they look like his and her toasters???
*headdesk*
Me, I want the video going to the display (TV), and the audio going through the TOSlink to the receiver/amp to the 5.1 setup. I do *not* want to have audio routing to some crappy tinny little speakers on my TV.
Mini-DisplayPort -> HDMI is a no-brainer $12 cable.
As is Mini-DisplayPort -> DVI.
As is Mini-DisplayPort -> DisplayPort.
DisplayPort is the new computer display interconnect, that is quite a bit beyond HDMI, yet has backwards-compatibility with HDMI. This is what is known as Good Thing(tm).
The speculation surrounding the Mini-DVI connector being included as well leads me to believe that it will handle the analog (ie, non-HDCP) signals, and the Mini-DP will handle all digital (ie, HDCP capable) signals. No more of that funky "will this protected media play on that monitor/tv/display device"? One port it will (Mini-DP), one port it won't (Mini-DVI). Note also that Mini-DVI -> VGA is quite possible this way, giving you the gamut from the oldest to the newest display connections, and everything in between, with two tiny little ports.
HDMI is... well... just HDMI.
You may as well be asking for a full sized VGA port.
DisplayPort isn't a superset of HDMI functionality. Display port doesn't do the new high-def audio formats, doesn't do the extended color space, and doesn't use the same control signal standard for connected devices. Granted, this only really matters in a home theater or when the mini is attached primarily to a TV. The following doesn't really apply to office workers and email only users.
I can't wait for a blu-ray equiped mini. That would make an excellent HTPC. HDMI would be sorely missing from such a product.
Also note that HDMI doesn't necessitate using "crappy tinny little speakers on [your] TV". It is the preferred method for running audio to an amp/receiver. Toslink can't handle the bandwidth delivered by blu-ray.
In theory I prefer displayport. In the real world i'd still opt for hdmi on a mini if given a choice.
DisplayPort isn't a superset of HDMI functionality. Display port doesn't do the new high-def audio formats, doesn't do the extended color space, and doesn't use the same control signal standard for connected devices.
I was under the impression that the chipsets would detect the presence of the DP to HDMI cable and send HDMI compliant signals rather than DP packets. Whether they are able to be HDMI 1.3 compliant I dunno.
I would also expect that high end TVs will start showing up with display port sooner or later just like some sported DVI for computer use.
I was under the impression that the chipsets would detect the presence of the DP to HDMI cable and send HDMI compliant signals rather than DP packets. Whether they are able to be HDMI 1.3 compliant I dunno.
Bingo.
dfiler, you are correct that DP is not a superset of HDMI - I wasn't trying to state that it was with 'quite a bit beyond' - it has taken the idea of a display standard in a very different direction, including such things as daisy-chaining, negotiated bandwidth, suitability for internal connectors on laptops, etc. HDMI can be considered DVI++, while DP is a different philosophy altogether - but one that still maintains that backward signal compatibility with HDMI. A DP port can sense what is on the other end, and output the proper legacy signal.
HDMI does have support for more professional AV-oriented features such as color spaces and high end audio specs, but it isn't really suitable for a computing environment. In some ways it's overkill, and in some ways it's lacking compared to DisplayPort.
I wouldn't be shocked to see the pro AV support come in a later spec revision of DP, for professional cinema use.
(Considering that there's absolutely no evidence of Blu-Ray support in a mini, I can't really consider that alone a reasonable justification for HDMI inclusion.
I would also expect that high end TVs will start showing up with display port sooner or later just like some sported DVI for computer use.
Same here.
I know....Mini-DisplayPort does that too, though with a HDMI adapter.
No, it does not. You need an audio cable too mate. I can't wait to see the actual mini get a HDMI slot too, and people around here eating their words.
No, it does not. You need an audio cable too mate. I can't wait to see the actual mini get a HDMI slot too, and people around here eating their words.
You're right but:
Current Mini DisplayPort adaptors do not support audio (although the port itself does)[citation needed].
But like the article said, citation needed.
No, it does not. You need an audio cable too mate. I can't wait to see the actual mini get a HDMI slot too, and people around here eating their words.
I would be shocked if they did so. The mini is a general purpose computer.
Now, I'd be surprised if the next revision (assuming there is one) of the AppleTV didn't have HDMI, since it is *designed* as a piece of AV equip, but I really don't see the design reasoning behind slapping one on the mini.
Replacing the Mini-DP with HDMI would be phenomenally stupid.
Replacing the Mini-DVI with HDMI would mean that this general purpose computer designed for people who already have legacy monitors... couldn't hook up to analog monitors. Again, blindly stupid.
The only option is to *add* an HDMI... think there's room?
So we have stupid, stupid, and probably not possible without serious redesign. All to eliminate a $12 cable adapter.
Not seeing it.
No, it does not. You need an audio cable too mate. I can't wait to see the actual mini get a HDMI slot too, and people around here eating their words.
People still doubting the actual video of the Mini that was posted?
First came the images, so called Photoshop 'experts' claimed it was a mockup then the video came and disproved that.
Now we have a proper video of the ports on the Mini and people still think it's somehow fake and this person has drilled the holes out to make the mockup.
HDMI is for TVs and the Mini is not a TV device. Apple don't want you to use it for that purpose as they have the ATV and it quite rightly has HDMI.
I would be shocked if they did so. The mini is a general purpose computer.
You're right. I just wish Apple would (officially) realise it also makes a very good home theater machine. A rough analogy might be: AppleTV is to Mac mini, as iPhoto is to Aperture.
Replacing the Mini-DP with HDMI would be phenomenally stupid.
Yes.
Replacing the Mini-DVI with HDMI would mean that this general purpose computer designed for people who already have legacy monitors... couldn't hook up to analog monitors. Again, blindly stupid.
No, assuming there was both Mini-DP and HDMI, legacy monitors are taken care of, in exactly the same way that the new unibody MacBooks provide DVI and VGA.
Maybe Apple would even provide the Mini-DP to DVI and Mini-DP to VGA adapters in the box, like they do the DVI to VGA adapter for the current Mac mini (and unlike the unibodys).
The only option is to *add* an HDMI... think there's room?
It's not the only option, and in terms of plug space, Mini-DP and HDMI side by side would take no more room than a single (full) DVI connector, which is what it used to have. In terms of chip space and internal wiring, I don't know. I'm sure the circuitry is pretty miniaturized by now.
So we have stupid, stupid, and probably not possible without serious redesign. All to eliminate a $12 cable adapter.
As posters above have mentioned, there is more benefit to having HDMI than just eliminating an adapter. My PS3 integrates very well into my home theater setup because it has HDMI. It feeds the sound into a Bravia screen, which is then routed optically to an amp. So, I can simply change the input using the remote to get a change of both picture and sound. The Mac mini is more cumbersome to change the input(s) to.
However, as you've said, Apple doesn't see the Mac mini as a home theater machine. That's a shame.
You're right. I just wish Apple would (officially) realise it also makes a very good home theater machine. A rough analogy might be: AppleTV is to Mac mini, as iPhoto is to Aperture.
I see it completely the opposite - the Mac mini is a general purpose machine that happens to do okay as a media server. An AppleTV *IS* a media device, first foremost and only. It's dedicated to that one task, and it should do it better than any other device in that arena, in theory. That means full HDMI, 1080p, 5.1, 7.1, whatevva, it should do it, no compromises. (Yes, I realize it's 720p now, which is why I not only said 'should', but haven't purchased one yet.)
The fact that Mac mini makes a pretty darned good media device is ancillary - it's not the primary purpose.
No, assuming there was both Mini-DP and HDMI, legacy monitors are taken care of, in exactly the same way that the new unibody MacBooks provide DVI and VGA.
Except for one thing - remember the confusion/uproar over DRM'd media not playing on external monitors?
The Mini-DP port can take care of DRM'd media through HDCP and... crud, what's the official lettersoup on DP? DDCP? Anyhow, the mini-DVI can handle the analog signals, the ones that can't carry the DRM. One port is protected, one isn't. That's pretty simple, and not likely to cause much confusion on the part of the user. The laptops don't have the luxury of the room for two ports, so double-duty is called for.
I agree that the port specs should allow for the analog signals over Mini-DP, but I've been racking my noodle to come up with a justification for the inclusion of Mini-DVI as well as Mini-DP, and that's what I've been able to come up with.
Quick Q: is the 9400M, the GPU suspected of being in this beast, capable of the additional bits of HDMI that folks are interested in such as the color spaces? Is the audio circuitry in the mini capable of handling the advanced audio on HDMI? If no to these, then what good would a license-fee-adding HDMI slot add?
Maybe Apple would even provide the Mini-DP to DVI and Mini-DP to VGA adapters in the box, like they do the DVI to VGA adapter for the current Mac mini (and unlike the unibodys).
I think the 'unlike' is the direction they'll go, to be honest. You buy what you need, period. I'll be happy to be proven wrong on this though.
It's not the only option, and in terms of plug space, Mini-DP and HDMI side by side would take no more room than a single (full) DVI connector, which is what it used to have. In terms of chip space and internal wiring, I don't know. I'm sure the circuitry is pretty miniaturized by now.
Problem is it keeps getting more demanded of it.
As posters above have mentioned, there is more benefit to having HDMI than just eliminating an adapter. My PS3 integrates very well into my home theater setup because it has HDMI. It feeds the sound into a Bravia screen, which is then routed optically to an amp. So, I can simply change the input using the remote to get a change of both picture and sound. The Mac mini is more cumbersome to change the input(s) to.
However, as you've said, Apple doesn't see the Mac mini as a home theater machine. That's a shame.
Eh, I think they see the AppleTV as filling that segment. *shrug*
Like it or not, HDMI has become the new standard for the living room. Not might be, but is. It isn't just for professional audio formats. Instead it is the connector found on pretty much every TV and piece of living room AV equipment sold today.
So the question is... is the mini better off with a theoretically superior port for computing, or a port that people use in their living rooms today? A very valid trade-off to analyze for sure. Especially now that computer-TV convergence is close to fruition. I'll admit that this all comes back to how minis are actually used by consumers.
A couple minor asides: Complaining about licensing seems a bit of a stretch when that licensing is 4 cents per port. And the mini most certainly does have the processing power to output the enhanced color space and high bit-rate audio of blu-ray media. But admittedly this is doesn't matter until equipped with a blu-ray drive.
In the meantime, convenient AV interconnection alone is enough motivation for me. I'm not a fan of adapters and multiple cords.
And yes, I think the mini video is fake, that's my viewpoint.