I wonder if it's the cheapest computer to ever have Firewire 800 out of the box.
I'm pretty sure it is. I can't do that powerful of a search with MacTracker, but a prelimanary search came up with nothing less than double the Mac Mini's price.
What I would be looking at is the benchmarks that Macworld, Engaget, etc., will report relative to my needs, whether it be video/audio editing or gaming for example.
Next, I would like, if possible, get real time hands on and review respected professional comprehensive benchmark testing*. Not the off-the-wall idiots posting that profess just how stupid one can be and certainly NOT Primate Labs singualar clock speed tables.
To add to this, I wish AppleInsider will stop presenting sensational "reviews" like these as news.
- I still cannot even BELIEVE they didn't use a low-power quad-core part, even in the highest end model. Clearly they think everyone is a sucker and didn't bother to revise the cooling system to support a low-power quad core. They hardly use any more power than the fastest Core 2 Duo.
Some precise power consumption data would help here. From what I remember, the low-power quad chips are running at 65 W at least, which is more than the G5 used in the (then noisy) iMac.
The real problem here is the really slim form factor of the iMac. You cannot do much if the computer is like that.
Some precise power consumption data would help here. From what I remember, the low-power quad chips are running at 65 W at least, which is more than the G5 used in the (then noisy) iMac.
The real problem here is the really slim form factor of the iMac. You cannot do much if the computer is like that.
No, thanks \ . Apple has two choices: either keep the current desing and use low-power laptop chips, with whatever this may mean, or introduce a new machine with more volume and use normal desktop parts. But Apple likes to innovate and apparently has not found an original way to materialize the second option, most probably because there is no other than the usual one adopted by pretty much everyone else. So there remains the first option...
I think that 18 months or more is to be expected on Mac Mini updates. If Snow Leopard will speed up the Mac Mini even more then Apple will have even less reason to push it to newer architecture. I think if you want a Mini and you want it to be current, for a Mini, then you'll need to buy now.
[OPINION]
I think you're right. Apple had to keep even the higher priced Mac mini at 2 GHz in the standard configuration to differentiate the iMac with clockspeed.
Apple won't play the same clockspeed game when it can transition the iMac to Nehalem mobile.
After the iMac gets its update to the new platform, the mini's clockspeed will raise a bit (hopefully even up to 2.5GHz) and will stay there for at least another year.
I think you're right. Apple had to keep even the higher priced Mac mini at 2 GHz in the standard configuration to differentiate the iMac with clockspeed.
Apple won't play the same clockspeed game when it can transition the iMac to Nehalem mobile.
After the iMac gets its update to the new platform, the mini's clockspeed will raise a bit (hopefully even up to 2.5GHz) and will stay there for at least another year.
[/OPINION]
I think there won't be any Mini updates for at least 12 months. Even if during this time iMac goes Nehalem mobile.
I think you're right. Apple had to keep even the higher priced Mac mini at 2 GHz in the standard configuration to differentiate the iMac with clockspeed.
Apple won't play the same clockspeed game when it can transition the iMac to Nehalem mobile.
After the iMac gets its update to the new platform, the mini's clockspeed will raise a bit (hopefully even up to 2.5GHz) and will stay there for at least another year.
[/OPINION]
My hunch is Apple is trying to restrain costs by only building one logic board for the mini which would require a single CPU selection for all models. This cuts work-in-process inventory of logic board assemblies considerably. All they have to do is pop in the appropriate HDD and memory amount at final assembly, both of which are stock items for Macbook production anyway.
Are people really surprised by the tests? The only thing Apple did was bump the processor speed by a little bit, added different RAM that rarely shows any difference for normal use and added a different selection of GPUs.
You misread the article, then you spout off like you actually know something.
GPUs actually handle more tasks than just graphics these days. And even more so with the new MacOS coming out soon. Read your dang Appleinsider!
Thus performance of the CPU alone is not the measure of the machine.
Having slapped you down... I will say this update is a bit underwhelming...
While you might have slapped him down a bit, did the front side bus increase? If it did, combined withbfaster CPU, sure some things like font redraw, screen refresh and app redraw might be tevhnicallybfaster but you know what. Ask 100 people if they notice the font redraw increase vs rendering a movie, ripping a auidiontrack, decompressing a rar or zip file. Sorry but the CPU increase affects more real world than update and we still don't now framerates for 3d games.
Combine your so called speed increase with a 5200 rpm hard drive andnthebrefreshbrate become moot.
Just saying. Turns out though. Best post isnthe 2005 post wheelrer apple is to focused on iPhone apps and iPhones. Now they don't care about the pro user at all. No pro app updates. Funny thing is, all the cash flow is about to hit millions of iPhone users that will reach their 2 yr marks and can dump iPhone for phones that record video, play flash and more. So apple IMHO has shot themself in the foot with their cash flow with contracts about to expire. Typed on iPhone.
Question:Who the hell buys a computer based solely on clock speed?
Answer: Idiots
Question:Who the hell relies on benchmarks based solely on clock speed?
Answer: Idiots
dude. Where have you been last 15 years. Ever hear of mad onion they make 3d mark. Millions of users. Test frame rates for vid games and rendering, CPU which sell morebthan movies and music combined. And users rely on CPU for more things than font redraw and the on board gpu lakes compared to discrete.
The more machine you get, the longer it will be viable. You won't grumble if FW 3200 comes out and you want it, because you will just pick up a board. With Express 2 standard now, newer graphics cards should work as well.
If your monitor breaks down, you can get a temporary one.
Four FW 800 ports and I believe five USB 2 ports.
If you really need RAM, it's pretty cheap at OWC, and it's reliable.
Well there are two schools of thought. That's one.
The other is to buy cheap, replace often. The only downside to that is Apple sometimes won't let you do the "upgrade often" part for the mini.
For video cards, that's been my strategy and it works a heck of a lot better than shelling out $500+ for a top end card. 3 revs later, the $99-$120 budget cards will work with more games anyway.
While you might have slapped him down a bit, did the front side bus increase? If it did, combined withbfaster CPU, sure some things like font redraw, screen refresh and app redraw might be tevhnicallybfaster but you know what. Ask 100 people if they notice the font redraw increase vs rendering a movie, ripping a auidiontrack, decompressing a rar or zip file. Sorry but the CPU increase affects more real world than update and we still don't now framerates for 3d games.
Combine your so called speed increase with a 5200 rpm hard drive andnthebrefreshbrate become moot.
Just saying. Turns out though. Best post isnthe 2005 post wheelrer apple is to focused on iPhone apps and iPhones. Now they don't care about the pro user at all. No pro app updates. Funny thing is, all the cash flow is about to hit millions of iPhone users that will reach their 2 yr marks and can dump iPhone for phones that record video, play flash and more. So apple IMHO has shot themself in the foot with their cash flow with contracts about to expire. Typed on iPhone.
You just scared everyone away from using virtual keyboards.
dude. Where have you been last 15 years. Ever hear of mad onion they make 3d mark. Millions of users. Test frame rates for vid games and rendering, CPU which sell morebthan movies and music combined. And users rely on CPU for more things than font redraw and the on board gpu lakes compared to discrete.
So your are telling me that you pick your computer simply and only by its clock speed.
Funny thing is, all the cash flow is about to hit millions of iPhone users that will reach their 2 yr marks and can dump iPhone for phones that record video, play flash and more. So apple IMHO has shot themself in the foot with their cash flow with contracts about to expire. Typed on iPhone.
If Apple uses Tegra there shouldn't be any technical reasons why they can't offer video recording. Yes, it's technically possible now, but it's quite poor do to the HW. If Apple keeps the iPhoen the same size or goes smaller we shouldn't expect a much better camera. I'd rather see a better CMOS over increased megapixels, but the public at large will only care about the specs they can understand. Who can blame them.
As for Flash, until Adobe fixes Flash no phone will have a good version of Flash. And, perhaps more importantly, the majority that seemed to have complained about the iPhone not having Flash Lite now seem to be stating that they don't really miss Flash. The sites that use Flash for video, which doesn't seem to like Flash Lite anyway, are rumored to be pushing for native apps. This is smart as subverting Flash site to DL their content is relatively easy via a many plug-ins, so a native app to watch their videos does offer them more control and protection. I look forward to Hulu offering such an app, sooner rather than later.
I think you'll fine that the iPhone, for all its faults (and it does have them), will be keeping an unprecedented number of subscribers and draw in more with each new model for the foreseeable future. It's not the end-all-be-all of smartphones, but does seem to fit the needs of the average Western person better than most other such devices. Smartphones are longer just for hardcore business users and über-geeks.
You are absolutely right a better CMOS sensor and better lens would make much more of a difference in picture quality than simply more megapixels. The public at large don't understand this because its inconvenient to marketing megapixels if the public really understood how imaging works.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
I'd rather see a better CMOS over increased megapixels, but the public at large will only care about the specs they can understand. Who can blame them.
dude. Where have you been last 15 years. Ever hear of mad onion they make 3d mark. Millions of users. Test frame rates for vid games and rendering, CPU which sell morebthan movies and music combined. And users rely on CPU for more things than font redraw and the on board gpu lakes compared to discrete.
Many games are already GPU bound, meaning, for those who don't know what that means, is that the cpu is more than powerful enough, but that the GPU isn't powerful enough.
We've been seeing this more and more.
As game companies move more of their games from one core to two, and then to many, this will be even less of a cpu problem.
With all the talk of how powerful GPU's are for certain calculations, four and eight cores with hyperthreading are even more powerful for most tasks, if those tasks can be put on all those cores and threads. That's what both Open CL and Grand Central will be doing.
The tests done aren't showing much useful information. They are just testing a PART of the computer, and not always the most important part. More balanced testing is needed.
Well there are two schools of thought. That's one.
The other is to buy cheap, replace often. The only downside to that is Apple sometimes won't let you do the "upgrade often" part for the mini.
For video cards, that's been my strategy and it works a heck of a lot better than shelling out $500+ for a top end card. 3 revs later, the $99-$120 budget cards will work with more games anyway.
Same for projectors.
Like you say, that's one way of looking at it.
The way I do it, I do get higher performance for at least half of the lifetime of owning the machine. The other way, you never get high performance, but are always hovering around the middle.
Each way is valid. It just depends on how you use your machine.
Comments
I wonder if it's the cheapest computer to ever have Firewire 800 out of the box.
I'm pretty sure it is. I can't do that powerful of a search with MacTracker, but a prelimanary search came up with nothing less than double the Mac Mini's price.
What I would be looking at is the benchmarks that Macworld, Engaget, etc., will report relative to my needs, whether it be video/audio editing or gaming for example.
Next, I would like, if possible, get real time hands on and review respected professional comprehensive benchmark testing*. Not the off-the-wall idiots posting that profess just how stupid one can be and certainly NOT Primate Labs singualar clock speed tables.
To add to this, I wish AppleInsider will stop presenting sensational "reviews" like these as news.
- I still cannot even BELIEVE they didn't use a low-power quad-core part, even in the highest end model. Clearly they think everyone is a sucker and didn't bother to revise the cooling system to support a low-power quad core. They hardly use any more power than the fastest Core 2 Duo.
Some precise power consumption data would help here. From what I remember, the low-power quad chips are running at 65 W at least, which is more than the G5 used in the (then noisy) iMac.
The real problem here is the really slim form factor of the iMac. You cannot do much if the computer is like that.
What happened to insanely great?
Greatly insane?
I agree that Apple has a problem here. And it is purely an issue of willingness and decisions about the design of the computers.
Some precise power consumption data would help here. From what I remember, the low-power quad chips are running at 65 W at least, which is more than the G5 used in the (then noisy) iMac.
The real problem here is the really slim form factor of the iMac. You cannot do much if the computer is like that.
Liquid cooling?
Liquid cooling?
No, thanks
I think that 18 months or more is to be expected on Mac Mini updates. If Snow Leopard will speed up the Mac Mini even more then Apple will have even less reason to push it to newer architecture. I think if you want a Mini and you want it to be current, for a Mini, then you'll need to buy now.
[OPINION]
I think you're right. Apple had to keep even the higher priced Mac mini at 2 GHz in the standard configuration to differentiate the iMac with clockspeed.
Apple won't play the same clockspeed game when it can transition the iMac to Nehalem mobile.
After the iMac gets its update to the new platform, the mini's clockspeed will raise a bit (hopefully even up to 2.5GHz) and will stay there for at least another year.
[/OPINION]
[OPINION]
I think you're right. Apple had to keep even the higher priced Mac mini at 2 GHz in the standard configuration to differentiate the iMac with clockspeed.
Apple won't play the same clockspeed game when it can transition the iMac to Nehalem mobile.
After the iMac gets its update to the new platform, the mini's clockspeed will raise a bit (hopefully even up to 2.5GHz) and will stay there for at least another year.
[/OPINION]
I think there won't be any Mini updates for at least 12 months. Even if during this time iMac goes Nehalem mobile.
[OPINION]
I think you're right. Apple had to keep even the higher priced Mac mini at 2 GHz in the standard configuration to differentiate the iMac with clockspeed.
Apple won't play the same clockspeed game when it can transition the iMac to Nehalem mobile.
After the iMac gets its update to the new platform, the mini's clockspeed will raise a bit (hopefully even up to 2.5GHz) and will stay there for at least another year.
[/OPINION]
My hunch is Apple is trying to restrain costs by only building one logic board for the mini which would require a single CPU selection for all models. This cuts work-in-process inventory of logic board assemblies considerably. All they have to do is pop in the appropriate HDD and memory amount at final assembly, both of which are stock items for Macbook production anyway.
Southbridge are hot powerhogs, and penryn uses less power than merom when compared
clock for clock).
For the iMac there might be some improvement, because it is now using the Nvidia chips also.
As far as I have read about the test, it just tests the cpu and nothing else. So any improvement
from RAM and GPU or HD will not be recognized.
I don't know, but will DDR3 help the IGP?
You misread the article, then you spout off like you actually know something.
GPUs actually handle more tasks than just graphics these days. And even more so with the new MacOS coming out soon. Read your dang Appleinsider!
Thus performance of the CPU alone is not the measure of the machine.
Having slapped you down... I will say this update is a bit underwhelming...
While you might have slapped him down a bit, did the front side bus increase? If it did, combined withbfaster CPU, sure some things like font redraw, screen refresh and app redraw might be tevhnicallybfaster but you know what. Ask 100 people if they notice the font redraw increase vs rendering a movie, ripping a auidiontrack, decompressing a rar or zip file. Sorry but the CPU increase affects more real world than update and we still don't now framerates for 3d games.
Combine your so called speed increase with a 5200 rpm hard drive andnthebrefreshbrate become moot.
Just saying. Turns out though. Best post isnthe 2005 post wheelrer apple is to focused on iPhone apps and iPhones. Now they don't care about the pro user at all. No pro app updates. Funny thing is, all the cash flow is about to hit millions of iPhone users that will reach their 2 yr marks and can dump iPhone for phones that record video, play flash and more. So apple IMHO has shot themself in the foot with their cash flow with contracts about to expire. Typed on iPhone.
Question:Who the hell buys a computer based solely on clock speed?
Answer: Idiots
Question:Who the hell relies on benchmarks based solely on clock speed?
Answer: Idiots
dude. Where have you been last 15 years. Ever hear of mad onion they make 3d mark. Millions of users. Test frame rates for vid games and rendering, CPU which sell morebthan movies and music combined. And users rely on CPU for more things than font redraw and the on board gpu lakes compared to discrete.
The more machine you get, the longer it will be viable. You won't grumble if FW 3200 comes out and you want it, because you will just pick up a board. With Express 2 standard now, newer graphics cards should work as well.
If your monitor breaks down, you can get a temporary one.
Four FW 800 ports and I believe five USB 2 ports.
If you really need RAM, it's pretty cheap at OWC, and it's reliable.
Well there are two schools of thought. That's one.
The other is to buy cheap, replace often. The only downside to that is Apple sometimes won't let you do the "upgrade often" part for the mini.
For video cards, that's been my strategy and it works a heck of a lot better than shelling out $500+ for a top end card. 3 revs later, the $99-$120 budget cards will work with more games anyway.
Same for projectors.
While you might have slapped him down a bit, did the front side bus increase? If it did, combined withbfaster CPU, sure some things like font redraw, screen refresh and app redraw might be tevhnicallybfaster but you know what. Ask 100 people if they notice the font redraw increase vs rendering a movie, ripping a auidiontrack, decompressing a rar or zip file. Sorry but the CPU increase affects more real world than update and we still don't now framerates for 3d games.
Combine your so called speed increase with a 5200 rpm hard drive andnthebrefreshbrate become moot.
Just saying. Turns out though. Best post isnthe 2005 post wheelrer apple is to focused on iPhone apps and iPhones. Now they don't care about the pro user at all. No pro app updates. Funny thing is, all the cash flow is about to hit millions of iPhone users that will reach their 2 yr marks and can dump iPhone for phones that record video, play flash and more. So apple IMHO has shot themself in the foot with their cash flow with contracts about to expire. Typed on iPhone.
You just scared everyone away from using virtual keyboards.
dude. Where have you been last 15 years. Ever hear of mad onion they make 3d mark. Millions of users. Test frame rates for vid games and rendering, CPU which sell morebthan movies and music combined. And users rely on CPU for more things than font redraw and the on board gpu lakes compared to discrete.
So your are telling me that you pick your computer simply and only by its clock speed.
Funny thing is, all the cash flow is about to hit millions of iPhone users that will reach their 2 yr marks and can dump iPhone for phones that record video, play flash and more. So apple IMHO has shot themself in the foot with their cash flow with contracts about to expire. Typed on iPhone.
If Apple uses Tegra there shouldn't be any technical reasons why they can't offer video recording. Yes, it's technically possible now, but it's quite poor do to the HW. If Apple keeps the iPhoen the same size or goes smaller we shouldn't expect a much better camera. I'd rather see a better CMOS over increased megapixels, but the public at large will only care about the specs they can understand. Who can blame them.
As for Flash, until Adobe fixes Flash no phone will have a good version of Flash. And, perhaps more importantly, the majority that seemed to have complained about the iPhone not having Flash Lite now seem to be stating that they don't really miss Flash. The sites that use Flash for video, which doesn't seem to like Flash Lite anyway, are rumored to be pushing for native apps. This is smart as subverting Flash site to DL their content is relatively easy via a many plug-ins, so a native app to watch their videos does offer them more control and protection. I look forward to Hulu offering such an app, sooner rather than later.
I think you'll fine that the iPhone, for all its faults (and it does have them), will be keeping an unprecedented number of subscribers and draw in more with each new model for the foreseeable future. It's not the end-all-be-all of smartphones, but does seem to fit the needs of the average Western person better than most other such devices. Smartphones are longer just for hardcore business users and über-geeks.
I'd rather see a better CMOS over increased megapixels, but the public at large will only care about the specs they can understand. Who can blame them.
dude. Where have you been last 15 years. Ever hear of mad onion they make 3d mark. Millions of users. Test frame rates for vid games and rendering, CPU which sell morebthan movies and music combined. And users rely on CPU for more things than font redraw and the on board gpu lakes compared to discrete.
Many games are already GPU bound, meaning, for those who don't know what that means, is that the cpu is more than powerful enough, but that the GPU isn't powerful enough.
We've been seeing this more and more.
As game companies move more of their games from one core to two, and then to many, this will be even less of a cpu problem.
With all the talk of how powerful GPU's are for certain calculations, four and eight cores with hyperthreading are even more powerful for most tasks, if those tasks can be put on all those cores and threads. That's what both Open CL and Grand Central will be doing.
The tests done aren't showing much useful information. They are just testing a PART of the computer, and not always the most important part. More balanced testing is needed.
Well there are two schools of thought. That's one.
The other is to buy cheap, replace often. The only downside to that is Apple sometimes won't let you do the "upgrade often" part for the mini.
For video cards, that's been my strategy and it works a heck of a lot better than shelling out $500+ for a top end card. 3 revs later, the $99-$120 budget cards will work with more games anyway.
Same for projectors.
Like you say, that's one way of looking at it.
The way I do it, I do get higher performance for at least half of the lifetime of owning the machine. The other way, you never get high performance, but are always hovering around the middle.
Each way is valid. It just depends on how you use your machine.