When a screen is backlit with LEDs, what does the lighting pattern look like?
Are there multiple rows of LEDs behind the screen or is it just illuminated around the edges?
Anyone have any links to photos or video on this?
Thanks in advance.
There are a couple of different ways to do it. The conventional way is to use an array of LEDs covering the back of the panel. They can use white or an array of RGB LEDs (the best option) to produce light. This type of lighting allows for fancy stuff like local dimming for deep blacks.
Here's a picture of the LED array behind Sharp's LE700 series of TVs:
The second way is to have LEDs mounted around the edges of the display. Because the LEDs are not directly behind the display, local dimming isn't possible. However, because there isn't that extra layer behind the panel, they can be made super slim (like the Samsung TVs).
As far as comparing LEDs with CFLs, it's not even close. LEDs are clearly better, they are far brighter and they don't have the corner lighting issues that CFLs do. And frankly for those people who are complaining about matte screens not being on the iMac or 13" Macbook Pro, I say the benefits of using a brighter LCD outweighs the glare issue. Matte screens have had their time
Brighter screens are fine for playing games and watching movies, the very last thing you want for editing photographs though is a bright screen - which is why there is the demand from that community for matte and lower brightness. A 'pro' line of iMacs with less stupidly bright screens and a matte option would be a great step forward for many of us or even a headless mac between the mini and the pro.
Brighter screens are fine for playing games and watching movies, the very last thing you want for editing photographs though is a bright screen - which is why there is the demand from that community for matte and lower brightness. A 'pro' line of iMacs with less stupidly bright screens and a matte option would be a great step forward for many of us or even a headless mac between the mini and the pro.
Would matte on a MBP be too dull for Diablo III or games in general (let's use Crysis as another example)? I'm pretty sure my old Gateway desktop monitor was matte and it seemed fine and that was in 2003 so the MBP screen (be it 15" or 17") would have to be an improvement, no?
Would matte on a MBP be too dull for Diablo III or games in general (let's use Crysis as another example)? I'm pretty sure my old Gateway desktop monitor was matte and it seemed fine and that was in 2003 so the MBP screen (be it 15" or 17") would have to be an improvement, no?
The Matte on a MBP is as good as any laptop display for gaming. The difference in actual image quality between matte and glossy is small. As with everything else, it simply comes down to whether you want to see reflections clearly, or want them diffused.
An AIO is a relic compared to a desktop you put together yourself? I haven?t built a machine since the mid 90s and consider anyone who feels this is an ideal solution for the average person to be ?a relic?. Notebooks are the market segment that are growing and Apple?s AIOs are the only desktop segment that appear to be increasing in popularity. Most of the us aren?t or are no longer homebrew users who want to find cheap components online that we then have to find shabby drivers for to get a working box. Which we then put in a huge case with neon lights with over-clocked CPUs and anything else that may make our PC the envy of our friends. Nope, most of use want something that just works and works well.
PS: i Also prefer to drive a Mercedes and not a souped-up, bombastically sounding, ornately painted Honda Civic that can take turns sharper because of an ugly-ass wing on the back and technically do 0-60 faster than my Merc
Yes, it's a relic, in terms of price, performance, and expandability. And sorry to burst your little anti-PC bubble, but my machine, sadly, isn't covered in neon lights or in a giant box. It's a tiny Shuttle XPC, which is very pretty and took me about an hour to put together (at most).
But that's by the by, I could put together a machine on the Dell website right now for the same price as an iMac with performance many times greater. And Blu-Ray, eSATA, 8gb RAM etc.
My point, which you completely missed, was that using gimped laptop parts in a desktop is spectacularly idiotic. What does it matter if a desktop machine is a few cm thicker? I will be in the market for a new PC soon, and as I have a lot of other Apple gear (including a Macbook) I would like to get an iMac. But... the current model, as I said, is a joke, there's no way I'm paying so much for such a dated bit of hardware. If that means my next PC is another Windows box, then so be it, but I know when I'm being taken for a ride, and an iMac is a giant con.
Yes, it's a relic, in terms of price, performance, and expandability. And sorry to burst your little anti-PC bubble, but my machine, sadly, isn't covered in neon lights or in a giant box. It's a tiny Shuttle XPC, which is very pretty and took me about an hour to put together (at most).
But that's by the by, I could put together a machine on the Dell website right now for the same price as an iMac with performance many times greater. And Blu-Ray, eSATA, 8gb RAM etc.
My point, which you completely missed, was that using gimped laptop parts in a desktop is spectacularly idiotic. What does it matter if a desktop machine is a few cm thicker? I will be in the market for a new PC soon, and as I have a lot of other Apple gear (including a Macbook) I would like to get an iMac. But... the current model, as I said, is a joke, there's no way I'm paying so much for such a dated bit of hardware. If that means my next PC is another Windows box, then so be it, but I know when I'm being taken for a ride, and an iMac is a giant con.
So you do understand that Apple is using the more expensive notebook components for their AIO, yet you still wish to compare it to a desktop you put together from Dell. That doesn’t strike you as disingenuous in the least bit? And if using notebook components that lack excessive upgradability means that a machine is a relic than nearly every notebook out there is a relic. Have you checked out Dell’s AIO. Talk about a relic, they are matching the old Mac Mini with time between updates on that XPS One.
What you “idiotic” is a model that is working for Apple. Just because it doesn’t fit your particular needs doesn’t mean that it’s a bad model. I have no need for the iMac, but I can see how it can appeal to others. I also have no need for a huge tower, whether built by a major vendor or myself, but I can see how it can appeal to others.
You are confusing what you want Apple to do to suit your specific needs with what you think they ought to be doing to best serve their needs as a business. You don’t have to like it, but you do have to accept it. For example, i wish Apple would produce a home server running OS X, but they don’t, so I have a HP MediaSmart running Windows Home Server. It even allows for Time Machine backups. Not ideal, since my home is otherwise all Macs, but I don’t think Apple is idiotic, stupid or wrong for not making a specific product simply because I want it.
So you do understand that Apple is using the more expensive notebook components for their AIO, yet you still wish to compare it to a desktop you put together from Dell. That doesn?t strike you as disingenuous in the least bit? And if using notebook components that lack excessive upgradability means that a machine is a relic than nearly every notebook out there is a relic. Have you checked out Dell?s AIO. Talk about a relic, they are matching the old Mac Mini with time between updates on that XPS One.
What you ?idiotic? is a model that is working for Apple. Just because it doesn?t fit your particular needs doesn?t mean that it?s a bad model. I have no need for the iMac, but I can see how it can appeal to others. I also have no need for a huge tower, whether built by a major vendor or myself, but I can see how it can appeal to others.
I wasn't aware Dell made an all in one, but I had a quick look and this is what I found.
Dell XPS One - Core 2 Quad 2.3ghz, blu-ray ROM/DVDR drive, 2gb RAM, digital TV tuner, 802.11n, 500gb HD, GeForce 9600M GT, 24" 1080p screen, wireless mouse and keyboard. UK price = £1500
Apple iMac - Core 2 Duo 2.93ghz, DVDR drive, 4gb RAM, 640gb HD, GeForce GT 120, 24" 1080p screen, 802.11n, wired mouse and keyboard.
UK price = £1500
Which of these is the better value machine? Granted both are pretty crappy and over priced, but I know which one seems like a more modern PC.
Or alternatively, Dell also offer this choice:
Dell Studio XPS - i7 Quad 3.06ghz, blu-ray RW, drive, 8gb RAM, 2tb HD, GeForce GTS 240, 19 in 1 media card reader, 802.11n, 23" 1080p screen, wired keyboard and mouse.
UK price = £1550.
You defend Apple for not producing a consumer desktop tower, but given how laptops dominate Apple's sales perhaps they should reconsider. The value for money the Dell tower gives is light years ahead of the all in ones, particularly the iMac.
Looking at these specs and prices has actually been pretty interesting, as I didn't realise it was possible to get such a ridiculously fast new PC for a decent price. Looks like my next PC purchase is confirmed, as there's no way the new iMac will come anywhere close.
As far as comparing LEDs with CFLs, it's not even close. LEDs are clearly better, they are far brighter and they don't have the corner lighting issues that CFLs do.
They are better, but that's not why. LEDs (especially RGB LEDs, though those are very rare) allow the display to show the full color gamut, something that CCFL backlights don't allow. They allow the display to be either thinner (side lit) or have insanely high contrast ratios (local dimming), all while using less power and having longer lifespans. They can also strobe to produce a moving image with less blurring.
I wasn't aware Dell made an all in one, but I had a quick look and this is what I found.
Dell XPS One - Core 2 Quad 2.3ghz, blu-ray ROM/DVDR drive, 2gb RAM, digital TV tuner, 802.11n, 500gb HD, GeForce 9600M GT, 24" 1080p screen, wireless mouse and keyboard. UK price = £1500
Apple iMac - Core 2 Duo 2.93ghz, DVDR drive, 4gb RAM, 640gb HD, GeForce GT 120, 24" 1080p screen, 802.11n, wired mouse and keyboard.
UK price = £1500
Which of these is the better value machine? Granted both are pretty crappy and over priced, but I know which one seems like a more modern PC.
Or alternatively, Dell also offer this choice:
Dell Studio XPS - i7 Quad 3.06ghz, blu-ray RW, drive, 8gb RAM, 2tb HD, GeForce GTS 240, 19 in 1 media card reader, 802.11n, 23" 1080p screen, wired keyboard and mouse.
UK price = £1550.
You defend Apple for not producing a consumer desktop tower, but given how laptops dominate Apple's sales perhaps they should reconsider. The value for money the Dell tower gives is light years ahead of the all in ones, particularly the iMac.
Looking at these specs and prices has actually been pretty interesting, as I didn't realise it was possible to get such a ridiculously fast new PC for a decent price. Looks like my next PC purchase is confirmed, as there's no way the new iMac will come anywhere close.
Those Dells are rubbish. I'd rather build my own PC or choose individual parts from a reliable beige-box supplier and let them build it. Core i5, 4GB RAM, ATI 4870 1GB, 802.11n, Samsung 24" 1080p screen, wireless keyboard and mouse, 1TB HD (who needs 2TB?), 550W branded power supply ~ this should come in under £1,000 easily.
So, thin sexy iMac 24" for £1,200 with way underpowered graphics and dualcore CPU but with Mac OS X Snow Leopard goodness, or reliable beige-box supplier for great value for money. Dell is a no go. Neither here nor there.
Thanks to all , I just found this forum on the internet. I ordered a imac two days ago but after reading this forum I cancelled the order and will wait for the new imac !
The few users who will need an optical drive a few years from now can simply get an external drive.
I already have an external optical drive attached to my Mini on account of the Mini doesn't burn DVDs and so I bought a DVD external burner. As long as the thing is working properly, I can hook it up to whatever computer I want. And if Apple gets around to supporting Blu-Ray, when the price of Blu-Ray hardware becomes reasonable - probably not far off - I don't have to get rid of a perfectly good computer to go the Blu-Ray route.
Granted, I have more spaghetti in my work area than an Italian restaurant but I'm not that stressed by it. Out of sight out of mind. I have three external hard drives, including a terrabyte unit I just bought to handle more than seven hours of HD footage and an external DVD burner. I could replace it all with a Mac Pro tower, eliminating all that spaghetti, but the cost of doing that is rather high. Here in Canada it's $3379 Cdn before taxes to order up a base Pro with 2T worth of hard drive. The Mini, as it is configured now even with the CPU upgrade and a jump up to 4G of RAM, runs $1,089 Cdn. before taxes. Now imagine pulling the optical drive but lowering the cost by say $150, to bring it down to $939. Now to up the hard drive count order up a 2T hard drive from Apple for $400 and a "superdrive", i.e. an external DVD burner for maybe $150, a keyboard and mouse for $108 bringing the total cost to $1,597. Of course there is a huge performance difference but our sales tax in the area I live is 13 per cent, meaning the Mini, spaghetti and all, would check at about $1,805, whereas the tiower would come in at $3,818. That's a difference of $2,013.
If I'm running a business, it's a no-brainer to opt for the Pro's speed and less cluttered appearance. But as a hobbyist, the Mini package, including the DVD burner and hard drive, is the obvious choice.
More to the point, it would not matter in the slightest that the Mini didn't come with an optical drive. I already have the burner, so it would save me, in particular, money if the device were configured that way. If one were a beginner, i.e. starting off with no legacy equipment and not sure what my plans were for the computer, would there be a problem with bringing hiome a Mini that had the OS and iLife suite preinstalled, plugging the thing in and starting to tinker around. Adding optical capability would not require much tech savvy. Go to store, buy burner, bring burner home, plug in via USB (or firewire), done.
The original idea behind the Mini was bring-your-own-keyboard-mouse-monitor. So why not take it one step further by making it bring-your-own-keyboard-mouse-monitor-optical drive? Some folks might never need to add the drive and others like me, already have one. Don't know how many external DVD burners are out there but I'm betting it numbers in the millions. Everybody sells them. Worst case the cost is about the same and it's an additional minute or two to plug the external in. The Mini by it's very nature requires a ton of externals to be expanded for anything more than casual use so I guess my point is, what's one more?
Gruber's reporting that Blu-Ray is once again not happening. What's this, the third year in a row that it's been rumored for inclusion in Macs, since every other computer manufacturer has offered it for that long of time?
Comments
I just tried "iMac Air" in google and among the first few results there were two - actually about the same site - quite suspicious ones:
http://asaogz.321webs.com/imacair0.html
If you click on those picts or on the video, it starts to download an .exe file.
I'm a mac, so don't really care. But watch out if you search for this iMac Air rumor on Windows.
it's nasty!
When a screen is backlit with LEDs, what does the lighting pattern look like?
Are there multiple rows of LEDs behind the screen or is it just illuminated around the edges?
Anyone have any links to photos or video on this?
Thanks in advance.
There are a couple of different ways to do it. The conventional way is to use an array of LEDs covering the back of the panel. They can use white or an array of RGB LEDs (the best option) to produce light. This type of lighting allows for fancy stuff like local dimming for deep blacks.
Here's a picture of the LED array behind Sharp's LE700 series of TVs:
The second way is to have LEDs mounted around the edges of the display. Because the LEDs are not directly behind the display, local dimming isn't possible. However, because there isn't that extra layer behind the panel, they can be made super slim (like the Samsung TVs).
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehou...t=120&hl=en-GB
just registered to post this. some bored person posted a sketch up?
http://sketchup.google.com/3dwarehou...t=120&hl=en-GB
Rather neat looking if it were true.
As far as comparing LEDs with CFLs, it's not even close. LEDs are clearly better, they are far brighter and they don't have the corner lighting issues that CFLs do. And frankly for those people who are complaining about matte screens not being on the iMac or 13" Macbook Pro, I say the benefits of using a brighter LCD outweighs the glare issue. Matte screens have had their time
Brighter screens are fine for playing games and watching movies, the very last thing you want for editing photographs though is a bright screen - which is why there is the demand from that community for matte and lower brightness. A 'pro' line of iMacs with less stupidly bright screens and a matte option would be a great step forward for many of us or even a headless mac between the mini and the pro.
Brighter screens are fine for playing games and watching movies, the very last thing you want for editing photographs though is a bright screen - which is why there is the demand from that community for matte and lower brightness. A 'pro' line of iMacs with less stupidly bright screens and a matte option would be a great step forward for many of us or even a headless mac between the mini and the pro.
Would matte on a MBP be too dull for Diablo III or games in general (let's use Crysis as another example)? I'm pretty sure my old Gateway desktop monitor was matte and it seemed fine and that was in 2003 so the MBP screen (be it 15" or 17") would have to be an improvement, no?
Would matte on a MBP be too dull for Diablo III or games in general (let's use Crysis as another example)? I'm pretty sure my old Gateway desktop monitor was matte and it seemed fine and that was in 2003 so the MBP screen (be it 15" or 17") would have to be an improvement, no?
The Matte on a MBP is as good as any laptop display for gaming. The difference in actual image quality between matte and glossy is small. As with everything else, it simply comes down to whether you want to see reflections clearly, or want them diffused.
An AIO is a relic compared to a desktop you put together yourself? I haven?t built a machine since the mid 90s and consider anyone who feels this is an ideal solution for the average person to be ?a relic?. Notebooks are the market segment that are growing and Apple?s AIOs are the only desktop segment that appear to be increasing in popularity. Most of the us aren?t or are no longer homebrew users who want to find cheap components online that we then have to find shabby drivers for to get a working box. Which we then put in a huge case with neon lights with over-clocked CPUs and anything else that may make our PC the envy of our friends. Nope, most of use want something that just works and works well.
PS: i Also prefer to drive a Mercedes and not a souped-up, bombastically sounding, ornately painted Honda Civic that can take turns sharper because of an ugly-ass wing on the back and technically do 0-60 faster than my Merc
Yes, it's a relic, in terms of price, performance, and expandability. And sorry to burst your little anti-PC bubble, but my machine, sadly, isn't covered in neon lights or in a giant box. It's a tiny Shuttle XPC, which is very pretty and took me about an hour to put together (at most).
But that's by the by, I could put together a machine on the Dell website right now for the same price as an iMac with performance many times greater. And Blu-Ray, eSATA, 8gb RAM etc.
My point, which you completely missed, was that using gimped laptop parts in a desktop is spectacularly idiotic. What does it matter if a desktop machine is a few cm thicker? I will be in the market for a new PC soon, and as I have a lot of other Apple gear (including a Macbook) I would like to get an iMac. But... the current model, as I said, is a joke, there's no way I'm paying so much for such a dated bit of hardware. If that means my next PC is another Windows box, then so be it, but I know when I'm being taken for a ride, and an iMac is a giant con.
Yes, it's a relic, in terms of price, performance, and expandability. And sorry to burst your little anti-PC bubble, but my machine, sadly, isn't covered in neon lights or in a giant box. It's a tiny Shuttle XPC, which is very pretty and took me about an hour to put together (at most).
But that's by the by, I could put together a machine on the Dell website right now for the same price as an iMac with performance many times greater. And Blu-Ray, eSATA, 8gb RAM etc.
My point, which you completely missed, was that using gimped laptop parts in a desktop is spectacularly idiotic. What does it matter if a desktop machine is a few cm thicker? I will be in the market for a new PC soon, and as I have a lot of other Apple gear (including a Macbook) I would like to get an iMac. But... the current model, as I said, is a joke, there's no way I'm paying so much for such a dated bit of hardware. If that means my next PC is another Windows box, then so be it, but I know when I'm being taken for a ride, and an iMac is a giant con.
So you do understand that Apple is using the more expensive notebook components for their AIO, yet you still wish to compare it to a desktop you put together from Dell. That doesn’t strike you as disingenuous in the least bit? And if using notebook components that lack excessive upgradability means that a machine is a relic than nearly every notebook out there is a relic. Have you checked out Dell’s AIO. Talk about a relic, they are matching the old Mac Mini with time between updates on that XPS One.
What you “idiotic” is a model that is working for Apple. Just because it doesn’t fit your particular needs doesn’t mean that it’s a bad model. I have no need for the iMac, but I can see how it can appeal to others. I also have no need for a huge tower, whether built by a major vendor or myself, but I can see how it can appeal to others.
You are confusing what you want Apple to do to suit your specific needs with what you think they ought to be doing to best serve their needs as a business. You don’t have to like it, but you do have to accept it. For example, i wish Apple would produce a home server running OS X, but they don’t, so I have a HP MediaSmart running Windows Home Server. It even allows for Time Machine backups. Not ideal, since my home is otherwise all Macs, but I don’t think Apple is idiotic, stupid or wrong for not making a specific product simply because I want it.
So you do understand that Apple is using the more expensive notebook components for their AIO, yet you still wish to compare it to a desktop you put together from Dell. That doesn?t strike you as disingenuous in the least bit? And if using notebook components that lack excessive upgradability means that a machine is a relic than nearly every notebook out there is a relic. Have you checked out Dell?s AIO. Talk about a relic, they are matching the old Mac Mini with time between updates on that XPS One.
What you ?idiotic? is a model that is working for Apple. Just because it doesn?t fit your particular needs doesn?t mean that it?s a bad model. I have no need for the iMac, but I can see how it can appeal to others. I also have no need for a huge tower, whether built by a major vendor or myself, but I can see how it can appeal to others.
I wasn't aware Dell made an all in one, but I had a quick look and this is what I found.
Dell XPS One - Core 2 Quad 2.3ghz, blu-ray ROM/DVDR drive, 2gb RAM, digital TV tuner, 802.11n, 500gb HD, GeForce 9600M GT, 24" 1080p screen, wireless mouse and keyboard. UK price = £1500
Apple iMac - Core 2 Duo 2.93ghz, DVDR drive, 4gb RAM, 640gb HD, GeForce GT 120, 24" 1080p screen, 802.11n, wired mouse and keyboard.
UK price = £1500
Which of these is the better value machine? Granted both are pretty crappy and over priced, but I know which one seems like a more modern PC.
Or alternatively, Dell also offer this choice:
Dell Studio XPS - i7 Quad 3.06ghz, blu-ray RW, drive, 8gb RAM, 2tb HD, GeForce GTS 240, 19 in 1 media card reader, 802.11n, 23" 1080p screen, wired keyboard and mouse.
UK price = £1550.
You defend Apple for not producing a consumer desktop tower, but given how laptops dominate Apple's sales perhaps they should reconsider. The value for money the Dell tower gives is light years ahead of the all in ones, particularly the iMac.
Looking at these specs and prices has actually been pretty interesting, as I didn't realise it was possible to get such a ridiculously fast new PC for a decent price. Looks like my next PC purchase is confirmed, as there's no way the new iMac will come anywhere close.
Actually I think the back will be aluminium, like my mockup, but the front will retain the aluminium chin, *unlike* my mockup.
Of course I could have posted these somehow as "OMFG leaked" images
As far as comparing LEDs with CFLs, it's not even close. LEDs are clearly better, they are far brighter and they don't have the corner lighting issues that CFLs do.
They are better, but that's not why. LEDs (especially RGB LEDs, though those are very rare) allow the display to show the full color gamut, something that CCFL backlights don't allow. They allow the display to be either thinner (side lit) or have insanely high contrast ratios (local dimming), all while using less power and having longer lifespans. They can also strobe to produce a moving image with less blurring.
I wasn't aware Dell made an all in one, but I had a quick look and this is what I found.
Dell XPS One - Core 2 Quad 2.3ghz, blu-ray ROM/DVDR drive, 2gb RAM, digital TV tuner, 802.11n, 500gb HD, GeForce 9600M GT, 24" 1080p screen, wireless mouse and keyboard. UK price = £1500
Apple iMac - Core 2 Duo 2.93ghz, DVDR drive, 4gb RAM, 640gb HD, GeForce GT 120, 24" 1080p screen, 802.11n, wired mouse and keyboard.
UK price = £1500
Which of these is the better value machine? Granted both are pretty crappy and over priced, but I know which one seems like a more modern PC.
Or alternatively, Dell also offer this choice:
Dell Studio XPS - i7 Quad 3.06ghz, blu-ray RW, drive, 8gb RAM, 2tb HD, GeForce GTS 240, 19 in 1 media card reader, 802.11n, 23" 1080p screen, wired keyboard and mouse.
UK price = £1550.
You defend Apple for not producing a consumer desktop tower, but given how laptops dominate Apple's sales perhaps they should reconsider. The value for money the Dell tower gives is light years ahead of the all in ones, particularly the iMac.
Looking at these specs and prices has actually been pretty interesting, as I didn't realise it was possible to get such a ridiculously fast new PC for a decent price. Looks like my next PC purchase is confirmed, as there's no way the new iMac will come anywhere close.
Those Dells are rubbish. I'd rather build my own PC or choose individual parts from a reliable beige-box supplier and let them build it. Core i5, 4GB RAM, ATI 4870 1GB, 802.11n, Samsung 24" 1080p screen, wireless keyboard and mouse, 1TB HD (who needs 2TB?), 550W branded power supply ~ this should come in under £1,000 easily.
So, thin sexy iMac 24" for £1,200 with way underpowered graphics and dualcore CPU but with Mac OS X Snow Leopard goodness, or reliable beige-box supplier for great value for money. Dell is a no go. Neither here nor there.
Clarksfield is 65W TDP right? Way to hot for thinner iMacs. No Clarksfield, I think. Just bumped Core2Duo specs.
You do know you can buy PC laptops with i7s in them, don't you?
Sorry didn´t mean for my post to appear that big
The few users who will need an optical drive a few years from now can simply get an external drive.
I already have an external optical drive attached to my Mini on account of the Mini doesn't burn DVDs and so I bought a DVD external burner. As long as the thing is working properly, I can hook it up to whatever computer I want. And if Apple gets around to supporting Blu-Ray, when the price of Blu-Ray hardware becomes reasonable - probably not far off - I don't have to get rid of a perfectly good computer to go the Blu-Ray route.
Granted, I have more spaghetti in my work area than an Italian restaurant but I'm not that stressed by it. Out of sight out of mind. I have three external hard drives, including a terrabyte unit I just bought to handle more than seven hours of HD footage and an external DVD burner. I could replace it all with a Mac Pro tower, eliminating all that spaghetti, but the cost of doing that is rather high. Here in Canada it's $3379 Cdn before taxes to order up a base Pro with 2T worth of hard drive. The Mini, as it is configured now even with the CPU upgrade and a jump up to 4G of RAM, runs $1,089 Cdn. before taxes. Now imagine pulling the optical drive but lowering the cost by say $150, to bring it down to $939. Now to up the hard drive count order up a 2T hard drive from Apple for $400 and a "superdrive", i.e. an external DVD burner for maybe $150, a keyboard and mouse for $108 bringing the total cost to $1,597. Of course there is a huge performance difference but our sales tax in the area I live is 13 per cent, meaning the Mini, spaghetti and all, would check at about $1,805, whereas the tiower would come in at $3,818. That's a difference of $2,013.
If I'm running a business, it's a no-brainer to opt for the Pro's speed and less cluttered appearance. But as a hobbyist, the Mini package, including the DVD burner and hard drive, is the obvious choice.
More to the point, it would not matter in the slightest that the Mini didn't come with an optical drive. I already have the burner, so it would save me, in particular, money if the device were configured that way. If one were a beginner, i.e. starting off with no legacy equipment and not sure what my plans were for the computer, would there be a problem with bringing hiome a Mini that had the OS and iLife suite preinstalled, plugging the thing in and starting to tinker around. Adding optical capability would not require much tech savvy. Go to store, buy burner, bring burner home, plug in via USB (or firewire), done.
The original idea behind the Mini was bring-your-own-keyboard-mouse-monitor. So why not take it one step further by making it bring-your-own-keyboard-mouse-monitor-optical drive? Some folks might never need to add the drive and others like me, already have one. Don't know how many external DVD burners are out there but I'm betting it numbers in the millions. Everybody sells them. Worst case the cost is about the same and it's an additional minute or two to plug the external in. The Mini by it's very nature requires a ton of externals to be expanded for anything more than casual use so I guess my point is, what's one more?