Apple updates Mac mini, doubles RAM

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 87
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    First NOBODY should have to get use to this sort of market manipulation.



    Seocnd there is good reason to believe that Apple could have done alot processor wise and not gotten into a huge engineering program. It would have been a simple matter to pu Freescales 90nm e600 based G4 in the mini. That would have done alot right there for the processor



    AS to the grapics card that may involve a bit more work but this chip set is so old now that apple should not be charigning the prices they are for the Mini.



    Does anybody know what the HELL is going on at Apple? This is about the lamest update to come along in ages. What is sad is that there is hardware to upgrade the machine with, it is not like faster variants of the chips aren't available.



    Dave





    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gamrin

    Louzer, your "get used to it" argument is based on the notion that I'm surprised that the Mac mini update is weak. I'm not surprised. I'm disappointed. I know that Apple can't increase their processor speeds much. It doesn't mean that there aren't other places to upgrade the Mac mini.



  • Reply 42 of 87
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Katya;



    What many people don't understand in this country is that Broadband has far wider availability in some "third world" countries than here in the good ole USofA. Often with serivices far cheaper than in the US. Several factors have lead to this reality, including the the density of some countires and the relatively new infrastucture in place to support communications. In the US the population is spread out across the country often connected via older communications systems.



    Well that and alot of people don't seem to care at all about the net.



    dave







    Quote:

    Originally posted by Katya

    I live in a third world country and most of us now are actually using broadband internet. In fact, a lot of restaurants/coffee shops/internet cafes now have WiFi to cater to those who use laptops.



  • Reply 43 of 87
    stustanleystustanley Posts: 236member
    They actually raised the price of the Mac mini Here in the UK.



    The basic config now costs £359, £20 pounds more than before.



    That £359 is $625. The basic mini costs $125 or £72 more in the UK than USA. I am really dissapointed in Apple.
  • Reply 44 of 87
    g_warreng_warren Posts: 713member
    I think all this confirms is that the Mac mini will be the first mac to go intel. Sure, it would have been nice to have a 1.5GHz processor and a 64MB video card, but this update still saves me about £60 since I was going to get bluetooth, airport and 512Mb anyway - it just means that I can buy off the shelf and now save myself a few pounds.



    Not a great update, but it will me for 18 months, then I'll buy an intel mac mini to go with the 20" cinema display I'm about to buy.... off to the Apple store I go....
  • Reply 45 of 87
    stustanleystustanley Posts: 236member
    i wouldnt buy that cinema display yet, i think apple will go with new styling for all of the new intel macs



    stu
  • Reply 46 of 87
    capiendocapiendo Posts: 22member
    man i feel stupid. i held out buying a mini, hoping for a Core Image compliant GPU. i wanted to experiment with programming Core Image.



    why does the eMac have an ATI 9600 GPU and the mini doesn't? aren't they kinda based on the same motherboard design? if they are, it shouldn't have cost that much to upgrade the mini's GPU.



    anyway, does anyone have any idea about Core Image support on OSXintel? card drivers? i might have to hit the P2P networks and experiment with Core Image that way
  • Reply 47 of 87
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by capiendo

    man i feel stupid. i held out buying a mini, hoping for a Core Image compliant GPU. i wanted to experiment with programming Core Image.



    why does the eMac have an ATI 9600 GPU and the mini doesn't? aren't they kinda based on the same motherboard design? if they are, it shouldn't have cost that much to upgrade the mini's GPU.



    anyway, does anyone have any idea about Core Image support on OSXintel? card drivers? i might have to hit the P2P networks and experiment with Core Image that way




    Why feel stupid? Now at least you don't have to pay extra to get more ram or whatever else they've done to the low or mid end. Its not like the new model costs more or is less capable (then you would feel stupid).
  • Reply 48 of 87
    capiendocapiendo Posts: 22member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Louzer

    Why feel stupid? Now at least you don't have to pay extra to get more ram or whatever else they've done to the low or mid end. Its not like the new model costs more or is less capable (then you would feel stupid).



    i was specifically waiting for a fully Core Image compliant GPU. i didn't want to buy a high end Mac just so i could check out what programming for Core Image was like.
  • Reply 49 of 87
    louzerlouzer Posts: 1,054member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by wizard69

    First NOBODY should have to get use to this sort of market manipulation.





    This isn't market manipulation. Market manipulation is holding back inventory to boost demand and prices. Or flooding the market with a product to undercut competitors or the like. Issuing a crappy update can be called lousy business, or just a bad deal for consumers who've been hankering for who knows what, but it isn't manipulation.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by wizard69

    Seocnd there is good reason to believe that Apple could have done alot processor wise and not gotten into a huge engineering program. It would have been a simple matter to pu Freescales 90nm e600 based G4 in the mini. That would have done alot right there for the processor





    Wow, have you actually tried putting an e600 onto the mini's motherboard? How do you know its a simple matter? How do you know there aren't pin issues, heat issues, compatibility issues, bus issues, etc? Certainly not just because Freescale says its compatible, I hope, since that's putting trust in marketers (a big mistake). And maybe Apple doesn't have a contract nor a supply of these magical chips to use them. And has anyone actually shoved one of these into a mac to know whether they perform better then the current chips?





    Quote:

    Originally posted by wizard69

    AS to the grapics card that may involve a bit more work but this chip set is so old now that apple should not be charigning the prices they are for the Mini.





    So changing the brains of the mini is no problem, but flipping the graphics card is involved? I would think it would be the other way around. And Apple, as a public company that has to actually make money, should charge for the mini whatever the hell they can get people to pay. If people buy this product, then Apple has no incentive to change it. But the strength in a capitalist society is to NOT buy it. For apple then won't make money, and will need to adjust accordingly.



    Quote:

    Originally posted by wizard69

    Does anybody know what the HELL is going on at Apple? This is about the lamest update to come along in ages. What is sad is that there is hardware to upgrade the machine with, it is not like faster variants of the chips aren't available.





    Yeah, I know what's going on at Apple. Most everyone is on the Intel bandwagon, and Apple is just trying to get by without having to spend money on new PPC machines. Well, either Intel or iPod. That's where Apple spends its time. Their computer business is mostly an afterthought in the hierarchy (how else can you explain the fact that there's only been one 'new' machine out of apple in the last 2+ years - the iMac G5 - and everything else is just "hey, lets increase the CD-RW speed and go to a faster chip and hawk this iBook as an 'update'!") The mini is an eMac without a screen. Not upgradable. Slow and old components. Not exactly cutting edge. The only 'oomph' about it is the small enclosure and price. Big f'ing deal. How about selling a computer for less than $2000 that you can change the video card on. Or add an extra internal drive? Or, well, do ANYTHING with?



    BTW, for all you "How could apple not update the graphics card!" ranters, I'd like to point out that it took apple YEARS to update the graphics card in the ibook and imac lines, and both started out with crappy and outdated video cards to begin with. If you're expecting quick changeovers from Apple, you're smoking something funny.
  • Reply 50 of 87
    xflarexflare Posts: 199member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Louzer

    Why feel stupid? Now at least you don't have to pay extra to get more ram or whatever else they've done to the low or mid end. Its not like the new model costs more or is less capable (then you would feel stupid).



    This is true for Apple's American customers, not for the rest of the world, unfortunately here in the UK the price increased, so we're paying for the extra memory.
  • Reply 51 of 87
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Robin Hood

    Even the phone I bought my mother 2 years ago supports GPRS at 57kbps. It works anywhere. How much did it cost? $99, with no monthly subscription, and already including $99 in call credit. For checking email, it's perfectly fine (just hook it up to your iBook or Mac mini or whatever).



    But really all this is besides the point. My point is that the majority of people won't need the modem, so why should it be included? I'd rather have 512MB RAM as standard instead of a modem. Those that need a modem can add one for 29 bucks...




    Those that need a modem aren't going to add one when they grab it off the shelf at the apple store, which is where most of these things sell anyway.
  • Reply 52 of 87
    gregalexandergregalexander Posts: 1,399member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Robin Hood

    Who needs a modem? I mean, it's not last millennium anymore. I wish Apple did not sell any computers with modems anymore, including iBook's and PowerBook's, since WiFi has replaced the modem for travel.



    Actually I wish my iMac's modem could double as an answering machine... record my voice messages into my email (similar to what fax receiving does). But that's just my little wish.



    Anyway, as long as they keep the modem built-to-order option I think it's fine.

    Quote:

    Originally posted by 1984

    It has the same GPU as before so still is not Core Image compliant. The Superdrive is the same one as before without DL support which you get in the eMac and iMac.



    Folks, this is the end of the Mac mini. They treated the Cube this way just before killing it off.




    I think the Mac Mini may be a stepping stone to a set top box. So Apple adds airport express (so you can sit the Mac Mini in the lounge room), and bluetooth (for a bluetooth remote), and removes the modem. Now they need a graphics card with S-video output, a digital TV receiver (different for every country), and some nice software. As a digital TV receiver, recorder, and DVD player, it may still be too expensive.



    Still, if you're using the Mac Mini as a computer it's good to see the extra ram and features - why didn't they make the graphics card core-image compliant!?!
  • Reply 53 of 87
    sjksjk Posts: 603member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kenaustus

    The RAM upgrade is the best part - makes it cheaper to get a Gig.



    Nope, there's only one RAM slot in the mini so you have to remove the 512MB to upgrade to 1GB. Maybe you're thinking of the updated iBooks, now with 512MB standard and an empty slot?
  • Reply 54 of 87
    exhibit_13exhibit_13 Posts: 110member
    ok, here's what i think.



    a) this is an ENTRY-LEVEL computer. its not even consumer-level, by apple's standards. apple's consumer level-computer is the imac. deal with it. the mini is meant to be a little computer for easy solutions, not hardcore gaming or whatever. yes, it'd be nice if it had better than a piece of crap for a video card, but for the people buying an ENTRY-LEVEL computer, i think they can handle it.



    b) this was originally intended to be a second machine or a switcher for people who wanted a little bit more for cheap. again, if you really are upset about it, this isn't the computer for you.



    c) if you ARE upset about it, shell out an extra 300 dollars and get an emac. sure, you're not gonna have a studio display or whatever you may want, but you'll have a monitor with your computer, a bigger, faster hard drive, better speakers, a decent gpu, a faster superdrive, really everything you might want for cheap.



    d) i, for example, have a very slow computer. its roughly 5 years ago, and i'm starting to get upset with it. i'm leaving for college in little over a year, so i'm going to have a new computer all for myself, but this imac isn't going to last forever. for a person like me, the mini makes sense because its a cheap computer with enough power to get through the needed tasks, certainly better than my POS i'm using right now. i'd like to get one (or perhaps an emac, for reasons stating above, but, of course, that requires more money) for home, as a sort of segue machine until i spend all my money on a powerbook or whatever i might get. from where i'm standing, it seems like a logical option. my brother, who just graduated from college, is looking to get a new computer thats better than his paperweight of a compaq notebook, and he's looking seriously at the mini because for a college grad, its an inexpensive way to get what he loves: a mac. he's sick of windows and needs something that has a little power, and the mini is a perfect option. even though it hasn't seen a real update in 6 months or whatever. saving money=good. the mini, again, has its niche. being the best and fastest is not its purpose, being a cheap mac is.



    e) like some other people mentioned, it appears as though the mini will be the first to be moved to intel. until such time, apple probably isn't going to pour as much into it, as they have and might still into the imac, for example, which probably won't be switched for a while. if they do indeed start the transition in january, as i think they won't, this is likely to be first on the list, in which case it will surely have an impressive boost in performance. i do NOT think this is the end of the mini. it seems its more like a tiny (very tiny) stepping stone.



    f) this update also keeps out of the territory of other computers, i.e. the emac. it won't steal sales from higher-end models. it'd be nice to be a LITTLE more aggressive, but, for apple, it is still marketable and won't shaft them out of profits.





    so yeah, i'm a little disappointed, and you may call me an apple apologist or what have you, but to me, it seems like for its market sector, its still a viable option for those who are looking for cheap solution.
  • Reply 55 of 87
    amac4meamac4me Posts: 282member
    Let's not forget the motivation for the Mac mini ... Apple's objective is to market it as the "The most affordable Mac ever" hence, the goal is to expose potential Mac switchers to the platform.



    I agree that the revision is not very exciting but considering that Apple is seeing evidence of the "iPod Halo Effect" I think it was wise on Apple's part to upgrade the RAM to make the decision for potential switchers to the platform a bit easier. I do like the Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth on the $599 amd $699 models.



    Overall, I think the mini is a great system to offer to potential switchers.
  • Reply 56 of 87
    aquamacaquamac Posts: 585member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by 1984

    I'm ashamed to be a Mac user. I think its time Steve Jobs stepped down. This is awful. Folks, this is the end of the Mac mini. They treated the Cube this way just before killing it off.



    Oh now Please, I am disappointed too. espacialy for the GPU but That is taking it a little too far don't you think?
  • Reply 57 of 87
    aquamacaquamac Posts: 585member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mikef

    Apple didn't hype up these updates, this forum did. Has there ever been an Apple release that members of AI were content with?



    Yes the last iMac update. May people were happy with it.
  • Reply 58 of 87
    katyakatya Posts: 6member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by wizard69

    Katya;



    What many people don't understand in this country is that Broadband has far wider availability in some "third world" countries than here in the good ole USofA. Often with serivices far cheaper than in the US. Several factors have lead to this reality, including the the density of some countires and the relatively new infrastucture in place to support communications. In the US the population is spread out across the country often connected via older communications systems.



    Well that and alot of people don't seem to care at all about the net.



    dave




    Thanks for explaining this, Dave!
  • Reply 59 of 87
    glamingoglamingo Posts: 46member
    Im just sad about this update. I expected more than just inbuilt built to order options, but i do agree about apples position at the moment.anyway..
  • Reply 60 of 87
    xflarexflare Posts: 199member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by amac4me

    Let's not forget the motivation for the Mac mini ... Apple's objective is to market it as the "The most affordable Mac ever" hence, the goal is to expose potential Mac switchers to the platform.



    I agree that the revision is not very exciting but considering that Apple is seeing evidence of the "iPod Halo Effect" I think it was wise on Apple's part to upgrade the RAM to make the decision for potential switchers to the platform a bit easier. I do like the Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth on the $599 amd $699 models.



    Overall, I think the mini is a great system to offer to potential switchers.




    The "New" mini has nothing new in it - I don't want airport/bluetooth. I've been waiting for an upgraded one for a while, that coupled with the price increase in the uk - Apple have just lost a customer.
Sign In or Register to comment.