Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jackt

New Mac Mini

Recommended Posts

If it is more than 2X faster than the old model, why is an extra $100 such a big deal? Am I putting too much importance on processor power?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hmm interesting, but that means Rossetta too will take up alot of RAM so maybe stick in a 1 GB stick in place of one of the 256s

 

Yeah I think 1GB is what you'd need, but then the whole package starts looking pricey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i so have to go and get a mac mini g4 before they all sell out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i so have to go and get a mac mini g4 before they all sell out.

I admire you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i so have to go and get a mac mini g4 before they all sell out.

I admire you.

 

 

for once i might agree, even though i have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i so have to go and get a mac mini g4 before they all sell out.

I admire you.

 

why? ive been saving for a mac mini for a couple of weeks now and im going to get one. but i dont want an intel one. i do alot of digital editing and one of the main reasons why i need a new mac is cause im starting a video podcast.

 

 

1. you cant run any pro video editing apps on the new intels. not yet anyway and im not paying for a new version of final cut just so it can be universal.

2. photoshop runs like crap and they wont be universal till CS 3 or whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i so have to go and get a mac mini g4 before they all sell out.

I admire you.

 

why?

Because That is what I would do. A piece of advice: go refurb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm with you craigeth on buying one of the few remaining MacMini G4's on Amazon (Apple Mac mini M9971LL/B (1.42 GHz PowerPC G4, 512 MB DDR SDRAM, 80 GB Hard Drive, SuperDrive DVD-RW/CD-RW Drive)

. This was a let down on the revamp of the MacMini in a couple of areas.

 

1. Intergrated Video Chipset. (Should have went with an ATI X1300 64MB or something similar)

2. Price. (I don't feel that your getting the bang for your buck, should have that magic price of 499.00 for the intro and 699 for the high end) Oh wait you get the remote how should I forget :lol:

 

Well I was going to buy a iBook but it looks like they will probably have a intergrated video chipset as well.

 

I agree with the Woz that Apple may becoming distracted with the ipod.

 

Lastly, what's up with the iPod Hi-Fi. It may sound good but it doesn't look that great.

 

If I did not make any sense, I've been up for 16hrs straight....

 

 

:P:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must live on a differrent planet. I just don't see the new machine as being all that bad. OK, so its an integrated video chip. The previous ATI wasn't so great either. I've had my G4 mini since they came out and have been pretty frustrated with it from a performance standpoint. It just didn't have enough horsepower, RAM or inputs. All of those have been addressed so my order's placed.

 

cypher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so i just rang up the two apple resellers in my town. both of them only had 1 high end G4 mac mini left. i told the guy at the second shop that i wanted to layby it and that i have $300AUD saved already. he's gonna hold it for me till tomorrow when i can go put a deposit on it.

 

dont even start with the ipod hi-fi.

 

check this out. WHY buy a $599AUD stereo system that, a) doesnt play cds, tapes, radio or vinals, when you can use your current stereo with your ipod plugged in to the AUX inputs. if your stereo is anything like mine, (mine is about 6 or so years old) then it has RCA inputs at the back of it. just get a standard jack to RCA cable (comes with most video cameras) or buy the ipod to RCA cable that apple sells, and plug it in to the back of your stereo.

 

106133666_449434626e_m.jpg

ipod

106133700_770487aa1b_m.jpg

back of ipod. white cable is going to apple usb power adaptor.

black cable is going to stereo.

106133745_d3f0a127e1_m.jpg

back of stereo. because im using a standard jack to RCA cable, i had to switch them around. yellow now goes into white, and white goes into red. blame apple.

106133811_587d560582_m.jpg

finished. works like a charm. sounds great. i just saved $599AUD

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If it is more than 2X faster than the old model, why is an extra $100 such a big deal? Am I putting too much importance on processor power?

 

Yes.

 

The mini served as a perfect entry point for people such as me who wanted to experience a Mac at a non-Mac price. When I looked at the mini I knew that it was seriously lacking in hardware performance (It's slower than my 3 year-old AMD machine!), but I didn't care. I willingly sacrificed processor power for the ability to use OS X and the apps that go with it (primarily iLife).

 

Of course I would have loved to buy a Mac with more power, but I just couldn't afford it. As others have pointed out already, by the time you spec the new mini the way you want it, you're close to the price of an iMac. There goes the appeal for people on a budget.

 

WHY buy a $599AUD stereo system that, a) doesnt play cds, tapes, radio or vinals, when you can use your current stereo with your ipod plugged in to the AUX inputs.

 

For the same reason that someone would spend $200 on an iPod dock with speakers when a $20 set of PC speakers do the same job. I don't get it either. I connect my iPod to my stereo the same way you do. It works great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check out the new macbreak episode at www.macbreak.com (you have to subsribe via iTunes)

They did cover the event and were there.

 

In the show they talk alot about how this MacMini is going to be a DVD Plyer replacement and how the MacMini has become a MediaCentre for the living room with the Bonjour improvement to FrontRow.

 

But what I am still missing I guess a MacMini Tivo.

The capability for me to record TV content directly to my MacMini

 

I also think that the MacMini is a bit pricy but I also think the Intel chips are so expensive that Apple cannot do much about it.

 

The integrated graphics do not bother me at all, who cares? I just want the thing to work and on a MacMini I am certainly not looking for graphics performance, as long as my HDTV content looks good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I for one think this is being blown out of all proportion. It wasn't a keynote, it wasn't a big event and Apple didn't make a big deal. If they had, you would have known about it. The idea of adding a Core Duo CPU to a Mac Mini was one most people wanted to see happen, now it has all they can do is moan.

 

Frankly the Core Duo is an expensive chip, it is, and that has put the price up. The integrated graphics have helped keep that price down a little even if it does fail to meet the target. Price points are difficult things to hit with new revisions, especially those that are as heavy as the ones "we" have pushed on the product. Whatever happened, people wouldn't be happy.

 

Integrated however are just graphics; the argument against them is laughable. I don't care what anybody has to scream about there is no way that anyone in their right mind would buy a $600 miniature computer and expect it to the kinds of things that a separate GPU and VRAM would give. It's a Mac Mini, not a Mac Super Computer. If things go wrong then yes, I agree, it's bad, but the HDD can always be swapped out instead of the motherboard which would be my choice as a store manager.

 

So in conclusion:

 

1. Price: Steep, out of range, but predictable due to Mac fans cries.

2. Graphics: Reasonable, adequate, show me you need more from THAT computer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I for one think this is being blown out of all proportion. ...

 

I don't care what anybody has to scream about there is no way that anyone in their right mind would buy a $600 miniature computer and expect it to the kinds of things that a separate GPU and VRAM would give....

 

So in conclusion:

 

1. Price: Steep, out of range, but predictable due to Mac fans cries.

2. Graphics: Reasonable, adequate, show me you need more from THAT computer.

 

As so often happens, I agree Matt.

 

Going to 4 USB ports was a great improvement. Adding an audio input was a great improvement. Making it dual core was a huge improvement. Adding a second RAM slot was a great improvement. The new Mac Mini may not be everything that some had hoped for, but it is a forward evolutionary step for the product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Going to 4 USB ports was a great improvement. Adding an audio input was a great improvement. Making it dual core was a huge improvement. Adding a second RAM slot was a great improvement. The new Mac Mini may not be everything that some had hoped for, but it is a forward evolutionary step for the product.

 

On the back of that; look at it this way: "everyone" wanted a Mac Mini Media... thing, right? If you add a couple of tweaks (such as a Rev B?!?), a lower price point and a tag, do you think this would make a great little media server... thing? I do, hell yeah I do. Add your own graphics to "drive" a 1b" TV and 5.1 support you are sorted for life. Think of this as a stepping stone, and making money from Rev A (as everyone does, including APPL) along the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Core Duo in a mac mini? That's crazy that chip costs around $250US on it's own.

I think it's actually quite good. Don't like the price increase although it would be due to the more expensive intel chip.

The intel graphics I actually don't think are a downgrade on a 9200 which is not a very good GPU at all. It has pixel shader 2 which means it should in theory support core image and quartz 2d extreme. Which means that this GPU will be far more able to run quartz than the 9200 is. Although you should certainly get a imac if you plan on playing any games.

Also the optical out is a really useful feature, this will make the mac mini a lot more useful as a home theatre computer, it's a perfect form factor for that use. You'll only need an eyetv and you're set.

And it has gigabit ethernet, which could make it an excellent cheap server.

I don't mind the intel graphics so much my only criticism is the price, I hope that will go down as intel brings prices down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On the back of that; look at it this way: "everyone" wanted a Mac Mini Media... thing, right? If you add a couple of tweaks (such as a Rev B?!?), a lower price point and a tag, do you think this would make a great little media server... thing? I do, hell yeah I do. Add your own graphics to "drive" a 1b" TV and 5.1 support you are sorted for life. Think of this as a stepping stone, and making money from Rev A (as everyone does, including APPL) along the way.

 

I think what people really "wanted" from the next gen mac mini was a Personal Video Recorder. I also think that, given the success of the iTunes video store, a PVR built into a mac, particularly a "media center" mac, is simply not going to happen.

 

Apple wants you to hook the mini up to your TV. They do not want you recording TV shows from your cable. They want you to purchase those shows from iTMS.

 

In hindsight, I have to admit that I was really hoping for a completely redesigned mac mini, with a real hard drive and a built in PVR. But as I've already said in this post, that simply wouldn't make any sense from apple's business model. It would piss off the networks and encourage them to throw their support behind google video or microsoft's new store (urge? IIRC). Apple doesn't want that. The more music and videos they can get people to purchase that will play only on the iPods, the more deeply entrenched they become in the battle for your living room.

 

gekko

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

February 28, 2006

Intel Mac Mini Graphics Surprise

The change from ATI Radeon 9200 graphics card to integrated Intel Graphics is more than a bit puzzling to me.

 

Ok, so the integrated Intel has 64MB as opposed to the Radeon's 32MB. But Apple has thrown us a curve. Not only is the Intel Graphics "shared", Apple states "1. Memory available to Mac OS X may vary depending on graphics needs. Minimum graphics memory usage is 80MB, resulting in 432MB of system memory available.".

 

Am I reading this right? Minimum graphics usage requires more than Apple has provided for with their Intel integrated graphics? So, the most system memory you will ever have available is 432MB instead of the 512MB advertised.

 

Can someone explain to me how this is an improvement and why the same Mac OS X that worked with a 32MB graphics card now requires at least 80MB?

 

Posted by PowerPage Contributor at February 28, 2006 03:42 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@tide96 yes, it can be explained but I don't think anyone can write a book for such a question. If anyone can think of a quick response that covers it, please take a shot.

 

@gekko Media Center is the term I have seen thrown around and from what I can see people want what was already there, what we can already do but somehow have it built into the OS or something. I really couldn't tell. Either way, it was a pointless querk of nature and it's all there so people should just find out how to use it.

 

I agree that we can't expect a DVR Mac Mini. That's insane. If we had that it would cease to be a Mac, it would cease to be of use, it would require stupidity to think you can't already do it and also to think it would be better than anything else out there. More than anything it would show a bad move by Apple for exactly the reasons you pointed out and none of us want to see that come to fruition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another big problem with adding DVR functionality is the different global broadcast standards, Apple wouldn't be able to provide a one size fits all solution.

 

Apple are better off letting Elgato deal with the global standards and we can just hook up our Mac's to their EyeTv or whichever product we prefer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ive been saving for a mac mini for a couple of weeks now and im going to get one. but i dont want an intel one. i do alot of digital editing and one of the main reasons why i need a new mac is cause im starting a video podcast.

 

 

1. you cant run any pro video editing apps on the new intels. not yet anyway and im not paying for a new version of final cut just so it can be universal.

2. photoshop runs like crap and they wont be universal till CS 3 or whatever.

 

Based on your needs it doesn't really seem to me that a macmini is your best choice. Video editing would be better served with a more robust computer regardless of universal binaries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Check out the new macbreak episode at www.macbreak.com (you have to subsribe via iTunes)

They did cover the event and were there.

 

In the show they talk alot about how this MacMini is going to be a DVD Plyer replacement and how the MacMini has become a MediaCentre for the living room with the Bonjour improvement to FrontRow.

 

But what I am still missing I guess a MacMini Tivo.

The capability for me to record TV content directly to my MacMini

 

I also think that the MacMini is a bit pricy but I also think the Intel chips are so expensive that Apple cannot do much about it.

 

The integrated graphics do not bother me at all, who cares? I just want the thing to work and on a MacMini I am certainly not looking for graphics performance, as long as my HDTV content looks good.

 

like you said the intel chips are expensive and that is probably why they went integrated and didn't want to jack up the price with a video card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an edited version of what I sent Adam...

 

Thanks for the quickly-produced MacCast to talk about the new Apple stuff. I'll skip over the other announcements to offer my opinions on the new mini. As an owner of the latest (well, mostly - I only have a 32 MB VRAM version) Mac mini, I have some perspective on what the mini "was" as compared to the new version.

 

First of all - here's my gripe list of the G4 mini:

 

  • . Not until I upgraded to 1 Gig of RAM did the mini finally feel like it had decent performance.

Needs at least 64 MB of VRAM. 32 MB of VRAM limits a number of games that could at least be playable, not to mention certain Quartz Extreme effects (such as the rotating cube for fast user switching) that don't work at higher resolutions.

Could use ATI 9600 or equivalent for decent game performance. Actually the 9600 series is about 2 generations old for lower-midrange graphics, and it would have really benefited the mini for a decent casual gaming machine. As it is, the 9200 will let you play a lot of games that are 3+ years old with decent performance, but most newer games become either unplayable or are really ugly. This is less of a gripe than a wistful "gee, wouldn't it have been great if..."

Hard drive - slow and small. Yeah, I know - the form factor almost forced them to use a laptop-style drive. However, it's really dog slow and it helps to pull down the performance quite a bit. If the drive was faster, 512 MB wouldn't seem too skimpy as hitting VM would hurt less. Additionally, 80 Gigs just isn't all that much these days, especially if people actually use applications like iMovie and iDVD. If one attempts to use the mini as a media center, you absolutely must have a large/fast external drive, or a good connection to an 802.11G (or Ethernet) access point to access a dedicated server somewhere.

 

Other than these gripes, I really like my mini! ;-)

 

Now, let's contrast the new mini.

 

The Good

 

* Fast or Faster CPU offerings. The dual-core offering is really sweet on a machine like this, as it's typically going to be asked to be a real hub. Dual cores mean it can deal with drive access much better, plus do a lot of other simultaneous processing (e.g., DVR record functions while watching at the same time?).

* 5400 RPM SATA Drives. Faster rotation, faster bus, and larger sized offerings. What's not to like here?

* Two more USB ports. Again, what's not to like?

* Sound Out and In. Flexibility to use analog or digital sound - both out and in instead of just analog out. Very good feature for a media hub.

* WiFi and Bluetooth standard. I use both technologies a lot, so this is only a plus IMO.

* Front Row & Remote. Moves the mini toward the ideal media hub. Now, if only they could address the DVR market directly...

 

The Bad

 

* RAM "needs" to be in pairs. OK, so the old mini only had one DIMM slot anyway. However, from what I can gather, one needs to upgrade the RAM in pairs. This point is somewhere between good and bad, but I think it's less than optimal so it goes here.

* HD Expansion pricey. OK, so they are limited due to what's available, but the drive upgrading is not cheap, and you can't expand it all that much. Better performance and higher capacity can be had for those willing to use a 3rd party external drive offering.

 

The Ugly

 

* Wimpy graphic processor with Shared Memory. They traded a decent graphics card (ATI Radeon 9200 chipset) for the anemic Intel GMA950 graphics processor with 64MB of SDRAM shared with main memory. No! NO!!!! I wish I had saved the old mini page - one of the selling points on the graphics page was the fact they didn't take the same route that Wintel box manufacturers took and use a wimpy graphics chipset that borrowed memory from the system. Now, they've gone and done it too! This one fact alone is enough for me to entirely abandon any consideration of upgrading/sidegrading to this new model. There is NO WAY I will use or buy a system like this. They have effectively (pardon the analogy) castrated the machine's performance in the name of saving a few bucks. From what I understand, the Intel part runs OEM's about $7. The 9200 runs about 3 times that. Hey, I'll PAY another $15-25 for decent 3-D performance. You know - something I can actually play games with!? Bad Apple - no biscuit (or sale)!!

 

Looking at the list above, it would seem at first glance that Apple has made a decent improvement to the mini. However, for me (as I stated above), the paltry video will keep me a 10-foot-pole's distance away from this model. I could probably ignore the other issues if it weren't for this. However, I find the video setup inexcusable for Apple, of all vendors. Although I've been an Apple owner since 1985 (a "Fat Mac"), I honestly hope that this model sells poorly. Hopefully, Apple will "get it" and re-design the video subsystem correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what do you mean RAM must be upgraded in pairs? u mean that if i want 1 GB total i i have to replace each 256 with a 512?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
what do you mean RAM must be upgraded in pairs? u mean that if i want 1 GB total i i have to replace each 256 with a 512?

If you want the best speed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

×