• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

The New Mac Mini

P

POLO

Limp Gawd
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
142
I saw someone asking about the long overdue revision of the Mac Mini.
It was closed fast for some reason, so here are some creditable links incase there are more people out there asking about it.

Great Mac Rumor Site: www.macrumors.com

http://www.macrumors.com/2009/02/19/leaked-photo-of-the-next-generation-mac-mini/
164552-00968_MacMini_122_978lo_425.jpg


The original leaker also claimed the following specs:

- Intel Core 2 Duo
- 2GHz
- 3MB L2 cache
- 2GB RAM DDR III, 1066MHz
- Super Drive is SATA

The port configuration is consistent with previous rumors that the new Mac mini would bring improved specs. Specifically, the new Mini was described to have 5 USB ports, FireWire 800, and two Display ports (Mini DisplayPort and Mini DVI). All these can be found on the leaked photograph.
Click to expand...

And a Video that goes with it:
http://www.macrumors.com/2009/02/20/video-of-leaked-next-gen-mac-mini/



And When I mean Long over due, it is Crazy long overdue!

http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac_mini
Product Mac mini
Recommendation: Don't Buy - Updates soon
Last Release August 07, 2007
Days Since Update 564 (Avg = 188)
Click to expand...

Is this the longest an Apple product has gone without a revision?!
 
I don't know that I would call this credible. The specs seem about right which most people already knew. However it's just another grainy cell phone picture that for some reason the person who took it is conveniently unable to open it up or take a picture of it running or produce any other real tangible evidence that it exists.
 
Why does it have Mini-DVI and Displayport? The converter to go from Displayport to DVI costs like $20. Why would apple bother putting a physical port for it on the board? I wonder if it supports dual monitors.
 
jwhazel said:
However it's just another grainy cell phone picture that for some reason the person who took it is conveniently unable to open it up or take a picture of it running or produce any other real tangible evidence that it exists.
Click to expand...

Who has been able to take apart an Apple Computer and post pictures before it was introduced?
 
Several people, like this guy: http://guides.macrumors.com/Gallery_of_Apple_Leaks_and_Prototypes#PowerMac_G4

I'm not saying that a new mini is out of the question. Given the specs, I think this is probably dead on (but most people could have told you that prior to these pictures). Why this person has one, obviously cares enough to share a picture and video, but can't provide any more proof that it's functional and not a fake is beyond me.
 
Apple has definitely taken their grand old time with introducing a new Mac Mini. The Mini was a great idea, but now, it's so old and obsolete that no one wants to purchase it. If they had made a Mac Mini with the newer Core 2 chips, and better specifications, I probably wouldn't have a new 20" iMac sitting on my desk. I would have much preferred to keep my old monitor. So, hopefully Apple does something soon with a new Mini soon. Hope I'm not being too opinionated here.
 
jwhazel said:
Why this person has one, obviously cares enough to share a picture and video, but can't provide any more proof that it's functional and not a fake is beyond me.
Click to expand...

So 7 years ago was the last time,
All the Apple computers since then haven't been leaked,

and the fact no one has done it since is beyond you?
 
The mini is the only mac I have actually considered owning. I would love to see an interesting refresh, but maybe with something more than just moving to the new C2D architecture (I dont know what, just saying though).
 
and the fact no one has done it since is beyond you?
Click to expand...

So because no one has successfully published photos of mac internals in 7 years means that it's impossible for this guy to open it up or... dare I say... power it on? The fact that it's not been released yet has put some type of magical "seal" on it that prevents a putty knife from prying open the top case?

Just a recap, macrumors.com also reported the mini as being dead last october: http://www.macrumors.com/2008/10/21/mac-mini-to-be-discontinued/ and then posted "confirmation" that the mini would launch at MWSF in January of this year: http://www.macrumors.com/2009/01/04...7-macbook-pro-battery-mac-mini-with-firewire/
 
fake. you can easily tell it was a robots hand moving the imaginary object.

reminds me of the leaked ipod nano picture, when everyone said it was fake and could see the photoshopped edges- but then it turns out that it was real.
 
Grentz said:
I would love to see an interesting refresh, but maybe with something more than just moving to the new C2D architecture (I dont know what, just saying though).
Click to expand...
I think a lot of people, myself included, were looking forward to an Ion-based mini. A mini with a dual core 1.8 GHz Atom proc would make for a pretty amazingly small, energy-efficient machine, and it would be perfect for enhancing Apple's "green" image.
 
CEpeep said:
Why does it have Mini-DVI and Displayport? The converter to go from Displayport to DVI costs like $20. Why would apple bother putting a physical port for it on the board? I wonder if it supports dual monitors.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine Apple allowing the Mini to support two displays out of box.
 
phide said:
I think a lot of people, myself included, were looking forward to an Ion-based mini. A mini with a dual core 1.8 GHz Atom proc would make for a pretty amazingly small, energy-efficient machine, and it would be perfect for enhancing Apple's "green" image.
Click to expand...


The Mini, as well as the iMac, use mobile cpu's, so are already much more efficient than standard desktops. I don't think it would be very popular if the Mini had was made comparable to a MBA as standard. Instead the Mini is more likely to be comparable to a MB in performance if it's refreshed, as a standard configuration. If it were a BTO option to go with the Atom, that would satisfy even more people, I agree. What would also be nice is if the Mini was expanded so that there is a range of options. Maybe two models and BTO for each including lower and higher CPU's. The second model would have a 9600. This would be a coup IMO because there are many people that consider buying a Mac but do not want to get rid of, or buy, another monitor. One reason I doubt this strategy being adopted by Apple is that they are in the monitor/screen business, but I hope they do it anyway.
 
phide said:
I think a lot of people, myself included, were looking forward to an Ion-based mini. A mini with a dual core 1.8 GHz Atom proc would make for a pretty amazingly small, energy-efficient machine, and it would be perfect for enhancing Apple's "green" image.
Click to expand...

That would kinda suck if they only had Atom processor versions. The new mini would be less powerful than the old then...
 
I just hope the mini display port, if it has it, supports multichannel audio. 7.1 would be nice.
 
Relativist said:
The Mini, as well as the iMac, use mobile cpu's, so are already much more efficient than standard desktops.
Click to expand...
Granted, but we're talking about 8W for a dual core 1.6 GHz Atom (the Atom 330) versus the 34W TDP of the 1.83 GHz Core 2 Duo used in the current mini. NVIDIA's reference Ion machine only draws around 25 watts under load, compared to about 60 watts the current mini would draw under the same load.

Grentz said:
That would kinda suck if they only had Atom processor versions. The new mini would be less powerful than the old then...
Click to expand...
But with a significantly more powerful GPU. The real thing holding the mini back in terms of general desktop performance is the integrated Intel graphics, not the CPU, which is astonishingly powerful for simple office tasks. Who's doing any kind of CPU-intensive stuff on the mini anyway?
 
If you are doing simple office tasks you don't need anything more than integrated intel.

The things is the CPU and GPU must be balanced or they bottleneck each other. Core2Duo is a fine choice for the 9400m. Though even that video isn't that great for gaming depending on the resolution you play at. Putting an atom in there is going to really gimp it.
Games like World of Warcraft are more dependent on CPU than GPU. Most people don't realize that.

I don't think i've done any office tasks in OSX beyond a few documents. I do mostly video conversions, extracting large files, some WoW. So leaving the c2d in the mini, maybe even getting some faster ones and bumping it up to a 9400m would help. As would the ability to go beyond 2gb of ram.
I don't need or want an imac. I have a 24" monitor already.
 
phide, I didn't say they shouldn't do it, but that they shouldn't do it as standard config, but as a BTO option. I'm sure there are people that would prefer lower power draw and don't mind the performance hit. What Archer75 said is what I suspect, people are more willing to buy the Mini if it were updated and don't want an iMac because they already have monitors.
 
Archer75 said:
If you are doing simple office tasks you don't need anything more than integrated intel.

The things is the CPU and GPU must be balanced or they bottleneck each other. Core2Duo is a fine choice for the 9400m. Though even that video isn't that great for gaming depending on the resolution you play at. Putting an atom in there is going to really gimp it.
Games like World of Warcraft are more dependent on CPU than GPU. Most people don't realize that.

I don't think i've done any office tasks in OSX beyond a few documents. I do mostly video conversions, extracting large files, some WoW. So leaving the c2d in the mini, maybe even getting some faster ones and bumping it up to a 9400m would help. As would the ability to go beyond 2gb of ram.
I don't need or want an imac. I have a 24" monitor already.
Click to expand...

Exactly, it is stupid to step back the processor and step forward the GPU, it just makes a bottleneck.

There are plenty that would like a slightly faster mini, the CPU does not have to be a power burner to be faster. They already use laptop CPUs which are very efficient.
 
If they used an Atom with a 9400M, couldn't they implement the CUDA architecture to bolster performance as needed?
 
Torquemada XP said:
If they used an Atom with a 9400M, couldn't they implement the CUDA architecture to bolster performance as needed?
Click to expand...

CUDA being Nvidia's propriatary technology will probably never really take off. But there is OpenCL which is roughly the same thing but it's open and it's what apple will be using.
 
Relativist said:
What Archer75 said is what I suspect, people are more willing to buy the Mini if it were updated and don't want an iMac because they already have monitors.
Click to expand...
I just don't think Apple necessarily wants to push what is essentially a headless iMac. If there's one universal truth, it's that Apple is always careful not to cannibalize sales by tiering products too closely. Ideally, Apple wants giant chasms between their products -- not tiny little gaps.

Archer75 said:
CUDA being Nvidia's propriatary technology will probably never really take off. But there is OpenCL which is roughly the same thing but it's open and it's what apple will be using.
Click to expand...
And that's precisely why Apple is pushing OpenCL in Snow Leopard, the idea being to alleviate potential CPU/GPU bottlenecks. Maybe I'm getting ahead of myself here, but if Snow Leopard is able to deliver an environment in which it's relatively easy for developers to offload FP-intensive processes to the GPU, a slower processor in the mini wouldn't necessarily be a significant drawback.

A mini that is "simply faster" is just terribly bland and uninteresting to me. The mini was a remarkable product when it launched, but it's simply unremarkable now. Even with a speed bump and a 9400M, it would still be pretty unremarkable. The mini needs something that consumers can immediately grasp as being appealing. If Apple can put something out that delivers comparable performance for the majority of consumers that's smaller and consumes half as much power as the current mini, that's something your average consumer is going to find significantly appealing.
 
It would be pointless though to gimp the CPU and then force developers to all code for OpenCL to get that performance back.
Rather they should keep the Core2Duo or even bump up the speed. Then you still have a faster GPU that developers could take advantage of if they so choose.

I'm still hoping they release a midrange tower. A core2duo tower doesn't cost much at all and I want the ability to upgrade.
It wouldn't cannabalize imac sales at all. People would still buy those simply for the form factor. And if you don't care about upgrading those are the way to go.
 
the video of it is really puzzling because to me the strangest thing about this alleged new mac mini is the firewire 800 port... just the fact that it is turned 90 degrees makes me wonder what the innards would even look like on that thing....

kind of like having an ethernet port turned 90 degrees on a mobo.... how foten do you ever see that?
 
Archer75 said:
I'm still hoping they release a midrange tower. A core2duo tower doesn't cost much at all and I want the ability to upgrade.
It wouldn't cannabalize imac sales at all. People would still buy those simply for the form factor. And if you don't care about upgrading those are the way to go.
Click to expand...

I would have thought this too, but I know a lot of devs who got imacs to work on since mac pros were more than they wanted to spend. For professionals, if you need a mac, you'll get one. If you're a home user, they get to control nearly 100% of your experiance by selling you an imac. The mac mini always seemed like the gateway drug into the mac world. Good enough to get you in the door, but not good enough to keep you from upgrading.
 
Archer75 said:
It would be pointless though to gimp the CPU and then force developers to all code for OpenCL to get that performance back.
Click to expand...
Hardly pointless. Something you're not thinking about here is the majority of the other Macs also have OpenCL-ready GPUs. Right now, the GPUs in Macs are spending most of their time just sitting around doing nothing more than a little crunching for Quartz and Core Image. The rest of the Mac lineup would see a similar or greater benefit to GPGPU than the mini.

And, again, think about the power window. The advantage of GPGPU is doing certain calculations on processors that are more efficient at doing those operations, with greater performance, rather than relying on the "brute force" of a general-purpose CPU like the Atom or Core 2.

Archer75 said:
I'm still hoping they release a midrange tower. A core2duo tower doesn't cost much at all and I want the ability to upgrade. It wouldn't cannabalize imac sales at all.
Click to expand...
And I'll happily give you $100 if it happens within the next five years. Apple's put the Mac Pro in the stratosphere in terms of price and performance, slowly having gotten ridden of midrange configurations entirely, and they're not going to introduce something that makes it much less attractive to creative professionals.
 
phide said:
Hardly pointless. Something you're not thinking about here is the majority of the other Macs also have OpenCL-ready GPUs. Right now, the GPUs in Macs are spending most of their time just sitting around doing nothing more than a little crunching for Quartz and Core Image. The rest of the Mac lineup would see a similar or greater benefit to GPGPU than the mini.
Click to expand...

It's pointless for a mini that may be getting downgraded on the CPU to upgrade the GPU. Yes, other products would see a benefit. But my focus here is the mini.
And I would like to see both a GPU and CPU upgrade. As well as a mini display port that supports 7.1 audio.
 
If the super drive is a blu-ray drive, then it will make it into my home theater.
 
Liver said:
If the super drive is a blu-ray drive, then it will make it into my home theater.
Click to expand...

Won't happen. They may come along for macs for data storage but to play actual movies there is a bunch of DRM that must be built into the OS and the hardware would also have to support HDCP. Does display port support that?
 
Yep. Version 1.1 of DisplayPort supports HDCP. It also has its own copy protection scheme called DPCP.
 
Didn't Jobs say BR was a mess? I'd love to replace my current Mac Mini running my home theater with one with BR, but it seems like Apple would want to pimp out their iTunes services through things like the AppleTV.
 
croakz said:
Didn't Jobs say BR was a mess? I'd love to replace my current Mac Mini running my home theater with one with BR, but it seems like Apple would want to pimp out their iTunes services through things like the AppleTV.
Click to expand...

Yeah, he said the licensing is a headache... Which is kinda funny because Pixar was in the BD camp during the format war.
 
phide said:
I just don't think Apple necessarily wants to push what is essentially a headless iMac. If there's one universal truth, it's that Apple is always careful not to cannibalize sales by tiering products too closely. Ideally, Apple wants giant chasms between their products -- not tiny little gaps.
Click to expand...

So what your saying is they will widen the already huge gap between the Mini and the iMac by lowering the performance of the Mini? Well, while I agree that they do want to keep their products differentiated, I think what would happen is that both the Mini and iMac would get upgrades. All the iMacs have dedicated video, and the Mini is likely to always have integrated video, all they would have to do is upgrade the video in the iMacs and the gap would be intact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top