evilgEEk
Sep 8, 08:01 PM
Number of posts in this thread seem to indicate that this update has been underwhelming
Well, the update certainly wasn't jaw-dropping, it was just a normal product cycle update. So in comparison to the new CPU's in the iMac, oh, and the whole 24" screen business, the mini update kind of pales in comparison.
That said, I did buy one today from CompUSA! :D I was very surprised that they had them in already, they even got some of the new low end iMacs yesterday, no 24 inchers yet.
So now my office will be pleasantly furnished with a new Mac mini, wireless keyboard and Mighty Mouse. Everyone else in the building runs Windows (although a few have ACD's), but it shouldn't be too difficult to convert them once they see my little powerhouse of a mini. My boss was already blown away when I showed it to him, he called in three other people to look at it.
Fish in a barrel, my friends. ;)
Well, the update certainly wasn't jaw-dropping, it was just a normal product cycle update. So in comparison to the new CPU's in the iMac, oh, and the whole 24" screen business, the mini update kind of pales in comparison.
That said, I did buy one today from CompUSA! :D I was very surprised that they had them in already, they even got some of the new low end iMacs yesterday, no 24 inchers yet.
So now my office will be pleasantly furnished with a new Mac mini, wireless keyboard and Mighty Mouse. Everyone else in the building runs Windows (although a few have ACD's), but it shouldn't be too difficult to convert them once they see my little powerhouse of a mini. My boss was already blown away when I showed it to him, he called in three other people to look at it.
Fish in a barrel, my friends. ;)
EagerDragon
Nov 28, 11:42 AM
Creating a low end monitor would be a very, very wise decision on Apple's part. Buyers of Mac Minis would appreciate having a less expensive Apple monitor to go with their stuff.
I disagree, take the price of a mini, add a good 17" monitor (4:3 (but not a super cheap one)) then compare the price to the 17" iMac. Not much difference and the iMac has better everything.
I disagree, take the price of a mini, add a good 17" monitor (4:3 (but not a super cheap one)) then compare the price to the 17" iMac. Not much difference and the iMac has better everything.
Ping Guo
Jun 23, 11:09 AM
Lay the iMac on it's back, and it all becomes clear. There's nothing more frustrating than not being able to touch your computer screen.
Why would I lay an iMac on its back? There's nothing more frustrating than not being able to touch your computer screen, are you sure? I can think of many things that are a lot more frustrating. Perhaps you're obsessive-compulsive?:p
Why would I lay an iMac on its back? There's nothing more frustrating than not being able to touch your computer screen, are you sure? I can think of many things that are a lot more frustrating. Perhaps you're obsessive-compulsive?:p
mrgreen4242
Aug 29, 11:08 AM
IF they go to a 1.66ghz Core Duo, 512mb RAM, GMA950, 80gb 5400rpm HD, SD, AE, and BT model for $599 I'll get one immediately. That's a great price and would make an affordable upgrade from my current mini (assuming I could get at least, say, $350 for it which is fairly reasonable I think).
I'd probably be OK if they went with a 60gb HDD, but the SD is non-negotiable. I think the current high end mini is a perfectly acceptable machine for 90% of the people in the world, even those who want to play SOME games (the GMA950 outpaces the 9200 in the PPC minis in most things, especially in Windows).
Ideally, though, I agree that the mini needs to get back to a $499 and $599 (or $699 if the specs warrent it) price point. If they update the speed and keep the price the same this update, they need to have a mid cycle price drop to $499 and $699, followed by a move to Memrom and the x3000/Santa Rosa platform (at the same prices).
EDIT: Now that I think about it, even if they don't make those specs at that price, the refurbs are already $699, so there's a good chance they will drop to $599 after a refresh, which works just as well for me... guess I'm getting a new computer next month! (WooWoo for 3 pay period months ;))
I'd probably be OK if they went with a 60gb HDD, but the SD is non-negotiable. I think the current high end mini is a perfectly acceptable machine for 90% of the people in the world, even those who want to play SOME games (the GMA950 outpaces the 9200 in the PPC minis in most things, especially in Windows).
Ideally, though, I agree that the mini needs to get back to a $499 and $599 (or $699 if the specs warrent it) price point. If they update the speed and keep the price the same this update, they need to have a mid cycle price drop to $499 and $699, followed by a move to Memrom and the x3000/Santa Rosa platform (at the same prices).
EDIT: Now that I think about it, even if they don't make those specs at that price, the refurbs are already $699, so there's a good chance they will drop to $599 after a refresh, which works just as well for me... guess I'm getting a new computer next month! (WooWoo for 3 pay period months ;))
flyfish29
Mar 27, 07:50 AM
I don't think MS dropping IE was because of Apple's market share.MSIE was more of a gesture than anything else, since it never supported activeX wich was the only real major reason for needing IE6...
I don't think I ever said it had anything to do with market share. I also believe that MSIE was all about getting M$ software on the mac which in their minds would make it easier to get other proprietary software on the mac ie. Windows Media Player which integrated better with IE than Netscape at the time. NOt to mention that they wanted to get rid of Netscape to (in their minds) have a heavy hand in internet development which they did.
I don't think I ever said it had anything to do with market share. I also believe that MSIE was all about getting M$ software on the mac which in their minds would make it easier to get other proprietary software on the mac ie. Windows Media Player which integrated better with IE than Netscape at the time. NOt to mention that they wanted to get rid of Netscape to (in their minds) have a heavy hand in internet development which they did.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 10, 10:56 AM
I definitely think driving a manual makes me a safer, more attentive driver.
I'm against crap that makes people lazy like adaptive cruise control, auto headlights and auto wipers and stuff like that, I suppose an automatic can fall in there too. That stuff makes drivers lazy and inattentive because they don't have to concentrate on the road.
The amount of times I see people who do not turn on their head lights at night makes me glad that a lot of cars have automatic headlights.
Way to many people refuse to turn on their headlights until they need them to to light up the road. They do not understand the fact that headlights also make a hell of a lot easier for other drivers to SEE YOU. Automatic headlights solve that issue.
As for adabptive cruise control I will admit I want that because on long drives having to mess with the cruise control settings gets annoying that or if I am following someone on long distance road trips it is hard to use the cruise unless you are the lead car.
As for me I drive a Manual but I also know manuals are a dieing bread as modern Automatics have gotten to the point they remove almost all the advantages manuals had. They can and often times do get better fuel economy due to the fact in city driving they have a computer that can shift exactly at the best point for the given power demand. Something no human can match and then at cruising speed the tranny and the engine are physically lock together just like in a manual so that advantage is gone. Hell they are not putting clutches in automatics that the car controls farther killing any plus the manuals had left.
I'm against crap that makes people lazy like adaptive cruise control, auto headlights and auto wipers and stuff like that, I suppose an automatic can fall in there too. That stuff makes drivers lazy and inattentive because they don't have to concentrate on the road.
The amount of times I see people who do not turn on their head lights at night makes me glad that a lot of cars have automatic headlights.
Way to many people refuse to turn on their headlights until they need them to to light up the road. They do not understand the fact that headlights also make a hell of a lot easier for other drivers to SEE YOU. Automatic headlights solve that issue.
As for adabptive cruise control I will admit I want that because on long drives having to mess with the cruise control settings gets annoying that or if I am following someone on long distance road trips it is hard to use the cruise unless you are the lead car.
As for me I drive a Manual but I also know manuals are a dieing bread as modern Automatics have gotten to the point they remove almost all the advantages manuals had. They can and often times do get better fuel economy due to the fact in city driving they have a computer that can shift exactly at the best point for the given power demand. Something no human can match and then at cruising speed the tranny and the engine are physically lock together just like in a manual so that advantage is gone. Hell they are not putting clutches in automatics that the car controls farther killing any plus the manuals had left.
brad.c
Nov 28, 10:00 AM
Deep pockets or not, MS will have a struggle to find a niche. But at least they were smart enough to put in a radio.
timmillwood
Aug 25, 05:08 AM
If they bring out a core2duo mac mini it will be faster than my 18month old power mac.
cant see it happening, they might go for a faster core duo in the mac mini and macbook then core 2 duo in iMac and Macbook pro
cant see it happening, they might go for a faster core duo in the mac mini and macbook then core 2 duo in iMac and Macbook pro
treblah
Jul 19, 08:25 PM
Leopard will ROCK, is a lot faster then Tiger and has a lot of new functionality. They are not even going to show all the stuff under the hood at the presentation.
Source? :rolleyes:
Source? :rolleyes:
Detlev
Jul 18, 08:42 PM
- People don't watch movies over and over like they do songs
Ah, I must not be people then and kids must not be either. How many times have you seen [pick your favorite movie] on DVD?
- Renting is cheaper than buying
Actually, that is not true UNLESS you are one of the people you mentioned above and then it would still depend on where or how you are getting rentals. Then you would have to state whether you mean per viewing or per title.
The rest I agree with.
Ah, I must not be people then and kids must not be either. How many times have you seen [pick your favorite movie] on DVD?
- Renting is cheaper than buying
Actually, that is not true UNLESS you are one of the people you mentioned above and then it would still depend on where or how you are getting rentals. Then you would have to state whether you mean per viewing or per title.
The rest I agree with.
Multimedia
Aug 29, 10:25 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Think Secret claims (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0608macmini.html) to have information on the rumored revision (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060824183848.shtml) to the Mac Mini. According to the site, Apple will replace the existing Core Solo model with the existing 1.66 GHz Core Duo model, and add a 1.83 GHz Core Duo model, effectively eliminating all single-core CPUs from Apple's computer product line.
The new systems are said to be "ready for production." Think Secret believes the models will be introduced in a few weeks time with little fanfare, although not totally under the radar like the last Mac Mini update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/09/20050930023909.shtml).Not Core 2 Duo??!! :eek: :confused: :( I can't beleive they are not going to go Core 2 Duo in the mini before Thanksgiving.Only if they don't drop prices. Just depends what they charge, if they had core solo for $399 sales would go through the roof.And Apple would be losing money with every sale. :rolleyes:
And for all you Yonah FanBoys out there I say you are completely out of touch with reality living in some sort of parallel dimension where old obsolete stopgap technology prevails beyond it's short useful lifespan. :) It makes no sense to me why would a laptop be more powerful than a desktop. If you're gonna stay with core duo why not just make the mini a 1.83 & 2.00 GHz Core Duo machine like the macbooks. 1.66 & 1.83 on a core duo is pathetic in my opinions and solidifies my believe that the mini and i will never get along....at least for now. Thats just too much crippling to handle.Here here. I totally agree. Staying with Core Duo is insane, rude and greedy.
Think Secret claims (http://www.thinksecret.com/news/0608macmini.html) to have information on the rumored revision (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060824183848.shtml) to the Mac Mini. According to the site, Apple will replace the existing Core Solo model with the existing 1.66 GHz Core Duo model, and add a 1.83 GHz Core Duo model, effectively eliminating all single-core CPUs from Apple's computer product line.
The new systems are said to be "ready for production." Think Secret believes the models will be introduced in a few weeks time with little fanfare, although not totally under the radar like the last Mac Mini update (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/09/20050930023909.shtml).Not Core 2 Duo??!! :eek: :confused: :( I can't beleive they are not going to go Core 2 Duo in the mini before Thanksgiving.Only if they don't drop prices. Just depends what they charge, if they had core solo for $399 sales would go through the roof.And Apple would be losing money with every sale. :rolleyes:
And for all you Yonah FanBoys out there I say you are completely out of touch with reality living in some sort of parallel dimension where old obsolete stopgap technology prevails beyond it's short useful lifespan. :) It makes no sense to me why would a laptop be more powerful than a desktop. If you're gonna stay with core duo why not just make the mini a 1.83 & 2.00 GHz Core Duo machine like the macbooks. 1.66 & 1.83 on a core duo is pathetic in my opinions and solidifies my believe that the mini and i will never get along....at least for now. Thats just too much crippling to handle.Here here. I totally agree. Staying with Core Duo is insane, rude and greedy.
BenRoethig
Sep 6, 06:08 PM
probably supply reasons and cost reasons.
if they bumped it to core 2, at least the base model would still have been core duo, the c2d one would have been more expensive, and i'm willing to bet we may see the 1.83 C2D in more than just the 17" imac soon.
I'm guessing that Apple probably had a bunch of yonahs sitting around and hoped they could sell some off.
Bet the combo and Superdrives are all unchanged-the suppliers the same as February's model.
Considering Panasonic and Pioneer are the only ones who make slot loading notebook drives, I'd guess so.
if they bumped it to core 2, at least the base model would still have been core duo, the c2d one would have been more expensive, and i'm willing to bet we may see the 1.83 C2D in more than just the 17" imac soon.
I'm guessing that Apple probably had a bunch of yonahs sitting around and hoped they could sell some off.
Bet the combo and Superdrives are all unchanged-the suppliers the same as February's model.
Considering Panasonic and Pioneer are the only ones who make slot loading notebook drives, I'd guess so.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:10 PM
I don't believe you, that's my opinion.
I think thats why I said in the first sentence, "that's my opinion".
I think thats why I said in the first sentence, "that's my opinion".
twoodcc
May 3, 11:07 AM
I don't use my 09 MP for anything real intense but even having several apps going it doesn't take anything out of folding, I get the same times regardless.
so running things like itunes and iphoto, and surfing the web, things are fine?
so running things like itunes and iphoto, and surfing the web, things are fine?
JFreak
Jul 14, 12:41 AM
I think is too early for either HDDVD or Blue-Ray
I think Blu-Ray should have been out 3 years ago. There have been HD displays for reasonable price for some time now, but nothing to really use them with. 3 years ago you would probably have been right saying it's too early, but still IMHO it would have been great if Blu-Ray were released together with the G5's.
It's so sad to think that Blu-Ray shouldn't be here now, because it is still rather expensive. Everything is, until they can produce larger volumes. Using this kind of "too early" thinking, we would have nothing ever released. How cool would that be :P
I think Blu-Ray should have been out 3 years ago. There have been HD displays for reasonable price for some time now, but nothing to really use them with. 3 years ago you would probably have been right saying it's too early, but still IMHO it would have been great if Blu-Ray were released together with the G5's.
It's so sad to think that Blu-Ray shouldn't be here now, because it is still rather expensive. Everything is, until they can produce larger volumes. Using this kind of "too early" thinking, we would have nothing ever released. How cool would that be :P
Speczorz
Sep 28, 12:56 AM
Is the screen protector a fingerprint/oil magnet?
Not from what I can tell, I never used it as it was junk and wouldn't really apply correctly.
Bill
Not from what I can tell, I never used it as it was junk and wouldn't really apply correctly.
Bill
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 06:49 AM
Anyway, would you mind sharing why you want it so bad as I asked above?
I don't think it's really all that necessary until we have a much more prominent wireless infrastructure that isn't T-Mobile trying to charge you 7.99/hr to log on. Until then, it's nearly pointless unless you live in NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc.
I don't think it's really all that necessary until we have a much more prominent wireless infrastructure that isn't T-Mobile trying to charge you 7.99/hr to log on. Until then, it's nearly pointless unless you live in NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc.
iGav
Feb 25, 07:51 AM
looking at the very current and very genius Fiat Twin Air engines i have to say that very refined turbocharged small displacement/ few cylinder engines are actually the next step over the overly complicated hybrid systems
The Twin Air is conceptually brilliant... but its real world numbers haven't anywhere near matched up to Fiat's official figures (68.9mpg official - 35.7mpg real world, neither of which are particularly brilliant to begin with) and there lies one of the problems with small capacity engines, in anything other than ideal test conditions (i.e. rolling road), it is extraordinarily difficult to even approach the officials figures in everyday conditions, because put simply, they have to be razzed.
Like what you've said though, there's a compelling argument to be made that a diesel-electric hybrid (like VW's XL1 Concept), with energy recovery would probably be the best arrangement (particularly for an urban car), in this instance the diesel engine is isolated from the actually drivetrain (reducing NVH etc) and the electric motors counter the age old argument of petrol>diesel refinement.
I do think that smaller capacity, fewer cylinder engines are the way to go, but only if the absolutely most important factor is addressed first, and that is one of weight, until then...
The Twin Air is conceptually brilliant... but its real world numbers haven't anywhere near matched up to Fiat's official figures (68.9mpg official - 35.7mpg real world, neither of which are particularly brilliant to begin with) and there lies one of the problems with small capacity engines, in anything other than ideal test conditions (i.e. rolling road), it is extraordinarily difficult to even approach the officials figures in everyday conditions, because put simply, they have to be razzed.
Like what you've said though, there's a compelling argument to be made that a diesel-electric hybrid (like VW's XL1 Concept), with energy recovery would probably be the best arrangement (particularly for an urban car), in this instance the diesel engine is isolated from the actually drivetrain (reducing NVH etc) and the electric motors counter the age old argument of petrol>diesel refinement.
I do think that smaller capacity, fewer cylinder engines are the way to go, but only if the absolutely most important factor is addressed first, and that is one of weight, until then...
Manic Mouse
Aug 19, 07:08 AM
Apple should take a leaf out of Sony's book and make the new iPod a mini palm-Mac like the MYLO. A slide out QWERTY keyboard in the style of the Macbook and a large touch screen would make it capable of running anything: Safari, Mail, iCal, iChat etc. It would make the iPod revolutionary (to an extent) again, and more than a mere music device: You could surf the net, write emails, watch movies and listen to music on it. Were it to run a mini-OSX the possibilities would be endless. It would also make people more interested in buying Macs because they can see how good the OS is.
Imagine, on your couch (or in starbucks) reading your email, IMing while listening to your tunes. Bliss. It would also make the WiFi functionality actually useful rather than a gimmick if it's merely a music/video player.
If Apple merely release a new media player they will have missed out on revolutionising the market again like they did when they first released the ipod. Sony have already gone half way there with the MYLO, if Apple go the rest of the way they will blow away the competition!
Imagine, on your couch (or in starbucks) reading your email, IMing while listening to your tunes. Bliss. It would also make the WiFi functionality actually useful rather than a gimmick if it's merely a music/video player.
If Apple merely release a new media player they will have missed out on revolutionising the market again like they did when they first released the ipod. Sony have already gone half way there with the MYLO, if Apple go the rest of the way they will blow away the competition!
thefunkymunky
Aug 7, 08:12 AM
Man, thats not enough.... we need dual Nvidia mobile GPUs with SLI...just like Alienware has! (Each with 512MB, for a total of 1GB video ram!)
Imagine trying to keep those puppies cool.
Imagine trying to keep those puppies cool.
Multimedia
Aug 25, 09:59 AM
If they bring out a core2duo mac mini it will be faster than my 18month old power mac.Duh. Welcome to the completed transition. I need to run a few tests to confirm this once they are out, but I think any Core 2 Mac may be faster than the Dual 2GHz G5 PowerMac from October of 2005.cant see it happening, they might go for a faster core duo in the mac mini and macbook then core 2 duo in iMac and Macbook proThen you are in denial. Core Duo is already history. And Apple doesn't like to be selling historical artifacts any longer than they must - especially when the new state-of-the-art processors don't cost them any more. :rolleyes:I don't think we are going to see Core Duos in Apples for much longer, though it is possible that the base Mini will offer a Core Duo, and the better model a Core 2 Duo.
Still, I think it much more likely that with this revision, both Minis will sport Core 2 Duos, probably Meroms to keep them quiet and lower-powered, and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.
What I am really hoping is that there will be an add-on base module in a similar form factor to turn any Mini into a full-blown HD/Audio media centre. Now that could really be exciting. While Tivos and Sky+ boxes are welcome in my home, we are just aching for someone to really rethink the entire home media experience. I'd love to see Apple take a shot at that.I think the addition of the new EyeTV hybrid USB2 Digital-Analog Broadcast Tuner (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) may be a significant part of the ticket you are looking for with a new 1.66GHz Core 2 Duo mini. Ships early September for only $150. They have combined two large bulky Firewire tuners from older products they previously sold only separately for a combined price of $500 into a tiny not-much-bigger-than-a-flash-ram-stick USB2 product that will sell for only $150. It's a miracle!
Still, I think it much more likely that with this revision, both Minis will sport Core 2 Duos, probably Meroms to keep them quiet and lower-powered, and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.
What I am really hoping is that there will be an add-on base module in a similar form factor to turn any Mini into a full-blown HD/Audio media centre. Now that could really be exciting. While Tivos and Sky+ boxes are welcome in my home, we are just aching for someone to really rethink the entire home media experience. I'd love to see Apple take a shot at that.I think the addition of the new EyeTV hybrid USB2 Digital-Analog Broadcast Tuner (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) may be a significant part of the ticket you are looking for with a new 1.66GHz Core 2 Duo mini. Ships early September for only $150. They have combined two large bulky Firewire tuners from older products they previously sold only separately for a combined price of $500 into a tiny not-much-bigger-than-a-flash-ram-stick USB2 product that will sell for only $150. It's a miracle!
Chef Medeski
Jul 14, 11:31 AM
I just saw this and though it was pretty interesting:
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Yeah, but wasn't that also when Apple had something like 50% of the consumer market share. I mean... I think its a very different situation even if its the same names.
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Yeah, but wasn't that also when Apple had something like 50% of the consumer market share. I mean... I think its a very different situation even if its the same names.
(marc)
Mar 19, 05:18 PM
It's just the last time I remember a UN action it was 98% US in Iraq.
Not UN backed. afaik, at least.
Not UN backed. afaik, at least.
appleguy123
Jun 22, 04:34 PM
it is the only product now to start with the "i" and not run the "i"OS.
iPod? iLife? iSight? iWork? The i naming scheme is more pervasive than it appears.
iPod? iLife? iSight? iWork? The i naming scheme is more pervasive than it appears.
No comments:
Post a Comment