Evidence that Next iMacs and Mac Minis to use NVIDIA Chipsets

[iDave]

I don't understand why everybody what's to lead towards the magsafe on a mini. Don't get me wrong it's possible but then it would need a battery for a just in case scenario. (i.e. pulling out usb and slip the magesafe off by accident.)
Are you familiar with the power connector on the current mini? It would be just as easy to pull out as a USB cord or a Magsafe cord. Really, I don't see this being a problem.

I do think Apple will sell more displays, to go with a "mini with magsafe" if they make a 20" model just like the new 23" and give it a more reasonable price. Unfortunately, until the glossy fad fades away, they won't sell one to me. :(

[hiimamac]

"Of course it will, if you can call LACK OF FIREWIRE an 'exciting feature'!!!!!!!" :D:D:D Sorry I couldn't resist. I'm sure the FireWhining is gonna kick up something fierce in this thread. Oh well...NVIDIA yaaayyyy!!! :D :D :D :apple:

I know, makes too much sense to release firewire.

Why are people PINHEADS? Especially fan boys lifers? I remember saying DEDICATED GPU and got answers like
maybe Apple doesn't care about gaming market" - I then went on to state that it was larger than music biz, then it came out and NO FIREWIRE impounded my "AFRAID OF PRO MARKET, even though less than 1%, only no FIREWIRE hurt not only PROS but MOM AND DAD CAM CORDER, millions of musicians, IT who used target mode, and many more. Okay fanbot have another. It wasn't until Steve pulled out of MW that the lifers got a taste of how it feels to be excluded. About time.


A mini should be a mid range machine, not the low end piece of crap headless macbook.

Don't mean to sound well, negative, just sick and tired of APPLE making MORON moves all timid and afraid, all worried and BOYZ not reading between lines and realizing things like lack of FIREWIRE was to keep PRO users from having a cheap solution yet this time it hurt a larger audience. Makes me crazy that Apple does such stupid things for stupid reasons. If they did there research, they would find users would own both HIGHEND and lowend and would sell MORE machines, not less. There marketing department is one person, Jobs, and glad he will be stepping down soon.

Apple will make more $$$ once Jobs steps down.

[NT1440]

A mini should be a mid range machine, not the low end piece of crap headless macbook.

I wasnt aware you make apples strategy for them......

[hiimamac]

I wasnt aware you make apples strategy for them......

One only has to read between the lines that its made by one person right now and yes, I used to be in marketing. Apple has gone from a PRO developer, ONE TO ONE for LOGIC, SHAKE, FCP, PRO CARE USED TO BE SAME AS TRAINING to little old lady's learning how to do emails, attachments and how to import her photo's from her retirement trip to Florida.


You don't have to be a genius to see that Apple has lost it and cares only about iPhones, iLife (trainers are 90% trained on iLife and many do not KNOW PRO APPS), and puppy dog owners. LOL LOL LOL :D:D:D Sad but true.

Apple has fallen from the cool hip creative place to barking dogs, crying babies, and iLife Pro's - how sad.
:D:D:D

[i.mac]

is there no other rumor other than this last thread?

If this is any indication, this January may be either boring (no rumors or speculation or leaks) or fantastic ('one more thing' that none saw coming :)

Oh well. We'll see...

[NT1440]

Apple has fallen from the cool hip creative place to barking dogs, crying babies, and iLife Pro's - how sad.
:D:D:D

What an elitist post.

Does it really matter whos buying them? The point is that their strategy clearly works. Sure some people get hurt feelings that their old friend apple isnt catering specifically to them, but its a company, nothing more.

[inkswamp]

I used to think those rumors about the Mac Mini and the AppleTV being merged were bunk but the more I think about it, the more it seems like the logical move to make and the fact that we're seeing evidence for only one model of the Mini with a real graphics card is a nod in that direction.

Apple could eliminate the AppleTV and incorporate its features into a "high-end" Mac Mini. You could have 2 models of Mini that could replace the existing lines. There would be the low-end, entry-level Mini at $300-400 with integrated graphics, and then the "media center" (hate that phrase) Mini with a real graphics cards and a DVD slot (please... Apple if you go this route, please include a @#$%& DVD slot) at $400-500.

At this point, you have a lot of Mac owners out there who I think have no interest in the Mini and no interest in the AppleTV because of the shortcomings of each, but put them together and I think you'd gain a lot of interest. I have no interest in either but if Apple were to put out a machine that allowed me to replace my DVD player, stream, store and download videos, pics and music and also offered a full computing experience (i.e., being able to stream Netflix and Hulu to the TV screen) then you could count me in.

[Sellihca]

One only has to read between the lines that its made by one person right now and yes, I used to be in marketing. Apple has gone from a PRO developer, ONE TO ONE for LOGIC, SHAKE, FCP, PRO CARE USED TO BE SAME AS TRAINING to little old lady's learning how to do emails, attachments and how to import her photo's from her retirement trip to Florida.


You don't have to be a genius to see that Apple has lost it and cares only about iPhones, iLife (trainers are 90% trained on iLife and many do not KNOW PRO APPS), and puppy dog owners. LOL LOL LOL :D:D:D Sad but true.

Apple has fallen from the cool hip creative place to barking dogs, crying babies, and iLife Pro's - how sad.
:D:D:D

Apple's interest in the iphone is very smart-as handheld computing is the future of the computer. The tv/phone/computer/mp3/etc will merge into one device, this can be seen already. This is where the future of tech is taking us and that is a good thing.

As for Apple as a whole, I have also noticed in the last couple of years, that as it has grown, it has also moved away from the pro group. it is the nature of the beast-company to corporation-(few pro) to (meager millions). This is not necessarily bad but apple should not forget who got them where they are today.

[Sellihca]

Why do people keep saying $400-$500??? If the entry line mini now costs $599 why would an upgraded mini cost less? if anything it would cost more. This is Apple we are talking about, price never goes down. sad but true.

[Eric S.]

Does it really matter whos buying them?

Of course it does.

The point is that their strategy clearly works. Sure some people get hurt feelings that their old friend apple isnt catering specifically to them, but its a company, nothing more.

And that's the sad part because for a lot of us it used to be more.

[NT1440]

Of course it does.



And that's the sad part because for a lot of us it used to be more.

To the underlined: Why, why does it matter? Does being a "Pro" buying a product make you better somehow than a regular consumer?


And to this nostalgia, why people seem to have this glory days connection with a company i dont get? doesnt that define fanboyism?

Its a company who happens to make nice products.

[marbles]

If it has decent graphics (MINI) it will not have firewire.

Apple will never in the greedy over medicined minds, ever let you have a machine that could potentially run pro apps on it which it could if it had good graphics AND firewire. It WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

Expected to be underwhelemed. The MACHINE will be good but LIMITED.

READ MY LIPS: APPLE WILL NOT RELEASE A MACHINE THAT COULD EVER BE USED FOR PRO APPLICATIONS THAT COSTS LITTLE MONEY. IT WILL NOT HAVE FIREWIRE, IT WILL NOT HAVE FIREWIRE, IT WILL NOT HAVE FIREWIRE.

Apple is afraid that it would lose sales to less than one percent of the user base to ever allow that to happen. NOT UNTIL JOBS IS GONE will you see machines that make sense. ala MACBOOK WITH DECENT GPU yet no FIREWIRE. :D

ran logic on mini a couple years back , no trouble !.

Of course it does.



And that's the sad part because for a lot of us it used to be more.


thought they always dumped on the previous gen customers , certainly looks that way , unless the fanboism takes hold then its seen as progression ;)






rj

[RyanR.]

I used to think those rumors about the Mac Mini and the AppleTV being merged were bunk but the more I think about it, the more it seems like the logical move to make and the fact that we're seeing evidence for only one model of the Mini with a real graphics card is a nod in that direction.

Apple could eliminate the AppleTV and incorporate its features into a "high-end" Mac Mini. You could have 2 models of Mini that could replace the existing lines. There would be the low-end, entry-level Mini at $300-400 with integrated graphics, and then the "media center" (hate that phrase) Mini with a real graphics cards and a DVD slot (please... Apple if you go this route, please include a @#$%& DVD slot) at $400-500.

At this point, you have a lot of Mac owners out there who I think have no interest in the Mini and no interest in the AppleTV because of the shortcomings of each, but put them together and I think you'd gain a lot of interest. I have no interest in either but if Apple were to put out a machine that allowed me to replace my DVD player, stream, store and download videos, pics and music and also offered a full computing experience (i.e., being able to stream Netflix and Hulu to the TV screen) then you could count me in.

I with you... Perhaps even a B-Ray Player.

[Eric S.]

To the underlined: Why, why does it matter? Does being a "Pro" buying a product make you better somehow than a regular consumer?

I don't buy into "pro" and "consumer" labels; I think they are largely pushed by Apple to get people to fit into their marketing goals. Lots of "pros" also do consumer-type things and vice versa. But it does matter who your customer base is because that's how products are defined. For example, when Apple built systems with a mostly open, proprietary bus (Nubus) architecture, there was a vibrant third-party market in producing cards for that market that satisfied a number of customer needs. This created a loyal Apple community that revolved around Apple architecture, was very creative, and influenced the products of both Apple and third-party companies. In those days Apple was geared to the creative, computer-savvy customer. Now, it's true that today proprietary technologies have mostly been replaced by industry standards, like USB. This creates a more "generic" type of consumer because these devices can be plugged into any computer manufacturer's architecture. But unfortunately it also allows Apple (meaning Jobs) to fall back to its preference for closed, appliance-like products. One result is a loss of that community that was passionately bound up in Apple's HW designs. (People still follow Apple's HW closely from an intellectual standpoint, but there's little involvement and certainly no input into Apple's decisions.)

And to this nostalgia, why people seem to have this glory days connection with a company i dont get? doesnt that define fanboyism?

If you don't get it, you don't get it. Fanyboyism? Yes and no - even Apple's loyal customers weren't happy with everything they did, but they were firm in a belief that Apple was better than the competition. Today I can say two things that I thought I would never say in my life - 1) I use Windows as much as I use Mac OS (even though it is on my Macbook), and 2) for future computer products I will consider other companies' HW. Because, as you say, now Apple is just another company.

[iDave]

Today I can say two things that I thought I would never say in my life - 1) I use Windows as much as I use Mac OS (even though it is on my Macbook), and 2) for future computer products I will consider other companies' HW. Because, as you say, now Apple is just another company.
Me too. Apple's recent desisions (glossy screens) and refusal to budge on prices has set me firmly on the road toward OS independence. Where as I used to think using Windows was out of the question, I now think of it as necessary to get what I want in the hardware. And Windows ain't so bad.

[hiimamac]

ran logic on mini a couple years back , no trouble !.




thought they always dumped on the previous gen customers , certainly looks that way , unless the fanboism takes hold then its seen as progression ;)






rj



While that may be TRUE, LOGIC on a MINI a few weeks ago, you (and others I assume), CLEARLY MISSED MY POINT.

No kidding, you can RUN LOGIC on a older MACBOOK and current mini ....

however with the LACK OF FIREWIRE, (NEW MB) you are limited to crappy USB devices

New MACBOOK and presumably, the NEW MINI (lack of fire wire) will have to use USB.

PRO DEVICES ARE FIREWIRE and old mini's and MACBOOKS had FIREWIRE, the new MINI WILL NOT - and even though it's not texas instruments, it was 1000 fold better than USB as USB takes CPU cycles and DOES NOT have the throughput to play 192k/24 bit audio, 30+ tracks. You COULD do this with FIREWIRE.

Apple could prove me wrong, realize that not only did they shut out <less than 1% of the PRO market with LACK of 1394 on new macbook but realize that mom/pop cam corder, I.T. users and target disk and the millions of musicians NEED the 1394 on the mini. Probably not though as Apple just doesn't care anymore.

They care about consumer, charge $700 for a machine that has 1394, pciexpress slot, 2 more inches (macbook pro) yet its the same production uni-body and their cost is much cheaper now, yet do they pass the savings? No....

I could go on and on....

Another example, iMacs are strong machines but no MATTE = no PRO GRAPHIC work, gotta get a MAC PRO if you want MATTE.

Older macbooks and iMACS used non TEXAS INSTRUMENTS FIREWIRE which some said caused audio/video problems but saved apple a few dollars. They even released MAC BOOK PROS with non TEXAS INSTRUMENT FIREWIRE from JAN 08-ARPRIL 08, then brought it back in MAY.

There are a lot of things Apple does or rather, doesn't do, if you are smart enough, read the tech blogs, sites, info, INTEL, ATI, NVIDIA, TEXAS INSTRUMENT news and so on...

[drsmithy]

A mini should be a mid range machine, not the low end piece of crap headless macbook.

No, there should be a PROPER mid-range machine, with essentially half the specs of a Mac Pro (1 CPU, 1 PCIe x16, 1 PCIe x4, 2 hard disks, single optical drive, singel gigabit, etc).

The Mini should stay at the low-end. It's a more than adequate machine for the average user (albeit a somewhat expensive entry point). The integrated graphics are irrelevant to anyone not playing games.

[drsmithy]

Apple could eliminate the AppleTV and incorporate its features into a "high-end" Mac Mini. You could have 2 models of Mini that could replace the existing lines. There would be the low-end, entry-level Mini at $300-400 with integrated graphics, and then the "media center" (hate that phrase) Mini with a real graphics cards and a DVD slot (please... Apple if you go this route, please include a @#$%& DVD slot) at $400-500.

There is no need for a discrete video card in a machine targeted at this segment (indeed, given the extra power draw and heat, it would almost certainly be a disadvantage). All the current integrated chipsets (and most even a generation or two old) are quite adequate for a media-centre style computer.

Heck, I used to use a Core Duo (not even Core 2) Mini for my MCE machine a while back (with 3 USB tuners connected) and even it could handle anything short of high-bitrate 1080p video.

[BenRoethig]

Eidorian:

Optical media is too sensitive, balky for its size, slow and the drive itself is massive for what it provides. I don't know, am I being to out-there? What do other think?


That it is, but its currently the standard. Are there better potential options out there? Aboslutely there are. Technologically, we've advanced past optical media. Why is it still here? Shortsightedness and greed. Some companies/organizations want the consumer to have to re-buy their video library. Some have developed a vital piece of technology they want to keep proprietary. Until we work past the non-technical issues, they're sticking around.

[mosx]

Optical drives....this is a poor-dying media but it will be part of the new mini. I'm sure apple wants to phase out optical drives but will not be the first. Look at the backlash that they got from axing firewire from the macbook. The sooner people abandon optical media the sooner companies stop making billions of a dying tech. Not only are cd/dvds a horrible media type, the are also wasteful-Flash is the future.

Optical media is definitely not dying.

If you hadn't noticed, CDs still greatly outsell digital music. Rightly so. I used to buy music from the iTunes Store then I realized what a fool I had been for buying DRM'ed 128kbps files when, most of the time, a much better sounding CD cost around the same amount and sometimes cheaper. You look through the Sunday ads and you'll always find a ton of CDs for less than $10.

Plus there was an article recently explaining why movies had been disappearing or replaced on iTunes. Digital downloads only represent 0.06% of movie studios revenue stream. DVDs outsell downloads by a margin thats about as wide as the Earth is far from the Sun.

And for the most part, people can't abandon optical media.

As people already discussed in this thread, internet connections outside of Japan and South Korea just aren't up to the task. Why would people wait an hour or two or three to download a movie, that they paid for, that isn't even CLOSE to DVD quality? Have you seen the iTunes stuff? Sure it looks good on a small notebook screen. But it doesn't even come close to an upscaled DVD on a decent HD set. Plus you don't get Dolby Digital or DTS sound. Even the "HD" stuff from Apple TV doesn't scale very well to 1080p, plus those movies that DO have DD sound don't have as high of an audio bitrate as the DVD of the movie. So while the picture might or might not be better than an upscaled DVD, it still doesn't sound as good and, unless you have a 10Mbps connection (most people don't) that 4Mbps "HD" movie on your Apple TV is going to take hours to download.

And there are other problems with downloadable movies. If I buy a movie on iTunes I can play it on my computers, but only in Apple's software, and on an iPod or iPhone. I can't play it on an Xbox, I can't play it on a PS3, I can't stream it using another media set top box, and I can't convert it to DVD Video and play it on my DVD player. Likewise with Amazon and other downloadable video from other online stores.

So basically, if I buy a movie from iTunes and I want to watch it on my Xbox360.. oh guess what? I can't. I have to buy the version from Xbox Live Marketplace. Now what if I want to watch that one on my PS3? Can't. I have to buy it from the PSN store. Now if I want to watch any of those on my DVD player? Can't. Have to go buy the DVD.

But if I buy the DVD I can watch it anywhere. I can watch it on my computer, I can watch it on a portable DVD player, an upscaling DVD player, a PS3, a PS2, an Xbox360, that DVD player I bought half a decade ago that still works.

People may be willing to abandon CDs in favor of downloads. But thats far different. Most music these days is DRM free and can be played on anything. Plus you can burn it to CD and legally strip that DRM away without any hassles by reripping the song back into the format you want, just with a loss of quality.

And even high quality DRM free songs are only a few MB in size that can be downloaded in a matter of seconds even on a 768Kbps DSL connection.

Video is an entirely different beast though. "DVD quality" is several GB in size and has ridiculously restrictive DRM that essentially requires you to obtain a different copy for each device you want to play it on. And there is currently NO download service that offers anything even remotely near the quality you get with current blu-ray discs.

And flash memory may be the future, but its not yet. And not for a long time for most people.

A QUALITY 4GB flash chip that will not corrupt or die easily still costs around $30.

A high quality Taiyo Yuden 4.38GB DVD-R is about 20 cents. I can go get 438GB worth of DVD-R storage for about $20. Not even HDDs are that cheap.

And even though blu-ray discs are expensive for optical media, they're still cheaper than flash. Around $15 gets you 25GB worth of storage.

Downloads may be the "future" as well as flash memory. But that is a very DISTANT future. We have to see downloads finally reach the TRUE quality of DVD and blu-ray, we have to see ISPs finally offer necessary bandwidth to at least deliver that media in real-time with no hiccups, and we have to see content providers finally agree on a format standard and usage "rights" that are as flexible as current DRM free music rights and a format that will play on anything without conversion and the resulting loss of quality.

I then went on to state that it was larger than music biz, then it came out and NO FIREWIRE impounded my "AFRAID OF PRO MARKET, even though less than 1%, only no FIREWIRE hurt not only PROS but MOM AND DAD CAM CORDER, millions of musicians, IT who used target mode, and many more

Uh oh. Here we go with this nonsense again.

M-Audio, E-Mu and others sell USB versions of all of their recording equipment.

Nearly all camcorders and HD cameras from the last several years have been USB capable or USB only.

Target Disk Mode is a non-issue considering, if theres an issue with the drive or file system, it'd be better to boot from an OPTICAL disc and do things that way.

however with the LACK OF FIREWIRE, (NEW MB) you are limited to crappy USB devices

M-Audio and E-MU are regarded as two of the best in the business. They make USB versions of every product they have, or in some cases, they don't support Firewire at all.

USB is hardly crappy. It's just that you and others here can't accept the fact that USB devices caught up to and surpassed Firewire years ago and that Firewire is no longer relevant.

USB takes CPU cycles and DOES NOT have the throughput to play 192k/24 bit audio, 30+ tracks. You COULD do this with FIREWIRE.

How do you know USB 2.0 doesn't? Real world bandwidth is EVERY bit as good as Firewire. It's only on the Macs that USB 2.0 wasn't as good as Firewire, but on the PC side, USB 2.0 has ALWAYS performed as well as Firewire. And benchmarks show that the new MacBooks and MBPs have USB 2.0 performing nearly as well as PCs.

And, again, M-Audio and E-MU have been making USB 2.0 versions of everything for years that perform just as well.

LACK of 1394 on new macbook but realize that mom/pop cam corder,

Again, nearly every camcorder and HD camera from the last few years has either been USB capable or USB only. Firewire for video IS A NON ISSUE.

I.T. users and target disk

Because they can't boot off of a DVD? Or take the drive out and put it in an external enclosure?

Another example, iMacs are strong machines but no MATTE = no PRO GRAPHIC work, gotta get a MAC PRO if you want MATTE.

Why is that?

Matte screens distort color and blur text. Some people MISTAKENLY believe that matte is more like print. But thats not true. You can't compare the two mediums at all. That is a true apple to oranges comparison. Print is not only using an entirely different technology than LCD to get the text and colors to you, but it also relies on ambient lighting to be seen, where LCDs generate their own light.

Arstechnica had a good article/discussion on this issue and it pretty much mopped the floor with all of the pro matte arguments.

Glossy is more realistic and outperforms matte in every way. Plus, didn't you notice? Apple is moving their cinema displays to glossy as well.

[Dagless]

Why is that?

Matte screens distort color and blur text. Some people MISTAKENLY believe that matte is more like print. But thats not true. You can't compare the two mediums at all. That is a true apple to oranges comparison. Print is not only using an entirely different technology than LCD to get the text and colors to you, but it also relies on ambient lighting to be seen, where LCDs generate their own light.

Arstechnica had a good article/discussion on this issue and it pretty much mopped the floor with all of the pro matte arguments.

Glossy is more realistic and outperforms matte in every way. Plus, didn't you notice? Apple is moving their cinema displays to glossy as well.

I have to agree, I do paid graphics work on a glossy display and my clients are sticking with me *shrugs*

[powers74]

Include a small clip to retain the MagSafe plug.

What would the point of a clip on a MagSafe be?

[mosx]

I have to agree, I do paid graphics work on a glossy display and my clients are sticking with me *shrugs*

Yeah. I know an artist who switched from a matte to a glossy display earlier this year and her workload has doubled since then because the company she works for has liked her work that much better since she switched to glossy.

[powers74]

Yeah. I know an artist who switched from a matte to a glossy display earlier this year and her workload has doubled since then because the company she works for has liked her work that much better since she switched to glossy.

Can't argue with those numbers...

[surroundfan]

Software such as vlc don't require the region code on a drive and disk to match. This (http://www.macos.utah.edu/documentation/multimedia/foreign_dvd_playback/region_free_playback/why_how.html) article covers how vlc does its thing on a Mac.

Except with newer Matshita drives. VLC can't bypass the region coding on those (trust me, been there, done that twice now. I required region free firmware on the drive to enable multiregion playback through VLC)...

[igazza]

This is the imac i want

24inch
2.83GHz core 2 quad
NVIDIA GeForce 9600
8GB of ram
250GB Solid state

i can dream right

[iDave]

Yeah. I know an artist who switched from a matte to a glossy display earlier this year and her workload has doubled since then because the company she works for has liked her work that much better since she switched to glossy.
I know one who tripled his workload because he dumped his glossy iMac and got a mini and a matte display. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[NT1440]

Guys, this is one of the few times I'm going to defend mosx's post. He wasnt giving a reason in favor of or against, merely anecdotal evidence. Why switching to a glossy display doubles someones productivity however, ill never know....

[iDave]

Guys, this is one of the few times I'm going to defend mosx's post. He wasnt giving a reason in favor of or against, merely anecdotal evidence. Why switching to a glossy display doubles someones productivity however, ill never know....
I don't know what's funnier, the original tall tale, or the fact that you believe such a thing would happen because of a glossy display. ;) ;)

The designer had a streak of good luck and creativity and that is all.

[NT1440]

I don't know what's funnier, the original tall tale, or the fact that you believe such a thing would happen because of a glossy display. ;) ;)

The designer had a streak of good luck and creativity and that is all.

Hopefully my post didn't give off the impression that I actually believed that.

[iDave]

Hopefully my post didn't give off the impression that I actually believed that.
Sorry that I jumped to the conclusion that you did. Rereading your post, I see differently.

Look, the glossy vs. matte debate has gone on since Apple switched to glossy in the MacBooks. It will probably go on forever. Some people really like glossy displays and maybe even think glossy inspires creativity or that their work is better. Some may actually do better work on glossy displays, and others enjoy brighter colors on them, etc., etc.

The fact is, glossy displays are reflective. In many enviroments it creates a distraction that's hard to overlook. I bought a MacBook and hate that when I sit down to use it, I have to adjust lights, close blinds or tilt the screen at a certain angle so that I'm not annoyed by reflections.

Therefore, I'll vote with my wallet and not buy any glossy display or another Mac portable that has one. And I will laugh when I hear silly stories about how great they are. Sorry if I speak up now and then. I'll try to resist the temptation.

...back on topic now.

[MattInOz]

I used to think those rumors about the Mac Mini and the AppleTV being merged were bunk but the more I think about it, the more it seems like the logical move to make and the fact that we're seeing evidence for only one model of the Mini with a real graphics card is a nod in that direction.

Apple could eliminate the AppleTV and incorporate its features into a "high-end" Mac Mini. You could have 2 models of Mini that could replace the existing lines. There would be the low-end, entry-level Mini at $300-400 with integrated graphics, and then the "media center" (hate that phrase) Mini with a real graphics cards and a DVD slot (please... Apple if you go this route, please include a @#$%& DVD slot) at $400-500.

At this point, you have a lot of Mac owners out there who I think have no interest in the Mini and no interest in the AppleTV because of the shortcomings of each, but put them together and I think you'd gain a lot of interest. I have no interest in either but if Apple were to put out a machine that allowed me to replace my DVD player, stream, store and download videos, pics and music and also offered a full computing experience (i.e., being able to stream Netflix and Hulu to the TV screen) then you could count me in.

More likely is that both will use nVidia integrated graphic like the macbook
the MacMini with upgraded Core2Duo the Apple TV with an Atom, unless Apple has an ARM in mind for the next AppleTV update.

[NT1440]

Yea i see Apples acquisition of that chipmaker coming into play later this year. In what, remains to see.

[xbjllb]

Anyway your right about one thing, connections in this country are a joke compared to the rest of the world, thank god we have a soon to be president that at least wants to do something about it.

Is that BEFORE or AFTER the 30,000 troops to Afghanistan?

Or BEFORE or AFTER saving the worlds' economy?

Ridiculous* expectations: bad for Apple and worse for Presidents.

:apple:

*Ridiculous meaning, in this case, doing anything they said they were going to do.

[NT1440]

Is that BEFORE or AFTER the 30,000 troops to Afghanistan?

Or BEFORE or AFTER saving the worlds' economy?

Ridiculous expectations: bad for Apple and worse for Presidents.

:apple:

Hey hey hey, i said WANTS to do something about it. Not will get it done. Don't forget that washington is still washington, just a new figurehead in town.

Anyway, even without a stevenote, im still looking forward to macworld and hopefully something about this will be mentioned.

[mosx]

Sorry that I jumped to the conclusion that you did. Rereading your post, I see differently.

Look, the glossy vs. matte debate has gone on since Apple switched to glossy in the MacBooks. It will probably go on forever. Some people really like glossy displays and maybe even think glossy inspires creativity or that their work is better. Some may actually do better work on glossy displays, and others enjoy brighter colors on them, etc., etc.

The fact is, glossy displays are reflective. In many enviroments it creates a distraction that's hard to overlook. I bought a MacBook and hate that when I sit down to use it, I have to adjust lights, close blinds or tilt the screen at a certain angle so that I'm not annoyed by reflections.

Therefore, I'll vote with my wallet and not buy any glossy display or another Mac portable that has one. And I will laugh when I hear silly stories about how great they are. Sorry if I speak up now and then. I'll try to resist the temptation.

...back on topic now.

Well, you're in an overly vocal yet incredibly small minority that doesn't like glossy displays.

Apple offered both giving the consumers the choice between the two. Obviously the people chose glossy.

HP, Dell, Gateway, and every other PC manufacturer also offered both glossy and matte displays. Guess which one the people chose?

HP has been offering glass screens for half a year now, before Apple did. They offer the choice of glossy plastic versus glossy glass and you can guess which people are choosing.

You can go ahead and "speak with your wallet" but Apple knows what the majority of people want.

What they "lose" in sales from people who still want matte screens they gain probably 10x more in people who like the new glossy glass screens, the same way HP is selling more systems with glass screens.

It's the same with the nonsensical Firewire debate as well. What they lose in a very very small number of sales there, they make up many times over in the way they advertise the MacBook as a machine designed for your digital photography and syncing your iPod and iPhone.

[Umbongo]

This is the imac i want

24inch
2.83GHz core 2 quad
NVIDIA GeForce 9600
8GB of ram
250GB Solid state

i can dream right

There is a decent possibility of such a system. Though if Apple still required SODIMMs you'd be looking at over $2000 + tax just for the memory and SSD making the Mac Pro a better choice, unless you really wanted an all in one.

[NT1440]

Well, you're in an overly vocal yet incredibly small minority that doesn't like glossy displays.

Apple offered both giving the consumers the choice between the two. Obviously the people chose glossy.

HP, Dell, Gateway, and every other PC manufacturer also offered both glossy and matte displays. Guess which one the people chose?

HP has been offering glass screens for half a year now, before Apple did. They offer the choice of glossy plastic versus glossy glass and you can guess which people are choosing.

You can go ahead and "speak with your wallet" but Apple knows what the majority of people want.

What they "lose" in sales from people who still want matte screens they gain probably 10x more in people who like the new glossy glass screens, the same way HP is selling more systems with glass screens.

It's the same with the nonsensical Firewire debate as well. What they lose in a very very small number of sales there, they make up many times over in the way they advertise the MacBook as a machine designed for your digital photography and syncing your iPod and iPhone.

That is one of the most straightforward and true posts ive ever seen from you, kudos man.

[mdriftmeyer]

This happens every time I mention Pentium Dual-Core. You do know they make mobile versions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Pentium_Dual-Core_microprocessors#.22Merom-2M.22_.2865_nm.29) of them, right?

Unless they plan on crippling the Mac Mini by keeping the Front-side bus at 667Mhz [they won't] then they are moving most likely to the 1066Mhz.

http://compare.intel.com/pcc/showchart.aspx?mmID=965315,36463,60130&familyID=1

Centrino Line:
http://www.intel.com/products/centrino/compare.htm

The MacBook, MacBook Pro, MacBook Air and the iMac are ALL 1066Mhz Front-side Bus systems.

The Mac Mini is the last one to get that minimum standard.

The AppleTV is a consumer electronics product for Television: the Mac Mini isn't interdependent upon what the AppleTV becomes.

They are two different channels in hardware development.

Mac Mini [if it continues] will come with a 1066Mhz Front-side Bus.

[powers74]

This is a little off topic I guess, but I just thought of something. iMac has to be updated to LED backlighting anyway doesn't it? Apple wouldn't let that be the only new feature. I don't think...

[Eric S.]

Well, you're in an overly vocal yet incredibly small minority that doesn't like glossy displays.

Apple offered both giving the consumers the choice between the two. Obviously the people chose glossy.

HP, Dell, Gateway, and every other PC manufacturer also offered both glossy and matte displays. Guess which one the people chose?

HP has been offering glass screens for half a year now, before Apple did. They offer the choice of glossy plastic versus glossy glass and you can guess which people are choosing.

You can go ahead and "speak with your wallet" but Apple knows what the majority of people want.

What they "lose" in sales from people who still want matte screens they gain probably 10x more in people who like the new glossy glass screens, the same way HP is selling more systems with glass screens.

It's the same with the nonsensical Firewire debate as well. What they lose in a very very small number of sales there, they make up many times over in the way they advertise the MacBook as a machine designed for your digital photography and syncing your iPod and iPhone.

Do you have a source for any of these statements?

[shivi2004]

Apple the Mac Mini is the ONLY Apple product that doesn't come in an aluminum body, so that should be expected at MacWorld.

[NT1440]

The mini is aluminum right?

[iDave]

The mini is aluminum right?
Yeah, since 2005.

[NT1440]

Yeah, since 2005.

Funny how ive never actually been near one in nearly 4 years:p

[AidenShaw]

There is a decent possibility of such a system. Though if Apple still required SODIMMs you'd be looking at over $2000 + tax just for the memory and SSD making the Mac Pro a better choice, unless you really wanted an all in one.

Interesting that so many needs would be met by a mini-tower that used desktop chips - rather than an anorexic "thin" system with laptop parts...

[Vivaldi]

I'm quite excited with this news — in my opinion, the Mac Mini should contain basic hardware, but nothing to the extent of the subpar GM945. It's good to see this!

[sighlent]

Glossy is more realistic and outperforms matte in every way. Plus, didn't you notice? Apple is moving their cinema displays to glossy as well.

I wish we could start referring to Apple's displays now as Glassy, not Glossy because they are way different than the Glossy film coated LCDs.

[h0mi]

I'm curious as to how the case will change. Can we safely assume no more putty knives to update ram/hdds? I'd also like to see if the apple tv gets any updates. Regardless, this bit of news will make it very likely that I'll snag a mac mini in the next few months.

[alexbates]

I'm curious as to how the case will change. Can we safely assume no more putty knives to update ram/hdds? I'd also like to see if the apple tv gets any updates. Regardless, this bit of news will make it very likely that I'll snag a mac mini in the next few months.

Apple TV definitely will get an update if some sort. Some people have been installing that 3rd party software on their Apple TV's. I'm sure that Apple wants to find a way to stop this before it gets as bad as jailbreaking iPhones has gotten.

[Sehnsucht]

I know, makes too much sense to release firewire.

Why are people PINHEADS? Especially fan boys lifers? I remember saying DEDICATED GPU and got answers like
maybe Apple doesn't care about gaming market" - I then went on to state that it was larger than music biz, then it came out and NO FIREWIRE impounded my "AFRAID OF PRO MARKET, even though less than 1%, only no FIREWIRE hurt not only PROS but MOM AND DAD CAM CORDER, millions of musicians, IT who used target mode, and many more. Okay fanbot have another. It wasn't until Steve pulled out of MW that the lifers got a taste of how it feels to be excluded. About time.


A mini should be a mid range machine, not the low end piece of crap headless macbook.

Don't mean to sound well, negative, just sick and tired of APPLE making MORON moves all timid and afraid, all worried and BOYZ not reading between lines and realizing things like lack of FIREWIRE was to keep PRO users from having a cheap solution yet this time it hurt a larger audience. Makes me crazy that Apple does such stupid things for stupid reasons. If they did there research, they would find users would own both HIGHEND and lowend and would sell MORE machines, not less. There marketing department is one person, Jobs, and glad he will be stepping down soon.

Apple will make more $$$ once Jobs steps down.

*Uses fire extinguisher to put himself out* My my, a little touchy are we? :D Rest assured that I am actually against the removal of FireWire. I have a FW800 external harddrive and a Sony Handycam also with FW. I merely wanted to the honor of starting the inevitable FW rant. :D I am not a "fanbot" sir.

[mjstew33]

I think it's going to keep it's form factor. It matches the AirPort Extreme, Time Capsule, and the :apple: TV. It will most likely get upgrades... ie: graphics, faster processor, and a mini? DisplayPort.

[mdriftmeyer]

Interesting that so many needs would be met by a mini-tower that used desktop chips - rather than an anorexic "thin" system with laptop parts...

I completely agree.

[surferfromuk]

Apple TV definitely will get an update if some sort. Some people have been installing that 3rd party software on their Apple TV's. I'm sure that Apple wants to find a way to stop this before it gets as bad as jailbreaking iPhones has gotten.

It's ridiculous to update products in the 1st week of January - simply kills the idea of buying in December for Xmas.

I'm not buying an ATV for Xmas for precisely that reason...

I'm glad they're ditching Macworld - if Macworld had the sense to move to September Apple would probably have stuck with it....it's there own stupid fault for having it at a ridiculous time of the year. It's just too annoying having the prospect of obscelecence 2 weeks after you've bought something.

[intempo808]

While that may be TRUE, LOGIC on a MINI a few weeks ago, you (and others I assume), CLEARLY MISSED MY POINT.

No kidding, you can RUN LOGIC on a older MACBOOK and current mini ....

however with the LACK OF FIREWIRE, (NEW MB) you are limited to crappy USB devices

New MACBOOK and presumably, the NEW MINI (lack of fire wire) will have to use USB.

PRO DEVICES ARE FIREWIRE and old mini's and MACBOOKS had FIREWIRE, the new MINI WILL NOT - and even though it's not texas instruments, it was 1000 fold better than USB as USB takes CPU cycles and DOES NOT have the throughput to play 192k/24 bit audio, 30+ tracks. You COULD do this with FIREWIRE.

Apple could prove me wrong, realize that not only did they shut out <less than 1% of the PRO market with LACK of 1394 on new macbook but realize that mom/pop cam corder, I.T. users and target disk and the millions of musicians NEED the 1394 on the mini. Probably not though as Apple just doesn't care anymore.

They care about consumer, charge $700 for a machine that has 1394, pciexpress slot, 2 more inches (macbook pro) yet its the same production uni-body and their cost is much cheaper now, yet do they pass the savings? No....

I could go on and on....

Another example, iMacs are strong machines but no MATTE = no PRO GRAPHIC work, gotta get a MAC PRO if you want MATTE.

Older macbooks and iMACS used non TEXAS INSTRUMENTS FIREWIRE which some said caused audio/video problems but saved apple a few dollars. They even released MAC BOOK PROS with non TEXAS INSTRUMENT FIREWIRE from JAN 08-ARPRIL 08, then brought it back in MAY.

There are a lot of things Apple does or rather, doesn't do, if you are smart enough, read the tech blogs, sites, info, INTEL, ATI, NVIDIA, TEXAS INSTRUMENT news and so on...

WOW, you USE a lot OF irrelevant CAPS.

Don't be so patronizing. It's just a box no one cares who buys it or anything, they just want it, so shut up and calm down you fool. You're just wasting peoples time and getting them angry.


Anyway, on to more important matters, I can't wait for the new Mac Mini :D I'll buy one! Haha
;) :D

[phasornc]

If they can forego the size fixation and make it a wee bit bigger, they can use 3.5" hard drives which are MUCH cheaper than laptop drives, and more reliable too.


Finally someone said it! The 2.5" is stupid for a desktop, less reliable, more expensive, less space and slower, but you save 4 cubic inches of desk space . . . "effin' awesome tradeoff!"

Anyway here's my wishlist:
1) Firewire is dead, face it, let's get esata on the mini and the time cube thingy
2) Put 2 3.5" drives in the mini (call me crazy)
3) Blu-Ray
4) HDMI with HDCP (a necessary evil to use Blu-Ray so shutup haters)
5) Cool new laptop keyboard/mouse thingy - right now my Gyration mouse is pretty damn cool but Apple could beat it
6) 720p movie rentals
7) Variable overscan correction (if you hook a computer up to an LCP or DLP tv you know what I'm talking about, ATI and nVidia deliver it for Windows we need it on mac os. I'm tired of having to unclick the 'overscan' box to see my menus and then re-clicking the overscan box to make movies completely file the screen)

[Evangelion]

have you seen this:

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3478

[nick9191]

long time lerker, first time poster....

how is it no one has put two and two together? nVidia just released the Ion platform... Atom processor and 9400M chip in the palm of your hand, say hello to the new mini! HD output small form factor.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3478

can't wait

case closed :)
Yes because we are just dying for a Mini that is half the speed of the current model.

[nick9191]

Plus you don't have to worry about ATI/AMD's AWFUL drivers if you're running Windows.
But you do have to worry about Nvidia's awful drivers when running OS X.

[Eric S.]

Anyway here's my wishlist:
1) Firewire is dead, face it, let's get esata on the mini and the time cube thingy

eSATA is only for storage, not a solution for other FW peripherals. What's the "time cube thingy"?

2) Put 2 3.5" drives in the mini (call me crazy)

OK, you're crazy. Why do you need that if you have eSATA? ;) Anyway, that would add too much cost and never pass the "thin" test.

3) Blu-Ray

Bag of hurt.

[Evangelion]

Yes because we are just dying for a Mini that is half the speed of the current model.

It depends... That mini would have a lot faster graphics than current mini does. It would also enable the machine to be cheaper and smaller than it is now.

That mini might have slower CPU than current mini does. Nut it would be fast enough.

[mdriftmeyer]

Finally someone said it! The 2.5" is stupid for a desktop, less reliable, more expensive, less space and slower, but you save 4 cubic inches of desk space . . . "effin' awesome tradeoff!"

Anyway here's my wishlist:
1) Firewire is dead, face it, let's get esata on the mini and the time cube thingy
2) Put 2 3.5" drives in the mini (call me crazy)
3) Blu-Ray
4) HDMI with HDCP (a necessary evil to use Blu-Ray so shutup haters)
5) Cool new laptop keyboard/mouse thingy - right now my Gyration mouse is pretty damn cool but Apple could beat it
6) 720p movie rentals
7) Variable overscan correction (if you hook a computer up to an LCP or DLP tv you know what I'm talking about, ATI and nVidia deliver it for Windows we need it on mac os. I'm tired of having to unclick the 'overscan' box to see my menus and then re-clicking the overscan box to make movies completely file the screen)

I agree. Get rid of the 2.5" drives and give me full 3.5" drives.

[mdriftmeyer]

It's ridiculous to update products in the 1st week of January - simply kills the idea of buying in December for Xmas.

I'm not buying an ATV for Xmas for precisely that reason...

I'm glad they're ditching Macworld - if Macworld had the sense to move to September Apple would probably have stuck with it....it's there own stupid fault for having it at a ridiculous time of the year. It's just too annoying having the prospect of obscelecence 2 weeks after you've bought something.

They announce in January and release in March.

[Evangelion]

Wat I think will happen is that the mini will continue to follow the MacBook as far as specs are concerned, but Apple will release a new AppleTV that will use NVIDIA's Ion-platform. It makes sense.

[FrenchKheldar]

Wat I think will happen is that the mini will continue to follow the MacBook as far as specs are concerned, but Apple will release a new AppleTV that will use NVIDIA's Ion-platform. It makes sense.

I agree.The combo Atom+nVidia 9300 will spank the old Pentium M processor in the Apple TV. This should allow 1080p video without breaking a sweat, as well as some light/casual gaming on the Apple TV (similar to the small Wii games). Maybe Apple will also release a controller for this or allow the use of the iPhone...

[inkswamp]

Apple offered both giving the consumers the choice between the two. Obviously the people chose glossy.

Oh? There's a matte screen iMac available on Apple's site that I'm unaware of? There's a choice between glossy and matte across the entire laptop line? There's some secret Macbook Air with a matte screen?

When exactly did Apple offer a choice? Calling what Apple did "giving the consumers the choice" is an amazing instance of cognitive dissonance. They took choices away from the consumer. Stop making excuses for them. Apple has gone along with the herd mentality in the industry in pushing glossy screens on their consumers.

Think different. Riiiiiiiiight.

Do you have a source for any of these statements?

I was wondering that too. And remember, when citing sources, "my ass" doesn't count.

[Bodypainter]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NC6mEkKSouA

[Bubba Satori]

Bag of hurt.


Not in my store. Blu-ray players are flying off the shelves in home theater and so are the Sony, HP and Dell laptops with Blu-ray players starting at $900.

But don't let that stop you from the "Bag of hurt" chant that Steve delivered to his disciples. :D

[jim.arrows]

Oh? There's a matte screen iMac available on Apple's site that I'm unaware of? There's a choice between glossy and matte across the entire laptop line? There's some secret Macbook Air with a matte screen?

When exactly did Apple offer a choice? Calling what Apple did "giving the consumers the choice" is an amazing instance of cognitive dissonance. They took choices away from the consumer. Stop making excuses for them. Apple has gone along with the herd mentality in the industry in pushing glossy screens on their consumers.

Think different. Riiiiiiiiight.



I was wondering that too. And remember, when citing sources, "my ass" doesn't count.

I think his point is that in the previous generation of products both screens were offered, and since with this generation they're only offering the glossy the implication is that the consumers "chose" the glossy screens, i.e. the demand for glossy so overwhelmed the demand for matte that they dropped the matte from their entire product lineup.

I hate the glossy and will never buy one again (sold a blackbook 5 months after buying it because I couldn't stand the glossy screen, replaced it with a matte mbp), but it's hard to argue with the logic above. Really, if in the previous generation the matte outsold the glossy 3 to 1, do we think they'd have dropped the matte? I hate to say it, but I think the idiot consumers have actually chosen glossy across the industry, otherwise glossy would have died and matte would still be around.

ON TOPIC, I'm kind of excited to see what they do with the new mini, I'm actually one of the consumers they're worried about choosing the mini over a mac pro -- I'm considering a mac pro, but if they make the mini appealing enough I'll go with that instead (already own a 1.83GHz c2d mini, which will become a HTPC). Looking forward to seeing what's announced in a couple of weeks...

[surferfromuk]

They announce in January and release in March.

That's even more absurd...

[Eric S.]

But don't let that stop you from the "Bag of hurt" chant that Steve delivered to his disciples. :D

I meant that that is Apple's position, and therefore we shouldn't expect to see Blu-Ray on any Apple products in the near future.

I think his point is that in the previous generation of products both screens were offered, and since with this generation they're only offering the glossy the implication is that the consumers "chose" the glossy screens, i.e. the demand for glossy so overwhelmed the demand for matte that they dropped the matte from their entire product lineup.

I don't know why that implies it was the customers' choice. To me it implies that Apple chose it. Apple customers have been offered fewer and fewer choices as time goes on, and I believe that is a conscious marketing decision on Apple's part.

I hate the glossy and will never buy one again (sold a blackbook 5 months after buying it because I couldn't stand the glossy screen, replaced it with a matte mbp), but it's hard to argue with the logic above. Really, if in the previous generation the matte outsold the glossy 3 to 1, do we think they'd have dropped the matte? I hate to say it, but I think the idiot consumers have actually chosen glossy across the industry, otherwise glossy would have died and matte would still be around.

There's a very simple alternative way to look at it - Apple makes more profit margin from glossy screens, and therefore they prevent the majority of customers from making another choice.

I was also one who said I would never buy a glossy screen. When I bought the Blackbook I didn't have a choice, which I wasn't happy about. But once I had it I found that I actually liked it. Now I have the aluminum Macbook and it's even more reflective, but it still isn't a problem when the screen is on unless there's a very bright light shining directly into the screen.

[Redgiemental]

So you hated them so much you swore off buying a new laptop without even trying them?

Then when you eventually did try them you liked them.

Yet you are still complaining.

If you found you liked the Glossy screen why is it so hard to believe that perhaps the majority of people prefer them too?

[iDave]

I bought a MacBook thinking I could get used to glossy, and hate it. I bought a (matte) Netbook for portable use instead.

I can't imagine using the now even glassier MacBooks or iMacs.

That's why I'm a Mac mini fan. :D I can hardly wait for the upgrade.

[inkswamp]

Really, if in the previous generation the matte outsold the glossy 3 to 1, do we think they'd have dropped the matte?

But that's post hoc reasoning and I'd be stunned to hear that Apple is being run on the idea that because two things happen simultaneously, they must be linked as cause and effect. That kind of reasoning borders on the superstitious.

My point stands. At no instance, did Apple offer both matte and glossy screens across the line and give consumers real choice. Therefore nobody here or at Apple can claim that Mac buyers consciously chose glossy over matte. I find it ludicrous that anyone here (as was the case with the previous poster on this topic--this is not directed at you of course) would defend Apple's move on the basis that they have given the consumer a choice. Nonsense! They've done nothing of the sort. They've taken options away from the consumer.

I hate to say it, but I think the idiot consumers have actually chosen glossy across the industry, otherwise glossy would have died and matte would still be around.

That's likely the case but I don't give a rip what the rest of the industry decides. That's why I've used a Mac for the last 15 years of my life. I look for quality in my platform of choice, not popularity. It's frustrating to see Apple follow the herd on this and switch their line-up to a display that consumers with more discerning eyes regard as an inferior product.

[jim.arrows]

My point stands. At no instance, did Apple offer both matte and glossy screens across the line and give consumers real choice. Therefore nobody here or at Apple can claim that Mac buyers consciously chose glossy over matte.

In at least one instance (the Macbook Pro) they offered both screens for the same price, so they have hard numbers on an otherwise identical configuration as to which version was most popular.

Again, I can't stand the glossy and will never buy another, and have told them that via feedback at apple.com, but I doubt it will matter. For whatever reason, be it higher margins or a simplified, more efficient manufacturing process (which leads to the higher margins) they've decided to go with the glossy -- the only thing I can do is vote with my dollars by never buying a product with a glossy screen, and hope they lose enough revenue to make them reconsider that decision.

[Eric S.]

So you hated them so much you swore off buying a new laptop without even trying them?

Then when you eventually did try them you liked them.

Yet you are still complaining.

My complaint is with Apple's marketing techniques, not the glossy screens.

If you found you liked the Glossy screen why is it so hard to believe that perhaps the majority of people prefer them too?

If that's true, where is the evidence to support it? Just because Apple chose to go entirely glossy doesn't mean a majority of their customer base supported it. Apple is pretty well known for forcing technology choices down their customers' throats.

[Sehnsucht]

Bag of hurt.

There's a ton of debate on whether or not Blu-Ray is a passing fad or is here to stay. I say who knows and who cares. Why not go ahead and incorporate Blu-Ray just in case? Might I remind everyone that Blu-Ray drives/players are backward-compatible with regular CD's and DVD's, so it's not as if Blu-Ray drives will become totally useless if the Blu-Ray standard does eventually turn out to be a flop. Just sayin'. :D

[sighlent]

There's a ton of debate on whether or not Blu-Ray is a passing fad or is here to stay. I say who knows and who cares. Why not go ahead and incorporate Blu-Ray just in case? Might I remind everyone that Blu-Ray drives/players are backward-compatible with regular CD's and DVD's, so it's not as if Blu-Ray drives will become totally useless if the Blu-Ray standard does eventually turn out to be a flop. Just sayin'. :D

I think there should at least be software support for BD playback in Mac OS X. If Apple doesn't want to support the hardware fine, let everyone use external Bluray drives (as they already do), but don't ignore the technology all together. I think that as a leading Hardware and Software company in video production and film, Apple of all manufacturers should have had Bluray support from the beginning.

[Pigumon]

Include a small clip to retain the MagSafe plug.

I think it's a terrific idea for the mini. I don't think it provides enough power to drive any larger desktop.

Whoa, you want a magnetic power cord that was designed to come out easily, to have a clip to prevent it from coming out easily? hmmm...


If anything, I'd like to see a third party (since apple would never do something like this) come out with a thin battery that plugs directly into the power port, and slides under the mini, then the power cord plugs into that. making it able to move from room to room, or in a car or to a friend's house.

Anyway, If this Mini is cheap and finally capable of 30fps (preferably 60fps) 1080P video... I'll be selling my HDX-1000. :D

[iDave]

Whoa, you want a magnetic power cord that was designed to come out easily, to have a clip to prevent it from coming out easily? hmmm...
I don't think it was designed to come out easily. It was designed to break away if you trip over the cord. Magsafe is attached plenty firm enough that it wouldn't need a clip on a Mac mini any more than a USB or Firewire cord needs a clip. Putting a battery in a Mac mini would be a needless expense. It's a desktop computer, not a laptop. :)

[Cecco]

Eidorian:

Optical media is too sensitive, balky for its size, slow and the drive itself is massive for what it provides. I don't know, am I being to out-there? What do other think?

For raw data storage and backups optical media is out. Most of us already use external hard-disks for that task.

But for HD movies - purchase or rented, blue-ray is currently the only way to go. The industry needs cheap, high-capacity media, that can be copy protected. Flash memory is currently not an alternative to distribute movies.

Distributing content online, like it works great for music, could be an alternative in the future. But today over 90% of the people don't have the bandwidth to stream HD movie content. From the remaining 10% probably 90% don't have a LAN connection in their living room and wireless even over 802.11n isn't always fast enough to stream HD content. And even if you have all the technical prerequisites, in Europe you are still out of luck, as iTunes, the only store, which offers movies for download playable on a Mac, currently doesn't offer movies in Europe at all (except in the UK).

Not implementing blue-ray or even phasing out optical drives completely would make the MacMini useless as a media center for playing movie content.

Unfortunately, if you want to use your nice, new, big 1080p Flat-TV the way it was designed for, currently your only option is to buy a blue-ray player.

Cecco

[MacAgent84]

Blu-Ray simply has not become mainstream enough, and therefore not cheap enough for the media itself. The higher cost and potential loss of including hardware support for Blu-Ray at this point is too much of a risk for Apple. Profits with existing SuperDrives compared to Blu-Ray are significantly higher. I think, if the technology holds with steady growth in the market, we shouldn't expect Apple to start considering Blu-Ray as an option until around Q4 2009, Q1 2010.

_____________
OS X Mac Tips & Tricks (http://osxmactips.blogspot.com)

[NewsAndHistory]

nVidia GeForce seems to be worth trying, as well.

[xbjllb]

Blu-Ray simply has not become mainstream enough, and therefore not cheap enough for the media itself. The higher cost and potential loss of including hardware support for Blu-Ray at this point is too much of a risk for Apple. Profits with existing SuperDrives compared to Blu-Ray are significantly higher. I think, if the technology holds with steady growth in the market, we shouldn't expect Apple to start considering Blu-Ray as an option until around Q4 2009, Q1 2010.

Perfect! Bankruptcy 2011, right on schedule, once other manufacturers make cheaper iCrap iPhones and iPods and power users continue to desert the platform in droves for a cutting-edge workstation computer manufacturer.

:apple:

[Yamcha]

Im waiting, i really hope we some new iMacs by the end of January.

[Yamcha]

Blu-Ray simply has not become mainstream enough, and therefore not cheap enough for the media itself. The higher cost and potential loss of including hardware support for Blu-Ray at this point is too much of a risk for Apple. Profits with existing SuperDrives compared to Blu-Ray are significantly higher. I think, if the technology holds with steady growth in the market, we shouldn't expect Apple to start considering Blu-Ray as an option until around Q4 2009, Q1 2010.

_____________
OS X Mac Tips & Tricks (http://osxmactips.blogspot.com)

+1, We won't see Bluray on iMacs for a while, I honestly don't care for it at all, Im not picky with video quality, my bro is though, he constantly downloads bluray movies and shows the fam.

[applgeek]

The Most Likely Scenario for the new mini:

New Design to Combat Dell Studio Hybrid (they come in your choice of color, you know). They will keep the optical drive, because the potential switcher wants it.

Possibly HDMI so you can hook up the mini to the tv. I dont know though, the tv really isn't the target market though. They want you to buy an apple TV.

Upgraded Graphics, almost the same processor. The current ones are the same as a Pentium dual core, so they are probably cheap. This cheaper proc helps pay for the nvidia chipset.

If apple was smart, they would lower the price to meet economic times. But that wont happen. If anything, the price will go up just like the macbooks.

I just know that my 6 month old $600 dell laptop is faster than a mac mini, and im getting tired of buying $350 dell desktops that beat out the mini.

[nonarKitten]

Too bad they might be going with the Atom 330. It's a serious step-back from the Intel Core Duo that's in there right now.

[Eric S.]

Anyone think that today's updated White MB basically has the logic board for the new mini?

[iMacmatician]

Anyone think that today's updated White MB basically has the logic board for the new mini?I think that is a reasonable possibility.

Maybe aluminum MacBook logic board on the high-end.

[Kilamite]

I think that is a reasonable possibility.

Maybe aluminum MacBook logic board on the high-end.

So the high end Mac Mini won't have FireWire?

[Bubba Satori]

I think there should at least be software support for BD playback in Mac OS X. If Apple doesn't want to support the hardware fine, let everyone use external Bluray drives (as they already do), but don't ignore the technology all together. I think that as a leading Hardware and Software company in video production and film, Apple of all manufacturers should have had Bluray support from the beginning.

Yes, there should be. My customers want it.

They ask for BD equiped laptops. Sold an $1,100 Sony Vaio with BD today. It was the deciding feature for them. 4GB, 320GB and a P8400 Core Duo 2 with a 16.4" screen for $1,300 less than a MacBook pro.

[BenRoethig]

I think that is a reasonable possibility.

Maybe aluminum MacBook logic board on the high-end.

Same chipset. 9400M is designed work with either DDR 2 or 3. Depending on Apple's plans for the Mini, if they actually have any you might see DDR2 in the lower end model and DDR3 in the higher end model or they might reserve DDR3 for the iMac.

So the high end Mac Mini won't have FireWire?

Firewire is its own chip. The AluBooks lack it due to design choices.