Evidence that Next iMacs and Mac Minis to use NVIDIA Chipsets [Archive]

MacRumors

Dec 19, 2008, 09:12 AM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/19/evidence-that-next-imacs-and-mac-minis-to-use-nvidia-chipsets/)

Configuration files buried within some versions of Mac OS X show evidence that the next iMac and Mac Mini will indeed be based on the NVIDIA MCP79 chipset. Apple recently switched their MacBook, MacBook Pro and MacBook Air models to the NVIDIA chipsets in October. Amongst other benefits, the new notebooks have much improved graphics card capabilities, which make them more suitable to take advantage of OpenCL technologies coming in Snow Leopard.

Apple will apparently be bringing these improvements to both the new iMac and Mac mini. While many have expected the iMac to receive these upgrades, the fate of the Mac mini has been less certain.

A configuration file found in the Mac OS X version that ships with the new MacBook and MacBook Pros reveal entries referencing an unreleased "MacMini3,1" and "iMac9,1" models. The relevant lines have been excerpted here:
<dict>
<key>Desc-Key</key>
<string>CFG_MCP79</string>
<string>Macmini3,1</string>
</dict>

<dict>
<key>Desc-Key</key>
<string>CFG_MCP79</string>
<key>model</key>
<string>iMac9,1</string>
</dict>

The CFG_MCP79 appears to refer to the NVIDIA MCP79 chipset found in the newest laptops. The findings were originally described in a forum post (http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?showtopic=140774) that we've subsequently verified.

Article Link: Evidence that Next iMacs and Mac Minis to use NVIDIA Chipsets (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/12/19/evidence-that-next-imacs-and-mac-minis-to-use-nvidia-chipsets/)

Konradx

Dec 19, 2008, 09:15 AM

Have had the money saved up and waiting for a long time for the mini! The second it comes out i'll be ordering it! Finally a mini with a vid card!

xUKHCx

Dec 19, 2008, 09:15 AM

Ohh updated Mac Mini. I sincerely hope this is true. I have been holding off buying one (and getting a few other people to buy one) for a very very very long time.

alphaod

Dec 19, 2008, 09:17 AM

Oh Mac Mini. I can't wait.

Of course I'm to wonder why people surf kext files for fun.

Too bad I already bought a MSI Wind to install OS X on.

I guess I'll hold for revision 2 (in another year? :D)

shikimo

Dec 19, 2008, 09:18 AM

IKNEWITIKNEWITIKNEWIT!!!!!

Fie upon all of you who insisted the mini is dead! I never lost faith...

PeterQC

Dec 19, 2008, 09:21 AM

Only a 9400m for the iMacs? I hope not. It need at least a 9800 for the high end.

Akitakoi

Dec 19, 2008, 09:22 AM

Yea I'll be picking one of those up too. I took my :apple:TV back recently it was just to limited.

colmaclean

Dec 19, 2008, 09:30 AM

It goes without saying that I hope the new hardware comes with 10.6 or if not, a "free upgrade" guarantee (yeah, right!)...

ditzy

Dec 19, 2008, 09:30 AM

Only a 9400m for the iMacs? I hope not. It need at least a 9800 for the high end.

I'm assuming whether rightly or wrongly that the iMacs will have similar cards to the MBP while the minis will have the same as the macbooks. I could be completely wrong though. But if I am wrong there would be no good reason to buy an imac over a mini.

Motley

Dec 19, 2008, 09:30 AM

Have had the money saved up and waiting for a long time for the mini! The second it comes out i'll be ordering it! Finally a mini with a vid card!

Finally the return of a mini with a vid card (or at least not integrated graphics).

tonyl

Dec 19, 2008, 09:31 AM

That's excellent news, couldn't wait to get rid of my G4 Mini!

talkingfuture

Dec 19, 2008, 09:32 AM

Mini with better graphics will be good. Lets just hope it has some other exciting features too.

tonyl

Dec 19, 2008, 09:32 AM

Finally the return of a mini with a vid card (or at least not integrated graphics).

Probably integrated, same as Macbook, but it'll be better than Intel one.

Maxington

Dec 19, 2008, 09:35 AM

Good news indeed if it tis true.

JGowan

Dec 19, 2008, 09:37 AM

Aside from the slick menus to download movie rentals and watch Flickr, are there any other REAL benefits from getting an AppleTV over a MacMini?

richard.mac

Dec 19, 2008, 09:38 AM

1. New Mac Minis coming!
2. Big Phily will release Mac Minis at Macworld 09
3. Who the hell finds this stuff?

CalmEnvy

Dec 19, 2008, 09:41 AM

Finally, took them forever to update the damn mini lol. Anyways, the iMac will most likely have the same graphics setup as the MBP, mini as the MB. Hopefully they will announce them at Macworld '09.

brop52

Dec 19, 2008, 09:42 AM

Buying the mini for my mom's work when it comes out. As you can see from my sig it will be quite the upgrade from the iMac G3.

gkarris

Dec 19, 2008, 09:43 AM

OMG :eek:

People are actually disecting OS X code to try to find evidence of upcoming computers... :eek:

LOL.. :D

The Mini is AWESOME. People I recommended it to back when it was a PPC still have theirs and love them...

The new ones with nVidia and Aluminum Unibody(?) are gonna be sweet...

jaw04005

Dec 19, 2008, 09:47 AM

Aside from the slick menus to download movie rentals and watch Flickr, are there any other REAL benefits from getting an AppleTV over a MacMini?

Hummmm.

1. $370 less than low-end Mac mini.
2. Has HDMI and Component ports.
3. Outputs correct resolutions for your HDTV.
4. Has HD movie rentals (not available on Mac/PC).
5. Built-in iTunes store (not in Front Row).
6. Built-in Podcasts streaming (not in Front Row).
7. iPhone remote support.

MvdM

Dec 19, 2008, 09:48 AM

Have had the money saved up and waiting for a long time for the mini! The second it comes out i'll be ordering it! Finally a mini with a vid card!

And also a mini with a mini display port, which can not directly be connected to your current display.
And also a mini with no firewire.
I wouldn't be surprised if it also lacks an optical drive and replaces the Apple TV.

Fidgetyrat

Dec 19, 2008, 09:48 AM

At least the iMac will have plenty of room for cooling the 9600. Maybe it won't hit 100C like it does in my MBP.

This also does fit nicely with apple possibly Demoing grand central.

himansk

Dec 19, 2008, 09:48 AM

thats a much more solid evidence of mac mini updates coming soon, cant wait to get my hands on it.

aries2580

Dec 19, 2008, 09:49 AM

Only a 9400m for the iMacs? I hope not. It need at least a 9800 for the high end.

I totally agree. What is the deal with these subpar cards...
For god sake apple sort it out. Im sick of last Gen. graphics hardware.

:apple: Need to keep up to date with the latest graphical hardware...

A 9400... 9400!!!! WTF.

Also i bet some of you are thinking ok then, get a MacPro yeah?
With what...? an 8800GT? holy hell that is old.

Anyone else with me?

fleshman03

Dec 19, 2008, 09:50 AM

thats a much more solid evidence of mac mini updates coming soon, cant wait to get my hands on it.

That's exactly why I logged in.

Rock solid proof of hardware updates

phasornc

Dec 19, 2008, 10:03 AM

Okay I couldn't let this one go. The original aritcle states the reference was found in:
System -> Library -> IOPlatformPluginFamily.kext -> Contents -> PlugIns -> ACPI_SMC_PlatformPlugin.kext -> Contents -> Info.plist

Before someone looks its up and says the file does not exist, ever good kext warrior know that the file is located here [my bold]:
System -> Library -> Extensions -> IOPlatformPluginFamily.kext -> Contents -> PlugIns -> ACPI_SMC_PlatformPlugin.kext -> Contents -> Info.plist

Other than "Extensions.mkext", there have never been any files at the root of System -> Library.

And in case anyone is wondering, people mess around in these files all the time because they are working on video drivers for running Mac OS on unsupported PCs. In this case, I know that people are working on getting any generic PCs using the same NVidia chipset to run Mac OS. So the fact that people are playing around in these files isn't just to spy on what Apple is coming up with next, although why wouldn't you, if you were a news site trying to scoop the competition. File exploration is just the modern version of investigative journalism.

gkarris

Dec 19, 2008, 10:03 AM

And also a mini with a mini display port, which can not directly be connected to your current display.
And also a mini with no firewire.
I wouldn't be surprised if it also lacks an optical drive and replaces the Apple TV.

You have to buy an adapter. :eek: No, it will have an optical. The Ethernet port, I'd say, is another in question, at least in the "budget $499" model...

JGowan

Dec 19, 2008, 10:03 AM

Hummmm.

1. $370 less than low-end Mac mini.
2. Has HDMI and Component ports.
3. Outputs correct resolutions for your HDTV.
4. Has HD movie rentals (not available on Mac/PC).
5. Built-in iTunes store (not in Front Row).
6. Built-in Podcasts streaming (not in Front Row).
7. iPhone remote support.

Thanks. I have am intel MacMini in my bedroom hooked up (w/HDMI adapter) to my 50" Vizio and have always loved it. Getting another Vizio* for the livingroom soon and didn't know what to put in there: another MacMini or an AppleTV. Thanks for helping me see the differences.

* Super great plasmas and LCDs for the money. Picture is super great and rivals most everything I've seen for much higher.

dal20402

Dec 19, 2008, 10:07 AM

You have to buy an adapter. :eek: No, it will have an optical. The Ethernet port, I'd say, is another in question, at least in the "budget $499" model...

It'll have an Ethernet port; there's not the same extreme lack of space there is on the Air.

The question in my mind is whether the optical will be optional. Lots of people use minis as servers. If you could "officially" replace the optical with another 2.5" hard drive -- or even better, put a 3.5" hard drive in the space where the optical AND the first 2.5" drive would normally fit -- the mini-as-server people will be overjoyed. (I would too!)

infernohellion

Dec 19, 2008, 10:08 AM

*craving for the new 17" unibody MBP w/ any graphic card that is better than 9600M GT*

Joe The Dragon

Dec 19, 2008, 10:08 AM

Only a 9400m for the iMacs? I hope not. It need at least a 9800 for the high end.

moving from ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory to 9400m useing system ram is a down grade and at $1,199.00 or more will just make apple look bad next to psystar.

The mac mini should have 9500 / 9600 or better in the $700 - $900 system.

Warbrain

Dec 19, 2008, 10:08 AM

It'll have an Ethernet port; there's not the same extreme lack of space there is on the Air.

The question in my mind is whether the optical will be optional. Lots of people use minis as servers. If you could "officially" replace the optical with another 2.5" hard drive -- or even better, put a 3.5" hard drive in the space where the optical AND the first 2.5" drive would normally fit -- the mini-as-server people will be overjoyed. (I would too!)

That would be great. And if absolutely necessary buy the external Superdrive and connect it over USB. I'd buy one.

dXTC

Dec 19, 2008, 10:15 AM

And also a mini with a mini display port, which can not directly be connected to your current display.
And also a mini with no firewire.
I wouldn't be surprised if it also lacks an optical drive and replaces the Apple TV.

I would expect a mini DisplayPort, sure, but as the Mac mini is an entry-level item, it may a bad idea for Apple to force the issue, and would keep away potential switchers hoping to use their current keyboard/mouse/monitor combo. Perhaps a MiniDP-to-DVI adapter tossed in for free?

Firewire might indeed be left off, as in the new MacBook. That might tick off the digital camcorder and pro audio crowd. But quite a few cam users are getting HD-or-Flash based video cameras nowadays, and pro audio enthusiasts are better off with an iMac or Mac Pro so they can run more softsynths and audio effects. I dabble in electronic music myself, and for this particular reason I chose my iMac over the mini.

Optical drive? Sure, leave it off. This would be a very smart move, in fact. Removing the internal optical drive would allow room for higher-capacity 3.5" hard drives. All Apple would have to do is allow the MacBook Air's Superdrive to be compatible with the new mini, for those who need to install applications from DVDs.

EDIT: I see that dal20402 and Warbrain were thinking along the same lines.

rockdog

Dec 19, 2008, 10:17 AM

I guess we will have to wait until January to see for sure, but reports of the mini's death now seem premature.

Srai-W

Dec 19, 2008, 10:18 AM

Ok, so there is a new mini. Yay... I am now waiting for the standard blurry photos to arrive. Come on - we only have a few weeks!!! :o

iAthena

Dec 19, 2008, 10:35 AM

This is exciting news, although I expected this to be the case for the iMac update. If they put the graphics chip in the mini though, this will breathe new life into the product and open up a lot more applications for the device.

Eidorian

Dec 19, 2008, 10:37 AM

I'm a little surprised we didn't get this earlier. This isn't the first time we've seen new models and configurations in these files.

Kar98

Dec 19, 2008, 10:37 AM

Ok, so there is a new mini. Yay... I am now waiting for the standard blurry photos to arrive. Come on - we only have a few weeks!!! :o

There ya go:
http://i40.tinypic.com/29ll7vd.jpg

No optical drive, no remote, no remote sensor, no firewire, the slowest hard drives Apple can scrounge up, 1 GB of RAM soldered to the board :D

macaco74

Dec 19, 2008, 10:43 AM

very excited about the mac mini - have been waiting over a year to get one - :-)

fhall1

Dec 19, 2008, 10:44 AM

Excellent.....hopefully it'll support dual monitors.....and at least 6 GB RAM....that would be super!

~Shard~

Dec 19, 2008, 10:50 AM

VoR

Dec 19, 2008, 10:58 AM

r0d3nt

Dec 19, 2008, 10:59 AM

I'm hoping that the Firewire 400 sticks around on the Mac Mini! I've got an older Firewire iSight, and if the current system that this iSight is on dies, I'd rather go to a Mac Mini. No Firewire 400 would suck big time...

diamond.g

Dec 19, 2008, 10:59 AM

I'm kind of surprised all macs cant 'do' apple tv and time capsule at the moment.

AFAIK, all macs can share a drive for Time Machine use (dunno if you would call that Time Capsule per se). Isn't the Front Row interface gotten from AppleTV?

mmccaskill

Dec 19, 2008, 11:03 AM

I have the new MacBook Pro Unibody, and I can't find the evidence claimed in the article.

LukeW16

Dec 19, 2008, 11:05 AM

i hope the imacs get Geforce 9800 GX2 or the Geforce GTX 260/280 graphics cards. Or maybe the new graphics cards released by Nvdia in January? Does this seem likely or?

Digital Skunk

Dec 19, 2008, 11:06 AM

Only a 9400m for the iMacs? I hope not. It need at least a 9800 for the high end.

Hopefully this will be for the 20" base level $999 iMac only. Ever since we lost the white coating, Apple has been pushing up the base price for all of their systems.

Having an iMac with an integrated chip and low end dual core processor at around $899 (hopefully) or $999 (likely) would be great.

Personally, I would love to see the Mini with more Apple TV features, or at least a Mini with more headless desktop features.

Rorikynn

Dec 19, 2008, 11:07 AM

I totally agree. What is the deal with these subpar cards...
For god sake apple sort it out. Im sick of last Gen. graphics hardware.

:apple: Need to keep up to date with the latest graphical hardware...

A 9400... 9400!!!! WTF.

Also i bet some of you are thinking ok then, get a MacPro yeah?
With what...? an 8800GT? holy hell that is old.

Anyone else with me?

Calm down. The NVIDIA MCP79 chipset is an integrated component that serves as the southbridge and has a GPU integrated with it. So any computer using the MCP79 automatically has a 9400M tagging along with it. Yes, the iMac will have a 9400M but that doesn't mean it won't have a discrete GPU either. IMHO, the low-end iMac should have the best Performance graphics and the high-end models should have enthusiast cards. I mean, come on Apple, $3000 for a high-end iMac and we get yesterday's performance cards.

diamond.g

Dec 19, 2008, 11:09 AM

i hope the imacs get Geforce 9800 GX2 or the Geforce GTX 260/280 graphics cards. Or maybe the new graphics cards released by Nvdia in January? Does this seem likely or?

The cards you listed draw over 100W by themselves. With Apples move towards thinness stuffing a GTX 2x0 or even a GX2 is pretty unlikely.

Umbongo

Dec 19, 2008, 11:13 AM

i hope the imacs get Geforce 9800 GX2 or the Geforce GTX 260/280 graphics cards. Or maybe the new graphics cards released by Nvdia in January? Does this seem likely or?

Not a chance. Those cards put out too much heat for the iMac to handle.

VoR

Dec 19, 2008, 11:14 AM

I wouldn't buy a mini (or a macbook) until I was sure I could purchase a hdmi cable with sound - moving these things around and plugging them into tv's and receivers is pretty common usage surely?

jholzner

Dec 19, 2008, 11:27 AM

I have an Apple TV and love it. I don't see Apple replacing it with the mini but who knows. I'd like to pick up the lowest end mini (as long as it has 802.11n) to act as my AppleTV server. Currently I have a Macbook with a 1TB HD connected to it and over 200 movies I've ripped from my DVD collection. It then serves them to the AppleTV via iTunes on my Macbook. Problem is, I can't take my macbook out of my room and still have access to those movies since the HD is not connected. I'd like to just hook up the HD to the low end Mini and have that serve all my content to my apple tv.

jaw04005

Dec 19, 2008, 11:29 AM

I thought it would be interesting if Apple combined the Mac mini, Apple TV and Time Capsule into a single product, but with this reference to "Mac Mini" specifically, I doubt this will be the case as they probably wouldn't use that name for such a 3-in-1 device. Regardless, nice to see the Mini isn't dead!

I've read this from several members in other threads and fail to understand the logic of wanting such a device.

Do you want your Mac mini to be a router? If so, why? Replacing a network appliance with a full-blown Mac would be a nightmare. Every time you install updates or your Mac mini crashes it would be bring down your entire network.

Or did you mean Time Capsule's wireless backup feature? Because you can already attach an external drive off the Mac mini for Time Machine, and all your Macs can backup to that drive (wirelessly if you want) just like Time Capsule.

Time Machine natively supports built-in AFP shares if they're genuine (Mac OS X, Mac OS X Server). It just doesn't support emulated AFP shares (ReadyNAS, Windows Server 2003, etc).

As for Apple TV, I suppose you mean you want Front Row updated with the Apple TV GUI and all its features?

Until Apple gets around to adding 720p, 1080i and 1080p to Mac OS X's built-in resolutions (and include automatic adjustments for overscan and square pixels) — it's going to be difficult to use the Mac mini as an Apple TV.

Not to even mention the whole HDCP requirement for content providers, although I'm sure that's coming with DisplayPort.

Rocketman

Dec 19, 2008, 11:34 AM

The current Apple Mac Mini website does not offer a SSD BTO option but visually shows a SSD.

This may be indicative of things to come.

Rocketman

Beric

Dec 19, 2008, 11:42 AM

Pretty good.

However, neither the Mac Mini nor the iMac's prices appeal to me as of now. I'll have to wait and see where they go. I really want something of the iMac's caliber but without an included monitor, as I just bought an excellent 24" BenQ one.

EDIT:
The current Apple Mac Mini website does not offer a SSD BTO option but visually shows a SSD.

This may be indicative of things to come.

Rocketman

Correct me if I wrong, but I really don't see the use of a SSD in a desktop. Faster speeds over HHD's really haven't been proven, it's way more expensive, has a limited number of writes, and comes in smaller capacities. I really don't see why anyone would want that.

Marx55

Dec 19, 2008, 11:50 AM

Oops. double post. Sorry.

Marx55

Dec 19, 2008, 11:51 AM

GREAT!!!

Hopefully they will have at least TWO ports of FireWire 800. Or else they will be useless for us. We always boot from external Firewire drives.

pacohaas

Dec 19, 2008, 11:54 AM

gnasher729

Dec 19, 2008, 11:59 AM

Finally the return of a mini with a vid card (or at least not integrated graphics).

It _is_ integrated graphics. It is just much, much, much, much better integrated graphics :D

I wouldn't be surprised of future MacPro's would get the same graphics, so you can use this to handle the screen, while four GPU cards can be plugged in for use with OpenCL to turn the MacPro into a supercomputer.

Beric

Dec 19, 2008, 11:59 AM

GREAT!!!

Hopefully they will have at least TWO ports of FireWire 800. Or else they will be useless for us. We always boot from external Firewire drives.

QFT. I love firewire, and if Apple dumps it, then firewire will be one more reason why I'll dump Apple.

rented mule

Dec 19, 2008, 12:02 PM

Correct me if I wrong, but I really don't see the use of a SSD in a desktop. Faster speeds over HHD's really haven't been proven, it's way more expensive, has a limited number of writes, and comes in smaller capacities. I really don't see why anyone would want that.

I sure will correct you since you've been living in a cave for the past year.

SSDs have indeed proven their speed (the majority are almost twice faster than most 7200RPM drives, with some being almost 4 times faster like the Intel X25-M). Next year we'll see Toshiba's 512GB SSD with read performance over 200MB/s and write performance around 200MB/s. Try *that* at home with your 7200RPM HDD.

The limited number of writes for the recent SDDs is now well above the lifetime of a typical HDD (which usually last only 4-5 years).

Yes, they're still expensive and lower capacity but within the next 2-3 years, I can see SDDs matching HDD capacities and being only slightly more expensive...but the extra cash plunked on a a drive with no moving parts and higher life expectancy will be all worth it.

wilycoder

Dec 19, 2008, 12:10 PM

I want quad core iMac for my home studio NNNNAAAAOOOOOOO!!!

urtho

Dec 19, 2008, 12:21 PM

The macmini would be perfect as a PVR. Throw in a decent Hybrid Analog+Digital tuner that allows me to plug my cable line into the back of it and hook up to a TV and I'd be eternally grateful. Doing this now with a huge custom PC just isn't an option in every room of my house...Oh and an iPod dock on the top would be nice too.

I agree that the Mini would be a great PVR, but if you are in the US or most of Europe and quite a few other countries, why would you want a Hybrid Analogue/Digital tuner, they are obsolete in 2 months. I want a Dual Digital with Cable Card capability tuner, built in would be best, but hopefully something will be announced about the time of Macworld.

nick9191

Dec 19, 2008, 12:24 PM

i hope the imacs get Geforce 9800 GX2 or the Geforce GTX 260/280 graphics cards. Or maybe the new graphics cards released by Nvdia in January? Does this seem likely or?
No those are all desktop cards. The cards themselves wouldn't even physically fit in the iMac enclosure. 9400M in the low end, 9600GT in the mid/high end/ with a 9800GS BTO/very high end is my guess. Oh and all those cards you listed are owned by the 4870X2 :D

poundsmack

Dec 19, 2008, 12:29 PM

The cards you listed draw over 100W by themselves. With Apples move towards thinness stuffing a GTX 2x0 or even a GX2 is pretty unlikely.

Nvidia will be detailing its 300 series at CES in January. a lot of the 200 series and the 9000 series (to be rebranded into the 100 series) will make a move to the 55nm die shrink, making them use less power. Sorry Nvidia but I wasn't teh first to leak it anyways :)

funkyp56

Dec 19, 2008, 12:32 PM

2.0GHz OR 2.4GHz
2GB 1067 Ram OR 4GB 1067 Ram
Nvidia 9400M 256mb
120GB HDD OR 250 GB HDD
8x slot-loading SuperDrive
Firewire 800
Display port mini

$599 $799

bigwig

Dec 19, 2008, 12:33 PM

Since a Mini with the new graphics will be able to drive a 30" ACD, it becomes a real desktop alternative for those wanting a large screen but weren't willing to shell out the big bucks for a Mac Pro.

brop52

Dec 19, 2008, 12:36 PM

QFT. I love firewire, and if Apple dumps it, then firewire will be one more reason why I'll dump Apple.

Blah blah blah. :p

angemon89

Dec 19, 2008, 12:39 PM

Mac Mini: Now starting at $899

:p Just kidding, at least I hope they don't raise the price.

Joe The Dragon

Dec 19, 2008, 12:39 PM

The macmini would be perfect as a PVR. Throw in a decent Hybrid Analog+Digital tuner that allows me to plug my cable line into the back of it and hook up to a TV and I'd be eternally grateful. Doing this now with a huge custom PC just isn't an option in every room of my house...Oh and an iPod dock on the top would be nice too.

Analog cable is just about dead / as well over the air.

You want cable card v2 / tur2way / OCAP but that will force them to run cable co applications on apples box and other out side lock down.

Joe The Dragon

Dec 19, 2008, 12:40 PM

I agree that the Mini would be a great PVR, but if you are in the US or most of Europe and quite a few other countries, why would you want a Hybrid Analogue/Digital tuner, they are obsolete in 2 months. I want a Dual Digital with Cable Card capability tuner, built in would be best, but hopefully something will be announced about the time of Macworld.
You don't want cable card v1 and right now the tru2way tests need a PRO install likely form the cable co installer.

dXTC

Dec 19, 2008, 12:47 PM

Excellent.....hopefully it'll support dual monitors.....and at least 6 GB RAM....that would be super!

I remember getting a PC with a 6 GB HD and thinking I was the pimp of the neigborhood. Gawd, am I getting old. Thanks for the tangential reminder. :D

ctone

Dec 19, 2008, 12:50 PM

GREAT!!!

Hopefully they will have at least TWO ports of FireWire 800. Or else they will be useless for us. We always boot from external Firewire drives.

Agreed. Because they use slow (and fairly small capacity) drives inside the Mini, booting from external Firewire drives is a great option increase its performance.

If they drop FireWire and use the Mini Display port (and don't include an adaptor), this would drastically increase the overall cost of upgrading my current Mini to the new model (I would need new external drives, new monitor or adaptor, replace iSight camera, etc., etc.). And isn't the Mini's whole purpose in life to be inexpensive?

twoodcc

Dec 19, 2008, 12:52 PM

alright! this should make the mini a much better machine. can't wait to see if it will be redesigned!

BenRoethig

Dec 19, 2008, 12:58 PM

Only a 9400m for the iMacs? I hope not. It need at least a 9800 for the high end.

No, it just means its using the chipset. Using a dedicated graphics solution disables the IGP by default. With bulk discounts its cheaper for Apple to buy the MCP79 chips for all their notebooks, SFF desktops, and all in ones than to use the MCP79 for integrated graphics machines and Intel's PM45 for dedicated graphics machines. Besides, if hybrid SLI support were ever written into the OS, that 9400M would give a pretty big boost to the dedicated chip.

There ya go:
http://i40.tinypic.com/29ll7vd.jpg

No optical drive, no remote, no remote sensor, no firewire, the slowest hard drives Apple can scrounge up, 1 GB of RAM soldered to the board :D

No sales outside the Mac community either.

Hattig

Dec 19, 2008, 01:04 PM

moving from ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory to 9400m useing system ram is a down grade and at $1,199.00 or more will just make apple look bad next to psystar.

The mac mini should have 9500 / 9600 or better in the $700 - $900 system.

1. It could be a cheaper configuration, which is sorely needed.

2. It doesn't stop Apple from using a discrete GPU as well in the other configurations. 9600M seems an obvious choice. Maybe even an ATI 4650 or better...

Rocketman

Dec 19, 2008, 01:07 PM

They could resolve 90% of the loudest complaints by simply offering a 2x expanded casing option for the Mini.

Rocketman

xJulianx

Dec 19, 2008, 01:07 PM

Wonder if were going to see any major design changed to it...alluminium maybe?

tibi08

Dec 19, 2008, 01:14 PM

Wonder if were going to see any major design changed to it...alluminium maybe?

Think the point of a Mac Mini is that it's cheap as chips....

brop52

Dec 19, 2008, 01:20 PM

Wonder if were going to see any major design changed to it...alluminium maybe?

To what? Both the iMac and Mac Mini are already aluminum besides the back side of the iMac.

Aeolius

Dec 19, 2008, 01:24 PM

Now they need to give the Mac Mini, AppleTV, and Time Capsule the same footprint, make them stackable, add a built-in iPod dock to one of them, and put a giant Apple Logo on the front that requires all 3 products to complete. ;)

Soat

Dec 19, 2008, 01:32 PM

A 9400M in a Mac Mini will convince me to buy one. I originally wanted to build one into my glove compartment and connect it to a 7" touchscreen for wifi syncing of my music + movies to my car. Now I can mount a keyboard onto the glove compartment door and use it as a mobile wardriving gaming system. :eek:

mdntcallr

Dec 19, 2008, 01:35 PM

Mykbibby

Dec 19, 2008, 01:37 PM

It's Official: the Mac Mini is alive!

voidptr

Dec 19, 2008, 01:40 PM

Until Apple gets around to adding 720p, 1080i and 1080p to Mac OS X's built-in resolutions (and include automatic adjustments for overscan and square pixels) — it's going to be difficult to use the Mac mini as an Apple TV.

OS X drives my HDTV at 1080p over a DVI -> HDMI cable connected to my MacBook Pro perfectly. A modern HDTV over HDMI should look just like a 1920x1080p monitor.

Xapplimatic

Dec 19, 2008, 01:44 PM

Configuration files buried within some versions of Mac OS X show evidence that the next iMac and Mac Mini will indeed be based on the NVIDIA MCP79 chipset. . ..
The CFG_MCP79 appears to refer to the NVIDIA MCP79 chipset found in the newest laptops. The findings were originally described in a forum post (http://forum.insanelymac.com/index.php?showtopic=140774) that we've subsequently verified.

And the data on the MCP79 shows it fully supports not only 1080i and HDMI but Intel 1333 MHz Quad-FSB CPUs.. which means Core 2 Quad capable...

MacsBestFriend

Dec 19, 2008, 01:45 PM

how did they let that slide, lol?:D:eek:

Eagle51389

Dec 19, 2008, 01:54 PM

I'm pretty pleased to hear this. I have been looking to make the switch to a Mac for a while but was always disappointed with the Mac Mini's hardware. I'm not a power user, but its nice to have the extra horsepower when you need it.

The only thing standing in the way of a new Mini is the fact that I gotta get a car pretty soon. My truck is dying a slow death.

BillyBobBongo

Dec 19, 2008, 02:02 PM

Fie upon all of you who insisted the mini is dead! I never lost faith...

I hear you Brother!

Count Blah

Dec 19, 2008, 02:05 PM

Mini with better graphics will be good. Lets just hope it has some other exciting features too.

Like a lack of Firewire? The 100+ pages on the firewire missing from the macbook tells us that people are excited about it. :rolleyes:

justbn

Dec 19, 2008, 02:05 PM

Umbongo

Dec 19, 2008, 02:14 PM

And the data on the MCP79 shows it fully supports not only 1080i and HDMI but Intel 1333 MHz Quad-FSB CPUs.. which means Core 2 Quad capable...

The quad core situation is an interesting one. The only way it seems the iMac will go quad core is with the processors digitimes (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=602822) reported on last month. That would of course mean a desktop socket and more heat which shouldn't be an issue for the iMac, but I can't see it happening for the Mini. The Mini could go with the Q9000 which is going to be a 2GHz mobile quad core, but that's a $350 processor so I think that line will remain dual core. This could see both lines drop in price too.

Tilpots

Dec 19, 2008, 02:21 PM

BlizzardBomb

Dec 19, 2008, 02:35 PM

The current Apple Mac Mini website does not offer a SSD BTO option but visually shows a SSD.

This may be indicative of things to come.

I don't personally see much point to SSDs on desktops unless you really crave speed. No moving parts isn't really an advantage on something which is still all of the time (sure it may be slightly more durable, but let's face it, it costs more than a HDD and one or even two backup HDDs).

Well, finally the mini gets the update it deserves. Should be much better value for money, although it's still lacking something I can't quite put my finger on *cough* 3.5" Hard Drive *cough*.

Eric S.

Dec 19, 2008, 02:42 PM

It goes without saying that I hope the new hardware comes with 10.6 or if not, a "free upgrade" guarantee (yeah, right!)...

If probably will, if you wait six months to buy it. :cool:

Beric

Dec 19, 2008, 02:43 PM

I sure will correct you since you've been living in a cave for the past year.

SSDs have indeed proven their speed (the majority are almost twice faster than most 7200RPM drives, with some being almost 4 times faster like the Intel X25-M). Next year we'll see Toshiba's 512GB SSD with read performance over 200MB/s and write performance around 200MB/s. Try *that* at home with your 7200RPM HDD.

The limited number of writes for the recent SDDs is now well above the lifetime of a typical HDD (which usually last only 4-5 years).

Yes, they're still expensive and lower capacity but within the next 2-3 years, I can see SDDs matching HDD capacities and being only slightly more expensive...but the extra cash plunked on a a drive with no moving parts and higher life expectancy will be all worth it.

Your first line really wasn't necessary. :p

And a LOT of SSD's have been shown to not provide any significant boosts. And of course, cost defeats all.

The moral is, I'll wait for numerous others to attest to a SSD being all positives and no negatives over a HDD. Until then, I'll use what's tried and true.

JGowan

Dec 19, 2008, 02:54 PM

Ok, so there is a new mini. Yay... I am now waiting for the standard blurry photos to arrive. Come on - we only have a few weeks!!! :oHere's a little thing I whipped up. I kind imagine it'll look like the sides of the new Macbooks.

Rocketman

Dec 19, 2008, 02:56 PM

I don't personally see much point to SSDs on desktops unless you really crave speed. No moving parts isn't really an advantage on something which is still all of the time

Many Mini's are used in automobiles and industrial automation now.

A 2x casing option would make it more suitable to DIY hobbiests, server farms, vertical market applications, and DVR's.

Rocketman

11800506

Dec 19, 2008, 02:57 PM

Yay for a Mac Mini update! That'll be good and hopefully Apple will realize the ridiculousness of the Mac Mini's prices and drop it $100 (although probably not). And we'll see if the combo drive will continue to live, although if they drop the prices it probably will stay.

sighlent

Dec 19, 2008, 03:01 PM

And also a mini with a mini display port, which can not directly be connected to your current display.
And also a mini with no firewire.
I wouldn't be surprised if it also lacks an optical drive and replaces the Apple TV.

there are minidisplay port to dvi and vga adapters homeslice. you just can't use a monitor (LED Cinema Display) with an older computer without displayport.

aswitcher

Dec 19, 2008, 03:05 PM

Price will be key. We need them to hit back with a Mac everyone can afford that can still perform.

chickenninja

Dec 19, 2008, 03:07 PM

I do hope they keep the mac mini around, If your like me, you have lots of game systems that all plug into one HDTV. and with a mac mini you get all the computer you need ( -graphics card) with cash left over for buying games. It would be cool if the mac mini had a graphics card upgrade option or some kind of expansion slot or an external graphics accessory that allows any mac to boost its graphics through a simple USB or Firewire connection. also a small LCD on a mac mini or mac pro would be nice in case your monitor poops on you and you need to troubleshoot or safely remove drives before shutting down.

tr0jan

Dec 19, 2008, 03:09 PM

gregorsamsa

Dec 19, 2008, 03:09 PM

Good & about time! Though it should have happened ages ago, this time Apple really had little choice, other than ending the Mini altogether. With Snow Leopard's support of OpenCL, significantly improved GPUs on the Mini were a must. Looking forward to next month to find out more.

zorinlynx

Dec 19, 2008, 03:16 PM

new mini with nvidia chip would be great for my home theatre (watching full hd)

but without a dp-hdmi adapter i cant connect the mini to my TV.. so im happy to have an old one :)

btw this would be nice:
http://thomi.apfelcouch.de/bilder/albums/macintosh/macmini.jpg

with magsafe..

Magsafe is a bad idea on the Mini.

On a laptop, you have the battery, so if it gets unplugged by mistake it's no big deal; just plug it back in and keep computing.

On a desktop like the Mini, no battery. Unplug it by mistake and... darkness and possible lost data.

So yeah, no Magsafe please on anything that's not a laptop.

sighlent

Dec 19, 2008, 03:21 PM

I remember getting a PC with a 6 GB HD and thinking I was the pimp of the neigborhood. Gawd, am I getting old. Thanks for the tangential reminder. :D

I remember when I got my LCII and it had an 80MB HD over the 40MB predecessor and I thought I was hot ****.

sighlent

Dec 19, 2008, 03:23 PM

Magsafe is a bad idea on the Mini.

On a laptop, you have the battery, so if it gets unplugged by mistake it's no big deal; just plug it back in and keep computing.

On a desktop like the Mini, no battery. Unplug it by mistake and... darkness and possible lost data.

So yeah, no Magsafe please on anything that's not a laptop.

Have you had experience with the current Mac mini power supply? Its less resistive than a MagSafe connector, the MagSafe at least as a magnetic pull to try and keep it in place. The current adapter is so small and lacks grip, and it's a desktop, you're not going to get your power cord ripped out. If anything the MagSafe would be a great idea so you could use it with the LED Cinema Display without another cable.

notjustjay

Dec 19, 2008, 03:36 PM

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.

dal20402

Dec 19, 2008, 03:43 PM

So yeah, no Magsafe please on anything that's not a laptop.

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.

felibb

Dec 19, 2008, 03:44 PM

Hey have anyone bothered to check the file Info.plist? I have a MacBook5,1 and I don't see any Mac Mini in this file reference at all! Is it a fake or is there any special condition I should know about to see this strings?

danvdr

Dec 19, 2008, 03:46 PM

I remember when I got my LCII and it had an 80MB HD over the 40MB predecessor and I thought I was hot ****.

Ya beat me to the punch. My first Mac was an SE (I think) and the choice was between a second floppy or a 20 MB HD (I took the HD and wondered how I would ever fill it). Upgraded the RAM from 1 MB to 4 MB for $160.

**waiting for the "I had to use punch cards..." response**

ctone

Dec 19, 2008, 03:47 PM

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.

Right. Faster, too.

SACD02

Dec 19, 2008, 03:54 PM

Ya beat me to the punch. My first Mac was an SE (I think) and the choice was between a second floppy or a 20 MB HD (I took the HD and wondered how I would ever fill it). Upgraded the RAM from 1 MB to 4 MB for $160.

**waiting for the "I had to use punch cards..." response**

I remember my 486 DX2 running Doom with 4MB of Ram and I thought it was the end of it all :D
I remember watching the Screen Savers and how they once said who can fill up a 80GB HDD! That's massive....
Times change. Now we have close to 1 Trillion transistors on a GPU....

ChrisA

Dec 19, 2008, 04:00 PM

Ya beat me to the punch. My first Mac was an SE (I think) and the choice was between a second floppy or a 20 MB HD (I took the HD and wondered how I would ever fill it). Upgraded the RAM from 1 MB to 4 MB for $160.

**waiting for the "I had to use punch cards..." response**

You don't have to be all that old to remember punch cards. I studied computer programming in 1972 and not many people back then have glass screens. They were very expensive. Although I did get to use the CRT based operator's console on the CDC 6400 Have a look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CDC_6600_console.JPG It's not as primitive as you might think. Those a two huge screens and they worked like a pen plotter and drew characters on the screen on e at a time

One nice thing about punch cards is that we did not have to type in the source
code. We'd write by hand with a pencil and turn the forms into the keypunch service and they would do the work for us

By about 1980 it was a hybrid system. We had CRT based terminals everywhere but the card punch service was still in place. So I'd send the first cut in on paper forms and then read the cards in and from that point make any changes using a text editor.

In those days no one except computer professionals went near computers so having an easy to use interface was a non-issue. I was hapy with 20 bazillion switches on a front panel and a card reader

I actually still own a "512K Mac". This was the machine with one floppy that could be upgraded al the way to 1/2 megabyte. I think it cost about $3,500. back when $3K was a lot of money.

sapota

Dec 19, 2008, 04:20 PM

I doubt that nvidia based mac minis will be sold for $500...but even if they are priced around $600 they are an ok deal...any more than that...for me personally an iMac is a better deal...note that the macmini lacks webcam, keyboard, mouse...remote etc....

compuguy1088

Dec 19, 2008, 04:21 PM

You don't have to be all that old to remember punch cards. I studied computer programming in 1972 and not many people back then have glass screens. They were very expensive. Although I did get to use the CRT based operator's console on the CDC 6400 Have a look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CDC_6600_console.JPG It's not as primitive as you might think. Those a two huge screens and they worked like a pen plotter and drew characters on the screen on e at a time

One nice thing about punch cards is that we did not have to type in the source
code. We'd write by hand with a pencil and turn the forms into the keypunch service and they would do the work for us

By about 1980 it was a hybrid system. We had CRT based terminals everywhere but the card punch service was still in place. So I'd send the first cut in on paper forms and then read the cards in and from that point make any changes using a text editor.

In those days no one except computer professionals went near computers so having an easy to use interface was a non-issue. I was hapy with 20 bazillion switches on a front panel and a card reader

I actually still own a "512K Mac". This was the machine with one floppy that could be upgraded al the way to 1/2 megabyte. I think it cost about $3,500. back when $3K was a lot of money.

I wasn't alive back when computers used punch cards. The first machine I used was a Zenith 286.......

Sellihca

Dec 19, 2008, 04:22 PM

Never had a mini but glad apple is updating it for those that love them. As for people that want something that can stream audio/video somewhat like what apple tv can do but better, check this out:

http://www.egreat.nl/index.php

to see its details, click on Specifications

Hope this help those interested

MacsRgr8

Dec 19, 2008, 04:26 PM

Ah... finally, finally.... the return of the Mac mini. :)

I needed a new Mac mini to hook up to my TV. My current Core Duo 1.66 GHz just can't get Plex or XBMC to play my 1080p .mkv files smooth enough.... Just not enough horsepower.

Bring 'em on, dear Phil! (gotta get used to that....)

sapota

Dec 19, 2008, 04:30 PM

I didn't know you couldn't rent/buy in HDTV for the Mac. ARgh!!! I was going to do that tonight as we just got a new HDTV!!! Dang it!

They did some time back enable Macs & PCs I think to rent HD movies through itunes.

iLao

Dec 19, 2008, 04:41 PM

No, it just means its using the chipset. Using a dedicated graphics solution disables the IGP by default. With bulk discounts its cheaper for Apple to buy the MCP79 chips for all their notebooks, SFF desktops, and all in ones than to use the MCP79 for integrated graphics machines and Intel's PM45 for dedicated graphics machines. Besides, if hybrid SLI support were ever written into the OS, that 9400M would give a pretty big boost to the dedicated chip.
.

Thank you for the explanation...

vista.john

Dec 19, 2008, 04:44 PM

Love this thread. Just couldn't understand that there are still people sitting around and voting for negative! :D

marbles

Dec 19, 2008, 05:00 PM

Love this thread. Just couldn't understand that there are still people sitting around and voting for negative! :D

yeah weird that , whats negative about new mac minis ?

best news for ages this!! ,

.......... always a catch with apple tho' so I wonder , silly prices ??? probably .

still looking forward to getting one if the price is not too silly .

I'm expecting 599£UK then dropping to 5 @starting point.*hopes

tonyl

Dec 19, 2008, 05:10 PM

Marx55

Dec 19, 2008, 05:15 PM

Agreed. Because they use slow (and fairly small capacity) drives inside the Mini, booting from external Firewire drives is a great option increase its performance.

If they drop FireWire and use the Mini Display port (and don't include an adaptor), this would drastically increase the overall cost of upgrading my current Mini to the new model (I would need new external drives, new monitor or adaptor, replace iSight camera, etc., etc.). And isn't the Mini's whole purpose in life to be inexpensive?

Firewire is also essential for Target Disk Mode and repairs on any Mac. Any.

Besides audio and video on real-time. USB cannot deliver. It is amazing how Apple can do things so wrong sometimes.

corywoolf

Dec 19, 2008, 05:18 PM

lithium06

Dec 19, 2008, 05:20 PM

There's been like 3 ppl that have said 'i have a new mbp and i dont see this kext entry anywhere'... or said that they found it in a kext that wasnt in /System/Library/Extensions/

Is this a fake? I want a new mini as much as the rest of you. But i haven't seen enough ppl saying they see these strings too to make me believe it.

jzuena

Dec 19, 2008, 05:29 PM

To what? Both the iMac and Mac Mini are already aluminum besides the back side of the iMac.

and the top of the Mini.

oldwatery

Dec 19, 2008, 05:57 PM

I'm really of a mind that Jobs and Co might have been swayed by public opinion into saving the baby Mac...... we can change the world ;)
The New Mini is coming .....
Happy new Year :D

blakjak

Dec 19, 2008, 06:06 PM

jono_3

Dec 19, 2008, 06:42 PM

heres hoping for a mini the size of a cd rom

4armshiver

Dec 19, 2008, 06:52 PM

Yes it is about time they updated the Mac Mini. This is suppose to be the system to draw in switchers so this needs to be the most attractable system in their line up (price and spec wise).

iMacmatician

Dec 19, 2008, 07:00 PM

If the Mac mini is going to see an NVIDIA update at MWSF (as rumored), then the chance of the iMac having the same thing has increased quite a lot too.

I had long doubted a MWSF iMac update, but now I'm starting to swing the other way. Since (last I heard) the 2.0 GHz mobile quad is due for a Q1 2009 release, if I try to be optimistic enough, I can see the 24" models going to 2.0/2.27 GHz quad-core (2.53 GHz BTO) and the 20" models staying dual-core (higher GHz though). This would also fit in with my thoughts that the 20" and 24" iMacs are going farther apart. Plus, a MWSF update would be fairly reasonable considering Nehalem is coming in Q3 2009 and Q1 2010 (but then again so is a late January/February update).

(I'm not so sure Apple can stay all-dual-core for much longer. Intel's pushing quad-core in the high-end, and dual-cores aren't going faster than 3.07 GHz.)

I would also expect one Mac mini to be the older model, like with the MacBooks, at $499. I would also expect a redesign to aluminum and black etc. CPU speeds I don't see going too much higher than 2.0 GHz (there may be a sub-2.0 GHz model).

11800506

Dec 19, 2008, 07:00 PM

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 :)

There is no way Apple would use an Atom processor in the Mini. Apple doesn't do super cheap and a wouldn't put in any less than a Core 2 Duo. Plus the performance would be so much less than even the current Mini.

iMacmatician

Dec 19, 2008, 07:03 PM

There is no way Apple would use an Atom processor in the Mini. Apple doesn't do super cheap and a wouldn't put in any less than a Core 2 Duo. Plus the performance would be so much less than even the current Mini.Apple would need to use a quad-core Atom (which doesn't even exist) to get anywhere near Core 2 Duo performance.

I only see an Atom in a mini version of the MacBook Air.

But if Apple used Atom in the Mac mini...it would be renamed the Mac nano and it would be quite cheap. It would also increase the chance of an Apple netbook.

Come to think of it, if the Mac mini loses its optical drive (as some speculation here says), it might be renamed the Mac nano. An optical drive would just stack on top/bottom of the Mac nano.

Eric S.

Dec 19, 2008, 07:13 PM

You don't have to be all that old to remember punch cards. I studied computer programming in 1972 and not many people back then have glass screens. They were very expensive. Although I did get to use the CRT based operator's console on the CDC 6400 Have a look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CDC_6600_console.JPG It's not as primitive as you might think. Those a two huge screens and they worked like a pen plotter and drew characters on the screen on e at a time

Yup, my university had a CDC 6500. Read your job in the card reader, then watch the monitors as it traversed its way from the input queue to the compute queue to the output queue. When it disappeared that meant your printout was ready.

One nice thing about punch cards is that we did not have to type in the source code. We'd write by hand with a pencil and turn the forms into the keypunch service and they would do the work for us

Ooh, hoity toity. ;) We used the keypunch machines ourselves. After you got to know the Hollerith code it was sometimes possible to make changes to the code by hand-punching your own cards, instead of waiting in the keypunch machine lines.

My start in programming was even more primitive - punching Fortran programs onto paper tape.

Kebabselector

Dec 19, 2008, 07:28 PM

..for me personally an iMac is a better deal...note that the macmini lacks webcam, keyboard, mouse...remote etc....

Depends if you don't want to choose a monitor. I hate all in one devices, so the iMac is out for me.

They have to keep FW on the replacement. I wouldn't want to use my external drives on USB.

Bubba Satori

Dec 19, 2008, 07:39 PM

The average mini user needs no more then 160 GB at this point.

You're kidding, right ? :rolleyes:

mosx

Dec 19, 2008, 07:42 PM

moving from ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory to 9400m useing system ram is a down grade and at $1,199.00 or more will just make apple look bad next to psystar.

The mac mini should have 9500 / 9600 or better in the $700 - $900 system.

Thats not true about the Radeon versus the 9400M actually.

Apple always uses mobile GPUs in their iMacs the same way they use mobile chipsets and mobile CPUs.

So that was the mobile Radeon HD 2400 XT. Which was actually not any better than the GeForce 8400M GS.

And I have a PC with the GeForce 8400M GS and the 9400M outperforms it by double on average.

So the 9400M in the low end model would actually be an upgrade over the HD 2400 XT.

Plus you don't have to worry about ATI/AMD's AWFUL drivers if you're running Windows.

askthedust

Dec 19, 2008, 07:46 PM

mac mini's already. My old 12" powerbook needs to find a new home as soon as they release them. Anyone gotten a fair trade in deal from powermax?

skellener

Dec 19, 2008, 08:04 PM

My 24" iMac has the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS which I got back in May 2008.

Lesser Evets

Dec 19, 2008, 08:05 PM

I hope they keep the mini around for a good, long time. I'll buy on in 2013 to upgrade from my, by then, flagging MacPro. :P I wonder what the power of a modern mini is compared to older PowerMacs.

The average mini user needs no more then 160 GB at this point.
I would like to see your research data. Called toilet paper.

iDave

Dec 19, 2008, 08:48 PM

2.0GHz OR 2.4GHz
2GB 1067 Ram OR 4GB 1067 Ram
Nvidia 9400M 256mb
120GB HDD OR 250 GB HDD
8x slot-loading SuperDrive
Firewire 800
Display port mini

$599 $799

Good luck with that. :rolleyes:

SuperMacMan

Dec 19, 2008, 08:59 PM

Here's a little thing I whipped up. I kind imagine it'll look like the sides of the new Macbooks.

Euck!! What the hell? Apple would never imagine something so ugly!! Not putting you down.. But bleck!

petermcphee

Dec 19, 2008, 09:12 PM

This is so exciting! I can't wait!

petermcphee

Dec 19, 2008, 09:13 PM

mdriftmeyer

Dec 19, 2008, 10:44 PM

winterspan

Dec 19, 2008, 10:58 PM

And a LOT of SSD's have been shown to not provide any significant boosts. And of course, cost defeats all.
The moral is, I'll wait for numerous others to attest to a SSD being all positives and no negatives over a HDD. Until then, I'll use what's tried and true.

Apparently, you haven't done any research if you are waiting for these nebulous "others" to attest to the performance advantages of SSDs, because there are plenty of reviews. The big problem with SSDs in the consumer/prosumer market is primarily an issue of perception. Saying "a lot of SSDs have been shown to not provide any significant boosts [over HDDs]" is irrelevant because every SSD model is different. Unlike the mature technology of platter-based harddrives in which it is fairly easy to determine performance and power usage by size and rotational speed, and which all are pretty much built with similar architecture, the technology utilized in flash-based SSDs is very diverse -- All SSDs are NOT built alike. In addition to utilizing either SLC NAND flash or MLC NAND flash, the largest component of an SSD's performance lies in how advanced the flash controller hardware is and how many independent channels it uses. Besides the huge range of performance, different SSDs also use dramatically different amounts of power, again based on the architecture, flash controller, and optimizations.

Perhaps many of you on this forum are uneasy about SSDs because unfortunately Apple used a very poor performing 64GB SSD in the original Macbook Air (not sure about the new one). Well, do not let that color your perspectives of all SSDs, because there are many that are MUCH faster from companies like Samsung, OCZ, Supertalent, etc.

Intel's name gets thrown around a lot because they have entered the SSD market (in a partnership with Micron technology) with next-gen flash controller technology that has blown away speed records. And one of the biggest advantages of Intel's SSD technology is that they have been able to get much better performance out of the vastly cheaper, higher-density "MLC" type of flash. As seen here on an initial Anandtech review, the 2.5" 80GB X-25M (the cheaper MLC version) absolutely blows away many of the fastest 3.5" 10,000RPM harddrives on the market. Compared to an average 5400RPM laptop drive, this thing is in another league.

Check out the whole review which gives an excellent technical overview of SSD technology:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3403&p=15

winterspan

Dec 19, 2008, 10:59 PM

i hope the imacs get Geforce 9800 GX2 or the Geforce GTX 260/280 graphics cards. Or maybe the new graphics cards released by Nvdia in January? Does this seem likely or?

IMHO, the low-end iMac should have the best Performance graphics and the high-end models should have enthusiast cards. I mean, come on Apple, $3000 for a high-end iMac and we get yesterday's performance cards.

GTX 280 in an iMac? "Enthusiast cards" in an iMac? You both are dreaming...

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 :)

Welcome lurker.. but no way will the over-hyped Atom go in the Mini. It is much too slow and would represent a huge *downgrade* in CPU.

Agreed. Because they use slow (and fairly small capacity) drives inside the Mini, booting from external Firewire drives is a great option increase its performance.

Why wouldn't you just replace the 2.5" HDD with a decent 250GB 7200RPM version?

jaw04005

Dec 19, 2008, 11:02 PM

OS X drives my HDTV at 1080p over a DVI -> HDMI cable connected to my MacBook Pro perfectly. A modern HDTV over HDMI should look just like a 1920x1080p monitor.

Not always. Many modern HDTVs don't even support a "computer" connection over HDMI. For example, my Samsung HDTV doesn't and it's just over a year old.

HDTVs that support computer connections over HDMI, DVI or VGA can be equally as annoying as they sometimes turn off image processing automatically, which can lead to color shifting among other issues.

Also, I have a 720p Samsung that is nightmare to use with a Mac mini. The lack of native resolution support is a big problem. You can literally waste hours with DisplayConfigX trying to find the right resolution and timing.

Windows Media Center gets around this by creating a special 720p, 1080i and 1080p "mode" that sort of tricks your TV into thinking it's decoding pure video. Using that mode, Windows Media Center works perfectly fine on my Samsung via DVI to HDMI, and looks fantastic.

Front Row or Mac OS X in general not so much.

JGowan

Dec 19, 2008, 11:13 PM

Euck!! What the hell? Apple would never imagine something so ugly!! Not putting you down.. But bleck!Ha! This is sooo funny. It was actually after I photoshopped the thing I did from a photo of the new Mac Book that I realized that it looked VERY MUCH like Apple's new Mac Book Air Super Drive. Just goes to show that you don't have much to say afterall, SuperMacBoy.

Slam!

Vanilla Thunder

Dec 19, 2008, 11:14 PM

Good & about time! Though it should have happened ages ago...

It still HASN'T happened. Don't hold your breath, because the Mini is dead dead dead.

Santabean2000

Dec 19, 2008, 11:55 PM

It still HASN'T happened. Don't hold your breath, because the Mini is dead dead dead.

It'll come, it'll come. And I want one, just because I'm a greedy bstrd... (I should be saving the children, turning green and eating well - but I just want some new Mac toys. Ha, I'm pathetic:o)

queshy

Dec 20, 2008, 12:12 AM

mosx

Dec 20, 2008, 12:24 AM

Not always. Many modern HDTVs don't even support a "computer" connection over HDMI. For example, my Samsung HDTV doesn't and it's just over a year old.

Thats a common problem with Samsung TVs and not an issue with TVs from other manufacturers.

HDTVs that support computer connections over HDMI, DVI or VGA can be equally as annoying as they sometimes turn off image processing automatically, which can lead to color shifting among other issues.

Not true. Nearly all HDTVs are just giant computer monitors. When they have DVI or VGA inputs they act as such.

Also, I have a 720p Samsung that is nightmare to use with a Mac mini. The lack of native resolution support is a big problem. You can literally waste hours with DisplayConfigX trying to find the right resolution and timing.

Thats an OS X problem (non-native resolution support) combined with Samsung's lacking support, NOT a Windows problem.

Windows Media Center gets around this by creating a special 720p, 1080i and 1080p "mode" that sort of tricks your TV into thinking it's decoding pure video. Using that mode, Windows Media Center works perfectly fine on my Samsung via DVI to HDMI, and looks fantastic.

Thats not even remotely true. Windows doesn't do anything special. It detects the display its connected to and puts out an appropriate resolution. It doesn't have any sort of fancy video mode. Whoever told you that needs a good slap.

I run Windows XP and Vista Home Premium connected to my HDTV via VGA (for the Mac) and HDMI (PC, Vista) and there is no fancy video mode at all. The nvidia drivers allow you to set a 1366x768 resolution that fills the screen properly and you're good to go.

Your problems fall entirely on the heads of Samsung and Apple.

California

Dec 20, 2008, 12:31 AM

QFT. I love firewire, and if Apple dumps it, then firewire will be one more reason why I'll dump Apple.

I'm betting that this will not have firewire.

Betting also it will be a 2.0ghz - 2.1ghz machine.

But I bet they keep the optical drive, unless they completely restyle the Mini to be an aluminum unibody, in which case they will drop the optical.

mackiwi

Dec 20, 2008, 12:43 AM

I'm no longer truly excited for MacWorld as I was last week before the terrible announcement about no Steve Jobs.

But I'm still curious to see what they come up with. My expectations aren't very high though.

Nothing really wrong with the current iMacs. The Mac Mini is old though. Really old. Either kill it or update it - don't leave it the way it is Apple!

I'm sure they won't kill it at MW. They will introduce something new. Perhaps a mac mini - apple TV - time capsule combo of some sort?

In regards to your comment on no steve jobs - I look at it in a completely opposite viewpoint - and am now very excited about the keynote.

Why? - if you were apple and wanted to transition to PR & keynotes without steve jobs (which has to happen sometime) - then when you do it, wouldn't you want the person who is not steve jobs to have an awesome first keynote - thereby nullifying all the "oh no we are doomed because no steve jobs" comments?

mrichmon

Dec 20, 2008, 12:45 AM

OS X drives my HDTV at 1080p over a DVI -> HDMI cable connected to my MacBook Pro perfectly. A modern HDTV over HDMI should look just like a 1920x1080p monitor.

For that matter, OS X has been driving my HDTV at 1080p over a DVI -> HDMI signal for the past year. Overscan option exits in the Displays Preference Panel though it isn't as flexible as the overscan options on higher end DVD players.

Did I mention that this is a 1.5GHz Mac Mini? :) Sure, it will not decode 1080p files but the GPU is perfectly capable of generating a 1080p image.

alexbates

Dec 20, 2008, 12:52 AM

I think that both a new iMac and mac mini will be released at the same time at MacWorld. A mac mini with a Nvidia chipset though? This can't only be $500.

~Shard~

Dec 20, 2008, 12:52 AM

In regards to your comment on no steve jobs - I look at it in a completely opposite viewpoint - and am now very excited about the keynote.

Why? - if you were apple and wanted to transition to PR & keynotes without steve jobs (which has to happen sometime) - then when you do it, wouldn't you want the person who is not steve jobs to have an awesome first keynote - thereby nullifying all the "oh no we are doomed because no steve jobs" comments?

An interesting take on the upcoming keynote - you would think Apple would not want to set up Schilller to fail. On the other hand though, if Apple wants to bow out of trade shows, place less emphasis on keynotes and the like, perhaps this would then be a effective way to slowly wean people off the exciting Steve Jobs keynotes of the past - an attempt to start managing expectations for the future perhaps...

alexbates

Dec 20, 2008, 01:03 AM

In regards to your comment on no steve jobs - I look at it in a completely opposite viewpoint - and am now very excited about the keynote.

Why? - if you were apple and wanted to transition to PR & keynotes without steve jobs (which has to happen sometime) - then when you do it, wouldn't you want the person who is not steve jobs to have an awesome first keynote - thereby nullifying all the "oh no we are doomed because no steve jobs" comments?

I agree that we're not going to die without Jobs. When I first heard that he was not going to be at Macworld, I thought that meant nothing exciting would be released. Now I understand that he has a good excuse, health problems.

queshy

Dec 20, 2008, 01:58 AM

In regards to your comment on no steve jobs - I look at it in a completely opposite viewpoint - and am now very excited about the keynote.

Why? - if you were apple and wanted to transition to PR & keynotes without steve jobs (which has to happen sometime) - then when you do it, wouldn't you want the person who is not steve jobs to have an awesome first keynote - thereby nullifying all the "oh no we are doomed because no steve jobs" comments?

Heh yeah I guess. It's kind of a glass half full/half empty kind of thing.

I kind of care more about Jobs being there than the actual products. I love his presentations. I guess the RDF has really gotten to me...

Michael CM1

Dec 20, 2008, 02:15 AM

Optical drive? Sure, leave it off. This would be a very smart move, in fact. Removing the internal optical drive would allow room for higher-capacity 3.5" hard drives. All Apple would have to do is allow the MacBook Air's Superdrive to be compatible with the new mini, for those who need to install applications from DVDs.

I know people are going to throw the removal of the floppy at me, but WHAT IS THE OBSESSION WITH KILLING OPTICAL DRIVES? I get it (kinda) on the MacBook Air, but otherwise it is the dumbest frickin' idea on the planet. Nobody, and I mean nobody, is going to pay $500 for a desktop without an optical drive.

I know there is a fantasy world that some people live in where optical drives are useless. I can only assume that they don't know how much more likely hard drives are to fail than optical discs. I'm not smart to not have a DVD backup of all of my iTunes songs because a power surge or something could easily kill my internal and networked HDDs.

Let me also point out that you can't buy most software via download. You can do tax programs and this and that online, but OS X, iLife, Creative Suite, etc. are disc-only. Why would people pay an extra $100 to have such a basic function? Way more people buy a Mac Mini as a solo computer compared to the MBA. Therefore, none of that network install.

I would lay money that you'll see a Mac desktop with Blu-ray before you see one sold without any optical drive.

NT1440

Dec 20, 2008, 02:26 AM

its because optical is dead in less than or equal to 5 years. Assuming this country gets its crap together and improves its laughable connectivity.

mosx

Dec 20, 2008, 03:01 AM

its because optical is dead in less than or equal to 5 years. Assuming this country gets its crap together and improves its laughable connectivity.

Why would optical drives be dead in 5 years?

Sales AND polls, outside of hardcore forums like this, show that people still prefer physical media. They like having a product they can hold in their hand.

Second, connection speeds all over the world except Japan and South Korea would have to increase dramatically to be able to keep up with what optical drives offer today.

With overhead taken into account, blu-ray discs can and DO offer 45Mbps video+audio.

There isn't a single download service currently in existence that offers quality anywhere near that. The HD downloads on Apple TV use about 1/10th the bandwidth and are of considerably lower visual quality and resolution.

You also have to consider the fact that most of this country does not live in major cities or major metropolitan areas. A very large majority of it is still rural and that means completely rewiring those areas to be able to even deliver that kind of bandwidth.

Then there are other stupid things. Let's say in one household you have an Apple TV, an Xbox360, and a PS3, all in separate rooms. Currently, with downloadable content, you have to have 3 separate copies to play on all of those devices.

So until there are download standards and formats that are completely universal like optical media, downloads will never be able to replace optical discs.

For optical discs to be dead in 5 years we're going to have to see a complete turn around by device manufacturers that want to lock you in to their devices (Apple is king here), by ISP's that are imposing bandwidth caps to lock you in to their video on demand services, and by content creators that absolutely LOVE the idea of you paying for each copy you want to own.

NT1440

Dec 20, 2008, 03:05 AM

Why would optical drives be dead in 5 years?

Sales AND polls, outside of hardcore forums like this, show that people still prefer physical media. They like having a product they can hold in their hand.

Second, connection speeds all over the world except Japan and South Korea would have to increase dramatically to be able to keep up with what optical drives offer today.

With overhead taken into account, blu-ray discs can and DO offer 45Mbps video+audio.

There isn't a single download service currently in existence that offers quality anywhere near that. The HD downloads on Apple TV use about 1/10th the bandwidth and are of considerably lower visual quality and resolution.

You also have to consider the fact that most of this country does not live in major cities or major metropolitan areas. A very large majority of it is still rural and that means completely rewiring those areas to be able to even deliver that kind of bandwidth.

Then there are other stupid things. Let's say in one household you have an Apple TV, an Xbox360, and a PS3, all in separate rooms. Currently, with downloadable content, you have to have 3 separate copies to play on all of those devices.

So until there are download standards and formats that are completely universal like optical media, downloads will never be able to replace optical discs.

For optical discs to be dead in 5 years we're going to have to see a complete turn around by device manufacturers that want to lock you in to their devices (Apple is king here), by ISP's that are imposing bandwidth caps to lock you in to their video on demand services, and by content creators that absolutely LOVE the idea of you paying for each copy you want to own.

5 years is an eternity in technological terms my friend, just you wait and see.

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.

Undecided

Dec 20, 2008, 03:09 AM

This is actually disappointing news, because the 9400M just isn't good enough. You really have to dial down the graphics in games with it.

mosx

Dec 20, 2008, 04:11 AM

5 years is an eternity in technological terms my friend, just you wait and see.

Yeah thats true. But that doesn't mean things are going to completely change in 5 years from the way they are now.

Back in 1997 everyone said DVD-ROMs would replace CD-ROMs. Look how long it took for software and game developers to finally start using DVDs instead of multiple CDs. Apple still ships a computer without a DVD writer after all. It took them how many years to finally move to DVD writers as standard across their entire notebook line?

Like I said, downloadable media has too many things going against it at this point.

You have ISPs that are video providers that have a vested interest in locking you in to their VOD services. They're either going to have to be forced to be neutral and uncapped, or things are going to have to change to make the legalized monopolies illegal and force competition.

You have content providers that would love to charge you for each copy you buy or each device you want to watch it on. The DRM they're using now allows them to do that. They're either going to have to get their head out of their ass and realize that a standard format is needed that is as universal as DVD/blu-ray so that way you can buy a movie from iTunes and play it on your Zune, Xbox, DVD player, whatever. Either they'll have to realize that or be forced to somehow.

Its the same way with the device makers. Apple, Microsoft, Sony, etc. are all going to have to realize or be forced to make it so that they cannot tie up hardware and media at all.

And like I said before, the issue of quality. I'm sorry but 720p 4Mbps "HD" video stretched out even on a 42" 1080p TV doesn't look good.

And back to content creators/owners. They LOVE sticking with models that work. Look at what happened recently with iTunes and Netflix. Premium channels like HBO moaned about how they paid so much to be able to play a movie and iTunes/Netflix get it, so the studios pulled those movies in question. That has to change too.

Basically, we have to see a complete 180 from standard practices today as well as technological revolutions (50Mbps connections that don't cost as much as a small car payment every month that are available nationwide and not just in some areas).

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.

Only Japan and South Korea have really good internet connections. Europe, the rest of Asia, Australia and surrounding island nations are all pretty much the same as the US right now. Some with some pretty bad bandwidth capping. Africa is just getting into the broadband game, and South Africa has bandwidth caps that the US ISPs would LOVE to put in place.

And it doesn't really matter what Obama wants to do as soon as the telco and cable lobbyists start lining the pockets of those in Congress.

This is actually disappointing news, because the 9400M just isn't good enough. You really have to dial down the graphics in games with it.

Well, in the low end model of the iMac, the 9400M would be considerably faster than the Radeon 2400 currently in it.

But in the rest of the iMacs it will probably be like the MacBook Pro. The 9400M functioning as a chipset while having an additional dedicated GPU.

The Mac mini with a 9400M would finally make it a good HTPC. Let's just hope they use HDMI rather than mini-display port. Doubtful though. Considering DisplayPort is royalty free itself, they get to keep EVERY penny they make from selling those adapters.

chewy5000

Dec 20, 2008, 06:46 AM

Display port mini

Wouldn't they just put a normal sized DisplayPort?
And they removed Firewire from the MacBook due to space issues. The mini should have plenty of room for extra ports, so it would probably still have VGA, DVI etc.

...and an optical drive:D

mosx

Dec 20, 2008, 07:24 AM

Wouldn't they just put a normal sized DisplayPort?
And they removed Firewire from the MacBook due to space issues. The mini should have plenty of room for extra ports, so it would probably still have VGA, DVI etc.

...and an optical drive:D

I guarantee you it will have mini DisplayPort. Why? Well, the sole reason Apple went to it in the first place.

DisplayPort itself is royalty free. You can have the connector on your device and not pay a single cent of royalties to anyone.

So with that said, they get to make and sell those adapters. Thanks to the whole thing being royalty free, Apple is essentially screwing customers out of an additional $30 for every computer sold. Theres no reason they can't go with a standard port like HDMI (everything has HDMI these days). They just choose to go with the royalty free one (rather than pay a few pennies to use HDMI) so they can make their own adapters and screw the customers out of more money.

goodcow

Dec 20, 2008, 07:25 AM

5 years is an eternity in technological terms my friend, just you wait and see.

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.

Sure five years is an eternity in technology, but not in terms of companies outlaying hundreds of billions for new infrastructure. They won't do it. They're cheap.

Not to mention ISPs like Comcast already want to start capping downloads at about 250GB per month. We're going backward not forward.

happydude

Dec 20, 2008, 08:25 AM

so glad the mini isn't dead. can't wait for them to show up in the stores!!

macstatic

Dec 20, 2008, 09:10 AM

I read recently that the NVIDIA chipsets used in the latest MacBook Pros had some problems (http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/052/1050052/nvidia-chips-show-underfill-problems).

Are these the same chips which will (supposedly) be used in the new iMac? If that's the case I'd rather get the current 20" model with ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT graphics. I'm not in favor of losing out on Firewire either, which seems to be Apple's new trend on "entry-level" Macs.

I suppose (hope) there will be a transition period in January where I can choose between the old and the new models. I'd rather have a more reliable Mac than a more powerful one. Besides, for "normal" use (web browsing, email, word-processing etc.) I won't need particularly powerful graphic hardware either.

So when in January will these new iMacs and Mac minis pop up?

voidptr

Dec 20, 2008, 09:24 AM

Not always. Many modern HDTVs don't even support a "computer" connection over HDMI. For example, my Samsung HDTV doesn't and it's just over a year old.

Mine's driving a Samsung LN46A550 and it works perfectly. Which model are you having trouble with?

I'm planning on grabbing a new Mini for it as soon as they ship.

archipellago

Dec 20, 2008, 09:32 AM

I wouldn't buy a mini (or a macbook) until I was sure I could purchase a hdmi cable with sound - moving these things around and plugging them into tv's and receivers is pretty common usage surely?

absolutely not..

surferfromuk

Dec 20, 2008, 09:35 AM

VicMacs

Dec 20, 2008, 10:08 AM

spyd4r

Dec 20, 2008, 10:17 AM

come on 24" iMac!

BenRoethig

Dec 20, 2008, 10:24 AM

5 years is an eternity in technological terms my friend, just you wait and see.

Four things needs to happen before you can begin to phase out optical media. This is one area where Apple needs to play it conservatively. Act too soon and Apple could jeopardize both Mac and AppleTV sales.

1. Apple needs to work with the movie studios to give movie owners the same rights as music owners have. Popularity of digital media will go up if you can import your DVD library and burn a copy of your digital movies for the portable DVD player using iTunes.

2. Apple needs to license AppleTV technology. Digital movies will never reach their full potential while AppleTV exists as only a set top box. The world of audio/video products is far too big for Apple to go it alone. AppleTV (or compatible tech) needs to find its way into TVs, DVD/Blu-Ray players, game consoles, surround sound systems, PVRs, and portable video players in addition to Apple's stand alone device.

3. The App store needs to come to the Mac. Not only that, it would be in their best interest to implement Blizzard's download policy where once you pay for the license, you have unlimited download rights (to the authorized computer). There also need to be "additional computer" discounts.

4. There needs to be a way to sell and install Mac OS X using flash drives. Stick the drive in and it'll function exactly like a Mac OS X install DVD. You have the option of either buying it preloaded on from a store or downloading the OS using the App store and using your own flash drive.

ikir

Dec 20, 2008, 10:33 AM

I would like to see your research data. Called toilet paper.

It is true. i work in a Apple Center, the average Mac Mini users don't even need 80GB. Average isn't all users.

lftrghtparadigm

Dec 20, 2008, 11:01 AM

So, new, equally fast iMac and Mini due out to match the new blazing fast laptops.....big leap for people to believe this one. :rolleyes:

The only surprise at Macworld will be the Netbook product that everyone expects and everyone will HATE.

lftrghtparadigm

Dec 20, 2008, 11:03 AM

It is true. i work in a Apple Center, the average Mac Mini users don't even need 80GB. Average isn't all users.

Yup. The average Mac Mini user is "semi serious". Wants a Mac, but only at the cheapest price possible. The amount of gigs does not affect this person. If it does they are going the wrong route, or should be aware of the very sexy stackable external HDs available to mini owners.

Digital Skunk

Dec 20, 2008, 11:06 AM

.....

This is very VERY true.

For number 3, there needs to be steep discounts, or at least a way for the store to know that you downloaded an app using your license three times.

hscottm

Dec 20, 2008, 11:18 AM

flottenheimer

Dec 20, 2008, 11:18 AM

I'm assuming whether rightly or wrongly that the iMacs will have similar cards to the MBP while the minis will have the same as the macbooks. I could be completely wrong though. But if I am wrong there would be no good reason to buy an imac over a mini.
The design? The lack of cable clutter? The screen?

Eric S.

Dec 20, 2008, 12:36 PM

Apple should buy Nvidia and stop messing about in the shallow ends. It just shows a lack of conviction.

They're only a measly $4 Billion dollars.

Buy 'em - but leave them run as a separate company but making the best stuff exclusively for Apple.

Because....I can almost guarantee Microsoft will try and buy them later in 2009 if Apple doesn't.

Then Apple will suddenly find themselves in a bad place...

What would Microsoft do with Nvidia ?? And why would Apple want that mess? Apple wants to buy the chipsets that make sense for them, but it doesn't want Nvidia's corporate problems. And Apple wants to keep the relationship with Intel open - don't be surprised if Intel chipsets are back in the picture once the switch to Nehalem happens.

BenRoethig

Dec 20, 2008, 12:38 PM

It is true. i work in a Apple Center, the average Mac Mini users don't even need 80GB. Average isn't all users.

If they're under 35 or have a child they do. My little sister singlehandedly filled up my parents old HP's 60GB hard drive with music files. In the era of digital media, 80GB is nowhere near enough.

BenRoethig

Dec 20, 2008, 12:41 PM

stanislaus1

Dec 20, 2008, 01:35 PM

InkMaster

Dec 20, 2008, 01:44 PM

There needs to be a way to install Mac OS X using flash drives. Stick the drive in and it'll function exactly like a Mac OS X install DVD.

You already can do that, and could do it for atleast 4-5 years now. Just 'restore' your install DVD to any flash drive/hard drive etc via Disk Utility, boot from it and it'll act like a regular DVD. I've been doing it for years now and it works perfectly fine while installing 2-3x faster then from a disk...

iDave

Dec 20, 2008, 02:02 PM

Could imagine they'll give a discount when buying both mini & display.
I can see it now: $15 off. :D

sgibson

Dec 20, 2008, 02:41 PM

brice

Dec 20, 2008, 02:49 PM

TurboSC

Dec 20, 2008, 04:15 PM

Dammit Apple, where are my holograms. Hurry it up.

NT1440

Dec 20, 2008, 04:18 PM

Well thanks for stomping on the optimism of youth guys, i really appreciate it.:(

:p

puffnstuff

Dec 20, 2008, 04:18 PM

mmm Mac Mini for movie streaming, dvr, gaming, dvd watching, ad-hoc connection goodness!

I want now!

iMacmatician

Dec 20, 2008, 04:21 PM

GTX 280 in an iMac? "Enthusiast cards" in an iMac? You both are dreaming...We may see a 9700M/9800M in the 24" models as BTO. But that's about it.

(GTX 280, LOL)

The design? The lack of cable clutter? The screen?The iMac would also still have better specs than the Mac mini.

dubhe

Dec 20, 2008, 04:30 PM

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.

And much more robust. Please, please, please be 3.5"

marbles

Dec 20, 2008, 04:47 PM

The new mini will be thinner if theyleave out the optical drive . I seriously doubt Apple would put in a 3.5" drive and keep the same form factor. The average mini user needs no more then 160 GB at this point. So look to see a mini with the same form factor as the Apple TV. Even though that code says Mac Mini, I wouldn't be surprised to see a change of the name as well. The Mac Mini has gotten stale and needs a new name for the relaunch.
:rolleyes:
hard copies are safer !
160GB , your having a laugh , surely ?
now I know you must be joking :) stale ? , new name ?

New internals is all that's needed! what's in there now is stale.

That looks great. I would love to have a mag-safe enabled mini to protect against the dog's legs.

what so your data go's bye bye ? , move the dog outside .

I know people are going to throw the removal of the floppy at me, but WHAT IS THE OBSESSION WITH KILLING OPTICAL DRIVES? I get it (kinda) on the MacBook Air, but otherwise it is the dumbest frickin' idea on the planet. Nobody, and I mean nobody, is going to pay $500 for a desktop without an optical drive.

I know there is a fantasy world that some people live in where optical drives are useless. I can only assume that they don't know how much more likely hard drives are to fail than optical discs. I'm not smart to not have a DVD backup of all of my iTunes songs because a power surge or something could easily kill my internal and networked HDDs.

snippet<
well said indeed

I know! thats a lot of text ....

really ? , it smells of a marketing leak to me .

Yup. The average Mac Mini user is "semi serious". Wants a Mac, but only at the cheapest price possible. The amount of gigs does not affect this person. If it does they are going the wrong route, or should be aware of the very sexy stackable external HDs available to mini owners.
semi serious ? that's not my experience , I'll hold off saying majority but many mnay mini users are "serious" maybe its just that buying a macpro is overkill and all in ones do not appeal to everyone !! , they are a fine machine , rather they where when released , plenty can be done with a mini , plenty more if they update it to reasonable specs , best mac going imho .

Who could have ever doubted a mac-mini update?

why else would Apple put an isight, usb hub and speakers into the new LED Cinema Display.
Surely not solely for college kids who can afford a new macBook AND the display.
Could imagine they'll give a discount when buying both mini & display.
good point and nice idea for sure , might just go that route if this pans out

I can see it now: $15 off. :D

yeah , sounds about right :( when will they learn ?

NEW MINI cant wait yeeeeeeeeeeehaaaaaaaaa

NorrisKillsKids

Dec 20, 2008, 04:51 PM

There's no way in HELL that their desktop computers will have the same video cards as their laptops. It will obviously be a higher level. Alls I know is it best be out sometime in January so I can buy it.

winterspan

Dec 20, 2008, 04:59 PM

deggs37

Dec 20, 2008, 05:08 PM

YES!!!! Updated Mini w/ 9400 will be mine.:D

iDave

Dec 20, 2008, 05:14 PM

Seems like there's a lot of pent up demand for a new mini. Even the old ones are selling well. I hope Apple is stockpiling a lot of the new ones before introduction.

jackfrost123

Dec 20, 2008, 05:26 PM

I hope apple doesn't leave the previous model at about the same price a la macbook white and introduces the "new" mini with a 800 say price tag, because the demand is indeed high....Whatever the price though the put on it we should do a +100 for that fu...ing display port adapter....:D

BenRoethig

Dec 20, 2008, 05:28 PM

Who could have ever doubted a mac-mini update?

why else would Apple put an isight, usb hub and speakers into the new LED Cinema Display.
Surely not solely for college kids who can afford a new macBook AND the display.
Could imagine they'll give a discount when buying both mini & display.

I seriously doubt very many who are in the market for an entry level computer are going to pay $900 for a monitor.

There's no way in HELL that their desktop computers will have the same video cards as their laptops. It will obviously be a higher level. Alls I know is it best be out sometime in January so I can buy it.

Most of the time they already do. Apple uses desktop branding on mobile GPUs. The 2600 Pro in my iMac is a mobile 2600XT and the 8800GS in the 24" is actually an 8800M GTS. The all in one and small form factor enclosures Apple uses cannot cool desktop GPUs.

Eric S.

Dec 20, 2008, 05:30 PM

I hope apple doesn't leave the previous model at about the same price a la macbook white and introduces the "new" mini with a 800 say price tag

White Macbooks are not that down-rev in specs compared to the aluminum models, especially comparing the CPUs. But the old minis would be so out of date compared to a new model that they wouldn't be attractive at all.

puffnstuff

Dec 20, 2008, 05:42 PM

jackfrost123

Dec 20, 2008, 05:43 PM

I can see it now: $15 off. :D

ahhahahahahah, post of the day.... $15 in the mini/display combo plus another $100 saved from the adaptor for the mini display that you 'd use in pretty much EVERY other display on the planet, ahahahahaha... :D

White Macbooks are not that down-rev in specs compared to the aluminum models, especially comparing the CPUs. But the old minis would be so out of date compared to a new model that they wouldn't be attractive at all.

point taken, but my/apple's suggested strategy could go well with their recent one step forward two step backword, shoot myself in the foot kind of strategy, introduce gorgeous unique unibody design and f. up with standard glossy across the board, luck of firewire for macbook, and mini dsiplay port....

Btw if they do keep the price at about $500 it will be really fun how the display port adaptor will cost 1/5 of the computer's price, the friggin adaptor!!!!:eek::mad::eek::D:D:D

jackfrost123

Dec 20, 2008, 05:57 PM

another poster mentioned something about nvidia's ion and the atom (a first time poster): Makes the mini look big a fat, no easy fit:

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/video/NVIDIA/Ion/vsmini2.jpg

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/video/NVIDIA/Ion/nvidiavsmini.jpg

iDave

Dec 20, 2008, 05:57 PM

BTW, a mini-DP to DVI adapter goes for $29 at the Apple store. The mini-DP to dual-link DVI is a lot more.

jackfrost123

Dec 20, 2008, 06:00 PM

BTW, a mini-DP to DVI adapter goes for $29 at the Apple store. The mini-DP to dual-link DVI is a lot more.

the latter is the one I was refering to as the more versatile in uses of the two.

surferfromuk

Dec 20, 2008, 06:18 PM

MS buying a major hardware company? I highly doubt it...

:-)

MS already are becoming a major hardware company...

and...You'd better check the accuracy of some of my past predictions before you make such absolutes.

Can you not see how easy it would be for MS to hobble future Mac h/w, Snow Leopard & Open CL simply by taking control of Nvidia and just 'slowing' things down a little?

If Apple have the courage and intelligence to buy Nvidia (at half the market price of 6 months ago I should add!) then that will signal to me that Apple will indeed continue it's current rate of forward momentum and capture 25-30% market share by the end of 2010.

I'll say it again MS will buy Nvidia late 2009 if Apple don't.

surferfromuk

Dec 20, 2008, 06:31 PM

What would Microsoft do with Nvidia ?? And why would Apple want that mess? Apple wants to buy the chipsets that make sense for them, but it doesn't want Nvidia's corporate problems. And Apple wants to keep the relationship with Intel open - don't be surprised if Intel chipsets are back in the picture once the switch to Nehalem happens.

MS+ Nvidia = next gen Xbox ( 720 ) and Windows Mobile phone - in fact, I'm really surprised it hasn't happened already.

Apple would leave Nvidia alone essentially - perhaps slick a few things up in the corporate sense - maybe bring some focus, but still definitely two separate companies just with a high end focus towards Apple and Apple's needs.

Kind of like Pixar and Disney...

Again Apple could integrate better and retain top end exclusivity on graphics hardware.

Steve Jobs is very fond of saying that if your serious about software you should be serious about hardware. Well graphics is where it's at and where it's going and I think they need this edge..

RyanR.

Dec 20, 2008, 06:47 PM

MS+ Nvidia = next gen Xbox ( 720 ) and Windows Mobile phone - in fact, I'm really surprised it hasn't happened already.

Apple would leave Nvidia alone essentially - perhaps slick a few things up in the corporate sense - maybe bring some focus, but still definitely two separate companies just with a high end focus towards Apple and Apple's needs.

Kind of like Pixar and Disney...

Again Apple could integrate better and retain top end exclusivity on graphics hardware.

Steve Jobs is very fond of saying that if your serious about software you should be serious about hardware. Well graphics is where it's at and where it's going and I think they need this edge..

I agree that they should invest, but you mentioned pixar when Jobs invested in Pixar it took 10 years before they even made any money. Lets face it Apple is changing the way they look at things.

We Mac users have noticed this over the past few years. The let down of iMovie08, to make you move to final cut, glossy screens (which I don't mind, but..) To get back to my original thought Apple is out to make money, not always to make the best product that they could. (i.e. this new $100 adapter, why not $29.99 like all the others)

rstansby

Dec 20, 2008, 07:20 PM

Aside from the slick menus to download movie rentals and watch Flickr, are there any other REAL benefits from getting an AppleTV over a MacMini?

It is simpler- which makes it easier to use for the wife and kids.

powers74

Dec 20, 2008, 07:25 PM

I know there are a lot of hardcore Mini fans out there, but isn't the Mini supposed to be a switch machine? I'm trying to convince my Mom to get one - if they nix the optical, no deal. She'd laugh me out of the room! Apple might lump time capsule and TV, and maybe airport, but they'd have to be nuts to remove the optical. People still back up files to CD/DVD you know.

hiimamac

Dec 20, 2008, 07:41 PM

And also a mini with a mini display port, which can not directly be connected to your current display.
And also a mini with no firewire.
I wouldn't be surprised if it also lacks an optical drive and replaces the Apple TV.

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

iDave

Dec 20, 2008, 07:48 PM

I know there are a lot of hardcore Mini fans out there, but isn't the Mini supposed to be a switch machine? I'm trying to convince my Mom to get one - if they nix the optical, no deal.
It was a switcher machine but as time has passed it has also become very popular with long-time Mac users. It's used both as a primary computer and as a secondary, HTPC or children's computer. I know people who are doing graphic design for a living on Mac minis because they like the monitors they already have and can't afford $2300 Mac Pros. And no, the optical drive won't be removed.

ceslami

Dec 20, 2008, 09:28 PM

If you ask me, the Nvidia chipset is an allusion to Nvidia's new 9400M with compatibility aimed at the netbook market. Get more coverage on the netbook movement (especially by Apple) at http://www.netbookstation.com

puffnstuff

Dec 20, 2008, 10:14 PM

removing the optical from a notebook makes sense but not from a desktop

Who ever suggested that..:rolleyes::eek:

iDave

Dec 20, 2008, 10:37 PM

This guy. :D

But I think he was joking.

There ya go:
http://i40.tinypic.com/29ll7vd.jpg

Digital Skunk

Dec 20, 2008, 11:44 PM

Okay....

So Apple won't make a netbook since they barely have a complete desktop lineup.

I may be in line to get an Apple netbook, and if it's priced right two of them, but I know that Apple is missing that wonderful mini tower which will always leave Apple with a missing machine.

We have plenty of laptops from them already.

fteoath64

Dec 21, 2008, 12:25 AM

Using the Atom 330 (or variants at higher Ghz) do make sense for the lower model of Mini. eg a 1.8Ghz or 2.0Ghz Atom would be slower than C2D penryn but heck of a lot cheaper.

Coupled with ion platform, the overall system speed would be faster, athough the raw CPU cannot compete with C2D. I would really like to see the 2.0Ghz penryn in ION for the high-end Mini at the same price as now. Potentially only 1Ghz of DDR3 RAM hardwaired and only one slot for additional 1Ghz, 2Ghz module.

To me Nvidia makes all the difference and this Mini will sell well in whatever shape of form. YES :apple:

Eidorian

Dec 21, 2008, 12:36 AM

Sehnsucht

Dec 21, 2008, 01:24 AM

Mini with better graphics will be good. Lets just hope it has some other exciting features too.

"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:

alexbates

Dec 21, 2008, 01:28 AM

At first the notion of the display going with the mini made sense. It makes more sense then them trying to fit it with the notebooks.

Then it didn't make so much sense when I realized it is a $900 monitor with a $600 mini.

I think it is plausible that there will be a very low end mini they could do the whole sell the current overstock like someone mentioned like they are doing with the Macbook and sell it for $399 or less? Then it would make more sense for people to buy that and the monitor instead of going for a 24" high end iMac.

Once again, I do not think it is possible to see an good Mac at $399. It does not make sense to buy a $900 monitor with a $400 computer. If someone did buy a computer that cheap, they would probably go and buy some cheap $100 monitor. Another thing to think about is if a computer is $400, it can not be a very good quality. Think of the cost of an HD, RAM, and graphics card together. If you buy these three items separate, you would end up paying around $400. (and remember this excludes all other costs like the logic board and other minor things) Lately, Apple has wanted to have the latest a greatest stuff in their computers. With a $400 budget, you would not be getting very much.

I think that the next generation of the Mac Mini will be the same price as it currently is, $599. Saying this, I think Apple will improve it a lot. I think that it will have at least a 2.0GHz processor and 2GB of RAM standard. This will improve the speed by far and make the Mac Mini a computer that people will consider buying. People don't want to buy a slow Mac, even if its cheap.

The Mac Mini should be similar in size to the current Airport Extreme but with an aluminum frame and a black Apple logo in the center. I am surprised that Apple did not use it with the new MacBook because its on the iMacs and Time Capsule. I also think it would look better with the Black display liner and the black keyboard.

For whoever is still interested in future low-end Mac ideas, check this one out. It looks real to me. I know that people could easily photoshop this in, but I think its real:

http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/photos/photo1jz6.jpg

Does anyone besides me think this is real?

mdriftmeyer

Dec 21, 2008, 01:57 AM

You'd be much better off with a Pentium Dual-Core for that. Why go Atom in the mini?

You're correct:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116072

They'd get more bite for their buck if they go this route:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115206

Both are 64 bit architecture compliant.

The Atom isn't 64 bit architecture compliant:

http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=35460

Result: Atom is a no-show.

All CPUs moving forward for the Server and Desktop are 64 bit architecture compliant.

localoid

Dec 21, 2008, 03:23 AM

You're correct:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116072

They'd get more bite for their buck if they go this route:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115206

Both are 64 bit architecture compliant.

The Wolfdales wipe the floor with the Atoms, but Apple would never use a Wolfdale in a Mac mini. My overclocked E7200 Wolfdale gets a Geekbench of 4937 (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/94472), which is higher than the 3973 (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2008/06/mac-performance-june-2008/) score of the average 3.1 GHz iMac (Early 2008, C2D E8435).

The Atom isn't 64 bit architecture compliant:

http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=35460

Result: Atom is a no-show.

All CPUs moving forward for the Server and Desktop are 64 bit architecture compliant.

The Atom CPU is great for a low-power solution, like a netbook that can go 6-hours on battery. Or for a low-heat (and thus silent) solution, like a 24/7 file server or media device.

But the Atoms lack any serious amount of raw CPU horsepower. They seem to Geekbench in the 900 (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/93355) range, which is even less than the 1397 (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2008/06/mac-performance-june-2008/) score for the original Intel Core Solo T1200 1.5 GHz (1 core) Mac mini.

mdriftmeyer

Dec 21, 2008, 04:46 AM

The Wolfdales wipe the floor with the Atoms, but Apple would never use a Wolfdale in a Mac mini. My overclocked E7200 Wolfdale gets a Geekbench of 4937 (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/94472), which is higher than the 3973 (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2008/06/mac-performance-june-2008/) score of the average 3.1 GHz iMac (Early 2008, C2D E8435).

The Atom CPU is great for a low-power solution, like a netbook that can go 6-hours on battery. Or for a low-heat (and thus silent) solution, like a 24/7 file server or media device.

But the Atoms lack any serious amount of raw CPU horsepower. They seem to Geekbench in the 900 (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/93355) range, which is even less than the 1397 (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2008/06/mac-performance-june-2008/) score for the original Intel Core Solo T1200 1.5 GHz (1 core) Mac mini.

Who said the iMac isn't going to get an update?

flottenheimer

Dec 21, 2008, 05:00 AM

mmm Mac Mini for movie streaming, dvr, gaming, dvd watching, ad-hoc connection goodness!

I want now!
If the new mac-mini has a MATSHITA UJ-868 DVD-drive (like the Unibody laptops) you wont be able to make it region free. Major downer.

localoid

Dec 21, 2008, 05:08 AM

Who said the iMac isn't going to get an update?

I said absolutely nothing about an Imac update, so I don't understand your (rhetorical?) question. :confused:

My comments were regarding the Mac mini, specifically that in terms of raw CPU horsepower the Atom CPU would be too little and the Wolfdale would be too much. Too little power and the mini's users would be disappointed. Too much power and Apple's accountants would have to double up on their meds.

mosx

Dec 21, 2008, 05:21 AM

If the new mac-mini has a MATSHITA UJ-868 DVD-drive (like the Unibody laptops) you wont be able to make it region free. Major downer.

My aluminum MacBook has an LG DVD writer in it.

VicMacs

Dec 21, 2008, 07:00 AM

does it say anything about a new Mac Pro?

they need to be revamped now!

Dagless

Dec 21, 2008, 07:17 AM

I like my Macbooks 9400M, I can play the only PC game I really go on now in native res with everything on full on Team Fortress 2... But given that the iMac has a larger resolution I sure hope that 9400M is reserved for the lower model only. I'd like something higher so I never have to drop below 30fps again. :)

puffnstuff

Dec 21, 2008, 08:41 AM

If the new mac-mini has a MATSHITA UJ-868 DVD-drive (like the Unibody laptops) you wont be able to make it region free. Major downer.

Doesn't the software you use determine the region?

The monitor doesn't make much sense with the notebook but it does make sense with the mini the only thing that is strange is the price. But then again this is :apple:

surroundfan

Dec 21, 2008, 08:48 AM

Doesn't the software you use determine the region?

Nope - region coding's hard coded into the drive. Unless you run hacked firmware, it'll get five changes and then lock. Thusfar, the person who hacked the firmware for older Matshita drives has not done them for newer drives.

If you run hacked firmware, you can use Region X to bypass software-based locks...

Personally, it's not a big issue for me because I have a dedicated DVD player in my home theatre (the Mini I'm eager to replace is used to play DIVX files and music)...

puffnstuff

Dec 21, 2008, 09:08 AM

that sucks I was hoping to use it as a dedicated player :(

jzuena

Dec 21, 2008, 10:37 AM

For whoever is still interested in future low-end Mac ideas, check this one out. It looks real to me. I know that people could easily photoshop this in, but I think its real:

http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/photos/photo1jz6.jpg

Does anyone besides me think this is real?

Of course its fake. Apple never uses the Windows logo on their site. And they never mention Linux at all (when talking about what runs on a Mac), let alone use the penguin logo.

jzuena

Dec 21, 2008, 10:44 AM

Nope - region coding's hard coded into the drive. Unless you run hacked firmware, it'll get five changes and then lock. Thusfar, the person who hacked the firmware for older Matshita drives has not done them for newer drives.

If you run hacked firmware, you can use Region X to bypass software-based locks...

Personally, it's not a big issue for me because I have a dedicated DVD player in my home theatre (the Mini I'm eager to replace is used to play DIVX files and music)...

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.

igazza

Dec 21, 2008, 11:02 AM

does it say anything about a new Mac Pro?

they need to be revamped now!

Totally but macworld probably not the place :(

Eidorian

Dec 21, 2008, 11:07 AM

You're correct:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116072

They'd get more bite for their buck if they go this route:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115206

Both are 64 bit architecture compliant.

The Atom isn't 64 bit architecture compliant:

http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=35460

Result: Atom is a no-show.

All CPUs moving forward for the Server and Desktop are 64 bit architecture compliant.

The Wolfdales wipe the floor with the Atoms, but Apple would never use a Wolfdale in a Mac mini. My overclocked E7200 Wolfdale gets a Geekbench of 4937 (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/94472), which is higher than the 3973 (http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/2008/06/mac-performance-june-2008/) score of the average 3.1 GHz iMac (Early 2008, C2D E8435).
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?

Sellihca

Dec 21, 2008, 11:12 AM

My two cents:

If the entry line mini now starts at $599, and apple is updating it with newer hardware, there is no way it will drop in price. Apple hasn't dropped the price of its other computers, with the exception of the "slap in your face xmas discount", why would it do it from its lower profit margin mini? We will all be lucky if the price stays the same. We all love apple here but we also know that apple does not drop prices.

9400m possible but not likely and if it does go in, the price will go up for sure.

There is no way firewire will be part of the new mini. If apple axed it from the macbook, why wouldn't they do it from the mini?

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.

p.s. I've been a longtime apple owner and I love them but the only poor part of their close to perfect computers has always been graphics. Every new mac has had 6 month to 1 year old GPU's or sub-par GPU's. I know heat is always a factor in the form-fitting computers apple makes but this is an issue that needs to be addressed.

hope life is smiling on you all :)

igazza

Dec 21, 2008, 11:14 AM

So what cpu will the new imacs have, core 2 quad?
Is core i7 possible for imacs ?

Eidorian

Dec 21, 2008, 11:21 AM

9400m possible but not likely and if it does go in, the price will go up for sure.If Apple wants to keep milking the mini crowd. You do know that the 9400M G is the chipset and IGP all-in-one. The difference over GM45 is going to be a few dollars. Not to mention nVidia rode in with Apple as its flagship for the 9400M G.

There is no way firewire will be part of the new mini. If apple axed it from the macbook, why wouldn't they do it from the mini?Doubtful

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 make billions of a dying tech. Not only are cd/dvds a horrible media type, the are also wasteful-Flash is the future.I take it you'll never buy a disc again then?

So what cpu will the new imacs have, core 2 quad?
Is core i7 possible for imacs ?http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=6631864&postcount=23

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=602822

Sellihca

Dec 21, 2008, 11:28 AM

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?

iDave

Dec 21, 2008, 11:56 AM

9400m possible but not likely and if it does go in, the price will go up for sure.

There is no way firewire will be part of the new mini. If apple axed it from the macbook, why wouldn't they do it from the mini?

Optical drives....this is a poor-dying media but it will be part of the new mini.
I agree and think the new minis will go for $699 and $899. Firewire will be gone. Magsafe and mini-DisplayPort will be new.

As for optical drives, I think they have a few more years to go. Flash storage (like SD cards) is getting so cheap I think it will eventually replace CDs for software and rewritable backups, sneakernet, etc.

Dagless

Dec 21, 2008, 12:03 PM

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?

I'm not massively keen on optical media now. I only get PC games from Steam and tend to stick towards film downloads than DVD disks. What do I think? I think it would be nice if Apple would at least give the option of replacing the optical drive with 1 or 2 extra HDD's. I'd give my MB 960gb storage over a DVD-RW any day of the week!

Eric S.

Dec 21, 2008, 12:10 PM

RyanR.

Dec 21, 2008, 12:10 PM

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.)

As for the price of the new LCD Displays going with the Mac mini who is to say that they aren't going to drop the price now that all the hard core Mac Heads have gone out and spent twice as much as they will in 09.

As for me I am a refurb. Mac head switcher. I own a lot of Mac stuff but never spend top dollar. Don't get me wrong I would love to have the newest, but Jobs and the rest of them get enough of my money as is.

BTW I'm still waiting for an app. for my iPhone to make voice mail greetings through garage band, Mr. Jobs and friends.;)

Sellihca

Dec 21, 2008, 12:12 PM

raggedjimmi:

Options are always good, esp when one has the choice of bouncing a useless optical drive for close to a TB of harddrive space-that would be amazing-at least until SSD's take over. God let it be soon!!!

commander.data

Dec 21, 2008, 12:27 PM

The Atom isn't 64 bit architecture compliant:

http://ark.intel.com/cpu.aspx?groupId=35460

Result: Atom is a no-show.

All CPUs moving forward for the Server and Desktop are 64 bit architecture compliant.
http://download.intel.com/design/processor/datashts/319977.pdf
http://download.intel.com/design/processor/datashts/320528.pdf

If you checked Intel developer documentation (page 6), the Atom 230 and 330 are actually Intel 64 compliant. The Atom architecture itself was built with 64-bit in mind. The feature is disabled for the N270 in netbooks and the Z models for MIDs.

But yes, going with Atom for the Mini is unlikely since the performance just isn't there. I could definitely see Apple using the Atom for the Apple TV though since the Apple TV is 2 years old on the same hardware and the 1GHz Dothan based Pentium M is getting really old and I'm pretty sure Intel designed the 1.6GHz Atom specifically to compete against a 1GHz Dothan. nVidia has also launched their Ion platform with the 9400M to couple with Atom in nettops, so all the components are now in place.

I'm kind of worried about putting too much support with nVidia though. Apple has also kept nVidia and ATI competing against each other in their models probably to get a better price. Putting the 9400M in the iMac would probably lock Apple in to using nVidia GPUs for Hybrid Power. And my complaint against nVidia GPUs is again that the 8x and 9xxx series do not support 64-bit floats for GPGPU, only the GT200. ATI however supports 64-bit floats in both the HD3xxx and HD4xxx series. If Apple wants to be ahead in GPGPU adoption, it'd probably be better to have more full-featured hardware in as many Macs as possible. 64-bit floats is currently an optional feature in OpenCL, but that could change in the next OpenCL spec.

It'd probably be best if Apple went with the upcoming ATI Mobility HD4xxx series, maybe a Mobility HD4670 with a Mobility HD4850 BTO for the iMacs. Maybe, Apple can figure out how to get Hybrid Power working between the 9400M and ATI GPUs. It can't be that hard since Intel's GMA X3100 and GMA X4500 dynamic power switching is GPU agnostic and works with both ATI and nVidia GPUs.