Not exactly sure which model that is, but to people like me the ability to attach one or two good NEC screens, for example, is one of the main reasons to buy a Mac Mini over an iMac. This is the kind of stuff that is important for instance for photographers. The Apple screens are not well suited for that kind of stuff. And a lot of people will say similar things about the fancy looking keyboards and mice. In that the picture is very representative of people who are moving over to the Mac world for pretty practical reasons and not for how the stuff looks that is piled up on or under my desk. Take the wireless Apple keyboard for instance. Beautiful, but useless for anyone who a) needs or wants a numbers pad (and that's not just the fat account from the old arrogant Apple commercials but also for creatives who use a lot of shortcuts) or b) anyone who actually types a lot
Silence on issues like this alienate both users and potential users. Whereas being upfront and acknowledging that 1) there is indeed an issue and 2) it will be fixed, increase consumer confidence in the integrity of a company and its willingness to stand behind the quality of its products.
I agree with all of this.
I would never buy a Mini and Apple LCD but not for their function. For me it comes down to cost, do the math it would cost about the same as and 27" iMac and I'd rather the iMac or save a tone of money on something much cheaper like the BenQ 24" I currently use.
As for the KB I agree again, I'll be ordering the wired KB for my new iMac and a touch pad.
I guess the whole point of the Mini is you can use you current PC extras like the KB, Mouse and LCD or buy what you need.
Integrated graphics are ridiculous for a desktop. I'd rather sacrifice a bit of space in order to replace the card, repair it, upgrade it or simply have an independent card with its own RAM and better performance.
Mobile devices I can understand, but this obsession with "thin" iMac's and small Mac Mini's at the sacrifice of function is getting out of hand. How is Intel proposing to fix this issue? What if this had been a bad logic board w/ integrated graphics?
This [anti-Intel statement] doesn't seem fair to me. A GPU is actually a performance optimized CPU. Intel has been in the *PU business for a long time.
Not sure if serious or trying to troll hard. Intel has always been a CPU manufacturer. That is how they started and that's how it is. Their core business is CPUs. Now, as per the GPU being just a CPU is inherently, borderline dumb. Why?
Check this out and notice the first company in the history section. Also note in the explanation at the top, that when paraphrased, says GPUs are performance optimized processors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPU
You effectively said I was dumb. I've cited a reasonable reference for my statement. I think people will see you as patronizing and arrogant.
A graphics processing unit (GPU), also occasionally called visual processing unit (VPU), is a specialized electronic circuit designed to rapidly manipulate and alter memory to accelerate the building of images in a frame buffer intended for output to a display. GPUs are used in embedded systems, mobile phones, personal computers, workstations, and game consoles. Modern GPUs are very efficient at manipulating computer graphics, and their highly parallel structure makes them more effective than general-purpose CPUs for algorithms where processing of large blocks of data is done in parallel. In a personal computer, a GPU can be present on a video card, or it can be on the motherboard or—in certain CPUs—on the CPU die. More than 90% of new desktop and notebook computers[when?] have integrated GPUs, which are usually far less powerful than those on a dedicated video card.[1]
The term GPU was popularized by Nvidia in 1999, who marketed the GeForce 256 as "the world's first 'GPU', or Graphics Processing Unit, a single-chip processor with integrated transform, lighting, triangle setup/clipping, and rendering engines that are capable of processing a minimum of 10 million polygons per second". Rival ATI Technologies coined the term visual processing unit or VPU with the release of the Radeon 9700 in 2002.
I fixed this problem weeks ago by spending $6 on this:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/p...=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5106&seq=1&format=2
Good points. Even more important at a time when their stock price is on the fence. If that tanks because of something like this turning into a major news story for no good reason I won't be buying a Mac any time soon just for financial reasons.
Macs are now a small (percentage-wise) contributor to Apple's bottom line...and the Mini is only one of many Macs they sell. The stock price isn't going to tank because of this issue.
Silence on issues like this alienate both users and potential users. Whereas being upfront and acknowledging that 1) there is indeed an issue and 2) it will be fixed, increase consumer confidence in the integrity of a company and its willingness to stand behind the quality of its products.
And in this case, some folks (like me) can now go forward with their Mac Mini purchase. I can use a MDP to HDMI cable/adapter as a workaround until the fix is ready. After which I will hookup my monitor via HDMI and free-up the TB port for other functions or a 2nd monitor.
Everyone makes mistakes but not everyone is honest about it.
Thank you Apple/Intel for being honest about this.
No one forces you to buy the new Macs
Lol, I'll give you half true since in the end Apple was also arm bent to use Intel's crap.
I did try the VGA connection and it helps but the image is fuzzy compared to HDMI. As I also said the monitor only had HDMI and VGA inputs.
Last but not least I called YOU arrogant specifically when YOU called my comments ignorant.
"The sentences highlighted in red just shows ignorance and incorrect assumptions". That makes you arrogant and insulting. What other way should that be read?
Please, this is the most stupid comment you can post, dont do that again
Dont think so, they chose to build mini with only integrated intel GPU in 2012, crippling mini to GPU underpowered machine...
Why? Just stop whining! You have plenty of options to chose from.
The Mac Mini is perfect for 99% of users. The HD4000 is plenty fast for newer games on low setting. The Radeon 6630M was only slightly better, but then again it would only be a dual core.
If you need a faster Apple you can always get an iMac. If you want your own screen you can get an MacPro.
Again...it's not like the 6630M made the Mini an GPU powerhouse...
I am fed up with trolls acusing anyone who is not 100 percent apple zealot of being whiner..
It is like saying, if you want just a car, buy some 10 year old little russian car, or bus or ferarri, nothing in the middle... I would like to buy decent computer (in all areas - mac mini is decent except GPU) and my own display.. thats why iMac is not perfect for everyone and I understand, that if apple give mini decent gpu, many people would go this way with easily upgradable SSDs - less money for blood apple SSD upgrades..
Well, at least it was much better than Intel HD 3000. Let me ask you, why not to offer some better GPU in high mac mini? any rational reason except that one mentioned above? dont think so.. so stop being completely brainless apple zealot.
Back off and drink your cool aid!
First: again NOONE forces you to buy Apple hardware. If you don't like their way of building the hardware go ahead and put the computer together you would like to have!
Second: The Mac Mini is a pretty size constrained computer. For the 99,9% of potential Mac Mini owners it was much more important to get a quad core CPU then a discrete graphic. The Intel HD4000 is "only" about 15-20% slower then the Radeon 6630M on synthetical benchmarks. I guess real world performance will be even smaller. Games that are unplayable on an HD4000 will stay unplayable on Radeon 6630M
Third: I'm not an Apple Zealot. I tend to think before I make a purchase. No need to bitch at every other company just because they don't offer the product I want. If the 2012 Mac Mini is not for you why do you have to whine about it? You think that will change anything? It is physically not possible to put a better graphic card in there. Again if you care about a good graphic card I suggest you either get an iMac, MacBook Pro 15", Mac Pro or Hackintosh or just any other x86 machine out there...you have sooooooooooooo many options, why insist that the Mac Mini must have a graphic card? It is childish and whiney. Get a life!