Evidence that Next iMacs and Mac Minis to use NVIDIA Chipsets

[Sehnsucht]

I know, makes too much sense to release firewire.

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


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

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

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

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

 

[FocusAndEarnIt]

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

 

[mdriftmeyer]

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

I completely agree.

 

[surferfromuk]

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

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

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

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

 

[intempo808]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I could go on and on....

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

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

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

WOW, you USE a lot OF irrelevant CAPS.

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


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

 

[phasornc]

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

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

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

 

[Evangelion]

have you seen this:

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

 

[nick9191]

long time lerker, first time poster....

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

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

can't wait

case closed

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

 

[nick9191]

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

But you do have to worry about Nvidia's awful drivers when running OS X.

 

[Eric S.]

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

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

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

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

3) Blu-Ray

Bag of hurt.

 

[Evangelion]

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

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

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

 

[mdriftmeyer]

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

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

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

 

[mdriftmeyer]

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

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

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

They announce in January and release in March.

 

[Evangelion]

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

 

[FrenchKheldar]

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

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

 

[inkswamp]

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

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

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

Think different. Riiiiiiiiight.

Do you have a source for any of these statements?

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

 

[Bodypainter]

is this how the next mac mini will look like?

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

 

[Bubba Satori]

Bag of hurt.

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

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

 

[jim.arrows]

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

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

Think different. Riiiiiiiiight.



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

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

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

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

 

[surferfromuk]

They announce in January and release in March.

That's even more absurd...

 

[Eric S.]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

[Redgiemental]

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

Then when you eventually did try them you liked them.

Yet you are still complaining.

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

 

[iDave]

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

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

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

 

[inkswamp]

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

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

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

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

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

 

[jim.arrows]

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

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

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