It still HASN'T happened. Don't hold your breath, because the Mini is dead dead dead.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Evidence that Next iMacs and Mac Minis to use NVIDIA Chipsets
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
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
)
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?
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?
Thats a common problem with Samsung TVs and not an issue with TVs from other manufacturers.
Not true. Nearly all HDTVs are just giant computer monitors. When they have DVI or VGA inputs they act as such.
Thats an OS X problem (non-native resolution support) combined with Samsung's lacking support, NOT a Windows problem.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
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...
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.
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...
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.
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.
9400m
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
I read recently that the NVIDIA chipsets used in the latest MacBook Pros had some 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?
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?
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.
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...
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...