Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sorry, but there were notebooks available for 600 USD long time before the netbook mania started. Long time before Macbooks sold really well actually. Your point doesn't hold.

Netbooks are aimed at and bought for different purposes. Usually they are complemented by a "real" computer. No one would buy a netbook and not own a PC/Mac to store data, do real work etc.

My point holds just fine. Those $600 notebooks of the past were junk. They were big, bulky, cheap build, poor quality displays, lacked storage, power, connectivity and weighed 7 or 8 lbs.

These new Netbooks like the Dell mini 9" weigh less than 2lbs, are 7" X 9", contain 64GB SSD drives, 802.11b/g wireless, bluetooth, sport card readers for additional flash memory, contain 2GB of memory, have LED backlit displays, and decent quality GPUs.

Plus cloud computing options now allow mass storage on the web, personal web finance programs from Quicken, Photo editing web software from Adobe, google docs, and more is coming from Microsoft with Office web apps, and Apple with iwork.com.

Computing is changing rapidly and most consumers don't need a full computer anymore. Obviously these new devices will never replace desktops and portables for those who really need full computing power. But honestly how many consumers really need a full computer anymore.

99% of the tasks that consumers use a computer for can be done on a Netbook. Only pro users or computer hobbyists need the CPU & GPU power necessary to run things like CS4, Maya, Final Cut Pro, etc.
 
Maybe I expect too much on a rumor site, but GDit people. This rumor makes little to no sense whatsoever. Why would Apple make a Mac Mini with less power than the one already out there yet charge the same amount? The

Because they can. It's that simple. Why make the Mini in the first place? It's an underpowered joke for its current price (it should come down in price when they don't update it), *BUT* it's the only the Mac that's halfway reasonable in price so they KNOW they got you if you want a Mac and can't afford one over $1k. Basically, they use their monopoly status (in terms of OS X; in other words if you want the Mac you HAVE to buy Apple hardware or go Hackintosh) to screw the consumer. But that shouldn't be anything new to any of you. I think some Mac people live in a fantasy world where Steve is god and everyone is happy. Reality is finally starting to set in with a few of you and you seem shocked. I love OS X for the most part, but Apple hardware is not the be-all of everything. It's underpowered, overpriced, and mostly flat thin things. I'd personally prefer a beefy mini-tower for a desktop than try to cram a computer into a monitor. I mean WHY do that? If I wanted a notebook, I'd buy one...wait I did.
 
So what would people think if this new mac mini had a dual core atom chip the Atom 330 for about $499 or so with a 250gb hd an 1gb of ram and 256mb for video? Cause for me that be a nice device to run Snow Leopard on.
 
I think the Atom will go in the Apple TV if anything. I'm not too worried about this. I think the new Mini will be sweet, can't wait :D

Can't wait for Apple TV Take 3 as well hehe :)
 
i can believe the part about the atom, but i can do without a smaller mini,
what i would hope would happen is,

atom (low end), atom (med range), core duo (high end) option

to me that would be great
 
My point holds just fine.

Nope. The other poster is completely correct and you have serious misconceptions about the computer marketplace.

Those $600 notebooks of the past were junk. They were big, bulky, cheap build, poor quality displays, lacked storage, power, connectivity and weighed 7 or 8 lbs.

The build quality of most of the netbooks is much poorer than that of recent generation $600 notebooks. That's because they are being built to a much lower price point and trying to find every way to shed weight, including going to flimsier construction.

These new Netbooks like the Dell mini 9" weigh less than 2lbs, are 7" X 9", contain 64GB SSD drives, 802.11b/g wireless, bluetooth, sport card readers for additional flash memory, contain 2GB of memory, have LED backlit displays, and decent quality GPUs.

SSD drives save power, but have much lower write performance and much more limited capacity. 64GB capacity is pretty sad when my iPod has 120GB.

The limited size and resolution of netbook displays means more eyestrain and less productivity (numerous studies bear out the fact that larger, higher resolution displays improve productivity).

All modern notebooks have 802.11b/g. No advantage to netbooks there.

Many modern notebooks have Bluetooth (though only a small percentage of people with it use it).

2GB of RAM is adequate, but hardly anything to write home about -- especially if there is no option to expand it further.

Plus cloud computing options now allow mass storage on the web, personal web finance programs from Quicken, Photo editing web software from Adobe, google docs, and more is coming from Microsoft with Office web apps, and Apple with iwork.com.

Marketers love people like you. They invent terms like "cloud computing" and you're right on board. Ever try "cloud computing" when you're actually in the clouds on a multi-hour plane flight (where there is no Internet connectivity)? Ever try to copy a DVD operating system ISO to "mass storage on the web" using the typical hotel "broadband" connection (which is often one cable modem shared between a hundred or more rooms)? I bet you were one of those guys telling everyone how tablet computers were going to replace notebooks and how the wave of the future was "Internet appliances."

99% of the tasks that consumers use a computer for can be done on a Netbook. Only pro users or computer hobbyists need the CPU & GPU power necessary to run things like CS4, Maya, Final Cut Pro, etc.

I've got a DVD that I would like to watch on my flight to from Virginia to California on Monday. Later on, I'd like to rip it and convert it to h.264 to put on my iPod Classic. I'm probably going to be burning some MP3s to play in my rental car which has an in-dash MP3 player that reads CD-R discs. While I'm on my business trip, I'll probably want to play some first-person shooters (Quake III, Unreal Tournament, etc.) in my hotel room. There's also a multiplayer game I've been hearing about called Armada Online and it requires at least 1024x768 resolution, so I'll need a netbook that can do that. I'm hoping to edit together a video using footage from the HD camcorder I'm taking. I'll have to work on some work-related documents and I will be typing for several hours, so I need a decent keyboard and display.

So, which netbook do you recommend for the above? It will need at least 1024x768 resolution, a combo DVD/CD-R drive, a full-size keyboard, enough processing power to do video conversions to put on an iPod. It will have to have good enough CPU horsepower and 3D video acceleration to play a first-person shooter. It will need to be capable of light video editing.

All of those examples are pretty typical mainstream things done by consumers. I didn't get into esoteric examples like 3D rendering, high-end video editing, film and audio restoration, etc.

As the other poster said, the netbook is intended to supplement a normal desktop or notebook PC, not to replace them. I plan on buying a netbook, but I'm under no illusion that I'm going to use it for hours at a time like I do with my conventional systems. I'm expecting that it will be handy to checking e-mail, storing contact info, moving some files around via FTP, running some simple spreadsheets, etc. It will be great if I want something to carry on my motorcycle or to have with me to take notes at a meeting.
 
So what would people think if this new mac mini had a dual core atom chip the Atom 330 for about $499 or so with a 250gb hd an 1gb of ram and 256mb for video? Cause for me that be a nice device to run Snow Leopard on.

No sale here.

I've got a Core 2 Duo 1.83ghz Mac Mini with 4GB of RAM (3.2 addressable), 320GB hard drive, and a "Superdrive." I am looking for more performance and storage, not less. I have very little concern about the amount of RAM available for video, but am much more concerned about the speed of the GPU (a low-end 3D GPU with a lot of RAM is no match for even a mid-level GPU with 1/2 the RAM).

I don't want to have to choose between a crippled system with less performance than a $500 laptop or a $3000 system with 8 CPU cores that could handle all of the rendering for the next Pixar movie in real time.
 
You really are a newbie , aren't you?

If, by newbie, you mean someone who has been using computers since 1976, then, yes. Or if you mean someone who actually designed and wire-wrapped a single-board computer before IBM introduced the PC, you've got your guy. If newbie refers to someone whose first hard drive was 5.25", full height, and held 5mb, then that's me.
 
I'm calling BS on this rumor. Apple may embed Atom CPUs into some media device like Apple TV, but they won't be in the next Mac Mini. My guess is that the "source" for Tom's Hardware saw an AppleTV with the Atom and thought he was looking at the next Mac Mini.

Apple has continuously improved the CPU performance of the Mac Mini, even when it resulted in a $100 price jump. They have increased CPU clock speeds, jumped from PowerPCs to higher performance Intel CPUs, upgraded from Intel Core Solos and Duos to Intel Core 2 Duos.

To those who say that the Atom 330 has adequate performance, take a look at the benchmark at the top of this page:

http://www.guru3d.com/article/ecs-atom-330-dual-core-p945gc-review/7

Not pretty -- or even competitive.

If Apple wants to release a "Mac Nano" (as another poster called it) and price it at $399 with an Atom 330, they might sell quite a few of them, but at the $600-$800 price points of the Mac Mini, it's a non-starter.

___________________________________________

My guess is that Apple will be smart enough to stay out of the cutthroat netbook market. Their business model is based on selling hardware dearly and software cheaply. If you want their elegant OS and applications, then you fork over a handsome price for Apple hardware.

To those who say that Apple has to compete in the netbook segment, no, they don't. Apple chooses to compete in markets where they can enjoy a strong markup on their hardware. The market for budget mini-tower systems is huge and you don't see any Apple mini towers competing with Dells and Gateways, do you? You don't see Apple-branded gaming systems replete with blue LEDs, cases with windows, and glowing hard drive cables. Apple isn't competing in the huge budget notebook market (those systems selling for $600 and less). They no longer sell printers.

Every time the bottom falls out of a market, Apple quietly withdraws from it.
 
a simple Mac

<obvious>
The real problem with this whole thing, due to the absence of a non-all-in-one in the $600 - $1000 range, the new mac mini needs to fit a lot more roles then any machine can.
</obvious>

For me, an Atom 330/Ion-based mac mini in the <$400 range (given Lenovo has nettops in the <$300) would be the killer machine. Despite what has been said, it would be plenty fine for iLife, iWork, HD playback, and surfing the web. It would also run bootcamp and Windows fine. This price point, in this economy, would sell to a lot of schools that already have minis and imacs, but need to equip classroom-size orders.

Now, a lot of people want more horsepower in their CPU and don't want a built in display. Since the next step up on the non-all-in-one is the Mac Pro, there is a huge gap. These people are generally arguing for a more powerful mini at around the current price point ($600).

I really wish Apple would release a machine, targeted at the $600 - $800 crowd that was basically a macbook pro without the display. If they had a mini mac (atom) and mac (core2duo), I think, particularly in this economic time, they both would do well.

If they were really worried about the iMac, just boost its CPU (or use desktop parts) and add another bank of memory slots. I would drop the 20" iMac and only produce the 24".
 
Atom

Maybe they'll cram four of those things in there!

The market for budget mini-tower systems is huge and you don't see any Apple mini towers competing with Dells and Gateways, do you? You don't see Apple-branded gaming systems replete with blue LEDs, cases with windows, and glowing hard drive cables. Apple isn't competing in the huge budget notebook market (those systems selling for $600 and less). They no longer sell printers.

That's the thing, Apple prefers to create its own markets, not follow markets that are already there. How many all in ones are there out there. Not many. I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure Apple pioneered this segment. The iPhone was certainly not he first "smart phone", or even touch screen phone, but Apple did their thing before the market was really even there, and now look at the place.

I don't claim to know if this rumor is rue or false or anywhere in between, but I suspect Apple will be trying to do something that nobody else has done quite right yet, rather than jump into a market just because it is supposedly lucrative. That's not really Apple's thang. I can see them doing something different in the "netbook" segment i.e. a slate, I know I'd snap up one of those, but a midrange tower? Apple would just as soon sell it's soul to IBM.
 
wow..just amazing Mac innovation

Perfect example of Mac ingenuity and quality product placement and look at the cheap price...new hardware but still same price!

Hurry all mac sheeps..come and buy.

RIDICULOUS.

Yes Atom will run OS X on a satisfactory level and dual core will help a bit but it's definitely no core 2 duo.

Given the hardware, it should be thin like macbook air so it will look pretty at least. =)

This will spur a lot of new mac mini clones =)
 
AppleTV with Atom likely

I'm calling BS on this rumor. Apple may embed Atom CPUs into some media device like Apple TV, but they won't be in the next Mac Mini. My guess is that the "source" for Tom's Hardware saw an AppleTV with the Atom and thought he was looking at the next Mac Mini.

I agree. Apple would be committing product suicide on the Mac Mini by embedding it with an Atom CPU.

I also believe Apple is moving an Atom into the AppleTV and extending its feature sets.
 
It's probably the only way that Steve would let them create another mac mini...changing to the Atom is the only way they can keep the profit margins up. But I'm guessing since I have no idea what an atom chip costs.

About $43, as oposed to the $175 chips currently which were $240 at launch.

Of course, the mini will NOT start at $499. They will increase the margin by $200 instead of increasing it by $100 and passing on savings as well. Way to commit to selling the best machines on the market for a premium price, rather than the same old crap at a much higher price Apple.

:mad:
 
After so many posts, it becomes very easy to speculate fairly accurately. Remember Apple is very conservative (just look at MBP 17).

- No Atom, they will use the SAME C2D processors. No speed bump either.
- No DDR3 RAM , they will stick to DDR2 (as above).
NCP 79M Nvidia chipset but they will clock it lower than full speed. Maybe same of Rev B MBA or even slower. Combined speed still faster than MBA but slower than MB 2.0Ghz Unibody.
SLight case re-design but NO aluminum slides or top. They would keep FW 400 port, and potentially drop the DVD drive algother or make that a BTO option.

Same price. :apple::apple:
 
Is there a consensus that this is the probable change for the mac mini? Seems like Apple should have been up to something since the last rev.
 
Here's my predictions:

  • 2.0/2.4 GHz CPUs, probably lower speeds if Intel can release an even slower one. If Apple moves to Atom for the Mac mini, the reason might be that regular mobile CPUs aren't cheap enough.
  • NVIDIA chipset, DDR3 RAM, 9400M GPU, downclocked for heat and differentiation reasons
  • 2 GB RAM
  • Increased HDD capacity
  • No Firewire 400, maybe Firewire 800
  • Possible case redesign
  • The current $599 Mac mini may remain as a $499 Mac mini, if the new ones start at $699 or so
 
Here's my predictions:

  • 2.0/2.4 GHz CPUs, probably lower speeds if Intel can release an even slower one. If Apple moves to Atom for the Mac mini, the reason might be that regular mobile CPUs aren't cheap enough.
  • NVIDIA chipset, DDR3 RAM, 9400M GPU, downclocked for heat and differentiation reasons
  • 2 GB RAM
  • Increased HDD capacity
  • No Firewire 400, maybe Firewire 800
  • Possible case redesign
  • The current $599 Mac mini may remain as a $499 Mac mini, if the new ones start at $699 or so

I'm an Apple Realist, and I approve this message. :cool:
 
If, by newbie, you mean someone who has been using computers since 1976, then, yes. Or if you mean someone who actually designed and wire-wrapped a single-board computer before IBM introduced the PC, you've got your guy. If newbie refers to someone whose first hard drive was 5.25", full height, and held 5mb, then that's me.

Many "Milleniumists" call "Newbies" anyone that doesn't agree with their own, only correct, opinions - don't take it personally...

I agree. Apple would be committing product suicide on the Mac Mini by embedding it with an Atom CPU.

I also believe Apple is moving an Atom into the AppleTV and extending its feature sets.

Could be - but Apple is into this whole "Green" thing and there is demand for "Greener Computing" - look at the NetBook market. I almost bought one, but the performance is too slow for watching iTunes HD Video.

Apple, I think, will go "Green" and make the Mini with Atom... Other companies are doing so...
 
After reading the specs on the Nvidia website, I believe Apple will be using the Ion Platform in the mini's.

The keybenifits look obvious:
It can play populair games like Call of Duty 4
Video conversion 10x faster
HD technology 1080p
Cuda
Premium Windows Vista experience (did I hear bootcamp)

I think those benifits are perfect for the future mini's
What i'm also thinking Apple will bring two versions:
Atom 230 CPU + GeForce 9400M
1 gig

and:
Atom 230 CPU GeForce 9400M
2gig

Well that is what I have to say :p
 
Here's my predictions:

  • 2.0/2.4 GHz CPUs, probably lower speeds if Intel can release an even slower one. If Apple moves to Atom for the Mac mini, the reason might be that regular mobile CPUs aren't cheap enough.
  • NVIDIA chipset, DDR3 RAM, 9400M GPU, downclocked for heat and differentiation reasons
  • 2 GB RAM
  • Increased HDD capacity
  • No Firewire 400, maybe Firewire 800
  • Possible case redesign
  • The current $599 Mac mini may remain as a $499 Mac mini, if the new ones start at $699 or so

Except for the Nvidia chipset, why couldn't Apple do everything else six months or a year ago?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.