Yeah I wouldn't pay double. You still are looking at limited expandability. I'd be happy with improved intergrated graphics. A dedicated mobile solution, since its running a mobile chipset.
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.
Mac Mini End Of Life?
- Thread starter Dont Hurt Me
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
Yeah I wouldn't pay double. You still are looking at limited expandability. I'd be happy with improved intergrated graphics. A dedicated mobile solution, since its running a mobile chipset.
Fast forward to 2012:
The Mini with Intel Core 4 Octo, 32 Gigs RAM, 1TB Hard Drive, and Blu-ray burner will be Apple's last!
It will be EOL'd - really this time!!!
The Mini with Intel Core 4 Octo, 32 Gigs RAM, 1TB Hard Drive, and Blu-ray burner will be Apple's last!
It will be EOL'd - really this time!!!
Well I hope not! I for one expect Apple will finally upgrade that GMA 950 video card in 2013.
Well I hope not! I for one expect Apple will finally upgrade that GMA 950 video card in 2013.
Lol. Yeah. All the upgrades. But they'd still have the GMA 950.
Well I hope not! I for one expect Apple will finally upgrade that GMA 950 video card in 2013.
Naaaah, the Intel GMA 950 is all you'll ever need - the Mini is only for "switchers"...
Exactly my feelings.
I still have to have my old PC here, because I want to play C&C3, HL2, Civ4 and Settlers6...all require a much better card thatn the GMA950 offering.
I'd love a speed hike, but given that my current gaming rig is only a PentiumD, I'm sure a Mini graphics update would be all I need. X1950 mobile chipset ( or similar ) would do the trick
No Kidding lets kill it,this thread still going
Funny thing here is the Mini is treated like a afterthought only that afterthought is making Apple look good meaning strong sales. Apple needs to refresh it, its just that simple and thay dont even have to spend much to do it. Give it some real world bumps. Apple needs to stop competing among itself in my view. Said that for years. Let the thread continue
I still have to have my old PC here, because I want to play C&C3, HL2, Civ4 and Settlers6...all require a much better card thatn the GMA950 offering.
I'd love a speed hike, but given that my current gaming rig is only a PentiumD, I'm sure a Mini graphics update would be all I need. X1950 mobile chipset ( or similar ) would do the trick
This is it. I know a few PC owners who'd love to switch via a Mini, but integrated graphics are a no-no for them.
You'd think that the brains at Apple would have realized long ago that there are many potential switchers out there who already have dedicated graphics on their PCs & the software that makes use of it. Most of these aren't going to switch under any circumstances (regardless of ongoing bad press for Vista) as long as Apple offers only crap graphics with the Mini.
I'd definitely buy a Mini only if it had a BTO option for better graphics.
This is it. I know a few PC owners who'd love to switch via a Mini, but integrated graphics are a no-no for them.
You'd think that the brains at Apple would have realized long ago that there are many potential switchers out there who already have dedicated graphics on their PCs & the software that makes use of it. Most of these aren't going to switch under any circumstances (regardless of ongoing bad press for Vista) as long as Apple offers only crap graphics with the Mini.
I'd definitely buy a Mini only if it had a BTO option for better graphics.
What percentage of PC owners know what integrated vs dedicated graphics are. You really think they know the difference? If they do, they are probably into games. If that's the case why would they want a Mac first of all and second why would they want a mini. If they do care about games and perhaps want to use a Mac they should use an older PC for games and a mini for everything else. Most are going to care about the price. If they want dedicated graphics they should get an iMac. A mini is never going to have dedicated graphics. It doesn't make sense.
Beacuse the mini doesn't support pixel shader 2.0. You need a dedicated graphics card for that. Supposedly the new chipset support one, but I haven't check to be sure.
In otherwords, the mini cannot play some games.
P6
Edit: some people like playing games, but don't want to spend a fortune to do it. that is why the mini is appealing.
Well as there's approx 1 billion PCs out there (& growing), asking about percentages seems a rhetorical question. My point is that many PC owners are into gaming (not necessarily hardcore), & of those who feel disillusioned with Vista many would like to embrace OS X. As they already have quality peripherals, the Mini with a BTO graphics option would be the ideal Mac for them. The iMac isn't.
Yes, some do exactly as you advise; they buy a Mini & keep their old PCs for gaming. But the vast majority of computer-savvy potential switchers won't buy an underpowered, boutique-type desktop computer with cheap & now increasingly-dated laptop parts. In fact, for the price of the higher-end Mini these guys can get a new upgradeable PC tower with better specs... which is what many of them end up doing. - IMO, it's now time to either upgrade the Mini or give it BTO options.
somebody who knows about the difference between a dedicated graphics card and an integrated card for sure wont get an imac ...
especially since it's cheaper to get an mac mini and get a separate PC for games which would smoke the imac with it's lousy graphics card anyway
having a BTO m8600 (or at least an m8400) would really give the mini a nice boost to make it at least worth a consideration ... i would buy a mini again under such circumstances
Not so , todays current tech even in iMac is more then able to play 99% of todays games and the 2600 series isnt that bad its just apple is using crap old drivers. As soon as things are updated for the coming UT3 and 10.5.2 and then a ATi graphic driver fix! things should be fine.
As far as Mini goes it needs at gpu from ati or nvidia and skip the integrated stuff from Intel. Bump up its harddrive and give it a keyboard and mouse.
well can it play games 2 years from now in an OK resolution and details ?
seriously i expect that from a 1499 dollar desktop computer
a mac mini costs me what ? 599 or so ? that would mean i still have 900 bucks for a computer for games... and that amount of money still gives me more 3d performance on the PC side than any imac can deliver
and crappy drivers ? .. isn't "driver problems something more attributed to ordinary beige boxed windows computers
As far as Mini goes it needs at gpu from ati or nvidia and skip the integrated stuff from Intel. Bump up its harddrive and give it a keyboard and mouse.
exactly... a good mobile graphcis chip (mobile geforce 8600 or something like that) available as BTO might make an aweful lot of people happy
sure it has nowhere near desktop parts performance but it would be enough for games and wouldn't increase the size of the mac mini
desktop class harddrive would be pushing the size limitations but i for sure would like that... especially since apple isn't keen on any mid sized tower
No, its not to do with that. Just that I want the sound as well.
The inputs on my plasma won't take dvi as well as a further sound input.
iMax?
I can buy a maxed-out Mini for $1000 (not good enough) or I can get the cheapest MacPro for $2100 (oversized big empty box.) Why can't I buy something right in the middle? We need a Maxi. The iMax. Probably patented by those movie guys though.
I can buy a maxed-out Mini for $1000 (not good enough) or I can get the cheapest MacPro for $2100 (oversized big empty box.) Why can't I buy something right in the middle? We need a Maxi. The iMax. Probably patented by those movie guys though.
Unfortunately for us folks that would never buy an integrated monitor / cpu, the iMac is considered the "middle".
Regardless of whether or not people will actually "hard-core" game or game at all, Apple *should* offer users a cost-effective way to game on the Mac. The popular games (Guitar Hero III, The Sims, everything Blizzard makes) are all out on Mac. This alone should encourage Apple to increase their GPU performance, as even some of these games are graphically-intense! And tell me how many "Hard-Core" gamers you know that play the Sims 2... a GPU-killer on high settings! The Sims 2! A kids game!
Or what about me? I am NOT a hard-core gamer, but there is one game that really resonates with me: StarCraft. As you may know, StarCraft II is coming out late '08 and I want to run it in all its glory. Do you mean to tell me that I should consider a PC because neither an iMac or MacMini will cut it, performance-wise? That's just ridiculous.
Apple needs to cut it out with the eliteist attitude and realize that their computers are terrible at doing something that should be a basic capability! Better than average performance while running 3D games!
Good Grief, how embarrassing would it be to buy a MacMini and find out it struggles on high settings with the Sims 2? What a joke. Get it in gear, Apple. You think you're so good... Why don't you prove it by having a product line with something for everybody? Games are not a niche market, Apple.
This is precisely why I will never buy another iMac. I got one in 2002, and guess what? It couldn't play Unreal Tournament 2003. Even on the lowest settings, I got between 4 & 8 fps... appalling.
Sad but true. This is exactly what I am forced to do. I maintain a low-budget upgrade-PC. Every few years, I'll upgrade it for a couple hundred bucks. I have to deal with two friggen computers to do what I should be able to do with just one. And most dissappointingly, I have to deal with Windows. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have a Windows PC around for various "hacking" endeavors, but instead I have to maintain a GPU-friendly beast under my desk, composed of 90% open space.
This would appease me, but I would really like to see a mid-sized tower. Having their most inexpensive upgradable tower debut at $2800... is shocking... and wrong. I can't even imagine how they consider that to be acceptable.
My secret wish is that Apple has been moving the Mac Pro further up to make room for a new tower. If it's priced right and upgradable, I'm definitely on-board for Cube 2.0... maybe just a little bigger this time so it's more GPU-friendly. My kids have to be able to play The Sims 3!
-Clive
Apple is not about to put a better base GPU in the Mini then they have in the iMac or the Mac Pro. At best, the Mini would get the ATI 2600 as well, but is more likely to get the latest Intel GPU (which does have hardware 3D acceleration) like the MacBook.
And considering how long it takes Apple to update the GPU for the Mac Pro - and the fact that no third-party option ever became available for it - no matter what Mac you buy, you're likely going to be stuck with that video card for the life of the machine.
If gaming is most important to you, buy a Windows PC and a Mac Mini or Mac Pro and get a nice third-party LCD that can drive both. Use a wireless keyboard and mouse that works on both machines and just move the receiver between them.
The Mini/Pro will do whatever you need to do under OS X and the PC will play all the games and will allow you to constantly update the drivers for your existing card - as well as easily put in new cards - to improve gaming performance.
And considering how long it takes Apple to update the GPU for the Mac Pro - and the fact that no third-party option ever became available for it - no matter what Mac you buy, you're likely going to be stuck with that video card for the life of the machine.
If gaming is most important to you, buy a Windows PC and a Mac Mini or Mac Pro and get a nice third-party LCD that can drive both. Use a wireless keyboard and mouse that works on both machines and just move the receiver between them.
The Mini/Pro will do whatever you need to do under OS X and the PC will play all the games and will allow you to constantly update the drivers for your existing card - as well as easily put in new cards - to improve gaming performance.
It's not just that the mini has integrated graphics, but that it's the antiquated GMA950.
I'd be willing to buy a couple minis if only they had the integrated GMA X3100 the macbooks have.
While I expect any future mini will have the GMA X3x00 series, what general-use application really needs that?
I was able to use Aero under Windows Vista on the GMA950 with Intel's latest drivers and was able to play videos and DVDs with no problems. I could even play older non-FPS games with little problem. Only the absolute latest games (like Titan Quest) would not work.
Why are you so satisfied with Apple's hardware mediocrity? Why SHOULDN'T a Mac be able to game?
Gaming isn't important to me, like I said in my ealier post. StarCraft is a hobby of mine, and I want to be able to run StarCraft II at full spec. While StarCraft II will debut on OS X, what's the point if Apple's hardware selections suck? I shouldn't be forced to buy a computer to finish the job where my Mac can't! Apple should give us a computer that won't leave people wanting more.
And also as I said earlier, it's not always about "gamers" and "hard-core" and this and that. Kids use this stuff too. The Sims 2 is a graphically-intense game which a MacMini would struggle at when the settings are pushed upward. "Then leave the settings where they are." WHY? Why should we all be forced to just digest Apple's table scraps?
REAL PEOPLE WANT GOOD GRAPHICS TOO!
-Clive
Well, there's no doubt that apple seems to continue to keep the mini in its line up. Rumors of its demise keep coming...and go. I am hoping for an updated mini. I am waiting to buy one. I think the mini is one of the few apple products that people never complain about in these forums. I can count on my fingers the amount of hardware problems or returns of the minis I've read here compare to the other lines of apple. I really hope they keep it and upgrade it some. I am keeping my hopes up for something new hopefully sooner than laters..or i'll have to settle for the current model.
- Status