I read sarcasm in your post. My G4 mini will still be going strong when this thread goes over 10,000 posts too.
Glad someone did. Way too many serious people online these days.
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
Glad someone did. Way too many serious people online these days.
It'd be nice to see a BTO option for a Blue Ray player. Although at this point i'd just settle for better graphics and larger hard drives and slight processor increase.
Yes, I've long suspected that Steve has been attentively reading this thread, having his prototype 3G iPhone vibrate in his pocket every time there is a new post
.
No, Steve follows this thread and takes notes on what NOT to include on the Mini, just to spite us for buying Apple's least expensive Mac.
To summarize, the next MacMini will NOT have a better GPU, will NOT have a better CPU, will NOT have a bigger HDD, will NOT have more RAM, will NOT have 802.11n, will NOT have a DVD-burner by default, and it won't even come preloaded with OS X.
When you open the box of your new MacMini, expect to find an old shoe-box inside, filled with tangled wires... and maybe an LED.
To summarize, the next MacMini will NOT have a better GPU, will NOT have a better CPU, will NOT have a bigger HDD, will NOT have more RAM, will NOT have 802.11n, will NOT have a DVD-burner by default, and it won't even come preloaded with OS X.
When you open the box of your new MacMini, expect to find an old shoe-box inside, filled with tangled wires... and maybe an LED.
Tangled wires, are you mad? The box will undoubtably contain a single solid piece of white plastic with perfectly rounded edges approximately the size of a paperback book. It's translucent surface will give off an almost unearthly glow and a single apple logo will be etched on the front. And of course a polishing cloth
I feel sorry for the posters in this thread, it really doesn't seem like Jobs loves you anymore.
Tangled wires, are you mad? The box will undoubtably contain a single solid piece of white plastic with perfectly rounded edges approximately the size of a paperback book. It's translucent surface will give off an almost unearthly glow and a single apple logo will be etched on the front. And of course a polishing cloth
Oooo an Apple companion cube!!! Me wants!!!
I have also been waiting (for the X3100 and also a higher RAM ceiling) but
I gave up and have bought two Minis in the last month. I'm still waiting a
bit longer before buying one or two more.
Gee, that sounds familiar, kinda like the OP of this thread in fact...on Oct. 14, 2007.
Vive la Mini!!
How many times do we have to beat this dead horse!!!??
It's not even a recognizable animal anymore, it's a bloody rotten mess!
I guess with that whole "Apple is the top selling machine for computers over $1,000" - they could abandon the Mini and not even blink at it....
We could just go ahead and start a duplicate thread....
(runs for cover....)
We could just go ahead and start a duplicate thread....
(runs for cover....)
Just a quick comment
To everyone who keeps saying that the profit margin on the Mac mini are too thin... where is your proof? Lots of people say that but have nothing to back their statements.
And if the price tag is your argument, then can you explain why Apple is selling a 50$ iPod? Where's the huge profit margin on that?
How can you make the Mac mini better and yet keep the price tag as it is (or even lower it back to 499$US?). Easy, in three points:
First, 3.5" drives cost less than 2.5", are faster and have more capacity.
Second, that thick aluminum case could cost at least half as much by making it shorter, although a bit bigger in size. See Time Machine for an example of the size of an Apple-designed device that has a built-in 3.5" hard drive. Thin is in, and the MacBook Air is proof of that. The Mac mini is the next on the list.
And third, in order to keep the cost low, it will only include the X3100.
If you ask me, however, I'd make whatever case would be necessary to host the motherboard of the iMac and just sell that instead. Less R&D, less manufacturing costs, better volume pricing, one less system to debug for in Mac OS X).
To everyone who keeps saying that the profit margin on the Mac mini are too thin... where is your proof? Lots of people say that but have nothing to back their statements.
And if the price tag is your argument, then can you explain why Apple is selling a 50$ iPod? Where's the huge profit margin on that?
How can you make the Mac mini better and yet keep the price tag as it is (or even lower it back to 499$US?). Easy, in three points:
First, 3.5" drives cost less than 2.5", are faster and have more capacity.
Second, that thick aluminum case could cost at least half as much by making it shorter, although a bit bigger in size. See Time Machine for an example of the size of an Apple-designed device that has a built-in 3.5" hard drive. Thin is in, and the MacBook Air is proof of that. The Mac mini is the next on the list.
And third, in order to keep the cost low, it will only include the X3100.
If you ask me, however, I'd make whatever case would be necessary to host the motherboard of the iMac and just sell that instead. Less R&D, less manufacturing costs, better volume pricing, one less system to debug for in Mac OS X).
To everyone who keeps saying that the profit margin on the Mac mini are too thin... where is your proof? Lots of people say that but have nothing to back their statements.
And if the price tag is your argument, then can you explain why Apple is selling a 50$ iPod? Where's the huge profit margin on that?
How can you make the Mac mini better and yet keep the price tag as it is (or even lower it back to 499$US?). Easy, in three points:
First, 3.5" drives cost less than 2.5", are faster and have more capacity.
Second, that thick aluminum case could cost at least half as much by making it shorter, although a bit bigger in size. See Time Machine for an example of the size of an Apple-designed device that has a built-in 3.5" hard drive. Thin is in, and the MacBook Air is proof of that. The Mac mini is the next on the list.
And third, in order to keep the cost low, it will only include the X3100.
If you ask me, however, I'd make whatever case would be necessary to host the motherboard of the iMac and just sell that instead. Less R&D, less manufacturing costs, better volume pricing, one less system to debug for in Mac OS X).
You're right, but to host a 3.5" HDD and an ODD, the case must be bigger in all dimensions (a slightly taller Time Capsule enclosure).
Given the timing, if Apple updates the Mac mini, they should go straight to Montevina and offer the same GMA as the next MacBook (hopefully X4500).
And if they really want to please their customers (and attract more new ones), they should use the GM47 chipset on both computers (the GMA on the GM47 is clocked faster than on the GM45), especially since the low-end Montevina chips will have a lower TDP (25W vs 35W), hence allowing for faster/hotter other parts in the same power envelop...
The "new" Mac mini could be offered in the following specs:
$599 2.26GHz 1GB RAM, 250GB HDD, Combo, GMA X4500HD
$799 2.40GHz 2GB RAM, 320GB HDD, Superdrive, GMA X4500HD
$999 2.53GHz 2GB RAM, 500GB HDD, Superdrive, GMA X4500HD
I'm not saying that Apple will do this, but it wouldn't bother me if they do so, including a taller Time Capsule-like enclosure.
^^^^
That's what I'm thinking - update the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and Mini to Montevina in August...
That's what I'm thinking - update the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and Mini to Montevina in August...
Why would anyone in there right mind buy a computer with a combo drive in this day and age ?
People that already have a computer with a DVD burner and want the cheapest computer possible.
Hell sell me that model for $499 WITHOUT an optical drive and I'll accept that.
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=307317
I still don't get it, using any if these three price points as an example would still make me save my money and just get a 20" iMac oh well ... what ever makes people happy I guess
Apple must have a large warehouse of combo drives somewhere. I tried a couple of online stores, and none of them offered a combo drive for separate purchase or in a PC config. At one place they would give you 10$ off for downgrading to a DVD-ROM.
The combo drive must be one of the most blatant examples of sticking in sub-standard equipment(with same cost) to create a low price point. A bit like selling cars with down-tuned engines.
/sarcasm
You're right, ralnar, there are none at the Disney Store or at Huggies.com.
But during MY research, I stumbled upon Newegg.com (one of the major computer equipment online store) and they have anykind of drive you want, Combo or not Combo.
Slim Combo drives cost $35-$40, Slim "Superdrives" cost $45-$65, so not the same cost, thank you.
If the MacBook with Combo drive wasn't selling, Apple would have updated the model with the last refresh.
I agree that it's true that DVD piracy is still a nice and lucrative activity for the week-end "power" users. But yet, not each and every user needs to burn DVDs.
Refresh my memory, don't car analogies have been banned from discussions about Apple computers?
/end sarcasm
True. I added a "superdrive" to my Power Mac and bought a stack of DVD-R's to burn. Eight years later, the DVD-R's remain unopened.
So when I decided to get a Mini, the combo drive version was just fine. (And I kept the price at $499 by buying a refurb.) It's been perfect for my use. If I ever need to burn a DVD (which seems highly unlikely at this stage), I can use my iMac.
Not saying I'm typical, but neither are all the people here who seem to think Apple is being managed by a bunch of dolts who don't understand the market.
- Status