Maybe along with the "updated Mini bit" (before "preferably") that went missing from the quote.
sorry bout that oldbean , not intentional I assure you
best
marble
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
sorry bout that oldbean , not intentional I assure you
best
marble
sorry bout that oldbean , not intentional I assure you
best
marble
Cheers. First thought I'd missed some pertinent bits in making my point & laughed at my presumed carelessness in posting, but I never even considered anything other than mere oversight (& mostly mine at that, which wouldn't be unusual for me). So no problems. Regards.
Isn't it all about the TPM?
Doesn't Apple rely on the TPM chips in the imacs? Would it be easier to alter OS X for certain motherboard TPM chips?
Maybe along with the "updated Mini bit" (before "preferably") that went missing from the quote.
Indeed, but another future possibility that may offer a solution for you guys would be if Apple released a special version of OS X to run on certain (by no means all) PCs. This idea has been mooted countless times previously (I'm not seeking to debate it here as it's concurrent on other threads) &, however unlikely for now, it's something that I don't dismiss altogether.
Doesn't Apple rely on the TPM chips in the imacs? Would it be easier to alter OS X for certain motherboard TPM chips?
I wasn't sure, so just Googled it. Apparently today's Macs now don't rely on TPM, so a special PC-optimized version of OS X would only require quite minimal reprogramming.
The 2 major drawbacks to this most probably would be: 1) for it to be viable for Apple, any standalone OS X-for-PC copies would have to retail at similar to Vista-type prices. Mac owners essentially buy only upgrades to the existing OS X that came with their Mac. 2) Piracy of any OS X-for-PC version would certainly be high - as can be evidenced by the rampant piracy of Windows.
So why would Apple consider doing it? I guess if they were serious about becoming the dominant OS, some limited piracy would actually be a beneficial thing. For eg. the countless millions of people running pirated copies of Windows, who would only run Linux otherwise, may later refuse to abandon the platform & will end up buying legit copies of Windows. IMO, it's one reason why Steve Jobs offered a FREE, slimmed-down copy of OS X for OLPC (which was refused for Linux). - Young people generally (students, etc.) often have limited funds, but catch them when they're young any way you can!
From what I found, Apple did ship some Macs with TPM chips, but stopped after the Mac Pros were released. Amit Singh seems to think that even on the machines with them installed Apple never implemented them.
I remember people getting excited Monday night that the Mini would get updated the next day. No such anticipation seems to exist anymore..
Why set one's self up for disappointment? We've been waiting 10 months for an update... I'm tired of waiting, but moreso, I'm tired of being tired of waiting. So I just don't care anymore.
That's why I'm ordering the first parts for my Hackintosh tonight, beginning with the Kingwin 700 Watt modular PSU. She is a beauty and will be a perfect first step, as my current home-built compy's PSU is struggling with 2 HDDs and 2 ODDs.
Then I'll probably take the big step and upgrade the Mo-board, CPU & RAM. I'll wait for the GPUs because I'm really eyeing the 8800GT (maybe 2 for SLI in Windows) but I know prices will plummet, thanks to the 280GTX (240 cores!!!)
I'm building it all inside a windowed case... it'll be stellar.
-Clive
I hear ya Clive. If you're going to jump ship, do it in style! Nothin' like a graphics card that cost more than the base mini!
As long as you don't go too crazy with the rest of it, the price should be less than $1500.
I have a feeling that a lot of the speculation and wait for new models surrounds around Montevina and GMA X4500. It's delayed till July 14th, which might explain things a little. Still, the best integrated graphics, even under Montevina, can't compete with what you're talking about.
As long as you don't go too crazy with the rest of it, the price should be less than $1500.
I have a feeling that a lot of the speculation and wait for new models surrounds around Montevina and GMA X4500. It's delayed till July 14th, which might explain things a little. Still, the best integrated graphics, even under Montevina, can't compete with what you're talking about.
Why set one's self up for disappointment? We've been waiting 10 months for an update... I'm tired of waiting, but moreso, I'm tired of being tired of waiting. So I just don't care anymore.
That's why I'm ordering the first parts for my Hackintosh tonight, beginning with the Kingwin 700 Watt modular PSU. She is a beauty and will be a perfect first step, as my current home-built compy's PSU is struggling with 2 HDDs and 2 ODDs.
Then I'll probably take the big step and upgrade the Mo-board, CPU & RAM. I'll wait for the GPUs because I'm really eyeing the 8800GT (maybe 2 for SLI in Windows) but I know prices will plummet, thanks to the 280GTX (240 cores!!!)
I'm building it all inside a windowed case... it'll be stellar.
-Clive
Allez Clive! Let us know it goes...it might be fun if you felt like documenting the adventure in a separate thread.
It's funny how people talk about how Apple has a hole in their desktop lineup. Apple doesn't even make a desktop. The mini is a laptop with separate screen and keyboard. The iMac is a laptop with a bigger screen and separate keyboard. The MacPro is a workstation.
A few minutes ago, I looked at the Psystar web site. They have an announcement stating that they are soon going to be making a very big announcement.
Possibilities:
1. Apple will be forcing them to shut down or
2. Announcing the latest Intel chips or
3. Making a powerful Mini copy or
4. Announcing a merger with Apple, Inc, and they will be producing legitimate Apple desktop computers.
Presently, I am considering buying a Psystar to experiment with, building a Hackintosh, waiting for a Mini upgrade or a combination of the above.
The base Psystar has a 300 watt power supply. Is that going to be adequate?
Possibilities:
1. Apple will be forcing them to shut down or
2. Announcing the latest Intel chips or
3. Making a powerful Mini copy or
4. Announcing a merger with Apple, Inc, and they will be producing legitimate Apple desktop computers.
Presently, I am considering buying a Psystar to experiment with, building a Hackintosh, waiting for a Mini upgrade or a combination of the above.
The base Psystar has a 300 watt power supply. Is that going to be adequate?
Aopen already make a Santa Rosa mini look-alike. OSX probably runs quite well on it.
I see Psystar are moving into XServe markets:
I see Psystar are moving into XServe markets:
ormation Technology and Communication Consultants OpenServ Rack-Mount Servers and OpenGamer Gaming Systems OpenServ 1U and 2U Servers
We're proud to annouce the dual-Xeon capable OpenServ line of Open Computers. The Open Serv 1100OpenServ 1100 is a 1U with four drive bays that provides up to 4 terabytes of storage and compatible with major server OSs like Microsoft Server 2003/2008, CentOS, Ubuntu Server, and even Mac OS X Leopard Server. You can load up an OpenServ with 16GB of ECC FBDIMMs and two Quad-Core Xeons. The OpenServ 2400 is a 2U version with up to 6 terabytes of raw storage space. You can have it similarly configured with 8 cores so that you can run even the most storage intensive databases or web applications.
OpenGamer Camps the Quad Damage
The OpenGamer makes a stand in gaming systems with a 45nm Intel Core2Quad Q9300 and an nVidia GeForce 8800GT standard. With SLI nVidia cards available your system configurations can range from "pretty good" to "outrageous." It's possible to run quad-GPU mayhem with dual-SLI nVidia GeForce 9800 GX2s. The OpenGamer features dual Gigabit LAN ports as well as Firewire 400 on board. With the OpenGamer you can get a system that is completely Direct X 10 ready making this a no-nonsense machine--you'll see from the price that it means business.
Y'know, I just may do that.
True, Apple uses laptop and server components in their machines and tries to disguise them as desktop computers. I think the big compaint here is that Apple doesn't use desktop components, PERIOD. They're often very powerful and very cheap. As an example, an 80GB 2.5" HDD is about $60 on NewEgg. Meanwhile, for $70 on the same site, one can purchase a 320GB 3.5" HDD; four times more spacious than the Mac Mini's HDD, at roughly the same price. The same analogy can be made for just about all of the Mini's components (which I've done on AI).
Unfortunately pricer components = pricier computers = higher profits
A Hackintosh is currently the only way to get a reasonably-priced OS X desktop machine.
-Clive
a related post on the Retro Thing blog
There's an opinion piece related to this topic over at the Retro Thing blog that might be worth a look.
There's an opinion piece related to this topic over at the Retro Thing blog that might be worth a look.
3000-3049. I doubt actually it'll even happen by then. I'm guessing it won't be until centrino 2 platform is fully out in the wild.
I stated...
... this very line of thought in a different thread. Really, is there any doubt that someone is going to make an Apple Laptop Clone as well as affordable Tower much like Psystar has?
... this very line of thought in a different thread. Really, is there any doubt that someone is going to make an Apple Laptop Clone as well as affordable Tower much like Psystar has?
less costly components = less pricier computers = more profits
Taking the hard drive as an example here, they could lower their cost for the drive and increase the capacity/speed of the final product.
Exactly. I must be boring people on other MacRumors threads, no need to spare you people:
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=5623100#post5623100
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=5598141#post5598141
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=5524939#post5524939
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=5554426#post5554426
https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=5446029#post5446029
Think I'll shut up for a while. Before I get spanked.
It isn't that you aren't right on one level, but why expect a highly successful business like Apple to abandon a profitable strategy just to pander to an increasingly diminishing segment of the consumer market, ie. those wanting small-profit margin, consumer mid-towers? (Besides, if I want something to tinker with, I'd just buy a PC, which I may well do one day).
What we've seen in the PC market for the past few years is continuously increasing sales in powerful PC laptops, not just for their portability, but to be used as desktop-replacements. This is because today's average consumer rarely bothers to upgrade anything on their computer, demands ever less clutter & powerful technology is relatively affordable (as opposed to the $2,000+/£1,000+ you'd have to pay back in the 1990s if you wanted a powerful PC). Hence we're even seeing more clutter-free, Mini PCs coming out with powerful components to satisfy even avid gamers.
Apple's strategy will never appeal to all, but making a mid-tower Mac in today's market trends would be sheer folly.
::shrugs:: Dunno if it's sheer folly or not, but the orig point of this thread (many moons ago) was about the Mac Mini, not a "consumer mid-tower."
And I still:
- Want to buy a Mini, but one updated with more recent hardware, and...
- Think that Apple should have a place in its product line for an inexpensive, entry-level PC
As nice as their consumer-level laptop & all-in-one desktop models are (and I'm saving up for a MacBook late in the year), they don't fit the bill for every consumer. And if Apple doesn't update, or downright kills, the Mini, then I'll bite the bullet and make myself a Hackintosh - even tho' I'd hate the extra expenditure of time needed to build & support it
Clive very eloquently outlined why Apple has the computer lineup it does, and he very effectively wiped out my hope of a mid tower. Consequently, I will have to decide if a soon to be Mini upgrade will be adequate for me or will I just build a Hackintosh.It isn't that you aren't right on one level, but why expect a highly successful business like Apple to abandon a profitable strategy just to pander to an increasingly diminishing segment of the consumer market, ie. those wanting small-profit margin, consumer mid-towers? (Besides, if I want something to tinker with, I'd just buy a PC, which I may well do one day).
What we've seen in the PC market for the past few years is continuously increasing sales in powerful PC laptops, not just for their portability, but to be used as desktop-replacements. This is because today's average consumer rarely bothers to upgrade anything on their computer, demands ever less clutter & powerful technology is relatively affordable (as opposed to the $2,000+/£1,000+ you'd have to pay back in the 1990s if you wanted a powerful PC). Hence we're even seeing more clutter-free, Mini PCs coming out with powerful components to satisfy even avid gamers.
Apple's strategy will never appeal to all, but making a mid-tower Mac in today's market trends would be sheer folly.
One thing I read over and over, "Most people never upgrade anything on their computer". I am wondering how any of those nay-sayers compile that data. When one cannot even determine the level of sales of the Mini, how can anyone know who upgrades or repairs their own computer or wants to.
I don't think it is that simple. Don't just think of the Mac as a product, think of it as a PLATFORM. A lower-priced, lower-power, modular, headless mac (i.e., mini) fills the "other" category of desktop market needs besides creative professionals (Mac Pro) and general consumers (iMac). There are innumerable niches not served by the existing desktop strategy. For example:
* Installations, displays, retail settings where low-power, small form factor, and non-attached monitor is important
* Laboratories and other specialized environments where ergonomics require non-attached monitors (think Ergotron arm)
* Home music studios where Mac Pro is too big and noisy but iMac doesn't work ergonomically
* Home theater
* Home server
* "Green" consumers
...and probably dozens more that I can't think of
In fact, the fact that I can't think of them speaks to the need for the mini. It is a very flexible little machine and fills the cracks in the existing product lineup.
If the Mac is to make it to the next level as a PLATFORM, it has to fill a wide diversity of needs. PCs do this because there are so many different manufacturers making different form factors. Apple will never license its OS to clone makers so a flexible, multi-purpose machine like the Mini provides the next best option. Unfortunately, it is unclear what the future holds for the Mini.
- Status