Mac Mini End Of Life?

[spatlese44]

If the Apple TV noise bothers you then you will have issue with the mini. ATV doesn't even have a fan. The only thing you could be hearing is the hard drive.

I started thinking about Intel shrinking things and the associated power drop and wondered what Apple might use as a next processor, so I made up this below. Do current MB's run cooler than the ones a year ago (when I got mine).

Current Mobile Processors

Merom, 65 nm, standard voltage

Core 2 Duo T5200 1600 MHz Oct-2006 34 W
Core 2 Duo T5500 1667 MHz 28-Aug-2006 34 W
Core 2 Duo T5600 1833 MHz 28-Aug-2006 34 W <--- current Mini
Core 2 Duo T7200 2000 MHz 28-Aug-2006 34 W <--- current Mini
Core 2 Duo T7300 2000 MHz 09-May-2007 35 W
Core 2 Duo T7400 2166 MHz 28-Aug-2006 34 W
Core 2 Duo T7500 2200 MHz 09-May-2007 35 W
Core 2 Duo T7600 2333 MHz 28-Aug-2006 34 W
Core 2 Duo T7700 2400 MHz 09-May-2007 35 W
Core 2 Duo T7800 2600 MHz 02-Sep-2007 35 W

Merom, 65 nm, low voltage

Core 2 Duo LV L7200 1333 MHz Q1 2007 17 W
Core 2 Duo LV L7300 1400 MHz May 2007 17 W
Core 2 Duo LV L7400 1500 MHz Q1 2007 17 W
Core 2 Duo LV L7500 1600 MHz May 2007 17 W
Core 2 Duo LV L7700 1800 MHz 02-Sep-2007 17 W

Merom-2M, 65 nm, ultra low voltage

Core 2 Duo ULV L7500 1066 MHz 05-Apr-2007 17 W
Core 2 Duo ULV L7600 1200 MHz 05-Apr-2007 17 W
Core 2 Duo ULV L7700 1333 MHz 30-Dec-2007 17 W

Penryn-3M, 45 nm, standard voltage

Core 2 Duo T7350 2000 MHz mid 2008 17 W
Core 2 Duo T8100 2100 MHz 06-Jan-2008 17 W <--- current MB
Core 2 Duo T8300 2400 MHz 06-Jan-2008 17 W <--- current MB

Penryn, 45 nm, standard voltage

Core 2 Duo T9300 2500 MHz 06-Jan-2008 35 W <--- current MBP
Core 2 Duo T9500 2600 MHz 06-Jan-2008 35 W <--- current MBP

Future Mobile Processors

Penryn-3M, 45 nm, medium voltage

Core 2 Duo P8700 2533 MHz Q1 2009 25 W

Core 2 Quad, 45 nm, standard voltage (expected initial cost $800)

Core 2 Quad Q9100 2266 MHz Q4 2008 35 W

Nehalem, 32 nm, ??? voltage (power optimized)

Core 2 Quad Q9100 ???? MHz Q3 2009 35 W first mobile Nehalem
(future MBP)

 

[Eric S.]

If a $1299-1499 Mac Mini Tower would raise Apple's annual sales by tens of millions of units as their proponents claim - effectively doubling or even tripling Apple's annual sales - then why have they not done so?

I'll tell you why. Because Apple's margins wouldn't let them sell it for that cheap. It would be more like $1799 to $1999 to meet Apple's margin requirements and then we'd really see wailing and gnashing of teeth.

I'd still pay $1799 to $1999 for one if the CPU was truly upgradeable and the PCI slots offered the ability to switch to new I/O technologies as they became available. The point would be to get a system that would be usable for six to eight years, like my Power Mac G4 has been.

 

[snberk103]

We are not going to see a mid-range tower because....

of two reasons.

1) User swappable parts. It becomes very difficult to design and support an OS that works with the nearly infinite combinations of parts that users will want to put into a mid-range tower. It is amazing that MS and Linux manage to do it as well as they do, though they are far from perfect. Thats why MS and Linux can't use "It just works" (aside from the TM issue).

Yes Apple could dictate that only a limited number of Apple certified parts be used, but then that sort of defeats the purpose of having user swappable parts in the first place. Many people will add the $35 HD, despite it not being "certified", and then complain to everybody how crappy Macs are when they discover data corruption.

2) A mid-range tower competes directly with - well - practically everyone. Quite honestly, how many people are going to pay any kind of a premium price for something Apple makes that they can get cheaper (perhaps much cheaper because of shoddy design work) from anyone else. For the most part, people who buy iMacs and Minis pay the premium because of their respective form-factors. These form-factors don't really compete with much else. Yes, I know that there are other AIOs and Minis - but they don't get promoted much, nor are they as easy to find as Apple's offerings.

Economics 101: The vast majority of people base their purchase decisions based solely on price. Thats why they fly on discount airlines, and then complain about the lack of service. Thats why they shop at Walmart, and then complain that "things aren't made to last like they used to". Apple does not compete on price. Thats why we have a superior product from them. The only way to sell a mid-range tower that competes with everything else out there is to compete on price. I don't want Apple to start cutting corners that why.

There, I've said it....

 

[Eric S.]

There, I've said it....

I agree with you.

I just don't have to like it.

 

[chillywilly]

Just to clarify, when I run handbrake and the CPU is pegged at 100%, I'm not going to hear running full blast like it does on my MB? (I'm asking a real question here.) I plan on using handbrake a lot and don't want to hear the fan going all the time. Also, is there a way to throttle the performance of the CPU to prevent this? Something in the software, or underclocking perhaps? If not, maybe I do want to build a machine where I can control what kind of fans I'm using.

Maybe some people wouldn't mind a little noise from their Mini. Are they quieter than a MB? Whatever I get is going into a back room, so it's not that critical, but it sort of is. I have good ears and often have nothing in the background making noise. I regularly put my Apple TV to sleep because I don't like the small amount of noise it makes.

My G4 mini is just as "noisy" as my MacBook Pro 15" 2.0 Ghz.

The Core2Duo 2.0Ghz Mac mini would work well with Handbrake, basing that on similar experiences I've had with that program on my MBP.

 

[MinorBidoh]

There, I've said it....

legendary thinking, that would go down in my top 10 most nod-able quotes. Macrumors, I love how you can help life make sense.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

Things have gotten worse because:

a) The mac pro uses server-class processors which require expensive server-class RAM, whereas the G4/G5s pared up more to AMD's desktop-class offerings
b) The pmG5/mac pro is a little bigger and a lot heavier than the powermac g3/g4s were
c) The imac has drifted from being a clever return to the all-in-one design to more of a lifestyle computer as its dimensions have gotten closer to those of an LCD tv. Accordingly, compromises have been made, ie glossy screens make dvds look better, only mobile variants on processors can be accommodated, thinner enclosures limit gfx card options even on mobile variants
d) The shift to intel processors has meant that integrated gfx dominates the consumer product lines, which puts off a whole host of switchers who aren't used to being told that dedicated VRAM is a pro option; and so the gap between the current mini and MP is a lot wider than it was before the switch

E) The mini is over a year old with the same price and hardware.
$799.00 for a DVDRW 2.0ghz cpu and only 1gb of ram - on board video take.

 

[jodelli]

of two reasons.

I don't want Apple to start cutting corners that's why.

There, I've said it....

They already are cutting corners... on hardware.

The indisputable advantage is the software. OS X is the most elegant operating system going in the personal computer world IMHO, at least that I've used. That's going back to CP/M, and includes several flavors of ix und ux.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

of two reasons.

1) User swappable parts. It becomes very difficult to design and support an OS that works with the nearly infinite combinations of parts that users will want to put into a mid-range tower. It is amazing that MS and Linux manage to do it as well as they do, though they are far from perfect. Thats why MS and Linux can't use "It just works" (aside from the TM issue).

Yes Apple could dictate that only a limited number of Apple certified parts be used, but then that sort of defeats the purpose of having user swappable parts in the first place. Many people will add the $35 HD, despite it not being "certified", and then complain to everybody how crappy Macs are when they discover data corruption.

2) A mid-range tower competes directly with - well - practically everyone. Quite honestly, how many people are going to pay any kind of a premium price for something Apple makes that they can get cheaper (perhaps much cheaper because of shoddy design work) from anyone else. For the most part, people who buy iMacs and Minis pay the premium because of their respective form-factors. These form-factors don't really compete with much else. Yes, I know that there are other AIOs and Minis - but they don't get promoted much, nor are they as easy to find as Apple's offerings.

Economics 101: The vast majority of people base their purchase decisions based solely on price. Thats why they fly on discount airlines, and then complain about the lack of service. Thats why they shop at Walmart, and then complain that "things aren't made to last like they used to". Apple does not compete on price. Thats why we have a superior product from them. The only way to sell a mid-range tower that competes with everything else out there is to compete on price. I don't want Apple to start cutting corners that why.

There, I've said it....

you don't need certified HD's, maybe ram but as long you stay way from the low cost POS ram then you should better ok.

As for video cards you only have ATI and NVIDIA to deal with and cards all have common drivers.

 

[Vanilla Thunder]

They already are cutting corners... on hardware.

Exactly!!!

 

[snberk103]

The indisputable advantage is the software. OS X is the most elegant operating system going in the personal computer world IMHO, at least that I've used. That's going back to CP/M, and includes several flavors of ix und ux.

I used IBM's OS/2 for many years. There are some things that OS/2 did that are mind boggling. I have waited 3 years now to start comparing so that I could give Apple's OS X a fair trial. And, overall, for maturity, ease of use, elegance, and productivity OS X wins. It took me no time at all to transition over. I just can't get the hang of Windows.... I try when I have to - it makes no sense to me.

OS/2 was entirely an Objected Oriented OS (in theory. Also Unix based,in concept). Everything was an "object" and they had properties. For example... If you had set your printer to default to print in colour (or high resolution), you could drag/copy it's icon, then change a property to have it default to greyscale (or draft resolution) and you would now have two icons with different paper properties and different names. To print a document - any document - you could drag/drop its icon onto the printer icon of your choice. Depending on which icon, you would get either colour/high resolution or greyscale/draft resolution. The different printer names would appear in the printer setting in the application. You could have as many different printers icons as you liked. You could designate any one as a "template". Then all you needed to do is to drag it, and a copy was made. Any object could be made a template (documents, palettes, etc). A template could not be edited by the application, so it was safe from accidental changes.

Or, the thing I miss most - Workspaces. It looks like an ordinary folder on your desktop. You drag/drop all the program and document icon aliases you need for a project into the Workspace Folder. Work on the project with whatever applications and/or documents open you need. Close the Workspace Folder and all the applications and documents in that folder also close. Open the Workspace Folder, and all the applications and documents that were open when you closed the folder will open again, where you left off. Sort of like having Spaces in a folder.... except that you could have an application present and open in multiple Workspaces. Very elegant.

I could go on. Colour palettes that you could drag a colour from to any GUI document part, or GUI element (at least in theory). ie, you could drag any colour off the palette to the title bar, or scroll bar, or icon text, or or or to change it's colour. And certainly there are some overlaps since IBM and Apple initially collaborated on the concept of Object Oriented OSes. But IBM took it much further (though Apple actually made it work). If I had the money I would pay a developer to create a Workspace folder for OS X. It would be an astoundingly productive feature. For me at least.

I'm tired an babbling.... I need to go to bed. Or watch the Olympics.

good night everyone.

 

[donb123]

I started thinking about Intel shrinking things and the associated power drop and wondered what Apple might use as a next processor, so I made up this below. Do current MB's run cooler than the ones a year ago (when I got mine).

Yes - Penryn based Macbooks run cooler and consequently have much less fan noise. However - if you hate fan noise like me - then its still too loud.

If Apple made a MB Pro that was as quiet as my Dell Latitude, I'd buy two immediately. Till then however, I just can't justify paying a premium for a notebook that sounds like a vacuum cleaner when you're doing any kind of real work on it.

And just to stay on topic - my Mini is pretty quiet with the internal fan rarely exceeding 1500 RPM according to iStat.

 

[Joe-Hamburg]

"39% performance gain ..."

... or somehow like this Apple's Mac Mini web page trries to attract potential customers. After one year do not seeing any upgrade this statement has some ironic impact.

 

[CWallace]

The mini is over a year old with the same price and hardware.

$799.00 for a DVDRW 2.0ghz cpu and only 1gb of ram - on board video take.

The fact that the Mac Mini "sucks so bad" might be it's own worse enemy at driving an update.

If Apple is sitting on a ton of stock, they have no incentive to update it because they'll just take a bath on having to clear out the stock they have at significant discount ($200+ off).

Anyone know of a large philanthropic organization that uses OS X and could use some new entry-level machines? That way, Apple could donate their current Mini stock and take a tax write-off.

 

[Eric S.]

The fact that the Mac Mini "sucks so bad" might be it's own worse enemy at driving an update.

If Apple is sitting on a ton of stock, they have no incentive to update it because they'll just take a bath on having to clear out the stock they have at significant discount ($200+ off).

Anyone know of a large philanthropic organization that uses OS X and could use some new entry-level machines? That way, Apple could donate their current Mini stock and take a tax write-off.

I doubt that Apple has a ton of stock of any of their products. Accumulating a large inventory is not an efficient business practice. If Apple is selling them, they must still be making them.

 

[Eidorian]

Keep in mind the low stock rumor as well.

 

[mandoman]

The fact that the Mac Mini "sucks so bad" might be it's own worse enemy at driving an update.

If Apple is sitting on a ton of stock, they have no incentive to update it because they'll just take a bath on having to clear out the stock they have at significant discount ($200+ off).

Anyone know of a large philanthropic organization that uses OS X and could use some new entry-level machines? That way, Apple could donate their current Mini stock and take a tax write-off.

The current mini is so over priced, even knocking $200 off the price apple would still make a profit...

 

[ivnj]

I have a mini core duo. It may be a little expensive but it does what I need to do. Not to bad for 600 sinse I don't game or video edit. No other unitts from apple are under 600 unless the new mac fusion rumor is true. 300 will be awesome for a computer from apple.

 

[MacTraveller]

i think appel will killz the minimac.

n then relunch it a later date. and bundles it wit mobileme softwear.

and then new product wil b call "mini-me"

 

[spatlese44]

Yes - Penryn based Macbooks run cooler and consequently have much less fan noise. However - if you hate fan noise like me - then its still too loud.

If Apple made a MB Pro that was as quiet as my Dell Latitude, I'd buy two immediately. Till then however, I just can't justify paying a premium for a notebook that sounds like a vacuum cleaner when you're doing any kind of real work on it.

And just to stay on topic - my Mini is pretty quiet with the internal fan rarely exceeding 1500 RPM according to iStat.

Nice to hear it's a little quieter. I guess the point of my list was that an updated mini is unlikely to have anything but the current MB lineup of processors. My list was a little incomplete, but I tried to show the list of likely options. (no quad core for a while, extreme version, etc.)

 

[MacTraveller]

apple should discontinue mac mini and apple tv. and in fact just about any apple product that gets more than 75 negative votes on macrumors.com

thats way too much hate for a single product, and an embarassment to the apple brand

 

[Steve NoJobs]

Will they ever update?

I have a Mini ppc 1.33 ghz. I've been waiting for a mini update forever. I even bought my friends old dell dimension 2400 for $100 bucks, and tried to turn it into a hackintosh. I spent 24 hours trying to do it with no luck. Then I realized maybe I should just buy one of the current minis in order to save time and hassle. It's not that easy getting osx to install on non apple hardware. believe me i tried just about everything... iatkos, kalyway, ToH, etc... apple is lame

 

[Wotan31]

I have a Mini ppc 1.33 ghz. I've been waiting for a mini update forever. I even bought my friends old dell dimension 2400 for $100 bucks, and tried to turn it into a hackintosh. I spent 24 hours trying to do it with no luck. Then I realized maybe I should just buy one of the current minis in order to save time and hassle. It's not that easy getting osx to install on non apple hardware. believe me i tried just about everything... iatkos, kalyway, ToH, etc... apple is lame

An illegal, unsupported hack didn't work for you, and therefore Apple is lame? LOL I can has teh logic?

Plenty of lame things that Apple does, but this ain't one of them.

 

[Yvan256]

apple should discontinue mac mini and apple tv. and in fact just about any apple product that gets more than 75 negative votes on macrumors.com

thats way too much hate for a single product, and an embarassment to the apple brand

You have no idea how many people use and like their Mac minis, do you?

Just because you think something is not popular doesn't mean it's not selling well. We've never seen any sales numbers, all we hear is rumors about the Mac mini not selling well.

I'd bet that the Mac Pro sells even less than the Mac mini. Should Apple discontinue it as well?

 

[maccompaq]

apple should discontinue mac mini and apple tv. and in fact just about any apple product that gets more than 75 negative votes on macrumors.com

thats way too much hate for a single product, and an embarassment to the apple brand

The Mini is much faster than people give it credit for. It runs Photoshop just fine with 2GB RAM, streams HD TV full screen with no problems, and is very quiet. Now that the hardware is outdated, the price could be lowered by $100 or so. With the new Intel offerings, I suspect that Apple will update the Mini within 3 months. They might even make 2GB RAM standard. Wouldn't that be nice?