Mac Mini End Of Life?

[Yvan256]

Show me a computer that has a dual core processor with optical audio (up to 7.1 DD or DTS) that is virtually silent and with such a tiny footprint, then we'll see who likes what. The Mini is in a class by itself.

AOpen miniPC (exactly the same size) and Dell Studio Hybrid (7.5 x 7.5 x 3.75" once you remove the outer shell, so not much bigger than the Mac mini). But the Studio Hybrid does have a Blu-Ray option and an HDMI port in addition to DVI.

The Mac mini hasn't been in a class by itself for a long time. And now with those EEEBox and similar very low-cost 'net computers, the Mac mini is also no longer the smallest consumer desktop computer either (specs aside).

Steve seems to love being able to say "we have the thinnest notebook", "we have the thinnest all-in-one desktop computer"... but competitors have gone and beat the Mac mini so many times, perhaps Apple has had to scrap their "Mac nano" designs a few times already, which would explain the lack of updates. Maybe they were waiting for a new part to become available (such as the 1.6 GHz dual core Intel Atom 330 perhaps, with some people saying that it makes a great low-cost hackintosh with the Intel D945GCLF2 mini-ITX motherboard).

I'm not saying that I want a very thin, Atom 330-powered Mac nano, but seeing the MacBook Air and the latest updates to the iMac, it's a safe bet that Apple will probably replace the Mac mini with a very tiny, very thin Mac nano. Maybe even with the footprint of the MacBook Air drive, so they can even exclude the optical drive from the Mac nano to make it even cheaper and thinner. The EEEBox and similar internet boxes also don't have optical drives and Apple has its "airdrive" thing that it made for the MacBook Air. People who still want an optical drive can buy the MacBook Air superdrive as a 99$ option and stack it on top of their Mac nano.

Me, I'd rather have a bigger Mac mini (same size as Time Capsule, taller wouldn't be a problem) with a 3.5" drive and a decent discrete GPU.

 

[shatalin]

So just a mac mini with upgradable graphics, HDD etc?

I think the mini is fine as it is, although is long overdue for an upgrade.
Not everybody needs great power, graphics and upgradability, many just want a small, quiet, cheap and reliable machine that runs OSX.

Actually, I'm saying, that I'm the one who wants some power. Not a power of a mac pro though, but of an imac in a separate small enough box.

Let's imagine a low-end mini for $499 (the same price when it was first introduced), an iMac for $1199 and a headless mid-range desktop with a power of an imac for $899.

Well, maybe I'm just a nerd, who needs to stand up on his own tongue and buy himself an iMac.

 

[Yvan256]

Actually, I'm saying, that I'm the one who wants some power. Not a power of a mac pro though, but of an imac in a separate small enough box.

Let's imagine a low-end mini for $499 (the same price when it was first introduced), an iMac for $1199 and a headless mid-range desktop with a power of an imac for $899.

Well, maybe I'm just a nerd, who needs to stand up on his own tongue and buy himself an iMac.

Just find an iMac with a broken LCD on eBay, make your own case and voilà, headless-iMac-in-a-box Mac mini.

 

[Cave Man]

not any more they are all doing it now dell, asus etc

Not anymore. You have Dell and Asus that are starting to follow the trend of the mini. The mini is also way overpriced for what you get with it. For example:

AOpen miniPC (exactly the same size) and Dell Studio Hybrid (7.5 x 7.5 x 3.75" once you remove the outer shell, so not much bigger than the Mac mini). But the Studio Hybrid does have a Blu-Ray option and an HDMI port in addition to DVI.

I understand all that. But the scuttlebutt on the AOpen is that it's noisy, and if you look at the Studio and AOpen (too, I believe), they use 2 mb cache chips (compared to the Mini's 4 mb). By the time you get roughly equal processor performance out of them, the Dell is almost $1,000.

 

[JG271]

Actually, I'm saying, that I'm the one who wants some power. Not a power of a mac pro though, but of an imac in a separate small enough box.

Let's imagine a low-end mini for $499 (the same price when it was first introduced), an iMac for $1199 and a headless mid-range desktop with a power of an imac for $899.

Yeah, your not alone in wanting one. The mac mini was launched as a first time mac, and has since branched out to other areas.

It'll never happen though, apple don't like that sort of thing...

 

[marbles]

I'm getting frustrated now so I'll have a little rant if I may

why oh why can't these folk over at Cupertino just pull there heads from the proverbial *** and release the headless mac already ??

Oh , and before any one else chimes in saying that Apple will have done research and found that it will cannibalize sales of iMac /MacPro ..BULL !!!..

Every , not one , every forum I have been on there are many many people are wanting , nay , needing a more powerful headless Mac ......without the need to drop Macpro money or buy a monitor with there PC !!!!!!!!

WAKE UP APPLE !!

 

[bankshot]

why oh why can't these folk over at Cupertino just pull there heads from the proverbial *** and release the headless mac already ??

My guess is because even without an updated headless consumer Mac, they're already raking in money faster than they can count it. Apple is making insane profits right now, so where's the incentive to enter a market segment with traditionally razor-thin profit margins?

I don't like it any more than anyone else here, but that's the reality. I've been waiting for an updated Mac mini forever, but I finally caved last week and ordered a refurb 1.83, even knowing there's a slight chance of updates next month. My only regret is not doing it months ago. This machine is quiet, small, powerful, and will replace two ancient, noisy, electricity-guzzling beasts (a Power Mac G4/733 and a FreeBSD PC). I'm happy.

 

[iDave]

why oh why can't these folk over at Cupertino just pull there heads from the proverbial *** and release the headless mac already ??

Because Steve Jobs thinks the glossy iMac is so cool, nobody could possibly want anything else on their desktop. Just guessing.

 

[zombitronic]

horrible and stupid

Brutal. Look, that was a picture of the MacBook Air SuperDrive. I'm just saying from a design point of view, it looks nice. Thin. Streamlined. Look at the Apple TV. I'd post a picture but someone may take it out of context and post that it's horrible and stupid. Anyway, it's thin. Streamlined. It's been hacked to run OS X, so one could argue that it is a Mac. The main thing it's missing (IMO) is an optical drive. With the height of the Apple TV standing at 1.1 inches, I wouldn't expect the addition of an optical drive to add another 0.9 inches, bringing it to 2 inches, the current height of the Mini.

As one who intends only to use a mini as an HTPC, I'd like to see HDMI, a big hard drive and 802.11n in the new mini and I'd probably buy one.

Many of us on this thread view the Apple TV as the Mac Mini's handicapped little brother. What I'm hoping for in a new Mini is a true HTPC. Yes it needs the Apple TV's HDMI and 802.11n and the Mini's graphics processor and optical drive, (I'd pay extra for Blu-ray.) The lack of a combination of these features in a single device is what's stopping many of us from buying either.

With my set up, however, the hard drive size is a moot point. If the Mini is going to be used purely as an HTPC and not your main desktop, it doesn't need a bigger hard drive, provided you already have a machine running as your media "server." (Note: I do not use OS X Server.) With my set up, the Mini would act as a node, in a similar way that the Apple TV can act as a node and acquire streaming media from the local network. Just set up iTunes on the Mini to use the iTunes Music folder from your main desktop machine. iTunes, (or Front Row,) starts on the Mini using the Library from your "server." Also, any changes or additions to the Library are reflected on all machines since it literally is the same Library. Even the current 80GB hard drive in the Mini would be enough for any background applications you'd like to install.

 

[iDave]

With my set up, however, the hard drive size is a moot point. If the Mini is going to be used purely as an HTPC and not your main desktop, it doesn't need a bigger hard drive, provided you already have a machine running as your media "server." (Note: I do not use OS X Server.) With my set up, the Mini would act as a node, in a similar way that the Apple TV can act as a node and acquire streaming media from the local network. Just set up iTunes on the Mini to use the iTunes Music folder from your main desktop machine. iTunes, (or Front Row,) starts on the Mini using the Library from your "server." Also, any changes or additions to the Library are reflected on all machines since it literally is the same Library. Even the current 80GB hard drive in the Mini would be enough for any background applications you'd like to install.

That's essentially what I'm already doing. However, I find that playing TV shows and movies across my gig ethernet network isn't quite as good as playing them from the mini's internal drive. Startup is slower; fast reverse and fast forward aren't as smooth. And I think I'd rather have all video on the machine which will play it, rather than using space on my desktop Mac to store it. (Some prefer to keep everything one place, but then backups are enormous.) I wish iTunes would somehow separate video and audio into separate libraries, but that's another subject.

 

[Yvan256]

Apple Media Server?

Given the fact that TV shows and movies (especially HD TV shows and movies) take a lot more space than music, I'm wondering why we still haven't seen something like a dedicated Apple Media Server from Apple. Surely I'm not the only person who has multiple external hard drives.

Think of it as a home version of the Xserve, but more oriented toward capacity then processing power, with a capacity of four or eight hard drives. And since it's a media server, it should go in your living room, hence replacing the role of the TV at the same time.

And with a powerful enough CPU and GPU, it could also replace the current Mac mini (even though I've always been with the "keep the TV and Mac mini separated" crowd).

 

[dwl017]

Given the fact that TV shows and movies (especially HD TV shows and movies) take a lot more space than music, I'm wondering why we still haven't seen something like a dedicated Apple Media Server from Apple. Surely I'm not the only person who has multiple external hard drives.

Think of it as a home version of the Xserve, but more oriented toward capacity then processing power, with a capacity of four or eight hard drives. And since it's a media server, it should go in your living room, hence replacing the role of the TV at the same time.

And with a powerful enough CPU and GPU, it could also replace the current Mac mini (even though I've always been with the "keep the TV and Mac mini separated" crowd).

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/windowshomeserver/default.mspx

 

[dwl017]

Given the fact that TV shows and movies (especially HD TV shows and movies) take a lot more space than music, I'm wondering why we still haven't seen something like a dedicated Apple Media Server from Apple. Surely I'm not the only person who has multiple external hard drives.

Think of it as a home version of the Xserve, but more oriented toward capacity then processing power, with a capacity of four or eight hard drives. And since it's a media server, it should go in your living room, hence replacing the role of the TV at the same time.

And with a powerful enough CPU and GPU, it could also replace the current Mac mini (even though I've always been with the "keep the TV and Mac mini separated" crowd).

I don't think Apple can see past the stupid iPhone these days it seems to be all they care about anymore. People can yell and roll there eyes at Windows based products all they want but at least they are spending time developing new PC's not cell phones.

By the way I am huge fan and owner of both platforms, I am also the proud new owner of a top of line Dell Studio Hybird which is a sweet little box. I also have a CD2 Mini that I haven't used since my new Dell arrived I'm sure the novelty will wear off but it sure is sweet to have something new and not just a speed bumped machine.

 

[zombitronic]

Given the fact that TV shows and movies (especially HD TV shows and movies) take a lot more space than music, I'm wondering why we still haven't seen something like a dedicated Apple Media Server from Apple. Surely I'm not the only person who has multiple external hard drives.

Think of it as a home version of the Xserve, but more oriented toward capacity then processing power, with a capacity of four or eight hard drives. And since it's a media server, it should go in your living room, hence replacing the role of the TV at the same time.

How about something to complement Apple TV, or your entire network, for that matter? Time Capsule, but not just for backups. A complete, wireless, central data storage device that's accessible from anywhere on your network, at blazing speeds, of course. I imagine they'd look something like this...

I'd get one if they were BYOHD. Otherwise, it might set you back about $3,999.00 for the 8TB one.

 

[t0mat0]

How about something to complement Apple TV, or your entire network, for that matter? Time Capsule, but not just for backups. A complete, wireless, central data storage device that's accessible from anywhere on your network, at blazing speeds, of course. I imagine they'd look something like this...

I'd get one if they were BYOHD. Otherwise, it might set you back about $3,999.00 for the 8TB one.

SO basically a Drobo, but with decent RAID config (i.e. not proprietary way of putting on your data to those HDs), with a ATV, Airport Extreme , Time capsule options built in.

 

[yrsonicdeath]

How about something to complement Apple TV, or your entire network, for that matter? Time Capsule, but not just for backups. A complete, wireless, central data storage device that's accessible from anywhere on your network, at blazing speeds, of course. I imagine they'd look something like this...

I'd get one if they were BYOHD. Otherwise, it might set you back about $3,999.00 for the 8TB one.

While I would probably buy one of these I don't see it as very likely at this point, although you never know. The point someone made about HD content is a good one.

 

[Cave Man]

How about something to complement Apple TV, or your entire network, for that matter? Time Capsule, but not just for backups. A complete, wireless, central data storage device that's accessible from anywhere on your network, at blazing speeds, of course. I imagine they'd look something like this...

Talk about butt-ugly.

 

[mjteix]

I understand all that. But the scuttlebutt on the AOpen is that it's noisy, and if you look at the Studio and AOpen (too, I believe), they use 2 mb cache chips (compared to the Mini's 4 mb). By the time you get roughly equal processor performance out of them, the Dell is almost $1,000.

That's not completly true, the 1.83GHz cpus on the low-end Mac mini only has 2MB of cache too, while the low-end Dell models have low-end cpus, you can get a technically better Dell Studio hybrid for less than the price of the "better" Mac mini:
$764
SYSTEM COLOR Slate edit
PROCESSOR Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T8100 (2.1GHz/800Mhz FSB/3MB cache) edit
OPERATING SYSTEM Genuine Windows Vista® Home Basic Service Pack 1 edit
MONITOR No Monitor (System includes DVI and HDMI ports. VGA is not supported) edit
MEMORY 2GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 at 667MHz (2 DIMM) edit
HARD DRIVE 160GB SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM) edit
OPTICAL DRIVE Slot Load CD / DVD Burner (Dual Layer DVD+/-RW Drive) edit
VIDEO CARD Intel® Integrated Graphics Media Accelerator X3100 edit
SOUND Integrated Stereo Audio with 5.1ch digital output (S/P DIF) edit
KEYBOARD & MOUSE Dell USB Multimedia Keyboard & Optical Mouse edit
WIRELESS NETWORKING Built-in Dell 1505 Wireless-N Networking edit
EXTERNAL MODEM No Modem Included edit

A 2.0GHz Mac mini with 2GB of RAM and a 160GB HDD costs $949 (with GMA950 graphics).

Anyway, the point is not to try to compare the Mac mini to other PC, there will still be differences here and there. IMO, the problem is that the Mac mini lags versus the other Apple computers (the MacBook and the iMac). Especially when the MacBook will be updated to Montevina-based components, the gap will be huge. I understand that the Mac mini gets less love than the other sales/profit makers in Apple line-up, but I believe that annual updates should be done (instead of 2 updates/year for the MB/MBP/iMac), and they should always use the latest architecture.

MB/MBP/iMac updates twice a year, architecture + speedbump
- Example: Q4 2008 Montevina, Q2 2009 speedbump, Q4 2009 mobile Nehalem, Q2 2010 speedbump, ...
MBA/Mac Pro/mini updates once a year, architecture
- Examples:
MBA/Mac mini: Q4 2008 Montevina, Q4 2009 mobile Nehalem, ...
Mac Pro: Q1 2009 Xeon Nehalem, Q1 2010 Xeon Westmere (32nm), ...

 

[Cave Man]

That's a recent revision then, because the t8100 was not an option when I first looked at the studio a few months ago. Now, if you can only make a hackintosh out of it...

 

[mjteix]

That's a recent revision then, because the t8100 was not an option when I first looked at the studio a few months ago. Now, if you can only make a hackintosh out of it...

Dell store for the Studio hybrid

For just $1214 you can get the above config with a Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T9500 (2.6GHz/800Mhz FSB/6MB cache)

Given that the chipset is Santa Rosa, I would believe it would be a quite simple hack... But I know nothing about hackintoshes

 

[Cave Man]

OK, there are no Dell Studios in geekbench database, so I just averaged the most recent 20 scores on Windows computers for the T8100:

Win T8100 (2.1 ghz) average = 2350
Mac Mini T7200 (2 ghz) average = 2591

Even with a slower processor and slower bus, the Mini is a better machine, at geekbench at least. Still, it would be nice to get a Mini with better specs.

Given that the chipset is Santa Rosa, I would believe it would be a quite simple hack... But I know nothing about hackintoshes

The problem is that x3100 video. That still gives hackintosh problems.

 

[iknowyourider]

EOL? I hope not. I love my Mini and would love to see an update. EOL? Something has to give , soon. Either eol or update. Update Oct 14 with MB? Maybe.

Cave Man, I finally got a 42" plasma 9 days ago and connected Mini a few days ago. I have a Apple BT Mouse & KB. Right now the hdd is about 80% full of great movies, music and concert video. I am having fun! Mick

 

[penguy]

That's not completly true, the 1.83GHz cpus on the low-end Mac mini only has 2MB of cache too, while the low-end Dell models have low-end cpus, you can get a technically better Dell Studio hybrid for less than the price of the "better" Mac mini:
$764
SYSTEM COLOR Slate edit
PROCESSOR Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T8100 (2.1GHz/800Mhz FSB/3MB cache) edit
OPERATING SYSTEM Genuine Windows Vista® Home Basic Service Pack 1 edit
MONITOR No Monitor (System includes DVI and HDMI ports. VGA is not supported) edit
MEMORY 2GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 at 667MHz (2 DIMM) edit
HARD DRIVE 160GB SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM) edit
OPTICAL DRIVE Slot Load CD / DVD Burner (Dual Layer DVD+/-RW Drive) edit
VIDEO CARD Intel® Integrated Graphics Media Accelerator X3100 edit
SOUND Integrated Stereo Audio with 5.1ch digital output (S/P DIF) edit
KEYBOARD & MOUSE Dell USB Multimedia Keyboard & Optical Mouse edit
WIRELESS NETWORKING Built-in Dell 1505 Wireless-N Networking edit
EXTERNAL MODEM No Modem Included edit

A 2.0GHz Mac mini with 2GB of RAM and a 160GB HDD costs $949 (with GMA950 graphics).

Anyway, the point is not to try to compare the Mac mini to other PC, there will still be differences here and there. IMO, the problem is that the Mac mini lags versus the other Apple computers (the MacBook and the iMac). Especially when the MacBook will be updated to Montevina-based components, the gap will be huge. I understand that the Mac mini gets less love than the other sales/profit makers in Apple line-up, but I believe that annual updates should be done (instead of 2 updates/year for the MB/MBP/iMac), and they should always use the latest architecture.

MB/MBP/iMac updates twice a year, architecture + speedbump
- Example: Q4 2008 Montevina, Q2 2009 speedbump, Q4 2009 mobile Nehalem, Q2 2010 speedbump, ...
MBA/Mac Pro/mini updates once a year, architecture
- Examples:
MBA/Mac mini: Q4 2008 Montevina, Q4 2009 mobile Nehalem, ...
Mac Pro: Q1 2009 Xeon Nehalem, Q1 2010 Xeon Westmere (32nm), ...

I priced the same unit and it came up $931...did you apply discounts?

 

[Joe The Dragon]

That's not completly true, the 1.83GHz cpus on the low-end Mac mini only has 2MB of cache too, while the low-end Dell models have low-end cpus, you can get a technically better Dell Studio hybrid for less than the price of the "better" Mac mini:
$764
SYSTEM COLOR Slate edit
PROCESSOR Intel® Core™ 2 Duo T8100 (2.1GHz/800Mhz FSB/3MB cache) edit
OPERATING SYSTEM Genuine Windows Vista® Home Basic Service Pack 1 edit
MONITOR No Monitor (System includes DVI and HDMI ports. VGA is not supported) edit
MEMORY 2GB Shared Dual Channel DDR2 at 667MHz (2 DIMM) edit
HARD DRIVE 160GB SATA Hard Drive (5400RPM) edit
OPTICAL DRIVE Slot Load CD / DVD Burner (Dual Layer DVD+/-RW Drive) edit
VIDEO CARD Intel® Integrated Graphics Media Accelerator X3100 edit
SOUND Integrated Stereo Audio with 5.1ch digital output (S/P DIF) edit
KEYBOARD & MOUSE Dell USB Multimedia Keyboard & Optical Mouse edit
WIRELESS NETWORKING Built-in Dell 1505 Wireless-N Networking edit
EXTERNAL MODEM No Modem Included edit

A 2.0GHz Mac mini with 2GB of RAM and a 160GB HDD costs $949 (with GMA950 graphics).

Anyway, the point is not to try to compare the Mac mini to other PC, there will still be differences here and there. IMO, the problem is that the Mac mini lags versus the other Apple computers (the MacBook and the iMac). Especially when the MacBook will be updated to Montevina-based components, the gap will be huge. I understand that the Mac mini gets less love than the other sales/profit makers in Apple line-up, but I believe that annual updates should be done (instead of 2 updates/year for the MB/MBP/iMac), and they should always use the latest architecture.

MB/MBP/iMac updates twice a year, architecture + speedbump
- Example: Q4 2008 Montevina, Q2 2009 speedbump, Q4 2009 mobile Nehalem, Q2 2010 speedbump, ...
MBA/Mac Pro/mini updates once a year, architecture
- Examples:
MBA/Mac mini: Q4 2008 Montevina, Q4 2009 mobile Nehalem, ...
Mac Pro: Q1 2009 Xeon Nehalem, Q1 2010 Xeon Westmere (32nm), ...

apple needs to move to a desktop cpu and chipset and maybe keep the laptop based mini starting at $500 with a easier to open case.

 

[opeter]

apple needs to move to a desktop cpu and chipset and maybe keep the laptop based mini starting at $500 with a easier to open case.

But i think, it could be laptop component basebased, and aslo i do like it as it is now, since the power consumption is so pocket-friendly (at least for me).

Anyway, what i want to say is, please Apple, update the Mini as follows:

- CPUs from T8xxx series
- RAM fully utilitized 4 GB (or even more), 800 MHz
- the HDD can stay as of 2,5" size, but give us SATA-II 300 support
- DVD-RW in all models
- Intel GMA X3100 or X4500HD

Dont have any other wishes.