Mac Mini Nano hmm

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by Ironduke, Oct 12, 2007.

  1. Ironduke Suspended

    Ironduke

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Location:
    England
    #1
    I hope this rumour doesnt actually happen.

    whats the point?

    like the mini is still to big:rolleyes:

    lets make it smaller and lose afew usb ports, when I show people windows and mac os on my tv they are like wheres the computer?

    I point at the mini and their like thats a computer, I thought it was a mini dvd player or something


    Mac Nano load of bollox

    Steve stop mincing:mad:

    Give us esata fw800 and dedicated gfx in the mini;)
     
  2. Vidd macrumors 6502a

    Vidd

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    #2
    The mini does not "need" dedicated graphics. At the moment it isn't aimed at people who want people who want such a feature, probably because there's more profit to be made on the iMacs.
    I agree that it's small enough already; I'd actually like to see it get bigger to accomodate a 3.5" drive instead of the slow laptop versions it uses now.
     
  3. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #3
    Neither the Mini nor the MacBook need dedicated graphics, nor FW800, correct.

    They are both aimed at entry level people, and the education market.

    But both of them could stand to have an entry level machine below them using less expensive PC parts, less expensive CPU/chipset, a tray loading drive, 3.5" drive in a entry Mini, etc.

    An eMini, eBook, eMac would all be welcome.
     
  4. will792 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2007
    #4
    Many entry level computers are used for games (not the most demanding ones) and 965 graphics just does not cut it. There is a huge gap between mac mini and Mac Pro. I consider iMac to be OK in terms of features and functionality but it uses integrated with display form factor, an option that rules it out for many people, myself included.

    I would love to have "maxi" mac mini with 3.5" HD, and some dedicated graphics chip. A selection of FW800 or eSATA would allow to use external hard drives at similar speed as internal drives.
     
  5. ryannel2003 macrumors 68000

    ryannel2003

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2005
    Location:
    Greenville, NC
    #5
    I find my Mac mini plenty adequate for what I use it for. I saw a mock-up of the so called "Mac nano" and it's pretty pointless to have a computer without an optical drive. Plus I think the thinner it is, the harder it will be to upgrade the computer. The Mac mini is already pretty complicated as it is (i haven't been inside mine yet) but you know that Mac nano has to pretty damn hard to upgrade something simple as RAM or the HD. I think the lusted after Mac tower would be a much better concept and sell better than a small Mac mini. Might not be as beautiful, but much more expandable.
     
  6. Vidd macrumors 6502a

    Vidd

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2006
    #6
    The point is that the Mini is not for this purpose. If people want these features they have to opt for the more expensive iMac if they want OSX.
    That is why people always talk about the "gap" between the all-in-one iMac and mini.

    It suits Apple because the difference between the top mini and bottom iMac are close enough for people just to go ignore the mini completely if they need more power/storage etc.

    The fact is, the mini isn't that weak and the GPU isn't as bad as it's made out. It just is intended for games.
     
  7. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #7
    965? The mini has the 945 chipset. The 965 is better for gaming. Not a whole lot but better.
     
  8. jhkingsr macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Location:
    NC
    #8
    Hmm... I thought all the intel minis used the 950 chipset. At least mine does and the ones in the Apple store do. :)
     
  9. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #9
    The whole chipset in the mini is called the GM945. The GPU (GMA950) resides inside the northbridge chip.

    The GM965 is part of the new Santa Rosa platform. The GPU for it is called the X3100. Confused now? ;)
     
  10. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #10
    That graphics chips costs money, and takes up space -- basically the Mini plus a GPU and screen is the iMac.

    The MacBook plus a GPU is the MacBook Pro.

    No need to add a GPU to either the mini nor MacBook, keeping it off these machines makes them both smaller and cheaper.

    If you look at the iMac, the GPU card and heatpipe is massive...

    http://www.kodawarisan.com/imac_2007_mid/DSC_3847.jpg
    (top card and the heatpipe movie to right)

    Simply adding a decent GPU alone to the Mini without incurring a laptop parts price increase for this feature would make the unit larger. Even a tray loading optical drive would probably increase its thickness by a quarter inch.
     
  11. jhkingsr macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Location:
    NC
    #11
    Good info. Thanks!
     
  12. gregorsamsa macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Location:
    (Metamorphosing near) Staffs, 51st State.
    #12
    I agree. If Apple retires the Mini, it'll surely be because it hasn't sold as well as expected. Making it smaller will fare little better. It'd be much better to release a slightly bigger Mini with improved graphics.

    I really don't think it would cannibalize iMac sales. AFAIC, the new iMacs aren't an option for me because of glossy displays, but a graphically improved Mini certainly would be. A nano? No-no!
     
  13. WannaGoMac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    #13
    What surprises me with the Mac mini is the size of the power supply. WOW! the thing is HUGE!!

    Why is it so large? Laptop power supplies aren't that big...
     
  14. Tara Davis macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2007
    #14
    I own two Core2 Duo Mac minis, and they are AWESOME for what I do with them.

    One runs by HDTV. For most tasks (I don't play any games since getting bored with WoW), it does a better job than my dual G5 tower did.

    The other is rack-mounted into my music studio/stage rig, and runs garage band with a MOTU 828 to take the place of a guitar amp, a bass amp, a vocal pre-amp, a keyboard amp, all of my effects pedals, all of my pre-amp effects, and with a little swapping around of the mics, can even be used for recording. With Wi-Fi and Apple Remote Desktop, it even makes a cable snake redundant, as a sound tech can manipulate everything with a laptop from anywhere in the room!

    I love how small it is, how little power they consume, and how little heat they put out. I consider the graphics card more than adequate.

    I barely ever use the optical drives so stripping a few things off to make them even smaller would also be spiffy, as far as I'm concerned.

    If I wanted to play games, I'd buy a PC/X-Box 360/PS3/Wii. But I don't so I'm not bothering.

    If I wanted a general purpose desktop computer, I'd buy an iMac. But I don't because my MacBook does everything I need for that kind of stuff.

    So Hooray for the mini, as far as I'm concerned. It's a great little unit for dedicated media tasks. ^_^
     
  15. iDave macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2003
    #15
    Call it a mini or a nano or whatever, I believe a small headless Mac will continue to exist, despite the rumors of the mini's demise. It might get a little bigger or it might get a little smaller.

    Apple might make the new mini even harder to upgrade (RAM and hard drive) and call it a nano. I think the original intent was for the mini to be non-upgradeable, until users discovered the putty knife trick. (Most still don't want to do it.)

    I don't think AppleTV and the mini will be merged into one. AppleTV can't be too expensive or it won't sell to its intended audience. Apple isn't going to sell a full-fledged Mac for $299. So, two distinctly different products will remain.
     
  16. kwfl macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2007
    #16
    eSATA is not even in the Mac Pro
    u want it in the mini?! :D
     
  17. Leaver macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Location:
    Uk
    #17
    Don't wanna Hijack the thread but...

    I wanted to here a little more about that music Setup that Tara posted about - sounds like a great way to use a Mini and a Laptop to do live sound - which is what I do and it got me thinking...

    Sorry again if i bothered anyone - I just read on these forums, very rare I post anything so i don't know the etiquette :)

    Cheers - Dan
     
  18. gregorsamsa macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2006
    Location:
    (Metamorphosing near) Staffs, 51st State.
    #18
    Then perhaps Apple should release 2 new Minis, Nano, & another one bigger than the current Mini with discrete graphics.

    Many will agree with your point about gaming, but some people prefer computer-type games & want to play them either natively or via Boot Camp. I know you can't always get what you want, etc., but it's not as if we're asking for all that much. So a Mini with discrete graphics would probably sway me, but as things stand, I'm considering buying a PC (& not just for gaming).

    Re iMacs: most people either love or hate those glossy screens, so they're not an option for all, me included.
     
  19. Jimmdean macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    #19
    You cannot compare a power supply to a power adapter. The mac mini power supply has additional components that are not necessary in a laptop power adapter as they are instead put inside the laptop. It's probably better to just compare it to a normal power supply - which makes it relatively small...
     
  20. gkarris macrumors 604

    gkarris

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2004
    Location:
    "No escape from Reality..."
    #20
    They can switch to an adapter then so that they can use what they already have for the MacBooks.

    If they keep them, they should just use the new IGA as it is supposed to be pretty powerful...

    I think they will merge the :apple:TV and the Mini (as Leopard's Front Row looks like the :apple:TV interface) and go from $299 to $699 depending on the config. (like if you get an internal optical drive, memory, hard disk, etc.).
     
  21. iDave macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2003
    #21
    So you think you'll be able to buy a Macintosh computer for $299 soon? Good luck with that one. Even stripped down, Apple would want to get more than that and I doubt they would offer a Mac stripped of so many features anyway.
     
  22. WannaGoMac macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    #22
    But, it's strange that since the mini is overall the same size as a laptop, uses the same laptop parts, why is this power supply/adapter so huge?
     
  23. SirOmega macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    #23
    $299 mac is not going to happen. Dont get me wrong I'd love one but its just not going to work.

    Here is my breakdown...

    Start with :apple:TV
    -replace Pentium-M chip with dual core C2D-based Celeron (due out in January) +$50
    -add in combo drive (slimline) +$40
    -upgrade HDD from 40GB to 80GB +$30
    -upgrade from 256MB RAM to 1GB (and not solder it to the mobo) +$50

    So you end up going from $300 to $470. Personally I'd expect Apple to price it at $499. Upgrade to the faster processor 1.8Ghz for $100 more. We'd be back to the same price points as before with the G4 Minis.

    The real question is do we see apple make an attempt at putting one w/o a CD/DVD drive out at $399. I dont see it happening, and likewise I dont see how to make the above computer any cheaper.

    Until Silverthorne/Menlow comes out in 1H 2008 and offers better integration in a smaller form factor for (possibly) cheaper, I dont see anything replacing the mini.
     

Share This Page