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 Not Dead Yet?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And a 4200 RPM drive to boot. Shared Video memory that will eat out of that 1GB of ram you have and swapping to a 4200RPM drive is gonna be tough.
Mini is not really a desktop replacement, 600 dollars gets you much more performance.
They need to come out with a single socket desktop solution.
I got around that, sort of.
I boot to an external FW400 7200 rpm HDD, and use the internal 4200 rpm drive as the time machine. If the external dies, I plug in a new one and restore to an hour ago. If the internal one dies, I'm still running, but I've lost my great backup.
I'm sure I missed the prior post, but the Mini has had a 5400 rpm drive for quite some time. But there should be BTO options to include 7200 rpm drives and some of the other features discussed.
As for the change in footprint, it wouldn't surprise me, but there are SO many peripherals which mate the mini, and a fair sized user base likely looking to upgrade (I know I'm not alone), that I think they may stick with the current footprint and go higher if they needed to.
Once you get to 250 gigs, 7200 rpm becomes almost meaningless. I'd take a 320/5400 over a 200/7200 any day.
Minis have shipped with 5400 drives for some time now.
So buy two gigs - or 3.1 gigs.
I'll take my Minis over any of the current iMacs as they offer what I need (whereas the iMacs don't).
still dont know why there is so much hate on the mini. it's a great small inconspicuous computer that doesnt use a lot of power or make noise. it's great as a HTPC (or should i say HTM) which can do double-duty as an internet gateway and server. i love minis.
i'd take one over an iMac any day, especially now with the joke displays they ship on them. glossy screens need to die!!!!!!!
i'd take one over an iMac any day, especially now with the joke displays they ship on them. glossy screens need to die!!!!!!!
You are correct, sir. After I wrote that post, I noticed something fishy about that and asked him. He has a Core single in there. Sorry bout that.
I agree with you on most of your post. It's obvious that even a low-end Mac would cost a little (okay, maybe a lot) more than it's worth, simply because Apple puts a premium on all of their products. Look at ram prices from Apple! I have some friends with Mac Mini's and they LOVE them, and they even bought up the ability to use another screen if they wanted to vs. an iMac. So why should the Mac Mini's die?
You're all missing the point!
Come on, you're all missing the point: AppleInsider didn't report on MacScoop's article (although MacRumors did) from March, 7th until now because they HATE the Mac Mini. The interesting point of this story, apart from the fact that the Mini will be updated, is to realize how much it must be painful to AI to even mention the Mini in an article. AI have taken a stance against the product (which in itself is bad journalism since it's biased) and they have become so snobish lately that it's plain to see: the Mini is obviously not good enough for them to lower their nose at it so it's a little like tapping them on the back of the head to bring them back down to the average user's level.
Using "the Cupertino-based company" and other paraphrases as a reference to Apple became a way of pretending that they have a certain panache, or flair, but in fact it's just arrogance and plain bad attitude, punctuated by this last blunder.
AI, eat your words, it's time someone puts you back into your place.
Come on, you're all missing the point: AppleInsider didn't report on MacScoop's article (although MacRumors did) from March, 7th until now because they HATE the Mac Mini. The interesting point of this story, apart from the fact that the Mini will be updated, is to realize how much it must be painful to AI to even mention the Mini in an article. AI have taken a stance against the product (which in itself is bad journalism since it's biased) and they have become so snobish lately that it's plain to see: the Mini is obviously not good enough for them to lower their nose at it so it's a little like tapping them on the back of the head to bring them back down to the average user's level.
Using "the Cupertino-based company" and other paraphrases as a reference to Apple became a way of pretending that they have a certain panache, or flair, but in fact it's just arrogance and plain bad attitude, punctuated by this last blunder.
AI, eat your words, it's time someone puts you back into your place.
Damn and I bought my iMac this year 
It's good that the Mac Mini will continue. At work we recently decked out classrooms with new mac mini's so I'm hoping these things will kick on! At least then I can continue to plan my media centre
As for the hate, all the PC teachers are "wow, that's the computer!?!" Just need to slowly implement Mac software and OS and then we're winning!
It's good that the Mac Mini will continue. At work we recently decked out classrooms with new mac mini's so I'm hoping these things will kick on! At least then I can continue to plan my media centre
As for the hate, all the PC teachers are "wow, that's the computer!?!" Just need to slowly implement Mac software and OS and then we're winning!
Huh? What's that supposed to mean? The entire system is accelerated substantially by using a 7,200 rpm drive, even when compared to a 5,400 rpm one.
How about this, I'm using a 320 GB/7,200 rpm drive with my mini
I'm glad someone else brought this up. Rather than showing "panache", by overusing this style of reporting they just look like amateur try-hards.
Back on topic: given that Intel has recently announced mini-ITX boards, these seem like a logical choice for an updated mac mini, and should answer many of the concerns of those critical of the mini's current abilities. It seems that they might not be around for a few months, but it's an upgrade I'd consider worth waiting for.
While that's not entirely correct per se, I think his point was that increased plate density could alleviate some of the performance deficiencies as a result of lower rotor speed.
Although 320/5400 and 250/7200 aren't a close comparison. I'd imagine that a typical 320GB configuration would be 2 plates of 160GB wheres the 250GB would be maybe 1 disc of 250GB?
(of course I could be wrong, not really keeping up with the hard drives well enough).
A fairer comparison would be maybe a 320/5400 vs. 120/7200.
That is because there are a lot of unrealistic dreamers that want the power of a Mac Pro in a slyly larger case (for 3.5 drive) for 100 less than the mini.
The mini is a starter Mac and it can do a lot as it is right now, minus screen or keyboard it is in line with a MacBook (if slyly less power) that is where it was positioned and where it will remain. It is a starter machine.
Some people want it to come BTO with Blu Ray. Why? Blue Ray will add 400 to 600 to the system. Sounds like a candidate for an external drive and not a BTO to me.
I will be getting one as soon as Apple bumps it. Notice I say bump it, not richly upgrade it.
As is the mini has a place and is a fine sweet lady.
The following is what is realistic that Apple will do:
Two models at 2.1 Ghz and 2.4 Ghz with 3 MB of L2 cache
One model with 1 Gig memory, second with two Gig memory, maybe a BTO to 4 Gig
GMA X3100 on both
802.11N on both
Gigabit Ethernet
Maybe add a Firewire 800 port
Drop price of both model by 100
EVERYTHING ELSE THE SAME
Now the above is possible, it is as close to the MacBook as Apple will permit and it would make a dream starter machine.
As to Blue Ray .... Apple will have full support by August for Blue Ray, and will have it BTO for the Mac Pro, and as an external drive for all other systems.
For some reason, while it'd be nice, I don't think it'll happen...but we could only hope.
i think you are being quite realistic there. maybe the fw800 is a bit wishful, or shall i say possible but not necessary plausible (as in apple has little reason to do it). another possible but not plausible part would be AMD's E2400 (embedded version of hd2400) for video - the part works fine under tight power envelopes, and easts GMA for breakfast. also it would be in line with the original mini's philosophy of decent-for-its-time video (RV280)
See this article about notebook drive performance. While 7200 rpm drives can perform better at some tasks, high-density 5400 drives perform better in others. The overall experience is about the same.
How about this, I'm using a 320 GB/7,200 rpm drive with my mini
You're not using a notebook drive, and unless you've connected your 3.5" SATA drive to your internal SATA bus, I suspect your performance will be less than that of a large capacity 5400 rpm 2.5" drive.
See the link above.
Great news, my hope is for a high end mac mini...
Option to upgrade to 4-8 gig of ram
Full sized HD, 7200rpm
ATI or Nvida video card
Option to upgrade to 4-8 gig of ram
Full sized HD, 7200rpm
ATI or Nvida video card