New Intel Mac mini

[matticus008]

IMO Hugh, don't consider buying anything atm based on opinions of people who think they can predict what the mini is going to be able to do. Wait a few days until reviews start coming online from people with hands on experience of the new minis and all will become very clear. Right now pretty much everything being said is bias and speculation.

Careful, there. A GeForce 2 MX is a pathetic card that's not even fully DirectX 8 compliant. Not only does it not support CoreImage, but its core clock and memory clock are both painfully slow with SDR (as I recall) SGRAM. Regardless of the opinions of people on the newer cores Radeon 8500 family and newer, which the jury's still out on (GMA950 is technically superior and undoubtedly more capable, but the dedicated cards handle hardware-based 3D with greater ease, so ultimately the decision will depend on specific expectations), there is absolutely no way that the new graphics don't utterly smash a GeForce 2 MX (which was a bottom-performer even when it was released).

 

[jiv3turkey748]

Not sure but I would think the price increase is more related to the extras made standard (WIFI, Bluetooth, Digital In/Out, Gigabit Ethernet, Extra USB ports) than the change of processor. I could be wrong. I think these extras made standard have something to do with the role the Mini is meant to migrate to: in your living room.

when i posted that i didnt realize it had bt and airport, i think apple should make the mini into a "media mac" and then come out eith anther computer to replace the mini as the low budget computer

 

[AidenShaw]

don't change the mini

when i posted that i didnt realize it had bt and airport, i think apple should make the mini into a "media mac" and then come out eith anther computer to replace the mini as the low budget computer

The MiniMacIntel should stay the way it is....

The media mac should be larger - the size of a smallish DVD player.

This will not only fit in with other audio/video components, it leaves room for:

1. Two or three large 3.5" drives (1.5 TB wouldn't be unreasonable for a DVR - you can get 1 TB TiVos today)
2. There would be room for a replaceable, upgradeable video card
3. There would be space for better airflow (quieter cooling)

THis wouldn't be innovative, of course, since HP already makes a 600 GB media center.

 

[cr2sh]

THis wouldn't be innovative, of course, since HP already makes a 600 GB media center.

Nice post. I agree, but I really don't care how innovative the design is... at a certain point you'd wish Apple would just produce something that we really want... and stop trying to pull a rabbit out of the hat.

We assume innovation makes things better... but I think using OS X instead of XP Media Edition might be innovative enough.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

seems to make sense.

When i first heard about the integrated graphics it immediately made me think of crap graphics. But that association is not a correct one to make, since integrated normally means crap because its actually a crap graphics card that is integrated, not because the fact that its integrated turns all graphics cards into crap.

Therefore, i dont think people should immediately jump to the conclusion that the mini has a crap graphcis card, instead its probably better to look at the stats of the 950 card and what it is capable off. Surely because of the space constraints in the mini, whatever card would have been in there would have been integrated. They couldnt have put in one of the newer ones due to the large heatsinks and fans they require and the amount of heat they produce, surely?

Please dont call me shirley, Apple could have popped in a $20 GPU with no problem, but Intel is pushing its integrated crap graphics, maybe giving them away. Gag😱 Bean Counters,,,,will use the 99cent special and charge 100 bucks more! yeah yeah thats the ticket. Ilove the spin and lies on Apple using such crap, please zealots continue the spin on how the 950 is so wonderful😀

 

[OCOTILLO]

Mine shipped today.

After reading all the gripes about the new mini here, I figured it must really be great. So, I ordered the core duo with 1GB memory. It shipped today.

 

[peharri]

After reading all the gripes about the new mini here, I figured it must really be great. So, I ordered the core duo with 1GB memory. It shipped today.

Personally I'll wait for the Ars Technica review. (They're pretty reliable and will do objective benchmarking. I suspect for the next few weeks we're going to hear from a lot of buyers who are doing what they can to justify their purchases. Even if the thing runs like a 266MHz G3 it'll get raves. What I want to hear is the independent, technical, PoV. And yeah, if it doesn't run two year old games better than its predecessor (apparently the Core Solo runs UT2004 at a lower frame rate than the 1.5GHz G4 Mac mini - what I'm interested in though is the Core Duo), then that'll be a major reason for me to wait.

 

[MacinDoc]

Please dont call me shirley, Apple could have popped in a $20 GPU with no problem, but Intel is pushing its integrated crap graphics, maybe giving them away. Gag😱 Bean Counters,,,,will use the 99cent special and charge 100 bucks more! yeah yeah thats the ticket. Ilove the spin and lies on Apple using such crap, please zealots continue the spin on how the 950 is so wonderful😀

I take it you didn't look at the photos of the disassembled Intel Mac Mini. There is simply no space for a separate GPU in the current case, period.

In order to maintain the appearance of consistency and stability, Apple seems to be trying to keep the same case designs for the introduction of its Intel models (Intel iMac and Mac Mini look identical to their predecessors, and even the MBP is almost identical to the Powerbook it replaces). Perhaps the next revision will see a slightly bigger form factor and a separate GPU.

 

[chibianh]

Anyway, for just spending one night with a product, I give this baby a 9/10, but just watch out for the bleeding edge, it hurts a little. Like I said, I will not hesitate to buy an upgraded one for my main office computer. It is really, really now a sweet little computer.

Thanks for the excellent review. Considering you have the Solo version, I have no doubt the Duo version will do 1080p without any problems. 😀

 

[steelfist]

Now, just curious, to the people who complains about the mac mini being awful or expensive, if you have enough money, would you buy the ppc mac mini or the intel mac mini?

For me, i would buy the intel one.

i find the intel mac mini a better value for apple newcomers than the ppc. Seriously. i mean, if it's a bto option, Front row would have costed like 70 $, and have a core solo which IS faster than the ppc processor, another like 50$ (more or less but you get the point), and also 2 more USB ports, like 20$ more. not to mention a good graphics upgrade, like additional $40, it all adds up to a number that is a LOT higher than $ 100 increase from 499 to 599.

i see the main problem, is that some new features aren't really useful to some people, and some people would rather not have some of these new stuff like a faster graphics card, or front row, and have a 499 mac mini.

apple missed something i guess.

 

[Anonymous Freak]

Please dont call me shirley, Apple could have popped in a $20 GPU with no problem, but Intel is pushing its integrated crap graphics, maybe giving them away. Gag😱 Bean Counters,,,,will use the 99cent special and charge 100 bucks more! yeah yeah thats the ticket. Ilove the spin and lies on Apple using such crap, please zealots continue the spin on how the 950 is so wonderful😀

I have never said the GMA950 is wonderful. I said that it's not as bad as people claim. Yes, an integrated Radeon 9550 would be better. But for $20, you'd end up with as crap as the 950, if not worse. (For $20 in discrete graphics, you wouldn't get anything CoreImage capable.) For all the 'sucks-processor-power-and-system-memory' problems with the 950, at least it is CoreImage compatible. And, again, by moving from a 167 MHz bus, 1.5 GHz G4 to a 667 MHz bus, 1.67 GHz Core Duo, the processor speed increase probably is enough to balance out the fact that now it's doing the work of the previously-discrete graphics chip. (You can essentially think of it as having a 1.67 GHz CPU with as little as 288 MB of main memory plus a 1.67 GHz GPU with up to 224 MB graphics memory, if you want to be a 'spinning zealot'. [is that like the Tasmanian Devil?])

Now, the 1.5 GHz Core SOLO, on the other hand... I wouldn't touch with a 10' pole for any game playing. But, for basic computer tasks, even media work, it should do fine. It should be at least an equal to the G4, probably noticably better in processor tasks. But in GPU tasks? I imagine it would perform worse than the G4 with discrete graphics.

I think that as most have said, adding AirPort and WiFi standard, adding the IR, etc, have added to the cost; it's not just that they're taking something cheaper and charging more. But it probably SHOULD have balanced out to stay the same price. We'll have to wait for one of the cost analysis to be sure, though.

For comparison, the G4 mini went for $499 for a Combo drive 1.33 GHz, no wireless, $599 for 1.5 GHz with wireless (same basic setup as now for $599, only now you also get Front Row,) and $699 for 1.5 GHz with wireless and SuperDrive (so you're paying a $100 premium for moving to dual-core 1.67 GHz and Front Row.) So they essentially just got rid of the slower 'wireless-less' $100 cheaper model, and are charging $100 more for a noticably faster processor on the high end.

 

[Demoman]

I know this configuration is going to get them at least a few more sales. I have been waiting for the upgrade to bring a 2nd level test of 20 units into my company. Back in October I demonstrated the Mac was a viable option to Wintel desktops in some corporate environments. We run Citrix for WAN connectivity to many of our divisions. It really does not matter what the client machine is. But, we also have many users that use local applications. We liked Keynote better than Powerpoint, Notes and Word were a toss-up and Adobe is a non-factor. When we compare the licensing costs for Apple, compared to MS Office and XP Pro, we will be saving about $350 per station. Now with the beefed-up Mini, we are going to save an additional $200 (or more) over the Dells we have been buying. Thanks Apple!

 

[progx]

wow…i never thought i'd see Apple rip off the customer.

intregrated Intel graphics?! damn, the Mac mini was one hell of a steal, now it's just like any cheap-o PC for that price tag.

i can't believe it! we craved speed to replace the G4, now we got it; not the G5 since it's still lightyears ahead of Intel. at what cost though? the quality of hardware has now completely dipped.

Hi Steve, welcome to the machine.

 

[miniConvert]

I know this configuration is going to get them at least a few more sales. I have been waiting for the upgrade to bring a 2nd level test of 20 units into my company. Back in October I demonstrated the Mac was a viable option to Wintel desktops in some corporate environments. We run Citrix for WAN connectivity to many of our divisions. It really does not matter what the client machine is. But, we also have many users that use local applications. We liked Keynote better than Powerpoint, Notes and Word were a toss-up and Adobe is a non-factor. When we compare the licensing costs for Apple, compared to MS Office and XP Pro, we will be saving about $350 per station. Now with the beefed-up Mini, we are going to save an additional $200 (or more) over the Dells we have been buying. Thanks Apple!

It got them mine! I've always had Mac's in the corner of my eye, and over the last year I've been tempted, but the prospect of the Core Duo with 2GB's of ram (with a move, finally, to a much faster bus) finally won me over on Wednesday. My first Mac shipped yesterday, hurrah!

After the uproar over the integrated graphics issue I slept on it (Tuesday night) but after reading some early reviews and seeing benchmarks on Wednesday, with the added fact that I have a vastly more powerful PC for any small gaming requirements I have, I was convinced that this was exactly the system I had been looking for to finally have OS X in my house.

I'm so excited! It's going to be heaps of fun 😀 Now I just have to wait for delivery...

 

[Legacy]

$499 Intel Mini

It got them mine! I've always had Mac's in the corner of my eye, and over the last year I've been tempted, but the prospect of the Core Duo with 2GB's of ram (with a move, finally, to a much faster bus) finally won me over on Wednesday. My first Mac shipped yesterday, hurrah!

After the uproar over the integrated graphics issue I slept on it (Tuesday night) but after reading some early reviews and seeing benchmarks on Wednesday, with the added fact that I have a vastly more powerful PC for any small gaming requirements I have, I was convinced that this was exactly the system I had been looking for to finally have OS X in my house.

I'm so excited! It's going to be heaps of fun 😀 Now I just have to wait for delivery...

I still think they should have kept the $499 price point with the following specs:

Intel Core Solo 1.5Ghz Processor
512Mb DDR-2 Memory
CDRW/DVD Combi
Integrated Graphics
40Gb Hard Drive
Optional Airport and Bluetooth
No FrontRow built-in hence no remote either

We need a cheap mac for the consumer who just wants a computer. Not everyone wants FrontRow and AP+BT technology, or even a 60Gb HD if its just for simple computing. The above mini would have been perfect, and at $499, a steal.

PS: I still dont understand why alot of people are comparing to Dell and desktop PC's. This is a 'Shuttle' Mac, its in such a small compact form, I can guarantee it would be the same value if not substantially better than any Shuttle PC on the market.

 

[miniConvert]

I do agree a little that it'd have been nice to keep a really cheap mini out there, literally just so people can run OS X with minimal outlay.

However, if that extra cost vastly improves the user experience and first time switchers get a better impression of Mac then perhaps it's for the best. Time will tell... if sales lag I daresay they'll whip up a cheapy version snappy-like!

 

[Legacy]

I do agree a little that it'd have been nice to keep a really cheap mini out there, literally just so people can run OS X with minimal outlay.

However, if that extra cost vastly improves the user experience and first time switchers get a better impression of Mac then perhaps it's for the best. Time will tell... if sales lag I daresay they'll whip up a cheapy version snappy-like!

Well I still think Apple could include FrontRow but with a 40Gigs drive and no AP+BT for $499 but their profit margin would be very low I guess...

I could actually imagine they would downclock the Core Solo to 1.4Ghz just to differentiate between the models though😛

 

[Shadow]

I know I'm a bit late but on the intergrated graphics:

They arn't that bad, if people wanted a gaming computer they would:
a) Get a PC
b) If Mac, get a iMac/PowerMac

If it can play HD-Video at a decent frame rate (about 25-30fps) I'd say that is pretty good for intregrated graphics.

Sure it would be nice to have a "proper" graphics card, but we are already getting a dual-core HD-Video playing Front-Row running Music streaming "powerhouse" (I use the term lightly) in a very small package. Its even got a decent size HDD (although an external one may be nessesary for HD content). Personally I am amazed that the Mac Mini works at all, my freind has one (G4) and he can use Cinema4D, Photoshop CS1, Fireworks, Dreamweaver, and all the other design apps that he has. And he still has room for videos, music, iWork, iLife, ect! We did a test to see how long it takes to open them all and it did speedily (considering the size of the apps, and size of the Mini) without crashing! I use Windows (for now anyway) and that is a thing that could not be done on Windows. Even when loading all those apps its still faster than my 3GHz P4 just loading iTunes, IE7 and MSN Beta!!!

My point is that all Macs are amazing machines and are very capable at what they do, be it Photoshopping, Dreamweavering, working, and now, streaming music.

 

[CTSxViper]

Repeat after me:

The Mac Mini is not intended to be a game machine.

The Mac Mini is not intended to be a game machine.

The Mac Mini is not intended to be a game machine.

The Mac Mini is not intended to be a game machine.

The Mac Mini is not intended to be a game machine.

Okay, get it?

The Mac Mini is intended to be a media machine. And as you just said, as a media machine it will perform better than the older Mini.

Not everybody plays videogames.

Not everybody who buys a computer is buying it to play videogames.

Well, that may be true, but I for one think it is a bad move on Apple's part and will hurt them sales wise.

 

[gunm]

Personally I'll wait for the Ars Technica review. (They're pretty reliable and will do objective benchmarking. I suspect for the next few weeks we're going to hear from a lot of buyers who are doing what they can to justify their purchases. Even if the thing runs like a 266MHz G3 it'll get raves. What I want to hear is the independent, technical, PoV. And yeah, if it doesn't run two year old games better than its predecessor (apparently the Core Solo runs UT2004 at a lower frame rate than the 1.5GHz G4 Mac mini - what I'm interested in though is the Core Duo), then that'll be a major reason for me to wait.

Here ya go: (core solo)

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/macmini.ars/6

I guess regardless of the reviews you'll wait 'cause rosetta isn't going to make those two year old games run faster than the platform they were originally intended for, especially on what is (for Apple) an entry-level computer.

 

[laidbackliam]

i don't understand having wireless on a desktop computer

bluetooth, yes.

but my desktop is plugged into the router, when i get my laptop, it will be on wireless.

i just don't understand why one needs wireless in a desktop.

clue me in?

 

[balamw]

i just don't understand why one needs wireless in a desktop.

Don't forget, the Mini is being marketed as a living room computer. The builder of my house didn't install Cat5 or even a phone line to the entertainment area. Had I bought it new I would have corrected that and had them drop an additional RG-6.

So, now, wireless looks pretty good for a living room PC.

EDIT: To those suggesting no AP+BT, I think the point is that Apple is leveraging the entire Intel platform. AP+BT functionality doesn't add anywhere close to $100 cost to the box since the functionality is already there on the logic board, like the integrated graphics. I amone of those who believe the Core Solo mini will drop to fill the $499 price slot in the not too distant future, The current Duo will probably drop to $699 and they'll introduce something in-between.

B

 

[powerbook911]

Well, these Yonah chips are just so expensive right now, so I guess a price drop in the future is possible.

 

[Passante]

i don't understand having wireless on a desktop computer

bluetooth, yes.

but my desktop is plugged into the router, when i get my laptop, it will be on wireless.

i just don't understand why one needs wireless in a desktop.

clue me in?

I have 3 Macs on different floors of the house and my 1940's brick colonial did not get wired for ethernet when it was built. Big oversight but they built a lot of them like that in the 1940s.😕

 

[Undecided]

Moved