New Mac Pros and Mac Minis Launching in August

[Bear]

Every time I look into a Mac Mini and add up the $$$ I get to close to an iMac.
Something doesn't work with that set up (at least for me)

The Mini has its place and uses. But it's not for everyone. And if you're buying all the parts, yes it adds up quickly. However, when you go to replace the Mini, you save on the display/keyboard/mouse/etc. However, all the other parts go bad over time so they will get replaced at some point.

Best to wait for the refresh then (with Lion) and buy Snow Leopard separately for 29 dollars (or even less "used" on eBay). The few dollars should be well worth the better hardware (in comparison to the alternative: buy now the old Mini just to be sure with the OS).

This is most definitely bad advice. New computer models require updates to the OS. If Apple is releasing them with Lion there won't be a Snow Leopard version that runs on them. If you bought a system (that comes with SNow Leopard) today, you need need a copy of the restoration discs that come with it to install Snow Leopard on the system. The retail Snow Leopard package won't be new enough to have the device driver updates for your new system.

 

[Bear]

Mac Minis are a rip off for what you get. They should drop the price a lot.

I think the vast majority of people buying them will beg to differ. They are a very popular product.

I myself wouldn't use the term "rip off", however, Minis used to start at a lower price and should still have a $499 model. Yes, they are popular, but imagine if there was a lower priced Mini? It could become even more popular.

 

[KnightWRX]

I myself wouldn't use the term "rip off", however, Minis used to start at a lower price and should still have a $499 model. Yes, they are popular, but imagine if there was a lower priced Mini? It could become even more popular.

Except it's already very competitively priced in its segment. The problem is people compare it to machines outside its segment.

 

[CharlieY]

Wouldn't it be absolutely awesome if Apple decided to put a dedicated graphics chip in the Mac Mini? Or how about a Mac Mini + Apple TV combo?

 

[ugru]

Wouldn't it be absolutely awesome if Apple decided to put a dedicated graphics chip in the Mac Mini?

Il would be awesome, but they must change form factor to accomodate a discrete GPU, since shared memory GPU like nVidia 320m are forbidden by intel for i3/i5/i7Core processors.

I dubt they will do it....

 

[the8thark]

4. Why should the Mac be the only brand of computer without a BluRay drive option?

Simple. Remember the "Blu Ray is a bag of hurt"? Well I blame Sony for that. The licensing fees and how they licence it out is pretty terrible. Everyone else played the game Sony's way and can use Blu Rays. But Apple said no we want a fair deal or we won't take your Blu Rays.

Apple did not get what it thought was a fair deal so it said no to the Blu Ray. So the no Blu Ray on the Mac is as much to do with Sony as it is Apple.

 

[Bug-Creator]

Except it's already very competitively priced in its segment. The problem is people compare it to machines outside its segment.

Yeah and thats the problem (more with the current Mini than the ones before):

It's segment is "screenless-laptop-design-over-function" while it should be "cheap-powerfull-worth-a-try"

My first Mac was a late 2006 Mini after sitting on the fence for atleast 3 years before. Now I got a 2010 iMac and I'm happy with it.

There is no chance I would buy the current Mini if I were to "switch" now. iMacs or a laptop even less. So I would stay Linux with a bit Win as topping.

 

[mwayne85]

It would make sense for Apple to redesign the Mac Pro this year. It's the only Mac at this point that would get a redesign in 2011.

Macbook Air - redesigned last year
Mac Mini - redesigned last year
iMac - Already released, Wasn't redesigned this year
Macbook Pro - Already released, Wasn't redesigned this year
Mac Pro - Due for refresh, hasn't been redesigned in a long time

Unless the Macbook is something they're redesigning, but if they did, I imagine it would be very similar to the Macbook air.

Either that, or they won't redesign anything this year, and maybe the Macbook Pro will be what's redesigned early next year.

Who knows? Just thinking out loud.

 

[mjillard]

Yep marginalized, but by Apple, not the users. It's a cognitive decision, a strategic move - trying to make your fantasy (and Gruber's and Steve Jobs') real.

It isn't. There is no Post-PC era. Quite the contrary, but there is the chance for Apple to become the permanent leader and the dominant player in portable devices (i.e. the iOS devices)

The MBA will probably (in the end) be the only laptop-like device sold by Apple and it will run iOS. Macs will continue to be marginalized by Apple until people finally *get* it and stop buying them, allowing Apple to discontinue the development of Macs.

I really do not believe that Apple is marginalizing anyone, certainly not the pro users giving them their highest per unit margins. Believe me, if there were more of you, you would see much more frequent updates. The transition from workstations to portable iDevices is not some sinister plot hatched by Jobs et al to force people into buying iPads. I think Apple would much rather sell Mac Pros in the same quantities as iOS devices. However, that just is not happening, and is not a realistic expectation. In the end, Apple is a for-profit enterprise that has a responsibility to shareholders. As long as it continues to be profitable to sell Macs, it will. When Macs stop making money, Apple will have built this entire ecosystem centered around iOS to remain relevant should this "post-PC" world materialize. Bottom line: it's a business.

 

[ericmooreart]

I think the vast majority of people buying them will beg to differ. They are a very popular product.

While I do agree the price is a bit high, you can substantially lower it by buying a base model and putting in your own cheaper ram rather than Apples over priced ones. I also do not upgrade the hard drive or the processor. 2.4 ghz to 2.66 ghz isn't worth 150 dollars.

 

[bpaluzzi]

Yeah and thats the problem (more with the current Mini than the ones before):

It's segment is "screenless-laptop-design-over-function" while it should be "cheap-powerfull-worth-a-try"

I love it when people with absolutely no experience try and "correct" Apple's business strategy.

I especially love it when they don't understand that what THEY want just miiight not be what the market wants.

 

[ratzzo]

While I do agree the price is a bit high, you can substantially lower it by buying a base model and putting in your own cheaper ram rather than Apples over priced ones. I also do not upgrade the hard drive or the processor. 2.4 ghz to 2.66 ghz isn't worth 150 dollars.

Also the Mini prices were dropped by $100 about a year and a half ago.

 

[johnpaul191]

You mean Mac Mini? There is just no reason to have a huge Mac Pro anymore. Maybe there will be internal Thunderbolt ports/peripherals.

I disagree. The minis, and iMacs, still use more of a laptop setup inside. The Pro tower is the serious workhorse for the people that need it. For people that regularly run a process that can take hours at a time, even a 5% boost in performance over the course of a year is a huge deal in terms of what they can get done.

Apple is still huge with AV professionals, and those people need horsepower. I remember years ago my friend was doing post on a film he made. They were doing pretty simple digital effects in a cutting edge LA facility with the newest G4 towers. They would set up something to render, click "go" and it would easily take 5 hours if not longer. The facility literally had couches so you could nap while rendering happened. It wasn't unusual to tweak the finished render and redo it. Right there you spent a day and might not have it. While some huge studio may be able to support some sort of mega linux-based facility for the digital work, most people are going to use a Mac or MS Windows.
While computers today are lightyears ahead of what he used, the quality of effects has increased as well. When you do video/audio processing that can take hours and hours and hours, it pays to have the fastest machines around. Otherwise, you are paying people to sit and watch a progress bar, and tie up a facility for extra time. Heck, I even know people working with massive still images that are doing a lot of processing (maybe batch processing) that swear they need the tower for efficiency. They would love a simple iMac, but in the end time IS money.
The same needs exist in science and whatever else, just that film/TV is my world of experience.

 

[heisetax]

No Mac in OS 10.7 Lion

This is impossible. Not happening.

Apple's only supposed to care about "iToys" and nothing else. They don't care about Macs anymore.

Did you notice that Mac OS 10.7 Lion is only called Lion, no mention of the Mac. When Steve came back to Apple his reason for canceling the Mac Clones was because they did not make cheap entry models, but made mainly high end models. He said that this took business away from Apple. Also that the Clones were meant for the low end part of the Mac market. Now Computer has been taken out of Apple Computer Inc's name. Now Mac(intosh) has been taken out of the name of the Macintosh OS name. And as you mention the higher end Macs have come to have updates about every 15 months. The average was lowered because the first Intel Mac Pros had an additional model added at a higher price several months after the original Aug 2006 introduction. This one was the longest at a 15-18 month wait. August is much earlier than the past updates have been.

Even though the last WWDC started with the showing of Mac OS 10.7 Lion, it also showed 2 things: first Mac is no longer in the OS, & to go along with that many o the changes are to make it look & act like the iOS way of doing things.

Since as you say Apple is all about the iToy market where are we to turn? Windows is Windows & the many reasons why not do not have to be rementioned here. Linux is an alternative for some. Current Mac Clones many times referred to as Hacintoshes in many ways are the best alternative. But the stopping of them may be one of the reasons for the change of only allowing updates/upgrades/changes to the Mac OS to come through the iTunes Sore.

If Apple does not want the middle to high end Mac market why don't they license that part to someone that CARES. But as with Rosetta Apple has a long, long, long history of dropping a technology or product when there is still real need for it. I believe that Steve Jobs wants to change the name of Apple Inc to iToy Inc to keep in line with his iToy over all frame of mind. Whatever happened to be all you can be. Oh, I'm sorry that is for real men & women to do.

 

[ericmooreart]

Simple. Remember the "Blu Ray is a bag of hurt"? Well I blame Sony for that. The licensing fees and how they licence it out is pretty terrible. Everyone else played the game Sony's way and can use Blu Rays. But Apple said no we want a fair deal or we won't take your Blu Rays.

Apple did not get what it thought was a fair deal so it said no to the Blu Ray. So the no Blu Ray on the Mac is as much to do with Sony as it is Apple.

Another possibility is that Blu Ray would hurt iTunes video sales. Apple has been known to try and destroy technologies that dig into their profits.

 

[heisetax]

Apple doen't care

Is it just me, or Apple doesn't seem to care about the MacBooks anymore. Those Machines are stock with a Core Dual Processor. I like the MacBooks a lot, due to the way it looks, but like I said, seems like Apple doesn't care about them anymore!

The fact that they are still using such outdated cpus in them should tell you what they really think. Actions speak louder than words. The move to Intel was to give more timely updates. The MacBook & the MacMini always have old prior generation or 2 cpus. The Intel MacPro is updated about every 15 months since it first came out in Aug of 2006.

Remember Apple took computer out of its name some time ago already.

 

[Bug-Creator]

I love it when people with absolutely no experience try and "correct" Apple's business strategy.

I especially love it when they don't understand that what THEY want just miiight not be what the market wants.

The only way to find out what "the market" wants is to have both options on the market at the same time, but that won't happen and thats why everybody is guessing.

When the 1st Mini (1.25GHz G4) appeared it was priced low and offered reasonable performance compared to a bog-standar PC. It was what made people switch and it's just fair to ask how many of the private owned iMacs and MacBooks were bought by people who onced switched with a 499 Mini.

 

[johnpaul191]

1) I am looking forward to Minis with thunderbolt. I'll grab one when they ship. I say that as somebody that has been using Apple computers since the ][e.

2) Why do people want BluRay support in Macs? Is it to watch films, or to burn 50GB discs? I'm not being hostile, I'm genuinely curious.

Every time I work on a job that wants me to burn DVDs and I have to burn 2 or 3 I think how nice it would be.... but I would have to make phone calls to see if they could handle BluRay discs. I burn discs less and less now, and use more shuttle drives. Movies are being streamed more and more. I never really watched movies on my laptop, unless I am bored out of my head in a hotel and don't have a book..... but in that case I am ok with Netflix streaming. When I am in a hotel for a month or so, I will bring my Roku with me so I can watch stuff while using my laptop for something else.

 

[ericmooreart]

I disagree. The minis, and iMacs, still use more of a laptop setup inside. The Pro tower is the serious workhorse for the people that need it. For people that regularly run a process that can take hours at a time, even a 5% boost in performance over the course of a year is a huge deal in terms of what they can get done.

I have a 5 Mac Mini Render farm. 5 core duo processors - 10 cores, each processor with its own frontside bus. 4 gigs of ram each for a total of 20 gigs. Total cost about 3000. It renders Maya faster then any single Mac Pro for the equivalent cost.

 

[toddybody]

Give me mATX slim tower with 2 PCI-E x16 slots, 6 DIMMs, SATA III ports, and full AMD HD 6xxx desktop card support...starting at 1599.00 with an i5 2400(if they go non server SB side)

 

[bit density]

You're wrong, but don't feel bad. There are literally thousands of people that made the same mistake before.

But you are wrong. It is not about hardware, it is about cost and capability. While IOS is great and the devices are great, and constant Internet access is great, what is different this time is content creation. An on screen keyboard, and touch are not sufficient. Steve actually recognizes this. This is why, unlike windows, that touch is on a touch pad. You still need, and will always need a PC to go along with your IOS device. And IOS features will make it to the OSX machine, but it will not supplant it.

Apparently, listening to this board, many people here are not professional users and don't sit in front of their computers most of the day. But this doesn't appear to be true for SJ or the people at Apple. Lion is all about being more productive during that day, both expanding and narrowing the users focus. Having everything open and the same, and narrow casting down to a single app. Lion is going to amazing.

But it's ok, people like you have been wrong before. I have seen it a thousand times.

 

[johnpaul191]

Did you notice that Mac OS 10.7 Lion is only called Lion, no mention of the Mac. When Steve came back to Apple his reason for canceling the Mac Clones was because they did not make cheap entry models, but made mainly high end models. He said that this took business away from Apple. Also that the Clones were meant for the low end part of the Mac market. Now Computer has been taken out of Apple Computer Inc's name. Now Mac(intosh) has been taken out of the name of the Macintosh OS name. And as you mention the higher end Macs have come to have updates about every 15 months. The average was lowered because the first Intel Mac Pros had an additional model added at a higher price several months after the original Aug 2006 introduction. This one was the longest at a 15-18 month wait. August is much earlier than the past updates have been.

Even though the last WWDC started with the showing of Mac OS 10.7 Lion, it also showed 2 things: first Mac is no longer in the OS, & to go along with that many o the changes are to make it look & act like the iOS way of doing things.

Since as you say Apple is all about the iToy market where are we to turn? Windows is Windows & the many reasons why not do not have to be rementioned here. Linux is an alternative for some. Current Mac Clones many times referred to as Hacintoshes in many ways are the best alternative. But the stopping of them may be one of the reasons for the change of only allowing updates/upgrades/changes to the Mac OS to come through the iTunes Sore.

If Apple does not want the middle to high end Mac market why don't they license that part to someone that CARES. But as with Rosetta Apple has a long, long, long history of dropping a technology or product when there is still real need for it. I believe that Steve Jobs wants to change the name of Apple Inc to iToy Inc to keep in line with his iToy over all frame of mind. Whatever happened to be all you can be. Oh, I'm sorry that is for real men & women to do.

1) Apple, under Jobs, did hire a bunch of engineers from (i think) Umax. They were part of the team that built the iMac... the most affordable Mac until then.

2) Apple still has the middle + high end market. Their laptops sell like hotcakes. They sell more than they ever have. It's a fact that less people buy desktop computers across the board, so it makes sense that Apple would focus on laptop development.

3) iOS influence on desktop computing is not that big of a surprise. The desktop has not had a big input evolution since the mouse was introduced in the 80s. Arguably Apple had one foot in each pond with multi-touch track pads.... but we can see how that development was meshed with the iPhone. iPhone has the touchscreen interface down better than anyone else. Tons of people now use some brand of touchscreen device. Why not take that method and apply it to desktops/laptops? You don't HAVE to use it, but it makes life more efficient for many people. That's REALLY been the philosophy of Apple for the last 25 years. Not just to make a neat computer you can have to your own (like the Apple I and ][), but make a device that makes you do what you want to do in an easier way. That makes me think Apple is more on track than ever.

 

[bit density]

Give me mATX slim tower with 2 PCI-E x16 slots, 6 DIMMs, SATA III ports, and full AMD HD 6xxx desktop card support...starting at 1599.00 with an i5 2400(if they go non server SB side)

And this is precisely the market that Apple has cut out, in a conscious decision to both control the user experience and profitability. And they are not sad about it. You will either play in their world, and they make money off you, or you don't. They do not want you to play in their world, and NOT make money off you. It seems pretty simple.

 

[bpaluzzi]

But you are wrong. It is not about hardware, it is about cost and capability. While IOS is great and the devices are great, and constant Internet access is great, what is different this time is content creation. An on screen keyboard, and touch are not sufficient. Steve actually recognizes this. This is why, unlike windows, that touch is on a touch pad. You still need, and will always need a PC to go along with your IOS device. And IOS features will make it to the OSX machine, but it will not supplant it.

Apparently, listening to this board, many people here are not professional users and don't sit in front of their computers most of the day. But this doesn't appear to be true for SJ or the people at Apple. Lion is all about being more productive during that day, both expanding and narrowing the users focus. Having everything open and the same, and narrow casting down to a single app. Lion is going to amazing.

But it's ok, people like you have been wrong before. I have seen it a thousand times.

It's cool, you don't get it. You'll figure it out, eventually. It'll be too late, of course. But you'll get it eventually.

 

[johnpaul191]

I have a 5 Mac Mini Render farm. 5 core duo processors - 10 cores, each processor with its own frontside bus. 4 gigs of ram each for a total of 20 gigs. Total cost about 3000. It renders Maya faster then any single Mac Pro for the equivalent cost.

That's awesome. I have to be honest though, I don't see many of my photographer friends ever doing that over a single tower (because of the simplicity). If there was an easy way to stack Minis and link them (kind of like a diesel locomotive?), that might really be a knife in the Pro.

I don't know about today, but when I was in school, people also liked the tower because you could secure everything in one box. I know people make the argument that the Mini has the I/O ports to do just about anything a tower can, but you have a pile of devices that all have to be secured. I'm getting specific, but those people buy computers... and often turn them over faster than home users (meaning they buy more).

My last tower was a G4.... For what I personally do (pro audio), I can get away with an iMac. There is a part of me that misses having a big machine, and there is a lot of me that loves the clean miniaturization. Of course, I still have a shelf of external HDDs.