MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

On the single core model-fine
On the $799 Core Duo-NO F*&^%$G WAY.

Mr Jobs,
I'm the customer & the customer is ALWAYSright. It's my money.

You will find that the chip is optimized for Micro$oftopoly's Direct X B$. This is a component right out of a Wal-Mart Center-Aisle Bargain Basement Special.

I don't know why folks are moaning about the new graphics chip. It's a low-end Mac, for the love of Pete.

Man, if there is one reason NOT to buy this system, THIS is it. I don't think there is ANY reason SHARED memory makes sense in a MAC. Man, I'm REALLY disappointed in Jobs on this one.

I'm the customer & the customer is ALWAYSright. It's my money.

So, like, don't buy it. I'm not going to. I'm not buying the "boom box" either. Too expensive and doesn't fit my needs.

Life's too short to get angry because Apple releases a product you don't care about.

We will need to wait til REV C

Glaken, do you want to know why SHARED memory makes sense? Good, I'll tell you... MOVIES.

Apple is obviously trying to market the mini as a media center... Using integrated video with shared memory is the only way to keep costs at $600 yet still allow the graphics engine to use as much Ram as needed for movies and HD video content...

Movies are the next step for Apple folks.. Hi-def movies require A LOT of video RAM.. Apple is certainly not going to include a 256 mb graphics card in a Mini and still be able keep the price at $600... Integrated video with shared Ram was the solution...

Correction:

The previous Mac mini was quietly updated (several months ago) to have 64MB RAM, 5400 rpm hard drives and 1.33/1.5Ghz G4 CPUs. Apple never bothered to update the packaging.

I love it when all these tech nerds whine about the Mac mini, when they should be looking at the iMac at the least. The Mini will do better than the previous model for the average user. It comes with come with Frontrow, remote control etc just to name a few upgrades..

I dunno. IF Intel isn't hyping things (which is a big "if"), then this isn't your father's integrated graphics. Supposedly, the only thing it has in common with the familiar cheapo integrated chipsets is that it uses the same physical RAM as the CPU. But (again, if I've got this right) it has its own path to the RAM, so it's not fighting the CPU for access. So it may be a lot faster than you think.

Or not. I'm sure the magazines will be testing the bejeezus out of this thing in the coming weeks.

(Seriously, I'd be jaw-drop stunned if the graphic performance turned out to be as bad as the naysayers fear. Apple generally doesn't sell crap.)

C'mon everybody, say it with me:

Bitch, Bitch, Bitch, Bitch, Bitch

Say it rythmically so you get the feel for what I'm trying to tell you:

Bitch, Bitch....Bitch, Bitch, Bitch

Get over it you morons! The Mac mini will not explode b/c it doesn't have a dedicated graphics card. It will do just fine with the chipset it was introduced with!

Mike, I'm in complete agreement with you. This release makes complete sense and fits into their future plans...Movies!

What a bunch of frickin' whining babies, if you don't like the new Mac mini DON'T buy one, sheesh!

A HUGE feature that's been largely overlooked on the new Mini is AUDIO INPUT. Finally Apple has gotton over trying to use the lack of audio input as a step up feature.

I have a 1.42 Mini and I have to say I just love it. And after I put a Gig in it, it cruches SETI@Home (call me a geek) 2 1/2 hours...

As compared to my 2.2 Pentium M Dell runs at about 2 hours...


So I've never understood the performance nag that everyone talked about. I've always felt that theses are people NOT working on Minis. Just reading about them.


With that said...HOLY SPEED BUMP BATMAN! The Bus and RAM increases (both speed and size) makes Minis Corvette on the Internet Superhighway.

THE VIDEO SUCKS BECAUSE ITS FASTER!

I AM PISSED BECAUSE I CAN NOW HAVE UP TO 2GB RAM!

I LIKE AGP BETTER THAN PCI EXPRESS!!!

WWWWHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!

With the huge overall bandwidth difference, the new integrated graphics is quite likely still substantially faster than the one in the old mini. Not enough for a medium range or high end Mac, but probably okay for the mini.

And Macs King is right, the audio interfaces are a good step forwards; Both input (new) and output are now digital as well! Plus Gigabit ethernet - another limitation gone!

I ordered the high end one today. I feel guilty cutting my local reseller out of my purchases because they really are a good store and have been great servicing my machines, so I did a preorder today with them instead of ordering direct from Apple. Gives me some time to sell the old mini on craigslist, too.

I couldn't give a rat's ass about the shared memory. I won't be playing games on this machine--I have a PS2, a PSP, and will be getting an xbox 360 as soon as the supply is up. What I will be doing is hooking this up to my TV and stereo so that I finally have convenient access to the approaching-a-terabyte collection of video and music files I have spread accross multiple machines. I have been loathing the idea of consolidating these files and now I don't have to. At Apple's memory prices I'd put memory into the machine myself, so the shared memory doesn't bother me--I'd put a 1GB stick in it either way.

What matters most for me on this is that now I have no reason to replace my 20" iMac G5. It really is the best machine I've ever had. I had planned to hold onto for another six months and then sell it and get the next revision of the intel iMac, but now can hold out even longer.

I think Apple made some good design choices to best optimize the Mac mini for its market. And I don't think the Intel Graphics is all that bad (at least the recent versions of it). I have a PC laptop that I use for work, about a year old. It has the Intel Graphics chips. It seems to work fine, although I don't play 3D games on it. It should be at least comparable to the previous PPC Mac mini's video. Of course, 256MB of dedicated video RAM would be better, but this is a Mac mini.

Didn't the "developer's" preview Intel Macs from last year use Intel Graphics?

My Mac mini G4 Has 64 MB VRAM

I, too, agree with Macs King.

The audio interface is a pleasure to have. And so are the 4 USB ports, and the wireless.

I wish my first gen Mini had all this included standard.

ITunes 6.0.4 has front row streaming!
you heard it from me first



iTunes 6.0.4 is not out yet but is documented on the mac mini site

"Sharing photos requires iPhoto (i.e. a Mac). Sharing music and videos requires iTunes 6.0.4 or later. Video playback capabilities may vary against network bandwidth."

For all of the people who have acted as if integrated graphics are a strange thing for Apple you all obviously are newbies to the Mac world. Aside from the IIfx, all macs had integrated graphics until the first G3 tower and of course Apple used its own port which kept us from easily using third party monitors. Granted, Apple's integrated graphics were far superior to the card available to the rest of the world during most of that time but it was integrated all the same. Now most of those machines did use dedicated memory for the graphics but memory busses were much slower back then.

If you need top of the line graphics buy a $3299 quad G5 with a $1650 QUADRO FX 4500 not a $599 or $799 Mac Mini!

Man, if there is one reason NOT to buy this system, THIS is it. I don't think there is ANY reason SHARED memory makes sense in a MAC. Man, I'm REALLY disappointed in Jobs on this one.

Spoken like someone that has never used a low end PC. This isn't a PowerMac, or even an iMac, or an iBook for that matter.

Don't like it, don't buy it. My guess is that you were never a customer for it to begin with. Gawd, how I hate geeks. Always wanting more, never willing to pay for it.

Movies....so that´s what computers are now for. Watching movies.

Dang, guess I better trash my vcr, dvd players and tv...cause the we will all be watching movies with our computers...

LOL. Never would I think that I would buy a computer that is optimized for watching movies and tv shows.

Quezzie, don't you find it convenient to have all your music on your iPod? Think of the Mac mini as less of a computer and more of an iHub.

Why cry. I work in the graphic business - I wouldn't buy this for a graphic work station but what an awesome home machine.
Even better how about a good replacement for the ugly DELL's in an office. The mini is now a good replacement for our admin computers as they need updating. Good price, ease of a MAC - a lot of offices can easily switch. My work will be thrilled.

Queezzie, the only thing I've used my TV for in the past year is watching football games and playing PS2. The only thing I've used the VCR for is as an over-power-consumptive line-in-to-coax adapter for the PS2. Just realized when arranging my furniture last week that the DVD player hasn't been plugged into anything for as long as I can remember. Just wired the stereo speakers back up after not having used that since before the summer.

I'm quite happy with the specs of this new mini. But - and nobody so far has complained about it, are you all sleeping or what? - it just got 25% more expensive ! How dare they. In times when consumer electronics and computers are only ever getting cheaper, Apple bumps the price right up. That'd be a good reason not to buy one!

Another question: Can I connect the mini via digital out to my 5.1 surround system and get the 5.1 sound from DVDs? All I can find in the specs is that it's stereo. If it's not 5.1 (or better) it's not going to replace my DVD player. If it's not going to replace my DVD player, I'm not going to buy one. Anyone here thinking the same?

I would have bought one of these things in a heartbeat to replace my dying DVD player. Damn, I could even connect it to my 20" monitor and do some work... VectorWorks, Photoshop.

I saw some complaints...

THEN I READ THIS:

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1821808,00.asp


NO SALE, Steve. Unfortunately for Apple, I KNOW I'm not alone!
Maybe they'll get it right for Rev. B

Here are some more specs to help ease our pain...

-256-bit graphics core running at 400MHz

-Up to 10.6 GB/sec memory bandwidth with DDR2 667 system memory

-1.6 GPixels/sec and 1.6 GTexels/sec fill rate

-Up to 224 MB maximum video memory

-2048x1536 at 75 Hz maximum resolution

-Dynamic Display Modes for flat-panel, wide-screen and Digital TV support

-Up to 4 pixels per clock rendering

-OpenGL* 1.4 support plus ARB_vertex_buffer and EXT_shadow_funcs extensions and TexEnv shader caching

-High Definition Hardware Motion Compensation to support high definition hi-bitrate MPEG2 media playback

-Up and Down Scaling of Video Content

-High Definition Content Decode - up to two stream support

-5x3 Overlay Filtering.


While this may not give us 54 fps on our favorite 3D games it will handle Quartz Extreme well and do a great job with all type of video playback.

I bolded the Open GL support because this is the key for OS X developers. While this chip set has a lot of Direct X optimization, Open GL is the technology that Apple has based all of its graphics development on and all of the reviews of this processor have used only Direct X based benchmarks. Maybe Apple is genuinely pleased with the Open GL support that Intel has incorporated in this product.

Integrated video or not, I'll guarantee you that when the benchmarks come out, this will still be much faster than the previous Radeon 9200 was. Besides, this is an entry level machine for Christ sakes, so stop your bitching people.

Here is another interesting feature I left out.

-Dynamic Video Memory Technology (DVMT) 3.0 supports up to 224MB of video memory; system memory is allocated where it is needed dynamically.

Now that is interesting. I would definitely upgrade my memory to at least 1GB and probably 2GB if the graphics processor can dynamically grab up to 224MB of my systems RAM. Especially if Rosetta is an important part of using my software.

While this may not give us 54 fps on our favorite 3D games

---

I hope you're being sarcastic..

it's a Mac mini.. anyone in here considering HIGH END GAMING on (let's be honest) a Mac... and.. (even more specific) a Mac MINI... should jump off a cliff. Seriously, THINK.

The high end will come later.. since that's the LEAST POPULAR CATEGORY.


Whining about niche markets like video editing.. puh-lease..

At the $600-800 price point without a monitor, keyboard or mouse the use of the Kia of GPUs with shared memory is unacceptable. My God, Dell is selling laptops with the core chip (including a display & input devices) for around $100 more than the new mini.

Apple is getting damn cheap and it's starting to really show. No FireWire in the new iPod (USB 2 sucks for iPod sync), no built-in modem (some of us use our Macs to FAX, Steve), a cheapened software package with new Macs and now shared memory on Intel GPUs.

Even the most basic of Macs has always had a decent graphics chip for years and years. I was fully prepared to buy a couple of these new Mac minis today, but will not now. <i>REALMacintoshes do not use Intel shared graphics.

Steve Jobs, being a chintzy MF is bad Karma. How much could a decent ATI video chip cost? Did you have to sell your soul to Otellini in order to get the deal done?

Let's see, 2 SuperDrive Mac minis with AppleCare and upgraded drive and memory sales lost from but one long-time Mac user. I will not recommend one of these to anybody. I'm sure I'm not alone. I'll see you in hell before I buy one of these. Maybe you can sucker Windows 'switchers' with sh*t graphics, but not real Mac users.

Well, the question isn't whether this is a bad Mac--arguably there's no such thing.

The question is whether this Mac is better than the one it replaces.

From the look of the graphics subsystem, I'd say no. First, you have the issue of shared memory (there goes 64MB of your 512MB). Frankly, every review I've seen of the Radeon 9200 certainly puts it ahead of Intel's on-board graphics.

This is where I get a bit snarky, though. If Apple had dumped the Radeon 9200 for Intel's graphics chip in order to keep the price at $499, I could understand. But, personally, I'd've sacrificed the gigabit Ethernet and the audio in to keep the price at $499. As it is, I'm paying an extra $100 for things I probably won't use while losing stuff I would use.

Over on the Ars boards a poster had it right:
"Welcome to e-Machines."

Last year, when Intel made a mini rip-off and showed it publicly these same boards were full of jokes about shared Intel graphics. A couple of quarts of Cupertino Kool-Aid later you are defending this lame decision.

Amazing

will playback 1080p h.264 video? WIll i be able to use it as a media machine on my Sharp Aquos 45" 180p screen?

that is all i want to know.

looking at the quicktime website - the answer is no.

http://www.apple.com/quicktime/guide/hd/recommendations.html

For 1280x720 (720p) video at 24-30 frames per second:
QuickTime 7 for Mac OS X:
* 1.8 GHz PowerMac G5 or faster Macintosh computer; 1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo or faster
* At least 256MB of RAM
* 64 MB or greater video card

For 1920x1080 (1080p) video at 24 frames per second:
QuickTime 7 for Mac OS X:
* Dual 2.0 GHz PowerMac G5 or faster Macintosh computer; 2.0 GHz Intel Core Duo or faster
* At least 512MB of RAM
* 128MB or greater video card

Mr. Reese, just what kind of monster video card do you think you need to play DVDs?

mike,

Yes, that was sarcasm that you detected. I am not, and will never be, a gamer. I write database for a living and love the Mac as a development platform. Thanks to MySQL and Java, I can create platform independent solutions for clients no matter what platform they use.

I do however use the Adobe CS applications a lot and can't wait for Adobe to get up to speed with making all of their software Universal! Rosetta may be great for word processors but I do not want to use it for serious Photoshop work.

To those complaining about the video: It will play your porn just fine!

GMA950 will play Quake 4 on a PC. Not smooth but it will play. And it will sure as shiite play any games currently available for the Mac.

Do that with your crap ATI 9200.

the 950 will certainly do everything a Mac mini should do. If you want to play the newest games you don't buy a mini anyway. And games are the only thing that will strain the GMA950.

You just got a tiny new silent Intel-based media center Mac for less money than a comparable crap HP.

tHE dUDE,

Well put.

Wow, if I put all of my porn in iTunes on my old dual 867GHz G4 then I don't have to worry about filling up the HD on my new Mini. 10 second clips galore streaming to my TV and controlled by my Apple remote; Life is good!!!

Intel GMA 950Radeon 9200

1.6 Gpixel/sec fill rate1 Gpixel/sec fill rate
4 pipelines4 pipelines
667MHz DDR2 memory200MHz DDR memory
minimum 80 megs RAM32 or 64 megs RAM
400MHz clock speed250MHz clock speed
Core Image supportedCore Image not supported


Hmm.

Anybody know if the new mini will support multichannel audio output for surround sound, without a USB output device?

Do we know if Core Graphics is supported on this new mini? I know Quartz Extreme is...

Sorry, didn't get a chance to read the last post.... MS Media Center 2005 just got its arse kicked, or will soon.... If it is one thing Microsoft can't get right is simplicity....

To the whiners too lazy or stupid to read the fsking specs:

The price did not go up $100 because this model's "low end" already INCLUDES the wireless tech that the previous model charged (you guessed it) $100 for the upgrade for wireless tech.

If the new MacMini doesn't satisfy your techno needs, make other fsking choices.

Life goes on.

I don't care if Dell or the others are selling cheaper product...I'll gladly pay more for an Apple machine running the more stable and OS X....plus iLife...plus UNIX...plus...

"Intel GPU Chips with Shared Memory Suck"

You are so right. I've been building my own for about 15 years now, and shared video is the first step on the slippery slope of cheap mediocrity that Mr. Jobs has spent so many years avoiding. Way to go Stevie!

To the whiners whining about the whiners . . .
stop your fsking whining

without thinking or knowing what this REALLY means when you sit down in front of a Mini.

Wait and see? Look at real tests? Nah--haven't you heard? Mindless bitching is all the rage!

Low-end PCs have integrated graphics. And that's all they need. Shocker!