MacDailyNews - Where Mac news comes first

Please...keep FireWire!!!!

This is probably misleading. There may be two outputs available (miniDisplayPort and DVI), but I'd be surprised if the mini can run 2 displays at the same time.

I'd be surprised if Firewire is still available in either the new iMac or mini, based on the direction they seem to be moving.

Jan 02, 09 - 09:55 am Comment from: Cubert

Ironic that this article about the updated mini getting a DisplayPort is right above the one about Hollywood's 20th century thinking.

Grrrilla,

That's not so surprising, because a new mini is likely to have display hardware very similar to the new MacBooks, which can and do drive dual displays.

The perfect display out put imho would be the new display port standard and then a display port to HDMI cable or adapter to go into a HDTV. It's like the Apple TV does, but for geeks like me who want a whole computer hooked up to their tv with audio and video in one cable.

What, can it be? A first post lying around not doing anything.

Well I like the mini, although I prefer the Cube, now THAT was a computer for it's day.

Jan 02, 09 - 10:22 am Comment from: R

Steve said Apple would be using mini display port in ALL their future products. My guess is the same here. Just like the mini used to come with a mini dvi to vga adapter, the new one will need an adapter for older displays.

This makes sense for the mini to continue to be two kinds of computers.

On one hand it needs to keep "normal" DVI so that switchers or their handlers can easily hook up their old (presumably PC) monitor as part of the "bring your own" KVM etc bit either with a DVI cable or a VGA cable with an adapter.

On the other hand, it needs the display port out to keep up with the new notebooks and be a true mac to already-apple users either replacing an older mini or getting a new one to have in an already apple-centric setup.

Just a (MDN word!) "thought."

Why is firewire going by the wayside?

I have been puzzled by the whole MiniDisplay Port thing. Why introduce a new interface when there was no compelling reason to do so? Especially an interface that only Apple is offering.

Therefore, I think we are about to see Apple introduce a compelling reason for this new interface. What if the new iMac is a mini-tower designed similar to the cheesegrater look of the Mac Pro with the miniDisplay Port as an interface. This would allow it to only hook up to the new Apple 24" Display and the two units would constitute the iMac and be sold as a compete unit at about the current pricing. This would also allow Apple to offer a larger monitor in the future.

This arrangement would allow Apple to make a profit on both units but would defeat the old objection to the all in one unit of what happens to the other part if the display or mobo dies. This would have the potential of opening the iMac up for many businesses.

Perhaps the Mac Mini would become a similar cheesegrater unit but would offer fewer features than the more fully featured iMac. However, it would have a display interface that would allow it to hook up to other monitors or a HD TV. It would keep its place in the pricing structure.

I guess we will see on Tuesday!

the reason for the mini display port is you will see it on the next or close to next addition of the iPhone. Within 2 years the iPhone will be as capable as a mac mini, and people will use it as a portable computer.

Think I'm daft? My iphone has more storage and a faster processor than my iMac of 9 years ago. Within 2 years. No, 18 mos. iCal it

Jan 02, 09 - 11:13 am Comment from: Jack

I agree with Ratty. Apple needs to keep Firewire standard on everything. It is so much better than USB and really adds to the user experience. Plus for some things like dealing with video from a camera, USB just doesn't hold a candle to firewire.

If anybody at Apple is reading this, PLEASE KEEP FIREWIRE!

What's the story on USB 3? Is it a match for Firewire? If so, maybe that's Apple's plan.

Jan 02, 09 - 11:40 am Comment from: goobi

Unless the unit can support two displays at once, I don't see the point! After all, you just need a converter to make that DisplayPort into anything else! Apple's not putting two ports on it if it doesn't support two displays…

macbones,

right ye' are!

My old bondi-blue iMac (still with me, but hardly used) has less than half the processing power of my touch and only a fraction of the 'memory' - 4Gb as compared to 32Gb.

I think the new lineup will be the first to pack in USB3.

In traditional form, it will piss off those with existing firewire gear, but be very forward looking. Typical Apple move.

All that aside, USB3 sounds wonderful, so let's use it!

Jan 02, 09 - 12:08 pm Comment from: DogGone

Are DisplayPort - HDMI adapters available? If not it will be difficult to use it with an HDTV.

Surely the dual outputs will be HDMI and DisplayPort. About half of Minis are sold for Media Centers after all. To lose firewire would be a bad move, a 4 pin firewire connector take up bugger all room.

My ideal Mac Mini;
Bluray player built in, Firewire 800, HDMI and Display Port with DVI adapter in the box. 2Gb Ram, updated Front Row Software to include divx and mkv support. Full 1080p HD support - killer media center computer

No duh... Of course it will have the mini display port. Just like the iMac will and the MBPs and MBs today.

Jan 02, 09 - 02:39 pm Comment from: Mr. Reeee

DisplayPort or DVI make sense for computer displays. HDMI does not.
HDMI is okay, but ONLY supports FullHD HDTV display resolutions up to 1920 x 1080, so any more typical COMPUTER display of 1920 x 1200 couldn't be used ...
MEANING that it wouldn't even be capable of driving the current Aluminum Apple display OR any more typical COMPUTER display of 22" to 30". It doesn't make sense.

I hope Apple loads a new mini with FireWire 800. Maybe they'll even make the move to FireWire 3200. THAT would be nice! There's a place reserved on the back of my HDTV for a mini!

From what I've read about USB3, like USB 1.1 and USB2, it's STILL processor dependent, unlike FireWire which uses a dedicated chip and is far more efficient for devices like hard drives. You can still have the fastest gaming mouse in town with USB3!

USB3 is like a new chapter of the old Intel megahertz myth. Where the AIM alliance's PowerPC processors had lower MHz numbers than Pentium processors, they were far more power efficient, ran much cooler and in most cases were faster than their Intel counterparts.

Remember, Apple used the EXACT SAME PPC processors in laptops to iMacs to PowerMacs. That's certainly something Intel wouldn't have DARED claim.

Firewire is going away because they are finding out there are problems after using it for long periods of time. My firewire connection helped shorten the life of my external HD, which meant the loss of some important data.

'Firewire is going away because they are finding out there are problems after using it for long periods of time. My firewire connection helped shorten the life of my external HD, which meant the loss of some important data.'

Where did you hear that??

Grrrilla: This is probably misleading. There may be two outputs available (miniDisplayPort and DVI), but I'd be surprised if the mini can run 2 displays at the same time.

Even a single DisplayPort can already drive multiple monitors via daisy chaining, even through the CinemaDisplay currently doesn't offer such an output. But there may be third-party splitters available.

The ned Nvidia chipset can drive 30" screens as well, so it will certainly be the most capable mini ever if it gets that one (which seems quite likely).


Curious: What's the story on USB 3? Is it a match for Firewire? If so, maybe that's Apple's plan.

Almost certainly. USB3 will finally fix almost all of USB's shortcomings relative to FireWire, so Apple will probably keep FireWire around on the Pro machines for a while as long as the existing peripherals still last and then ditch it at some point in favour of the then already established USB3. (Which will probably allow for USB3 to FireWire adapters unlike previous revisions.)


Mr. Reeee: From what I've read about USB3, like USB 1.1 and USB2, it's STILL processor dependent, unlike FireWire which uses a dedicated chip and is far more efficient for devices like hard drives.

Not as far as I know. USB3 for the first time gets rid of the dreaded polling requirement. With the older revisions the host has to perform constant repetitive accesses to every(!) connected device and open port to check whether it needs attention or can receive additional data. This is one reason why the effective data rates are so bad, because transfers need to be split up to let the polling actions through with a lot of overhead.

USB3 will for the first time allow devices to announce interrupts to the host (the computer), so the need for polling will no longer be there.

USB3 will still not be peer-to-peer like FireWire, but its efficiency and latency should be about on par with FireWire for the first time, at much higher raw speeds than existing FireWire. So for almost all uses USB3 will be able to effectively and efficiently replace FireWire while being backwards compatible with older USB devices and not needing separate ports.

Ed: Firewire is going away because they are finding out there are problems after using it for long periods of time. My firewire connection helped shorten the life of my external HD, which meant the loss of some important data.

Hardly. FireWire has no "bad mojo" of that kind in any part of its specs. Your harddisk probably died from mechanical failure or other normal defects.