You have a point. I had understood, wrongly it appears, that Mini Display Port to HDMI adapters were every expensive. Apparently, though, they are available for less that $30. Thus, while Apple's decision to make one of its video ports HDMI only certainly makes marketing sense, it probably makes less sense when viewed from a purely technical perspective.
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.
A new Mac Mini could potentially make me hold my breath longer for a new MBA...
- Thread starter Huubster
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Absolutely. And that's my point. With two MDPs, we could use two ACDs. Why wouldn't Apple want that capability to sell two ACDs? I guess their hope would be to get people to buy MPs then? Heck, it just doesn't make sense to me especially with Apple adding sound to MDP. It would allow people to buy two new 27" LED ACDs when they're released. It would allow people to connect one HDMI flat panel TV and an LED ACD. The HDMI limits more than the DVI did before it. It's installing a far inferior capability to allow people to connect their flat panel TVs without an adaptor. I guess for those wanting inferiority it's acceptable as it's cheap and cheap is what people want nowadays. Excuse me for expecting more from Apple.
This isn't hard to figure out. I know many people, including the developer of the uber popular app "Deliveries," that use their Mac Mini as a cheap file server. An HDMI port lets them hook ITMS content up to their TV, which is not a bad idea since Apple TV can't output in high-definition. The HDMI is the best feature of the new Mac Mini.
I love the ADC. I used to have two with my MacPro, but sold the second one. It's a great product - but I think it's pretty obvious that more people would use an HDMI output than a second MDP.
This is the most tempting feature of the new Mac Mini. I'd look into buying it, if I weren't certain a new Apple TV is just over the horizon.
As noted in earlier posts, I think the addition of an HDMI port to the Mac mini is terrific. Most of us who have home theaters have a plentitude of HDMI cables but few have Mini Display Port to HDMI adapters. Fewer still know that the MDP now supports both video and audio. Thus, on balance, I think that Apple has really provided the greatest good to the greatest number by adding the HDMI port.
I don't plan on updating my Apple TV. I may ultimately replace it with one of the new Mac minis but it seems to me that even an updated Apple TV would be far too proprietary and limited compared to the Mac mini, which is a real computer.
Yeah! ^_^ Totally agree. That news is FABULOUS! And who wants to use some clunky dongle on the back of their machine? How totally unApplelike!
I really feel your tergiversation about Apple TV. I don't feel burned in having bought mine, but I totally agree it's a mediocre device. I feel pretty strongly that if Apple updates it, it will run a variant of iOS, and will be expanded vastly in functionality.
I'll withhold judgement until I see a product. Until then, if I were building a new theatre, I'd use this Mac Mini as the centerpiece!
I bought an Apple TV, about two-and-a-half years ago, right after Apple started making HD movies available on iTunes. Although the resolution was only 720p, that was all my HDTV was capable at the time. I soon gave up on HD movies from iTunes, though, because at $4.99 each the rental price for new releases was way too high. I then started systematically ripping my DVD movies and converting them to M4V format, so that I could play them on the Apple TV via iTunes.
Six months after I got the Apple TV I bought a Blu-ray player and a Pioneer plasma 60 inch HDTV with 1080p resolution. Ever since, I have watched new releases exclusively on BD. I rent my BDs under subscription plans from Netflix for mail order and Blockbuster for in store exchanges. Those subscription plans have been far more cost effective than anyone's online rental offers are. I do buy a few BDs, but not many.
I have a pretty good home theater, if I do say so myself, so a new Mac mini would be a good fit for it. I'm not ready to do it yet but very well may sometime in the future. Until and unless Apple includes a real Web browser with Flash support in a new Apple TV, I won't be in the market for one. I will never again rent online content from iTunes, or anybody else who insists on selling it a la carte at extortionate prices.
I posted this somewhere already, but just in case you guys missed it, looks like Apple is definitely planning on updating ATV, it will run iOS, and looks pretty damn cool: link
Not sure how all of this will play out, or what Apple's long term goals are with respect to this "hobby", but I can definitely see the potential. I now understand why Nintendo is concerned...something like this could affect the Wii market, in addition to the increasing competition iOS devices are presenting to the DS etc.
I get your point, dude. I had two ACDs. I know the frustration of trying to wire two of them into a Macpro. The cables are too short, and the higher end cards don't support ACD.
I think you're the one missing the point, actually Scotsdale. On my regular Mac board people are complaining like mad about the $200 price increase. Do you think the Mac Mini market are the same people buying a $900 ACD? Let alone clamoring too hook up two?
Frak no. They have crappy Dell monitors or whatever, and want to wire them so they get a computer on the cheap.
An HDMI port is obviously much more useful for the reasons above.
Bri
I think you're the one missing the point, actually Scotsdale. On my regular Mac board people are complaining like mad about the $200 price increase. Do you think the Mac Mini market are the same people buying a $900 ACD? Let alone clamoring too hook up two?
Frak no. They have crappy Dell monitors or whatever, and want to wire them so they get a computer on the cheap.
An HDMI port is obviously much more useful for the reasons above.
Bri
They have included a $29 HDMI to DVI. If they're going to put a convertor in the deal, wouldn't we all be better with a much more capable second mini display port that "converts" to HDMI with sound out? That way people could connect their "crappy" HDMI connected components.
The point is we lost when EVERYONE could have "won." Apple could sell MORE LED ACDs. And those who couldn't afford the extravagant cost of an LED ACD could still install their "crappy" HDMI connected flat panel TV via the "included" MDP to HDMI convertor cable.
My "point" was not "got." Everybody is not poor. Why not focus on the POSSIBILITY that everyone is not poor and cannot pay $599 for two refurbished 24" LED ACDs. Apple could have pleased everyone much easier, and had the upside potential of selling extra LED ACDs. I actually think they're a complete bargain at $599. I have three of them, and I have bought four of them. There is no way to install two 24" LED ACDs, and that's frustrating and missing the opportunity to capitalize on another sale...
Scottsdale -- Because of the way in which you would want to use a Mac mini, I understand your frustration with Apple's having eliminated one of the Mini Display Ports and replaced it with an HDMI port. I suspect, though, that few buyers of new Mac minis would share your concerns. It seems to me that potential buyers who want to use the new Mac mini in a home theater and welcome the change represent a hefty percentage of potential buyers. To such users, the presence of an HDMI connection on the Mac mini out of the box means that connecting it to an AV receiver or HDTV is as simple as finding an HDMI cable of the proper length. Anyway, that's why I think that Apple was right. After all, why shouldn't I appreciate not having to spend an extra $30 for an MDP to HDMI adapter?
I think the HDMI port was a good call. Two 24" ACD's cost $1800. Very few people would attach them to $700 mini. 99% of people with that kind of display need would buy a 27" iMac and attach a single ACD, or buy a MP. The mini is used primarily in basic desktop settings, SOHO server applications, and home theater. The lack of an HDMI port hurt when it was compared it to competitive consumer offerings from Dell, etc. Having the HDMI port built in reassures consumers it's HDMI compatible. Even if a MDP->HDMI dongle had been included for free, it's still an inconvenience, and likely created consumer fear that there could be HDMI compatibility problems, even if that fear was unfounded.
Or they cost $599 each, the way I have bought my last three. Convertors cost $29. I am disappointed, and while many may not be, I am. The problem is there's no "converting the opposite way." That is the problem. The other way, EVERYONE could be happy! Including the MDP to HDMI would have made EVERYONE have ALL capabilities they wanted!
We are mostly all nerds around here, so I think that it's sometimes hard for us to understand that Apple's marketing, wisely it seems to me, is pitched at non-nerd potential users. I suggest that there are exponentially more of them than there are of us and that a hefty number of them have home theaters and have been waiting for a little Mac mini equipped with an HDMI port. I also suggest that most of them don't know and don't care that, with a VESA 1.3 capable MDP to HDMI converter, the Mini Display Ports on recent Macs are capable of transmitting video and audio to HDMI equipped HT components. Apple knows this, too, so they put an HDMI port in the Mac mini because they thought that doing so would do the greatest good for the greatest number.
Totally. I think the target audience of the Mac Mini is just above the audience of the white Macbook. The white Macbook users I've known have been people with minimal interest in computers, attracted to Macs for the simplicity. They want the cheapest one they can find. They have no care that it will crack, no care that it has fewer ports, no care of the increased durability and resale of the aluminum. They just want cheap.
The Mac Mini owner is a step above that. They have a cheap monitor and keyboard already, and my God they aren't going to spend $1200 on an iMac. It's a waste of money when I already have a screen! They're technically minded, but they are cheap. The other part of the Mac Mini population are using it for a server.
Both sides of the Mac Mini population would be interested in wiring it into their home theater. Neither side is going to shell out $900 for an ADC, let alone two. One side is too cheap, the other side doesn't use it as a work machine.
But still... it's pointless saying this to many... but you know exactly what I am talking about. EVERYONE could have been happy and Apple could have announced out-of-the-box HDMI support with an included MDP with sound to HDMI instead of HDMI to DVI.
I know the marketing bit, but they could have marketed it with HDMI with an included cable. I just find it odd to not want to keep all customers happy and keep "potential" SALES up. The nature of their wanting to market to the HDMI market is great, ADD SOUND TO MDP and an HDMI convertor and everyone gets everything on their wish list... except all of those wanting a "relevant" Arrandale CPU... as to some here C2D is dead tech and worthless. We cannot go back from HDMI to MDP, and that's why the decision sucks for those who care and buy Apple's LED ACDs.
The benchmarks are out. It's a mediocre improvement at best.
http://www.macworld.com/article/151349/2010/06/macmini_mid2010.html
For $200 more? No thanks.
If Apple TV does go too long without being updated, I'll just buy an old Mac Mini on Craig's List. Though - with this model being such a minimal improvement, I doubt old ones will depreciate much.
http://www.macworld.com/article/151349/2010/06/macmini_mid2010.html
For $200 more? No thanks.
If Apple TV does go too long without being updated, I'll just buy an old Mac Mini on Craig's List. Though - with this model being such a minimal improvement, I doubt old ones will depreciate much.
You call a 100% GPU improvement "minimal?"
In addition, there's the "looks/design" improvements of a "unibody" Mac mini to look like shear perfection on top of the desk next to ONE LED ACD.
And add in your coveted HDMI?
Some people are NEVER happy.
EDIT... forgot to add the SDXC. Still minimal?
You call a 100% GPU improvement "minimal?"
In addition, there's the "looks/design" improvements of a "unibody" Mac mini to look like shear perfection on top of the desk next to ONE LED ACD.
And add in your coveted HDMI?
Some people are NEVER happy.
EDIT... forgot to add the SDXC. Still minimal?
The PS test is exactly the same. Even including the GPU, it's only 13 percent faster. Besides, that's a 320m, which is available is some sub $400 netbook devices. Not exactly state of the art. If anything, it just shows how deficient the old GPU was.
Their GPU test is framerate for COD4, which was made back when sabertooth tigers roamed the earth 6 million years ago, or whatever. Isn't that written in a universal binary? Show me 50 percent improvement with TF2, and MAYBE you'd have a point.
So, if you play 5 year old games, you can get a framerate increase. If you do actual PS work, expect nothing.
Bri
That's just the thing. The "average" Mac mini buyer isn't playing games. Sorta like your argument that it's normal for every Mac mini buyer to want HDMI. Those buying a "PC" for gaming will not be buying a mini, but the mini with its 320m is actually getting pretty good reviews from other sites like Engadget or Apple Insider.
Apple says, up to 2X faster than previous generation Mac mini.
2.0X Quake 4
1.9X COD 4
1.9X Doom 3
I would call 2X about 100% faster.
... http://www.apple.com/macmini/features.html#performer
We all know that Core 2 Duo is dead to you and worthless. So I would have never thought you would be happy with a Mac mini, but then you are NOT the target market for the Mac mini. For some reason you spend your life in the MBA forum but don't own one and just hate it and every other Mac with a C2D CPU in them. As the complete system performance wouldn't do the most good for the most people, as some believe an Arrandale CPU is everything.
I am placing my order at the end of the month. Me, an actual buyer, has opinions about it that might be to the contrary of many, but at least I am buying one... others make arguments or rip on "the little mini that could" but were never target buyer(s) to begin with.
I, like many, will be buying the Mac mini Server model. I plan to connect an external BluRay drive to it, and have a perfect BootCamp/Windows 7 BluRay player... and OS X server when doing anything else. I will be connecting one LED ACD to it, and I suppose the HDMI might as well go to my flat panel Sony. However, I certainly would have been really happy connecting two 27" LED ACDs to this thing had it shipped with two MDPs. I look forward to it, and I am not going to discount it based on its GPU nor CPU, as it fits my needs for a media server and "backup" Windows 7 PC.
I totally agree, the package would be complete with Blu-Ray, but that won't stop me from getting one
I have a huge XP tower hooked behind my 55" Samsung LED via HDMI solely for the purpose of going on line, as I have a Oppo BDP-83 Blu ray Player. I see how the players inclusion will/would have completed the package, but for me, the Mini will replace this huge tower very nicely, the electricity savings alone will be worth it, along with the SILENCE!
The Oppo BDP-83 may be the best BD player available these days, although, arguably at least, it is a little overpriced at $500. I have been using a Sony PS3 for more than two years and it has been great. I still don't have a computer dedicated to media, though. If Apple had put a BD drive in the new Mac Mini I probably would have bought one to use as my primary BD player. Apple's failure to come into the 21st Century and add BD drives to its computers is just one more example, the absence of Flash on the iPad being another, of Apple's antipathy to any technology developed by one of its competitors, think Sony and Adobe.I have a huge XP tower hooked behind my 55" Samsung LED via HDMI solely for the purpose of going on line, as I have a Oppo BDP-83 Blu ray Player. I see how the players inclusion will/would have completed the package, but for me, the Mini will replace this huge tower very nicely, the electricity savings alone will be worth it, along with the SILENCE!
I read somewhere just a few days ago that a person had bought a slot-load BluRay and put it in a Mac mini. Now, it did not work in OS X, but it did work just fine in Windows 7.
I plan to buy the server model myself, and I will just use an external BluRay disk player. They only cost around $90 on Amazon. The problem is they're ugly. I suppose I will put my optical drive in a drawer or behind some books on a book shelf nearby with a 6' USB cable. I suppose the standard model would look better, but I like the "idea" of having a "server" model. I might even decide to do some web stuff with it. It just sounds fun.
Or, we might know better than to buy all all-in-one since the LCD will last three generations of computer. So when your iMac dies or is obsolete, and your display becomes useless, I'm sitting here with the same three LCDs, and I swap out the Mini.
But you're right, we're just too cheap for an iMac which is *way* better and can totally be moved over to the home theater, or the kitchen, or my car.
My server is a home built Linux box. I don't have to look at it, but it needs to host up my Time Machines, files, iTunes, etc.
The ACD is useless to me because it only has one input and a fixed cable length. With a normal panel, I can plug in what I want, and as far from the device as need be. Can't do it with an ACD.
I don't need a Mac Pro, an iMac is worthless to me. I don't like notebooks for the same reasons as the iMac. The Mini is perfect for me.
I'm not jumping on the new Mini just because the chip isn't an upgrade from the 2009 Mini. In 2011, I'll buy in. And plug it in to the same LCDs that I'm using now.