Ah come on now, the Mini is coming!, you said no way it was the Mini that was in the vid /pics etc or something like that as far as I can remember
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.
The 2009 (Penryn) Mac Mini: Everything We Know
- Thread starter Tallest Skil
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ah come on now, the Mini is coming!, you said no way it was the Mini that was in the vid /pics etc or something like that as far as I can remember
Hey Tallest Skil, I read the first post and the last couple of pages, sorry if this has been mentioned before:
Why do you think it will have SSD? Surely a 7200 rpm HDD would be cheaper and fast enough? Power drain shouldn't be an issue as it is plugged in. I just don't see SSD keeping the price of the Mac mini in the consumer market.
Why do you think it will have SSD? Surely a 7200 rpm HDD would be cheaper and fast enough? Power drain shouldn't be an issue as it is plugged in. I just don't see SSD keeping the price of the Mac mini in the consumer market.
I don't like the dual mini ports idea, and I don't see them not redesigning it.
The dual mini ports, as I said in the first post, goes against the Mac Mini's philosophy, BYODKM, in that you would be forced to buy an adapter for whatever display you plug into it.
It being updated without a redesign to match the rest of Apple's offerings is a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE thing to see.
It not being redesigned would show that Apple is feeling the recession and just not showing it on the surface. They've had nearly two years to come up with a new design to match the aluminum iMac (its design debuted the day of the last Mac Mini update), and if something is released that looks the same, that means that they've abandoned the new design that they DO have for monetary reasons.
I put SSD in the list of BTO options because that's where everything is going and it seems to be where Apple is going. Yes, that would take it out of the low-end consumer range, but that's kind of irrelevant because anyone wanting to spend the money on an SSD knows what it is, and the people who want a cheaper machine won't care.
The dual mini ports, as I said in the first post, goes against the Mac Mini's philosophy, BYODKM, in that you would be forced to buy an adapter for whatever display you plug into it.
It being updated without a redesign to match the rest of Apple's offerings is a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE thing to see.
It not being redesigned would show that Apple is feeling the recession and just not showing it on the surface. They've had nearly two years to come up with a new design to match the aluminum iMac (its design debuted the day of the last Mac Mini update), and if something is released that looks the same, that means that they've abandoned the new design that they DO have for monetary reasons.
I put SSD in the list of BTO options because that's where everything is going and it seems to be where Apple is going. Yes, that would take it out of the low-end consumer range, but that's kind of irrelevant because anyone wanting to spend the money on an SSD knows what it is, and the people who want a cheaper machine won't care.
New design, why so sure? , the Mini staying white fits nicely with the white macbook with them both being at the so called 'low end'.
I don't see a little bit of black pigment into the plastic mix costing that much tbh
Wasn't it Apple who have recently made a massive deal with a supplier(I forget the name-hitachi I think??) for storage devices ....that could have something to do with it , IF the Mini was to get SSD , a deal such as this would certainly make it a reasonable option simply because bulk buying will dramatically reduce the costs
That may be true, but we are still looking at machines that currently cost £450 with a SSD worth £300. I don't see how they can do it unless they go into iMac price territory.
Also, I don't think the mini has a great share of apple sales, and SSD minis would have an even smaller proportion, not going to make a great difference.
Yeah. The current SSD prices for the MacBooks cost about as much as the actual Mini itself. A BTO option, sure. Standard, no.
I did a search but can't seem to find my answer. The new nvidia chipset confuses me. Are there going to be any compatibility issues whatsoever, with things such as software? From what I understand this is replacing intel boards?
Thanks
Thanks
Well, I'm thinking more of when the processor switch happend, from PowerPC to Intel, and all my adobe software became unstable. I want to make sure this type of a switch doesn't affect items such as that.
Actually, I may be confusing this with the leopard upgrade too. Regardless, I'm still wondering if it may create any new issues.
Actually, I may be confusing this with the leopard upgrade too. Regardless, I'm still wondering if it may create any new issues.
i think that ssd deal has more to do with a new iphone, or tablet like pc then with a desktop computer. a mini sits there quietly doing its work, a laptop/iphone is being moved all the time. this part of product cycle (ssd) it is not logical to do.
Looks like our poster of the video was correct. Everybody care to eat their crow?
I do find it odd though that given this was only a speed bump that it took them so long.
Also, odd that the two Minis only differ by hard drive size and memory, yet you can configure both with a faster processor. Maybe the second 2.0 is a typo and it should be the 2.66 model?
I do find it odd though that given this was only a speed bump that it took them so long.
Also, odd that the two Minis only differ by hard drive size and memory, yet you can configure both with a faster processor. Maybe the second 2.0 is a typo and it should be the 2.66 model?
There's a 2.26 upgrade for either model; the base is 2.0 for both. I'm not sure it's worth the extra $150 they want.
Yeah, I've been watching this thread and, as expected, I don't see anyone stepping out and apologizing for ripping that guy a new one. He was spot on with the video and photo.
Cool!
Thread Wrap-up:
1. I was RIGHT. 2.0GHz base.
2. I was RIGHT. MOST of my BTO options were spot-on.
3. I was RIGHT. GPU is the 9400M.
4. I was RIGHT. No Blu-ray.
5. I was RIGHT. It's Penryn, not the Atom. Dumb idea, anyway.
In addition:
1. I was WRONG. 120GB instead of 160GB HDD, but that was to be expected.
2. I was WRONG. 2.26 instead of 2.4 in the top model. Oh, well.
3. I was WRONG. They went with that idiotic display output setup.
4. I was WRONG. No case redesign. None for the Mac Pro, either. Know what this says? THis says that, even though Apple has been WORKING on redesigns for almost TWO YEARS, the recession has made it not cost-effective to implement them. That sucks.
5. I was WRONG. We DO get FireWire. 800, even. That's cool.
Let this thread now fall into the annals of MacRumors history.
But first, your opinions: I was pretty darn close, right?
Thread Wrap-up:
1. I was RIGHT. 2.0GHz base.
2. I was RIGHT. MOST of my BTO options were spot-on.
3. I was RIGHT. GPU is the 9400M.
4. I was RIGHT. No Blu-ray.
5. I was RIGHT. It's Penryn, not the Atom. Dumb idea, anyway.
In addition:
1. I was WRONG. 120GB instead of 160GB HDD, but that was to be expected.
2. I was WRONG. 2.26 instead of 2.4 in the top model. Oh, well.
3. I was WRONG. They went with that idiotic display output setup.
4. I was WRONG. No case redesign. None for the Mac Pro, either. Know what this says? THis says that, even though Apple has been WORKING on redesigns for almost TWO YEARS, the recession has made it not cost-effective to implement them. That sucks.
5. I was WRONG. We DO get FireWire. 800, even. That's cool.
Let this thread now fall into the annals of MacRumors history.
But first, your opinions: I was pretty darn close, right?
But first, your opinions: I was pretty darn close, right?
Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
But first, your opinions: I was pretty darn close, right?
Close but no cigar. LOL
Seriously, you did a great job at guessing what the mini would be. I wouldn't have done that good.
Attachments
Close enough, I guess.But first, your opinions: I was pretty darn close, right?
Looks like those of you who confirmed the picture and video was fake owes the forum member an apology. Be a man or woman and say "I'm sorry".
I don't have to because I believed the picture was real.
I don't have to because I believed the picture was real.
But first, your opinions: I was pretty darn close, right?
No, you were very wrong, you more or less called that guy a fraud, liar and a cheat, just because it didn't meat 'your' expectations.
You (and several other people) owe him a public apology.
Forensic analysis....my arse
Cool!
Thread Wrap-up:
1. I was RIGHT. 2.0GHz base.
2. I was RIGHT. MOST of my BTO options were spot-on.
3. I was RIGHT. GPU is the 9400M.
4. I was RIGHT. No Blu-ray.
5. I was RIGHT. It's Penryn, not the Atom. Dumb idea, anyway.
In addition:
1. I was WRONG. 120GB instead of 160GB HDD, but that was to be expected.
2. I was WRONG. 2.26 instead of 2.4 in the top model. Oh, well.
3. I was WRONG. They went with that idiotic display output setup.
4. I was WRONG. No case redesign. None for the Mac Pro, either. Know what this says? THis says that, even though Apple has been WORKING on redesigns for almost TWO YEARS, the recession has made it not cost-effective to implement them. That sucks.
5. I was WRONG. We DO get FireWire. 800, even. That's cool.
Let this thread now fall into the annals of MacRumors history.
But first, your opinions: I was pretty darn close, right?
*claps* well done tallest!! once again you have been pretty close...
just one thing....
THE PRICE IS NOW REDICULOUS!!!!!!
EDIT: just thought id show...
top spec MM:: $799US
in australia:: $895US!!!!