[~ Billy.]

Hear me, 'o Prophets of MacNN!

When shall the new generation of Mac Mini's be released?

Humble Thanks,

~ Billy.

[Rodster]

There's been very little info on any rumors for an update. I personally would like to see it updated as it's been long overdue. If it's not i'll just buy the new iMac instead when it gets released.

[SLiMeX]

I've been waiting since before Christmas for any type of update from the Mac Mini, because I was planning on buying one. However, if one is not released soon, I will up my RAM to 2 gigabytes and when Seagate released larger HDD's, I'll throwdown for one of them. Until then, it's just a waiting game.

[mduell]

As for what to expect: 1.66/1.83Ghz (667Mhz FSB) were $208/241 when the minis were last updated and now 1.8/2.0 (800Mhz FSB) are at those price points, so I'd expect just that clockrate bump, along with improved graphics (care of Santa Rosa/Crestline), and 4GB RAM support. Probably minor memory/disk bumps too since component prices have fallen.

As for when, who knows...

[P]

Well, it has to be updated to Core 2 Duo before it can go to Santa Rosa - I'm not aware of a Socket M version of Santa Rosa or a Socket P version of Core Duo, although I suppose it's possible.

I'm also slightly suspicious of the fact that the Macbook was updated while staying with Napa and its GMA 950 - since Intel has had such problems with the X3000 drivers for Windows, it could be that Apple is passing on them for a while yet.

So, my guess is: Same prices, update to Core 2 at the same clockspeed, update to 80 and 120 gig HD and 802.11n as standard. And let's say within two months or so.

[TheoCryst]

My guess? No Santa Rosa for a while still (we'll see it in the MBP/iMac before the Minis). I foresee 1.83/2.0 GHz C2D, same video card, possibly 1 GB RAM standard, and at least 80 GB hard drives, all at the same price points.

If Apple decides to drop the low-end back down to $499, expect 1.66 GHz C2D instead. Either that or 512 MB RAM.

EDIT: I forgot: 802.11n standard, and released before the end of the summer (just in time for the education rush).

[shawnh]

Originally Posted by TheoCryst 

My guess? No Santa Rosa for a while still (we'll see it in the MBP/iMac before the Minis). I foresee 1.83/2.0 GHz C2D, same video card, possibly 1 GB RAM standard, and at least 80 GB hard drives, all at the same price points.

If Apple decides to drop the low-end back down to $499, expect 1.66 GHz C2D instead. Either that or 512 MB RAM.

EDIT: I forgot: 802.11n standard, and released before the end of the summer (just in time for the education rush).

Thats what I would have gone with. Except I would think they would give us a better video card, since many people use their mini's for home entertainment centers. I think apple needs to put some better fans or ventilation as the Mini heats up fast.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by TheoCryst 

My guess? No Santa Rosa for a while still (we'll see it in the MBP/iMac before the Minis). I foresee 1.83/2.0 GHz C2D, same video card, possibly 1 GB RAM standard, and at least 80 GB hard drives, all at the same price points.

Exactly. If Apple didn't even update the MB to SR, the mini most likely will stay Napa and GMA 950 as well. At the current price point 1.83/2.0 GHz C2D is already quite ok.

If Apple decides to drop the low-end back down to $499, expect 1.66 GHz C2D instead. Either that or 512 MB RAM.

I'd like to see them offer a config at $499 again. I doubt they'll actually do that, but considering the small gain people will actually experience from 1.67->1.83 GHz (both are 2 MB L2 cache Meroms), I think it would be more appealing to lower the price rather than increase the clock. Of course in the past that has seldom been Steve's opinion.

[shinykaro]

I agree. A $499 configuration would be sweet. I saw someone in another forum referring to that price point as a psychological barrier, and it really is.

I've been thinking about getting my mom a Mini so I can stop doing tech support on her old Windows machine, and $499 would be just right.

[Westfoto]

This wait has been too long. The MacBook's have just been updated. Hey lets seee some updates Apple.

I am waiting to help someone with thier businss to buy a second computer and the wait is too much as it will change what we will buy (and the price of that purchase). The updates have been slow in coming lately (not good). Mac Buyer's Guide: Know When to Buy Your Mac

[Rodster]

Well I hate to be the bearer of bad news as I too would love to buy an updated Mini. Appleinsider posted the following article today.

AppleInsider | Closing the book on Apple's Mac mini

Closing the book on Apple's Mac mini

Even while at the top of its game, Apple Inc. can seemingly find faults with just about anything, including a bit of itself. The Mac maker is constantly evaluating the market segments in which it wishes to participate and those which it does not. It's an application of love-hate methodology that inevitably produces its share of casualties.

Take, for instance, the firm's petite line of headless desktop computers known as Mac minis. They retail between $599 and $799, catering to the once critical sub-$800 PC market. Conspicuously, it was that precise market segment in which Apple executives asserted little interest just months before introducing the first Mac mini at the Macworld trade show in January of 2005. Maybe management wasn't fibbing after all.

Since then, the Mac mini has been treated to a rather mundane life-cycle. It has seen just four updates since inception, one of which was so insignificant in Apple's own eyes that the company didn't even bother to draft a press release. Even now, the current minis' 1.66GHz and 1.83GHz Core Duo processors are a far cry from the silicon offered in the rest of Apple's PC offerings. And rightfully so, as the company has seen lower margins from the units, which never gained the sales traction of its more fully equipped iMacs and MacBooks.

Some have gone so far as to call the mini Apple's bastard child; the neglected Mac that never was. At the same time, the history behind its creation and the reasons for its seeming abandonment are comparatively fuzzy. There is some speculation that Apple conceived the Mac mini under pressure from shareholders who wanted a sub-$800 Mac, but never really saw much in the design itself. It's almost as if the mini stood in direct contrast to Apple's fundamentals from the get-go.

In at least one instance, during the winter months of 2005 and early 2006, Apple began toying with concepts to more closely tie the mini to the essential nature of its business. The most public of those, per AppleInsider reports, was a plan to include a built-in iPod dock atop the high-end models. But just like every other bright idea Apple had for the tiny Mac, it was shelved and transformed under more economical standards into a project that would eventually emerge as Apple TV.

Ladies and gentlemen, AppleInsider believes in all sincerity that the Mac mini is dead.

[Westfoto]

Well if all of the above turns out true then it is sad. I would say that Apple does need a low cost unit that can connect to an externial monitor. I did like the idea of the Mini & look at the new Airport as it is the same form factor. Well only time will tell.

[Eriamjh]

Why isn't the Mac Mini using a Core 2 Duo? Why isn't the Mac mini running at 2, 2.16 or 2.33 GHZ? Why isn't the Mac mini $499 or less?

Becasue Apple is milking it for every penny. If they kill it due to "poor sales" it's because Apple did not want to sacrifice profits by updating it.

Honestly, I think Apple will update the Mac mini. It could be smaller or more powerful, or more like an Apple TV. Time will prove me right or wrong.

If they are killed, I'd buy one if they dropped to $299 on clearance!

[Simon]

If this actually turns out to be true it could also indicate Apple just wasn't selling so many. I've seen many people on the web talk about how they'd love to get one, but that this or that was holding them back. Well, there you go. Naturally some will say lackluster mini sales are due to it's humble specs. Apple has this habit of not dumbing down features below a certain level just to reduce the price. The mini was the only Mac in ages to go against that.

[shinykaro]

Simon, I think you've got a great point.

It sort of goes against Apple tradition to offer a machine that isn't top of the line in its class. Seasoned Mac users expect more. And I know Apple makes its money off hardware, so it's tough to have a profitable margin on something like the mini and make it impressive. It's almost like BMW trying to produce their own answer to the VW Beetle. Maybe it's best to stay out of that game, but now that they're in it, well ... it's a darn shame to give up on such a neat product.

[jools]

I agree with Eriamjh, the only reason for the Mac Mini to fail is Apple's development - or lack of. The price is on it's way down and you can already pick up good deals on Amazon.com:
Apple Mac Mini - $574.99