Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Gamoe · Jan 19, 2006, 10:37 PM

The only thing I couldn't really understand about the Mac mini is, well why Apple chose to make it so mini. It adds to its aesthetic appeal, I suppose, but as we all know, miniaturization costs more usually, so it is an odd combination to make the least expensive Mac the smallest desktop Mac.

That said, I have no problems with the small size myself, but my biggest (of few) gripe(s) is the use of 2.5" hard drives (due to Apple's obsession with miniaturization on the Mac mini). This means the mini uses a slower and smaller capacity drive than other desktop Macs and PCs do. 80, or even 100 GB just doesn't cut it for a lot of people now a days. I, myself, don't need a lot of CPU power normally, but I do need a lot of space, and a need a fast drive, so it can keep up with iMovie and such.

What about an external firewire drive? Well, FW 800 seems to be leaving us, and either way it is slower than IDE. Besides, what's the point of miniaturization if you need to add another piece of equipment almost as big as the Mac mini itself?

And so, in conclusion, I am hoping that the next Mac mini will use a standard 3.5" hard drive, even if that means it will become less mini. Or, alternatively Apple could add another similar Mac to the line up, which uses a standard 3.5" drive, which wouldn't be a bad idea at all. There seems to be little choice now for those who don't want to get an all-in-one Mac but can't afford, or don't need the power of, a Power Mac. But, I'd be happy with an updated Mac mini, though.

sodamnregistered2 · Jan 20, 2006, 07:11 AM

I pounded this issue to death, everyone told me to go die.

I put a 7200rpm drive in my mini and that helped A LOT, but, I still don't get the people that so vehemently defended the mini being so mini. Like you said, why be so mini just to have to plug an external drive in it? Laptop drives don't really hold up as well either. Noise and power would have gone up a little, but the gains would have been well worth it.

For example:

1.42GHz 80GB 5400rpm drive would have been 1.42GHz 160GB 7200rpm drive.

I like my mini, but still consider the laptop drive a mistake.

We'll see, there's almost no way they can pimp the revised mini as a digital entertainment hub with a smaller capacity, slower laptop drive.

It's really the one product that has always been missing in the Mac lineup (since the demise of the cube). The iMac without a built-in screen. I have my mini and a dualcore Athlon sharing a 21" monitor. I just flip the switch to switch computers. I can't do that with an iMac. The cube was crazy expensive, but there was a market for it if it did not come in a $500 acrylic case.

Plex · Jan 21, 2006, 10:51 AM

What "switch" do you flip? I see a need for something like this in the very near future. Thanks!

harrisjamieh · Jan 21, 2006, 11:32 AM

I assume he is talking about the switch on a KVM switchbox

iMacfan · Jan 21, 2006, 11:48 AM

I agree with the first post completely - I think the mini is great, but would have been just as impressed if it had been that tiny bit bigger and had 2 Ram slots and a full size HD - would at most have put on 1cm in width and 2cm in height.

David.

David Thompson · Jan 21, 2006, 01:03 PM

Originally Posted by iMacfan

I agree with the first post completely - I think the mini is great, but would have been just as impressed if it had been that tiny bit bigger and had 2 Ram slots and a full size HD - would at most have put on 1cm in width and 2cm in height.

David.

And not have to use a PUTTY KNIFE to open the case. I mean, REALLY!

Gamoe · Jan 21, 2006, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by sodamnregistered2

It's really the one product that has always been missing in the Mac lineup (since the demise of the cube). The iMac without a built-in screen. I have my mini and a dualcore Athlon sharing a 21" monitor. I just flip the switch to switch computers. I can't do that with an iMac. The cube was crazy expensive, but there was a market for it if it did not come in a $500 acrylic case.

Exactly. Apple needs a lower-end (that is, significantly less expensive than a Power Mac) desktop Mac for people who want more flexibility than an all-in-one form factor can give them. Clearly, there seems to be a market. But limiting it to a notebook hard drive-- Come on, what sense does that make?

Originally Posted by iMacfan

I agree with the first post completely - I think the mini is great, but would have been just as impressed if it had been that tiny bit bigger and had 2 Ram slots and a full size HD - would at most have put on 1cm in width and 2cm in height.

That's another thing... The mini doesn't support interleaving memory, which most PCs, even cheap ones, do. And yet it comes with a lot of key things that cheap PC don't (dedicated graphics, DVI, etc). Go figure.

Originally Posted by David Thompson

And not have to use a PUTTY KNIFE to open the case. I mean, REALLY!

Yeah, that's pretty ridiculous too. Again, another mysterious design decision.

David Thompson · Jan 21, 2006, 02:27 PM

Originally Posted by Gabriel Morales

Exactly. Apple needs a lower-end (that is, significantly less expensive than a Power Mac) desktop Mac for people who want more flexibility than an all-in-one form factor can give them. Clearly, there seems to be a market. But limiting it to a notebook hard drive-- Come on, what sense does that make?

I would like to have purchased one of these about seven months ago but didn't for the reasons described in this thread. The next step up was an iMac, but the heat/noise problems endemic at the time coupled with the fact that I didn't need a monitor eliminated that one. So, I ended up with a PM DP2.0 which I am pleased with even though it was rather more than I really need. Apple got a LOT more of my money. I sometimes wonder if they plan it that way... :-)

slugslugslug · Jan 21, 2006, 08:07 PM

After the mini's intro, I piped up a couple times with the same opinion: small is nice, but they probably could've made room for a 3.5" drive and still came up with an impressively small design. (And I'd've probably gotten one to sit in a corner and be a web/ftp/mail server without bothering anyone).

Now if they do alter the case to fit a desktop drive (e.g. for the rumored Media mini), it'l be a big ol' headache for all those accessory/peripheral companies that make cool matching mini stuff..

NordicMan · Jan 21, 2006, 10:12 PM

Well, I surely agree with the thread starter, and those following, I hope Apple changes the Mini to use 3.5 size drives, and gives the option of bigger drives, like 250GB.

In fact, I would like to see an economically minded Mini, and the option of building it up to be more like a Cube was. It will probably start with the core single, but I would like to see the option of a core duo. This would add to the cost, or it could come round later in the year.

Apple could come out with the mini desktop tower, like a new cube. Probably unlikely. So, I hope for upgradability for the Mini.

iMacFan, that is a good idea that you have, for 2 RAM slots.

While we are at it, I hope the graphics see more power, too.

Simon · Jan 22, 2006, 03:22 AM

• Core Solo T1300, 1.67GHz
• 3.5" HDDs with 7200 RPM
• Two DIMM slots
• FrontRow and Apple Remote
• A simple latch on the bottom, that releases the top case shell without need for putty knives, screw drivers, etc.

Not that it's going to happen (except maybe points 1 and 4), but it would be nice to have.

harrisjamieh · Jan 22, 2006, 06:07 AM

Originally Posted by Simon

• Core Solo T1300, 1.67GHz
• 3.5" HDDs with 7200 RPM
• Two DIMM slots
• FrontRow and Apple Remote
• A simple latch on the bottom, that releases the top case shell without need for putty knives, screw drivers, etc.

Not that it's going to happen (except maybe points 1 and 4), but it would be nice to have.

They could always change to Two SO-DIMMs to get 2 RAM slots

NordicMan · Jan 22, 2006, 06:47 AM

Yes, the demise of the Cube.

That idea of a latch on the bottom, that allows you to open it, is very good.

The Mini is rather like the original Macintosh, closed.

Well, I hope the Mini comes to have the larger HD size and options, two RAM slots, and frankly, a bit more in the way of graphics power. The Mini would look so good right by a larger display. Later in the year it will probably be more feasible to have a Core Duo Mini, cost wise.

Simon · Jan 22, 2006, 07:59 AM

I don't mind too much that the Mini's closed. The iMac, iBook and PBs are too. What I mind is this ridiculously clumsy disassembly requiring a specially thin edged putty knife to crack open a case when four screws would have done the same job. I mean, com'on. Chances are people will more likely break something with putty knife substitute tools than if they were just able to open the case normally to replace RAM or HDD. Of course Apple's warranty covers neither case so they could care less...

David Thompson · 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by Simon

I don't mind too much that the Mini's closed. The iMac, iBook and PBs are too. What I mind is this ridiculously clumsy disassembly requiring a specially thin edged putty knife to crack open a case when four screws would have done the same job. I mean, com'on. Chances are people will more likely break something with putty knife substitute tools than if they were just able to open the case normally to replace RAM or HDD. Of course Apple's warranty covers neither case so they could care less...

Once upon a time, I had a Mac II ci (I think it was) that had a top that came off fairly easily. There were no moving parts involved; you just pulled back on the latches to relieve the tension that held the lid on and lifted it up and off: simple and elegant--and probably cheap. Apple seems to be getting away from "elegance" as it applies to servicing their machines--not only the mini but the new iMac, for example is apparently a DISASTER should you want to replace the hard drive. You've got to almost completely disassemble the thing to get at the drive. The same with replacing the hard drive in a Powerbook, something I'm not going to attempt even though I could use the capacity and speed. (I read somewhere that some notebook PCs are actually designed to facilitate such an operation!)

Probably most people that buy consumer machines will never want or need to get at the guts. The MTBF of hard drives now probably such that the drive lasts until the computer next gets replaced--but how hard can it be to design one that can easily be serviced should you need to? This putty knife issue just makes me CRAZY! :-)

Simon · Jan 22, 2006, 11:25 AM

It's not just about MTBF and consumers not wanting to look at the guts. It's just as much about memory upgrades or larger HDDs. Those are things even consumers want to do now and then. Apple is either just plain disregarding that (rather sell a new machine than watch people upgrade the old one) or they are trying to subsidize their dealerships which earn big bucks just for having putty knives and the like.

Paco Loco · Jan 23, 2006, 06:15 AM

People who care about things like how easily you can get inside a machine or what RPM the hard-drive is (i.e. everyone in this forum) are such a small percentage of Apples target market that they really could not care less about what we think.

When designing the mac mini their one and only priority was to make the average consumer go "wow - look how small it is!" when he walks into the apple store. Nothing else took priority over that.

I'm afraid that we all have to face the fact that Apple really couldn't care less what we (the people reading this) thinks of it's low end products - they are a huge company with big ambitions who need to shift millions of these things and it's not the 'mac faithful' who they need to win over with them...

chefpastry · Jan 23, 2006, 10:03 AM

I don't mind having to use a putty knife to open the Mac Mini. While a 3,5" drive might be nice, I don't think I want to sacrifice the size/form factor. Also, using a 3.5" drive may actually add more heat. Besides, now that 7200RPM 2.5" drives are available... What I do want to see is two RAM slots and the CPU on a socket like the new Intel iMac!

Jasoco · Jan 24, 2006, 05:14 AM

All I want is a faster processor and better VRAM. HD doesn't matter to me. And it better have at least FireWire 400. I don't need 800, but I do need 400. While I doubt they'll drop FW (400) support this soon, I'm just sick of all the morons saying "Apple killed FireWire" just because the MacBooks don't have it. Give them a little credit.

So, faster Core Duo processor and a bit more VRAM so my 20" display doesn't seem so underpowered. (Not to mention the graphical crap glitches.)

As for the design, I'm all for a new look. But don't mess with perfection. So if they keep it the same (Ala the iMac G5/Intel) I won't scream bloody case design murder.

Also, I want it released at the very next Apple event. (BTW, when is the next Apple event?)

NordicMan · Jan 24, 2006, 09:51 AM

I would like to see quicker HD, as well as cpu upgrade. The graphics can be better than 32 MB, 64 is shipped on many of them now. You can buy a 9200 with 128 MB at OWC.

The MIni has such a lovely form factor, it just seems like it is fiting that Apple would make an optional kind of a power mini, that need not replace the iMac, or even necessarily be as powerful as the iMac. Besides not everyone needs a new display, like if you buy an iMac.

mduell · Jan 24, 2006, 08:11 PM

Originally Posted by NordicMan

I would like to see quicker HD, as well as cpu upgrade. The graphics can be better than 32 MB, 64 is shipped on many of them now. You can buy a 9200 with 128 MB at OWC.

You can get a 9200 with 256MB... that doesn't make it a good idea. With a GPU that slow, more than 64MB hardly matters.

NordicMan · Jan 25, 2006, 12:32 AM

Yes, well that is fine, I am glad that 64 MB is available on the current Mac Mini. I sure like the Mac Mini. Now then, I think it is reasonable to hope that Apple will give to its fine small Mac more power. Then it will not be unreasonable at all to wish for more potency in its graphics abilities.

Peter753 · Jan 25, 2006, 04:17 PM

64 MB graphics aren't available on the mini. I think he just means on other retail 9200s.

harrisjamieh · Jan 25, 2006, 04:43 PM

64 MB graphics are available on the mini, its just you are not 100% gonna get it. because of the 'stealth' upgrade to the mini, some are configured with a 1.5 ghz 4, 5400 RPM HD and 64 MB graphics, and some with 1.33 ghz G4, 5400 RPM and 64 Meg Graphics, though the configurations listed on Apples website are still the most commonly shipped ones, you are just lucky to get a better one.

I really hope Apple doesnt go the integrated graphics route with the mini, I dont think they will, but then again I dont think we are gonna get a fully fledged PCIe 16x graphics card, because they cant make the mini tooooo much like a headless iMac, or people will be tempted more by the mini. Its the whole crippling the iBook to not impose on the powerbook situation over again

harrisjamieh · Jan 25, 2006, 04:45 PM

64 MB graphics are available on the mini, its just you are not 100% gonna get it. because of the 'stealth' upgrade to the mini, some are configured with a 1.5 ghz 4, 5400 RPM HD and 64 MB graphics, and some with 1.33 ghz G4, 5400 RPM and 64 Meg Graphics, though the configurations listed on Apples website are still the most commonly shipped ones, you are just lucky to get a better one.

I really hope Apple doesnt go the integrated graphics route with the mini, I dont think they will, but then again I dont think we are gonna get a fully fledged PCIe 16x graphics card, because they cant make the mini tooooo much like a headless iMac, or people will be tempted more by the mini. Its the whole crippling the iBook to not impose on the powerbook situation over again

smoke-tetsu · 05:58 PM

I don't see why it would be so bad when the iMac has other things the Mac Mini doesn't have even with a hardware upgrade such as built in screen, speakers and iSight plus it includes peripherals where with the mini you have to supply your own. Some people might actually want a headless iMac also and want to BYOKDM. I've always hated the argument that the mini should always be crippled for fear of cannibalizing the other models (usually the model the person saying that has) and then they try to discount the value of the things I mentioned that the mac mini doesn't have.

Although I wouldn't have a problem if they simply just had the clock speed a bit lower than the iMac. Like make it a 1.5 and 1.6Ghz core duo.

Maybe though what I think what I would like to see is a Mac Mini that fills in the mid-range role maybe something like a "Mac Mini Pro" with a core duo and have the regular low end mac mini be a core solo. Either way I would like to see a mini with a core duo, a 7200rpm hard drive, a fully core graphics capable GPU and pretty much the same form factor as the current mini i would definetly want to ugprade to that. Even if it has to be released on the macbook pro and iMac's next revision.