toggle

AAPL Stock: 493.42 ( + 0.25 )

MacNN News

Apple offers faster Mac minis

updated 09:30 am EDT, Wed September 6, 2006

Faster Mac minis

As expected following reports of delays to bulk orders, Apple today also increased processor speeds on both models of the Mac mini, delivering dual-core performance across the line at no additional cost. Both models now feature the dual-core Core Duo processor. The $799 model now includes a 1.83 GHz Intel Core Duo processor, up from 1.66GHz Intel Core Duo processor, and the $599 model now includes a 1.66GHz Intel Core Duo processor, up from a 1.5 GHz Intel Core Solo processor. The Apple Store offers a 1-2 day ship times on the new Mac minis.

by MacNN Staff

(30)

TAGS :

Apple

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

legacyb4
Mac Elite

Joined: May 2001

0

09/06, 10:06am | report spam | close Reply |
sweet!

now they have the "usual" suspect upgrades out of the way, next week should be exciting!

panjandrum
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Dec 2004

0

09/06, 10:10am | report spam | close Reply |
No video upgrade

A far better thing would have been to upgrade the video chipset to something even remotely acceptable... I'm becoming more dismayed as Apple continues to release machines which fail to meet my needs in at least one fundamental way. Never before have I had this problem with Apple. I'm hoping the problem gets resolved with the next revision.

MacBook Pro: No model small enough for my needs MacBook: No model with acceptable video performance iMac: No model cheap enough for my 10 year old except possibly the bottom end model, in which Apple's placed a crappy video chipset, which I won't buy. Mini: No model with acceptable video performance MacPro: Super sweet, but unfortunately not what I'm currently in the market for, as it might be overkill for a 10 year old :-)

Never before in 20 years of buying Apple products have I looked at Apple's offerings and found nothing I would consider purchasing. They currently make no laptop suited to my desires, nor do they produce a desktop suitable for my daughter. *sigh*

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

09/06, 10:29am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: no video upgrade

Oh, come on man! What do you want? Apple to produce computers that its customers want? That's just insane! Steve knows what you need and what you should want, and that's what you should be buying.

And no one wants Apple to offer another model or two. If they did that, there might be 7 models of macs, and then you might as well have 700, as computer users would be just sooooo confused from such a large line-up. (And don't talk to me that they've already got a boatload of models, with differnt revisions of the same hardware having the same name, confusing people, because Apple's naming scheme is just so obvious - MacMini Fall 2006 vs macMini Spring 2006, and PowerMac G5 Early 2005 vs PowerMac G5 Late 2004. iBook dual-USB vs iBook firewire.)

I mean, if Apple offered a mid-priced tower with limited (but available) expandability (say a PCIexpress video slot plus one more), for $1000-1200, potential mac users wouldn't know whether to buy that, the mini, or the imac, and then go running into the night, lost forever until they die, turn into zombies, and start to feast on the brains of windows users (I know, what brains!). Apple has said many times they won't be responsible for another episode of swarms of walking dead swarming the country.

So, there you have it. You COULD get a computer that fits your needs, but you wouldn't enjoy it for long before you are eaten alive. Which do you want????

shawnce
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

09/06, 10:34am | report spam | close Reply |
integrated video is fine

The integrated video is perfectly fine for an entry level system. It handles core image, etc. just fine. These systems are not targeted as high-end gaming system... get over it.

Anyway have you actually tried one of the systems with the integrated chipset? It does ok for many games (often better then G4/G3 systems released recently except for high-end ones)

...and about the pricing ... Apple systems have never been so inexpensive for what you get. The new systems easily destroy any PowerPC based systems in performance, features, and price (especially in performance for price).

vasic
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2005

0

09/06, 10:34am | report spam | close Reply |
What's wrong?

Panjandrum, I'm not sure what the problem is with the video performance. What is it that your 10-year old needs to do, that requires high-end 3D card? While the bottom end sub $1k iMac with shared video memory may (arguably) not be the fastest 3D solution, the Radeon card in the rest of them is as good as any other. While I don't have much 3D software on my Core Duo iMac, I tested (albeit on Windows with Bootcamp) MS Flight Simulator X (the demo preview), which has some pretty steep requirements. I set all 3D and graphic settings at full tilt and framerate was still above 30, which is as smooth as a healthy human eye (and brain) can resolve.

Never before was there an iMac below $1000. For my 10-year old, I would gladly get it.

eldarkus
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2004

0

09/06, 10:50am | report spam | close Reply |
well..

I have never used the mini, but the words "intergrated video" make me cringe when makng a purchase. But for the price, who can argue?.. well, except panjandrum that is.

Fast iBook
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2003

0

09/06, 10:55am | report spam | close Reply |
Yea..

I am also disgusted with this integrated video thing apple has going on. Even the same stupid intel chip with dedicated video memory would be better. I have an iBook G4 (mid 2005), and i can play unreal tournament 2004 with full settings with no hiccoughs. I tried iChat with video chatting on a macbook, there was tiling and artefacts all over the video window. My iBook has NEVER experienced such an issue, except once when it was a bandwidth issue back when i had DSL before i got fiber. Apple needs to realize that people love capable low end models, because that is what the highest number of people can afford. Crippling them with c*** graphics system means people will be turned off. But hey, apple doesn't care about us long-term mac vets, the ones who were there in the dark days of the mid 90's, the ones buying osx, and the ones who were there when people in retail stores were saying apple is going out of business. No no. They care about growing marketshare, and they are willing to piss off some of its long term user base to gain marketshare. I just hope they fix this crappy integrated graphics thing before my iBook needs replacing in a few years.

jwdsail
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2000

0

09/06, 10:57am | report spam | close Reply |
As I have said...

As I have said... And will continue to say..

More and more... *APPLE* software, and even parts of the OS, are limited based on what GPU you have...

Most people have responded to that w/ a "It's PRO apps, shut the f**k up and buy a Mac Pro", or something near that comment..

Seriously?

I know a guy that on the advice of a Mac tech, that isn't used anymore, bought Aperture for his Wife's iMac G5... More than 'nuf CPU for the job, but the GPU wasn't supported and isn't upgradable..

How many switchers will enter the Mac market and have similar issues?

I really don't see a slight difference between two 2 year-old GPU designs significant enough to distinguish between Pro, and not... Shrug.

With more and more *APPLE* OS functions, and software, being DEPENDENT on GPU performance... Is it really reasonable that only ONE Mac currently made offers GPU upgradability? Seems more and more idiotic from where I sit.

Either GPU upgradeability should be added to one of the existing consumer Macs... or a mini Extreme, Cube neo, type mini tower should be offered with at least one open PCIe slot... Have Intel Integrated *spit* Graphics built-in, and offer BTO for better GPUs and future upgradability, for when iLife 08 requires a better GPU than your 1.5yo mini has.

Shrug.

Just my $0.02US

jwd

skipwiley
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Oct 2000

0

09/06, 11:15am | report spam | close Reply |
CPU is dissapointing

Either the price point should go back down to $499/$599 or they should have upgraded the CPUs to Core2. I cannot believe that I waited for such a pathetic bump to the mini, Apple really needs to release a midrange headless Mac. I say bring back the "Mac cube":

A cube form factor resembling the Mac mini 2 SATA sleds (7200) 1 Optical Drive 1 Ram Riser (4 slots) 2 PCI Express Slots (1 pre-filled with VPU) 1x1 USB & Fire400 on the front 1 CPU (core2) upgradeable $1099

godrifle
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2006

0

09/06, 11:43am | report spam | close Reply |
Too much $$$

Too much money.

doctor9
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

09/06, 12:36pm | report spam | close Reply |
some posts are ridiculous

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but some of these complaints are so off-base.

With the subject at hand, the mini is and has always been marketed as a entry-level system. As the owner of a mini Intel, I can say the GPU more than handles these limited requirements. It currently powers my 42" LCD/HDTV w/ EyeTV500 with nary a problem. It does some games, such as Pangea's line, quite well. That in itself should more than refute these ridiculous GMA comments. It meets the needs it was designed for; no more required.

As for the OS software statements, I've never heard of such BS. What stock elements of Mac OS X 10.4 do not work in a Mac mini? I'm not aware of any. As for someone purchasing Aperture for a base iMac, well that's just poor advice; certainly not Apple's fault. The software requirements clearly state on the minimum types of video cards required. Failure to follow clear instructions is not Apple's shortcoming.

Honestly, would you buy a Neon to pull a camper, even if the salesman tells you it can? Some of this is just simple logic. You want a gaming machine, then buy a gaming machine. You just need to surf and check email, then buy an entry system. You want to work remotely, then buy a laptop. Apple's lineup is built on this premise. Consumer level and Pro level, desktop and laptop...decide what you need and buy accordingly.

rtbarry
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

09/06, 01:06pm | report spam | close Reply |
doctor9...

...you said it all. thanks!

DannyMac
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

09/06, 01:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
I think the real story...

I think the real story is you can get a 160GB HD in there! I'm pretty sure that's a 160GB 2.5 inch (laptop) drive. I wonder how long it will be before Apple offers 160GB laptop drives for their MacBooks as a BTO option.

smoke-tetsu
Forum Regular

Joined: Jan 2003

0

09/06, 02:15pm | report spam | close Reply |
Assumptions

I wish people wouldn't make assumptions when people say that the GPU in the Mac Mini should be upgraded. If someone wants for the Mini to have a better chip than the same old intel integrated graphics it doesn't necessarily mean they are saying it should have a top of the line GPU nor does it mean they want to play the latest games at ultra detail either. It doesn't have to be either the same old integrated chip or a top of the line GPU.

I myself also don't like how you either have to buy an all in one computer, a computer with an integrated gpu or a top of the line big honking tower and that's all you have as far as your desktop choices go. I don't accept any excuses when it comes to that either.

But it's not like I didn't expect for the way this upgrade turned out and the solution is simple for me I just won't buy it.

mfox
Junior Member

Joined: Feb 2001

0

09/06, 02:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
good and bad

I was hoping the new mini would get core 2 duos, but am at least happy that the lowest cost model now has a core duo. Before there was a compelling reason to buy the more expensive model but now the cheapest model looks to be the best deal. Given the iMac upgrade to Core 2, I'm now torn between it and the $599 mini, despite my preferring a headless Mac.

ZinkDifferent
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2005

0

09/06, 02:42pm | report spam | close Reply |
Panjandrum

So, you're saying that you are looking for a machine for your 10 year old, and in the same sentence you claim that she needs 'Pro' level performance from the video card?

Please, get a clue!

First of all, the new Macs, especially the minis, outperform, even with built-in video, most any Mac you are looking to replace - hence, your problem is?

Secondly, the integrated video set uses a portion of main memory - unless you seriously hope to only need the original 512mb of RAM (in which case you are incredibly naive and stupid), you would put 2gb of RAM in that box, and you would end up with very acceptable performance.

Those complaining about your intel Mac producing jittery and artifacted video output in iChat -- you may want to learn how to read, as you most likely placed unmatched RAM of different capacities in your mac, which actually slows the machine down from he shipping configuration (or are running it just with 512). Ditto - get a clue.

Do not blame Apple for your lack in understanding the product you purchase.

As for testudo -- you really need to get yourself a nice Windows pC, hop on over to another forum, and be a good riddance...

jwdsail
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2000

0

09/06, 02:43pm | report spam | close Reply |
disrespectful?

ROFLOL...

"I don't mean to be disrespectful"

LOL

Dr, you're post is so off the mark, I have doubts you actually read my post at all. Either that, or you have a serious learning disability or brain injury. I haven't laughed so hard in weeks, thank you.

Where in my post did I say that the current mini wasn't going to work with 10.4? I'm not talking about now. I'm talking about 10.5, iLife 07, 08...

More and more, the limiting factor in the whole "User Experience" isn't the CPU. It's the GPU. (Dashboard? as one example in 10.4 that many were disappointed in how it behaved on their otherwise well equipped Macs..) Is it so hard to imagine that there will be some feature of 10.5, or a future version of iLife, that won't run properly, or at all, on what amounts to the least powerful GPU in any Mac currently sold?

All I'm saying, is that if the GPU is going to be such a limiting factor with the "User Experience" that it isn't unreasonable to expect that the GPU in at least ONE consumer Mac be upgradable.. Intel Integrated now, fine, but let me upgrade so I can use Top Secret 10.5 Feature XYZ to it's fullest...

And I'm sorry.. Did you call a maxed out iMac G5 a Neon? Seriously? Why is it so unreasonable for a average consumer that owns a Digital Rebel (shooting RAW) with a maxed out G5 iMac, to expect that Apple's RAW photo program would run on their maxed out G5 iMac? Again, the CPU was more than good enough.. The PowerBook G4 would run Aperture... Any average consumer would make the reasonable assumption that a G5 (much faster than a G4) would run the software just fine.. You don't see the potential for confusion? You don't think it's asinine for a small difference between two 2 year-old GPUs to be the qualifier between Pro and not?

Again. I'm just saying that if the GPU, rather than the CPU, is going to be such a limiting factor in the "User Experience", that Apple should at least offer one consumer Mac with upgradeable graphics. One would think that the headless mini would be that Mac.

Not sure how that could be considered BS by anyone.

LOL, "I don't mean to be disrespectful"

jwd

yakkiebah
Mac Elite

Joined: Jun 2002

0

09/06, 04:07pm | report spam | close Reply |
Mac mini pro

I wish there was a mini with the same specs as the 24" iMac. I just bought a 24" screen!

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

09/06, 04:15pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: panjandrum

First of all, the new Macs, especially the minis, outperform, even with built-in video, most any Mac you are looking to replace - hence, your problem is?

He's looking for a respectable computer that he feels will last him several years, and can be upgraded to last a few more, if necessary. And you're problem is?

And what I find hillarious is that, before this year, if anyone ever said "Hey, look, this Dell is sooooo much cheaper than that Mac!", people would be going "Ha! But its got integrated video and shared memory! That's not even close to a fair comparison!" Now, all of a sudden, integrated video is good enough and satisfies most peoples needs. Great flip-flopping going on.

Secondly, the integrated video set uses a portion of main memory - unless you seriously hope to only need the original 512mb of RAM (in which case you are incredibly naive and stupid), you would put 2gb of RAM in that box, and you would end up with very acceptable performance.

So the Mac mini is supposed to be cheap, low-end computer, yet I need to stick 2GB in there? WTF is that? 2GB is for pros, I would think.

Those complaining about your intel Mac producing jittery and artifacted video output in iChat -- you may want to learn how to read, as you most likely placed unmatched RAM of different capacities in your mac, which actually slows the machine down from he shipping configuration (or are running it just with 512). Ditto - get a clue.

So where is everyone supposed to read this? I just love the computer-elite who just assume that any computer user is supposed to pour over all tech documents to know how every little thing is configured.

Of course, you just dumbly assume that the problem isn't the computer (how could it be!) but the user adding mismatched RAM. Or stating he's clueless and dare run the computer in its shipping configuration (how dare anyone think a Mac can actually do anything they advertise with the memory it comes with????). And the 512MB might be enough to run OS X on an iMac, but with shared video RAM, you're already down to 420MB.

Do not blame Apple for your lack in understanding the product you purchase.

I blame them. If you need a gig or 2 to run simple applications like ichat without artifacts, maybe apple should be putting in a freakin' video card, or including that much ram to begin with. Why should customers buying the computer have to figure all that out? I thought Apple made everything simple for its users?

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

09/06, 04:27pm | report spam | close Reply |
zinkdifferent

As for testudo -- you really need to get yourself a nice Windows pC, hop on over to another forum, and be a good riddance... Well, you need to learn (ha! Good luck!) that just because someone criticizes apple doesn't mean they're just trolling. They might actually be criticizing them because they expect more from the company. I can understand at a time when sales were really, really low, that they had to cut back on their line-up. But you still have to face the stupidity. There are some people who want upgrade options. And these people would like to be able to afford to buy a mac with an upgrade path without having to sell their first-born.

And maybe you should look at yakkiebah's post. He has a 24" monitor. He needs a decent computer to hook up to it (like an imac in a mini's or small tower body). I'm one of those who refuses to buy an all-in-one desktop. I've had enough problems with laptops that I don't need the downtime if my monitor goes out (nor do I see the point if replacing a perfectly good monitor every couple of years just because its used on an old computer). I like extra space for internal storage. I like being able to expand my computer at some point (eSATA is around the corner and ready to kill firewire 800, although Apple's done a good job at killing it themselves).

I certainly would buy a new mac more often if Apple offered some decent headless options. So they don't. So they end up not getting much of my money (they still get a lot, since I end up buying a 600 pound, $2500 tower, but then I force that to last 3-5 years because it did cost so much).

But apparently Apple is more concerned about losing all those MacPro sales if they dared sell a MacAmateur. (They 'tried' once to sell a cheap G5 tower, but it was so underpowered at $1500 compared to the $2000 model it was a joke of an offering - I'm still amazed anyone bought it). Maybe they actually realize what their users really want, and just don't want to lose the profit margins it would cost them.

panjandrum
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Dec 2004

0

09/06, 04:58pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: as i have said...

"More and more... *APPLE* software, and even parts of the OS, are limited based on what GPU you have..."

Thank you! That is exactly my point. I should have been clearer that my main concern isn't 3D games, although I can definitely see my daughter joining us in some NeverWinter Nights games in the near future :-) The main problem in the general performance of the machine. The video integrated chipset is completely unacceptable even for basic functions. A dual-core mini, for example, manages tasks such as minimizing a window poorly, even when compared to say, my 1GHZ Powerbook G4. That is absolutely NOT acceptable, period. I feel bad for people who have purchased the Mini or MacBook under the assumption that it is good for "everything except 3D games". The truth is they are crippled machines with very little future. I would JUMP on a Mini or MacBook if it had a video chipset which was even the equal of the ones I've already been using in my older machines for years....

panjandrum
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Dec 2004

0

09/06, 05:08pm | report spam | close Reply |
zinkdifferent

"So, you're saying that you are looking for a machine for your 10 year old, and in the same sentence you claim that she needs 'Pro' level performance from the video card?

Please, get a clue!"

Zinkdifferent, please do not use the fact that you are on the internet to be ruder than you would be were we having a discussion face-to-face. It is just as unbecoming and speaks of a serious lack of social skills. You are welcome to read (or misread) as much as you like into a post. You can disagree or agree with it, but please try to be civil in your responses.

Toyin
Mac Elite

Joined: Nov 2000

0

09/06, 06:02pm | report spam | close Reply |
RE: RE as i have said

Quote: " The main problem in the general performance of the machine. The video integrated chipset is completely unacceptable even for basic functions. A dual-core mini, for example, manages tasks such as minimizing a window poorly, even when compared to say, my 1GHZ Powerbook G4. "

Have you used these machines? My wifes Macbook pro runs CIRCLES around my 1.5ghz Powerbook with a 64MB Radeon. Especially with the GUI (I don't game on either Mac). Window resizing, zoom effects, minimizing, dashboard, EVERYTHING runs better. Don't even get me started on Video, iPhoto, and iTunes.

MacnnGregor
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2004

0

09/06, 09:01pm | report spam | close Reply |
testudo and others...

First yakkiebah: Buy an iMac and set it to dual monitoring and you are set!!

testudo: some of us know you're not a troll. You are annoyed and can't understand why Apple doesn't take a bit of a hit on its profit margin and open up the platform to a more pc-like market dynamic. The trouble is that ALL computers need more than the 500+ megs of RAM they start with and Vista will make OSX look lean as a mongoose. All-in-ones are NOT the dead-end you think. Everyone I know who thought that way and ended up buying one can't remember ever needing more, ever really needing to upgrade for 4+ years (by then a new friggin processor is being used) and the Apple LCD's do not just shut down before the cpu itself. Theoretically your concerns there are real, but they don't happen in practice as much as the whiners assume.

Also Firewire800 looks like it's making a comeback!

jwd: History shows that gpu upgradeability has also not been such a big issue. you are correct in predicting that it is probably the bottleneck of the future. However, as with testudo's concerns, how many people have bought the Apple of the day and kept it just fine for years? Alot more percentagewise than the so-called upgrade-enable pc masses. Macs hold their value a long time.

padjandrum: If you want a great cheap desktop for your 10-year old, go on eBay and get a one-year old iMac. It will be cheaper and better (and probably full of software) than anything else, especially on the pc side, and it will outcool any of his friends! The MacBook is pretty much all your daughter would need, and the integrated video that turned me off to it, turns out to be quite good in real life use.

I don't need to apologize for Apple, but complaints that tend toward percieved problems rather than actual problems are just annoying because they prove consumers are too easily fooled for their own good - a concern of testudo, I'm sure.

Donfish
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2006

0

09/06, 11:17pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: testudo and others...

Let me begin by acknowledging that I know that I am not the typical Mac user. I also recognize that I am not Apple's favorite customer. I am typing this on a Mac that started life as a G3/266 desktop. After owning an Apple IIc and watching friends and family members upgrade their IIe's, I decided that I will not purchase another "closed box" system, except portables. I have upgraded the CPU, GPU, RAM, and IDE busses on this machine as well as adding USB and firewire. While none of those upgrades meant more money to Apple, I have also upgraded the OS from 8.0 to 10.0 to 10.1 to 10.3, providing income to Apple.

I am now past the pleasant life of this machine and I want to buy another. As others have noted, Apple does not sell the machine that I want, so I continue to wait. Please Apple, sell a computer with 3.5" SATA drives, multiple RAM slots, and at least 2 PCI-E slots for the $1300 that I paid for this computer 8 years ago or less.

Fast iBook
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2003

0

09/06, 11:39pm | report spam | close Reply |
Jittery video.

This "jittery video" i experienced at the 5th ave apple store in manhattan. Not my machines, but those on the floor owned by apple in their store. I have used photobooth on these macbooks as well, and the graphics performance just isn't there. It's the GPU, and the way the system and video memory often have to interact on the same chip. If i have safari, iChat, and iTunes on importing a CD you will not be able to turn on the visualizer let alone video chat or watch trailers online. I have used every iBook model ever made, in all most every configuration, and i've used these macbooks in stores. The iBook is a cute package hiding desktop level performance. The macbook is a toy compared to the iBook, especially the iBook G4. A toy which is obviously intended as a true entry level option. Most people with a pc could get a macbook and not really see any difference in performance, depending on which machine they are migrating from. We need something between macbook and macbook pro, or make macbook better, and offer something even more light/compact etc. I bought an iBook because it kicked a**, macbooks do NOT kick a**, even if they are black. Two words. Colorwarepc.com. I know most mac users agree with me, because iBook gave more bang for the buck. I may just have a chipset upgrade on my ibook G4 if macbook hasn't improved.

yakkiebah
Mac Elite

Joined: Jun 2002

0

09/07, 06:11am | report spam | close Reply |
re: testudo and others...

MacnnGregor,

I don't want pay for another screen! I don't need it. I was waiting for the new mac mini but since it is such a pathetic upgrade(a few MHz after 8 months!) i won't be buying. Maybe i'll get a shuttle pc or wait for the next mini.

dpaanlka
Junior Member

Joined: Nov 2004

0

09/11, 03:04pm | report spam | close Reply |
Way to be

You Integrated video complainers are pathetic.

You can't expect Apple, whose market share is less than 3%, to produce dozens and dozens of models to suit all of your nit-picky needs.

Ridiculous

bealzabobs_youruncle
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2006

0

09/12, 09:17am | report spam | close Reply |
No iBook outperforms Mm

�This "jittery video" i experienced at the 5th ave apple store in manhattan. Not my machines, but those on the floor owned by apple in their store. I have used photobooth on these macbooks as well, and the graphics performance just isn't there. It's the GPU, and the way the system and video memory often have to interact on the same chip. If i have safari, iChat, and iTunes on importing a CD you will not be able to turn on the visualizer let alone video chat or watch trailers online.�

Having owned an iBook G4, Mac mini G4 and now a Mac mini Core Duo I feel qualified to reply to these comments. PhotoBooth is fairly demanding and designed to run in the foreground, it is hardly surprising it steals video memory from background task as it needs it. I see little reason why anyone would be running PhotoBooth, therefore engaged in a virtually �in person� discussion and watching movie trailers or iTunes virtualizations at the same time? So it is hardly surprising that it doesn�t work, but it is surprising someone would try it and find that a fault; it isn�t a realistic set of task for the vast majority of users. I have Sarfai, Mail, iTunes and iChat open virtually all of the time with no issues. When I am actually working on something those apps are still open in the background and have caused me no issues, even when I do light photo and video editing or work in iWeb.

While integrated graphics aren�t my first choice either, the stuff on the current Mac mini are simply better than the ATi solutions that were part of my first iMac Snow, iBook G4 800 and my Rev A Mac mini G4; I can now turn dock magnification and not stall out, run at resolutions above 1280x1024 and not have Expose� lag and I get Core Video. Where anyone can find fault with this performance is beyond me. No, it won�t run the Pro apps or high end games (yet the UB version of Quake III runs circles around the G4 minis GPU), and there is always a chance your entry level PC might get left behind by a new app in a year or two, I see why that is an issue for some people.

Apple has sold far more MacBooks than they expected, I don�t see them alienating all those upgraders and new users any time soon. I would expect at least decent support and application level performance from the current MB and Mm lineup for the next 2 OS X releases. This probably doesn�t make the people who hold on to a PC for years and years very happy, but you can�t expect entry level PCs to last for an indefinite period of time. I know with the current line up my Mac mini is out of here by MW2008, to be replaced by the latest Mac mini or a Pro if my needs change enough to justify it (or maybe some other model announced by then, a Mac tower or a new cube, but I won�t hold my breath).

Bottom line, integrated graphics are likely here to stay and they are good enough for many peoples needs for the immediate future.

Toyin
Mac Elite

Joined: Nov 2000

0

09/15, 01:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
re: jittery video

QUOTE: "This "jittery video" i experienced at the 5th ave apple store in manhattan. Not my machines, but those on the floor owned by apple in their store. I have used photobooth on these macbooks as well, and the graphics performance just isn't there. It's the GPU, and the way the system and video memory often have to interact on the same chip. If i have safari, iChat, and iTunes on importing a CD you will not be able to turn on the visualizer let alone video chat or watch trailers online. I have used every iBook model ever made, in all most every configuration, and i've used these macbooks in stores. "

This is a blatantly false. I performed your 'tests' on both my 1.5gb Powerbook with 64mb Radeon and my wifes Macbook. Both have 1gb of RAM. Importing a CD in iTunes, with Safari, Mail, and iChat running.

1st of all the Macbook could play trailers and the iTunes visualizer while importing a CD. The PB was slower than the Macbook 8fps vs 13fps on iTunes visualizer. The PB also dropped frames on the trailer while the Macbook was smooth as butter.

If what you claim is true, I suspect that the floor models either had too little ram, or there were other background processes hogging ram and or cpu cycles.

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

02/10	Apple sells scaled-back 13-inch MacBook...
02/10	Apple sues Motorola over alleged Qualcomm...
02/10	Leaks: whole MacBook Pro line to drop...
02/10	Jobs did serve on Bush export council...
02/10	Amazon could have Kindle Fire 9-inch...

Show All

02/10	Apple sues Motorola over alleged Qualcomm...
02/10	Leaks: whole MacBook Pro line to drop...
02/10	Amazon could have Kindle Fire 9-inch...
02/09	Google said making self-branded wireless...
02/09	NOAA switches support from BlackBerry...

Show All

02/09	Apple explores environment-sensitive...
02/08	Paul McCartney to perform live concert...
02/06	Microsoft prepping Dynamics CRM apps...
02/03	iBooks Author update clarifies EULA...
02/02	Bug in iTunes Match may switch 'explicit...

Show All

02/10	$380 off refurbished 2.8GHz Mac Pro...
02/09	iHome Dual Alarm Clock for Apple iPod...
02/08	Save 69% on SanDisk Cruzer 32GB USB...
02/07	Refurb. Olympus 14MP Digital Camera...
02/06	17-inch, 2.2GHz MacBook Pro, cut to...

Show All

toggle

Apple offers faster Mac minis

updated 09:30 am EDT, Wed September 6, 2006

Faster Mac minis

Related Articles

Recent Articles

sweet!

No video upgrade

Re: no video upgrade

integrated video is fine

What's wrong?

well..

Yea..

As I have said...

CPU is dissapointing

Too much $$$

some posts are ridiculous

doctor9...

I think the real story...

Assumptions

good and bad

Panjandrum

disrespectful?

Mac mini pro

Re: panjandrum

zinkdifferent

re: as i have said...

zinkdifferent

RE: RE as i have said

testudo and others...

re: testudo and others...

Jittery video.

re: testudo and others...

Way to be

No iBook outperforms Mm

re: jittery video

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace