[Gizzer]

Just to add to the general confusion here are my thoughts:

iMac mini:
Will have 64Mb VRAM. If the article is true, the mini will be released end of Q1. This would also tie in with the rumoured release date for Tiger (give or take).
You can therefore take it as read that the mini will be preloaded with Tiger. This being the case, it would be suicide not to release a new piece of hardware that cannot fully take advantage of Core Image. We've all seen some of the new flashy effects built into Tiger (The Ripple being next years Cube transition!) plus the realtime video effects. You can also therefore assume that iLife '05 will also use Core Image to full effect: New transitions in iMovie. New realtime effects, Same for iDVD and probably iPhoto for handling slideshows etc.

If your're gonna attract new switchers, you may as well do it with snazzy effects as well as the main stability selling point. Everyone is initially a sucker for eye-candy

I know we all moaned at the GPU in the iMac & the paltry 256MB, BUT at the end of the day, the GPU can fully take advantage of Core Image.

Don't forget: Apple has 365 days (or more likely 3-6 months) to trickle out hardware upgrades to the entire range that will allow full Tiger support.

Think about it. Why build an OS that your *current* hardware range cannot fully utilise.

Also, if rumours are true, Apple are working their 'nads off to continually speed up the performance of OS X. This means that although lower specced, the mini should still feel just as nippy as a G5 running Panther. (Plus it can make Widgets wibble out of the screen ).

Whatever happens specs-wise, I reckon in practice, it will run Tiger just fine, and with no real compromise.


To comment on a previous post: I also agree that Steve Jobs will be the the new Apple-Crack Daddy. He'll be peddling his wares just like a real dealer. Imagine you finally take the leap into Happy Apple World by buying the mini. Most consumers (assuming they take to OS X) will almost certainly want to buy another Apple for their next computer. People's spending habits are for the most part very brand loyal. Once they've got used to/bored of their iMac Mini plugged into a cheap CTX 15" CRT, they'll look at the iMac in awe and wonder & immediately consider this as their next purchase (after all, almost everyone upgrades on a second purchase rather than downgrading). In the long run, this could be the best strategy Apple have ever employed.

If all the rumours are true, my MWSF saliva glands have just kicked into overload

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by Barto There have been a few Mac classic viruses, it's not like they didn't/don't exist.

Yes. But nothing like on the other side. Nothing. Not even close, in any way. Compared to Windows, we are pretty much "virus free". Yeah, a few.

[staph]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Yes. But nothing like on the other side. Nothing. Not even close, in any way. Compared to Windows, we are pretty much "virus free". Yeah, a few.

I think you missed Barto's point: in the context of a user experiencing abnormal behaviour, he was saying that the Mac user's statement that "we don't get viruses" was incorrect (which it was), and that it was not inconceivable that his machine was infected, not that we somehow can't boast of being a less f**ked platform.

Hell, I've disinfected several Macs before now. All <= OS 9, but hey.

[ast3r3x]

I used to have a few OS 9 virus', probably because of downloading all the stuff I did, but I don't think I've ever had a malicious one. In fact, I think you all know what caused more problems, having a virus, or installing new extensions

[Gizzer]

Originally Posted by ast3r3x I used to have a few OS 9 virus', probably because of downloading all the stuff I did, but I don't think I've ever had a malicious one. In fact, I think you all know what caused more problems, having a virus, or installing new extensions

Extensions?? I'm Soooooo glad I switched to the Mac when Jaguar was announced! (It was OSX/the iPod that got me to switch in the first place).

[dfiler]

Shhh.
Don't feed the trolls.

[psmith2.0]

Even more reason to bury 9.

If that's what everyone's talking about, virus-wise, then okay. In the past (yeah, it existed). That's fine. Any new Mac buyer has no need for it, for the most part. And no switcher ever should since they have no classic apps to run. Most switchers won't even know what OS 9 or "Classic" even refers to.

Which brings up a question: do you think, at some point, Apple will kill off OS 9 support (Classic environment) completely? Makes for a much simpler, cleaner hard drive (especially to a newbie, who is no doubt wondering "okay, why are there two applications folders? And there's also a System, AND a System Folder?".

That even bothers me, and I'm used to it and know what's going on there! The first thing I do is trash all that stuff. I can't even launch Classic if I wanted to (which I don't).

When do you think Apple will finally, officially say "come on, people...get with it already...it's been five years, and it's been a good TWO with a fully functional, usable OS X" and ditch Classic support? Ever? Soon? 2005? 2006?

Realistically, are there truly things - important, critical things - that haven't made it to OS X by now, OR that don't have an equal - or better - OS X counterpart? Anyone here still using OS 9/Classic because they truly HAVE to? I've been curious about that for a while now...

Some sort of specialized, custom software that just never made it to X, but that your entire company or industry relies on and can't do without? Or some sort of compatibility issues with other devices (certain high-end printers or scanners that don't support X)? Or has it been simple inertia or fear in some instances?

[TednDi]

why not a "remove os 9" button in a drop down menue or preference? I have both installed and never use os 9. I was a clasic user till os 7~ then thought windows might be better. Now, back to os X and lovin it. I don't need 9 at all. Yet, I am still not as proficient with OS X to attempt system brain surgery.

I would like the space back on the hard drive.

[BuonRotto]

Would people have the same expectations of this thing if instead of being marketed as a computer, it were marketed as an electronics device? Do people ask or care what the hardware specs are in their TV or DVD so long as they have the software right? What I mean is, imagine if this so-called Mac isn't a Mac at all, but rather comes out from the iPod division, given some related name, but doesn't include the name "Mac" or "Macintosh" anywhere on it. I wonder who will care if it has a G4 then. Nobody cares a lot or asks about the PS2, Xbox or TiVO's chipset. Sure, there is a geek minority, but people have learned to look for these things in a PC but not in their entertainment center. People lok for different specs there, and so long as a G4 or whatever hardware they use can satisfy them, consumers outside of here and slashdot won't give a hoot if it has a G4, G5, Pentium 8 or a Digic chip.

I think the iPod has offered an avenue out of being trapped in the Mac brand. Sounds sacreligious to us maclot faithful, but it's a burden to the company when they're trying to grow, and the iPod has opened a door. I'm now thinking that it won't be called an iMac mini or any such thing. I'm betting that on top of what I said before, that it will not be a Mac at all, as far as its brand name at least.

[psmith2.0]

I don't know, BuonRotto. But that possibility sure does make me sad.

Like we have to go and somehow hide or downplay the fact it's a Mac...just so ill-informed, myth-believing, mouth-breathing Spec Whores, virus clowns, mod monkeys and small pecker-compensating PC types will join us. Screw 'em. And the virus they rode in on.

THEY come to US, and do it our way...NOT the other way around. Their way is a proven pain-in-the-ass, steeped in lameness. They should be thankful we're considering giving them a $499 "out".

*

Oops...did I just say all that out loud? I need a Coke or something...maybe a danish...still morning for me. Lalala...ahem...forgive me...*whistles*



I don't know. Maybe it's one of those entertainment system things? And since last night and this morning, the more I think about this, the more I'm suspicious of the whole thing. Something doesn't ring quite right...




* used to denote sarcasm, lest some thin-skinned type gets his panties in a huge wad and wants to make something of it. Relax...I kid because I love.

[MCQ]

Originally Posted by jph1971 Also, would an airport extreme card be included (I would guess so, but since it´s apple and at this price point, who knows)?

AE ready? yes. Installed - no. This isn't the "make all other Mac desktop users angry" model.

[psmith2.0]

Like Messiahtosh's "it'll have 128MB graphics" comment yesterday.

People (except owners of the top-end G5 and 15" and 17" BTO PowerBooks) would riot and storm the walls at One Infinite Loop.

"We've come for Steve's head, and Phil's ass...out of the way!"



I guess this thing would be pretty bare-bones, although probably support AirPort Extreme and maybe Bluetooth too?

If it is anything like that mockup a few pages back, I always assumed that it would all slide out - like the G4 Cube - from the back. But maybe it's like a little G4 tower, and one of the side panels unlocks and folds down, opening the entire side up? Or maybe the side panel comes all the way off, like the back of the iMac G5, and you can easily access the RAM, AirPort, etc. areas?

It's funny...thegelding asked, just two days ago, "where's the keynote excitement?". A day later, a couple of the coolest, biggest rumors/leaks to come along in ages dropped...and now the community is buzzing like it hasn't for a long, long time.

What did gelding know, and when did he know it. I find that too convenient...

[nsousa]

I do not believe Apple will introduce such a machine.
It makes absolutely no sense at all.

Price is absurd.
Features are absurd.
Intended audience is absurd.

In a time where we could see dual OS enabled PowerMacs and +2GHZ iMacs it's inconceivable Apple would offer a 499 bare bones machine with outdated tech. Just to lure WindowsHeads ? WindowzHeads are stupid assholes. that from a marketing point of view you NEVER try to lure.
Stupidity only attracts and is attracted to volatile products.


Apple is about going forward, not going back !

Ridiculous.

[Hobbes]

Originally Posted by BuonRotto Would people have the same expectations of this thing if instead of being marketed as a computer, it were marketed as an electronics device? Do people ask or care what the hardware specs are in their TV or DVD so long as they have the software right? What I mean is, imagine if this so-called Mac isn't a Mac at all, but rather comes out from the iPod division, given some related name, but doesn't include the name "Mac" or "Macintosh" anywhere on it. I wonder who will care if it has a G4 then. Nobody cares a lot or asks about the PS2, Xbox or TiVO's chipset. Sure, there is a geek minority, but people have learned to look for these things in a PC but not in their entertainment center. People lok for different specs there, and so long as a G4 or whatever hardware they use can satisfy them, consumers outside of here and slashdot won't give a hoot if it has a G4, G5, Pentium 8 or a Digic chip. I think the iPod has offered an avenue out of being trapped in the Mac brand. Sounds sacreligious to us maclot faithful, but it's a burden to the company when they're trying to grow, and the iPod has opened a door. I'm now thinking that it won't be called an iMac mini or any such thing. I'm betting that on top of what I said before, that it will not be a Mac at all, as far as its brand name at least.

I think it's definitely true that most people who buy PCs are not spec hounds. They just want to make sure it can do the basic stuff (E-mail, internet, photos + video, home accounting, word processing, kid's software titles, etc). And that it's not obviously slow (slow being a relative term of course). That looks it nice. And doesn't cost arm and a leg. People on these kind of forums seem to always forget this.

Apple can't extend the iPod brand to things are clearly aren't iPods, though. Using a computer is different than using a MP3 player; you can't pretend using a a computer is like using an iPod. You *can* link up the two in your marketing, design, and so forth. But at some point Apple has to persuade the consumer to consider the "Mac" as a choice. Whether that product is called a Macintosh or something else, I can't say, but developing a new brand at this point it has to be something different than a general purpose computer. Unless Apple is ready to bust out a PVR + Apple Movie Store (not going to happen just yet, I think) this product seems to me in the newly sleek iMac line.

But at the same time the "iMac mini" might strike the wrong tone. This could easily be a solid computer for business and education, and "mini" has such a cute, consumer-oriented flavor to it.

Maybe that what's they want though. It'll be interesting to see how it's marketed, 'cause that's half of how this thing will succeed or fail.

[thegelding]

hey paul, don't go trying to get apple legal off your ass and onto mine


as for having dual machines and great specs and bargain machines with weak specs....it is called variety...also "bait and switch"....like this? now try this....like that...now try this....start with a 499 machine and your next one is a dual tower and 30 inch screen...or not

my mom and grandma would love the 499 machine....can you add iSight to them?? if so, you got a cheap way to talk to family across country

can you shop at amazon dot com and run your ebay site? sure

what else do the grey-hairs need???

g

[Jay]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 (except owners of the top-end G5 and 15" and 17" BTO PowerBooks)

All of the laptop lines have AirPort included since the last speed bumps for each line. The Powerbooks have had Bluetooth since 2 refreshes ago. My rev B 12" included Bluetooth but I had to buy the AirPort card later.

I'm guessing it will be optional for both items.

[psmith2.0]

Sigh...I was talking about the 128MB graphics (I even say that, referencing Messiah's comment on the matter yesterday).

I'm totally aware of what has stock AirPort cards and so forth...I've got a PowerBook that came with one (and built-in Bluetooth), and I do follow these things just a bit.



I was talking about the other thing.

g, I don't think Apple has any interest in me.

I'm just a lackey with an Etch-A-Sketch...

[thegelding]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Young pool-boy monkey love?

that was a given

g

[IonYz]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Which brings up a question: do you think, at some point, Apple will kill off OS 9 support (Classic environment) completely? Makes for a much simpler, cleaner hard drive (especially to a newbie, who is no doubt wondering "okay, why are there two applications folders? And there's also a System, AND a System Folder?".

I've kept my last working Mac OS 9 into a disk image. Wouldn't that be a solution? Keep it in /System/Library/CoreServices, but make it an "intelligent" disk image.

Once Classic needs to start, it mounts the disk image onto the desktop. From there if you ever need to add something to its System Folder just drag it to that mounted Classic image and it will prompt "This looks like an extension, I will move it to the System Folder" like in the past.

With so few apps still needed by classic users simply keep them in Applications/ along with other OS X apps.

Am I the only person that thinks its backwards to separate Classic apps from Native apps when you talk about User Experience? You double-click an application to start it, classic begins (with an optional prompt). People want to use the application, not worry about its classification.

I have only a few classic apps left around (Netscape Comm. for instance), as I'm sure many other OS X users do. Don't remove classic, but streamline how it is stored (within its own disk image) and behaves.

[Messiahtosh]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 Like Messiahtosh's "it'll have 128MB graphics" comment yesterday. People (except owners of the top-end G5 and 15" and 17" BTO PowerBooks) would riot and storm the walls at One Infinite Loop. "We've come for Steve's head, and Phil's ass...out of the way!" I guess this thing would be pretty bare-bones, although probably support AirPort Extreme and maybe Bluetooth too? If it is anything like that mockup a few pages back, I always assumed that it would all slide out - like the G4 Cube - from the back. But maybe it's like a little G4 tower, and one of the side panels unlocks and folds down, opening the entire side up? Or maybe the side panel comes all the way off, like the back of the iMac G5, and you can easily access the RAM, AirPort, etc. areas? It's funny...thegelding asked, just two days ago, "where's the keynote excitement?". A day later, a couple of the coolest, biggest rumors/leaks to come along in ages dropped...and now the community is buzzing like it hasn't for a long, long time. What did gelding know, and when did he know it. I find that too convenient...

Nobody would care that much if the thing came with 128 MB graphics.

[psmith2.0]

Originally Posted by Messiahtosh Nobody would care that much if the thing came with 128 MB graphics.

You're absolutely right...as long as Apple - on the very same day - also bumped all their OTHER Macs in the $799-2499 range (eMacs, iBooks, iMac G5s, stock PowerBooks and the first three G5 towers) to the same.

Don't be silly. You say freaky stuff like the above just to get a reaction and stir the pot, knowing damn well - from your time here and other places - how folks get and how they like to bitch about things like this.



People would lose their minds, and complain like crazy. Right or wrong, they would.

When you say "nobody would care", you need to clarify that to say "anyone BUYING one of these, especially as their first - or only - Mac wouldn't care". Of course not! They would be happy as a clam and "not care" that it came with 128MB...why would they, they just scored big! Everyone else, currently owning more expensive Macs with 32 or 64MB, would probably be a bit irked. "WTF?!?"

[Kickaha]

Unless of course the DVI connector also supported use in a home theatre setup, and the 128MB was part of the real-time video stream filtering...

Not *EVERY* device made has to have the latest and greatest hardware, you know. It depends on what you're doing and what the device was designed for, and every engineering task has trade-offs.

My PowerBook doesn't have the card-expansion of a tower, and that's *fine*... I have portability. Trade-offs.

[Messiahtosh]

Ok, first of all Paul, Apple does not give a damn about complaints about a minor hardware issue, especially since the people complaining would mostly be die-hards anyway. People that will buy a Mac again in the future, regardless of almost anything the company would do, short of endorsing Satan worship....and even then there are the folks who would still buy.

[BuonRotto]

Originally Posted by Kickaha Unless of course the DVI connector also supported use in a home theatre setup, and the 128MB was part of the real-time video stream filtering... Not *EVERY* device made has to have the latest and greatest hardware, you know. It depends on what you're doing and what the device was designed for, and every engineering task has trade-offs. My PowerBook doesn't have the card-expansion of a tower, and that's *fine*... I have portability. Trade-offs.

Exactly, pick your specs, save on others, get it within your price/margins target that way. A G4 or 128 MB GPU cache may or may not be relevant to this thing. We see "G4" and think, "2001 technology" but how many people really use 3.6 GHz P4's or look down on a 2.6 GHz Celeron? It's something of a closed system where these fan boards and other reactionary circles have people poo-pooing the specs baed on what we knnow of the current chip technology, but aside from seeing some bigger-is-better GHz number, do most really know or care if it's a G4 or G5 in the thing or what kind of performance they're going to get between one and the next?

If you speculate that this thing is oriented towards the component concept, then the GPU probably matters more than the CPU, especially if it involves Tiger software tech since it's mostly geared towards playback. DVI, VGA, Firewire, S-Video and/or other means of connectivity are also a priority. An iMac mini or replacement eMac would probably require a decent enough CPU and could sacrifice the GPU specs a bit in balance and would need only the usual networking setup.

[Gizzer]

Originally Posted by BuonRotto If you speculate that this thing is oriented towards the component concept, then the GPU probably matters more than the CPU, especially if it involves Tiger software tech since it's mostly geared towards playback. DVI, VGA, Firewire, S-Video and/or other means of connectivity are also a priority. An iMac mini or replacement eMac would probably require a decent enough CPU and could sacrifice the GPU specs a bit in balance and would need only the usual networking setup.

That's a spot-on observation - I remember when the X Box specs were announced I couldn't believe that (for arguments sake 'cos I've forgotten the exact spec) that Microsoft were only going to put a Pentium III 400mhz when the current top spec was Pentium III 1Ghz. BUT they still made a kick-ass super-fast games console, and it was essentially all down to the knowing that as a component concept, the GPU basically is the power behind it's smooth performance.

[Gizzer]

Originally Posted by pscates2.0 It's funny...thegelding asked, just two days ago, "where's the keynote excitement?". A day later, a couple of the coolest, biggest rumors/leaks to come along in ages dropped...and now the community is buzzing like it hasn't for a long, long time. What did gelding know, and when did he know it. I find that too convenient...

And, come to think of it...... the Mock-up's page hasn't been updated in two days either....... Wait...... It's because scates is posting too much in this thread!!

Now (Whuuuuupp!!!) get to work and bang out a concept so we can all speculate a bit more before this thread runs dry

[johnq]

So...is this thread 'Nova's Temporary Insanity or will we ignore that tradition?

[Unbeliever]

Originally Posted by nsousa I do not believe Apple will introduce such a machine. It makes absolutely no sense at all. Price is absurd. Features are absurd. Intended audience is absurd. In a time where we could see dual OS enabled PowerMacs and +2GHZ iMacs it's inconceivable Apple would offer a 499 bare bones machine with outdated tech. Just to lure WindowsHeads ? WindowzHeads are stupid assholes. that from a marketing point of view you NEVER try to lure. Stupidity only attracts and is attracted to volatile products. Apple is about going forward, not going back ! Ridiculous.

is there any real need for such words?
this is the part of the community i hate the most, trolls/brain-dead fanboys

also being a fan (like me who has a shrine to THE Apple and our Lord in One Infinite Loop ) and a flaming fanboy is not the same

[BuonRotto]

Originally Posted by johnq So...is this thread 'Nova's Temporary Insanity or will we ignore that tradition?

What do you mean, "temporary"?

[TednDi]

Originally Posted by johnq So...is this thread 'Nova's Temporary Insanity or will we ignore that tradition?

Temporary Insanity is what you plead when Apple legal slaps an ipoena on your ass for a too spot on mockup!