Apple Mac mini - nVidia 9400M Edition Comments

and remember--you still can get fit-PC2 by compulab which is 2x smaller, runs atom / 1gb / 160 gb / b / IR / up to 1920x1080. Of course it doesn't sport nv 9400M, but it'll cost you (drums) $245. And it's still 2x smaller.

If I was running Apple I'd include freeview+ PVR functionality in this box, put in a decent remote control and as mentioned add a HDMI plug. Maintain the price and find yourself with another iPOD on your hands. As it is they have slightly crippled it a la sony in the 90's trying to produce an ipod killer (apple tv canabalisation? wanting to sell the tv programs via itunes?). Perhaps the latest eeeBox from Asus will finally hit the nail on the head.

Will this generation output to 1920x1080p? I have the previous generation hooked up to a Full HD LCD at the office but the Mac mini will only output to 1920x1080i which looks horrendous, especially when displaying still images (powerpoint, jpgs, etc...)

Looks like the dell hybrid just got a pimp slap.

my oldmini did 1080p 50/60hz

Hugo - how do you think this Mac Mini will compare to the new batch of EEE Box's (B204, B206, B208) due to hit UK shores momentarily - all apparently ro be priced in the low £300s range?

@mjaffk - Thats $245 for one without a Hard disk tho, or CD/DVD drive which will add to the price. Also the Atom processor means it probably wont play Blu-Ray/HD-DVD and it doesnt seem to mention Vista on the site so how well would that play on it?

@timple - I agree with your PVR comments, if you have an iPhone/ipod touch then theres a lot of apps that you can download to make the ipod/iphone work as a very good remote (wireless as well!). Also the eyeTV software and DVB-t USB stick can be bought for £20-£25 online, and you can even get a plugin to add eyeTV to frontrow so it really would work as a PVR

Very poor spec for the money. I appreciate it's a small (tiny even) form factor, but in terms of Apple's line-up alone, it really is the simple or starter Mac in their range. The problem being that the price doesn't reflect that position; £539 (because let's face it, 1GB of RAM is unacceptable) for a base system that doesn't even come with a keyboard and mouse (a +£62 option) is ridiculous.

The Dell Studio Hybrid can be had for £499 with a comparable CPU (2.16GHz Pentium Dual Core), 2GB of RAM, comes with a keyboard and mouse AND an 18.5" LCD display.

I appreciate that in a sense, they can't be directly compared because someone interested in switching to Mac and considering the Mac Mini probably isn't going to be interested by the Dell, but it just doesn't appear to offer good value for money even for someone only considering Macs.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe people will happily spend lots of money on not-a-lot of computer. But I hope that's not the case.

I generally point people to this site if they want balanced recommendations on tech products, so I have to say I’m stunned by the unquestioning and (IMO) unwarranted praise of the new Mac Mini.

The first issue is ignoring the huge price rise for the system. Before the update the base system was £399, with the “high spec” 2.0 Ghz system was priced at £499. After the update, the base system is now £499. And for that you get a more up-to-date 2Ghz processor. When Apple came up with the “time machine” concept I didn’t think it meant offering new computers with specifications from a bygone age! 120Gb HDD and 1Mb RAM?!

I use a 24” 3.06Ghz iMac daily as the main family computer and I also don’t get the “OS X” trump card comment. But I can see that an OS is down to personal preference. Hardware specs. however are less subjective.

Last issue - no competitors? Well, I’ve been waiting eagerly for an updated Mac Mini to sit under my TV as a media server for over a year, so I had £500 of my own cash ready to go.
The “update” was so laughable I found an alternative within 24 hours. £499 for a slimline HP S3652 system. 4Gb Ram, Quad core, 640Gb HDD, HDMI, 512Mb 9500GS Card, and Blu-ray player, running on Vista 64Bit. (From John Lewis BTW, not some obscure website!)

If the base Mac Mini with its 120Gb HDD gets 8/10 for performance and 9/10 for features – I’m guessing the HP would be around 12/10 and 13/10?

Clearly I’m just not dazzled enough by the fact its all in a wee tiny silver box!

Oh dear TR! Comedy scoring for such a basic overpriced system. Value 8/10?? Have a day off!

It just seems a pretty pointless device. It not only lacks the necessary conections for it to be used alongside a home entertaintment system but is also over-priced for anyone considering switching over from a pc.
Also the neo-art deco styles becoming a bit tired now. It looks like something youd put in your childs room in the safe knowledge that there are no hard edges and buttons to worry about.

Well, this is the only Mac i'd buy apart from the Macbook, however it is TOO expensive for what it is. But thats apple for you, they have been expensive for the last 20 years...

In terms of features I'd like to see a mini with a 9600M or some dedicated graphics memory so it can run final cut pro properly. Plus the soldered CPU is just stupid. At least let us rip it open and have some fun for all our moneys.

PS. Value of 8/10, more like 5/10 i honestly think. Plus 8/10 for performance is too high, it's a 2Ghz CPU...

@ABG Although I don't wanna get too embroiled in this, I think I'd take issue with the form factor here, I know which I would rather have under my tv, you pay for design, you pay for small (just look at laptops vs desktops). I would have thought it would struggle with noise and power usage compared to the mini too.

@haim
I happy I am able to provide the perspective of someone who was waiting for the new mac mini and found a better alternative.
The HP isn't as small but its not huge (in fact I was surprised how compact it is) and the noise isn't noticeable. It is black and silver & looks pretty good under the plasma screen. Besides - after paying a (huge) premium for the form factor of the Mini you then need to buy an external HDD to give it extra capacity, which would undermine the point of it in the first place!
As for power consumption its not something I consider in a desktop specification, but I would expect a much more powerful system to use more power.

I don't see the point of buying something small and sleek and them adding on HDDs and Blu-ray players around it, because of all its different limitations.

Rip off.. plan and simple. And 1GB of RAM is laughable. A year ago I brought a silent quadcore dell computer with 4GB ram, 500GB HDD and 2600xt. For £390. Sure, it's a lot bigger than the mini, but it's not huge and it fits invisibly behind the TV. How exactly is this mac mini worth 8/10 in value?

£399 would have been a more acceptable price. I love Apple products but they are being extremely lazy with this update. I was expecting them to at least refresh the design to complement the Aluminium iMacs or Macbooks, but they've retained the glossy white. I agree the design is still unique, but perhaps its starting to look slightly dated?

I'm an owner of a new mini and I have to say it was money well spent. You also have to remember that Macs tend to keep their value better then PCs. So I actually didn't spend that much to upgrade to the new mini after I sold my previous Mac (just over a hundred pounds if I recall). Also, I've found Macs to be just that little bit more reliable then PCs (although that's only in my experience). Plus I prefer OS X to Windows (although that might change when 7 is released) so the extra Mac tax, or Mac premium, was worth it to me.

@Andy
I'd also want a bigger HDD - 320Gb. But then you have the £650 version.

@Pbryanw
I factored in the better residual value in my decision - and my 10% HE discount, but the combo of negligible upgrades and £100 price hike meant it just wasn't worth it for me. Apple always command a premium (I paid almost £2200 for my G4 powerbook in 2003) but they have gone way off the curve on this IMO.

I'm another vote for a reduction in the value score to 5.

How can a £100 price increase be justified - certainly not by the exchange rate thing as large companies hedge against this (very successfully).

So come on TR, reduce the score for your readers.

Never mind the price, what about the design? Now I admit I don't know much about Macs, I've never even seen one of these, but from the pictures this thing looks really 90s and out-dated. The iPod is a showcase in simplicity of design (though one thing that puts me off buying one is a lack of hardware volume control) but this is just a bland white rounded box. Sure we might not want our computers to stand out but I think this is going too far in the other direction. What are you going to do with this, hide it behind the hi-fi or at the back of your desk? Either way when you don't want to show off something - it's either invisible or going to be hidden - then I think design wise it's a failure and should be getting 0, not 10.

Personally for that money a DELL all in one with a keyboard, monitor, bigger HD, more ram, etc, etc...

Agree with everyone here complaining about the value score, too high in my opinion. I'd down it to 6 or 7.

The Mac mini is a fantastic small, quiet, cool computer. My Core Duo version blows me away - it's far faster than it should be for the spec (probably got OS X to thank for that) and with EyeTV it doubles up as my bedroom TV.

Mac minis have never, ever had good specs. It has never stopped them being fantastic machines. I don't think these new ones are bad value for money at all, especially as they're not using Intel integrated graphics anymore and have improved display outputs.

TR have obviously sat with one of these in front of them and based the score on what they actually experienced. If there was ever a computer that had a soul, it's the Mac mini - no spec sheet is going to help convey that in VFM terms.

@Hugo
Thanks for the comment about crap. Clearly TR isn't the place for me so I'll take my crap elsewhere. Sneering at readers isn't a great business model.

No ;) My personal opinion is that at £499 and £649 price points. They should have a 3 year hardware warranty as standard. That would clear up the value gap for me.

Anyways if the exchange rate was still 2 USD to 1 GBP. It would probably be £375 and £500. But it isn't.

I understand the price against the GPU and the new chipset, and the fact it doesn't need the extra RAM as much as other OSs, but then its the little extras that apple imposes like the remote at £15 where it came with the previous mini.
Also the fact they charge £80 for 250Gb drive where they can be bought for £50 from the shops, I know you argue about a NAS box but it is nice to have a little more than 120Gb local as it can still fill up even with ample extra storage.
All in all apple does demand a higher price point but it doesn't do itself any favors when it demands a higher price for components you may want to upgrade to, its not in value it falls down but rather in features, as it doesnt do anything special above a couple hundred pound bog-standard laptop hooked to a monitor or TV.

". I use a 3.0GHz quad-core CPU with 4GB of DDR3 at home and still Windows feels less snappy than OS X on the Mac mini."

Wow, either a testament to Apple or a wag of my finger to Microsoft, or both...

if it was reasonably pirced i would have been interested in dipping my toes into the dark side.

i really think that 90% of Apple buyers pay for the design, not OSX or the other reasons given for the Apple tax.

"Good value *for a Mac* and that's the only thing I can fairly compare to". Now that is a crap approach to comparison, given that Apple doesn't have any particularly unique hardware. Just compare it to other small form computers - and then it's bad value. If Trusted Reviews is heading down the Apple worship route like some other sites, it's not just ABG who's off.

Maybe TR should let Gordon write a couple of reviews? ;)

@ ravmania - Believe it or not (I didn't) many of the Apple users I have spoken to say that OS X is well worth the several hundred pound premium you pay over a PC of the same specification (for something like a Mac Pro or whatever it's called), hence it being the main selling point of a Mac. I really can't see why else you would pay over the odds for outdated, unupgradeable hardware and being locked into all sorts of proprietary nonsense, especially since Vista generally does everything I need it to without (too much) trouble. Each better at doing different things, but they are actually more similar than many Mac users would care to admit.

Although I still think I agree with Hugo, this actually seems to be quite good value for an Apple product.

Why is the value score judged against value "for a Mac"? Surely TR don't have a separate set of scores for Mac's vs other products that have a similar purpose (as DT said, "small form factor" boxes). I personally think it's a big mistake for TR to judge MAC products only against other Macs when it comes to "value" - as it the score and review completely avoids any judgment on whether Apple provides good value for money vs other manufacturers and designers (a fault that pro-apple sites often make imho).

Would love Gordon's view on this?

Holy moley, what a lot of fragile egos we have here. Get over it, lads - like ALL reviews, it's one man's opinion!

I agree with Petrov. Why is this valued in comparison with other macs? The other macs are NOT in competition with the mini, OTHER products from DIFFERENT companies represent the competition in the market for the mini(EEE PC as an example, etc). So, the value score should represent the value in the market. Also, value should also represent something that is user upgradeable; this is not even factory upgradeable,it is simply NOT upgradeable. So this little box is so much like the company policy lately - „MONEY AND MORE MONEY FROM THOSE THAT WILL BUY ANYTHING FROM US“. That my friends is why Steve Jobs is called THE MESSIAH... apple is just like a religion - „Do not ask questions, just believe!“

Posted by Xamph: „Holy moley, what a lot of fragile egos we have here. Get over it, lads - like ALL reviews, it's one man's opinion!“
Ok, it IS shis personal opinion, but the problem is, I think, that he should have posted his personal opinion in his PERSONAL blog, this is not a space for personal opinions, what we would like to read is NOT his personal opinion, we need a VERY OBJECTIVE OPINION on all the stuff that is being reviewed, be it a mac, a new windows version, or a new car.

Apparently everyone missed what Gordon said:

"The problem is we aren't all machines, we each bring our own individual take to any review and there's rarely exact consensus on anything."

Also:

"That my friends is why Steve Jobs is called THE MESSIAH... apple is just like a religion."

Whoa! Let's not go crazy now, let's wait and see what happens on Easter. ;)

"Andy said on 23rd March 2009

As a discussion point, were this version of the Mac mini to cost the same but have 2GB of RAM instead of 1GB, what difference would that make to the perception of value?"

If it came with 2GB of RAM and a mouse and keyboard, I'd view that as acceptable. At least that would mean a decent, usable system out-of-the-box (assuming most people already have a monitor). To not include basic peripherals though is simply pathetic.

You know what might clear this up? If Apple declared a standard 'OS X tax' on the surcharges column of your bill! That way they would actually clear up exactly how much of a premium the company feels they deserve to charge, given their constant mantra is, "We're just a software company, but we wrap it up in a beautiful box" yada, yada, yada.

Okay, I'm being a bit facetious, but the point I'm trying to make is, while I agree Apple has a right to charge an exclusivity premium, it should demonstrate some kind of limit and consistency. And when I see an 'ultra-portable' released with an iPod's HDD and no ethernet or optical drive for 1200 quid, that limit has been obliterated. I fully agree that value is difficult to decide because my 'dear' is your 'reasonable', and as was said before, it's very subjective and circumstantial, but wouldn't it be nice if Apple could be held accountable with a definitive answer to what THEY thought was a reasonable premium, and not just shift the goalposts for every new release?

As for a 'beautiful box tax'... one wrought debate at a time ladies.

Hi Hugo, could you comment on the fan noise of the mini?
All aspects of this box look great, but I'm worried that packing a C2D in with a hot chipset might make the unit rather noisy in an attempt to keep cool. Is it, say, a high or low pitch noise, and is it louder than an equivalent laptop? Does it ramp up the fan speed only when doing high-demand tasks?
Yeah I know, I'm sensitive to noise!