The new Mac mini -- with Front Row 2.0 and DVR?
posted November 29th 2005 9:35AM
It's on ThinkSecret, which means, of course, that we can't verify the information or its source, but now the rumor
on top of the pile for things we might see at
Macworld in January is that the
Mac mini will be given a second life as a Front
Row 2.0-bearing digital media hub — complete with DVR features. Apparently it'll also be an Intel Mac, and feature an
iPod dock, in addition to receiving a larger (physically and logically) 3.5-inch drive — all of which would undoubtedly
result in a more corpulent Mac mini. There are a lot of things we could (but won't) get into here, but we would like to
take a moment to say that if Apple did want to get their foot in the door to the living room really quick n' easy, an
Intel Mac mini + Front Row + DVR + iPod dock would be the way to do it. In fact, the only thing they'd probably have to
worry about would be the low-margin mini really cannibalizing thes sales of their non-Intel, non-DVR higher-margin iMac
and Power Mac products (at least for the time being). But again, this is all unconfirmed, so we'll ease up on ya.
[Thanks, Dave]
"a remote that you could use to wiegh down a dead body."
You mean like one that actually has numbers on it for TV channel number or DVD chapter number input? ;-) Or for searching for media using a T9-like interface? There are benefits to having a larger remote with more buttons. My Harmony 680 has replaced all the remotes in my living room, including the Media Center remote.
I have no problem with competition in the media center space. That is awesome. Competition drives companies to innovate.
And, for the record, I don't even have a virus scanner on my Media Center PC. There is no need.
I know the average user isn't a geek. That is why companies sell Media Center PCs complete with TV tuner cards already installed. No need to ever open the case, and they fit right in with your DVD player or stereo receiver.
For those of us that are geeks, it is great to have the flexibility to open the case and install a 4th or 5th or 9th hard drive, install a more powerful video card for improved de-interlacing, install more RAM, etc... While the average user isn't going to want to even open their computer's case, they also won't get the most out of their system. They also won't even know what de-interlacing is, let alone why it is important, or why different video cards or drivers or MPEG2 decoders provide better or worse de-interlacing. Of course, at least with a Microsoft PC, you do have the option of obtaining the best de-interlacing and hardware accelerated MPEG 2 decoding possible. Unfortunately, it is a feature you won't know you are missing until you see the difference it can make.
If this has:
SPDIF OUT (optical or coax)
TV Tuner
Front Row
Intel Processor
I will be buying one to replace my HTPC. And it will be my first Mac too! But dammit, if it has to have dangly attachments for the TV tuner of SPDIF then Apple is run by fools, because they are missing out on a large market of people who want low-cost, simple HTPCs!
You mean like one that actually has numbers on it for TV channel number or DVD chapter number input? ;-) Or for searching for media using a T9-like interface? There are benefits to having a larger remote with more buttons. My Harmony 680 has replaced all the remotes in my living room, including the Media Center remote.
Two words- 'Scroll wheel'. Imagine a wireless nano which you can use as a remote for this thing. Now that would look good, not weigh a ton and still be absolutly fine for navigating quickly and easily.
I played with the MCE interface on a computer at Sam's Club about a week ago. I liked it a lot. I am suprised how long it took for someone to mention MythTV.
And #46 Rick, you're retarded. Dell actually wanted to offer OS X on their computers, but Apple turned them down. Microsoft became a "monopoly" by getting a hold of the corporate market. People were forced to use Windows at work, and it became what they knew. So when it came to buying a home PC, they usually went with what they knew. However, Apple can be considered a monopoly since they pressure you to use only their software on their hardware. Ever notice how you have to pay $30 to get basic functionality (such as full screen) out of quicktime? Ever notice the lack of format support in Apple apps? Why should I waste my time converting unprotected wma to aac? So i can listen to it at even lower quality than before? I'm not saying that aac is a low quality codec, but when you convert from one lossy format to another lossy format, you lose quality, no matter which way you go. And Apple's media center PC will probably encode everything into proprietary formats. I'll just go with MythTV and say fuck the others. Then I get the Hardware I want without the bullshit formats.
can I take off the shelf parts and put together my own mac mini and then buy a oem copy of the os with front row?
pat, uh, i think that's the problem...not many want to take off the shelf parts and build anything. they want to open a box and have an attractive looking something work straight-away. not have to know how or why to install new hard drive and tinker with any registry-thingys to make it work. twe want it to work so we can have a life
Scroll wheel is to casette tape as direct numerical access is to CD.
I seem to vaguely remember having to walk over to the TV to turn a knob around to change the channel a long time ago. ;-)
Scroll wheels have their place, but sometimes you just want to get to where you want to go without seeing all the stuff inbetween.
Seriously, though, how much of a couch-potato are you if you feel that you have to complain about the heft of a remote control? It isn't like you have to hold a Commodore 64 in the air with one hand to change the channel from 64 to 2 without scrolling.
I would love to be a fly on the walls at both Intel and Microsoft right now - Intel with their coming VIIV rollout which initially is MS MCE specific. As recently as six weeks ago an Intel rep told me that VIIV was touting HD DVD and MCE over Bluray and linux. Has Apple indicated intended support for any high def dvd format? Is apple going to be an Intel VIIV platform? Should we care? Go Apple!!!
This argument is so tired - admit that DRM is everywhere and we can talk. Otherwise, eat a remote. Windows/Microsoft uses DRM as well.
Pat I doubt you purchase music online anyway, so honestly, does your iTunes Music Store complaint hold up? Just what online music store do you buy from that doesn't use a DRM of one sort or another?
By the way, you might want to differentiate talking about iTunes as a music management tool (which can handle all formats of music, DRM'd or not) and the iTunes Music Store, where, if you choose to buy music from, it will have a DRM, LIKE ALL ONLINE MUSIC STORES.
And the iPod is not limited to playing DRM'd music either, Pat.
Using your arguments, Windows is a monopoly as well - did you just join us here in 2005? It's a known fact that Microsoft and Apple smile at each other, but would rather not share formats. Either side of the fence, the other looks like a monopoly.
As for your super-great Media center... You can add more storage? Wow! So can anyone on any computer system. And your system is so stable... because you DON'T surf the internet with it? You honestly typed that like it was a good argument. No internet? That's part of the appeal of a media center to me - to call up a web site from the entertainment center for a quick search or something.
I hope this happens in January, just for people like Pat. Just so he can see that it won't take Apple 'three generations' to get it up and running at least at the equivalent of Windows Media Center.
"Ever notice how you have to pay $30 to get basic functionality (such as full screen) out of quicktime?"
Yes, so how does that force you to use their software. Shouldn't that dissuade you? I'd rather have Apple have a pay system to offer a full media editor (QT Pro is worth the $19.95 by the way) than have Microsoft pull mpeg codecs that it once offered for free.
"Ever notice the lack of format support in Apple apps?"
No, not at all. Their office apps support Microsoft formats and others. QT supports whatever you plug into it, etc...
"Why should I waste my time converting unprotected wma to aac?"
You don't have to. So why are you pretending you are forced. Equally, you can avoid the proprietary and marginal wma format entirely.
"I'm not saying that aac is a low quality codec, but when you convert from one lossy format to another lossy format, you lose quality, no matter which way you go."
Wow, thanks for the tired lossy to lossy is lossy argument. Never heard it before.
"And Apple's media center PC will probably encode everything into proprietary formats."
Why are you making sh1t up? What format does iTMS use? AAC, not proprietary to Apple. What format does the iTMS provide video in? H.264 or mpeg-4, neither are proprietary to Apple. What formats can QT, which powers all Apple media apps encode, decode, and transcode in? Anything you throw at it.
"I'll just go with MythTV and say fuck the others. Then I get the Hardware I want without the bullshit formats."
Good for you, but maybe you should do some research before acting like the brilliant bullhsh!tter that you aren't.
This guy's comments on Ars Technica make a whole lot of sense:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051129-5643.html
To paraphrase, a Mac mini with a DVR simply doesn't make any sense for Apple.
I hate fanboys, but at least apple fanboys have brains, compared to MS's sheep.
I think someone else has already said it above, but why would Apple wanna let you guys record TV shows in better quality (comparing with what you get from iTMS) for free?
Plus, after adding all those features, how can they manage to keep the price around $500?
I guess Apple can make such a product, but it won't be a $500 mac mini. However, I would love to see I'm wrong.
"I think someone else has already said it above, but why would Apple wanna let you guys record TV shows in better quality (comparing with what you get from iTMS) for free?"
They can keep the higher quality video on the box/TV and stream it over the network to other devices, and keep the iTMS-sold video for the iPod market. You can make the industry happy in both ways and you can sell Mac minis and iPods that way. Easy. Plus you increase leverage to add more content to the iTMS.
"Plus, after adding all those features, how can they manage to keep the price around $500?"
Easily. The Intel chips will be cheaper. El Gato provides similar functionality in a $99 box. That's about even.
Alex, Apple makes most of their money from hardware, so why wouldn't they want to make it easy for people to put recorded content on their video iPod? Sure, they make some money selling music and TV shows, but the whole purpose of ITMS is to generate iPod sales.
"and the quality is something Mac users can only dream about."
Your sadly mistaken if you think a Mac cannot play high quality DivX or mpeg-4 files. Sorry, but your solution is workable now on the Mac. And Apple themselves could be just a couple of months away from it. Nothing special about your "solution" except the amount of time you throw into it and claim is nothing because you have nothing else to do.
#68, then stick with that procedure. Stay the way you are. Why? Apple isn't aiming for people like you, but rather for people like me, who would have read your comment and stared at the word "Hauppauge" wondering if it was a typo for Hippopotamus. Apple is aiming who want a box that does what it says it does for the common public.
It would be illogical for calling Apple's products "dumbed-down" for today's common population. Not all of us took classes in high school to learn all of the computer lingo that advanced users use, or would ever need to the way things are engineered with Apple.
Call me a fanboy, or call me a "MS Hater." I am neither, but rather just your everyday 16 year old searching for solutions to make my life easier in anyway possible. IMHO, Apple is the only one that has done so for me.
I just asked my 19 year old sister what "H264" was and she honestly replied with: "Isn't that the robot from Star Wars?"
To Brian and tf: I see what you guys are saying now. Good point. It's true that Apple can earn much more by selling video ipods (about 50% profit?).
When I said keep the cost around $500, I forgot the intel chips Apple use on the new mini can be much cheaper. Thanks for correcting me guys :-)
Mac Mini with a 3.5" drive? Not only is it bigger than the currently-installed laptop drive, but it also generates much more heat. Maybe the new MiniDVR (whatever they call it) is going to end up looking like the Cube.
Sweet!
It's funny how people complain about the prices of Apple hardware. If you ever look at the Mac Mini clone by VooDoo, you will see, that not only does it cost almost twice as much. It doesn't even come with an OS to boot and has only a 40GB hard drive. But hey, it comes with a free t-shirt and all the crashes associated with Windows.
Excuse me, pat, but why do you keep harping on iTMS as a proprietary source of music if you own a Mac or iPod?
I have an iPod and I am able to put music on it from many sources besides iTMS. AAMOF, I have only purchased about 75 or so songs from iTMS, yet my music collection is approaching 4000 songs according to my iPod's counter. These songs came from many record shops and big box stores via CD, the now-defunct MP3.com, and other quite legal sources.
Basically, if you can get music in a format the the iPod can understand, you can load it on an iPod.
Why do you feel locked to buying music only from iTMS if you own an iPod? I certainly don't.
Look at thisbesides the summary that I pasted immediately below, note the very interesting paragraphs from the article body below that...sniff, sniffI smell an apple
The article's summary:
"At 2.0GHz, Yonah is basically equal to, if not slightly slower than an Athlon 64 X2 running at the same clock speed in virtually all of the tests we ran. The important distinction here is that Intel is able to achieve that level of performance, without an on-die memory controller. But there is also one more thing to note, Yonah can offer that level of performance with significantly lower power consumption"
Excerpt from the article:
"Whats this about a new chipset? Well, its not exactly a new chipset, rather its Intels mobile 945 chipset - the mobile version of the desktop chipset weve had for quite some time now. The platform were testing on in particular uses Intels 945G chipset, with integrated graphics, but of course we arent too interested in integrated graphics performance so well be using the PCIe x16 slot on the board."
"While we cant tell you who makes the motherboard were testing with, the important thing to note is that it is a desktop motherboard made specifically for Yonah. Its got a single PCIe x16 slot, meaning you dont have to rely on integrated graphics, and all of the bells and whistles youd expect from a desktop motherboard; this could very well be the heart of your next system."
full article is at anandtech.com
Boy, the hostility around here is so thick, you can cut through it with a hot knife.
If you have something that works for you, stick with it. Why waste your time with hostile postings? Who cares what anybody else thinks or does. You got what you need.
I would love to see an Apple DVR that would sync with the video iPod. This seems to be the natural progression from portable audio to video that we have also seen with cell phones. While an Apple DVR would seem to be in conflict with their video downloads, there aren't that many good things to download at this time. Sure, you could record Lost using your DVR and avoid paying $1.99 for it. But who wouldn't want a clean commercial free copy for that price? Especially for a true fan.
With the success of the iPod and iTunes, Apples is becoming less of a computer company and more of a consumer electronics and media company. A DVR product would only continue that progression.
I think Apple is preparing something similar to what it did in mp3 players. Apple is not the first to invent the mp3 player, there were many before, but with impressive marketing techniques and design features now it dominates this area. In this respect I see the mac mini as the apple's candidate for future media/entertainment PC. Especially with the introduction of HDTV this will be a huge market. Although there are many rivals around, they have various shortcomings, for example media pc's are either too large, too noisy, too complicated or too expensive. DVR's do not have the "freedom of modification or upgrade", and although consoles always promise "something more than a gaming device" they are often not (without warranty voiding modifications). Mac mini seems to be just crafted for this job.
By the way, I know that Apple was working on intel macs for more than a year know, they do have a quite stable MacOS X 10.4 for intel available solely for developers. The thing they last added was the mechanism that prevents ordinary PCs runnning this OS (based on that infamous security chip of intel's if I understand correctly). So the only thing left is the re-designing of mainboards and such for apple cases, which I suspect to be already done. I prefer linux anyways, and as long as they do not prevent me from installing one, I do not care.
I should mention that, I do not expect tuner for the mac mini yet, (altough I would gladly appreciate even something like a ati all in one wonder) but an IR remote, some UPNP software, HDTV cable, better sound system, and front row is likely to happen in this upgrade. If they did not sell a hefty amount of units in past three months, it is unlikely to be an intel due to G4 chip stocks. I still think first MACs to go intel are notebooks (maybe a new line of them, apple interpretation of a tablet pc maybe, why not?).
By the way, apple does sell ipod docks for a rather high price, why include a dock in mac mini when they do not even include it in an ipod? I think they will prefer agreeing with a HDTV manufacturer to add an ipod dock in their product instead.