“The Mac mini tends to parallel the features and performance of the same-generation iBook or MacBook. Before this month, the Mac mini was stuck in 2007; now it’s a reasonable part of the iMac and Mac Pro family, while being a viable option as a home entertainment hub,” Glenn Fleishman reports for The Seattle Times.
“After testing the new mini for a few weeks, it’s clear that it’s a good choice for anyone with existing monitors who wants to upgrade a computer set up, or who isn’t interested in Apple’s built-in displays in the iMac series,” Fleishman reports.
“Like newer MacBooks, all MacBook Pros, and recent generations of iMac, the Mac mini can now handle two monitors either as distinct displays or for mirroring through two video outputs. One uses a mini-DVI connector; the other, Mini DisplayPort,” Fleishman reports. “The Mac mini comes with a mini-DVI to full-sized DVI adapter, and can push out up to 1,900 by 1,200 pixels on that port. The Mini DisplayPort can drive a monitor up to 2,560 by 1,600 pixels, which includes Apple’s $1,799 30-inch Cinema HD Display.”
“As a hub for watching video, playing music and even playing games, the mini can use a DVI-to-HDMI adapter to power an HDTV set. Using a wireless keyboard, game controllers and an Apple Remote (sold separately for $19), you would have a pretty good array of choices.”
“Amazon (purchase and rentals) and Netflix (subscription) now stream via the Mac but require a fast-enough processor to handle video, which the mini has. Add to that Boxee (which provides a TV-like interface to Web video sources), Hulu.com and network TV streaming sites, and Drive-In for storing full DVD images on a hard drive, and you’re only leaving actual broadcast and cable TV behind,” Fleishman reports. “(Get an eyeTV in one of various models to handle that gap.)”
Fleishman reports, “And don’t forget the iTunes Store, either.”
Full review here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Brawndo Drinker” for the heads up.]
So you show a picture of the OLD Mac mini?
Please. That’s so three years ago.
And so is this article. 2009?