Is new Solo faster/better than original mini?

Good morning.
Is the new Mini Solo better/faster, etc. than the original lower end model mini?
Just looking for some thoughts and opinions.
Thanks.

Macworld has done some benchmarking which may be of interest. One article is http://www.macworld.com/2006/03/reviews/macmini/index.php and another at http://www.macworld.com/2006/03/firstlooks/minibenchmarks/index.php

Similar Messages

Its the nano better than the mini?????

why is the nano better than the mini?? if it is???

well, it IS smaller! I find the Mini's screen easier for my old eyes to read. I have NO personal experience (other than holding and playing with a Nano in the store) with a Nano, as I'm waiting for Apple to improve scratch resistance before I buy one. IF they don't, I won't. Other than a minor problem of distortion when using the bass boost EQ on a Mini, I'm not aware of any pervasive issues with them. My wife's works like a charm. I'm a 40GB iPod owner myself. It works great, also. having said that, I'd still like a Nano IF APPLE TOUGHENS UP THE CASE.

Does the latest Time Capsule broadcast 802.11n better than original?

I'm in a 1700 sq ft house with my original 500 GB Time Capsule upstairs and a MacBook Pro unibody downstairs in the living room. With 802.11n only or 802.11n/g/b enabled on the TC, the MacBook Pro can't detect a network.
Would a new Time Capsule broadcast the 802.11n significantly better than the original in this situation?

Bob Timmons wrote:
The newer version of the Time Capsule has an "improved" antenna design that may help things a bit. But, if you have no signal now, I very much doubt that a new Time Capsule would provide you with a usable signal in your situation, given the information in your post.
Have you verified that the MacBook Pro is working correctly? Can you get a good signal when it is close to the Time Capsule?
Yes.
If things check out when the MacBook is close to the Time Capsule, then this would indicate that you have too many obstructions...walls, ceilings, etc. between the Time Capsule and the MacBook when it is downstairs.
Yes, if I set the TC to 802.11n/b/g or 802.11n only, the MacBook Pro won't see the network. If I set the TC to 802.11g only, it shows full signal strength. This isn't surprising to me, as I have an older Airport Express whose signal also could be easily picked up downstairs.
Is there such a difference in range between 802.11n and 802.11g?
You may want to consider an AirPort Express to position it at an approximate mid-point between the Time Capsule and downstairs so that it can "extend" the wireless signal downstairs.
To get an idea if this might work, move your MacBook to a position that is 1/2 to 2/3 of the distance from the Time Capsule to the downstairs area where you want to use the MacBook. If you can get a good signal on the MacBook at that point, this means that an AirPort Express should receive a good signal as well so that it can "extend" the wireless network.
It's never possible to predict performance in advance, so if you want to try the AirPort Express, it would be a good idea to know the store's return policy in case things don't work as well as hoped.
Thanks.

New MBP's better than the old MBP's?

i have a 2009 13" MBP and been none too impressed with it. i just had an issue with wake from shutdown and i am wondering if the new MBP's are any better than the old ones.
i have been told i have issues because i am a "power" user (even though i don't really feel like i am and i don't do anything computationally intensive on the laptop) and i'm wondering if i have to get the 15" to get full power, if there is a machine anyone would recommend etc.
i have been sort of hankering for the 12" that is rumored to come out in part for the form factor and portability but i am a bit scared that this will be a step down and mean i have additional problems.
thanks for any advice.

iyacyas wrote:
I would have to totally agree with EWW...
I also agree that the 12" not only has the best keyboard but is the best Mac ever, and I am not looking forward to the day that I have to put the ol' girl down.
I still mourn mine. One tiny solder connection on the motherboard broke, and it is $800 to replace, but I sure loved that computer. Bought it the week it was introduced and it was wonderful.

Is current iphone4 bumper any better than original?

I just got a new iphone 4 and wanted to buy a bumper. I have the original bumper thru the free case program, but its getting a bit warn.
Has any improvements been made in the past year, has quality improved, or are they any issues anyone experienced with scratching on the metal band?
I just don't want to mess up this beautiful new and shinny gem!
Thanks bunches

I believe so. The dock connector and mute switch have larger holes for easier access. Go visit your Apple Store to see if you can get a replacement.

How is iMac better than mac mini ??????

Is there a iMac 2014 ?? how to identify ??? is it netter to buy iMac desk top as oppose to Mac Mini ????? what is a good dvd player to buy if I buy iMac desktop

Go to http://www.apple.com/mac/compare/
It will should you a comparison of the iMac to Mac Mini
For a good source of an optical drive for Mac go to http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/firewire/optical-drives/

I new MP3 player better than micropho

when i purchase my microphoto at bestbuy 2 weeks ago the employee told me not to get it because in a couple of week they will be recieveing a better MP3 player from creative that played videos/music/photo...
could anyone help me figure out what they were talking about? thanks

They were talking about the Zen Vision M. OR the Zen Vision.
Or perhaps the Zen V(plus) ?
Here is the information on all 3 of them:
-Zen Vision M:
http://us.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=20&subcategory=24&product=433
-Zen Vision:
http://us.creative.com/products/product.asp?category=20&subcategory=2&product=2985
-Zen V(plus):
http://us.creative.com/products/products.asp?category=23&subcategory=24&product=52 83
Enjoy looking at those!
Hope that helps you out!

New iMacs better than my Mac Pro?

So would the new 27-inch iMac top of the line out in Dec 2012, be a better/faster station than my MAC PRO 3.0 early 2008 with 3TB storage, 12GB RAM and a ATI 5870 card?
I'd be editing both CS6 and Final Cut Studio 3 on it.

In case Allan was unclear: Absolutely not.
I have a early 2008 MacPro 8x 3.2GHz (16GB RAM / 8TB Storage I've upgraded to SATA3 and have dual 27" Samsung monitors and a 37" color grading monitor on an Matrox MSO2 mini. I wouldn't trade it for a pile of new iMacs.

Does new 30 GB iPod have longer battery life than original 5th gen 30

The claim from Apple is that the new 30 GB iPod has a brighter screen and that the battery life during video playback is 3.5 hours. The original 5th generation 30 GB ipod only claimed to have 2 hour battery life during video playback. Does anyone know if the new 30 GB iPod actually has a better battery or a more efficieant screen than the original or if these claims are only a result of the new iPod bios (version 1.2) which gives you a brightness control. Is a new 30 GB iPod better than a original 5th gen 30 GB iPod which has been updated to v 1.2?
AMD64 Windows XP Pro 5th Gen 60 GB iPod Video

Let me first not say Ha ha but The fourth Gen photo people said the same thing about when the fifth gen came out and we all complained. Also now that gapless playback has come out we all complained. So all I have to say is that at least you got the quick letter thing when you scroll and the games as well as gapless where we got nothing. I have owned an Ipod since the first gen and let me say I am supprised that apple even gave you guys some update. For all of your complaining, get in line.

When transferring volumes to a new drive, is a cloning app better than the finder?

When transferring volumes to a new drive, is a cloning app better than the finder?
I’m adding a new (bigger) external hard drive. I have created five partions on it as the old drive has. Is it, better, faster, more accurate, etc. to use an app, or just drag and drop the folders on to the new partitions. The sofware I have are; TechTool6, Drive Genius3 & SuperDuper. Two of the partitons have a Mac OS on them. The others just have files.
Thanks,
Larry

If the drive is to be functional as a boot drive then cloning is the better approach as it will grab all hidden configuration files and preserve the file access permissions properly; however, if you are setting up a data drive then the Finder's copy options should be adequate. To ensure file permissions are properly attributed to the copied files, select them and press Command-C to copy, followed by Shift-Option-Command-V to paste the items in the new location and preserve their file attributes (you may need to authenticate when copying them in this manner). If you do not need to preserve permissions then a basic drag-and-drop copy should suffice.

Old Interface better than new

The old interface for the AppleTV seems much better than the new one. We lost features, especially when it comes to locating shows. Now they are in a single long list. More troublesome is the inability to see which episode I am selecting, without hovering and waiting for the show's art work to fade back and expose the episode details. This is painfully time consuming.
Am I the only one that thinks Apple has gone backwards in regards to usability?
Todd

Getting around in the old interface was much faster and easier. Notice how, with version 2, you have to work your way to "My shows" or "My movies". They didn't really consider usability or how much effort a user would need to go through to actually watch TV.
There is also the problem of placing shows in episode order. For example, with version 1.1, I purchased and downloaded three seasons of Bob Newhart from iTunes, and the shows were in order. Then, when the AppleTV was upgraded to 2.0, the order changed, and I now must hover over each show to determine which is the next episode. The same is true for the Terminator series. It became a less pleasant TV experience when I started watching episodes out of order.

New imac faster at handling RAW than my MacPro

I had a play around with a new iMac yesterday and tried Aperture with some Apple installed RAW (Nikon) imaged files. I was surprised to find Aperture snappier and Using the loupe is noticeably faster on the iMac.
Why is the new iMac faster when handling/manipulating RAW files in Aperture?
Some are saying (in the MacPro forum) the ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT video card is actually a little slower than my stock Nvidia 7300GT so it can't be video performance.
So what could be the issue?

A properly configured MP is far superior to any iMac for Aperture performance. As to why the described MP is slow:
The stock 7300GT card is very limiting to Aperture on a MP and should be replaced with an 8800GT when retrofit cards are available.
3 GB RAM on a MP is limiting. RAM is inexpensive now, so IMO MPs should have more RAM, adding two 2-GB sized DIMMs as a minimum add. For heavy apps like Adobe CS or Aperture I recommend adding 8 GB RAM, always minimum 2-GB sized DIMMs to avoid wasting limited slots. IMO RAM is the cheapest performance enhancer and most of us handling heavy graphics will want even more RAM, all slots, over the life of a new MP.
I would recommend buying 4-GB sized DIMMs except that they currently cost much more per GB.
Of course there are also lots of non-hardware issues that also affect performance. Steve Weller, builder of the excellent <http://www.bagelturf.com/index.html> Aperture website, discusses speed improvements here:
<http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1273934&tstart=75>
Immediately prior to and immediately after every installation of any kind (essentially anything that asks for sysadmin password) I recommend repairing Permissions. Note that repairing Permissions at other times does not have the same effect as immediately prior to and immediately after installations. Repairing Permissions is routine maintenance, not a magic fix.
On the Photoshop forums for years there have been many instances of some folks getting poor or unstable performance out of setups that other folks get good performance out of. We see the same thing here on the Aperture forums. The suggested protocol of repairing Permissions before/after installs is one of the routines that many of us with long term good Adobe performance have tended to follow.
There are many tens of thousands of files with Permissions settings. IMO maintaining them in a consistent state immediately before and after each installation of any kind is a potentially useful protocol with no down side risk.
System and application setup and maintenance apparently become particularly important on boxes used for heavy graphics. All apps and the OS should be in synch, version wise. Hard drives should not be allowed to become too full. Many folks run Cocktail routinely; I just let OS X do its own routine maintenance. Read the forums like MacFixit to be aware of know apps conflicts.
-Allen Wicks

Why does my iBook connect to WiFi better than my much faster Macbook?

Why does my iBook connect to WiFi better than my much faster Macbook?

Because it has a RISC processor. Just brag about all the MHz or even GHz while you are waiting like other Intel users. Using my trusty G4 rather than MBP becase its simply faster.
/usr/bin/gcc-4.4 -mcpu=G4 -mpowerpc-gfxopt -maltivec -mabi=altivec -fsigned-char

HT6012 In this new version Ability than original version of Export., In a lot of older Eprot several types of Vdo. But the new can not just mp4.

In this new version Ability than original version of Export., In a lot of older Eprot several types of Vdo. But the new can not just mp4.

Yes, the old album art view is gone, bu you can see the album art for a song that's playing by clicking on the art image and it will open a bigger view.
Everything else in your post is a waste. I'm not going to spend time reading it. If - and I repeat if, you have a question on how to get the best out of the new look iTunes, post it. But don't spend your time in long rambling negative rants.

New iMac faster than my MacPro?

I've recently purchased a new 24" iMac for a 2nd home I have out west. After a few days tinkering with it I'm pretty positive that this new machine is quicker than my 2 year old MacPro that I have at home. I was hoping after looking at the specs below if people could confirm that this should be the case.
The reason I'm wondering is that I even though the iMac is brand new, the Mac Pro was and still is far more expensive than the iMac. The main reason I would like to know for sure is that since I work from home and have fairly advanced needs (two VMWare Fusion vms running on top of OSX 60+ hours a week working with important financial software), if the iMac is indeed faster I may be looking for an upgrade. Before I essentially toss my $2700 MacPro to the side though I want to make sure the lag that I notice that I don't yet see on the iMac couldn't be simply cured with an OS reinstall, which hasn't been done in over 2 years.
I'm also a little unsure of how to compare the Xeon vs the current Pentium processors, as well as how important the 1067mhz vs the 667mhz ram is to my needs. I basically run two Fusion VMs with 1gb dedicated to each one in Unity, Safari, iTunes, Mail, Adium, and Skype occasionally.
Specs for each machine..
24" iMac - 2.93ghz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB Ram 1067mhz, 600gb ATA HD, NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 256MB
MacPro w 30" Cinema - 2 x 2.66Ghz Dual Core Intel Xeon, 5GB Ram 667mhz, 250GB ATA HD, NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT
All advice greatly appreciated.

I'm also a little unsure of how to compare the Xeon vs the current Pentium processors
No Intel Mac has ever had a "Pentium" inside.
The Mac Pro would be faster for applications that are designed to use multiple processors. It has 4 cores versus 2 in the iMac.
VMware Fusion has a option (in the virtual machine's settings) to use more than one +virtual processor+, but it is not as efficient booting the OS directly. Also, it probable that things like the financial software you are running on the virtual machine is itself not designed to take advantage of multiple cores. Therefore, CPU clock speed becomes the overriding factor for performance in your case. Since the new iMac runs at 2.93 GHz versus 2.66 GHz for the Mac Pro, it is certainly possible that your iMac is faster than the Mac Pro, in your situation. If you were running Final Cut Studio or Logic Studio (or other app that takes advantage of all the cores), the Mac Pro would be faster.
Also, Snow Leopard has a new technology called Grand Central Dispatch
http://www.apple.com/macosx/technology/#grandcentral
which is supposed to make use of multiple cores more efficient under Mac OS X. I don't think it will have too much impact on existing third-party software, but it will be interesting to see what the developers at VMware and other third-parties software firms can do with it. So your Mac Pro with four cores may become more efficient (faster) under Snow Leopard.

Is new Solo faster/better than original mini?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for