Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Hands-On With Intel's "Next Unit of Computing" Mini PC

Posted by Unknown on from the get-one-for-the-cat dept.

crookedvulture writes "Intel's Next Unit of Computing has finally made its way into the hands of reviewers. The final revision is a little different from the demo unit that made the rounds earlier this year, but the concept remains the same. Intel has crammed what are essentially ultrabook internals into a tiny box measuring 4" x 4" x 2". A mobile Core i3 CPU provides the horsepower, and there's a decent array of I/O ports: USB, HDMI, and Thunderbolt. Users can add their own memory, storage, and wireless card to the system, which will be sold without an OS for around $300. Those extras raise the total price, bringing the NUC closer to Mac Mini territory. The Apple system has a bigger footprint, but it also boasts a faster processer and the ability to accommodate notebook hard drives with higher storage capacities than the mSATA SSDs that are compatible with the NUC. If Intel can convince system builders to adopt the NUC, the future of the PC could be a lot smaller."

177 comments

  1. lol wut by Alex+Belits · · Score: 0

    So basically it's everything we didn't like in Mac Mini, except worse, and no hope for re-use of form factor in any device that has more than one expansion card, or faster CPU?

    Great job, Intel, I thought, you will never achieve the level of idiocy on par with Microsoft.

    --
    Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.
    1. Re:lol wut by hairyfish · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What didn't we like about the Mac Mini? I haven't used an expansion port on a PC about 15 years other than a 3Dvideo card. And if I want a gaming rig I'll get something big and airy with lots of fans. If I need a grunt box, I'll run up a VM on my servers at work. For everything else the Mac Mini is perfect. I never understood why PCs we're so big these days. 90% of them are simple Web/Email/Word processors, the Mac Mini and new this Intel thing are all most of us need.

    2. Re:lol wut by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Indeed. If the price tag was lower I could see a market for it, but at $300 you can build/buy a significantly better box.

      This "NUC" has an i3-3217U (1.8ghz / 2C)

      You could get an A6-5400K (3.6ghz / 2C) for $65, an FM2 Micro ATX motherboard (USB 3.0 / SATA 6GB / DVI+HDMI / 2x DDR3 1866) for $50, and a MicroATX Slim case with 300W power supply for $75, totaling $190

      Better CPU, better GPU, has multiple PCIE slots (with at least one 2.0 x16) and you can upgrade it. This Intel brick for $300..$320 (I read the article) has the CPU soldered on, and no PCIE slots so no upgrades of any kind ever, and the price quote doesn't include memory (which is why I didn't include any.)

      I'm sure that you could also put together a better performing Intel box (using a Celeron G5xx series for instance) for about 60% of the money as well.

      Looks to me like Intel over-produced some CPU's and/or chipsets and are looking to find a market for them.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    3. Re:lol wut by Rockoon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I haven't used an expansion port on a PC about 15 years other than a 3Dvideo card.

      We could translate your argument as "I splash money around like its going out of style so things like expansion ports are stupid"

      Many of us use those expansion slots about halfway through the life of the machine in order to upgrade them inexpensively (like adding SATA 3.0 to a machine purchased when SATA 1.0 was still new), repair them when a specific component goes tits up (The NIC died? Thats a $15 card for full-on b/g/n wireless), or to add specific functionality that only comes standard on much more expensive machines..

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    4. Re:lol wut by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      You could get an A6-5400K

      Indeed.

      I've been looking for a SFF PC recently, and the AMD choices are really weak.

      The bobcat is excellent for this kind of thing. Significantly faster per-thread than the atom, equal number of cores and graphics certainly superior to an i3 or even i5 probably.

      Or, the low end Fusion ones, which are weaker than the i3 per thread, but have more cores and stomp over the top end i5 when it comes to graphics.

      Where are the cool little AMD PCs ready built?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    5. Re:lol wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. If the price tag was lower I could see a market for it, but at $300 you can build/buy a significantly better box.

      and a MicroATX Slim case

      Lets take a random cheap example:
      Coolermaster Elite 342
      Dimension (W / H / D) (W) 180 x (H) 352 x (D) 440 mm

      Total volume: approximately 27.9 litres (or 2.79 x 10-2 m3 if you prefer)
      Assume ~300W PSU

      Intel NUC:
      4" x 4" x 2" - assuming 101.6 x 101.6 x 50.8 mm

      Total Volume: approximately 0.524 litres (or 5.24 x 10-4 m3 if you prefer)
      65W PSU

      Approximately 50 times physically larger, ~4.5 times more power.

      Can you make a random whitebox yourself cheaper? Of course you can.
      Is that the point? Of course not.

      50% more cost for something 1/50th of the size and a lot less power? I'd be happy to buy one, and I suspect many others would.

      Next thing you'll be complaining that a hammer is too expensive for what it is, and you can happily band in nails with a cheaper screwdriver insstead.

    6. Re:lol wut by amiga3D · · Score: 0

      You can bang nails in with a rock (granite works best.)

    7. Re:lol wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because with the release of this product all other computers, like desktop towers and laptops, will magically vanish and we will all be forced to use this new PC form factor.

      Oh wait...

    8. Re:lol wut by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      So basically it's everything we didn't like in Mac Mini, except worse, and no hope for re-use of form factor in any device that has more than one expansion card, or faster CPU?

      Great job, Intel, I thought, you will never achieve the level of idiocy on par with Microsoft.

      There doesn't need to be just one "unit of computing", does there?

      Clearly, I wouldn't be able to use this new form factor for much besides a media player, but it might be useful to some people.

      I doubt all of the full-size boxes over in the "Cases" section of MicroCenter are going to disappear any time soon.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    9. Re:lol wut by kenh · · Score: 1

      Looks to me like Intel over-produced some CPU's and/or chipsets and are looking to find a market for them.

      Seriously? You think their production processes are so out of sync with demand that they had to try and invent/promote an entirely new platform to reduce the backlog?

      I suspect Intel has buyers for most chips before they are ever produced. What I see is an attempt to build out on the original idea behind the various Atom motherboards they have been producing for years - small, good-enough systems that use less power and are designed for world markets, not necessarily the performance user in the first world.

      --
      Ken
    10. Re:lol wut by ajo_arctus · · Score: 2

      Many of us use those expansion slots about halfway through the life of the machine in order to upgrade them inexpensively (like adding SATA 3.0 to a machine purchased when SATA 1.0 was still new)

      Yeah, because not having SATA 3 makes a machine ununsable...

      repair them when a specific component goes tits up (The NIC died? Thats a $15 card for full-on b/g/n wireless)

      Yeah, because if a NIC dies then it doesn't matter that it's probably part of the motherboard chipset and all of a sudden you have an expensive repair bill. Not to mention that wireless cards *are* plug-in PCIe cards on these mini form factor PCs...

      or to add specific functionality that only comes standard on much more expensive machines..

      I think you might be havign problems understandnig/empathising with what a 'normal' person is going to want out of a PC. Not only that, but even us geeks get bored of the PC treadmill after a while. The last desktop I bought was an iMac in 2007. It's old, it's tired and it just stopped working reliably this past week or so. I cant' easily fix it, but you know what, I got five solid years out of that workhorse. I don't care that I couldn't upgrade it -- despite being a programmer, and therefore as much of a 'power user' as anybody, 2GHz of Core2 Duo has been plenty fast enough -- and, if repairibility had been an issue, I'd have bought 3 years of Applecare and retired it when the warranty expired.

      The MacMini is an excellent computer if you want a small, silent machine that keeps out of your way. If you want a toy to upgrade and play with, it's not so great.

    11. Re:lol wut by jeffmeden · · Score: 1

      This is a tech demo. Intel doesn't make full out of the box PCs (and might not, ever). This is to inspire hardware makers (cough, HP) who are otherwise totally screwed, to come up with something "new" in the PC realm. This is the form factor that will see growth in the future, the old days of a big box with a bunch of cards you could swap in and out are gone (unless you are a hard-core hobbyist willing to pay a price premium). The desktop systems made today by Dell, HP, etc are way too big for what they do (since they are often on par with laptops) so this kind of re-think is really critical.

    12. Re:lol wut by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      The problem is that the A6-5400K is a 65W CPU, so theres no way you can get it into a case 4" by 4" by 2".

    13. Re:lol wut by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

      What didn't we like about the Mac Mini?

      The price.

      Unfortunately this Intel box is similarly expensive for what it is.

    14. Re:lol wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MicroATX is absolutely huge compared to this thing.

    15. Re:lol wut by MightyYar · · Score: 2

      Your argument is sound, but I wanted to point out that the volume probably doubles (at least) when you include the external brick power supply.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    16. Re:lol wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not that terrible an idea though. Would be great for a basic bare-bones guest computer with Linux. Have a small case which caters to a FlexATX motherboard and also functions as a VESA mount monitor stand to minimize the footprint and instead of a hard drive use a 32GB SD memory. Nearly instant booting for quick internet access for email and other internet browsing. Serves the niche where you'd want something more functional than a tablet, and you'd have much better options for the screen, mouse, and keyboard than a laptop. I personally still wouldn't consider it for my main computer (I do too much stuff), but in many cases that's all some people need.

      The Mac mini was overpriced for what it was. But something like this in the $300 range seems reasonable enough.

    17. Re:lol wut by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Try this one, at just over half the price of this Intel brick.

      You could try googling for "amd fusion nettop", I hear all the cool kids are using google these days. That's how I found the above one, a review in the first page of results. You fail at the internets.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re:lol wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't forget an ethernet port!

      At first, I was: ``wow, this is really cool, I can get a dozen of these, a dozen external disks, a hub, and I gots myself a cheap cluster for all my hadoop experimenting needs... in a nice tiny power efficient package I can keep bundled under my desk.''----but I guess these aren't really designed for this.

    19. Re:lol wut by Rockoon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I see you saying that you will buy a whole new computer if you need SATA 3.

      I see you also saying that you blow reams of money on Apple hardware.

      You have just proved that you too will splash money around like its going out of style, so for you things like expansion ports are stupid. In my world, its not expansion ports that are stupid.. its needlessly wasting money like a complete retard thats stupid.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    20. Re:lol wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And it's got an external power supply. Why can't they put the f*>&^ng supply inside the case ?

    21. Re:lol wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The Mac mini was overpriced for what it was. But something like this in the $300 range seems reasonable enough." ... except that with this you still need to buy RAM, some sort of HD or SSD, and OS, so your cost goes up by at least 50%. That Mac Mini's not looking so bad now, is it?

    22. Re:lol wut by ajo_arctus · · Score: 1

      I see you saying

      No, you don't.

      need SATA 3

      Need?

      I see you also saying that you blow reams of money on Apple hardware.

      No, you don't. I buy them as tools and carefully measure their return over the years. I use these machines in my business.

      needlessly wasting money like a complete retard thats stupid.

      Keep it classy.

    23. Re:lol wut by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That just means that both of them are overpriced.

  2. Fitting my LTO2 tape drive into that thing... by drewm1980 · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...will be a worthy challenge.

    1. Re:Fitting my LTO2 tape drive into that thing... by chronokitsune3233 · · Score: 1

      Or attach it to the thing. You double the volume that way!

      --
      I have been a captive in America my entire life. Everybody and everything uses customary units instead of metric.
    2. Re:Fitting my LTO2 tape drive into that thing... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's always this:

      http://www.misco.co.uk/Product/192703/Tandberg-LTO-5-Drive-with-Fibre-that-can-connect-to-Thunderbolt

    3. Re:Fitting my LTO2 tape drive into that thing... by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      But to make it worth the effort, make sure it sports the steampunk look. Final size of it be damned.

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
  3. We'll see about that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    which will be sold without an OS for around $300

    Microsoft doesn't care. They'll be sure to tax these "naked" PCs anyway. Intel will rue the day they think they can get away without paying the Windows fee.

    1. Re:We'll see about that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      trollololol

    2. Re:We'll see about that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Takes one to know one, beeeyaaaatch!

  4. Bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Need to be smaller and cheaper and plug together like lego to allow me to add processing power. Now that I'd buy.

    1. Re:Bah by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 3, Interesting

      YES! I knew I wasn't alone!

      I've been wanting a PC-based system that expands like LEGO for over a decade now. However, I don't insist it be smaller. In fact, I want it bigger. 4" x 4" x 2" is too small. 4" x 4" x 4" (or 100mm x 100mm x 100mm for the normal parts of the world) is much better. That provides enough room for a CPU, a GPU, a standard notebook hard drive, and a standard 80mm fan. With a certain amount of squeezing, a CPU, a GPU, and a second GPU, each on its own board, stacked one on top of the other, and still with room for a hard drive. If the product takes off, offer additional configurations, such as dual CPU + GPU, or quad CPU no GPU, or single CPU + 4 hard drives, or single CPU + single GPU + 2 hard drives. Add a whole boatload of off-board signals on the chipset on the CPU card and run those signals to pinless contacts in each of the 6 faces of the cube. Round springloaded contacts might do. Add extra contacts for a DC power bus. I was told by an Intel test engineer, years ago, that PCI-e in its external connector incarnation could probably work well under these conditions. Hold cubes to each other with magnets at the corners, arranging the polarities of the magnets to force the correct lineup of the boards and exhaust fans into wind tunnels.

      Software would be tricky. Ideally you would want an arbitrary collection of cubes to be able to self-organize into a ccNUMA system. In practice, you may want dual mode software. Default coupling might be as a compute cluster, and only manually enable ccNUMA when you know a particular collection of cubes is going to be stable long term.

      Give the standard configuration cube (whichever one that might be) 1 DC power connector, 1 gigabit ethernet port, 1 Displayport, and 4 USB ports. Vary the ports as needed for the other configurations. Add some external LEDs for indicators of power and compute coupling mode and voila, an arbitrarily expandable compute platform that scales from a minimum of one cube to some silly maximum that is probably only hit when thermal management gets out of hand.

      Someday I'll have money enough to have some boards designed... Someday.

    2. Re:Bah by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      Damn, forgot the audio ports on the standard configuration cube. Yeah, add those too.

      Oh, and desktop versions of the CPU(s) and GPU(s). If possible. Get creative... This particular wish was a lot more feasible when I first conceived of the idea a decade ago. These days the infrastructure surrounding desktop CPUs and GPUs has gotten too extensive to fit anymore. The collection of capacitors alone has gotten silly. More's the pity.

    3. Re:Bah by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Behold... the future!

      And if that is too obscure, the PC Jr also had sidecar expansion - as well as vertical expansion for drive bays. I couldn't find as funny a picture, though.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    4. Re:Bah by doesnothingwell · · Score: 1

      expands like LEGO

      Ah, step back into the past, stackable, networked, and able to expand right off the edge of your desk. Come complete with a power brick feeding dual dc to dc (re)converters internally and with multitasking all on a 80186. A small monument (ok doorstop) to proprietary hardware and vendor lockin. I was forced to service these back in the early 90's and Lego style connections are unstable after a short time in use.

      http://bitsavers.trailing-edge.com/pdf/convergent/ngen/pictures/80186_processor_1.JPG

      --
      They can have my command prompt when they pry it from my cold dead fingers.
    5. Re:Bah by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      Fascinating.

      But I wasn't talking about literal LEGO style connections, where pieces of plastic physically interlock. While LEGO's connect/disconnect cycle count is actually very very high, it requires ABS plastic and extremely tight manufacturing tolerances, and I suspect it's only achievable at the scale LEGO is made. The compute blocks I'm talking about are probably too large for that style of connection. Hence my mention of magnets.

      As for vendor lock-in, people buy NanoITX parts, even though there was only one manufacturer. Price it toy-like and people will buy it anyway. Sell enough units and Taiwanese manufacturers will either license or clone the design, and your vendor problems are over.

    6. Re:Bah by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      Everything old is new again.

      Yet another example of why the patent system is ludicrously broken.

    7. Re:Bah by gigaherz · · Score: 1

      So, like the Arduino boards but with PC hardware instead. And hopefully a "stacking bus" based on a faster mini-PCI (pci-e is point-to-point and so it wouldn't work for stacking).

    8. Re:Bah by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      and a standard 80mm fan

      100mm x 100mm x 100mm should be able to accommodate a 120mm fan (140 might just not make it). One whole side covered with a single fan makes for a nice silent cooling effect without going into the details of design of the internals. Include dust filters for all holes, and you are set.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
    9. Re:Bah by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      Could still use PCI-e through the stacking connector. You'd just peel off lanes at each stack level, and feed the others upward without interruption. It'd be less flexible than having an actual bus, as in PC-104 and PC-104+, but it could work. Either stack order would be enforced, if lanes don't actually physically extend through all stacking connectors, or individual boards would be restricted to predefined lane usage to avoid conflicts with other boards.

      For CPU->GPU connection, I'm inclined to enforce stack order, and probably even require the usage of a separate connector. PC-104+ has two different stack connectors in its specification, so the design is not without precedent.

      I'd like to know if there's enough physical space to actually create such a system. As I said in one of my posts, I have my doubts, where modern desktop CPUs and GPUs are concerned.

    10. Re:Bah by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the exterior dimensions would be 100mm^3. The actual board dimensions would hopefully be identical to PC-104+. PC-104 parts are all overpriced, for lack of volume demand, but there are at least cases and such already available in those dimensions, so it might be better than nothing.

      If PC-104+ compatibility is not an issue, then you're probably right, a 120mm fan might be preferred, and the exterior dimensions would be 25% larger than I'd hoped. That might also make the idea physically possible. Board dimensions small enough to fit inside exterior dimensions of 100mm are small enough that the voltage regulators and capacitors that are required to surround a modern desktop CPU might not fit, especially while squeezing a SO-DIMM connector onto the same board. Not to mention a chipset. The possibility that AMD will do full chipset integration in their next generation CPUs, rather than just memory controller integration, might help alleviate the crush a little bit, but that's only a rumor.

    11. Re:Bah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transputer

  5. Mac Mini wannabe by Kergan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    After pushing PC makers into going after the MacBook Air, Intel wants them to also go after the Mac Mini. News at ten...

    Seems a bit too pricey to succeed, though.

    1. Re:Mac Mini wannabe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Outside of that, there is no real Lan port in the back, which makes Wifi the only option. The Mac Mini has a real Lan port.

    2. Re:Mac Mini wannabe by tuppe666 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Intel wants them to also go after the Mac Mini

      Yes because MAC invented small PC's its not like the microATX was introduced in December 1997. The original
        release was January 22, 2005 for the MAC Mini. Lets ignore the rich history of SFF PC's from the likes of Shuttle [I have owned many] http://www.shuttle.com/ or even new popular brands like Revo from Acer. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acer_Aspire_Revo Which oddly I also own.

    3. Re:Mac Mini wannabe by jawtheshark · · Score: 1

      Check out the Zotac ZBox Nano. Sure, the lineup's best seems to be a Celeron 867, but I don't see a reason why you couldn't put an i3 in it.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    4. Re:Mac Mini wannabe by Haxagon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's not like there are already cheaper and more powerful options for a mini-pc than a Mac Mini; I'm sure Intel was just so threatened by Apple's second least popular product.
      Face it, this Intel initiative is about semi-ubiquitous computing with a bit of a general twist. Not a response to the Mac that's seen the least innovation/interest.

    5. Re:Mac Mini wannabe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes because MAC invented small PC's its not like the microATX was introduced in December 1997.

      The term is "Mac" not MAC. It is not an acronym. Also, no one said that Apple invented MicroATX or this form factor.

      Lets ignore the rich history of SFF PC's from the likes of Shuttle or even new popular brands like Revo from Acer.

      So the "rich history" is of some ambiguous devices from a niche company and a device that came out in 2009 which is 4 years after the Mac Mini according to the link you posted? Wow, you throughly showed him up. NOT. Care to post the SFF PC's coming from HP, Dell, Lenovo, etc.? You know, one of the actual OEMs that the average person would have heard of? The fact of the matter is that Intel is once again chasing something that Apple made mainstream.

    6. Re:Mac Mini wannabe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      The rounded rectangle, for instance.

    7. Re:Mac Mini wannabe by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      You realise that ATX motherboards have a footprint nearly 4 times that of the MacMini (and that's without a case). They also mandate space above the CPU for a cooler that's twice as tall as a MacMini... So your example doesn't really seem apropriate.

      You may have meant mITX, which was developed in 2001... But *still* wasn't as small as the MacMini.

    8. Re:Mac Mini wannabe by cynyr · · Score: 1

      I agree that mini-ITX isn't as small as a mac mini, but here I am with a 125W AMD CPU (1050T x6) and a GTS450 all shoved into something about the size of 2 loaves of bread. Way more power than the mini as well. Granted it consumes more power than a mini. The idle is around 80W, and full out (FFmpeg doing a h264 encode on 6 threads, and furmark via wine) is somewhere around the 280W range.

      So the big thing with Mini-ITX is that it is about as small as you can go and still get a PCIE-16X slot on the board.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
    9. Re:Mac Mini wannabe by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      So, 2 loaves of bread, that's 30cm, by 30cm, by 15cm. Into that space, you could fit 12 MacMinis, or 25 NUCs. Your 1050T is already actually slower than similar CPUs to the current MacMini or NUC (sorry, couldn't find bunchmarks against the exact same CPU) http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/147?vs=677; so they're respectively about 12 to 25 times faster than your system by volume, and about 4 times faster per watt.

      Don't get me wrong there's nothing wrong with a bog standard desktop PC, but I really don't understand why people are so disparaging of small, low power systems like this. They're mighty impressive things.

  6. Put something better than Intel Video in there, by pecosdave · · Score: 2

    and I might consider it. Looks like a reasonable HTPC, but without the video horse power to run ZSNES, other emulators, or even Linux native 3D games (not even necessarily the advanced ones) I won't consider it.

    --
    The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    1. Re:Put something better than Intel Video in there, by SolidAltar · · Score: 1

      I'm sure Intel will get right on making sure all their products support SNES games.

    2. Re:Put something better than Intel Video in there, by darkain · · Score: 1

      Problem Solved, and for only $100 - http://www.ouya.tv/

    3. Re:Put something better than Intel Video in there, by bemymonkey · · Score: 1

      Really? SNES Emulators? You're aware they run on Pentium IV generation Intel graphics, right? I have a Pentium M machine here that gets regular use as an SNES emulator...

    4. Re:Put something better than Intel Video in there, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not ZSNES though. Read about it.

    5. Re:Put something better than Intel Video in there, by gman003 · · Score: 1

      Erm, the newest Intel graphics can run Crysis at semi-respectable settings. Considering I ran ZSNES just fine on a Rage 3D, I have no idea where you got the idea Intel graphics can't run a simple SNES emulator.

      Remember, Intel's newest graphics ("Intel HD") are a ground-up new design, not at all related to the old ("Intel GMA") integrated graphics.

    6. Re:Put something better than Intel Video in there, by AnonyMouseCowWard · · Score: 1

      Wait wait. I haven't tested it, but I'm genuinely wondering if you're trolling or if there's something I didn't know. I've ran ZSNES on machines that are close to a decade old, and HD4000 is able to run modern games (in low settings at least), so you telling me it can't run ZSNES because of lack of horsepower sounds like a trolling attempt. What am I missing?

    7. Re:Put something better than Intel Video in there, by pecosdave · · Score: 1

      ZSNES is a strange beast. Running it at low res and no filters is generally pretty easy on just about anything, but sound may suffer. Increase the resolution (say for a non-scaling LCD) or add any filters and there's severe performance hits, especially where sound is concerned. I've done much better with decade old equipment with good hardware of the era than I have with mostly software driven modern equipment.

      I would rather run a Riva TNT2 and a Soundblaster 16 with the correct drivers and any OS with ZSNES than I would Intel or most any other software driven chips with ZSNES or most 3D applications, especially with weak hardware.

      I will say I was very surprised when I actually found Torchlight playable (barely) on my Atom netbook.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
    8. Re:Put something better than Intel Video in there, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ZSNES is a strange beast.

      Emulator for old retards still living in basements. Evolve or die.

    9. Re:Put something better than Intel Video in there, by AnonyMouseCowWard · · Score: 1

      Gotcha. Thanks for the explanation!

    10. Re:Put something better than Intel Video in there, by toddestan · · Score: 1

      I was running ZSNES on a K6 system with Rage 128 Pro graphics over a decade ago. I'd be surprised if even the weakest modern computer would have any trouble with it.

  7. Price? by symbolset · · Score: 1

    Does Intel know you can get a Nexus7 or chromebook for $200?

    --
    Help stamp out iliturcy.
    1. Re:Price? by SolidAltar · · Score: 1

      Those are ARM based. But you're right, the price seems a bit high.

    2. Re:Price? by symbolset · · Score: 1

      The new $200 chromebook uses Celeron dual core.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    3. Re:Price? by ikaruga · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not only these devices are significantly weaker, but Google is selling them for the manufacturing cost. Google wants you to use them so they can make money through advertisement and selling content. Intel is trying to provide a stand alone computer platform. They are selling hardware and if they don't make a profit on hardware sales, they won't make profit anywhere. The problem of these devices is not the price, but the lack of basic audio output ports and ethernet. Even for a device that I guess is supposed to be marketed towards the Average Joe Grandpa, this is unacceptable.

    4. Re:Price? by Rudeboy777 · · Score: 2

      The problem of these devices is not the price, but the lack of basic audio output ports and ethernet.

      Buy the one that comes with an ethernet port. Sound comes through the HDMI port.

      --

      From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc

  8. No wired... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    No Wired, less volume than a Mini.

    But really the no Wired network port is a big deal.

    1. Re:No wired... by SolidAltar · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Holy shit. I just realized you're right. There's no wired network port.

      You kidding me, Intel? You want me to pay ~$500 for a computer without a network port? Who do you think you are, Apple?

    2. Re:No wired... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No dedicated audio ports either, it has to go through the video connections. You can't connect speakers directly to it.

    3. Re:No wired... by unix_core · · Score: 3, Funny

      You're right. Only Apple has the magic powers to remove functionality, raise the price, give it rounded corners and earn tons of money off it.

    4. Re:No wired... by Namarrgon · · Score: 2

      The DC3217IYE version trades the Thunderbolt port for GigE and a second HDMI. Still no audio ports though.

      --
      Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    5. Re:No wired... by BSalita · · Score: 1

      ... but you get USB 2.0.

    6. Re:No wired... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      You have the choice between 2 gigabit ports or a thunderbolt port w/o ethernet. But not both. Intel's low end offerings seem to be deliberately crippled so as to not complete with their higher end stuff. You add in the memory and drive on one of these and you're about $100 short of a mac mini which has gigabit ethernet and thunderbolt together plus usb 3.0 and no fscking power brick.

    7. Re:No wired... by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Informative

      ..in a world where USB 3.0 has become standard on low end motherboards.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    8. Re:No wired... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Average Joe needs a wired port? Been wireless for the past year now, streaming HD fine with half a dozen sharing.

    9. Re:No wired... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No fanless, neither.

    10. Re:No wired... by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      Yes.

      Average Joe needs a wired port because he screwed up the setup of his wireless network and doesn't have the time/money/patience to get it fixed.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    11. Re:No wired... by ricky-road-flats · · Score: 1
      Not so fast... I too didn't like that idea, but I just went to Intel.com and searched for NUC - first link that comes up is this: http://www.intel.co.uk/content/www/uk/en/desktops/dc3217iye-product-brief.html?wapkw=nuc

      It clearly shows a single gigabit NIC. I'll bet there are models with and without.

    12. Re:No wired... by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      Given that the thunderbolt port can be adapted to gigabit ethernet, and still daisy chained with 9Gb/s of bandwidth remaining, I'll take the thunderbolt port.

    13. Re:No wired... by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Does anyone actually make a thunderbolt to gigabit ethernet adaptor that has a second port for daisy chaining?

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    14. Re:No wired... by Provocateur · · Score: 1

      Somewhere, in a distant law office, a legal team collectively stands up and performs stretching and other warm-up exercises. And to top it all off, they crack their knuckles for yet another big showdown.

      --
      WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
    15. Re:No wired... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and I don't see "wifi" anywhere in the descriptions :-/

    16. Re:No wired... by Rudeboy777 · · Score: 1

      Holy shit. I just realized you're right. There's no wired network port.

      He's not right. Buy the one that has the wired network port if you need it.

      --

      From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc

  9. So... by gigaherz · · Score: 2

    ... a laptop in a box. Except without all the extra things a laptop comes with -- like battery, keyboard, speakers, screen, ethernet, etc. Cute, but that's all.

    1. Re:So... by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      No, no. It's more like one of those small HTPC boxes you can fit to the back of a VESA-mount TV, but more expensive and less powerful.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:So... by gigaherz · · Score: 1

      Don't those also generally come with laptop ("Mobile") models of the components? I have always thought of those -- and the ones that come integrated into a screen, like iMacs -- as non-mobile laptops.

    3. Re:So... by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      hint: This Intel brick also uses Mobile components. A particularly weak (1.8ghz dual core) mobile i3, in fact.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    4. Re:So... by gigaherz · · Score: 1

      That's what I meant with "also" in my previous post.

    5. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Intel based iMacs up to now actually used full size socketed desktop processors, although I think they're limited to 65w TDP. The primary hard drive was also a full 3.5". Although they were using mobile graphics chips, they were still more powerful than the integrated graphics available at the time found in most desktop. As for SO-DIMMs, so what?
      I don't know about the new 2012 models that haven't been released yet.

  10. Intel video pretty impressive these days... but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Speaking as the representative of one of the only companies who might have actually cared I can say this is a dead product.

    The issue with this device is it is actually too small and the limitations are ridicules. 2GB of ram is not enough to run GNU/Linux let alone Microsoft Windows, I don't even understand why it is limited to 2GB. The thing appears to have two DDR3 slots so in theory it should be able to support up to 16GB. The 2GB will technically be “good enough” for the next three years. And humorously we aim for “good enough” right now in GNU/Linux land just because it is such a small market right now (even though we are setting it up so that it can take off).

    However while you can install Ubuntu 12.04 LTS on it and have it work “good enough” for about 3 years there is no room to profit on these things. Not to mention we are one of the few companies with the catalog and resources to even begin to properly target this market with such a device. What happens when the user wants a DVD drive or a printer that works? The GNU/Linux ecosystem is a convoluted mess that requires an engineer with expertise in the subject to put together a proper catalog. Such a significant amount of "Linux hardware" is utter crap dependent on proprietary drivers and firmware.

    Hilariously we sell a bit bigger boxes with much more powerful options too that sell really really well (although only Intel graphics because Intel's the only thing which can be properly supported on GNU/Linux system... stupid AMD/NVIDIA refuse to cooperate- yes- even Linus bitches about it-even if he won't admit non-free software is bad). The ram is up to 16GB now and we can ship with up to an i5 (i7 would work but Intel's being bitchy with releasing a i7 low power CPU without digital restrictions in the CPU so we won't ship them). Our similarly small system also supports wireless and and has a bunch of additional ports/options (SSD, etc).

    Sadly we have the only systems that really work well in the industry.

    If you want something that stops working after the next upgrade- go ahead and buy something from one of our competitors like System76. Cause that is the standard they are setting. No. No. I won't say who I work for because my concern is freedom and stuff that works. Not promoting the company I work for. If you give a shit about free software and getting hardware that actually works well you can easily find the company anyway.

    And if your priority is gaming. Fine. Buy the crap hardware. But don't complain when you have to manually upgrade/install the drivers or the hardware stops working because you've decided non-free software works good enough. And yes- there is a lot of hardware for Linux which stops working. Just because you upgrade too frequently not notice or buy generally the right stuff doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just about every non-HP (and non post script) printer for example... has issues due to non-free drivers (and some HP printers do too- but there are a boatload of good ones with awesome documentation on the levels of support). A boatload of wireless cards (anything that isn't atheros just about) dependent on ndiwsrapper (which causes system instability by the way), and tons more. And no. We shouldn't have to reverse engineer NVIDIA's crap.

  11. Cheaper than the Mac Mini but not Rasberry Pi? by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    A quick look at the Mac mini shows them at $600 [500 i5] or $800 [1TB i7] so about half the price sans memory and hard drive. Ignoring the OS they are significantly better value, and you get to avoid all the Apple lock-in crap that is forced on you.

    Though I have to admit both these options seem incredibly expensive vs the myrid of ARM choices out there with a variety of funky/functional enclosures, and use next to no power, running everything from XBMC; Full Desktop Linux; Android[TV], and more than anything require very little money a quick scan puts then in the price range of $30-$150

    The reality is Intel are trying to make more money by doing what the SFF[Small Form Factor] manufacturers have been doing for years, bundle case+motherboard together for greater profit...only throwing a CPU into the equation, just when they need to start competing with ARM at the bottom end.

    1. Re:Cheaper than the Mac Mini but not Rasberry Pi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forget R.Pi as the comparator... The new standard is the large variety of systems based on the chinese Allwinner A13 chip. These mostly cost about $15 or so more than the pi, but are much more realistic in terms of performance - 1ghz A8 (i.e. dual issue, ooe, rather than single issue as the pi's processor is), overclockable to 1.5ghz according to most reports. I'm fond of olimex's board, mostly due to its open-source design, but there are others, too.

    2. Re:Cheaper than the Mac Mini but not Rasberry Pi? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once you strap on the items to provide needed ports as well as the drive and memory you are less than the price of an OS away from the mini. You are still short an optical drive and left with a less powerful box. The warrantees on all those parts will be more involved than dropping by the Apple store. More a pee in the wind than shot across the bow.

  12. Revo already fits this market by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ASUS Eee Box, Acer Revo, or Acer Veriton N already does this market well. Except, unlike the Intel, they are ready to go, software included and less than the cost Intel want after adding on the hard disk and wifi card:

    http://us.acer.com/ac/en/US/content/series/veritonn

    They're fairly powerful, dual core chip sets, (D525's), with an NVidia Ion 2 graphics, making it a damn site faster than Intels integrated display.

    So I don't quite know what market Intel thinks its chasing? A market that ones a faster processor but slower gpu?!

    If my next PC is a PC (and not an Android box) then I'd like a small form factor, fast PC sure. But this isn't it. Needs to have Windows 7, a 320GB minimum hard disk, Wifi and be ready to go for that price.

  13. Intel graphics have improved significantly. by tuppe666 · · Score: 2

    Ignoring the fact that its clearly not a gaming rig, the intel HD Graphics 4000, to put it in some kind of perspective I am currelty using Intel HD Graphics 3000 which allows me to play games like trine http://trine-thegame.com/site/ and Rochard http://www.rochardthegame.com/en/ both great Linux games

    As for ZSNES please [snaps fingers],that was designed to run SNES full speed on a 486 with a SIS 630 chipset. Now BSNES now that is a different beast!!

    1. Re:Intel graphics have improved significantly. by pecosdave · · Score: 1

      I just tried BSNES on my Atom netbook.

      Not happening.

      It works but I wouldn't exactly call it full speed emulation.

      --
      The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
  14. Microsofts Sick Properganda a History Note by tuppe666 · · Score: 5, Informative

    trollololol

    Not a troll, just a comment that is more a history reference, in a world where its been impossible to buy a PC without an OS for years http://www.zdnet.com/top-five-pc-manufacturers-fail-naked-pc-test-3039286228/ this is an article describing how difficult it was in 2007. The truth is Microsoft created the [propaganda] term "Naked PC" for "its dramatic value and as a means for creating the impression that it is evil to sell computers without operating systems because they might be used for so-called software piracy" http://www.linfo.org/naked_pc.html

    1. Re:Microsofts Sick Properganda a History Note by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

      Get over it, really. Life is so much better then spreading FUD and conspiracy theories around.

      --
      I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
    2. Re:Microsofts Sick Properganda a History Note by SourceFrog · · Score: 1

      "Conspiracy theory"? Lol ... a "conspiracy theory" for which Microsoft was taken to court and found guilty due to the actual evidence ... I suppose the slashdot crowd are getting too young to remember these things, but is it too much to expect to even know the basics of one of the most famous historical antitrust cases in the history of the tech industry?

      --
      My other UID is three digits.
    3. Re:Microsofts Sick Properganda a History Note by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Get over it, really. Life is so much better then spreading FUD and conspiracy theories around.

      You know what else would make life better? If, maybe just once, in between the first capitalized letter and the trailing punctuation mark of at least one of your worthless drivelesque sentences, you could actually find the wherewithal to coordinate that pathetic collection of neurons you call a brain in one singular collective effort stringing a collection of words together that not only exhibit some semblance of grammatical correctness but actually make some Goddamned sense! Seriously, the library is free. Go read a book on the proper utilization of the English fucking language. Please take your incessant lexical fart blossoms and GTFO!

    4. Re:Microsofts Sick Properganda a History Note by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and as a means for creating the impression that it is evil to sell computers without operating systems because they might be used for so-called software piracy"

      To be fair, that is highly likely by far the largest group of users buying PCs without OS, to run a free copy of Windows. But I still agree with your argument that there shouldn't be any restrictions on selling "naked" PCs. And I don't understand the impression that these are difficult to find. I just some time ago bought a Shuttle PC without any OS bundled.

      They might not be available from the top brand names, and I can understand that from a support perspective alone (they also lose the revenue from the crapware). I once read that a single call to Dell support has an average cost equal to what they pay for their OEM Windows Volume License... People buying the cheapest PC offer without understanding the consequences will wreck havoc with support.

  15. MAC Mini Overpriced by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    So basically it's everything we didn't like in Mac Mini

    Who is the "we" my main problem with the Mac Mini is the Price, and this is half that, and has more flexibility. Not really sure what this has to do with Microsoft being stupid, this looks like bog standard hardware.

    1. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by SomePgmr · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, this is a motherboard and case for half of what a Mac Mini in working order goes for. At $300, you still need to add a power supply, mSata storage, memory, ethernet, etc.

      Mac mini's start at $599, ready to run, with an i5, 4gb ram, 500gb hdd, and have ethernet, firewire, sound ports, etc.

    2. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by sgunhouse · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ever seen one of those Acer Aspire Revo "nettops"? Mine is the original - 1.6 GHz Atom processor (64-bit), nVidia Ion onboard graphics, 7 USB ports, ethernet, HDMI and VGA. Current models use an AMD processor and graphics for $329 or Intel I3 and Intel graphics for $499. (The $329 model has no optical drive, the $499 model has an 8x DVD+/-RW drive.)

      The case on all of the above is about 1.5"x8"x8".

      Actually, given that I'm not certain what the NUC is supposed to be offering. Slightly smaller form factor, that's about it ...

    3. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by amiga3D · · Score: 2

      Don't forget that it doesn't come with an OS. Unless you run Linux or some sort of BSD you can add the retail cost of Windows on to that price too. My mini also has the power supply internal unlike the older model with the brick.

    4. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by kenh · · Score: 1

      Unless you run Linux or some sort of BSD you can add the retail cost of Windows on to that price too.

      Unless, you know, you are a system builder and install OEM Windows or you are a large corp./educational institution and you install a volume license edition of Windows.

      --
      Ken
    5. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      System comes with a 65W laptop-style power brick that plugs into the back of the enclosure, are you seriously implying that the addition of a $300 to spend on hard drives and memory is a bad thing, with the advantage the device comes with 2 expansion slots. The idea as I read it is this will be given to "system builders" to make ready.

      The "system" is 4"x4"x2". What kind of "expansion" are you thinking of? Since it can't even take notebook size hard drives you're certainly going to be limited in your storage options, not to mention anything else that will fit inside the enclosure.

    6. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Windows 8* is only $40. Add $5 for a start menu replacement and you are set.

      * Why do I vomit in my mouth a little whenever I type that? Also, I haven't gotten around to the start menu replacement yet.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    7. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by DrXym · · Score: 1
      This box doesn't look exactly cheap either. It's unclear to me if the anticipated $300-320 retail price includes the memory, storage or wifi module. They say they added that stuff in their boxto make the price $450. When you consider that netbooks cost less but included wifi, memory, harddisk, battery, screen, keyboard / trackpad it makes you wonder why this thing costs so much. The CPU is better than an Atom processor but not *that* much better.

      There is no denying these would be fabulously useful boxes, though I think it would actually benefit the device if it were larger - if there were an empty bay to the side of the main unit where people could plug in USB sticks (TV tuners etc.) or extra drives without an obvious mess of stuff sticking out.

    8. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mac mini's start at $599, ready to run

      ... and directly contribute to the legal coffers of one of the industry's biggest bullies.

      Some of us still have principles.

    9. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Don't forget that it doesn't come with an OS. Unless you run Linux or some sort of BSD you can add the retail cost of Windows on to that price too. My mini also has the power supply internal unlike the older model with the brick."

      Ugh. Why would you take a perfectly good raw hardware box like this and add Windows to it?

      Not meaning to troll, honest. But this thing is barely capable of running Windows at all. You could put Linux on it and have a pretty snappy machine.

    10. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by Algae_94 · · Score: 1

      Isn't the $40 for an upgrade version. That won't work unless you get an older version of Windows running first.

    11. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Actually, no its not.

      That $39 number they are splashing around it the upgrade price. You need to buy the OEM version for about $100+.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    12. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      You only need to download it from a Windows PC to get the upgrade price. One of the install options is to burn to disk/memory stick, at which point you have full install media.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    13. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      Most of us have one of those laying around, if only at work or in a VM.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    14. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by amiga3D · · Score: 1

      Come on man, I despise windows but it'll run fine on it. At least until it gets clogged with malware.

    15. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by Algae_94 · · Score: 1

      That's true, but then you don't have to do as the GP says and factor the OS cost into the price.

    16. Re:MAC Mini Overpriced by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can also lie on the upgrade form and specify a purchase date for whatever PC within the June to January timeframe and you'll get Windows 8 for only $15. They don't (and probably can't) actually verify purchase dates,

      I bought my laptop only a few months before the offer began, so I just put in the real model and fudged the date by a few months. I have Windows 8 dual booting with the Windows 7 that came with the laptop. All seems to work fine.

  16. Creativity by grodzix · · Score: 1

    So Intel is basically taking creativity hints from Samsung. Why come up with ideas if someone has done it already for you...

    --
    My Windows is NOT slow, it's special!
  17. "most of the world is convinced the PC is doomed" by l3v1 · · Score: 2

    "most of the world is convinced the PC is doomed"

    I still can't take any writing seriously which begins by preaching the end of the PC. First, every computing-capable non-mainframe computer is a PC. Second, there will always be a need for PCs with "normal" computational capacity (meaning more than a mobile i3 cpu), of course in smaller numbers, but still. Remember, not everyone is only a content consumer living on tablets and small form factor AIO computers.

    That said, I like these small devices, they have their use and place, in my home too. And I like that there are nice alternatives to Apple.

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
  18. gigabit ethernet by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 2

    Actually that is Gigabit ethernet, something their products have had for a decade. Can't say the same about most low-end competition yet.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    1. Re:gigabit ethernet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      According to the research I have just done (Wikipedia is quickest reference, although other sites back it up), the Mac Mini started shipping with gigabit Ethernet standard in the "Early 2006" models... so no, you're wrong.

    2. Re:gigabit ethernet by Desler · · Score: 1

      My Mac Mini (2008)

      You're definitely trolling as there is no 2008 model Mac Mini. The only ones in that time region are the Mid 2007 and the Early 2009 Mac Mini. The 2009 Mac Mini has gigabit and the Mid 2007 Mac Mini has gigabit. Even the Early 2006 Mac Mini has gigabit. Wanna try again?

    3. Re:gigabit ethernet by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      So, then, one would be correct to say that Apple did not release a Mac Mini with gigabit ethernet in 2008?

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
    4. Re:gigabit ethernet by Desler · · Score: 1

      Yes, they didn't RELEASE any new Mac Mini in 2008. They only sold the mid 2007 which had gigabit.

    5. Re:gigabit ethernet by BronsCon · · Score: 1

      I was going for a funny mod, not a reply :)

      --
      APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  19. PC is a Different Toy. by tuppe666 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    First, every computing-capable non-mainframe computer is a PC.

    Second, there will always be a need for PCs with "normal" computational capacity

    I am not convinced that we will in a post-pc world...an always connected world maybe. but I disagree with you justification on defending a PC as a "personal computer", because tablets/Smartphones albeit incredibly powerful computing devices, and not tradition [Desktop] PCs. Ironically you recognise this by saying smartphones and tablets cannot do [well do badly], by accessing that traditional PC's [what you call "normal"(sic) PC's].

    I'm kind of tired of people trying to defend traditional PC's. If you create Stuff [CAD; Programming; Large Documents; Design], as opposed to consume things on the couch or on the Public transport You use a PC. The reality is most people here have tablets; PCs; Smartphones and know what niche they all occupy [or know why they don't want one].

    1. Re:PC is a Different Toy. by Anonymous+Cod · · Score: 1

      I think that "the PC is doomed" is a dumb statement. My main issue is with using the PC acronym. Really, all these new small-form-factor devices are also PCs. They are little "personal" computers that perform certain tasks. Sure, the tablets and smartphones aren't good at modeling and rendering 3D animations or what-have-you, so people don't try to use them for that. The "PC" as we currently refer to it, has already evolved from the original. Its components have seen improvements in technology and a reduction in size. One day we'll be able to have all the power we need in something as small as a cell phone, but at that point, that little device is now our PC. The "PC" is not doomed, it is just evolving.

    2. Re:PC is a Different Toy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm kind of tired of people trying to defend traditional PC's

      No-one needs to. In Q3 2012, PCs out-sold tablets by a factor of six to one.

    3. Re:PC is a Different Toy. by tepples · · Score: 1

      One day we'll be able to have all the power we need in something as small as a cell phone

      As a hobbyist software developer, the power I need includes the ability to run homemade code without having to pay the gatekeeper every year. That's why I didn't buy an iPhone or an iPad.

      but at that point, that little device is now our PC. The "PC" is not doomed, it is just evolving.

      Evolving to be more locked down, that is.

  20. A note to intel... by Genda · · Score: 2

    Please take a quick look at the soon to be available board being proffered at Parallella.org. or you can enjoy their videos. Now you can get the 16+2 core super computer for $99, or the 64+2 core super computer for $199. The board comes with plenty of I/O options and two GPIO bus board expanders. By the way the board is expected to run under 5 watts in use.

    It comes with linux installed. I could easily imagine a computer dramatically smaller than an Mac Mini running at lower power with the selection of peripherals that nobody expects. This little machine is going to redefine computers and I hope Intel can hear those tiny feet running up behind them at this very moment.

    Things are going to get more interesting by the day.

    1. Re:A note to intel... by sunderland56 · · Score: 1

      "soon to be available" == vaporware.

      Yes, if it ever appears, it might be interesting - but there is no indication that 64 slow cores will beat two fast ones.

    2. Re:A note to intel... by Nimey · · Score: 1

      "supercomputer".

      You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    3. Re:A note to intel... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a computer that originated from the planet Krypton.

    4. Re:A note to intel... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "No double precision. Less sane architecture than a Cell. Lame." - CmdrTaco.

      That chip is more of a joke than a supercomputer..

  21. More expensive than the Mac Mini by Kergan · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm not getting the impression that the Mac Mini is so much more expensive. On the contrary...

    - Core i3 vs core i5/i7.
    - No RAM (2 * DDR slots) vs 4GB RAM
    - No HD vs 500GB/1TB HD
    - HDMI, Thunderbolt (or GigE and an extra HDMI), 3 * USB2 vs GigE, Thunderbolt, HDMI, WireWire, 4 * USB3, SD Card, Speaker In, Speaker Out
    - No OS vs OS X

    1. Re:More expensive than the Mac Mini by tuppe666 · · Score: 0

      I'm not getting the impression that the Mac Mini is so much more expensive. On the contrary...

      - Core i3 vs core i5/i7.
      - No RAM (2 * DDR slots) vs 4GB RAM
      - No HD vs 500GB/1TB HD
      - HDMI, Thunderbolt (or GigE and an extra HDMI), 3 * USB2 vs GigE, Thunderbolt, HDMI, WireWire, 4 * USB3, SD Card, Speaker In, Speaker Out
      - No OS vs OS X

      That is because you find it difficult to price component of an equivalent barebone system to make it fully functional.

    2. Re:More expensive than the Mac Mini by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is because you find it difficult to price component of an equivalent barebone system to make it fully functional.

      Price me a 500GB HD that is compatible with this new Intel mini PC ... and any of those additional options that are compatible with this new Intel mini PC's expansion slots.

  22. What's with the 'name-calling'? by MurukeshM · · Score: 1

    Intel calls it NUC, for short, which is incredibly cute.

    This CPU, with the incredibly catchy name Core i3-3217U, ...
    ... the DC3217BY, a lovely name that could double as a software registration key ...

    (Emphasis mine) Huh? Are they being sarcastic or funny?

  23. Re:Intel video pretty impressive these days... but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since when do you need over 2GB to run either Linux or Windows? Only one of my computers has more than 2GB, and I don't notice any difference in performance on it.

    Actually, to be honest I do have a netbook with 4GB installed too, but I still haven't replaced the Starter version of Windows 7 so it can't see the top 2GB. It still runs as well as can be expected on the CPU.

  24. big brain, no arms and legs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    everything and the kitchen sink please.

    will try not to bitch here, so i for one welcome our new low power
    NUC overloards, that:
    1) don't have usb 3.0
    2) don't provide visualization support on chip?
    3) don't have enough "OOMPH" on the
    chipSET side for thunderbolt AND 4x SATA@3GB/sec
    AND at least 2(TWO) GIGABIT ports ...all at the same time.

    intel seems very strong on the CPU side of things,
    but lag on GPU and system bandwidth (see above) = garbage chipSET!

    the AMD CPU might not have the same grunt as intel CPUs,
    but have visualization enabled on ALL chips that are x64
    and enough system wide bandwidth.
    even a C50 with the amd chipSET can do HDMI 1080p AND
    USB3.0 (500Mbit/sec?)x2 AND two gigabit ports AND
    then have enough left over to talk to the GPU even ...
    so there.
    good try intel, but in that size-class, more peripheral
    and bandwidth is needed.

    AMD should stop requiring a dedicated PSU monster power brick
    to power their mainboards and go with a 60-95 watt
    external power brick (like laptops have).

    example:
    asus AT3ionT minitx board has a atom 330
    it has a nvidia ion GPU (8400) AND a 16 lane PCI-e
    slot that can ... yes ACTUALLY talk at 16x speed.
    the chipSET (not just the GPU) is nVidia!

    asus at5ionT minitx board has a atom 525
    it has a nvidia ion2 GPU and a 16 lane PCI-e slot
    that can talk .. wait for it .. 4x speed.
    this is NOT even enough to plugin a lowely
    gigabit PCIe network card (single port!).
    thats because it doesn't have a nvidia chipSET but a
    a "forced down your throat, it comes wit the atom 525"
    intel NM10 chipset.http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/chipsets/internet-devices-chipsets/nm10-chipset.html

    i rest my case.

  25. It's getting there.... by Le+Grande+Raoul · · Score: 1

    There are potentials for sales here.... Right now, today, the Mac Mini seems like a better deal. And, if one really wants to do so, there are a variety of ways to run Windows and/or Linux on the Mini. However, if a faster processor was available as an option and the price went down some, I could see a lot of these in the hands of consumers...

  26. Not modular? by flappinbooger · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When I saw it called the "unit" of computing I thought maybe it was modular so I could snap together a few "units" of them to make it faster, bigger, etc.

    Shoot, make it NOT expandable at ALL and simply modular, so more ram, more hd, more proc, etc, just click it together. Have variations, different colors mean more ram or more hard drive. Pair a unit with more ram with a unit with more processor.

    Otherwise, whats the point? They've made a nettop with an i3 rather than a atom? Ok...

    --
    Flappinbooger isn't my real name
  27. Yep by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just built 2 itx boxes:

    1 with a e-350 apu board, 8gb of ram, and a 1tb hard drive for $195.00 for everything.

    1 with a intel g550, itx board, 8gb of ram,and a 1Tb hd for $265 for everything.

    1. Re:Yep by beelsebob · · Score: 1

      Okay, and neither of those are comparably quick, or small to either this, or a MacMini...

    2. Re:Yep by petermgreen · · Score: 2

      neither of those are comparably quick

      Don't let the fact that the next unit of computing is marketed as having an i3 while the chip in his ITX build is marketed as a celeron fool you, look at the actual specs of the processor. A little extra cache and a slight core revision are not going to make up for a nearly 50% clockspeed difference.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    3. Re:Yep by beelsebob · · Score: 2

      1) The G550 is sandy bridge, not Ivy Bridge
      2) The i3 has hyper threading
      3) The Celeron is a 65W CPU, meaning it'll never fit into a 4x4x2 inch box.

    4. Re:Yep by hawguy · · Score: 2

      I just built 2 itx boxes:

      1 with a e-350 apu board, 8gb of ram, and a 1tb hard drive for $195.00 for everything.

      1 with a intel g550, itx board, 8gb of ram,and a 1Tb hd for $265 for everything.

      I just bought a Zotaz Zbox - AMD E-450, 2GB RAM, 64GB for $300 in the same formfactor as this "new" Intel formfactor: 4.17in x 4.17in x 1.46in

      http://www.zotacusa.com/zbox-nano-xs-ad11-plus.html

    5. Re:Yep by cynyr · · Score: 1

      which case did you use? At that price i assume it was a steel and plastic job with no expansion slot.

      --
      All of the above was encrypted with a Quad ROT-13 method. Unauthorized decryption is in violation of the DMCA.
  28. Mac mini predated Revo by 4 years by tepples · · Score: 1

    Yes because MAC invented small PC's its not like the microATX was introduced in December 1997.

    Perhaps what Apple invented was selling small PCs to the public. I don't believe Shuttle PCs were sold in brick-and-mortar stores, and the Mac mini predated the Revo by four years.

  29. So close but so fail by fnj · · Score: 2

    I LOVE the idea of this thing. I LOVE the size. I LOVE most of the choices and tradeoffs. i love the external power brick - and big fat Bronx cheer to Apple for abandoning that and bringing 110VAC right into their latest minis. Really stupid, Apple.
    But so sorry...
    1) No ethernet = HUGE FAIL
    2) No USB3 and not enough USB's = HUGE FAIL
    These are absolute showstoppers. Fix these and this thing is the answer to my prayers. I'll accept up to 1" more width and depth to get them.

    Until then, it's not even close to making me abandon my Aopen Mini.

    1. Re:So close but so fail by kenh · · Score: 2

      There will be a version with onboard Ethernet, and they are trying to promote use of thunderbolt, just like Apple is.

      I'll probably get one of the model with built-in Ethernet and put a system together - coukd be fun to play with.

      --
      Ken
    2. Re:So close but so fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first atom boards were quite underwhelming too (most init board from intel are). The latest ones from other companies are pretty slick. This is a proof of concept. Hence the high price point and lack of features. Give it about a year and you will some more interesting boards built around this platform.

    3. Re:So close but so fail by fnj · · Score: 1

      There will be a version with onboard Ethernet, and they are trying to promote use of thunderbolt, just like Apple is.

      I'll probably get one of the model with built-in Ethernet and put a system together - coukd be fun to play with.

      Do we know this or do we only suppose this? It would be very encouraging! I have a thing for minis. I used to have the original Mac Mini but it crapped out completely before too long (this was helped by me throwing it against concrete blocks in a fit when probably it only had a dead hard drive). Until it died I liked it a lot. When they changed the design and started toying with power sucking, overheating GPUs and brought 110VAC directly into the unit and made the footprint much too big, I lost pretty much all interest. Words cannot express how stupid it was to move the power supply into the main case.

      I tried a number of Aopen minis; same size as the original Mac Mini. The best IMO was the MP945. Mine still works. Thermally and acoustically (and those are the hard parts that amateurs always blunder on) it was a grand slam home run. Separate power brick (standard specs, too!), check. Real DVI-I connector, check; no stupid HDMI. Enough front and rear USBs, check (barely). Unfortunately the ancient GMA950 video was not up to full HD streaming, at least not on linux. But a truly fine mini desktop or mini light server.

      Subsequent Aopens dropped the ball badly. My GP7A with the NVidia video hit a home run for HD streaming, but thermally it was getting closer to the edge, and acoustically it was just a flat out noisy bastard. A repulsive little jet engine.

      The MP67 actually looks like it might be the one, but I don't haven't had the $ to try it since the bottom dropped out of my personal economy. I would definitely demand that it be upgraded to Ivy Bridge anyway.

      Advancing technology has stepped up to the plate now, and the Intel with the ultra low power version of Ivy Bridge and HD4000 video is the flat out right answer which can be a fully capable mini desktop AND mini server AND HD streaming. Screw games. They are just not on my radar.

  30. $450 is too expensive. by csumpi · · Score: 1

    It looks nice, but the price is not right. $450 pays for a nice i3 laptop with screen, ethernet, keyboard etc...

    If they could keep the price under $300 with 4gb of ram (at $10/piece retail) and a 500gb hdd (at $80 retail), then this would be interesting.

  31. Proof of concept by kenh · · Score: 1

    People here seem to have forgotten what a proof of concept design is. This board is intended to inspire Intel's partners to take the basic building block, extend it in some certain way and address their cluent's needs. Like the Atom MBs. After Intel produced their first few Atom MBs all kinds if systems emerged - SuperMicro made some server MBs, others added better graphics support, etc.

    I look at the NUC and I can easily imagine a system with similar specs, 8 gigs of RAM, 64 Gigs of local storage, a gigabit Ethernet port and a more conventional video/audio hook-up being reasonably successful in many call center, kiosk, and other high-volume applications.

    I think the real goal of this proof of concept/product is to get people used to the idea of using miniPCIe SSDs on desktop systems - intel has made several MBs with these ports, but they don't get used very often - most system builders opt for 2.5" form factor SSDs.

    How long before we see 'NUC co-location' offerings.

    This reminds me of PCs that were once made that stuffed a PC into a 5 1/4" drive chassis and was designed to be installed in a desktop system.

    --
    Ken
  32. Thanks but I'll pass by LoRdTAW · · Score: 1

    $300-$320? The original /. article was quoting prices of around $100, but it looks like it was more like wishful speculation. Where is the Ethernet port, memory or storage? Hell they don't even have an eSATA port which you can find on just about every motherboard these days. I can buy the parts to make a mini PC using an ITX board for less than $300 and that includes storage, memory and gigabit Ethernet plus eSATA. The CPU would be an AMD A series which has graphics that will wipe the floor with the i3's HD 4000.

    The Extremetech article linked in the older /. summary shows mini PCIe slots on the board so expansion is not out of the question but there is no mention of them in the latest article. Thunderbolt is also pretty damn fast, 10Gbps, equivalent to the bandwidth of 2 PCIe 2.0 x1 slots. But if you really need expansion slots you could probably buy a micro ATX system for the same price.

    What is the point of this system, size? No one will buy it as its marketed towards enthusiasts who know hardware prices and they wont touch this thing. If they want to charge that kind of money it better come with storage and memory, and a good deal of it to justify the $300 price tag. On Newegg, I can buy a Zotac ZBOX ID41 PLUS for $288 which is a 1.8GHz Atom, ION graphics, 250GB HDD and 2GB RAM.

    If Intel is selling this thing as a barebones system, they better drop the price to $100, I would buy one for that price, would make a great mini server or control PC (for robotics, CNC etc.). If they added Ethernet and eSATA AND included RAM along with an SSD then the $300-$320 would be more appealing. Its now a turnkey system, just power it on and install your OS.

  33. ZBox Nano seems better to me... by sottitron · · Score: 2

    $200 scores you a 5x5 box with wireless, LAN, can fit a 2.5" drive, and has a dual core (sandy bridge?) intel processor: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856173042

  34. VESA mounting bracket - all-in-one pc by olau · · Score: 1

    The review says it has a VESA mounting bracket. With that, you can probably hook it up to the back side of your monitor and make yourself a simple all-in-one pc. Of course, it will be less neat than the prepackaged options, but it will probably also be much cheaper and allow you to upgrade monitor and pc separately.

  35. mac mini has Ethernet more usb and firewire by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

    mac mini has Ethernet more usb and firewire as well.

    1. Re:mac mini has Ethernet more usb and firewire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And built in ethernet.

  36. well then to add cpus it may need some like HTX by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    well then to add cpus it may need some like a HTX (HyperTransport) bus.

    Now maybe with some kind of a pci-e link at least 16+(more) + sata pass though.

    thunderbolt is to slow as 1 video card can max out the bus and under power the video card at the same time.

  37. at the end of the chain by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    at the end of the chain.

    No I want a fixed Ethernet port at the start of the chain or on the main board.

  38. Re:Intel video pretty impressive these days... but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can't run GNU/Linux on 2GB of RAM?

    Are you serious?

    I've been doing that for years.

    My nettop only has 768MB and it runs Debian adequately.

  39. i was almost excited by tfocker4 · · Score: 2

    Until I saw the price tag. Comparing those specs to a tablet or laptop, this is a pricey machine without an OS or monitor. I suppose I can see a market for this as a compact personal server, but still, no ethernet? I'm just not clear what market they are targeting with this.

  40. Raspberry Pi by Erikderzweite · · Score: 2

    So, it is just a Raspberry Pi with x86, built-in hard disk and $300 instead of $35?

  41. Re:"most of the world is convinced the PC is doome by tepples · · Score: 1

    Remember, not everyone is only a content consumer living on tablets and small form factor AIO computers.

    The thinking is that the majority of home users are using their computers to view existing works rather than for medium- to heavy-duty creation of new works. As applications for light-duty creation become available for locked-down computers, more and more heads of household will choose not to own a computer that's not locked down. People who fear a "post-PC" ecosystem fear a loss of economies of scale that will cause the price of a computer that's not locked down to increase beyond a typical hobbyist's budget, much like a console devkit. By that point, only established businesses that can demonstrate a legitimate business need for a computer that's not locked down will be able to afford one, such as established software development companies.

  42. Multithreading in undergraduate CS classes by tepples · · Score: 1

    In practice, things won't get more interesting until computer science professors figure out how to teach the average college student how to use 64 cores safely and effectively.

  43. What is Closest to a Mac Mini today? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What comes closest today in power (particularly an i7) and footprint from a major manufacturer?