1. A 2018 Macbook Pro, not the Mac mini (yeah, I know; but...)
2. High Sierra, not Mojave.
On point 1: They're gonna be running the same firmware with a different system identifier.
On point 2: High Sierra or Mojave would be on the SSD, not in the firmware. The firmware is what decides whether the SSD is even visible; what's on ther SSD is irrelevant.
IOW, I'm still not buyin' it; not with these self-referential "sources".
Additional point (3): Maybe you should buy it. Literally. Go buy one of the systems in question and try it. Report back.
On points 1 and 2: I kinda figured that, really.
On point 3: I personally don't really care; since I will never install Linux on anything. But I do care, vicariously, for those who want, or need, to.
Ever seen a CPU upgrade? Eh, I'm wasting my breath arguing with Apple funded AstroTurf posters.
To answer your question: I know retail packages of CPUs "for upgrades" exist, and even worked in a computer store in my youth that sold them; but I seriously don't personally remember any of my friends (or really anybody) buying a CPU for an "upgrade" to an existing motherhoard. For a New motherboards, yes, of course. But for just a "CPU upgrade"? No, not really. I'm sure some fraction of a percent actually DO upgrade CPUs; but it sure ain't a common occurrence.
And as I have pointed out elsewhere in this thread, Intel seems to go out of its way to make CPU Upgrades impossible. For example, if you wanted to go just from a 7th gen Intel i7 to an 8th gen, you CAN'T! Same socket; but different. (And incompatible!) chipset, and more importantly, different PINOUT for the CPU. Both things are show-stoppers to any sort of "Upgrade" of that chip. So what's the point of some expensive (when you are talking about "production quantities") and fairly large, CPU socket?
And if I am indeed a paid shill for Apple, I've got to call my "handler". Seems like I haven't been receiving my checks for the past FORTY-TWO YEARS!
Linux is simply blocked from even seeing the SSD hardware by the T2 chip.
I see that; but I also see that this was:
1. A 2018 Macbook Pro, not the Mac mini (yeah, I know; but...)
2. High Sierra, not Mojave.
But if this is indeed still the case, I would agree that that behavior is in derogation with what is rather explicitly stated in the Secure Boot Utility documentation and Apple's whitepaper about the T2 chip and the Secure Boot process.
However, all I see is a bunch of echo-chamber blog postings that, in typical internet-meme-fashion, employ circular references as "proof".
IOW, I'm still not buyin' it; not with these self-referential "sources".
Bullshit. I read your citations and they agree with the summary not your dissent. One claims that Apple COULD support a certificate to allow secure booting but has not and clearly has not promised to. The other claims that it can be booted by disabling secure boot. That was in the fucking summary.
Also internal storage is inaccessible if disabling secure boot making installation impossible. QED.
Fake Tim Cook is obviously a Real Retard.
Where does it say internal storage is inaccessible when Secure Boot is disabled?
It sure isn't in this PDF whitepaper, either. I read every single word. If you turn OFF Secure Boot, it, um, simply TURNS OFF Secure Boot. Period. Dot. The End.
So, if you can find a VERIFIABLE source that PROVES that the Disabling of Secure Boot on a T2-equipped Mac in ANY way affects the "accessibility" of the internal storage, I'm all eyes.
Otherwise, yet another FALSE Apple meme bites the dust. Or rather, should.
Not THIS version. Desktop parts. BGA CPU package; but it IS a Desktop version. Apple made a point of pointing that out.
This is NOT Apple's idea of a low-cost "Switcher" system. This is their idea of a good little multipurpose desktop/cluster system for a reasonable price, assuming you are ok with adding an eGPU for certain applications. And yes, you are pretty much expected to keep most files on some external storage. Like Pros do.
According to the Teardowns, the SSD in the Mac mini (128 GB) is a:
As far as the SSD endurance goes, other than an MTBF spec of 1,500,000 hours (roughly 1.5 of a typical HDD, although some He-filled drives advertise 2,000,000 hrs MTBF), I can't find a "Write Endurance" spec. But, I assume that these SSDs are a cousin to these Toshiba Flash modules. Here's an in-depth benchmark and review of this likely SSD in a non-Mac environment:
Notice that they said that these are relatively expensive modules, in the neighborhood of $.049/GB at OEM quantities. That means that the 128 GB SSD in the Base Mac mini is likely costing APPLE around $60. Of course, I'm sure Apple has a good deal on these; but they aren't getting them for $20, or probably even $50. So, if you want to find some of that extra cost in this go-around of the Mac mini can be traced to these pricey (but nicely performing overall) Toshiba SSD modules. That, and the fact that the CPUs in this year's mini definitely cost more than the CPU in the 2014 version. I wouldn't be surprised if the CPUs are roughly double the cost of the old ones. It all adds up.
You only need your/boot partition in that format for EFI boot. Use a separate partition for/.
Still, the relevant problem here is not being able to use the built in SSD and being forced to use an external drive for dual-boot.
But I don't thnk that is the case.
And of course, there is always FUSE, plus the (decidedly non-free) Paragon File System Link. The problems with FUSE for Mac are that it only seems to provide limited support for ext2, and none(?) for ext3 or 4:
So, it comes down to this. Non-Free; but it gets pretty good reviews. Plus, it appears to be the whole enchilada, even allowing FORMATTING. So, since it is compatible with Mojave, one would expect it to be able to format an Ext4 Partition on the internal SSD.
Those "facts" are not compelling. I don't remember the filesystem I used the last time I formatted a partition for Linux on an Apple, it may well have been ext2...but it was not any version of FAT, which I won't even use on USB sticks.
To me Apple was already only marginally attractive. If I need to use an external disk, that's switched to more than marginally unattractive.
OTOH, I note your handle is "FakeTimCook", so perhaps your response isn't authoritative, and there actually is a decent way to avoid this problem. I've got awhile to decide, as I wasn't planning on buying an Apple this month anyway. Before I do, I'll find out for certain what's involved in installing Linux....or I may just avoid the hassle by avoiding Apple. I doubt that Apple would care, but I'm doing it for my benefit, not theirs. I really dislike bureaucratic and bureaucratically imposed hassles.
Seriously, I get wanting large amounts of internal storage with a laptop; but, considering that most "Pro" DESKTOP workflows involve some sort of EXTERNAL STORAGE for, depending on the Application(s), the actual Project Files, Render Files, etc, etc., I REALLY can't see a REASONABLE objection to using External Drives/RAIDs, etc. with the Mac mini.
With the possibility of !0gigE and TB3/USB 3.1 gen2, "speed" isn't REALLY a consideration, unless you are running 256 Tracks of Logic Pro X or something similar. And if you're doing Projects like that, then perhaps your Clients are paying enough that you can afford a nice little Cluster of minis, like Apple was showing-off in their "Hands-on" Area after the October 30th Keynote:
Apple also showed us an interesting setup where a single Mac mini (2018) was connected via a network switch to a network cluster of five Mac minis (piled on top of each other). By putting the 10Gb Ethernet port on the Mac mini (if you choose that option when purchasing the Mac mini) to good use, we saw how you can offload intensive processes (such as rendering video) to these other Mac minis. The process of doing this is impressively simple in Final Cut, where it was a matter of opening up a menu and selecting the attached Mac minis.
Once done, the tasks were completed by the other Mac minis, while the main one could still be used for working on without any noticeable impact to performance. Perhaps most impressively, the stack of five Mac minis remained pretty much silent, even when working on those intensive tasks. For anyone who has used multiple PCs at once on complex projects and had to put up with the sound of fans blasting off, this will be a welcome solution.
But in your case (guessing), I would actually suggest you wait to see what the new Mac Pro has in store. I can guarantee you that they are done with the cylinder form-factor, and has specifically stated that some of the primary design goals are:
1. High throughput.
2. Pro-Focused.
3. Modular. (Yes, what that means, exactly, is still a secret). This is a new thing for Apple, but they are the ones that specifically used that term.
4. Upgradeable. Again, especially when taken in the context of #3 and $5, are likely to be something beyond just RAM and Storarge. And again, "Upgradeable" is an exact Quote from Apple.
5. Able to be Future-Proof, (by (I assume) swapping-out "Modules" for newer ones?). I am paraphrasing what Apple said here; but that was the gist of their words on that subject.
All of these things are, you have to admit, at least SOMEWHAT interesting, no?
Will it be Cheese-Grater Part Tres? Magic 8-Ball sez "Unlikely".You want that? Build a Hack, and install Mojave on it:
That is a COMPONENT in a computer, NOT A COMPUTER!!!
WTF? You're seriously claiming the 2400G isn't a computer? Four Zen cores, sorry I had to explain it in one syllable words. Hey maybe you better just keep your mouth shut when it comes to anything technical. Or just keep your mouth shut period.
it has a TDP OF 100W
Wipe the drool off your chin. It's configurable 45 - 65 watts.
And that's my point. Mac Mini is a piece of shit, it's thermally challenged for anything serious and stupidly overpriced for low power roles a NUC does perfectly well. Why did Apple even bother, oh right, because it's populated by drivelling idiots like you. Dried Apple.
Please show me a picture of the COMPUTER you are calling a "2400G".
Please show me a 2400G on that Wikipedia Page you linked.
How is ensuring can still be used after 5 years not a real problem? eWaste is a real problem and machines older than 5 years still have lots of life left.
For the record, I'm running a 5 year old ThinkPad and have no intentions on purchasing something new for the foreseeable future.
The Mac mini is made from 100% Recycled Aluminum. So it has ALREADY contributed to reducing waste WHEN IT COMES OUT OF THE BOX.
And further, if you are so worried about keeping your Mac mini out of a future landfill, either sell/give it to someone else, or take advantage if Apple's RECYCLING SERVICE.
This argument isn't remotely new. It goes back at least as far as trusted platform computing. And maybe as far back as the Clipper chip which was the primordial TPC mutation. It even has shades of the original 68K mac rom code.
The tension is who owns the computer if hardware prevents unsigned software from running in trusted status?
If the user does then viruses can never be stopped and evil users mean platforms can't be trusted on a network.
If the manufacturer or govt controls the signed boot chain of trust then you don't own the computer but for most people this level of control isn't important. And the benefits of having the safety of a trusted platform are overwhelmingly positive
The good news is that both macs and chrome books support VM like enclaves that suffice for most of the cases it matters.
So we're left with edge cases where those people can just buy a machine without it.
Even if there were no commercial advantage of TPC it still was the inevitable security model. We had a lot of years to find something better and no one has that I know of.
The danger is creeping vertical integration of walled gardens that won't inter operate. That is where the commercial benefit lies. Not the signed boot
But this is all moot; because TFS was simply LYING BULLSHIT!
So where, pray tell, in a case like that, is a Vega going to find sufficient cooling?
Dumbass, the 2400G has Vega on board.
Dumberass, the AMD 2400G is a CPU/GPU Hybrid.
That is a COMPONENT in a computer, NOT A COMPUTER!!!
Big difference!
Plus, it has a TDP OF 100W, 35W over the CPU/GPU Hybrids in the Mac mini. Yeah. That would be nothing BUT a Throttle-fest in a COMPUTER the size of the mini.
I didn't dismiss anything. Your statement "And almost no I/O". was provably false. I showed that it was false, and I guess you can't handle that. Go argue somewhere else, kid.
All the NUCs I saw on Intel's site showed relatively shitty I/O (IIRC, 2 USB-A, one TB3, a singl HDMI out and an SD slot).
The Hades Canyon NUC has more I/O; but it is more than twice the size of the mini, and is admittedly targeted at gamers fairly exclusively. Plus its 4 core 7th gen i7 CPU is weaker than the 6 core 8th gen i7 available in the mini.
The mini appears to have a USB 3, an HDMI, four Thunderbolt 3, and an Ethernet port. The first NUC I looked at on Newegg has four USB 3.1, two USB 2.0, an HDMI, one Thunderbolt 3, and Ethernet. It also has a microSDXC port, and sockets for CPU as well as SATA and M.2 internal drives in a 4.4 x 4.6 x 2.5 in. case. I know which I would find more useful.
Meanwhile Windows 10 not only allows Linux in the same machine it now let's me run pretty much all of my Linux dev tools in Windows, without emulation, side by side my Windows apps in one windowed shell.
Note that there are TWO "parameters" that can be adjusted.
1. "Boot Protection". Note that this can be turned COMPLETELY OFF. No "Linux Block" Here.
2. Whether to allow Booting from External Media. This is to guard against "Evil Maid" attacks. Notice that it, TOO, has a setting to ALLOW booting from an external drive, USB stick, SD card, etc.
So, don't want to mess around with the SSD on your T2 equipped (or other Intel) Mac. Simply stick that Linux Install on a fast EXTERNAL drive, and use Apple's BUILT- IN BOOTLOADER to dal- boot Linux (or whichever) alternative OS. Where's the "Linux Block" NOW???
3. There is also Disk Utility. I am not sure if you can partition the internal SSD to support different Filesystems in separate Partitions; but I would imagine that, if so, the internal SSD could be partitioned to accommodate a Linux Install, and turning off Secure Boot checking would allow you to Dual-boot Linux using Apple's longstanding BUILT-IN BOOTLOADER.
Ah, yes, you can still have multiple partitions, each with a separate Format. I don't think Ext4 was ever supported as an option; but FAT and ExFAT are (as is HFS+), in addition to APFS.
Wrong on all counts. The Mac Mini 2018 hasn't changed the chassis size since 2014 and measures in at 19.7cm wide while the Intel NUC is only 11cm wide. Common Intel NUC's, including mine, come stock with an Intel 760p NVMe SSD. Show me a single benchmark speed test that tests both drives with the same testing software with the same parameters. Hint: You won't find any because they haven't been done yet, all we know is it has a Toshiba SSD but what brand? If it's the XG5 the I/O will be similar to the Intel, slightly slower write and slightly slower read.
I get it, I see the name, you're an Apple fanboy.
Depends on the NUC, now doesn't it?
For example, the Hades Canyon NUC is nearly TWICE the size of a Mac mini, and yet STILL doesn't have the I/O of the mini.
They're available with the same USB3 and Thunderbolt ports as the Macs are. Sure, if you have a need for 4 Thunderbolt ports you might be out of luck, but I'm betting there are going to be very few people for whom that's worth the price premium. Additionally, lower-cost variants are available for those that don't need TB at all.
Nice try. Simply dismiss that which you cannot defend against.
The entire rest of the industry and reviewers don't think so.
Oh, you mean the people who are removing audio jacks, putting notches in phones, going without memory card slots on phones and pads, and puking out designs like Apple's trashcan? The ones that want to litter our desks with cords and wall warts and little boxes? The ones that pulled magsafe off of laptops? The ones that obsoleted PPC binaries by dropping the "we'll keep your stuff running PPC-on-Intel engine"? Those people?
Huh.
No. Not those people.
I was talking about the people who USE and REVIEW those systems.
Moron.
And you're still Butthurt about Rosetta?
If Apple hadn't killed-off Rosetta after one major OS rev, there arguably would STILL be no Intel-Native Mac version of Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator or ProTools. And, if you know that much Mac history, you KNOW that's true!
I suppose the "ham sandwich" could be the size of the pizza box enclosure a Sun Sparcstation 20 came in. It's the same or a similar form factor.
Nice try. But, no.
One could easily find a sandwich bun 7" in diameter (I live in the Midwest US, where pork tenderloin patties are typically the size of a dinner plate!); but it really wouldn't be possible to find a readily-available loaf of bread the size of a pizza box.
Don't make yourself look like an idiot in a futile attempt to be "right", even at all costs to your reputation...
Apple recycle reuse and repair programs in many countries designate a service provider such as Brightstar to collect and resell. Apples trade in program in various countries will direct web traffic To Brightstar, there are others. Presumably companies like Brightstar follows Apples rules but independent outfits harder to control. Apple desires to maintain a high customer satisfaction level and wants to deter shady business using roque parts etc.. Kind of heavy handed Amazon banning the independents vs labeling more clearly Non-Authorized. Apple also outsourced repairs and to help maintain quality sites availability they restrict over saturation by independents by limiting access to parts. This is not unique to Apple many companies do it. Good luck servicing your J Deere tractor etc... there are trade offs with either approach A) restrict more consistent quality B) Open cheaper but wide range of quality. If Apple allows independents to apply and qualify by meeting standards, vs their repair approach which does limit of supply, then Would support Amazon - Apple arrangement. Much like Uber you can be a driver if you meet quality of service and compliance requirements. Not a medallion scarcity type model.
Slashdot Mirror
I see that; but I also see that this was:
1. A 2018 Macbook Pro, not the Mac mini (yeah, I know; but...)
2. High Sierra, not Mojave.
On point 1: They're gonna be running the same firmware with a different system identifier.
On point 2: High Sierra or Mojave would be on the SSD, not in the firmware. The firmware is what decides whether the SSD is even visible; what's on ther SSD is irrelevant.
IOW, I'm still not buyin' it; not with these self-referential "sources".
Additional point (3): Maybe you should buy it. Literally. Go buy one of the systems in question and try it. Report back.
On points 1 and 2: I kinda figured that, really.
On point 3: I personally don't really care; since I will never install Linux on anything. But I do care, vicariously, for those who want, or need, to.
Good seeing you again, BTW!
Ever seen a CPU upgrade? Eh, I'm wasting my breath arguing with Apple funded AstroTurf posters.
To answer your question: I know retail packages of CPUs "for upgrades" exist, and even worked in a computer store in my youth that sold them; but I seriously don't personally remember any of my friends (or really anybody) buying a CPU for an "upgrade" to an existing motherhoard. For a New motherboards, yes, of course. But for just a "CPU upgrade"? No, not really. I'm sure some fraction of a percent actually DO upgrade CPUs; but it sure ain't a common occurrence.
And as I have pointed out elsewhere in this thread, Intel seems to go out of its way to make CPU Upgrades impossible. For example, if you wanted to go just from a 7th gen Intel i7 to an 8th gen, you CAN'T! Same socket; but different. (And incompatible!) chipset, and more importantly, different PINOUT for the CPU. Both things are show-stoppers to any sort of "Upgrade" of that chip. So what's the point of some expensive (when you are talking about "production quantities") and fairly large, CPU socket?
And if I am indeed a paid shill for Apple, I've got to call my "handler". Seems like I haven't been receiving my checks for the past FORTY-TWO YEARS!
The latest update on the article points here:
https://unix.stackexchange.com...
Linux is simply blocked from even seeing the SSD hardware by the T2 chip.
I see that; but I also see that this was:
1. A 2018 Macbook Pro, not the Mac mini (yeah, I know; but...)
2. High Sierra, not Mojave.
But if this is indeed still the case, I would agree that that behavior is in derogation with what is rather explicitly stated in the Secure Boot Utility documentation and Apple's whitepaper about the T2 chip and the Secure Boot process.
However, all I see is a bunch of echo-chamber blog postings that, in typical internet-meme-fashion, employ circular references as "proof".
IOW, I'm still not buyin' it; not with these self-referential "sources".
Bullshit. I read your citations and they agree with the summary not your dissent. One claims that Apple COULD support a certificate to allow secure booting but has not and clearly has not promised to. The other claims that it can be booted by disabling secure boot. That was in the fucking summary.
Also internal storage is inaccessible if disabling secure boot making installation impossible. QED.
Fake Tim Cook is obviously a Real Retard.
Where does it say internal storage is inaccessible when Secure Boot is disabled?
https://support.apple.com/en-u...
https://www.apple.com/mac/docs...
It sure isn't in this PDF whitepaper, either. I read every single word. If you turn OFF Secure Boot, it, um, simply TURNS OFF Secure Boot. Period. Dot. The End.
So, if you can find a VERIFIABLE source that PROVES that the Disabling of Secure Boot on a T2-equipped Mac in ANY way affects the "accessibility" of the internal storage, I'm all eyes.
Otherwise, yet another FALSE Apple meme bites the dust. Or rather, should.
The Mac Mini is made using laptop parts. AFAIK
True before.
Not THIS version. Desktop parts. BGA CPU package; but it IS a Desktop version. Apple made a point of pointing that out.
This is NOT Apple's idea of a low-cost "Switcher" system. This is their idea of a good little multipurpose desktop/cluster system for a reasonable price, assuming you are ok with adding an eGPU for certain applications. And yes, you are pretty much expected to keep most files on some external storage. Like Pros do.
According to the Teardowns, the SSD in the Mac mini (128 GB) is a:
Toshiba TSB3225V81199TWNA1 flash storage (128 GB total)
As far as the SSD endurance goes, other than an MTBF spec of 1,500,000 hours (roughly 1.5 of a typical HDD, although some He-filled drives advertise 2,000,000 hrs MTBF), I can't find a "Write Endurance" spec. But, I assume that these SSDs are a cousin to these Toshiba Flash modules. Here's an in-depth benchmark and review of this likely SSD in a non-Mac environment:
https://hothardware.com/review...
Notice that they said that these are relatively expensive modules, in the neighborhood of $.049/GB at OEM quantities. That means that the 128 GB SSD in the Base Mac mini is likely costing APPLE around $60. Of course, I'm sure Apple has a good deal on these; but they aren't getting them for $20, or probably even $50. So, if you want to find some of that extra cost in this go-around of the Mac mini can be traced to these pricey (but nicely performing overall) Toshiba SSD modules. That, and the fact that the CPUs in this year's mini definitely cost more than the CPU in the 2014 version. I wouldn't be surprised if the CPUs are roughly double the cost of the old ones. It all adds up.
You only need your /boot partition in that format for EFI boot. Use a separate partition for /.
Still, the relevant problem here is not being able to use the built in SSD and being forced to use an external drive for dual-boot.
But I don't thnk that is the case.
And of course, there is always FUSE, plus the (decidedly non-free) Paragon File System Link. The problems with FUSE for Mac are that it only seems to provide limited support for ext2, and none(?) for ext3 or 4:
https://www.macworld.com/artic...
So, it comes down to this. Non-Free; but it gets pretty good reviews. Plus, it appears to be the whole enchilada, even allowing FORMATTING. So, since it is compatible with Mojave, one would expect it to be able to format an Ext4 Partition on the internal SSD.
https://www.paragon-software.c...
Sorry I couldn't find a FOSS solution; but it's not the most expensive thing in the world, either.
Those "facts" are not compelling. I don't remember the filesystem I used the last time I formatted a partition for Linux on an Apple, it may well have been ext2...but it was not any version of FAT, which I won't even use on USB sticks.
To me Apple was already only marginally attractive. If I need to use an external disk, that's switched to more than marginally unattractive.
OTOH, I note your handle is "FakeTimCook", so perhaps your response isn't authoritative, and there actually is a decent way to avoid this problem. I've got awhile to decide, as I wasn't planning on buying an Apple this month anyway. Before I do, I'll find out for certain what's involved in installing Linux....or I may just avoid the hassle by avoiding Apple. I doubt that Apple would care, but I'm doing it for my benefit, not theirs. I really dislike bureaucratic and bureaucratically imposed hassles.
Seriously, I get wanting large amounts of internal storage with a laptop; but, considering that most "Pro" DESKTOP workflows involve some sort of EXTERNAL STORAGE for, depending on the Application(s), the actual Project Files, Render Files, etc, etc., I REALLY can't see a REASONABLE objection to using External Drives/RAIDs, etc. with the Mac mini.
With the possibility of !0gigE and TB3/USB 3.1 gen2, "speed" isn't REALLY a consideration, unless you are running 256 Tracks of Logic Pro X or something similar. And if you're doing Projects like that, then perhaps your Clients are paying enough that you can afford a nice little Cluster of minis, like Apple was showing-off in their "Hands-on" Area after the October 30th Keynote:
https://www.techradar.com/revi...
But in your case (guessing), I would actually suggest you wait to see what the new Mac Pro has in store. I can guarantee you that they are done with the cylinder form-factor, and has specifically stated that some of the primary design goals are:
1. High throughput.
2. Pro-Focused.
3. Modular. (Yes, what that means, exactly, is still a secret). This is a new thing for Apple, but they are the ones that specifically used that term.
4. Upgradeable. Again, especially when taken in the context of #3 and $5, are likely to be something beyond just RAM and Storarge. And again, "Upgradeable" is an exact Quote from Apple.
5. Able to be Future-Proof, (by (I assume) swapping-out "Modules" for newer ones?). I am paraphrasing what Apple said here; but that was the gist of their words on that subject.
All of these things are, you have to admit, at least SOMEWHAT interesting, no?
Will it be Cheese-Grater Part Tres? Magic 8-Ball sez "Unlikely".You want that? Build a Hack, and install Mojave on it:
https://hackintosher.com/guide...
Will the Mac Pro be worth the wait? Magic 8-Ball sea "Signs point to Yes".
But, th
Sorry to reply to my own post. You are correct.
That is a COMPONENT in a computer, NOT A COMPUTER!!!
WTF? You're seriously claiming the 2400G isn't a computer? Four Zen cores, sorry I had to explain it in one syllable words. Hey maybe you better just keep your mouth shut when it comes to anything technical. Or just keep your mouth shut period.
it has a TDP OF 100W
Wipe the drool off your chin. It's configurable 45 - 65 watts.
And that's my point. Mac Mini is a piece of shit, it's thermally challenged for anything serious and stupidly overpriced for low power roles a NUC does perfectly well. Why did Apple even bother, oh right, because it's populated by drivelling idiots like you. Dried Apple.
Please show me a picture of the COMPUTER you are calling a "2400G".
Please show me a 2400G on that Wikipedia Page you linked.
Yes, this is a great point. Apple needs to give options to recycle the hardware away from landfills.
You mean like THIS?
https://www.apple.com/shop/tra...
How is ensuring can still be used after 5 years not a real problem? eWaste is a real problem and machines older than 5 years still have lots of life left.
For the record, I'm running a 5 year old ThinkPad and have no intentions on purchasing something new for the foreseeable future.
The Mac mini is made from 100% Recycled Aluminum. So it has ALREADY contributed to reducing waste WHEN IT COMES OUT OF THE BOX.
And further, if you are so worried about keeping your Mac mini out of a future landfill, either sell/give it to someone else, or take advantage if Apple's RECYCLING SERVICE.
Now what?
A beautiful one line summary! Bravo!
Chrome books do essentially the same thing.
This argument isn't remotely new. It goes back at least as far as trusted platform computing. And maybe as far back as the Clipper chip which was the primordial TPC mutation. It even has shades of the original 68K mac rom code.
The tension is who owns the computer if hardware prevents unsigned software from running in trusted status?
If the user does then viruses can never be stopped and evil users mean platforms can't be trusted on a network.
If the manufacturer or govt controls the signed boot chain of trust then you don't own the computer but for most people this level of control isn't important. And the benefits of having the safety of a trusted platform are overwhelmingly positive
The good news is that both macs and chrome books support VM like enclaves that suffice for most of the cases it matters.
So we're left with edge cases where those people can just buy a machine without it.
Even if there were no commercial advantage of TPC it still was the inevitable security model. We had a lot of years to find something better and no one has that I know of.
The danger is creeping vertical integration of walled gardens that won't inter operate. That is where the commercial benefit lies. Not the signed boot
But this is all moot; because TFS was simply LYING BULLSHIT!
https://apple.slashdot.org/com...
https://apple.slashdot.org/com...
We're taking our Open Source projects away from you. I'm ending binary releases for OSX for my projects.
Real mature.
Punish USERS over a FALSE accusation against a COMPANY?!?
Yes, I said FALSE.
https://apple.slashdot.org/com...
https://apple.slashdot.org/com...
Now what?
So where, pray tell, in a case like that, is a Vega going to find sufficient cooling?
Dumbass, the 2400G has Vega on board.
Dumberass, the AMD 2400G is a CPU/GPU Hybrid.
That is a COMPONENT in a computer, NOT A COMPUTER!!!
Big difference!
Plus, it has a TDP OF 100W, 35W over the CPU/GPU Hybrids in the Mac mini. Yeah. That would be nothing BUT a Throttle-fest in a COMPUTER the size of the mini.
As Bugs Bunny said, "What a Maroon!"
I didn't dismiss anything. Your statement "And almost no I/O". was provably false. I showed that it was false, and I guess you can't handle that. Go argue somewhere else, kid.
All the NUCs I saw on Intel's site showed relatively shitty I/O (IIRC, 2 USB-A, one TB3, a singl HDMI out and an SD slot).
The Hades Canyon NUC has more I/O; but it is more than twice the size of the mini, and is admittedly targeted at gamers fairly exclusively. Plus its 4 core 7th gen i7 CPU is weaker than the 6 core 8th gen i7 available in the mini.
The mini appears to have a USB 3, an HDMI, four Thunderbolt 3, and an Ethernet port. The first NUC I looked at on Newegg has four USB 3.1, two USB 2.0, an HDMI, one Thunderbolt 3, and Ethernet. It also has a microSDXC port, and sockets for CPU as well as SATA and M.2 internal drives in a 4.4 x 4.6 x 2.5 in. case. I know which I would find more useful.
So buy it and STFU.
Meanwhile Windows 10 not only allows Linux in the same machine it now let's me run pretty much all of my Linux dev tools in Windows, without emulation, side by side my Windows apps in one windowed shell.
And, also Meanwhile...
TFS LIES!
https://liliputing.com/2018/11...
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/20...
BTW, editors and Slashtards, I found these references in 0.5 secs. of Googling.
Nice work, fucktards!
TFS LIES!!!
https://liliputing.com/2018/11...
https://www.omgubuntu.co.uk/20...
BTW, editors and Slashtards, I found these references in 0.5 secs. of Googling.
Nice work, fucktards!
A Mac running X11/Linux is the only (legal) way to develop and test macOS and X11/Linux versions of one application on one machine.
TFA lies one all of its major "Grievances"
Here's the Apple Knowledge Base article on the Boot Assistant Utility:
https://support.apple.com/en-u...
Note that there are TWO "parameters" that can be adjusted.
1. "Boot Protection". Note that this can be turned COMPLETELY OFF. No "Linux Block" Here.
2. Whether to allow Booting from External Media. This is to guard against "Evil Maid" attacks. Notice that it, TOO, has a setting to ALLOW booting from an external drive, USB stick, SD card, etc.
So, don't want to mess around with the SSD on your T2 equipped (or other Intel) Mac. Simply stick that Linux Install on a fast EXTERNAL drive, and use Apple's BUILT- IN BOOTLOADER to dal- boot Linux (or whichever) alternative OS. Where's the "Linux Block" NOW???
3. There is also Disk Utility. I am not sure if you can partition the internal SSD to support different Filesystems in separate Partitions; but I would imagine that, if so, the internal SSD could be partitioned to accommodate a Linux Install, and turning off Secure Boot checking would allow you to Dual-boot Linux using Apple's longstanding BUILT-IN BOOTLOADER.
Ah, yes, you can still have multiple partitions, each with a separate Format. I don't think Ext4 was ever supported as an option; but FAT and ExFAT are (as is HFS+), in addition to APFS.
https://support.apple.com/guid...
Try as you Haters might, your bullshit "objections" simply can't withstand the FACTS.
Apple is not Microsoft, thank $Deity...
Oh, and don't forget what you can do with Parallels, VMWare, etc...
Wrong on all counts. The Mac Mini 2018 hasn't changed the chassis size since 2014 and measures in at 19.7cm wide while the Intel NUC is only 11cm wide. Common Intel NUC's, including mine, come stock with an Intel 760p NVMe SSD. Show me a single benchmark speed test that tests both drives with the same testing software with the same parameters. Hint: You won't find any because they haven't been done yet, all we know is it has a Toshiba SSD but what brand? If it's the XG5 the I/O will be similar to the Intel, slightly slower write and slightly slower read.
I get it, I see the name, you're an Apple fanboy.
Depends on the NUC, now doesn't it?
For example, the Hades Canyon NUC is nearly TWICE the size of a Mac mini, and yet STILL doesn't have the I/O of the mini.
Now what?
They're available with the same USB3 and Thunderbolt ports as the Macs are. Sure, if you have a need for 4 Thunderbolt ports you might be out of luck, but I'm betting there are going to be very few people for whom that's worth the price premium. Additionally, lower-cost variants are available for those that don't need TB at all.
Nice try. Simply dismiss that which you cannot defend against.
Oh, you mean the people who are removing audio jacks, putting notches in phones, going without memory card slots on phones and pads, and puking out designs like Apple's trashcan? The ones that want to litter our desks with cords and wall warts and little boxes? The ones that pulled magsafe off of laptops? The ones that obsoleted PPC binaries by dropping the "we'll keep your stuff running PPC-on-Intel engine"? Those people?
Huh.
No. Not those people.
I was talking about the people who USE and REVIEW those systems.
Moron.
And you're still Butthurt about Rosetta?
If Apple hadn't killed-off Rosetta after one major OS rev, there arguably would STILL be no Intel-Native Mac version of Photoshop, InDesign, Illustrator or ProTools. And, if you know that much Mac history, you KNOW that's true!
Wow, the literal use of fishing jargon by an infamous troll.
Off topic much?
I suppose the "ham sandwich" could be the size of the pizza box enclosure a Sun Sparcstation 20 came in. It's the same or a similar form factor.
Nice try. But, no.
One could easily find a sandwich bun 7" in diameter (I live in the Midwest US, where pork tenderloin patties are typically the size of a dinner plate!); but it really wouldn't be possible to find a readily-available loaf of bread the size of a pizza box.
Don't make yourself look like an idiot in a futile attempt to be "right", even at all costs to your reputation...
Apple recycle reuse and repair programs in many countries designate a service provider such as Brightstar to collect and resell. Apples trade in program in various countries will direct web traffic To Brightstar, there are others. Presumably companies like Brightstar follows Apples rules but independent outfits harder to control. Apple desires to maintain a high customer satisfaction level and wants to deter shady business using roque parts etc.. Kind of heavy handed Amazon banning the independents vs labeling more clearly Non-Authorized. Apple also outsourced repairs and to help maintain quality sites availability they restrict over saturation by independents by limiting access to parts. This is not unique to Apple many companies do it. Good luck servicing your J Deere tractor etc... there are trade offs with either approach A) restrict more consistent quality B) Open cheaper but wide range of quality. If Apple allows independents to apply and qualify by meeting standards, vs their repair approach which does limit of supply, then Would support Amazon - Apple arrangement. Much like Uber you can be a driver if you meet quality of service and compliance requirements. Not a medallion scarcity type model.
Very Insightful AND Informative!