Who really cares what iFixIt says? They are dinosaurs who want us to go back to a time when every chip was in a socket and motherboards were huge and devices had enough room in them to get your hands and pliers into every nook. They are anti Mac and anti Apple.

Fact is, they could've put an vVidia 650M in this form factor as well but decided to leave it out in their "$799 USD" model because of the obvious conflicts with the new cryMac crApple is offering now. Put it this way, it would of been a true headless mac with better computing power & I/O terminals for most tasks. This is horse poop, AGAIN.... by the only company that can offer such fruity nonsense.

The thermal envelope allows for quad-core OR discrete graphics.

And since nobody was buying the dual-core/discrete graphics model...

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot

The thermal envelope allows for quad-core OR discrete graphics.
And since nobody was buying the dual-core/discrete graphics model...

by "Nobody", you mean that crApple is not filling its user base properly. With all the tracking, and research, they know what we want, they just don't want to give up the control and manipulation. The thermal envelope can be accommodated with a new internal design. crApple translates to crIpple.. THIS IS BS

Originally Posted by blahblahbber

Fact is, they could've put an vVidia 650M in this form factor as well but decided to leave it out in their "$799 USD" model because of the obvious conflicts with the new cryMac crApple is offering now. Put it this way, it would of been a true headless mac with better computing power & I/O terminals for most tasks. This is horse poop, AGAIN.... by the only company that can offer such fruity nonsense.

I know I'm feeding the troll to some extent... but...
why would a headless terminal need a 650M?
I could understand wanting one in there for gaming directly on the system, but you wouldn't be doing that headless.

I knew a couple of people that bought the old $799 model with dedicated graphics, but most just bought the base model even old server version with quad core i7 people/businesses sold more (again, in a relatively small sample of customers or other people I know) so it could be that there just wasn't the demand in the people purchasing.

Most people wanting what you talk about here and in another post on this topic you made, would likely never settle for a slimline like this, but would want an i7 based tower with PCIe slot(s) for upgradable graphics.

Originally Posted by ElectroTech

Who really cares what iFixIt says? They are dinosaurs who want us to go back to a time when every chip was in a socket and motherboards were huge and devices had enough room in them to get your hands and pliers into every nook. They are anti Mac and anti Apple.

Who really cares what you say? They are not anti-mac. You're still red in the face because they gave a bad review to the MacBooks/Airs. Well guess what? They said the Mini was easy to fix. How is that anti-apple?

On the flip side, *I* care what iFixIt says, because from time to time I need access to teardown instructions to repair a friend's or family member's Mac.

Originally Posted by bdmarsh


Most people wanting what you talk about here and in another post on this topic you made, would likely never settle for a slimline like this, but would want an i7 based tower with PCIe slot(s) for upgradable graphics.

Maybe you aren't up with the times.... YOU DON'T NEED INTERNAL SLOTS ANYMORE.
Let me refresh you, with USB 3.0 and "thunderbutt"... the internal cards are nearly useless with a 650M package. Cannot be simpler.

Originally Posted by blahblahbber

[QUOTE=Spheric Harlot;4198719]The thermal envelope allows for quad-core OR discrete graphics.
And since nobody was buying the dual-core/discrete graphics model...

by "Nobody", you mean that crApple is not filling its user base properly. With all the tracking, and research, they know what we want, they just don't want to give up the control and manipulation. The thermal envelope can be accommodated with a new internal design. crApple translates to crIpple.. THIS IS BS[/quote]

So, they were doing wrong by offering a model nobody wanted, and now they're doing wrong by taking it off the market instead of listening to your industrial design expertise and hiring you to build a "new internal design"...

OF COURSE! What stupid ****ers, these crApple folks! Just build a "new internal design"! How stupid of them not to think of it, when some trolling IT consultant with too much time on his hands could have told them exactly how to build an $1,100 product that nobody wants!

Have you really been a member here for nearly 8 years just to bash Apple?

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep

Have you really been a member here for nearly 8 years just to bash Apple?

yup, actually longer, before they implemented the forced login... I bash only where it is needed (my opinion). And all of that is my contribution, whether liked or disliked; we all need a little critical thinking here & there to cover the facets of a product and/or service that may or may not appeal the targeting user base. Some just swallow what is given to them; inversely I read the labels (when space-time permits).