HD For Indies

I think it most likely has to do with the built in graphics chipset not being fast enough or easy to support

Yet the Intel Mini is clearly fast enough for HD editing with iMovie HD. In fact, it has to be able to digitize 25 Mb 1080i and transcode it to Apple Intermediate Codec on the fly while digitizing in real time. But somehow it's not fast enough for FCP?

Final Cut Studio 5.1 is not supported on Intel Mac Mini (early 2006) is how they describe it on their site. I glean/guess the following from that:

1.) There might be a mid- or late-2006 model

Given the upgrade schedule previously established for the mini, it is indeed quite likely that Apple won't go 12 months without at least a speed bump. But they are also seemingly intent on making the Mini the home entertainment platform, the cheap (but getting significantly more expensive than before) "switcher" platform. Not the low end desktop box for Pros, which is really one part of "the box" that desperately needs some options, other than a honkin' big, $2000+ G5 tower.

2.) that later model might run FCS 5.x (or later)

How many upgrades have you seen, especially Pro apps, that actually expand downward their list of qualifying machines? Never. Upgrades usually chop off lower end machines and increase hardware requirements, not lower them.

3.) Nothing says that Final Cut Studio 6.0, if such a thing were announced at NAB, might not run on Early 2006 Mac Minis.

See my previous thought. Also, I sincerely doubt there will be a 6.0 at NAB when the Universal version (which many have to pay for) is just starting to ship barely one month before NAB. It'd be a great way to piss Apple's best customers off, big time.

4.) I've heard conjecture that built in graphics are being used mostly due to lack of graphics chipsets/boards that would fit in the tiny form factor of a Mini - maybe they'll figure out how to later this year.

I'll conjecture that it's because Apple turned over design of the motherboard to Intel. It has nothing to do with "getting it to fit" because ATI chipsets fit in the MacBook (ugh) Pro... because Apple was able to put an ATI chip in all the previous Mac Mini computers... because Apple was and is able to put 256 MB of video horsepower in PowerBooks. No. It's definitely not a "that would fit" issue.

* It is either an artificial stratification issue- that Apple wants to limit Pros from using the Mini as a production platform (which I have done for a year). They can make the Pro software look for an ATI or nVidia chip and, no chip, no go.
* Or it is a relinquishment issue- Apple has basically ceded major motherboard design efforts (costs and time as well) to Intel. This is why the MacBook (ugh) is so easily comparable to all the PC laptops using the same Core Duo. Because the core boardset is probably identical or nearly identical in all the laptops, except for "add ons" which are easy to manage- like options in a car. One gets a modem, the other doesn't. Once gets a PC card slot, the other doesn't- but both get the ExpressCard slot.

the only fact we have is that version 5.1 won't be supported on current Intel Minis.

But FCP 4 HD and DVDSP run very well on last year's Mini.
How often to you see manufacturers saying that the new computer is less powerful. Apple has clearly tried to show us the new Mini is way MORE powerful and several times faster than before. If it's so damm powerful, and clearly able to handle HD for the iLife suite, why won't it run Pro apps?

Because they don't want it to.
 

Rather than blame this on an Apple conspiracy issue, I think the very simple problem is that the GMA950 does not support certain OpenGL extensions needed by the FCP studio suite, especially applications like Motion. I know for certain that certain much needed features like OpenGL programmable pixel shaders does not work correctly on the GMA950. It does under DirectX, but not OpenGL. There's a lot happening on the GMA950 to make it OpenGL "compatible" that is actually getting emulated in software on the processor rather than being offloaded onto the graphics GPU. And as I noted in my previous post, ARB_fragment_shader is not supported, which makes using Motion probably impossible. You'll notice on the Intel website that there are a number of popular games that rely on OpenGL that don't run too well on the GMA950, or have certain "issues". These "issues" may be fine for a game, but I'm sure in a pro app like FCP and Motion, they simply render the applications unusable or unstable. Issues that Apple simply doesn't want to support.

My feeling is that this again is a basic problem not necessarily with FCP or DVD Studio Pro, but is Motion-related. Since Motion is becoming more integrated into the package though, with embedding Motion files on FCP timelines, etc., they are probably just avoiding the issues that these OpenGL compatibility issues will create.
 

It wasn't on purpose. Motion runs like molasses on it. Everything else should be fine.
 

Mike,

It may be the case that only Motion is a problem for the Mac mini's graphics card right now, but I would bet good money that the next major version of FCP (and probably DVDSP and Compressor) will require beefed-up video cards as well. I bet Apple doesn't want to support FCP on minis and then turn around and say that you can't upgrade to the new version.

S.
 

I wouldn't read too much into the "(early 2006)" moniker. Apple routinely creates these parenthetical designations to distinguish models. Some are based on features [ex. Quicksilver (Mirror Drive Doors) or PowerMac G4 (AGP Graphics)] and some are based on timeframe [ex. PowerMac G5 (June 2004)].
 

Earlier in March, I called Apple and was told I needed Final Cut Studio to run DVD Studio Pro 4 on an Intel Mac Mini. So I bought the Intel Mac Mini Duo and a monitor and hard drive and I also bought a solo DVD Studio Pro 4 and just sent the install disc and money for the Final Cut Studio Upgrade. Suddenly, I find out online on Apple Knowledge Base that FC Studio doesn't support Intel Mac Mini! I call Apple and the first guy I talk to says it'll work. I press the point and he realizes he's wrong. As I wait for FC Studio, I'm freaking out thinking I did all the research and still ended up with a machine which might not run the only software I intend to use on it. I don't need to use Motion 2, but the other components are professionally important to me. If the Anonymous person who posted with confidence that, "It wasn't on purpose. Motion runs like molasses on it. Everything else should be fine. " would tell me the basis for his/her confidence, I could sleep at night. Please email me at bobby@paradiseflix.com.