Here's the thing.... I'm not positive the Mac Mini has an Intel wireless adapter, however, the chipset on the the motherboard is an Intel chipset (I'm talking northbridge and southbridge not wireless chipsets). The wireless N spec itself lists 40 MHz wide channels as a standard, but this does not work properly with some devices, in fact, Intel wireless N cards have the 'Channel Width' spec defaulted to 20 MHz only. Now, as for this being a D-Link only issue, it seems like this is more of a Mac only issue... I can almost guarantee you this is a Mac OS driver issue. One of the things that tipped me off in the original poster's message (it being a possible Intel issue), is the 130 mbps connection speed. When wireless N was first released, 20 MHz channel widths were the default, an as such were limited to 130 mbps (still wireless N because of the MIMO feature), however, the 40 MHz channel width is necessary for 270/300 mbps operation. This sort of seems like a weird auto step-down for the wireless device, unless the driver in Mac OS specifically allows only a 20 MHz channel bonding (this could be hardware or software related actually). There is also a feature, which as far as I know exists on a driver level, and in Windows only, for the wireless network card to broadcast whether or not it's capable of utilizing 20 or 40 MHz channels or both. Again.... this poster has found that the performance is only horrible with his Mac Mini, and doesn't have these issues with his PCs... this leads me to the conclusion that it's a hardware/software issue with the mac only. I've also done a quick search on Google to *try* to find any information on the performance of the wireless device in a Mac Mini and was unable to find anything. Please try setting the channel width on the router to 20 MHz as a possible/probable solution to this issue.
-update-
After seeing this last post, this REALLY leaves me to believe that in fact the wireless card/chipset of the Mac Mini is only capable of 20 MHz channel widths. Still though, the actual performance that dbtrader1 is seeing, is only a small fraction of 130 mbps (assuming the speed he gives is megabits and not megabytes).