$450 NUC Mini outperforms 2018 i3 Mini

[Cashmonee]

Offering a tower does not preclude you from having a Mini.

I actually think it does. The desktop market has got to be pretty small these days, especially for Apple. Laptops rule the day for the computer buyers at this point. I do not think there is a large enough market for Apple to offer the Mac mini, Mac Pro, iMac, and iMac Pro plus another mid tower. All that would do is cannibalize mini and iMac sales, and likely not bring in a lot of new customers. So what would be the point? If they went with a mid tower, the mini would necessarily have to go away. I say this as someone who would love nothing more than a midsized Mac tower.

 

[pl1984]

I actually think it does. The desktop market has got to be pretty small these days, especially for Apple. Laptops rule the day for the computer buyers at this point. I do not think there is a large enough market for Apple to offer the Mac mini, Mac Pro, iMac, and iMac Pro plus another mid tower. All that would do is cannibalize mini and iMac sales, and likely not bring in a lot of new customers. So what would be the point? If they went with a mid tower, the mini would necessarily have to go away. I say this as someone who would love nothing more than a midsized Mac tower.

Another way to state this is: Apple would be offering the customer what they want instead of forcing them to adopt less than ideal solutions which is exactly what I feel the Mini + external expansion is.

 

[Cashmonee]

Another way to state this is: Apple would be offering the customer what they want instead of forcing them to adopt less than ideal solutions which is exactly what I feel the Mini + external expansion is.

I suppose. What I am saying is right now the iMac is going to be the go to choice for a normal consumer looking for a Mac desktop and the mini is the go to for people that are more prosumer or professionals that need a lot of headless Macs. If you throw a tower in there, all you will be doing is pulling a few people from each of those products, but not enough for it to be financially viable. You would end up with a product that would be low volume while taking away sales from two other lines. Not to mention, where would you price it? It would have to be more than the mini presumably, but then you are squarely in 27" iMac range, which would make it a poor value. I just don't see a place for it.

I really want a tower. It makes no sense for Apple to offer one.

 

[pl1984]

I suppose. What I am saying is right now the iMac is going to be the go to choice for a normal consumer looking for a Mac desktop and the mini is the go to for people that are more prosumer or professionals that need a lot of headless Macs. If you throw a tower in there, all you will be doing is pulling a few people from each of those products, but not enough for it to be financially viable. You would end up with a product that would be low volume while taking away sales from two other lines. Not to mention, where would you price it? It would have to be more than the mini presumably, but then you are squarely in 27" iMac range, which would make it a poor value. I just don't see a place for it.

I really want a tower. It makes no sense for Apple to offer one.

There are a lot of people clamoring for a small / medium sized tower Mac (aka xMac). Not having one is a glaring hole in their product line. Will it pull people from the Mini and iMac? You bet it would. Perhaps enough that the Mini or iMac would no longer make sense.

 

[Cashmonee]

There are a lot of people clamoring for a small / medium sized tower Mac (aka xMac). Not having one is a glaring hole in their product line. Will it pull people from the Mini and iMac? You bet it would. Perhaps enough that the Mini or iMac would no longer make sense.

There are a lot of people here clamoring for a mid-sized tower. Unfortunately, we only represent a very small percentage of the Mac market, and we tend to be an echo chamber. I feel comfortable saying that if there were a market for a mid-sized tower, Apple would have one.

Here is a parallel for you to consider. Go visit Jalopnik one time. It is a car site. Over there, everyone clamors for station wagons, especially sport tuned station wagons. The users are always exacerbated by the fact that manufacturers have them in Europe, but refuse to bring them here. What they all either fail to see or are unwilling to admit is that Americans do not buy wagons. The car market is struggling. If manufacturers could sell more cars by offering wagons, they would. The fact is, they are switching to SUVs because that is what sells.

The mid-sized tower is the same for Apple. If they could sell enough mid-sized towers to supplant the mini and or iMac they would. It would be far cheaper to develop and manufacture something like that versus a mini or especially an iMac. The sad fact is that there is no market for a computer like that, nor station wagons. Which really sucks! Some of those wagons in Europe are amazing and a mid-sized Mac would be an insta-buy for me.

 

[pl1984]

There are a lot of people here clamoring for a mid-sized tower. Unfortunately, we only represent a very small percentage of the Mac market, and we tend to be an echo chamber. I feel comfortable saying that if there were a market for a mid-sized tower, Apple would have one.

Here is a parallel for you to consider. Go visit Jalopnik one time. It is a car site. Over there, everyone clamors for station wagons, especially sport tuned station wagons. The users are always exacerbated by the fact that manufacturers have them in Europe, but refuse to bring them here. What they all either fail to see or are unwilling to admit is that Americans do not buy wagons. The car market is struggling. If manufacturers could sell more cars by offering wagons, they would. The fact is, they are switching to SUVs because that is what sells.

The mid-sized tower is the same for Apple. If they could sell enough mid-sized towers to supplant the mini and or iMac they would. It would be far cheaper to develop and manufacture something like that versus a mini or especially an iMac. The sad fact is that there is no market for a computer like that, nor station wagons. Which really sucks! Some of those wagons in Europe are amazing and a mid-sized Mac would be an insta-buy for me.

MR doesn't represent the entirety of Mac users. There are plenty of other sites where I've read about people wanting a tower Mac.

 

[Cashmonee]

MR doesn't represent the entirety of Mac users. There are plenty of other sites where I've read about people wanting a tower Mac.

I was referring to enthusiast sites in general, which are essentially the same people. I can guarantee you that the number of people wanting a headless mid-sized Mac tower is not significant enough to warrant releasing one. If and when that number does become significant enough, I am sure the company that is about as good as any company in history at making money will release one.

Do you honestly think there is some massive untapped market that a company like Apple is just ignoring? Does that really make any sense to you?

 

[tpivette89]

I'd honestly be surprised if the next Mac Pro was completely upgradeable... to think Apple would release a small to mid size tower that had replaceable components is just crazy (no matter how badly I would want one). It's just not the direction the company has been heading in the last decade.

 

[LeeW]

Do you honestly think there is some massive untapped market that a company like Apple is just ignoring? Does that really make any sense to you?

Might not be massive but I say it is already at the lucrative stage that it would be worth their while. That said we know what Apples tactic is. That is always to get you buying something that will need another new something sooner rather than later.

Giving you a Mac that has everything upgradeable is not going to happen, people will then keep it too long.

 

[pl1984]

I was referring to enthusiast sites in general, which are essentially the same people. I can guarantee you that the number of people wanting a headless mid-sized Mac tower is not significant enough to warrant releasing one. If and when that number does become significant enough, I am sure the company that is about as good as any company in history at making money will release one.

Do you honestly think there is some massive untapped market that a company like Apple is just ignoring? Does that really make any sense to you?

How do you know this?
[doublepost=1545438387][/doublepost]

I'd honestly be surprised if the next Mac Pro was completely upgradeable... to think Apple would release a small to mid size tower that had replaceable components is just crazy (no matter how badly I would want one). It's just not the direction the company has been heading in the last decade.

So roll over and accept it?

 

[Cashmonee]

Might not be massive but I say it is already at the lucrative stage that it would be worth their while. That said we know what Apples tactic is. That is always to get you buying something that will need another new something sooner rather than later.

Giving you a Mac that has everything upgradeable is not going to happen, people will then keep it too long.

Let me share one other anecdote. I have a Subaru Forester XT. For those that don't know, it is a Forester with the turbocharged motor out of a WRX. It takes a rather bland SUV and turns it into a relatively quick fun car. If you go to any Subaru or Forester enthusiast site, the number of XT owners is rather high. I suspect they account for 60 or 70% of Forester owners on those sites.

Subaru stopped making the XT version this year. People were shocked! They could not believe this was happening! Well, it turns out that the XT made up 5% of Forester sales.

I can assure you, if it were enough people to be lucrative, Apple would do it. Apple knows what sells. Desktop towers are not it, especially on the Mac platform. Again, I wish they would do it, even if the parts were still not easily replaced, so that the thermals were better and they were able to get more performance because of it. Apple knows their customers. They are not interested in replacing parts. They are not interested in peak performance. They want all-in-one solutions that work and look nice. Apple enthusiasts like us are probably in the low single digit percentage of Apple users, if that. We are unfortunately a shrinking and dying breed, and Apple knows it.
[doublepost=1545439142][/doublepost]

How do you know this?

I admit to having no proof other than common sense. I'll ask again. Do you honestly think there is a large enough number to make a system like that profitable, and that Apple just says, "meh, we'll pass?"

 

[tpivette89]

[doublepost=1545438387][/doublepost]
So roll over and accept it?

PCs and Windows don't interest me, so, pretty much. I can still do anything a tower can do with expandability, just on the outside. It doesn't break the user experience at all. There are advantages to external solutions, like I can disconnect a eStorage drive, swap hard drives, and reinstall new units all while the computer is still running. Same with a eGPU. Can't do that with a tower without powering it down first.

Lusting and complaining about something that clearly won't happen isn't the answer either. Maybe the Mac Pro will be expandable and that will be the answer. Until then, I'll keep my cMP up and running as long as it is relevant and play with my Mini on the side.

EDIT: I just received an email from Apple's marketing division concerning my newly purchased Mini. I will for sure mention an interest in a small to medium form factor tower with expandability in my reply... however, I believe that will fall on deaf ears.

 

[LeeW]

if it were enough people to be lucrative, Apple would do it.

I disagree for the reasons stated. Apple can have a big enough market to justify doing something but still not do it.

As I said, they will not give users a totally self-upgradeable system, it is built into the Apple DNA that profit comes before what the customer really wants. You don't make Apple profit by encouraging customers not to be forced into returning within a max x year period. Something that would be lost with a PC style system.

The proof of that is everywhere for everyone to see.

Upgradeable Ram in the 2018 Mini was seen as a win, I saw it as throwing the dog a cheap bone. Yes, it is upgradeable, user upgradeable? Not so much, given the tools and surgery required it's not for everyone. Even fairly competent users on MR have reported breaking connectors in the process of upgrading.

A niche opportunity, compared to how you would upgrade Ram in everything else that is not a Mac where thought was given to make it as simple for everyone as possible.

It will take a bit of time but when faults start emerging on Mini's and they head down to the Genius Bar to get it looked at we all know what is coming. 'You replaced the ram yourself? Yeah, that's what caused the issue, no warranty cover, that will be $xxx to fix please.'

I am not bitter about it all, Apple, the Mini and macOS serve a purpose for me and it all works well. If my new mini lasts me five years I will be over the moon. If I fall out with them I like Windows 10 a lot more than previous versions and could get by.

 

[tpivette89]

I disagree for the reasons stated. Apple can have a big enough market to justify doing something but still not do it.

As I said, they will not give users a totally self-upgradeable system, it is built into the Apple DNA that profit comes before what the customer really wants. You don't make Apple profit by encouraging customers not to be forced into returning within a max x year period. Something that would be lost with a PC style system.

The proof of that is everywhere for everyone to see.

Upgradeable Ram in the 2018 Mini was seen as a win, I saw it as throwing the dog a cheap bone. Yes, it is upgradeable, user upgradeable? Not so much, given the tools and surgery required it's not for everyone. Even fairly competent users on MR have reported breaking connectors in the process of upgrading.

Apple has been throwing users a lot of bones lately, however. Especially with the cMP platform. Native drivers for most AMD graphics cards so owners can upgrade easily. Allowing Mojave to work with a ten year old platform with just a simple GPU swap. Native nVME booting on the same 10 year old computer was just added with a recent firmware update. That's right, the Mac Pro as far back as 2009 is STILL getting firmware updates. Incredible.

I don't want to get my hopes up too much for the upcoming Mac Pro 7,1, though. But it seems as though Apple has been doing things slightly differently in the last year.

 

[Cashmonee]

I disagree for the reasons stated. Apple can have a big enough market to justify doing something but still not do it.

As I said, they will not give users a totally self-upgradeable system, it is built into the Apple DNA that profit comes before what the customer really wants. You don't make Apple profit by encouraging customers not to be forced into returning within a max x year period. Something that would be lost with a PC style system.

The proof of that is everywhere for everyone to see.

Upgradeable Ram in the 2018 Mini was seen as a win, I saw it as throwing the dog a cheap bone. Yes, it is upgradeable, user upgradeable? Not so much, given the tools and surgery required it's not for everyone. Even fairly competent users on MR have reported breaking connectors in the process of upgrading.

A niche opportunity, compared to how you would upgrade Ram in everything else that is not a Mac where thought was given to make it as simple for everyone as possible.

It will take a bit of time but when faults start emerging on Mini's and they head down to the Genius Bar to get it looked at we all know what is coming. 'You replaced the ram yourself? Yeah, that's what caused the issue, no warranty cover, that will be $xxx to fix please.'

I am not bitter about it all, Apple, the Mini and macOS serve a purpose for me and it all works well. If my new mini lasts me five years I will be over the moon. If I fall out with them I like Windows 10 a lot more than previous versions and could get by.

I would agree that Apple are not likely to ever release a completely upgradable system again. I would argue that is a combination of market forces and streamlining of manufacturing. I suspect it is easier and cheaper to manufacture by soldering everything in place. It also allows them the opportunity to fill the market's desire: thin, light, and fashionable. Like it or not, the market has spoken. The market does not replace or upgrade parts. They take it to Apple to do whatever they need to do, and if it is beyond warranty and the repair price is high, they buy a new one. That is the Apple computer market, and that is why we will not be seeing a mid-tower. The market will not support it.

I also agree with you, I do not feel a part of that market, and a Windows machine lives right below my mini. I almost skipped Apple this time, and if this mini does not work out or Apple stops making machines that make sense for me (they are almost there), then I will move as well. I don't think Apple will care. They could lose every consumer like myself and it would be a rounding error.

 

[Acronyc]

This is a discussion about an NUC versus the Mac Mini. When the Mac users respond with "But it doesn't have four TB3 ports" I'm going to respond as to why having four TB3 ports is not an issue for these users. I feel that is more than appropriate discussion given the Mini advocates response. The reason you keep seeing this response from me is because we continue to hear about these four TB3 ports and how they make the Mini so functional. Thus you hear my counter point repeatedly.
[doublepost=1545397465][/doublepost]

I'm puzzled how this was resolved by buying a Mini. New drives will work with PCs too.

NOTE: I am not questioning your decision to buy a Mini.


I can't speak to your exact needs so you may be an edge case where no matter what case you would purchase it may be insufficient to house all your external devices. Yours is not the use case I am discussing.
[doublepost=1545398504][/doublepost]
Yes, it's a Z440 and I don't consider it massive. Its dimensions are: 6.65 (w) x 17.5 (d) x 17 (h) inches and is comparable in size to the PowerMac G3/G4: 8.9 (w) x 18.4 (d) x 17 (h) inches. I don't recall anyone stating the PowerMac G3/G4 systems as being massive.

But let's consider a Mini with the Black Magic (BMG) eGPU (because that's the one Apple is advocating). The Mini has dimensions of: 7.7 (w) x 7.7 (d) x 1.4 (h) inches. The BMG has dimensions of 6.96 (w) x 6.96 (d) x 11.59 (h) inches. The Z440 system consumes ~116 sq inches of desk space whereas the Mini and BMG consume ~107 sq inches giving a total savings of 9 sq inches. This assumes you've pushed the two of them right up next to one another and there is no wasted space. I guess you could stack them on top of one another but I that's not how I would configure them. So you really haven't saved much space and you have additional cabling, power, and, in some cases, lower performance. This example uses only one external device. What if I need to add storage?

For me it’s massive, as I live in a small apartment. The large Mac towers are massive too, of course! But you keep comparing the Z440 to a mini. I have a Sonnet eGPU, which is much smaller than the BlackMagoc eGPU. I don’t think it’s fair to compare the Z440 with a mini and a BlackMagic eGPU “just because it is the one Apple is advocating” because this is only one of many enclosures available and it is the largest one. All the others are smaller (head over to egpu.io to see) and offer better upgradeability than the BlackMagic.

Sonnet and Zotac even offer mini eGPUs that are the size of the mini itself. So the size of my Sonnet eGPU with a mini and two portable 4TB drives takes up much less space than a Z440. I don’t have time to get the measurements but easily half the amount of space, probably taking up even less.

Plus it’s way easier to move. I can put all my equipment in a small carry-on bag and easily take it with me and put it in the overhead bin of an airplane. Can’t do that easily, or if at all, with the Z440. I know my use case might be unique because I don’t need a workstation (do a lot of people here?) and many others might not move as much as I do, or frequently live in small apartments, but for me the mini + eGPU + portable external drives is the perfect combo. A NUC would do just as well, but I prefer MacOS, don’t have the time or desire to go the hackintosh route, prefer Apple’s hardware, and can deal with the extra cost.

 

[Ploki]

I think the Mini use case is pretty straight forward; it's for people who use laptops only wired and mostly on the same location? You can take it away from the eGPU and storage and everything and it will still work fine, or you can plug it back into your "desktop setup".
Maybe.
I don't know.

For as long as they keep Logic healthy and updated I'm probably going to find a machine that works for me

 

[LeeW]

I suspect it is easier and cheaper to manufacture by soldering everything in place. It also allows them the opportunity to fill the market's desire: thin, light, and fashionable. Like it or not, the market has spoken. The market does not replace or upgrade parts. They take it to Apple to do whatever they need to do, and if it is beyond warranty and the repair price is high, they buy a new one.

Absolutely, this is the present in many devices and the future for the majority of them. Even in laptops people only ever like to highlight the few that still allow upgradeable components, the simple fact is that in by far the majority of available devices out there today that people buy in the biggest numbers, it is all soldered on.

The present and future are thin and light, and that reduces the opportunity for upgradeability. I have long since accepted this is a fact. The DIY tech consumers are lower in numbers now than they were, people in the main don't want to tinker, just use.

I think the Mini use case is pretty straight forward; it's for people who use laptops only wired and mostly on the same location? You can take it away from the eGPU and storage and everything and it will still work fine, or you can plug it back into your "desktop setup".

I agree, certainly in my case. My 2014 Mini was no longer cutting it, so I turned my 2018 13" MBP into a desktop via clamshell. It was a heck more powerful. But the laptop simply turned into a static device and never left the desk. Hence I sold it and bought the new Mini, which I wanted anyway.

Whilst it lacks decent graphics I have an eGPU which I can switch between Mini and PC. It's a solution, a fairly elegant one that provides multiple uses across several devices.

 

[pl1984]

I admit to having no proof other than common sense. I'll ask again. Do you honestly think there is a large enough number to make a system like that profitable, and that Apple just says, "meh, we'll pass?"

I don't see it as common sense but rather wishful thinking on your part. I recall people saying the same thing about the Mini.

Outback XT was a great car, loved mine.
[doublepost=1545513972][/doublepost]

For me it’s massive, as I live in a small apartment. The large Mac towers are massive too, of course! But you keep comparing the Z440 to a mini. I have a Sonnet eGPU, which is much smaller than the BlackMagoc eGPU. I don’t think it’s fair to compare the Z440 with a mini and a BlackMagic eGPU “just because it is the one Apple is advocating” because this is only one of many enclosures available and it is the largest one. All the others are smaller (head over to egpu.io to see) and offer better upgradeability than the BlackMagic

I agree it consumes more space but not nearly as much when you pair the Mini with a bunch of external things. Yes, I do think it's fair to compare the desk space consumed by a Mini and BlackMagic eGPU enclosure despite there being other options (which Sonnet eGPU do you have?) You dislike the comparison because it illustrates my point.

Sonnet and Zotac even offer mini eGPUs that are the size of the mini itself. So the size of my Sonnet eGPU with a mini and two portable 4TB drives takes up much less space than a Z440. I don’t have time to get the measurements but easily half the amount of space, probably taking up even less

Z440 is just on example. If it's too large you could opt for a Z240 SFF instead.

Plus it’s way easier to move. I can put all my equipment in a small carry-on bag and easily take it with me and put it in the overhead bin of an airplane.

I think you're grasping here. If you need to take your computer on the go the a MBP would be the better solution.

Can’t do that easily, or if at all, with the Z440. I know my use case might be unique because I don’t need a workstation (do a lot of people here?) and many others might not move as much as I do, or frequently live in small apartments, but for me the mini + eGPU + portable external drives is the perfect combo. A NUC would do just as well, but I prefer MacOS, don’t have the time or desire to go the hackintosh route, prefer Apple’s hardware, and can deal with the extra cost.

I am not saying a desktop tower such as the Z440 is the right solution in every instance. But I suspect it, or something like it, is appropriate in many Mini + external stuff configurations. In this discussion we've only touched on the Mini + eGPU or Mini + additional storage. What if I want a media card reader? What if I want an optical drive? My Z440 has a GPU, additional storage, a media card reader, and an optical drive all inside a nice, compact chassis which, despite attempts to portray it otherwise, is not massive. It consumes no more space than all of those things connected to a Mini without the all the cabling and power connectivity required for such a configuration.

 

[megaseppl]

I just bought the current i5 NUC (NUC8I5BEH): It's fan is quite annoying. Even after disabling the CPU Turbo Mode in BIOS and reducing the fan speed it is much louder at only 20% CPU usage compared to my i7 Mac mini (even with it's Glory Blow Hole's second fan).
The NUC replaces my Gigabyte BRIX (with slower Intel N3150) which was almost completely silent. I will test if I can reduce the noise if I place it under my desk and add some acoustic blockers. The noise frequence is quite high, mostly it's easy to reduce.
Otherwise the NUC will be banned to a room in the basement. In my case this would be okay because it will only run my automation software, network monitoring, WiFi controller, Web server etc.

 

[hans1972]

Something which permits internal expansion is. Unfortunately that eliminates the Macintosh from consideration.

For a lot of Mac users, hardware that requires Windows, eliminates the hardware from consideration.

 

[pl1984]

For a lot of Mac users, hardware that requires Windows, eliminates the hardware from consideration.

I'm not arguing for a non Macintosh platform. I'm arguing for Apple to offer such a form factor. Big difference.

 

[LeeW]

I admit to having no proof other than common sense. I'll ask again. Do you honestly think there is a large enough number to make a system like that profitable, and that Apple just says, "meh, we'll pass?"

I don't see it as common sense but rather wishful thinking on your part. I recall people saying the same thing about the Mini.

I see it this way.

Firstly, Apple in terms of its core customer has zero competition. macOS forces you in one direction, Apple devices. Sure Hackintosh but that is a small enthusiast community. If Windows was as good an alternative you are already using it, not macOS.

Secondly, because of the first part, they can control the pace that devices are upgraded far easier, soldered ram, CPU and so on. Offering a pc style system where a core customer swaps out the CPU, Ram or GPU themselves removes that control. Potentially they could keep that system for the next 10 years. That is no use whatsoever to Apple and they won't risk core customers doing that.

Of course, some will keep an existing system for that long anyway and to apple's credit, they ensure support for that long. But that person is not core. Core customers are those that want to flash the bling as soon as it's released.

 

[pl1984]

Secondly, because of the first part, they can control the pace that devices are upgraded far easier, soldered ram, CPU and so on. Offering a pc style system where a core customer swaps out the CPU, Ram or GPU themselves removes that control. Potentially they could keep that system for the next 10 years. That is no use whatsoever to Apple and they won't risk core customers doing that.

This is exactly what cMP users are doing. Many have built systems which remain competitive today despite being based on 10 year old technology. Having said that none of this changes the fact there are many users who want a cMP style offering.

 

[LeeW]

I just don't believe that Apple is having discussions at any level on returning to tower type builds.

Once we see what their 'vision' is for the upcoming Mac Pro that will be telling for the future of the headless side of the business. I am willing to put money down now on the majority responding to whatever they announce with "WTF..."