Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

End of line for Mac mini?

Well, the new Pro is fairly mini in form. Its footprint is a bit less and it is just a couple or three Minis high. One commentator reckoned it was not much more than a couple of Minis stacked in a shiny cylinder. However, in function it is a different beast.

To me the Mini is all the desktop computer the average Joe or Jill needs; the Pro is for pros.

My guess is that the Mini will remain in the line-up for the foreseeable future.
 
Ah, the annual "Mac Mini" is dead post!

Apple is not going to confuse its crown jewel MP with the mini, and the cost of the MP's case alone makes it impossible to sell as Apple's most affordable Mac.

What I can see is the MP starting at $3K and Apple putting back discrete video in the top end mini to take over the "prosumer" market space of previous low end MP, but at lower price point -- $999. The mini would be great for that purpose since most "prosumers" don't use PCI cards, but do like to do their own upgrades and want independent monitors, not an all-in-one.
 
There are a bunch of minis out there being used by small offices as relatively cheap WP, email, calendar, and spreadsheet machines. I don't think Apple would want to abandon that market segment which is what would happen with a significantly more expensive offering, even if it's an iMac.
 
Dont apple want more product range? I read they want more range to match people like samsung (tablets and phone range) the mini ipad came out and next up a budget iphone, so seems unlikely they will stop anything, just keep increasing product range to get more buyers ultimately.
 
I think the mini is just getting going! I got my first one and I am in love! I do not need a 3500 dollar computer like the MAc Pro. I really don't.

I think fast PCIe SSD in the next one and the Intel 5000 graphics and maybe more cooling!
 
VanCleef2012 said:
But as they transition their manufacturing from China to here in the US, it would be very cost affective to just throw in cheap internals in a mac pro chassis instead of having 2 different designs being run. The only thing making the Mac Pro expensive is the internals, If you gave it much cheaper internals, the cost could be brought down to the 599-899 range. Imagine same level internals that Mac Minis are know for and just throw them in a new body. The Mac Mini design can't really get any different. I feel it could be replaced by a very cheap version of the Mac pro or a mini Mac Pro.
Click to expand...

They won't do that for the same reason Porsche doesn't just put in cheaper internals into a 911 body and sell it for 20k. Doing that lowers the perceived value.

Also it seems like the Mac Pro body would cost many times more then the Mac Mini body.

If Apple is willing to keep the low selling Mac Pro around, then they will definitely keep the Mini around. I could see them trying to make the Mini into a cube (like some mentioned, a taller Mini).
 
Hmm I think you are confused --- it is the end of the Mac Pro as they now have introduced the "Mac Mini Pro."
 
It will be the only form factor that survives! Moore runs faster than our demands on speed at the moment (the new end-2013 pro is a lousy 10% faster than the 2010 top pro!), so computers keep shrinking for a while. In 10 years any computer will be Raspberry-Pi sized and running of a simple USB charger. So Mini will be the last desktop standing from Apple, and going towards Apple-TV size. The new Pro is an intermediate, fusing with the Mini in 4-5 years. And the iMac will become irrelevant too. The next mini's will be 100% on par speed wise, and as Apple does not seem to get grip on display problems and starts overcharging for the built in screen, I won't miss the iMac.
 
They want to keep the Pro just that, a Pro. They wont put lesser internals in it. When someone looks at the Mac Pro, they want them to think "power" and making a miniature version would diminish that. I think the design is something that will help convince people to buy it. Making a smaller version would just hurt sales of the Pro (like the iPad mini did to the iPad upon its initial release)
 
John Kotches said:
I was thinking about this and think they could do this in a small cylinder.

2.5" drives as two sides of the triangle and the logic board as the third side.
Click to expand...

I though the mini took it's design cues from the Airport Basestation.
Maybe a much smaller footprint but taller with a thermal core internal design to make a hybrid Mac Pro / Airport.
 
EasyRider said:
They won't do that for the same reason Porsche doesn't just put in cheaper internals into a 911 body and sell it for 20k. Doing that lowers the perceived value.
Click to expand...

Actually they tried something like that with the 914 and 924 (See :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_924).
As I recall they weren't a success despite being affordable.
B&O have tried the same approach in the past - also w/o much success.
 
Knowing Apple the way I do, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Mini with an upgraded version of the A6.

Internal drives like the iPads and iPhone.

This would both reduce cost, and solve the heat issue.

Not to mention the fact that it could be MUCH smaller.
 
drsox said:
Actually they tried something like that with the 914 and 924 (See :http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_924).
As I recall they weren't a success despite being affordable.
Click to expand...
Actually, the 914 was a replacement for a totally different car, not the 911 and the 924, 944 and 968 lines (produced between 1975 and 1996) were quite successful, but they had nothing in common with the 911.
What you're referring to is probably the 912 - the entry-level 911 with a 4-cylinder engine. This was made between 1965 and 1969. Now one of the most precious Porsches of them all. So unfortunately the metaphor was totally out of place.
 
sonicrobby said:
They want to keep the Pro just that, a Pro. They wont put lesser internals in it. When someone looks at the Mac Pro, they want them to think "power" and making a miniature version would diminish that. I think the design is something that will help convince people to buy it. Making a smaller version would just hurt sales of the Pro (like the iPad mini did to the iPad upon its initial release)
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. I run a Mac Mini with Lion server (as i don't have the space at present) and the new MP..... Put it this way I think it's like this, if you walk into a top end designer shop and ask the price of something that means you can't afford it.

I don't really want to know the price of the new MP but I am sorely tempted to swap out my mac mini for it and MAKE space! :D
 
hwojtek said:
Actually, the 914 was a replacement for a totally different car, not the 911 and the 924, 944 and 968 lines (produced between 1975 and 1996) were quite successful, but they had nothing in common with the 911.
What you're referring to is probably the 912 - the entry-level 911 with a 4-cylinder engine. This was made between 1965 and 1969. Now one of the most precious Porsches of them all. So unfortunately the metaphor was totally out of place.
Click to expand...

No, I know to which I refer, thank you very much. The small engined front mounted "petite-poke" Porsches were an attempt to broaden the market and had a reputation of not-a-lot for the money. See this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_924

Also see the embedded quote : "While the car was praised for its styling, handling, fuel economy, and reliability, it was harshly written up in the automotive press for its very poor performance, especially in its US spec cars. With only 95-110 hp, rapid acceleration was simply not an option, but the Porsche name carried with it higher expectations."

Thus it is to which I refer.
 
drsox said:
No, I know to which I refer.
Click to expand...

The original quote was "Porsche doesn't just put in cheaper internals into a 911 body and sell it for 20k" and you answered "Actually they tried something like that with the 914 and 924". Well, sorry - they didn't. I appreciate your vast knowledge of Wikipedia entries regarding the marque, though.
 
VanCleef2012 said:
But as they transition their manufacturing from China to here in the US, it would be very cost affective to just throw in cheap internals in a mac pro chassis instead of having 2 different designs being run. The only thing making the Mac Pro expensive is the internals, If you gave it much cheaper internals, the cost could be brought down to the 599-899 range. Imagine same level internals that Mac Minis are know for and just throw them in a new body. The Mac Mini design can't really get any different. I feel it could be replaced by a very cheap version of the Mac pro or a mini Mac Pro.
Click to expand...

Cost effective maybe...but it would also destroy the image of what a "Professional" Mac is supposed to be.
 
The Mini will stick around because it gives Apple a way to double-dip on the engineering they put into the MacBook Pro. (The mini is really just a cMBP in a different case, with no keyboard, display, or optical drive.) It's a product they can offer for cheap and fill a market niche because they've already done the heavy lifting that makes it producible.
 
No doubt it will stay as a $599 model for years to come, being redesigned yearly for new processors.

I don't think the interior will ever undergo a radical re-engineering, but the shape might go smaller and upright to match the airport and Pro. I'd love a mini 4x as tall and 1/4 the footprint this year. They'll always try to compress the thing as far as economically feasible.
 
MattInOz said:
I though the mini took it's design cues from the Airport Basestation.
Maybe a much smaller footprint but taller with a thermal core internal design to make a hybrid Mac Pro / Airport.
Click to expand...

Maybe... I could see this going either way to be honest with you.

Taller and narrower if they were to go with 2.5" drives on the side with the logic board above or below might work.
 
drsox said:
No, I know to which I refer, thank you very much. The small engined front mounted "petite-poke" Porsches were an attempt to broaden the market and had a reputation of not-a-lot for the money. See this : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porsche_924

Also see the embedded quote : "While the car was praised for its styling, handling, fuel economy, and reliability, it was harshly written up in the automotive press for its very poor performance, especially in its US spec cars. With only 95-110 hp, rapid acceleration was simply not an option, but the Porsche name carried with it higher expectations."

Thus it is to which I refer.
Click to expand...

The 914 was not even really a Porsche. It was at least half Volkswagen. My dad had one of the first one off the line. It was the most poorly built car I have ever driven, but such fun until it fell apart/caught on fire! I speak of the 914/4. Not sure about the 6 cylinder variety.
 
Cape Dave said:
The 914 was not even really a Porsche. It was at least half Volkswagen. My dad had one of the first one off the line. It was the most poorly built car I have ever driven, but such fun until it fell apart/caught on fire! I speak of the 914/4. Not sure about the 6 cylinder variety.
Click to expand...

Glad to hear that (but sorry to hear about your dad's experience). If you've been following the arguments, it does reinforce my thesis that when Porsche tried to bring out a "lower spec/cheaper" model it devalued the brand and was basically a mistake. The same thing happened to B&O I think (and some other brands that I know of, but not consumer related brands).

So, I doubt Apple will go down the same route.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back