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

How bad will the cheapest new mini *really* be?

F

Florals

macrumors member
Original poster
Jul 19, 2013
63
14
I've got to admit, the £358 price tag of the lowest-spec mini (with Educational discount) has really caught my attention, but my question is this: how sluggish will it really be?

I am currently chugging along with a 2006 Core Duo mini which is growing slower and slower with each passing day, so I need to buy something soon. I'm extremely tempted by the 5K iMac but am the cautious sort who would rather wait a year or two for the various kinks to be ironed out, so I'm considering buying the cheapest Mini to last until I'm sure the 5K iMac isn't riddled with problems.

In your opinion, what would be the biggest limitations of the low-end Mini? Would I see lag when performing everyday tasks, such as word processing and light photoshopping? Would I be an idiot to spend £350 on this machine?
 
It would be a very big jump over your current Mac Mini and will last you for just as long as your current Mini.
 
FYI, I'm trying to track the specific CPU model numbers and specs here:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1802240/

As Mr. Retrofire said, it looks like the cheapest model might only be slightly slower than the previous base model. Plus, you'll get a newer GPU, a $100 price cut, 802.11ac (if that means anything to you). Not a great box for a server, but it should be decent as a regular computer.
 
How do Apple computers get slower over time?

I hear this a LOT from mac users. My 5 year old PC is the exact same speed, no faster and no slower, than it was the day I bought it.

Do mac components start to rust or something?
 
Florals said:
'm extremely tempted by the 5K iMac but am the cautious sort who would rather wait a year or two for the various kinks to be ironed out, so I'm considering buying the cheapest Mini to last until I'm sure the 5K iMac isn't riddled with problems.
Click to expand...

You're extremely tempted by a very expensive, gorgeous, high-end display, that should be good for many years of service before it starts to feel dated...that's permanently attached to a second-rate 2013 CPU that's will be junk in a couple of short years?

Some people really can't see the forest for the trees and Apple makes a fortune off those suckers.
 
Oracle1729 said:
You're extremely tempted by a very expensive, gorgeous, high-end display, that should be good for many years of service before it starts to feel dated...that's permanently attached to a second-rate 2013 CPU that's will be junk in a couple of short years?

Some people really can't see the forest for the trees and Apple makes a fortune off those suckers.
Click to expand...

You know what? Maybe that's Apple's point. Sell something that is the latest and the greatest (the 5K display) tied to something mediocre (2013 "high end" mobile graphic).

Those Apple suckers would spend more money that way. Win-lose for Apple. Me? I just want the display. I had a bad experience with the iMac (dirty display, failing GPU and hard drive). So it would be better if Apple sell a 5K Cinema Display and let me plug whichever computer I choose (Macbook, gaming PC etc). But I doubt it would happen anytime soon. It's Apple, you know. They go slowly and steadily rather than revolutionary.

----------
Tough Guy said:
How do Apple computers get slower over time?

I hear this a LOT from mac users. My 5 year old PC is the exact same speed, no faster and no slower, than it was the day I bought it.

Do mac components start to rust or something?
Click to expand...

By making the software harder to run?

It's been that way since Windows 95, and also iOS. It's mostly the software that makes you buy the new one. It was Siri that sell the 4S, it was Touch ID (cheap extra hardware + polished software) that sell the 5S, it was sluggish free UI operation that makes you wanna buy the 6 or 6+
 
Probably not bad at all for basic everyday functions. The power is more in the OS and apps than the hardware…..

As was the case long ago. Macs always used to seem under-speced compared to PCs, but they were more efficient at using the hardware.

For those whose needs or desires are more demanding, there is a Mini to suit.

Those who expect something akin to Mac Pro performance and specs at Mini prices (there do seem to be a few) are bound to be disappointed….. and whinging on forums such as this.
 
iSayuSay said:
Me? I just want the display. I had a bad experience with the iMac (dirty display, failing GPU and hard drive). So it would be better if Apple sell a 5K Cinema Display and let me plug whichever computer I choose (Macbook, gaming PC etc). But I doubt it would happen anytime soon.
Click to expand...

I'd be interested in the display, but I will never buy an AIW. With their 2560x1440 displays, they were only available in iMacs for ages before standalone screens. It will be available standalone in a couple of years.

But judging by this new mini, I won't be an Apple user at all any more. I'm just waiting for the Broadwell version of the i7-4790k to come out in a few months and I'll be building a windows box.

By making the software harder to run?

It's mostly the software that makes you buy the new one. It was Siri that sell the 4S, it was Touch ID (cheap extra hardware + polished software) that sell the 5S, it was sluggish free UI operation that makes you wanna buy the 6 or 6+
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. Their current Mac offerings are all so bad, I'd rather pass on the latest software features if need be. Not that there's anything really nice looking in iOS 8 or Yosemite. Convergence. ROFL.

I cared more for a 4.7" screen than anything in the 5 or 5s. I replaced my 4s with a galaxy S4 last year. You know what though, I found out I hate android, iOS is far superior. But that screen on the S4 more than made up for it so I was still happy with my choice. I know I would trade the S4 for a 6 in a heartbeat if I could, but I'm now 11 months into a 3-year Contract (Canada still had 3-year ones last year). So in 25 months we'll see where Apple goes. So far though I'm just laughing at how buggy iOS 8 seems to be.
 
Oracle1729 said:
You're extremely tempted by a very expensive, gorgeous, high-end display, that should be good for many years of service before it starts to feel dated...that's permanently attached to a second-rate 2013 CPU that's will be junk in a couple of short years?

Some people really can't see the forest for the trees and Apple makes a fortune off those suckers.
Click to expand...

Hence why I said I wasn't planning on buying one for a couple of years? I'm optimistic that by then it might have something a bit more meaty inside.

Would a refurb 2012 potentially be a better choice than the 2014 base? I'm just not sure I could get over it coming with the HD4000!
 
Florals said:
Hence why I said I wasn't planning on buying one for a couple of years? I'm optimistic that by then it might have something a bit more meaty inside.

Would a refurb 2012 potentially be a better choice than the 2014 base? I'm just not sure I could get over it coming with the HD4000!
Click to expand...

What will change in a few years? I good monitor should be good 10 years. A good computer 3-4 years. It's been like that since before Woz invented the Mac and it's still true today.

HD4000 or Iris are 1 generation apart integrated graphics. It really is annoying to buy the old stuff, but it's just not that major a difference.

Personally, I don't like either option, so I'm going to put together a PC, but if you insist on a mac mini, the 2012 is the better choice across the whole product range. I actually was reluctantly willing to pay an extra $300 for the i7 quad core, but I misread that and it's also a dual core. So the mid-range 2012 stock model beats the entire 2014 line including BTO options. That's just sad.
 
iSayuSay said:
I just want the display. So it would be better if Apple sell a 5K Cinema Display and let me plug whichever computer I choose (Macbook, gaming PC etc).
Click to expand...

Why not buy the iMac and just use it as an external display then? It is priced the same as Dell's 5k monitor (the only other 5k display that has been announced) at $2499. Treat it as a display with a free Mac thrown in - you can just ignore it if you want and hook up an external device to use as a dumb monitor.
 
Tough Guy said:
How do Apple computers get slower over time?

I hear this a LOT from mac users. My 5 year old PC is the exact same speed, no faster and no slower, than it was the day I bought it.

Do mac components start to rust or something?
Click to expand...

Every windows machine I have ever had needed to be refreshed every year or so.

----------
Oracle1729 said:
What will change in a few years? I good monitor should be good 10 years. A good computer 3-4 years. It's been like that since before Woz invented the Mac and it's still true today.

HD4000 or Iris are 1 generation apart integrated graphics. It really is annoying to buy the old stuff, but it's just not that major a difference.

Personally, I don't like either option, so I'm going to put together a PC, but if you insist on a mac mini, the 2012 is the better choice across the whole product range. I actually was reluctantly willing to pay an extra $300 for the i7 quad core, but I misread that and it's also a dual core. So the mid-range 2012 stock model beats the entire 2014 line including BTO options. That's just sad.
Click to expand...

Yes if you are totally maxing out all four cores of that machine. That would pretty much render that machines useless until that cleared up.

----------
Micky Do said:
Those who expect something akin to Mac Pro performance and specs at Mini prices (there do seem to be a few) are bound to be disappointed….. and whinging on forums such as this.
Click to expand...

I would say that people making real money aren't whining about it. They buy what they need and continue on. It's all the hobbyist that complain about the full version of AutoCAD and Photoshop being so expensive.
 
poppy10 said:
Why not buy the iMac and just use it as an external display then? It is priced the same as Dell's 5k monitor (the only other 5k display that has been announced) at $2499. Treat it as a display with a free Mac thrown in - you can just ignore it if you want and hook up an external device to use as a dumb monitor.
Click to expand...

Question is how would I connect another computer (maybe even Windows PC) to an iMac?

Target Display Mode requires Thunderbolt output from the computer you want to plug in, most of which is not available in PC. It also requires OS X on both sides, and by today's standard there is no computer (including Macs) were able to use a 5K resolution with a single cable, not even Thunderbolt 2.

In short, the 5K capability is only usable by computer inside the iMac. Plus I'm sure Dell will have to rethink about its 5K monitor pricing, it won't be $2500 or it'll be a hard sell. Thanks to Apple.
 
Florals said:
Would a refurb 2012 potentially be a better choice than the 2014 base? I'm just not sure I could get over it coming with the HD4000!
Click to expand...

Go with the 2012 all the way, if you want to upgrade RAM or add second drive at a later date.
 
I have used the 1.4 on the Air for some time with 4 gig and hadn't noticed any problems. Mainly lots of wp, internet, downloading and viewing uni vids etc. Of course this Air has an ssd. However if it was me I would stump up the extra for the middle model if you've got the cash there for the improved graphics and the extra Ram.
 
Tough Guy said:
How do Apple computers get slower over time?

I hear this a LOT from mac users. My 5 year old PC is the exact same speed, no faster and no slower, than it was the day I bought it.

Do mac components start to rust or something?
Click to expand...

The computers don't get any slower, the software just gets more demanding.
 
Alekto said:
The computers don't get any slower, the software just gets more demanding.
Click to expand...

That's a shame.

If you bought a PC in 2007 with Vista, it can run any version of windows ever made. The newer versions even run faster on the same hardware.
 
Tough Guy said:
That's a shame.

If you bought a PC in 2007 with Vista, it can run any version of windows ever made. The newer versions even run faster on the same hardware.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, sure it'll run but I doubt it'd run as well as it would on the latest hardware. Depends on what you're doing with your machine. For my mum (a woman in her early 60s) a 500 ghz Celeron laptop with windows XP runs perfectly fine. For me, that'd drive me nuts. lol.
 
On a positive note, it is likely to kick the new HP Stream Laptops in all the benchmarks.

Hard not to beat a Windows machine that has a 1GHz CPU, 2GB Ram and a 32GB drive.

So while Apple starts after the low end again, the Windows market fights back against both Apple and the Chromebooks.

Still amazed Apple hasn't attempted a return of something similar to the eMate and the Chromebooks-style machines.
 
Tough Guy said:
How do Apple computers get slower over time?

I hear this a LOT from mac users. My 5 year old PC is the exact same speed, no faster and no slower, than it was the day I bought it.

Do mac components start to rust or something?
Click to expand...

Software gets more demanding over time - by natural progression and with Apple, maybe by choice, as a way to push consumers to upgrade hardware where they make all their money.

Apple is also traditionally more aggressive with dropping support to older hardware, many times going out of their way to not support older hardware to encourage new sales.
 
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