How Thrilled Are You About the 2014 Mac Mini

[poematik13]

Hey everyone,

Avid follower of macrumors - been trying to keep up ever since I bought an iMac in 2009 two days before the upgrades

Didn't do it this time thanks to MacRumors

I don't have much to spend (saving on school) and I have no problem with having a separate monitor. The gf and I seem to always get house sitting gigs so i'm living for free at various places for a few months at a time and until that stops I just need something that is easy to move around.

I do lots of work involving spreadsheets, comparing 4 or 5 open windows at a time. Actually about 7 or 8 various multiple windows. Can't do split desktops for this stuff either - need full page wide data.

A tear came to my eye when I saw the new Mac Mini - looks like it has HDMI and two Thunderbolt Inputs. I thought I could have 3 monitors !

But then I saw the specs and now I'm not so sure. Apple says 'supports up to 2 displays.'

Two monitors is barely sufficient (which is what I have right now with my old iMac) and I was really hoping I could get a cheap alternative to the iMac and still run my triple monitors.

I've seen some videos on youtube of people running Mac Mini with 3 monitors... but not sure if its a huge task or not.

Can someone please let me know if the new Mac Mini can support up to 3 displays? If so - how does one do it? I only need these for internet windows / spreadsheets - no gaming.

After that I shall be able to answer how thrilled I am!

You can run a mini-display port 1.2 w/ MST cable out from the thunderbolt port to a monitor and then daisy chain that monitor to another one with another display port cable going from one screen to the other. That'll run off 1 thunderbolt 2 port. And then have 1 off the HDMI for a total of 3

You can theoretically run up to 6 monitors daisy chained per thunderbolt 2 port

 

[JackieInCo]

I bought my 2012 i7 last month and still have not regretted that purchase.

 

[iFitzgerald]

- Don't want a Mac Pro because 3100€ is a bit...too much...for me at least.
- Don't want a iMac because I want to have a dual screen display setup and that looks/feels weird using different screens;

Waited for a decent Mac Mini and got:
- No SSD standard;
- No Quad Core option;
- No Intel Iris Pro (at least);

What I think would be a fair configuration/price combination:

- i7 Quad Core (maybe at 2.6GHz);
- 8GB RAM
- 1TB HDD (not even going to mention SSD now)
- Intel Iris Pro HD 5200
- Price 919€/$899

 

[ktecac]

You can run a mini-display port 1.2 w/ MST cable out from the thunderbolt port to a monitor and then daisy chain that monitor to another one with another display port cable going from one screen to the other. That'll run off 1 thunderbolt 2 port. And then have 1 off the HDMI for a total of 3

You can theoretically run up to 6 monitors daisy chained per thunderbolt 2 port

Thank you!

Multiple desktop too? Not just mirror monitors?

If so this makes me more than excited. Are there any latency / lag issues with this? Again not gaming or anything but would still prefer real time.

 

[Beliblis]

I'm actually quite happy with the new MacMini... for a slightly quirky reason maybe:

I knew the 2.3 quad i7 would be good enough for my needs. (My 2011 MBP 2.5 quad i7 died on me with Radeongate dGPU failure, and I had made the decision to replace it with a MacMini for the time being, as I don't need portability that much these days).

I don't play games & don't do much video – so will never buy a dGPU machine again.

Now the new MacMinis came out, I purchased a 2012 2.3 quad i7 on eBay, knowing that it will keep its value. I strongly believe the 2.3 and 2.6 quad i7 will be VERY much sought after on eBay soon. Don't expect the prices to go up, but they'll keep stable I'd say.

Once the 2.2 Ghz quad i7 MacBook Pro (the one WITHOUT dGPU has come down in price, I'll sell the MacMini and go 'more portable' again.

 

[kazmac]

Underwhelmed and bummed. It is a nice machine for some, but I cannot justify the price for this with all the peripherals that go with it.

I am glad the Mini saw an update, but this kind of feels like a holding pattern for the Mini while Apple waits for Intel to move their tails.

Now I hope my 2010 iMac will last until ... <the next Mini update>

 

[mrderik]

Still glad I bought my 15" rMBP last winter instead of waiting for the mini....

The PCIe upgrade is a big deal though, it really is smoking fast with file transfers and startup. But I used the 13" rMBP dual core and the 15" quad last winter, all other things being equal, and for everyday work, the dual core (PCIe) was plenty fast. But for video editing and rendering, the quad core is substantially faster than the dual. The only reason I returned the 13" and kept the 15".

So, the mid level mini is (now) just a 13" rMBP, from LAST YEAR, minus the $600 monitor.

D.

 

[crawler1975]

I'm reading the threads right now about how people are dismayed with the mac mini specs. I just wonder why most people are fixated with wanting a quad-core processor instead of the dual core that the new mini offers. IMO (I work in IT and a photographer at the same time), unless you are running mission critical apps that need multi core processors or a server(which apple didnt offer this time) I don't see the need of having a quad core, dual core is certainly enough for everyday computing. I still have an old core 2 duo macbook which I still use up to this day using photoshop to post process my images.

 

[cfedu]

I'm reading the threads right now about how people are dismayed with the mac mini specs. I just wonder why most people are fixated with wanting a quad-core processor instead of the dual core that the new mini offers. IMO (I work in IT and a photographer at the same time), unless you are running mission critical apps that need multi core processors or a server(which apple didnt offer this time) I don't see the need of having a quad core, dual core is certainly enough for everyday computing. I still have an old core 2 duo macbook which I still use up to this day using photoshop to post process my images.

Why does Apple offer quad core cpu's in Macbook pros and iMac if no one needs them? Is choice a bad thing?

I can think of many reasons why PEOPLE would not want to pay 3000$ for then for a Mac Pro!!!!

 

[iBlogger]

No Quad Core... for Mac Mini 2014

In today's world of computing, and we are not given the option of quad core leaves me "Not Happy Apple"

 

[poematik13]

Thank you!

Multiple desktop too? Not just mirror monitors?

If so this makes me more than excited. Are there any latency / lag issues with this? Again not gaming or anything but would still prefer real time.

Probably wont lag for basic stuff. Dont know about the mirror vs multiple though.

 

[crawler1975]

Why does Apple offer quad core cpu's in Macbook pros and iMac if no one needs them? Is choice a bad thing?

I can think of many reasons why PEOPLE would not want to pay 3000$ for then for a Mac Pro!!!!

basically i am talking about the mini here. as i said in another post yesterday, the mini right now is spec'd to cater to those who are migrating to OS X from windows but do not want to spend top dollars for a machine. if people are fixated with quad core they do have the choice to go to macbook pro or imac. while it's true that previous version of the mini have a quad core and a server option - i think apple is now making a big differentiation of it's product catergory - and the mac pro (to me) is not marketed to the consumer/everyday user but rather to studios or video editing companies and also Apple is a premium brand - you are actually paying for the brand not the price of the machine.

 

[cfedu]

basically i am talking about the mini here. as i said in another post yesterday, the mini right now is spec'd to cater to those who are migrating to OS X from windows but do not want to spend top dollars for a machine. if people are fixated with quad core they do have the choice to go to macbook pro or imac. while it's true that previous version of the mini have a quad core and a server option - i think apple is now making a big differentiation of it's product catergory - and the mac pro (to me) is not marketed to the consumer/everyday user but rather to studios or video editing companies and also Apple is a premium brand - you are actually paying for the brand not the price of the machine.

So I have pay 3000$ to get a quad core. I don't want to use an Apple display nor do I need a second laptop. The fact that the Ram is no user upgradable makes this a farce.

I already said goodbye to the iPhone and now I will have to go the Hackintosh route for desktops. If they turn their notebooks to shitt I might have to leave those as well. I know I do not represent the majority but it will catch up to them if they continue like this. Since I went mac 5 years ago I have convinced many people to do them same. I have literally bought over 50 Mac products in the past 5 years for people, but will will not be able to continue this as I now feel ripped off.

 

[GoKyu]

I waited a long time for this - skipping past the 2012 (since I have a 2011 i5), and sure it's still decently powerful for what I need. I thought "Let this new one be a quad i7, and I'll get an SSD to really max it out."

I decided after some thought that maybe the i5 or i7 in the new machine really might be ok for what I'm doing (amateur sound studio, recording tracks online), until I just read about not being able to upgrade the RAM yourself.

*THAT* is pretty much a deal breaker for me - I want to max it out, but I'm not paying their ridiculous profit margin. I guess it really is time to seriously look into setting up a Hackintosh.

Full control over how much RAM I can put in, as well as even getting a more powerful CPU.

I *love* OS X, but not loving that Apple's trying to force anyone who wants a decently powerful headless Mac to go with a Mac Pro. I *had* a Mac Pro for years, and I loved it, but it really was way more than I actually needed.

 

[hpucker99]

Bought refurb 2012 2.3 i7

I waited for the new Mini and when I saw it, I jumped on a 2.3 i7 refurb. The minis have not been staying on the refurb site for long.

 

[frank4]

I'm glad they are still making the Mini but I wish they used socketed RAM and not the soldered-in type.

I think computers should enable user upgrading of RAM and HD and allow some minimal repairability by the user. User upgrades extend the life of the computer and reduce the cost. Help the environment by keeping our computers running as long as possible.

Also I'm disappointed that the 2014 base Mini will probably be only a little faster than my 2011 base Mini. Not much progress in 3 years, on that particular comparison.

...
I've seen some videos on youtube of people running Mac Mini with 3 monitors... but not sure if its a huge task or not.

Can someone please let me know if the new Mac Mini can support up to 3 displays? If so - how does one do it? I only need these for internet windows / spreadsheets - no gaming.

After that I shall be able to answer how thrilled I am!

I am using 2 HDMI monitors on a 2011 Mini by the usual setup. One is direct connection to the HDMI port, the other from a MiniDisplayPort-to-HDMI adapter.

A third monitor could be connected by HDMI to an Apple TV box. An Apple TV box is only $100 and they often go on sale. I have a conventional setup with a TV connected to the Apple TV, but I could use a regular HDMI monitor instead AFAIK.

OSX works very well in this 3 monitor configuration, but there is minor lag on the Apple TV display that would probably be no problem for non-gaming apps. I just use the TV for occasional movie playback from the Mini, but OSX Mavericks handles the extended 3 monitor desktop great and treats the TV just like a third monitor. I can also mirror the displays so all 3 show the same thing.

I noticed that I cannot use System Preferences to adjust the TV overscan or colour calibration. Those things can be adjusted individually for the directly connected monitors. Also I am unable to get overscan adjusted perfectly from the Apple TV settings but I think that is an issue with my TV which is a low-end 1080P unit.

 

[mtneer]

I was expecting a baby-mac pro with a small black cylinder body, iris and iris pro graphics, and quad i7's come on.

they really gimped it, probably because the biggest clients for these machines are crappy public schools who use them for libraries and you dont really need any power for web browsing

Nope.. 2014 is the year of the upsell for Apple. First it was 16GB base iPhones to upsell 64GB and 128GB models, then the sorry iPad Mini 3 to upsell to the Air 2 and now this Mini to upsell to the more margin-friendly iMac/ MacPro's.

 

[Glassed Silver]

Total kick in the balls, even for me as someone who doesn't even shop the Mini line.

Glassed Silver:mac

 

[flyinmac]

Apple has officially created a product line which will prevent this long time mac user from buying my next machine from Apple...

I will not buy an iMac... That is just simply ruled out. I've owned too many iMac's, and I've never had a good experience with any of them (except for the original CRT ones). But, every iMac I've had since the LCD generations, has been short lived. I won't go there again. Too many times I've owned an iMac only to be in immediate need of dumping it at a loss. Never again.

I have a Mac Pro, but it's getting to a point of needing to hack it to run the latest OS version, and needing to spend money on another video card to do that and successfully use it. Otherwise, the machine is fine. Just getting to outdated on OS 10.6.8 to run some of the software I need. And, the thought of unstable hacks to enable it to run on a machine that I need to be reliable... well, not attractive. I need to run OS 10.8 minimum by January (or switch to Windows).

I have no reason to spend money on a new model Mac Pro. The price point is ridiculous for my needs (and impossible for me to obtain).

And, the new Mac Mini... that's just an insult... It will run OS X 10.10, sure... but it actually does not meet the simple system requirements for the software I'll be needing. CPU speed is inadequate, and likewise, dual core is inadequate.

The prior Mac Mini.. that would be great, except that it's GPU was inadequate.

So, for someone who has been burned by too many iMac's and is not willing to gamble on them again, who will not buy a machine with less than a quad core cpu, will not settle for the lower GPU of the prior mini, and will not spend $2000, they have cut me out of the mac market. It took them a long time to do it, but sadly, when I am forced to retire my current Mac Pro, that will be the end of the line for me with Mac's, unless they move back to producing useful machines at reasonable prices.

Downgrades are not improvements. And, the price point for this downgraded mini is ridiculous. Even worse, is that even once you get it near Mac Pro price, the specs are still an insult for the ridiculous price tag on build to order for the current mini.

I will be required to purchase a new machine by January. And, nothing in Apple's product line will meet my needs and budget. How unfortunate...

I have come to prefer OS X, and have enjoyed my break from Windows. But, OS X is not worth more than a thousand dollar premium to get a machine that is more capable than this ridiculous mini and isn't an iMac.

If it's not a disposable laptop, I will not buy a machine with a built-in screen. Not going to happen. By disposable laptop, I mean less than $300 laptop.

It's just crazy to watch Apple going backwards. I was ready to spring for the new Mac Mini. All they had to do was bump the CPU up slightly, and bump up the GPU a little bit from the prior model. And, then I was going to buy it.

I won't buy an iMac... never going to happen. Learned my lesson after more than 10 extremely expensive lessons with iMac problems in the last 10 years.

And, while I'd love a new Mac Pro, the price is impossible.

Apple has successfully found a way to cripple and segment their product line so that myself and many other people will never be able to justify buying their computers again.

Here's hoping that Apple's sales numbers show them the error of their ways, and they realize that they need more reasonable mid-range options at affordable prices. And, no, the iMac is not that machine for a large number of us.

The mini was so close... Now it's not even adequate. Even maxed out for a ridiculous price tag, the new mini is still inadequate.

This strategy of creating gaps so large that they try to force their buyers into an iMac or a Mac Pro is a strategy that will kill them in the end. Many of us extremely longtime loyal customers (yes I date back to the 80's as an Apple customer), are being segmented into Windows machines because Apple has left huge gaps in their product lines.

 

[mcnallym]

As a person with a mac mini 2009 used for iTunes/Elgato then had been looking at the dual core anyway.

As such the middle mini looks great for my purposes. I don't find the performance too slow, whilst will have to order the RAM upfront can still replace storage myself.

As such it suits me but I have my upgraded Mac Pro 2010 for when need more power. Still most people on the forum seemed to be Quad buyers on the mini but I guess they do more with there mini then me, so it would have been good to see a Quad option for them.

 

[iFitzgerald]

Waited for a decent Mac Mini and got:
- No SSD standard;
- No Quad Core option;
- No Intel Iris Pro (at least);

Quoting myself to add:
- No upgradable RAM;
- Inferior Performance across the whole line

GG Apple...

 

[crazzapple]

I'm reading the threads right now about how people are dismayed with the mac mini specs. I just wonder why most people are fixated with wanting a quad-core processor instead of the dual core that the new mini offers. IMO (I work in IT and a photographer at the same time), unless you are running mission critical apps that need multi core processors or a server(which apple didnt offer this time) I don't see the need of having a quad core, dual core is certainly enough for everyday computing. I still have an old core 2 duo macbook which I still use up to this day using photoshop to post process my images.

Some people use their computers for more than photoshop. I personally could really use quad-core.