The value proposition is that you can own a Mini for 499$ with base 8gb/256gb. Upgrading requires an outlay of another 50% to get more ram/storage. It all depends on your requirements.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I refuse to buy an Apple Silicon Mac with only 8 GB RAM!
- Thread starter AlixSPQR
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
But it doesn't do iMessage
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
The value proposition is a lot of useful software that integrates seamlessly (or close to it) with your mobile devices, watch and headset.
Stupid little things like your headset pairing with a device intelligently without having to turn it on or connect via Bluetooth. I thought it was a gimmick until I bought a pair and it's a nice convenience. I run my life on iCloud Notes. I've tried to do that with Google Keep, Evernote and others and have just not found anything that works on all of my devices and works really well without an internet connection.
You can do all of this with other operating systems but there are some inconveniences with them that I don't have with the Apple ecosystem. It's not perfect but there's far more that I don't have to think about.
An example of something macOS does that Windows doesn't is independent virtual desktops. Microsoft promised this for Windows 10, then for Windows 11 and it's not there. Maybe Windows 12. Linux and macOS have had this for at least a decade.
Until your headphones decide they want to be connected to your laptop in your backpack and not the phone in your hand despite the fact you literally never wanted them connected to the laptop in the first place...
It's been there for quite some time in Windows 11. I never use them on Mac OS or Windows.
The integration you speak of on MacOS is something I don't use either. To do the same thing I use email and remote connections.
I have an iPhone, multiple iPads, and 2 Macs running all the time, but I also have Windows machines and an android phone, so my needs for integration are quite different. I do use onedrive sparingly, but it's not something critical to my workflow.
I don't have this problem. My Mac asks me if I want to connect; it doesn't just grab the headphones.
I googled for independent virtual desktops and found no evidence that the feature is in Windows 11. Could you provide an article indicating that the feature has been added?
I have several Windows systems but I find that I rarely need them anymore.
Same. I don’t think that feature exists for Windows. macOS is far better with the virtual desktops than Windows.
I built a large Windows system back in 2020 (5 TB SSD, 128 GB RAM, support for 5 monitors) and was incredibly disappointed that Windows didn't support independent virtual desktops and I just check Windows every six months to see if they added it. The virtual desktop implementation on Windows has always been clunky. It's been available in the Unix and macOS worlds for a long time.
So you never fullscreen an app and swipe back and forth with two fingers? I find that hard to believe.
Windows didn’t even have virtual desktops built in until Windows 10! Not sure if it was launch Windows 10 or an early feature update. I was happy then quickly got annoyed when I saw it’s not the same as macOS.
I'm looking at it on my Widows 11 PC right now, there's a widget to switch or add desktops, and this is GA, not windows insider. I haven't seen an article about it, I just see it's there.
Here's an article on how to use it:
Your trip-up is the word independent, that's not what they are called in Windows land.
I use full screen apps a lot of the time, but I use Alt-tab to switch between them. Also, I hate trackpads and use a mouse instead.
I'm looking at it on my Widows 11 PC right now, there's a widget to switch or add desktops, and this is GA, not windows insider. I haven't seen an article about it, I just see it's there.
Here's an article on how to use it:
Your trip-up is the word independent, that's not what they are called in Windows land.
You don't see the word independent because Windows doesn't support them.
Windows considers all of your monitors as one desktop. This means that changing to a different virtual desktop changes all of the monitors to that one desktop.
In macOS, you can set Spaces to what Windows does or have independent virtual desktops. That is you can change the desktop on one monitor while all of the other monitors stay the same. This is what Windows is missing and there are a lot of requests to Microsoft for this capability.
The reason you'd want to do this is if you're mainly working on a document or task on one monitor and using a second monitor for resources. So you'd have a web browser in one virtual desktop on the second monitor, maybe a document on another, a spreadsheet on another, etc. And you could flip back and forth on the second monitor but the first monitor would stay on the same desktop on that monitor.
Another use case would be watching a video on one monitor while doing work on a second. Or doing a video conference on one monitor while using the other with multiple desktops for your work.
Okay, I'll buy that they're different, but I really wouldn't say that Windows doesn't have some of that functionality between it's virtual desktops and extended windows capability, but whatever -- like I said, I don't use it on either.
A Magic Mouse with two-finger swipe? Anyway, each fullscreen app automatically creates its own virtual desktop next to and not on top of the main desktop. So you're using it unknowingly. Even if you switch with opt+tab.I use full screen apps a lot of the time, but I use Alt-tab to switch between them. Also, I hate trackpads and use a mouse instead.
There are a lot of requests for the feature. If you don't use it, then you really don't know. As I've said, it's been around for a very long time. Apple may have even inherited it from Unix. The only way that I've been able to do something useful for my workflow is to use multiple Windows computers which isn't what I really want to do.
Nope, hate the magic mouse, I use another kind. In truth I can't say I've ever tried the magic mouse as it doesn't fit my hand, but where would you swipe it? Not that I would switch to it, but I am curious, I didn't know it could do swipes.
By that definition, Windows has the same functionality, and people around here argue against that.
I don't really care if it's additional desktops or whatever, as long as I can switch between them and I can do that just as easily on Windows or MacOS.
As a professional, I never buy with the base RAM/storage configuration. I always upgrade. Generally I pick the max RAM and a step down from the max storage (that's usually the sweet spot for me).
8, or even 16GB, is just too anaemic for sustained, serious types of work on a machine.
I'm glad the option is there for people that want a performant, smooooooth operating MacOS device but don't need much more than the basics. 8GB is fine for folks like that.
8, or even 16GB, is just too anaemic for sustained, serious types of work on a machine.
I'm glad the option is there for people that want a performant, smooooooth operating MacOS device but don't need much more than the basics. 8GB is fine for folks like that.
You can also buy a pair of crappy shoes for a fraction of the price a good pair of sturdy fitted leather boots will cost. What’s your point?
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
An awful lot of very basic iOS and macOS features are not particularly obvious and hard to understand without explanation; and therefore sometimes only known to the generation of users, who were active when they were introduced on stage. But the mouse gestures are at least explained in System Preferences.
I abandoned Windows after version 7 and have no intention to look at it ever again.By that definition, Windows has the same functionality, and people around here argue against that.
Last time I checked, a recently introduced Microsoft Surface model had a base memory configuration of 4GB, which is even more restrictive than the 8GB on a number of recent macs. The price of the Surface was in the same ballpark as a MacBook Pro.
I bought a late 2013 13" mbp in early 2014 (with 8GB ram, which if I remember correctly, had a base configuration of 4GB). This seemed relatively speedy until around the time Big Sur came out (except the graphics was always pokey due to limited graphics capability on the Intel chip).
Recently, replaced the 2013 13" with a 2023 14" with the base 10c/16c/16c chip and 32GB memory (and the base 512GB SSD). This is by far the fastest laptop I've ever used. Would the base 16GB memory worked out? Probably, but the additional 16GB leaves plenty of room for caching programs and data (with about 5-8GB to spare). It has been my impression that memory usually has the biggest bang for the buck in performance improvement.
Was it pricey? Depends on comparisons. Most of my professional life, I was paid to work with equipment that cost in the range of $150,000-$350,000 per unit. The corporation owned machines that cost in the 7 to 8 figures (including a Cray supercomputer, at various times). The corporation at one time competed with IBM in the mainframe business, but they could not keep up with IBM or Hitachi.
www.redhat.com
I bought a late 2013 13" mbp in early 2014 (with 8GB ram, which if I remember correctly, had a base configuration of 4GB). This seemed relatively speedy until around the time Big Sur came out (except the graphics was always pokey due to limited graphics capability on the Intel chip).
Recently, replaced the 2013 13" with a 2023 14" with the base 10c/16c/16c chip and 32GB memory (and the base 512GB SSD). This is by far the fastest laptop I've ever used. Would the base 16GB memory worked out? Probably, but the additional 16GB leaves plenty of room for caching programs and data (with about 5-8GB to spare). It has been my impression that memory usually has the biggest bang for the buck in performance improvement.
Was it pricey? Depends on comparisons. Most of my professional life, I was paid to work with equipment that cost in the range of $150,000-$350,000 per unit. The corporation owned machines that cost in the 7 to 8 figures (including a Cray supercomputer, at various times). The corporation at one time competed with IBM in the mainframe business, but they could not keep up with IBM or Hitachi.
Mainframes | Command Line Heroes
Hear how a small team of rebel employees bent the rules to create the GE 225—a giant leap in engineering that pushed computing to the mainstream.
Last edited:
Personally I am so glad I am not locked in Apple's ecosystem. And I don't care if most people here are. The main reason that drives me to Apple Silicon Macs is silent operation (I hate any kind of fan noise) and the universal control with my iPads.
I love my 12" MacBook as a great Chromebook.
And my M1 Mini is a great server for Plex.
But for work I really can't get used to MacOS, the window management, the multple monitors management etc.
I clearly prefer Windows. And if you want lots of RAM and storage like I do, upgrades are also much cheaper (by upgrades I also mean models with more soldered RAM).
And I am glad I am on Android and will probably never move to iPhone as my main phone.
But I love my iPads and my Macs as entertainement devices, much better than Android tablets and Chromebooks, and also as companions to my work devices.
I love my 12" MacBook as a great Chromebook.
And my M1 Mini is a great server for Plex.
But for work I really can't get used to MacOS, the window management, the multple monitors management etc.
I clearly prefer Windows. And if you want lots of RAM and storage like I do, upgrades are also much cheaper (by upgrades I also mean models with more soldered RAM).
And I am glad I am on Android and will probably never move to iPhone as my main phone.
But I love my iPads and my Macs as entertainement devices, much better than Android tablets and Chromebooks, and also as companions to my work devices.
I have about 350 GB of RAM on my systems so I'm a fan of lots of RAM. About a third of it is on Macs so it is cheaper to add a lot of RAM, particularly if you like to build your own systems.
I'm not locked into Apple either as I prefer to buy the best devices for the job while they also interact well with each other.
I prefer the window management on macOS to Windows, particularly on multimonitor systems. Something as simple and old as independent virtual desktops isn't supported in Windows and I have a hard time understanding why.
Here's my option for a calculator that has stood the test of time:
Plug-in CPUs and memory are largely a relic of old 1920s radio construction, where tubes were plugged-in because they were likely to fail, due to the heated tungsten filaments. I am not aware of any cell phones that use plug-in memory, and expect laptop/desktop use to fade into oblivion over the coming years (first their use of plug-in components, then the laptops/desktops themselves). I don't recall that the failed windows phone or the failed windows zune mp3 player had plug-in devices. Many small startup businesses run on tablets already.
I'm glad that I'm no longer locked into the windows ecosystem, much of which was architected by IBM - including plug in components, BIOS (rather than a more advanced system used on other devices)...
I'm glad that I'm no longer locked into the windows ecosystem, much of which was architected by IBM - including plug in components, BIOS (rather than a more advanced system used on other devices)...