Is 256GB enough? MM2018

[pl1984]

Don't know why people are so excited about these new minis. You spend almost the price of a decent iMac 27" to get a thing that needs to become a cable mess to scale decently in time. Most people are excited with eGPU upgrades, but that's expensive and take a lot of space in the desk.

I am puzzled why so many are so enthusiastic about eGPUs. They offer nothing over an internal GPU and, if this thread is any indication:

I extensively benchmarked my 2018 Mac Mini+eGPU against my 2009 Mac Pro​

They can perform poorer than the same card installed in a system with 10 year old technology (yes, the eGPU did win in some circumstance but that should be expected when coupled with 10 year newer technology). An eGPU consumes deskspace somewhat negating the benefit of a SFF computer. If the intent is to purchase a SFF, add in an eGPU, and external storage what benefit does such a setup have over a small or medium sized tower?

I do like the new Mini but have no need to purchase one (too many computers already). I love the small size of the Mini. I have two 2012 models which are performing well. Neither has any external upgrades as any upgrade I need can be done internally (memory, HD) or I would use a form factor more appropriate (which means PC since Apple doesn't offer anything else) for anything beyond that.

 

[Cashmonee]

(Note: After decades of PC experience, this is my first Mac)
I purchased a Mac Mini with a 256GB hard drive with the intention of using it primarily for OS and Apps. I bought a 512GB Samsung T5 for miscellaneous data and I have a 8TB WD Easystore for my "media vault".

I'm getting frustrated with the number of apps that insist on either being installed to the boot/os drive or use the boot drive for their data (Microsoft Outlook...) . I'm getting concerned that I planned incorrectly and that 256GB may not have been enough.

Was my strategy flawed? Will 256GB be enough? I feel like the PC didn't care if stuff was on a C: D: E: drive. Not as much the case with my early on Mac experience.

I think 256 should be enough, but when I have been drawn to look at the mini for myself, I gravitate to the 512. The 512 is faster and offers more head room in case you need more space down the line. In theory, this machine should last you well over 5 years, and I find it hard to know my needs for a drive that far down the line. While 256 with external storage is good now, 512 gives you just a little more security with speed and size.

I will say that it is ridiculous Apple have forced users into this decision. It is also ridiculous that you sacrifice so much for having the small form factor to simply negate the advantage of a small form factor by essentially requiring users to attach external peripherals to it. If that was to be the case, make the thing twice as tall and include a GPU or get decent cooling that doesn't have these processors operating at max temps so they could turbo boost more.

In Apple's defense, one reason I have heard for why changing the form factor was a non-starter is that many professionals have these rack mounted and keeping the form factor (down to where the power plug is) lets them simply plug them into their racks. I think most of us here are actually not the target for the mini and we are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I think if you were to ask Apple what machine they intend the majority of the people here to purchase, it would be the iMac, not the mini. Not excusing it, and obviously not what we want to hear (I think most of us want a mid tower), but I believe Apple intends the mini to be a machine that is part of a deployment of machines, not a one off for enthusiasts, one-man shops, or home users.

 

[pl1984]

In Apple's defense, one reason I have heard for why changing the form factor was a non-starter is that many professionals have these rack mounted and keeping the form factor (down to where the power plug is) lets them simply plug them into their racks. I think most of us here are actually not the target for the mini and we are trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. I think if you were to ask Apple what machine they intend the majority of the people here to purchase, it would be the iMac, not the mini. Not excusing it, and obviously not what we want to hear (I think most of us want a mid tower), but I believe Apple intends the mini to be a machine that is part of a deployment of machines, not a one off for enthusiasts, one-man shops, or home users.

Since when did Apple start caring about what the end users wanted?

As for the square peg in a round hole that's exactly what is happening because users have no alternative when it comes to Apple. Simply put Apple does not currently make any Macintosh which can be internally expanded nor can they be upgraded with the exception of memory in some models and, depending on how you define upgraded, the SSD in one model. Apple has forced users into external expansion. That way Apple can claim slim, elegant designs while any user who needs something more has to deal with the inelegance of external expansion.