They are both desktop products and account for a fairly insignificant amount of Apple's revenue. Apple is a phone/toy company now. While they will continue to market laptops, I feel they are VERY close to killing off all desktops completely.
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.
Is The Mac Mini Dead
- Thread starter tpalermo30
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They are both desktop products and account for a fairly insignificant amount of Apple's revenue. Apple is a phone/toy company now. While they will continue to market laptops, I feel they are VERY close to killing off all desktops completely.
Well, not so much for the MP and iMac as they are showing up in benchmarks. The Mac Mini?
Last edited by a moderator:
I'll keep posting by bullocks Snow Globe sights as long as the makers of this site keep up the boelshit predictions on their side. At least to the math right MR! If you take the average interval, you get to November 7th. That is far ahead and the current model is NOT OVER ITS SHELF LIFE YET.
And know your gaming classics. Blanka is the most TESTOSTERONE GAME CREATURE ever. SHE.... LOL!
ummm. The iMac being an amazing leading machine?
I though that was that Mac Pro. opps Where's that at nowdays. (sorry to those holding there breath for a pro update on back the 2013 PR spin .)
The plan doesn't look so much like a "fudge" but a plan to evolve them into a merged laptop line over time that will be easy to infer by the users. Apple isn't going to provide a "roadmap" to a merge for a couple of reasons.
First they don't provide roadmaps. That is just how they roll. You can flap your arms about it but that likely isn't going to change their minds.
As long as their laptops keep rapidly growing they can probably afford to have the functionality overlap. So the transition to merged could take 1 , 2, or 3 years depending upon sales go. That is yet another reason to release a "set in stone" roadmap.
Second, there are already many signals that taking away Ethernet , ODDs, Firewire ports for the whole line up with cause major grumbling complaints.
If Apple floats rMBP 13" and 15" models and folks hear and see how those slots going away isn't the end of the world ... then the acceptance will go much better. For example, if Apple had taken away model(s) rather than added the MBA to the line up there would have been a riot.
With the MBA 13" and MBP 13" priced the same Apple can actually measure which one has more traction with a broader set of customers. The second revision of the rMBP 13" could be targeted at wiping out the weaker of those two. If Apple pre-selected which one to remove first then they could choose the wrong one. That would be a very bad move.
Tim Cook's statement were bundgled and they distorted by rumors. It is really very simple people.
"... Apple PR has reached out and clarified that only the Mac Pro is expected to be next updated in 2013 ... "
https://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/1...c-pro-and-imac-designs-likely-coming-in-2013/
At this point since Apple PR had to clean up Cooks comments, the orignal indirect email message should be thrown in the trash can. References to it will only cause more FUD and disinformation than provide clarity.
Likely updated this year but after the rMBP 13" and the "new iPhone / iPad" hysteria ( for logistical reasons ).
Since the Mac Mini shares alot of overlap between MBP 13". there is a good chance that some folks were 'borrowed' from the Mini team to get yet another 13" laptop out the door. The upside would be that perhaps some of the additional 13" improvements this round would get weaved into the Mini.
The downside in that case is that the Mini's release date would slide out further into the year.
The iMac is going to face much stiffer competition this year. First, because all-in-one is the segment of "good news" in the desktop sector.
"... So forecasts market watcher IHS iSuppli, which gleefully notes that the resultant "robust" growth - shipments will be up 20 per cent from 2011's 13.7m - could see the AIO platform become the saviour of the desktop market. ... "
http://www.reghardware.com/2012/07/11/all_in_one_desktops_on_the_ascendant/
That puts a 'bulleye' on the iMac's back by the other major system vendors.
Frankly, the HP Z1 clowns the iMac when it comes to engineering and inventiveness. It is generally aimed at the highest end of the iMac range but it is indicative that the other vendors can be serious competitors if they just focus.
The iMac needs something substantively new rather just same old iMac with a Ivy Bridge bump.
hiDPI mode was in Lion, just buried. Development on this could have started late 2011 and was just ready to go at this point. This would be a minor update since there is really no change in functionality. It is simply making what appears on the screen be less blurry than need be. It really shouldn't wait for major updates in functionality.
Releasing more, but smaller updates is actually a better evolutionary path in many cases. That's one reason why OS X is going is going to yearly updates instead of 18-24 month "Big Bang" updates.
Given the ongoing hot bed issue over "Duplicate" versus legacy "Save As..." semantics perhaps that is a good thing. Similar but in opposite coupling direction, until the new iCloud is fully rolled out on both iOS6 and ML there may be updates to iWork that need to come out together on both platforms.
Well, some of that is probably listening to some of the misguiding info trotted out on these forums.
Apple is focused on where the markets are going. In the overall PC industry, laptops have outsold desktops for several years now. So Apple's emphasis is more so on laptops than desktops. That has relatively little to do with the iOS devices in the alternative personal computers in that space. Or Apple being blinded by all the money they are making in iOS space.
That means the number of laptop models are probably going to expand over time and the number of desktop models contract over an extended period of time.
Apple only has 3 "desktop" products so they really don't need to shrink the line up much. I don't think they want to drop to less than three but they probably are going to be more careful that the 3 don't cannibalize each other to a greater extent than they do now.
One "problem" the Mini has is that it is getting "powerful enough" for more folks and the price of decent IPS panels is falling into the less $300 zone. (e.g., http://www.anandtech.com/show/6115/hp-2311xi-ips-monitor $200). So for $799-999 , a decent number of folks could buy a Mini instead of one of the lower end iMacs. It isn't even a matter of "reusing the old screen you have". They can get a new one that is very good if just not fixated on having the same supplier logo on each piece.
Apple can differentiate them but they may want to go to a context where release the Mini and iMac together so that they can highlight the value differences more than the "good enough" performance overlap.
Same issue but a different price point transition between the upper end iMacs and the entry-midrange Mac Pros. Don't need to couple the release schedules, because the Mac Pro class CPUs are on an entirely different release frequency. But they do need more of a value differentiation gap between the two... otherwise one is likely to eat into the share of the other.
+1... I think the Mini will have one more update, then morph into a HTPC with ATV. Apple will dump the desktop line and offer entry level laptops based on ARM.
who needs a new model
who knows??!! all i do know is my 2 yr old mini still works for me- c2d 320m
8gb 500g 10.6.8, although i dont expect it to run doom 3 at 60fps, etc.
who knows??!! all i do know is my 2 yr old mini still works for me- c2d 320m
8gb 500g 10.6.8, although i dont expect it to run doom 3 at 60fps, etc.
Last edited by a moderator:
If that's the case - why doesn't Apple officially leave the desktop computer segment completely? For all but the highest demands the mobile devices of today are more than sufficient!
Apple never had a problem with abruptly leaving familiar premises and migrate to something completely new. If people miss their known product, Apple tries to upsell them as they do it now already ("You need a dedicated graphic card and want to swap drives yourself? Well - take the MacPro then... Don't mind that it's far overpowered for your home needs - it'll last way longer then due to its server-grade components!").
The mini could be replaced by the 11" MBA (BTO: No screen included to reduce price), the iMac could be replaced by the 13" and 15" MBA and MBP (depending on performance demands) and the Mac Pro - well, Apple would probably have to double or even triple the thickness of the MBP to get at least halfway close to its functionality, but then - the number of customers on this behemoth is small as is the total sales number, so simply do away with it to clean up the portfolio. BOOM!
For people needing more screen real estate there still are the Thunderbolt displays (which can be daisy-chained for multi-monitor setups), with a BTO of a graphic card slot included in the housing (gets about 1-2 cm thicker then), powered by Thunderbolt 2.0.
That way Apple could save on that annoying maintenance for outdated desktop computers and focus completely on the mobile future, while in parallel streamlining the portfolio, which makes the shareholders happy...
There are still folks who need high-end workstations which are the solely the domains of the maxed out iMacs and Mac Pros. MBP's aren't powerful enough although the new ones are desktop replacements for most. I don't see MBP and MBA lines merging. Laptops sales are where the action is so it makes sense to differentiate there. I think that the lower end desktops are most at risk to be EOL. That said, it sure would be interesting to see the Mac Mini evolve into a media server/AT unit.
No. There are several disconnects from reality here.
1. Apple is not adverse to milking cash cows. The iPod is shrinking about 5-10% year over year for last 3-4 years. Apple is still in it. Primarily because even though shrinking they are a dominate player in that segment. The desktop Mac segment has actually been growing year over year for past 3 years. It is actually a cash cow that is generating even more money. It would foolish to walk away from revenue growth. When the Mac desktop segment starts shrinking 10% per year.... then I wouldn't expect Apple to hold onto to it for very long in models where they aren't the dominate market force. Apple's share of workstations is roughly akin to it overall PC market percentage (less than 10% ). I think the mini is roughly the same for its price and functionality range in the overall PC market. When those start to crater Apple will dump it long before it becomes a drag on growth.
For now. iMacs are exactly aligned with one of the singular substantive growth segments in desktop "half" of the spectrum. It would beyond silly to walk away now. Part of that growth comes at nuking the other desktop segments ( larger the average "box with slots" segment ). That is just fine with Apple because they don't have one of those. So they are primarily cannibalizing Windows boxes. That leads to Mac platform growth.
The Mini and Mac Pro need some tweaks to get back into the growth game. The Mac Pro's gaps are obvious. I think Apple is resigned to taking some lumps in that segment or two years until they can take a creditable stab at something sustainable over the long term. The Mini should do "OK" as long as it can turn in substantially better performance that the lowest end mac laptop offerings. As the only sub $999 Mac offering there is always going to be a ready market for it.
2. The iMac and Mac Pro don't use and are not restricted to using mobile CPU packages. The all the desktops are not restricted to just one drive ( for example it wouldn't hurt if the Mini went to a standard config where there was a SSD cache drive along with a HDD to create a virtual Hybird drive. ).
You mean like hanging onto the Apple II long after the Mac got released ?
There is a different between dropping maybe 1 or 2 desktop models and dropping the whole class altogether. Dropping the whole class typically takes time. Apple has dropped out of the perhiperals as they became commodities. Dropping whole system classes was usually done only after they started to substantively shrink.
to upsell you have to have something in the roughly the same class. A better chair, a better device , etc. Not if you need a kitchen chair ... here is my lounge recliner.
Not really. One the Mini is cheaper. As I pointed out with the 23" HP IPS screen at $200 you can buy a mini + screen at $799 and a MBA starts off at $999. That's a 25% increase. It would be far more profitable for users to spend that 25% on BTO options on the mini and/or on Mac App store software than on the stock MBA at $999.
Similarly the MBA would make for a horrible OS X Server box for a small workgroup or company.
It is not cost competitive. If normalize the persistance storage on SSDs, it is not performance competitive. That combination makes it a worse $/performance ratio and a worse value.
Again... no. If go into a $/performance ratio it isn't a value. Let along the loss in display space and/or the opportunity to sell more LCD panels that go into making the Thunderbolt displays more profitable.
If Apple want to give the all-in-one market to HP, Dell, and Lenovo that would be exactly the move they'd make.
Chuckle the iMacs have trouble competitive for the non entry level Mac Pro workloads. The Mac Pros can't.
There is a real migration 'down' to lower tiers and to laptops by people whose workload isn't going up as fast as the hardware improves. But there are also people moving down from up above the upper ends of the desktop line. Mac Pro -> iMac , iMac & Mac Pro -> Mini , and shared cluster & bigger iron -> Mac Pro transitions. Leveraging those Apple can hold off the desktop shrinking. If can just steal share from other PC vendors can actually get grow ( Apple being a more "stable" and successful company ... bankrupcy or going out of business isn't an immediate issue. )
Apple making laptops thicker? ROTFLMAO ... maybe in some parallel universe. Not in this one.
The only compromise Apple might make is keeping the rMBP 13" the same thickness as it is now. Just for battery and perahps GPU sake which it the 'classic' MBP 13" doesn't have, but would be useful for the new screen.
However, it is slightly more likely that they will create something that is eventually a MBA 13" replacement ( as soon as the screen costs come down in a year or two). It will be thinner just the the rMBP 15"
Apple already has "thicker laptops". They are called the Mini and iMac. They are substantially thicker and they can do substantially more.
Thunderbolt is not a panacea. Thunderbolt 2.0 isn't coming until the 2014-2015 timeframe.
Thunderbolt displays are docking stations more so than monitors. It is far more cost effective to just add the pane to an iMac or encased monitor to an Mini.
Most Mini and iMac users don't want two monitors. They aren't going to be happy about paying for two.
As long as the desktop models are returning a positive return on investment that reasonable ( Apple's typicall 30% mark up) then there is reasonable return on R&D investment here. The desktops can often use parts before they are practical for the laptops and so that R&D development isn't wasted. There are a relatively large number of common components. (wifi / bluetooth, HDDs , there could be overlap with SSDs with a few design adjustments ). Basically, the desktops give Apple larger purchasing power for laptops.
Apple's share of the smartphone market is now dropping. That will continue. Suing everyone on the planet is only a delaying tactic that slows the drop... it won't negate it. The tablets will probably peak and start to decline next year. Apple responding to the 7" tablet threat is indicative that while the iPad mini will be successful they are not totally in control anymore.
Apple can't afford to throw away desktops completely just yet.
What Apple can afford to do is ignore the spec freaks who pound the table for new system vendor models the week after Intel releases new CPUs or GPU vendors release a new generation of cards. That kind external demands from folks with relatively little leverage they can ignore for a couple of quarters with little to no long term impact.