I know the Mini is the cheapest mac offering, but it just occurred that the iPad Air is almost the same price! This has a touch screen, battery and a super thin form factor. With an Apple TV-ish redesign rumoured to come soon, and I know it's probably unlikely, but I wonder if there will be a price drop too. Food for thought!
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 Mini overpriced?
- Thread starter carl varley
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
When spec’d up, absolutely
Base prices are reasonable though
Base prices are reasonable though
I don't think they are overpriced for what you're getting.
I agree, it was really the comparison to the iPad Air that made me think.
Yeah, I'm not holding my breath.
I certainly don't think the Mac Mini is a bargain or that being the "cheapest Mac" is an excuse for not having premium features, and really don't think Apple can afford to cut functionality with the new model unless they are going to cut the price. I'm talking about Ethernet, the built-in power supply and the two USB-A ports ...and, if you don't use/value those features, you'd want Apple to pass on the "savings" to you, right? (...back in reality, that's probably not what determines the selling price).
I don't know about "overpriced" because it is hard to know what to compare it with. It's probably a niche product compared to the iPad Air - lower volume sales will always drive down the bangs-per-buck, and running full MacOS adds "value". I think that, all-round, it is still one of the nicest Mini PCs around in terms of power/performance/quietness and not having a honking great power brick or a screaming fan...
BUT you'll be hard pressed to find a PC in that price range that doesn't come with 16 or 32GB RAM and 512GB or 1TB SSD - and, yes, folks, MacOS may be efficient with RAM but it doesn't double it and a 4GB movie doesn't magically shrink to 2GB on a Mac. Needing to add 66% to the base price to get 16GB/512GB is a bad joke.
Absolutely. I've literally though the same thing two years ago 
and was downvoted for no reason.
Still, Mac mini is an ok value for entry-level models, mostly because their resale price just doesn't go down. 2018 Intel minis, base M1 minis and base M2 minis have been in 300-400 dollars range for quite some time now.
And because it's next to impossible to build a sane PC for the same price. 12400F with motherboard is at least $200 if you're lucky. Decent compact PCs from Minisforum also start at 300-400+.
But situation changes dramatically if one needs more than 8gb of RAM (so for everyone).
and was downvoted for no reason.Still, Mac mini is an ok value for entry-level models, mostly because their resale price just doesn't go down. 2018 Intel minis, base M1 minis and base M2 minis have been in 300-400 dollars range for quite some time now.
And because it's next to impossible to build a sane PC for the same price. 12400F with motherboard is at least $200 if you're lucky. Decent compact PCs from Minisforum also start at 300-400+.
But situation changes dramatically if one needs more than 8gb of RAM (so for everyone).
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
That's not how modern Apple Inc works. When there is some kind of cost-savings, they pocket the added profit as further margin expansion.
You might recall around the Silicon "big reveal" how we slung "now that Apple won't have to pay the steep Intel premium anymore, it could lead to cheaper Macs." Instead, the Intel Premium savings became added Apple margin.
For the first approx 15 years of my association with Apple, target margin was approx. 38%-40%. Since then and even through the whole inflation/supply chain/covid period, margin has EXPANDED... now nearing 50%.
So if there is some cost savings in a new Mini design, I'd expect "same great price" at best... if not higher price. And when they are able to replace the Qualcomm cellular modem with their own modem in a future iPhone, I expect "same great price" at best... if not higher price. Etc.
All that offered though, I'll hope right with you... just as I hope for market competitive rates on RAM & SSD vs. 3-5X market pricing. 💰💰💰
I don't find it overpriced at all, the mini is a solid performer for its target audience. The base vs spec'd price argument is moot because the same can me said for almost any Apple product. Apple charges a premium for non-base models and has forever.
they are overpriced if you deck them out with better guts. As a standalone base model though....it's unbeatable since it can do so much more than an iPad even at this point. They're perfect to stick behind a TV either for presentations, TV, movies, whatever it is. I've got a 2014 low end model which is barely useable at this point, but for the power it uses and versatility...it's good for watching movies ;-)
Perhaps my question was a little short. It was really from a hardware point of view. Both the mac mini and iPad have similar specs, M2 8gb ram, smaller ssd, but the iPad has a great screen, good speakers, built in cameras and mics. It also includes other things like touch id, apple pencil support and internal sensors (gyroscope, compass and some models gps). I get the Mini runs MacOS and can do lots of stuff the iPad can't but from a cost of design, R&D and production goes, I would hazard a guess it would be a lot cheaper to produce. I just wish and hope we as customer see some of that benefit.
I love my M1 mini its a real workhorse and can't wait for the M4 version. If they could just lower the cost a little I'm sure it would elevate sales and get Minis into many more people's hands.
I love my M1 mini its a real workhorse and can't wait for the M4 version. If they could just lower the cost a little I'm sure it would elevate sales and get Minis into many more people's hands.
It's horrible for watching movies, just like any other computer. You get 60 Hz instead of 24 Hz which leads to incorrect frame pacing, no HDR, effectively no 4K, and you don't get bit-perfect video signal either, since your output is being "processed" by macOS (converted into different colour space, etc).
"HTPC" is the dumbest idea ever. Stop dong this.
Just host Plex server on it and watch movies with Apple TV, or using TV's internal apps, and you'll get dramatically better experience (if your LAN has ok speeds).
Sincerely
Not... quite. Intel premium savings became TSMC's revenue.
Primary reason why Apple's chips are power-efficient is their size. They're BIG. Base M3 has 25 billion transistors, while top-tier Ryzen 7800X3D has just 12.
M3 Max has 92 billion transistors. That's TWO RTX 4080 Supers. These chips are huge, and that costs money.
So I don't think the margins became dramatically higher; if anything they're lower now (until you factor in an insane markup on RAM and storage). But customers get better computers, so there's that.
My dilemma is I really want a Mac Studio but not willing to pay full retail for an already two generation old M2 chip. And based on the rumors an M4 won’t be coming to the Studio until fall of 2025. So I’m planning on buying the top spec Mac Mini M4 this fall and maxing out the ram with a 1-tb ssd. Normally that would not be a wise decision if both the Mini and Studio had the same chip. But here we are.
I plan to ride out my maxxed-out 2018 Mini w/ eGPU, until there's a M*-Max Studio that's a total beast at on-device AI
It was only uninformed users on this forum that thought that Apple was somehow getting hosed by Intel on chip pricing and that Apple Silicon would somehow save them money.
R&D to develop and tape out chips is expensive. This is especially true for chips with lower volume like the Max and Ultra variants, whereas with Intel they could use off the shelf K-series and Xeon chips for their niche higher-end desktop offerings. Intel and AMD amortize these R&D costs across their entire customer base whereas Apple has to absorb these costs themselves.
Apple also insists on using TSMC's most bleeding edge manufacturing node which they pay a considerable premium for.
I would be genuinely shocked if Apple actually saves any money on its M chips versus the volume discounts they got from Intel. Apple made the switch primarily for performance/thermal reasons, to have tighter control over their product chain, and to align their i-devices and Macs on a more common hardware architecture.
I was of two minds on this issue across the Apple Mac line until Apple Silicon. BAS (if you will) you could buy entry level and increase memory and storage from good third-party vendors for a lot less than Apple charged. Now, nope. You have to buy from Apple what you need, no third-party interlopers. THAT, I do not like. And yes, I do think Apple Mini is overpriced for that reason alone.
May be the topic is the wrong question. With the mac you buy a lot of software, security and system updates and some support. May be real earnings for Apple are archived by the high upgrade pries from the base model. Are the buyers of upgraded macs support the buyers of base macs?