Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Sure, they could drop ethernet but there are countless minis being used in small offices around the world. Those peeps aren't looking to buy some adapter thingy.

Outside of probably the Mac Pro, my hunch is ethernet is used by a higher percentage of mini users than any other Mac model, including the iMac. What would be the reason for dropping it from the mini if they didn't drop it from the new Mac Pro?

I disagree, with dropping the ethernet you do have the Thunderbolt port where you can buy that nifty apple adaptor and still have ethernet connection. I do believe it would be a fair assessment that Apple will drop ethernet from the mini if not this revision then the next.

I wouldn't expect it to be dropped on a pro machine though for consumer level then it would be a fair expectation.
 
you are talking about HD4600 graphics and my point is .....apart from new haswell processors, Wi-Fi ac ....also, graphics is going to be HD 5000 series like WBA. Otherwise, customers will be disappointed to see only HD4600 graphics in Mac mini....this is my clarification.

According to ark.intel.com, the i5-4250U used in the base model Macbook Air cost over $120 more than the base model Mini's i5-3210M.

Now, I don't know what Intel plans to release this Fall, but currently there's no other mobile CPU with HD5000 graphics that cost less.

I seriously doubt Apple is willing to pay that much for the base model Mini's CPU.

Most of i7 Haswell processors are combined with HD5000 graphics series...however, some i7 comes with HD4600 ....this is what I mean "technologically behind" than a MBA.....

Both support DirectX 11.1, OpenCL 1.2, OpenGL 4.0, 4K video, Quick Sync encoder, etc., so one is no more technologically advanced than the other.
 
I seriously doubt Apple is willing to pay that much for the base model Mini's CPU.



Both support DirectX 11.1, OpenCL 1.2, OpenGL 4.0, 4K video, Quick Sync encoder, etc., so one is no more technologically advanced than the other.

I bet, Apple will introduce 3-4 different options including HD5000, Iris HD5100 (i5) and Iris Pro HD5200 graphics (i7). Iris performs similar to GT640M, Apple won't accept lower performance for the highest i7 Haswell mini Mac. Basic i5 model may have HD5000 or HD4600 similar to GT620/630M.
 
Last edited:
For certain applications that could be handy, but typically people need more than just a single device to shut down or remain online in the event of power failure or power fluctuations.

For example, I have my mac mini, monitor, dsl modem, airport extreme, and raspberry pi attached to a UPS.

Indeed but I was not thinking for the mini to act as a multi device UPC :)

Merely so that it itself can safely shut down so there is no data loss. I imagine many people use it as a server but do not have it hooked up to a UPC.

However I've never experienced data loss on a Mac because of a power cut and as rare as they are it would be an interesting little hardware feature and bridge a need gap where you do not need a full blown PC solution.

Plus many of those devices in many power cut scenarios would be about as important as your toaster as they have no direct data overheads, though there is nothing worse when the toaster pops out you bread onto the floor so that might be regarded as a form of data loss! :eek:

Data loss is the biggest issue. We have a live data base so it's integrity is very important. Since the mac mini is low powered I thought it feasible. I don't expect it but thought it might be neat on the server model.
 
Indeed but I was not thinking for the mini to act as a multi device UPC :)

Merely so that it itself can safely shut down so there is no data loss. I imagine many people use it as a server but do not have it hooked up to a UPC.

However I've never experienced data loss on a Mac because of a power cut and as rare as they are it would be an interesting little hardware feature and bridge a need gap where you do not need a full blown PC solution.

Plus many of those devices in many power cut scenarios would be about as important as your toaster as they have no direct data overheads, though there is nothing worse when the toaster pops out you bread onto the floor so that might be regarded as a form of data loss! :eek:

Data loss is the biggest issue. We have a live data base so it's integrity is very important. Since the mac mini is low powered I thought it feasible. I don't expect it but thought it might be neat on the server model.

I do have it hooked up to a UPS however it is not necessary if you have a SSD which have built in enough power storage reserve to write the data. (a bank of large capacity capacitors)
 
Data loss is the biggest issue. We have a live data base so it's integrity is very important. Since the mac mini is low powered I thought it feasible. I don't expect it but thought it might be neat on the server model.

There are features a quality UPS system provides other than just battery backup - including RF/EMI filtration, power conditioning, boost/trim voltage regulation, etc.

Any solution built into the Mini server would need to address the full gamut of protection, cost less than a comparable stand alone system, and be a BTO option. Otherwise, the added cost is a waste of IT expenditure.

It's a nifty idea, but also one ripe with support issues.
 
I disagree, with dropping the ethernet you do have the Thunderbolt port where you can buy that nifty apple adaptor and still have ethernet connection. I do believe it would be a fair assessment that Apple will drop ethernet from the mini if not this revision then the next.

I wouldn't expect it to be dropped on a pro machine though for consumer level then it would be a fair expectation.
I hate to say it but you may be right.
Though I do think apple sells a lot of these to folks who rackmount them for use as servers. We are discussing building our next render farm out of Minis.
If they yank the ethernet I think that will put a dent in those sales.
It may be possible to hook it up via TB>ethernet, but I do not see a lot of that happening. Non-locking connector and all. Besides, it's already hard enough to get corporate approval for Mac hardware, much less in a server room.
About the video, I don't think Apple would bother to segment the mini line along vid cards. I am sure the thinking is "buy an iMac" if you need a better video card. "Buy a Mac Pro" if you need best.
The Mini is the "Good" option, gotta save room for better and best.
 
There are features a quality UPS system provides other than just battery backup - including RF/EMI filtration, power conditioning, boost/trim voltage regulation, etc.

Any solution built into the Mini server would need to address the full gamut of protection, cost less than a comparable stand alone system, and be a BTO option. Otherwise, the added cost is a waste of IT expenditure.

It's a nifty idea, but also one ripe with support issues.
Always Always Always use a UPS. And a good one at that.
 
I do have it hooked up to a UPS however it is not necessary if you have a SSD which have built in enough power storage reserve to write the data. (a bank of large capacity capacitors)

Cool I didn't know that.

----------

There are features a quality UPS system provides other than just battery backup - including RF/EMI filtration, power conditioning, boost/trim voltage regulation, etc.

Any solution built into the Mini server would need to address the full gamut of protection, cost less than a comparable stand alone system, and be a BTO option. Otherwise, the added cost is a waste of IT expenditure.

It's a nifty idea, but also one ripe with support issues.


It would only have to be a tiny battery. I doubt we'll see it. Happily take on board any recommendations for UPS that will work with MAC Mini, keeping in mind I'm in a 220V country with three pin plugs in the EU

I had a PC server before and found the APC option expensive. I run Mac PRo and it's been hit a few times with power cuts via mains or someone accidental plug pull out. Never lost any data yet. Granted Intel G2 SSD.

I guess with spinning discs it's more an issue.

Anyone have any idea what spec the new mac mini server might have?

A cheaper dual SSD option maybe! (I can dream)

Also I presume it's going to have OS X Mavericks which means I may have to get a current mac mini server offering for it to work out of the box with our software to avoid any issues or need to install SL/ or Lion.
 
Always Always Always use a UPS. And a good one at that.

That is my philosophy as well since I am running a business on the Mac mini.

However if all you need to do is to finish writing the data it has had que'd to the drive then the SSD will have enough juice left to finish writing that - hence no data integrity error. And a SSD will need to finish writing otherwise there is a high chance that the SSD will be destroyed.
 
According to ark.intel.com, the i5-4250U used in the base model Macbook Air cost over $120 more than the base model Mini's i5-3210M.

Now, I don't know what Intel plans to release this Fall, but currently there's no other mobile CPU with HD5000 graphics that cost less.

I seriously doubt Apple is willing to pay that much for the base model Mini's CPU.

If we're talking about keeping CPU costs down to keep the existing price point Apple would have to look at making the next Mac Mini a headless iMac with a form factor similar to the Mac Pro for the enhanced cooling properties.

Intel haven't announced any mobile cpu cheaper than $342 with a decent GPU which Apple seem to be keen on. That's not to say they won't but if Apple are doing away with the non-retina Macs soon I don't believe they want to be supplied with graphics less powerful than HD5000 for any Haswell Mac as I suspect they'll want every Mac sold in 2013 bar the Macbook Airs to be able to run a Retina Thunderbolt display using the Thunderbolt 2 connector.

A quick scan of the Intel website shows that their desktop products might be a candidate for the next Mac Mini. I am looking specifically at the i5-4570R, i5-4670R and the i7-4770R.

These cpus are directly soldered to the customised motherboard of an OEM and would slot in nicely for the Haswell iMac 21.5" - replacing the models already there. They wouldn't need any discrete GPU added as they would come with Iris Pro 5200 and if the Mac Mini was allowed to look like a smaller silver aluminium 'new' Mac Pro with 2 Thunderbolt ports, and perhaps one or two 2.5" hard drive mountings where the GPUs would have gone we could be onto a popular machine which might start at, say, $699 with a single 500Gb HD.

Fusion drive and PCIe SSD options together with processor upgrades would drive the price up even higher allowing the Mac Pro to start where the old one left off north of $2499.

A Mini model with upgraded 3.2GHz i7 cpu but sticking with a 500Gb HD would cost $1199 based on Apple style pricing, for example, or $1499 with 256Gb SSD or a 1Tb Fusion drive. A 21.5" iMac would cost around $500 more to come with the IPS screen, keyboard and mouse and locked in RAM and storage.

Upsides: More powerful cpus across the range. 2.7GHz true quad i5 entry model much faster than old base model. Hopefully as easy to access and upgrade RAM and storage as the new Mac Pro appears to be. Iris Pro 5200 graphics.

Downsides: Still higher entry price and potentially more noise/heat from higher TDP (65W vs 45W of the current quad Mac Mini). Form factor may have to be bigger volumewise. If they go this route Apple could cannibalise the iMac 21.5" and lose the HTPC crowd who want a quieter and smaller Mac Mini.
 
If we're talking about keeping CPU costs down to keep the existing price point Apple would have to look at making the next Mac Mini a headless iMac with a form factor similar to the Mac Pro for the enhanced cooling properties.

Intel haven't announced any mobile cpu cheaper than $342 with a decent GPU which Apple seem to be keen on. That's not to say they won't but if Apple are doing away with the non-retina Macs soon I don't believe they want to be supplied with graphics less powerful than HD5000 for any Haswell Mac as I suspect they'll want every Mac sold in 2013 bar the Macbook Airs to be able to run a Retina Thunderbolt display using the Thunderbolt 2 connector.

A quick scan of the Intel website shows that their desktop products might be a candidate for the next Mac Mini. I am looking specifically at the i5-4570R, i5-4670R and the i7-4770R.

These cpus are directly soldered to the customised motherboard of an OEM and would slot in nicely for the Haswell iMac 21.5" - replacing the models already there. They wouldn't need any discrete GPU added as they would come with Iris Pro 5200 and if the Mac Mini was allowed to look like a smaller silver aluminium 'new' Mac Pro with 2 Thunderbolt ports, and perhaps one or two 2.5" hard drive mountings where the GPUs would have gone we could be onto a popular machine which might start at, say, $699 with a single 500Gb HD.

Fusion drive and PCIe SSD options together with processor upgrades would drive the price up even higher allowing the Mac Pro to start where the old one left off north of $2499.

A Mini model with upgraded 3.2GHz i7 cpu but sticking with a 500Gb HD would cost $1199 based on Apple style pricing, for example, or $1499 with 256Gb SSD or a 1Tb Fusion drive. A 21.5" iMac would cost around $500 more to come with the IPS screen, keyboard and mouse and locked in RAM and storage.

Upsides: More powerful cpus across the range. 2.7GHz true quad i5 entry model much faster than old base model. Hopefully as easy to access and upgrade RAM and storage as the new Mac Pro appears to be. Iris Pro 5200 graphics.

Downsides: Still higher entry price and potentially more noise/heat from higher TDP (65W vs 45W of the current quad Mac Mini). Form factor may have to be bigger volumewise. If they go this route Apple could cannibalise the iMac 21.5" and lose the HTPC crowd who want a quieter and smaller Mac Mini.

your approach is very dynamic! I will be very happy to see all these things happen so soon (before Q2 2014)....
 
If we're talking about keeping CPU costs down to keep the existing price point Apple would have to look at making the next Mac Mini a headless iMac with a form factor similar to the Mac Pro for the enhanced cooling properties.

Intel haven't announced any mobile cpu cheaper than $342 with a decent GPU which Apple seem to be keen on. That's not to say they won't but if Apple are doing away with the non-retina Macs soon I don't believe they want to be supplied with graphics less powerful than HD5000 for any Haswell Mac as I suspect they'll want every Mac sold in 2013 bar the Macbook Airs to be able to run a Retina Thunderbolt display using the Thunderbolt 2 connector.

A quick scan of the Intel website shows that their desktop products might be a candidate for the next Mac Mini. I am looking specifically at the i5-4570R, i5-4670R and the i7-4770R.

These cpus are directly soldered to the customised motherboard of an OEM and would slot in nicely for the Haswell iMac 21.5" - replacing the models already there. They wouldn't need any discrete GPU added as they would come with Iris Pro 5200 and if the Mac Mini was allowed to look like a smaller silver aluminium 'new' Mac Pro with 2 Thunderbolt ports, and perhaps one or two 2.5" hard drive mountings where the GPUs would have gone we could be onto a popular machine which might start at, say, $699 with a single 500Gb HD.

Fusion drive and PCIe SSD options together with processor upgrades would drive the price up even higher allowing the Mac Pro to start where the old one left off north of $2499.

A Mini model with upgraded 3.2GHz i7 cpu but sticking with a 500Gb HD would cost $1199 based on Apple style pricing, for example, or $1499 with 256Gb SSD or a 1Tb Fusion drive. A 21.5" iMac would cost around $500 more to come with the IPS screen, keyboard and mouse and locked in RAM and storage.

Upsides: More powerful cpus across the range. 2.7GHz true quad i5 entry model much faster than old base model. Hopefully as easy to access and upgrade RAM and storage as the new Mac Pro appears to be. Iris Pro 5200 graphics.

Downsides: Still higher entry price and potentially more noise/heat from higher TDP (65W vs 45W of the current quad Mac Mini). Form factor may have to be bigger volumewise. If they go this route Apple could cannibalise the iMac 21.5" and lose the HTPC crowd who want a quieter and smaller Mac Mini.

I was thinking desktop CPU as well, but more along the lines of a i5-4570T for the base model. It's the same TDP and price as the current Mini's i5 - 35W and $200 - so no major redesign required. Yeah, it uses HD4600 but even that is a significant improvement.

IMO, with Mac sales sliding, Apple should be trying to lower the entry price not raise it. Current Iris level graphics for lower cost chips will come with Haswell's successor. There's no need for them to overreach themselves right now.
 
I was thinking desktop CPU as well, but more along the lines of a i5-4570T for the base model. It's the same TDP and price as the current Mini's i5 - 35W and $200 - so no major redesign required. Yeah, it uses HD4600 but even that is a significant improvement.

IMO, with Mac sales sliding, Apple should be trying to lower the entry price not raise it. Current Iris level graphics for lower cost chips will come with Haswell's successor. There's no need for them to overreach themselves right now.

That would be a great CPU to use, low cost too if Apple are ok with the HD 4600 graphics, but a redesign would be necessary as the resulting motherboard would have to be bigger to accommodate it. It's no bad thing if they have already decided to use a Mac Pro/Airport Express tall case style.

No other Apple product would use it unless they provide an upgrade to the Early 2013 education model which is the only Ivy Bridge i3 model on sale.

If they wanted to provide higher power options for the middle range they'd have to design the case to cope with the 65W i5-4570S (which gains 2 more cores at the same 2.9GHz but loses hyperthreading for the same $192) or i5-4570R (which drops to 2.7GHz and 4 cores with no hyperthreading but gains Iris Pro 5200 Graphics at an unspecified higher cost).

At this stage, therefore, Apple may as well opt for having 4 genuine cores rather than a lower TDP for the same money if they are going to offer a mini in a case that has to cater for a 65W TDP processor.

The iMac 21.5" models are most likely to be i5-4570R in my opinion so Apple don't have to pay for additional discrete GPUs in that range.

The argument against desktop processors may end up being product differentiation. A truly headless iMac which doesn't use discrete graphics to all intents and purposes would cannibalise the iMac 21.5" on which it is based. Moreso if you could add your own RAM and perhaps even storage options. Imagine if someone could spec up a Mini with a desktop class i7-4770R and Fusion drive and bring their own monitor?

iMacs wouldn't be worth having for non gamers and any quad core entry level Mac Pro might be in danger too from those users who consider Iris Pro 5200 powerful enough and can bring an IPS screen of their choice.

This brings us back to a low cost entry level Mac Mini which would keep the HTPC and silent computing users happy. Perhaps Intel are about to show us some cheaper Haswell mobile chips in September which Apple will duly use in the entry level Mac Mini and perhaps in a Macbook Pro 13 non retina that's hanging on for another year? I'd be happy with a a 28w i5-4288U with Iris 5100 graphics even if that meant bumping up the base price by $117.

Perhaps people wanting a cheaper computer with a budget of $599 could be led towards the refreshed iPads with a bluetooth keyboard once iWork in the Cloud is launched?
 
That would be a great CPU to use, low cost too if Apple are ok with the HD 4600 graphics, but a redesign would be necessary as the resulting motherboard would have to be bigger to accommodate it. It's no bad thing if they have already decided to use a Mac Pro/Airport Express tall case style.

No other Apple product would use it unless they provide an upgrade to the Early 2013 education model which is the only Ivy Bridge i3 model on sale.

If they wanted to provide higher power options for the middle range they'd have to design the case to cope with the 65W i5-4570S (which gains 2 more cores at the same 2.9GHz but loses hyperthreading for the same $192) or i5-4570R (which drops to 2.7GHz and 4 cores with no hyperthreading but gains Iris Pro 5200 Graphics at an unspecified higher cost).

At this stage, therefore, Apple may as well opt for having 4 genuine cores rather than a lower TDP for the same money if they are going to offer a mini in a case that has to cater for a 65W TDP processor.

The iMac 21.5" models are most likely to be i5-4570R in my opinion so Apple don't have to pay for additional discrete GPUs in that range.

The argument against desktop processors may end up being product differentiation. A truly headless iMac which doesn't use discrete graphics to all intents and purposes would cannibalise the iMac 21.5" on which it is based. Moreso if you could add your own RAM and perhaps even storage options. Imagine if someone could spec up a Mini with a desktop class i7-4770R and Fusion drive and bring their own monitor?

iMacs wouldn't be worth having for non gamers and any quad core entry level Mac Pro might be in danger too from those users who consider Iris Pro 5200 powerful enough and can bring an IPS screen of their choice.

This brings us back to a low cost entry level Mac Mini which would keep the HTPC and silent computing users happy. Perhaps Intel are about to show us some cheaper Haswell mobile chips in September which Apple will duly use in the entry level Mac Mini and perhaps in a Macbook Pro 13 non retina that's hanging on for another year? I'd be happy with a a 28w i5-4288U with Iris 5100 graphics even if that meant bumping up the base price by $117.

Perhaps people wanting a cheaper computer with a budget of $599 could be led towards the refreshed iPads with a bluetooth keyboard once iWork in the Cloud is launched?
Especially since the new mac pro can't rely on having massive amounts of ram slots, or internal expansion to differentiate itself. So Apple can't make a too formidable mini (or imac) without cannibalizing the Pro's sales.
 
Wholeheartedly agree but realize that goes against Apple's philosophy of items having built in obsolesce and being not maintainable by the user.

As I mentioned before - Guy Kawasaki's video showed the 12 things he learned from SJ and one item was never to compete on price. To manufacture the iPhone "cheaper" and with a plastic back and the TimeMachine and Apple TV going to plastic outer means that Apple's philosophy has subtly changed away from Steve Jobs.

I really hope that this trend does not carry on into other products because that would mean not much good for the future of the company. If it does carry on then that will mean more run-of-the-mill parts being used which is good for those who thinker with their equipment. Unfortunately in the latter case overall quality and uniqueness will suffer.

I am fearing that the money grabbers and accountants will only look at the "bottom line" and have not much long term vision in which case the previous paragraph will eventually come to fruition.

Agree with what you are saying but I dont get it why iMac which is a desktop machine and should be user upgradeable atleast for RAM and SSD is now locked in by Apple in search of "thin" and more money. I'm not planning on fitting iMac in my jacket wallet so why worry about making it thin instead of making it more practical machine. I was waiting for new iMac but after seeing what they did with it, I went with Mini and if they do same again I may just switch to PC, atleast I've choice in terms of performance in PC world. I dont care too much about SJ as under his leadership it was always my way or high-way kind of attitude, remember the antenna gate where he called conference to tell people that they are not holding their phone right way.
 
I find it funny that people are posting Intel suggesting pricing when they are trying to figure out what processor is being used.

Apple is the largest consumer processor purchaser in the world, they aren't paying retail. Furthermore, the cost difference for Intel between chips is only several dollars.
 
I hate to say it but you may be right.
Though I do think apple sells a lot of these to folks who rackmount them for use as servers. We are discussing building our next render farm out of Minis.
If they yank the ethernet I think that will put a dent in those sales.
It may be possible to hook it up via TB>ethernet, but I do not see a lot of that happening. Non-locking connector and all. Besides, it's already hard enough to get corporate approval for Mac hardware, much less in a server room.
About the video, I don't think Apple would bother to segment the mini line along vid cards. I am sure the thinking is "buy an iMac" if you need a better video card. "Buy a Mac Pro" if you need best.
The Mini is the "Good" option, gotta save room for better and best.

I would agree, the Mini is a great little machine. We use them for rendering and as file services, though I would hate to see them loose the ethernet it would be problematic for those pro users who like using the mac mini and use them on a hardwired network.

Unfortunately when you look at Apple's reputation and the current Macbook Air opposed to Pro lines of products the ethernet has been dropped though there are still adaptors...
 
In my opinion, Haswell i7 (boost to 3.xxGHz) higher BTO Mac Mini model should have Iris Pro 5200 graphics, 8GB RAM, Wi-Fi AC and PCIe flash storage 256GB SSD.

Ethernet, firewire ports maybe yes, maybe not...There won't have TB2 or USB3.1 ports, if upgrade happens in 2013.

A basic Haswell i5 (with HD4600 or 5000 graphics) model should be as cheap as possible...
 
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7021/introducing-the-dualcore-haswell-skus

The Mac mini could use one of the dual core M suffix processors.

That's probably one of the things apple is waiting for to release the new line of macs. This will most likely go in the new base mini and the 13 macbook pro if it's not discontinued.

In my opinion, Haswell i7 (boost to 3.xxGHz) higher BTO Mac Mini model should have Iris Pro 5200 graphics, 8GB RAM, Wi-Fi AC and PCIe flash storage 256GB SSD.
That would be nice but probably quite expensive. But i would pay 999$ for that, if it has a harddrive slot as well.
 
What comes after haswell ?
I can't go crazy and update just to have latest & greatest , the 2012 mini is working just fine

Unless the mini gets the Mac Pro makeover hmmm
 
I find it funny that people are posting Intel suggesting pricing when they are trying to figure out what processor is being used.

Apple is the largest consumer processor purchaser in the world, they aren't paying retail. Furthermore, the cost difference for Intel between chips is only several dollars.

No, they aren't going to pay retail, but since they aren't competing with clone manufacturers they don't have to pass on all their savings either. We only have the Intel price guide to go on as a comparison between CPUs and the fact that the Mac Mini is Apple's least profitable Mac on a unit basis (they don't ask for the same margin as for an iMac for example) will encourage Apple to price it more aggressively than they would an iMac or Retina Macbook Pro.

If an Ivy Bridge i5 dual core base model chip cost $225 and a potential replacement cost $342 but came with Iris 5100 graphics you can assume it's going to be proportionally more but none of us could say categorically how much more.

The only other deal you could assume on Intel's part is some sort of exclusivity but we haven't seen that for a number of years (original Mac Pro Xeon) and it would have to be on an Iris Pro 5200 overclocked part which I think will be destined for top end Retina Macbook Pros.

I'm still assuming that Apple won't want to make the Mini so good that it would cannibalise the iMacs or the Mac Pros. How they do that will be up to them but not supplying it with Iris Pro 5200 graphics is one way of doing it. Getting rid of quad core processors in favour of a smaller enclosure would be another...
 
If Apple pays 60% of retail for processors, I would be amazed. Price will end up being almost a secondary concern after performance and thermal threshold.

Furthermore, Apple has shown already with their laptops, desktops, and mobile devices that they aren't too worried about cross cannibalism across their product lines.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.