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.
Mac Mini 2014 Review: A Terrible Shame
- Thread starter dogslobber
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Could you please point me to the cheaper PC alternative with
- pricey ULV processor (no Atom)
- dual, heck even single, thunderbolt2
- no ugly inconvenient external power brick (like the NUC)
- included high quality OS and future free upgrades (if the upgrade pattern of the last few years is to be believed)
- included commercial office suite and "iLife" suite
- bells and whistles with iOS Continuity
Planned obsolescence lol....like the average consumer was going to upgrade the RAM anyway...get out of your nerd bubble.
For people wanting more RAM, just max it out from the get go. That's it.
Airs (and every other ultrabook on earth), considered an average joe's favorite, have had soldered RAM for 7 years now and people are getting weirded out by soldered RAM in 2014, lol. Not to mention every ARM-based device ever sold...
- pricey ULV processor (no Atom)
- dual, heck even single, thunderbolt2
- no ugly inconvenient external power brick (like the NUC)
- included high quality OS and future free upgrades (if the upgrade pattern of the last few years is to be believed)
- included commercial office suite and "iLife" suite
- bells and whistles with iOS Continuity
Planned obsolescence lol....like the average consumer was going to upgrade the RAM anyway...get out of your nerd bubble.
For people wanting more RAM, just max it out from the get go. That's it.
Airs (and every other ultrabook on earth), considered an average joe's favorite, have had soldered RAM for 7 years now and people are getting weirded out by soldered RAM in 2014, lol. Not to mention every ARM-based device ever sold...
Last edited:
There it is folks... iFanboys justifying soldered ram in a DESKTOP computer because "green" apple's throwaway airs and iphones have soldered ram. Yes that makes perfect sense. *FACEPALM*
Show me statistics about people actually upgrading their RAM during its lifetime vs replacing the whole machine, thanks.
It's not a matter of this being an issue or not. Of course it is an issue for some of us*, of course it's less than what we took for granted up until a few weeks ago. I'm talking about what big of a deal it is in the real world, since 2014mini-bashing-bandwagoners are calling it "a terrible shame". Get some perspective people.
*an issue with an easy solution: buy from the online store and max the ram out...big deal...I wish it was that easy for ipads and one could just configure 2GB on the Mini3....
ps
newsflash: there's always been a limit to maximum RAM anyway, it's not like you can install 16GB on a 2009 Mini. By your logic that's also un-green and throwaway. By my logic, the only difference now is that you have to max out that limit from the get go.
Last edited:
I don't think it's a terrible shame, I just think the Haswell Mac Minis are not for us. In fact, I was sold a 2014 base model by accident at Best Buy for $404. I returned it for an older 2012 model. I can't imagine any other time in my life that I would return a new computer for an old one, but I did.
Apple has turned the Mac Mini into a consumer appliance, like an iPhone or an iPad. I'm surprised it has screws at all or any way to get inside of it.
You hit the nail on the head..
You ppl that claim to be tech savvy are very dumb.... You knock the use of LPDDR3 which has a higher bandwidth than DDR3L and lower power usage plus other features that DDR3L can't do... Yes there are trade offs but very minor. If you would step back you would see that Apple was going to have to create a new logic board for the new processor and Intel probably advised Apple to use the LPDDR3 memory because it allows the igpu to run higher frame rates.
There are reasons why Intel has included it in there chip design that being having a higher bandwidth allows the igpu access them memory more efficiently and allows for higher frame rates... They learned from AMDs mistakes with there APUs.
Maybe this;
HP EliteDesk 800 G1 Ultra-slim PC
HP EliteDesk 800 G1 Ultra-slim PC
(G5R51UT)
Windows 7 Professional 64 (available through downgrade rights from Windows 8.1 Pro)
Intel® Core i5-4590S with Intel HD Graphics 4600 (3 GHz, 6 MB cache, 4 cores)
2 SODIMM
4 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 SDRAM (1 x 4 GB)
500 GB 7200 rpm SATA
Slim SATA DVD-ROM
Intel HD Graphics 4600
Three-year warranty, bigger than a mini, no TB but lots of USB and totally user configurable.
Or maybe this;
HP EliteDesk 800 G1 Desktop Mini PC (ENERGY STAR)
See detailed specs: US QuickSpecs » pdf
Operating system: Windows 7 Professional 64 (available through downgrade rights from Windows 8.1 Pro)
Processor: Intel® Core i7-4785T with Intel HD Graphics 4600 (2.2 GHz, 8 MB cache, 4 cores)
Chipset: Intel® Q87 Express
Form factor: Mini
Environmental: Low halogen
Memory
Standard memory: 4 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 SDRAM (1 x 4 GB)
Memory slots: 2 SODIMM
Storage
Internal drive: 500 GB SATA SSHD
Internal drive bays: One 2.5"
Graphics
Graphics: Intel HD Graphics 4600
Expansion features
Ports: 6 USB 3.0
1 VGA
2 DisplayPort
1 RJ-45
1 audio line in
1 audio line out
1 headphone
1 microphone
Slots: 2 M.2
Mac mini sized, still no TB, quad-core, lots of USB, three-year warranty
I'm not saying that the HP examples are way better than the 2012 2.6 quad mini I am writing this on but there are other good computers out there.
At work I just got an HP DeskJet 600 small form factor, way bigger than a mini, maybe more like the midi we've all been waiting for. I has an i5 3.2GHz desktop quad, 16GB RAM expandable up to 32GB, HD 4600, 8 USB port, SFF PCI slots, optical drive and room for a 3.5 and 2.5" HDD.
It's a sturdy business computer that cost us around $800.00. It's not a Mac but it is one hell of a reasonably sized desktop computer that is very fast and expandable. The i7 versions with 4GB RAM in three sizes are still under $1000.
IMO the wrong question is being asked... who cares about what windows/linux computer can be had that compares to the mini? If I'm going to run windows, I'll just build exactly what I want. Better to ask what mac can be purchased that is a suitable replacement for the quad-core mini?
I will even *double* the budget of the 2012 quad-core mini... So for $1600US, what mac do I buy if I want quad-core, either 16GB+ (or the ability to upgrade the ram), 256GB ssd, and the ability to drive a 4k monitor at the normal 60Hz?
I will even *double* the budget of the 2012 quad-core mini... So for $1600US, what mac do I buy if I want quad-core, either 16GB+ (or the ability to upgrade the ram), 256GB ssd, and the ability to drive a 4k monitor at the normal 60Hz?
Well, for $1700 you could run this MacBook Pro referb in clamshell mode:
http://store.apple.com/us/product/F...-22GHz-Quad-core-Intel-i7-with-Retina-Display
http://store.apple.com/us/product/F...-22GHz-Quad-core-Intel-i7-with-Retina-Display
What pisses me off is that my macs from the past I upgraded myself. You say just buy the 16gb of ram from the get go but apple charges a large premium that is usually a lot more than if you were to do it yourself. Also ram can go bad and if have the mac and the warranty runs up your screwed. Of course unless you want to pay an large sum of money to get something as simple as ram chips replaced! I love my macs but don't want to spend thousands of dollars on something that is not repairable within reason. Also I have a 2011 mac mini server with a quad core i7 and the new models no longer come with quad core processors. Its like they are taking away options that were once there. Shame on apple - I may resort to hackintoshing in the future.
Last edited: