Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Mac Mini to use Intel Core M?

I think one of the reasons Apple continues to sell the Mini, despite the fact it's clearly not very popular, is that it allows them to upsell. They can honestly tell people that it is possible to get a new Mac for $500. Then, once in the store, it's possible to upsell on an SSD and RAM upgrade, or show them the gorgeous and more powerful iMac, or the affordable and portable Macbook Air, etc. Without the Mac Mini, the least expensive Mac is the 11" MBA at $900. There is a lot of distance between $500 and $900, especially psychological wallet-parting distance.

For this reason, I think Apple's main concern with choosing Mac Mini components is price. They will put the least expensive CPU into the base model that will run OS X reasonably well, to keep the price at $500 or less. Right now, it seems like Core M actually costs a premium over other more powerful chips with a slightly larger power consumption. Thus, it probably won't be in the Mac Mini.

Since Apple gets a better deal with volume, whatever CPU they order the most of will likely go into the next Mac Mini, since it will probably be the cheapest. This makes sense, since the 2014 base model has the i5-4260U, which is the same CPU has the very well selling 2014 MBA base model. I'd wager Apple ordered more of that CPU in 2014 than any other Intel CPU. Prior to that, the Mac Mini typically inherited components from the 13" MBP, when that was the top-selling Mac. Since I think the MBA will continue to be a very good seller, unless the price of the rMB drops significantly, the next base model Mac Mini will have the same CPU as the MBA.
 
deconstruct60 said:
Alot of folks want the Mini to be a headless iMac. It never was and is even less so now as the iMacs went on a more desktop class component track.
Click to expand...
I don't think the Mini should be a headless iMac, but I think the product line needs a headless Mac with an iMac's specs. Many of us have been clamoring for a "midrange" headless Mac for close to a decade now -- there is a huge gap in the product line in performance, expandability and upgradeability between the Mini and the Mac Pro -- and Apple continues to extend the middle finger. Many iMacs are in this midrange, but they aren't really upgradeable at all, and they force you to buy a display you may not want or need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: G4er?
Acorn said:
well WWDC is almost over. looks like no new mac mini after all :((( I know people want more powerful but I would totally buy a core m mac mini that was the size of a credit card.
Click to expand...

I doubt it will get down to the size of a credit card. iPhone size potentially if it has an external power supply, although I would rather have an internal and be a bit bigger.

I can see a market for a pocketable Mac, but would that leave a market for a Mac Mini? Maybe if it went more powerful, which I hope happens, but is doubtful.
 
I'm just hoping there's a redesign this year, as previously they were first released in 2005 and redesigned in 2010, so fingers crossed for every 5 years!
 
I didn't think at all there would be a new Mac mini at WWDC. All I cared about was what OS X 10.11 would be called and I thought El Capitan was a bit odd, I'll get used to it. Also I liked the diverse amount of people as part of the keynote.
 
Acorn said:
well WWDC is almost over. looks like no new mac mini after all :((( I know people want more powerful but I would totally buy a core m mac mini that was the size of a credit card.
Click to expand...

I think it unlikely Apple would choose to release a new generation of CPUs (Skylake in this case) in the Mac Mini first of all. Some of the other Mac models will get Skylake first, then the Mac Mini. After that a new scaled down Mac Mini with Intel Core M might appear.
 
Low end to me is Iris 6100 right now. I'm not paying a premium for Core M and HD 5300.
 
I think the next mini will get the same CPU as the current air with the base model being the 1.6GHz. I don't see them using the core M. I mean its possible but more than likely it will get Broadwell
 
Axeros said:
What is the likelihood that Apple will switch to using the Intel Core M instead of i5/i7 processors in the next Mac Mini? It might not be what some of us want, but the lower range Mac Minis have traditionally used components from the lower range laptops.

The lowest power Apple laptop is now the rMB. By using the same Intel Core M processors from the rMB, Apple could slim down the Mini's form factor, which they certainly have done with other models, and clearly differentiate the Mini from the iMac series in terms of computing power. (A step downwards for Mac Mini processing power).

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
I could never imagine this. Already, the current Intel Processors in them are great, they don't need to be more power efficient. Its just would be simply illogical for Apple to put Core M into the Mini's in the future, it just simply is backwards if doing so.
 
The trend is to much smaller fanless computing units. According to this leaked Intel roadmap for its Compute Stick, we should see compute sticks with Intel Core M in Q4 this year. These Compute sticks are small enough to put in your pocket. The present Mac Mini is going to appear rather oversized if Apple don't follow the trend. And if Apple have a track record in anything, it's in miniaturization:-

compute-stick-roadmap-680x383.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: mayuka
Axeros said:
The trend is to much smaller fanless computing units. According to this leaked Intel roadmap for its Compute Stick, we should see compute sticks with Intel Core M in Q4 this year. These Compute sticks are small enough to put in your pocket. The present Mac Mini is going to appear rather oversized if Apple don't follow the trend. And if Apple have a track record in anything, it's in miniaturization:-

compute-stick-roadmap-680x383.jpg
Click to expand...

This is pretty much what I have been saying. I think there is a good chance we will see a very small fanless Mac. The question is: Will this machine be a replacement for the Mini? Or sit alongside it in the range?

Originally the Mini was designed to lower the entry point to Macs, but this would fulfil that need. Hopefully the Mini would continue in the gap above this new device (Mac Nano?), and get more powerful to distance itself from it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: g33k
I think apple have recognized many people use Macmini as htpc. I think they asked them self why apple TV was not good enough and will try to make a new Apple TV that is good enough. Then they will build an entry level os x capable machine for schools, students and those who don't want or can spend a lot of cash on a machine. Then the server type/ advanced users demanding performece. Perhaps they realize the Mac pro is a fiasko and make a line up named mac and Mac pro with same chassis with entry level same performance as macbook pro and top tier as Mac pro.
 
Moonjumper said:
This is pretty much what I have been saying. I think there is a good chance we will see a very small fanless Mac. The question is: Will this machine be a replacement for the Mini? Or sit alongside it in the range?

Originally the Mini was designed to lower the entry point to Macs, but this would fulfil that need. Hopefully the Mini would continue in the gap above this new device (Mac Nano?), and get more powerful to distance itself from it.
Click to expand...

There's certainly going to be demand for a Mac Nano. Intel's marketing for the Compute Stick is definitely aimed at at capturing a large market,

Take it out of the box. Plug it in to your television. You just turned your TV into a powerful computer with ample speed and storage. The Intel Compute Stick takes up so little space and costs so few dollars.

see here:-

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/compute-stick/intel-compute-stick.html

A fanless Mac Nano or redseigned Mac Mini could bring the Mac to a huge market of traditional PC users. This is presumably what Apple hoped with the Mac Mini originally, but perhaps a low-priced Mac Nano would succeed where the Mac Mini failed somewhat. It's been rather neglected by Apple in recent years - so it's not inconceivable that the Mini would quietly transform into a totally non upgradeable pocket-sized Mac Nano.
 
I think these nano / stick computers aren't fit for Apple. They're aimed at being dumb terminals primarily, I think. Launch a low-power OS and stream a VM over network, or launch a browser application. However, I don't really see them being a computer running OS X with all the capabilities that OS X offers today. I know they have demonstrated them running Windows 10 and all, but an engineering demo often doesn't reflect how people will actually use the products.

I also don't see how they fit into Apple's business of selling full-featured hardware. These micro-comptuers are not high-margin devices like what Apple sells. Apple makes money from selling expensive hardware - and they sell it by coupling it with great software. While iTunes and apps and whatever certainly make Apple some money, it's mainly just a feature designed to sell more hardware; where the majority of the revenue is. (iphone ipad ipod and mac hardware sales make up 86% of Apple's revenue in 2014; itunes store made up only 11%).

I suspect this is why Apple has been struggling with the AppleTV. It also doesn't really fit into Apple's usual business model. It's a low margin, low cost, low capability device. Thus, it's really on an island of it's own in Apple's wheelhouse.
 
Besides the missing ports, the retina Macbook is a full-featured hardware computer. Imagine the next Nano without the notebook stuff and there you have it. The PC world is transforming and turning more and more to Cloud services. It seems reasonable that even simple tasks such as rendering a video is being outsourced into the cloud.

Personally, I don't like this whole cloud thing because I want to maintain control over my own work. Luckily there are still Apple products you can use offline. However, I do like smaller products that still have the same or at least very similar functionality than before.
 
mayuka said:
Besides the missing ports, the retina Macbook is a full-featured hardware computer. Imagine the next Nano without the notebook stuff and there you have it. The PC world is transforming and turning more and more to Cloud services. It seems reasonable that even simple tasks such as rendering a video is being outsourced into the cloud.
Click to expand...

But it's not the Core-M that makes it a full-features hardware computer; it's the retina screen, full-size keyboard, big trackpad, lots of RAM and a large SSD, and battery. If you just took a Core-M and wrapped it into HDMI stick / MacNano with minimal RAM and microSD card storage (as Intel's engineering demo shows), it's no longer the full-featured hardware computer that the rMB is. Also, while the rMB is sellable (obviously) for upwards of $1300 and thus has a high margin for Apple, the HDMI stick / MacNano probably wouldn't sell for more than $300, and even that is a stretch IMO. Thus, the margins wouldn't be nearly as appealing.

As I said above, I don't think it's Apple's goal to grow the sub-$1000 desktop segment. I think their goal is to sell more iMacs and Macbooks. The MacMini is just to get people into the door, and thus it will continue to use whatever CPU Apple orders the most of. The MacMini will get the Core-M CPU when the rMB sales overtake the MBA and MBP sales.
 
oneMadRssn said:
But it's not the Core-M that makes it a full-features hardware computer; it's the retina screen, full-size keyboard, big trackpad, lots of RAM and a large SSD, and battery. If you just took a Core-M and wrapped it into HDMI stick / MacNano with minimal RAM and microSD card storage (as Intel's engineering demo shows), it's no longer the full-featured hardware computer that the rMB is. Also, while the rMB is sellable (obviously) for upwards of $1300 and thus has a high margin for Apple, the HDMI stick / MacNano probably wouldn't sell for more than $300, and even that is a stretch IMO. Thus, the margins wouldn't be nearly as appealing.

As I said above, I don't think it's Apple's goal to grow the sub-$1000 desktop segment. I think their goal is to sell more iMacs and Macbooks. The MacMini is just to get people into the door, and thus it will continue to use whatever CPU Apple orders the most of. The MacMini will get the Core-M CPU when the rMB sales overtake the MBA and MBP sales.
Click to expand...

The Mac Mini doesn't have a full-size keyboard, big trackpad, lots of RAM, a large SSD or battery.

An Apple miniature fanless computer doesn't have to have the shortcomings the HDMI sticks do, just as Apple's attempt at a tablet didn't have the problems previous Windows tablets did. I wouldn't expect a Mac Nano to be as successful as the iPad, but the iPad does show that Apple can make a really good device where others have failed.
 
Moonjumper said:
The Mac Mini doesn't have a full-size keyboard, big trackpad, lots of RAM, a large SSD or battery.

An Apple miniature fanless computer doesn't have to have the shortcomings the HDMI sticks do, just as Apple's attempt at a tablet didn't have the problems previous Windows tablets did. I wouldn't expect a Mac Nano to be as successful as the iPad, but the iPad does show that Apple can make a really good device where others have failed.
Click to expand...

It does have enough RAM, and it does have a big hard drive. It's also easily compatible with any cheap USB keyboard and mouse.

I don't doubt that Apple could make a perfectly good stick computer. The question I pose is why would it? Why would they bother with an OS X device like that?

In a way they already make a fanless computer: AppleTV., which runs iOS on some last-gen A-series ARM compatible SoC. The only remaining thing is a proper app store, and pretty much all rumors predict that will happen this year.

But an OS X fanless mini computer? Why? What would be the point and who would pay the high price for it? Enterprise? Apple seems to have no interest in bringing OS X to enterprise - all their enterprise efforts have been with iOS lately, amd iPad in particular. Power users certainly wouldn't want it. Casual home users? Why would they pay a premium over an ARM iOS device?

Such a device also wouldn't help sell more Macs - the most important purpose the current mini serves IMO.

So, why bother? Other than the Watch ( :p ), I don't think Apple makes devices only for the sake of making them; they design solutions rather. A stick computer is a solution in search of a problem.
 
I think the future of the Mac mini will be to downsize it significantly. No fan, fixed memory, all SSD, USB-C for power/video/expansion and an Intel Core-M processor. Of course they will offer upgrades at the time of ordering for 8MB RAM, larger SSD, etc. They can do that now. Heck, take the mainboard from the new MacBook and wrap it in an aluminum case the size of a current gen AppleTV. As many have mentioned, the question is not if they can build it but when can they get the cost down to be able to sell the basic version at $499! Until they can, the current Mac mini will stay as it is with only minor tweaks. Probably a late 2016 timing as I really do not think Apple feels any pressure to address any earlier.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back