Did the same here. I was hoping for an upgrade just because, but I don't need one. I feel even better about this purchase than I did back in March when I made it.
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.
New Mac Minis, No Quad Core, No Server
- Thread starter RayK
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Did the same here. I was hoping for an upgrade just because, but I don't need one. I feel even better about this purchase than I did back in March when I made it.
More or less, i agree. A great deal of thought goes into the marketing of specific machines geared towards particular types of users. Apple made their choices expecting that most would be true to the Apple ecosystem and compromise by buying something more than they need.
Of course, part of the charm of the old Mini is that we can dig in there and customize it ourselves in order to customize it to our specific needs. It feeds the DIY part in all of us tinkerers. AND it saves us some $$ by not having to go thru the Apple Store and pay their high prices for customization.
Having said that, i can see why Apple took away the customization, they want you to pay them to do it. I disagree with this, but i understand that decision from a business perspective.
But, i think what the initial reaction of this forum points out is still true - there is a gap in the new Apple product offerings. Many of us want a quad-core machine for multitasking (i want one to be the center of a music studio that i can take on the road) and perhaps enhanced graphics capability BUT we want it to be headless (we either don't want to overpay for an Apple monitor, we have our own, or we just don't need one [for music performance, for example]).
Basically, we want an iMac-level or low-end MacPro powered machine without having to buy the monitor. We don't either want or need the 5K display. We want processing power and multitasking ability. In return, i think many of us (myself included) would be ok with the lack of user customization options, and would be willing to bite the bullet and pay Apple to do our customization for us. But, give us the computer (and the upgrade options) that we NEED/WANT!
Apple has left a gap here. I think one day they will fill it, but how far out in the future is "that day"? Undoubtedly in the meantime, some will work compromise with the new lower-priced Mini. Others will bite the bullet and go with the new iMac or maybe even a MacPro. However, others will leave the Apple ecosystem altogether, because the computer that they want is not a computer that Apple makes (anymore). And it's kind of a shame because they DID, and decided to STOP.
For myself, i recently bought/customized the upgraded 4-core Mini, but wanted a second one that i could take on the road. I'm kind of 'stuck' now, and i'll probably find a refurb Mini to do the job, since i've invested in the Apple ecosystem, Logic, etc.....
cheers!
Sounds like you need a MBP. True, it's more costly, but just as equally powerful as the mini with better portability. It could be more costly to use a Mac Mini to travel with. You will have to carry a monitor, keyboard, mouse, and have a power source immediately available. People are not going to leave Apple solely over the Mac Mini. If that's your reason then you probably don't have much tied up in the ecosystem anyway. Quite truthfully the iPad is taking over many task that was once owned by the laptop and desktop.
I remember when Apple did a speed bump on the Mac Pro Classic while waiting for Intel to update Xeon CPUs for the nMP. The new Minis are neither here nor there which is unlike Apple. Either they redesign or discontinue. I think these new Minis are just a stop gap for a completely new design "nMM" around Broadwell CPUs.
What I'm really curious about is actual sales of units that go out. It might make perfect sense to Apple to make a baseline Mini an easy $499 investment and then expect someone that wants more power to simply buy an iMac or Pro.
Since when has Apple ever been interested in making sure the low cost option gave the user everything they wanted? This kind of seems more in line with Apple's overall strategy than releasing a great update for the Mini that would dig into other sales.
For 90% of the needs of a Mini user, the base model will work just fine. Which, if they sold mostly dual-core models in the past, makes sense business-wise.
I kinda gave up on the Mini after last year's disappointment and built my own. Without hanging on the hope that they're going to give the fringe mini community exactly what they want, this makes a lot more sense.
Since when has Apple ever been interested in making sure the low cost option gave the user everything they wanted? This kind of seems more in line with Apple's overall strategy than releasing a great update for the Mini that would dig into other sales.
For 90% of the needs of a Mini user, the base model will work just fine. Which, if they sold mostly dual-core models in the past, makes sense business-wise.
I kinda gave up on the Mini after last year's disappointment and built my own. Without hanging on the hope that they're going to give the fringe mini community exactly what they want, this makes a lot more sense.
Until Apple finds a way to prevent hackintoshing. Is there some reason that would prevent them from signing OS X as they do iOS?
I love my Mini (favorite computer I've owned since my SE/30) and was hoping for a nice upgrade to buy about a year or so from now... And will keep hoping, I guess.
A really provocative comment on another website (9to5) from when the mid-2014 Mini leaked back in July has stuck with me. The author expressed his belief that Apple views Mini users with disdain, basically writing Mini fans off as low-end and hardly worth the effort, in terms of profit margin, vs those willing to throw down money on much more expensive and profitable equipment. Maybe there's something to that, I don't know. Maybe Apple regretted the Mini being so extensively and affordably customizable that a fully tricked-out Mini rivaled more expensive Apple systems, and took steps to rectify their "error."
The argument about no quad-core Haswell with Iris being available is reasonable. But to me what's egregious is the soldered-on RAM. This strikes me as a simply punitive profit-generating move ($200 for an extra 8GB is a little excessive). I bumped my mid-2011 Mini to 16 GB when I saw the 8GB that was in it being fully used when running Windows in a VM.
Maybe the PCI-based flash storage is so fast that it can have a big swap not ridiculously slower than RAM. It will be really interesting to see benchmarks of the memory (would benchmarks show the effects of using VRAM via a swap or pagefile, so we could compare 16GB of real RAM vs 8GB real and 8GB virtual?) and Iris graphics vs the dGPUs in the 2011 and 2012 Minis.
That's what Apple wanted to hear from you. Their strategy with the Mac Mini works beautifully. They're assuming they're going to sell few Macs, yet they want to have margins. It's all about margins. An "all in one" has more margins, and not only at purchase, but at service and repair as well.
I do not believe that Apple "disdains" anyone. It is business. If they are smart, they know that they will GAIN customers by having an entry level computer. Then, they know a certain percentage of them will upgrade and make MULTIPLE purchases at some point because they really like the OSX, and the "Apple Way".
Some won't. They will be mini customers forever. But those will tell friends about the mini, etc.
And with the "upgrades" to the mini, Ram, SSD, etc., I AM SURE THAT THERE IS ENOUGH PROFIT TO MAKE APPLE VERY VERY HAPPY.
But if you think Apple "looks down" on any of their customers ever, you are sadly mistaken. IT IS JUST BUSINESS.
Some won't. They will be mini customers forever. But those will tell friends about the mini, etc.
And with the "upgrades" to the mini, Ram, SSD, etc., I AM SURE THAT THERE IS ENOUGH PROFIT TO MAKE APPLE VERY VERY HAPPY.
But if you think Apple "looks down" on any of their customers ever, you are sadly mistaken. IT IS JUST BUSINESS.
Exactly
Its true that the new processor is obviously not as capable as the previous generation quad cores. Benchmarks can easily tell us that. Hopefully, HD5000 and IRIS graphics provide some boost to the lackluster HD 4000 IGU experience.
From a business standpoint and from Apples product lineup standpoint, I think the move makes sense.
The move to dual core was likely cost saving so that they can maximize profits on this lineup where they likely don't make much. This also helps distinguish the product line up. Apple wants you to purchase there $1000+ laptop or desktop computers if you need more processing or graphics power than what the mac mini offers. Apple also makes nothing from consumers using there own keyboard, mouse and monitor. In addition, they don't have control over the experience the user gets. Something that apple excels at and has made a priority for years.
In addition, 99% of users of the mac mini likely don't need more processing power than whats offered. Sure, I have a 2.6 i7 quad core, but 99% of the time, I'm not using a third of it. This computer is targeted at entry level users looking to get into the mac environment for far cheaper than there other computers cost, not for power users. Like many of you, I installed an SSD, 16gb of RAM and bought the top processor. Thats because I wanted a high performance machine that would keep me satisfied a few years. But users like me are the 1%, not the target audience. In addition, apple didn't make any money off me after the initial purchase of my device because nothing I've used from Ram to keyboards came from Apple.
The same goes for the soldered RAM and potentially difficult to upgrade HD/SSD. These are parts that are likely cheaper to manufacture this was and Apple makes out better when you pay premiums to upgrade that equipment at the time of purchase.
From Apples business and planning side, they're all the right moves. For consumers looking to get a value PC and turn it into a workhorse, it sucks. But those looking to make a workhorse out of a $600 Mac mini are not the target user. Apple would much rather those folks fork up $1500 for a macbook pro or iMac.
You're performance enthusiasts for a budget/value/economic/entry level product. Being upset about this is like being upset that the Dodge Dart you bought doesn't come with a V8 supercharged option.
It sucks, but it is what it is for this product
What a bunch of crap on so many levels. The 3 GHz dual core i5/5100 is most likely more expensive than the 2.5 GHz quad core i7/5200. There is no defending Apple here; please stop trying.
But they won't, so it's likely Apple won't see a dime from most of those folks after the remaining 2012 units are no longer available. And they'll stop promoting and recommending Minis to their friends and family.
It's bad business in my opinion.
I've been around since the beginning of Apple and have followed them through to the present, and this stinks of '90s Apple when they put out crippled low-end products based on protecting their higher-end products.
This new Mac Mini isn't even in the realm of putting out the best product they can at a lower price point. They've deliberately screwed it over to keep buyers who might otherwise buy a more expensive Mac from buying the Mac Mini.
That they don't include SSD drives as an option with the base model, and 256GB-only at an incredibly inflated price at the upper end, and no quad core option at all proves that.
This type of business "strategy" of trying to avoid cannibalization and putting short-term profits and margins ahead of products that users actually want, always leads to bad things in the end. It certainly did in the '90s.
He's probably looking at the base model. There's only a fusion option, which isn't an SSD option. Some people don't want any spinning HD parts whatsoever.
They used the same components as the 13‑inch Retina MacBook Pro. They should have used the components from the 15‑inch Retina MacBook Pro and everyone would have been happy. Moves like these and offering 16GB storage for iPhones and iPads makes me start to hate Apple. Just give your customers what they want... bastards...
It is signed. The difference between iOS and OS X is that the former runs on a proprietary hardware platform and the latter uses more or less off the shelf components.
I don't think that's the point. The point is we don't want a display. In fact I'd be happy to pay $1900 for a Mac Mini, but not for an iMac, because I don't want an all-in-one. The Mac Pro is out of question because $3000 is too much for me.
I'm not alone here. There's a substantial market segment willing to pay the iMac price if it didn't have a builtin display. That's the point, it's not about having a workhorse for $600, but having it for <$2000 without having to get an all-in-one.
Thats not true at all. Youre looking at this from the viewpoint of a consumer, not as the cooperation.
Apple cares about the user experience - and because Apple produces both the hardware and software, they can control that experience very closely. For iMacs and their laptops, apple can feel confident that if you spend $xxxx, you will have a good experience with both the hardware and software.
Thats something Microsoft cant do because they dont build computers. The mac mini, is the only computer that Apple sells (excluding the pro) where they do not have control over the experience. That means that a person could use a low quality monitor, mouse and keyboard and have a less-than apple intended experience. Thats not what Apple wants, they want to maintain the reputation that if you invest in an apple product, you will be satisfied.
Apple had to make that move with the mac mini. They gave up some control of the experience to create a computer in the sub $900 price range to attract new customers who couldnt afford there premium products.
Dont fool yourself. Apple does not make the mac mini for people who dont want to use apple monitors. The mac mini is not the mac pro mini. Apple doesnt care if you can modify it. They sell you a product, if youre unhappy with it they would be glad to offer you the chance to purchase one of there much more expensive premium products.
I understand that people want a sub $2000 computer with above average performance. Unfortunately, thats not currently in the line up. I agree, Id like a mac pro in the 1200-1800 dollar range. Unfortunately, thats not what we have.
Desktops are also going by the way side. Professional media users need a desktop, thats what the mac pro is for. The majority of the rest can have a laptop that connects to a desktop environment. The professional world today is laptops that dock. A permanent desktop was required because mobile processors and hard disk space were lacking, not anymore.
Apple cares about the user experience - and because Apple produces both the hardware and software, they can control that experience very closely. For iMacs and their laptops, apple can feel confident that if you spend $xxxx, you will have a good experience with both the hardware and software.
Thats something Microsoft cant do because they dont build computers. The mac mini, is the only computer that Apple sells (excluding the pro) where they do not have control over the experience. That means that a person could use a low quality monitor, mouse and keyboard and have a less-than apple intended experience. Thats not what Apple wants, they want to maintain the reputation that if you invest in an apple product, you will be satisfied.
Apple had to make that move with the mac mini. They gave up some control of the experience to create a computer in the sub $900 price range to attract new customers who couldnt afford there premium products.
Dont fool yourself. Apple does not make the mac mini for people who dont want to use apple monitors. The mac mini is not the mac pro mini. Apple doesnt care if you can modify it. They sell you a product, if youre unhappy with it they would be glad to offer you the chance to purchase one of there much more expensive premium products.
I understand that people want a sub $2000 computer with above average performance. Unfortunately, thats not currently in the line up. I agree, Id like a mac pro in the 1200-1800 dollar range. Unfortunately, thats not what we have.
Desktops are also going by the way side. Professional media users need a desktop, thats what the mac pro is for. The majority of the rest can have a laptop that connects to a desktop environment. The professional world today is laptops that dock. A permanent desktop was required because mobile processors and hard disk space were lacking, not anymore.
Wrong. People want a sub $2000 Mac with performance similar to a $1200 PC. It's not about getting a Mac cheaper than a PC. People are willing to pay substantially more than the PC price, for the stability, comfort, and ease of use of a Mac.
The problem with the Mac is this: There's no Mac below $3000. If you don't want to pay $3000, you've two options: low-end dual core, or all-in-one with laptop components and difficult repair/upgrades.
So, you want a Mac. Well, fine, provided you have more than $3000 to spend. There's no Mac below that price.
And don't talk about Macbooks, please, nor about pros using laptops. Laptops aren't good computers: they soon show thermal issues when stressed to 100% CPU+GPU work for hours.
Apple is neglecting the "prosumer" market: users willing to pay $2000 for a real Mac. There's no product for us right now.
----------
No, no, no, you didn't understand: We want an Apple keyboard. We want an Apple Magic Trackpad. We Want an Apple Display. And we want a Mac. But we don't want an iMac. And we don't want to pay >$3000 for it. Apple can easily produce what we want and sell it for $2000 while still having a >$500 margin per unit.
If Apple actually released what most of us want, the sales for the rest of their range would slump. I have an imac because thats the only Mac i could buy that has decent specs, even then the GPU is a mobile chip. What we all want is a "Mac Mini Pro" that has a larger chassis and has user upgradable Ram, HDD and GPU and uses desktop chips. I would be happy to pay 2K for something like this.
They should adjust their product range based on what we want. Instead they're trying to manipulate our buying behaviors by pulling these cheap moves here and there, like the 16 GB versions for the iPhone and iPad and now removing the quad-core option from the Mac mini. They should be ashamed. They're taking their reality distortion field past its limits. This is the first time since the early 90s that I feel that way about Apple. It's depressing.
They need a slap in the face to wake up from their greedy trip. Maybe if someone from the audience would boo them down on the next big Apple event they might get their act back together. We should organize a crowdfund to be awarded to the person that will go up on stage on the next Appel event and protest. Boom!
Even if we don't reach the funding target, it would gain enough media attention to shake them up a little and restore the balance between us and them.
It is because of us devoted fans that Apple is successful. Let's remind them of that.
They need a slap in the face to wake up from their greedy trip. Maybe if someone from the audience would boo them down on the next big Apple event they might get their act back together. We should organize a crowdfund to be awarded to the person that will go up on stage on the next Appel event and protest. Boom!
Even if we don't reach the funding target, it would gain enough media attention to shake them up a little and restore the balance between us and them.
It is because of us devoted fans that Apple is successful. Let's remind them of that.
Last edited:
I think one thing we need to remember/put into perspective is that we are the ones who created the appeal for the mini as a hobbyist machine. In its inception, I don't think it was ever meant to be a covert little dynamo capable of so much; rather, it was an entry level into the mac world or media server.
We feel let down by Apple's decisions regarding this update since many of those hobbyist characteristics have been intentionally squandered. However, I have happily ordered the new mid-tier mini upped to i7 3.0 with no regrets. Once an ssd is slapped in, I believe the machine will be capable for some time.
We feel let down by Apple's decisions regarding this update since many of those hobbyist characteristics have been intentionally squandered. However, I have happily ordered the new mid-tier mini upped to i7 3.0 with no regrets. Once an ssd is slapped in, I believe the machine will be capable for some time.