Now or Never Mac Mini

[Neodym]

Well, but you have to admit Apple has not designed the device to be modified in any manner by non-authorized personnel. Everything is locked away beneath Torx security screws. And unlike the 2012 model, even the bottom plate is not designed for easy removal.

The required TR6 Torx security screwdriver is available from iFixit and even Amazon. And the mini always required some special tools, like e.g. the motherboard removal tool.

The bottom plate needs a few screws removed now, because there is nothing in there anymore that the average user could maintain (like changing/upgrading Ram on earlier models). But every slightly dedicated upgrader has no problem to get into the machine. Persons who fail on this hurdle shouldn't even think of dealing with the fragile innards of the mini and better upgrade externally.

If you argue that the mini is not explicitly designed to be modified by non-authorized personnel, I'm not counter-arguing. However, that evaluation would then be valid for all other minis prior to 2014 as well, with the pre-2010 models being worst to get inside and the 2010 (first aluminum unibody) model giving some hassle due to integrated hard drive sensors impacting the cooler fan (iirc).

 

[MarkJames68]

Well, but you have to admit Apple has not designed the device to be modified in any manner by non-authorized personnel. Everything is locked away beneath Torx security screws. And unlike the 2012 model, even the bottom plate is not designed for easy removal.

It is definitely more involved. As I said in another thread, the fact that you have a bare aluminum shell by the time you get to the HDD means that Apple really doesn’t want you messing with it. But at least it is accessible.

 

[leo-tech]

It is definitely more involved. As I said in another thread, the fact that you have a bare aluminum shell by the time you get to the HDD means that Apple really doesn’t want you messing with it. But at least it is accessible.

Ever wondered why exactly Apple want to deny/prevent/forbid as much as they can users access to typically accessible components (in a normal universe, anyway), such as CPUs, HDDs, RAM modules, instead of making that procedure as easy and simple as possible? You so eloquently re-defined "users replacing or upgrading components" as "users messing with components", so in that respect it seems you and Apple are on the same wavelength.

 

[MarkJames68]

Ever wondered why exactly Apple want to deny/prevent/forbid as much as they can users access to typically accessible components (in a normal universe, anyway), such as CPUs, HDDs, RAM modules, instead of making that procedure as easy and simple as possible? You so eloquently re-defined "users replacing or upgrading components" as "users messing with components", so in that respect it seems you and Apple are on the same wavelength.

I may be on the same wavelength as Apple but I don’t agree with the practice at all. There is very little good reason, especially in the 2014 Mac mini, to make it that difficult and inaccessible. There is enough empty space that they could have arranged things to allow users to add RAM and change the disk.

The argument for doing things like soldering RAM is to eliminate user issues and socket failures. But what it really means is that Apple gets people to either overpay for upgrades up front or to dispose of their system and buy a new one when they outgrow it. So much for being eco-friendly too.

As mentioned elsewhere, I have been “messing with components” for around 30 years, and the quest for smaller and smaller has taken us to the edge of madness where things like antenna connectors can break just by disassembling it once. That’s why Apple looks at their devices more like disposable appliances than something worth upgrading and maintaining.

 

[EdwardC]

I have a 2012 I5 2.5 with 16 gigs of RAM which is my other Mac in my office my primary being a Late 2013 iMac. This little mini which is my 3rd over the years just keeps on going and although not a speed demon it is very capable for office tasks and running Apple Music 10 hours a day every day. I would buy another in a heart beat when this one finally bites the dust. I hope Apple can come up with a replacement in the near future other wise I'll pick up a Chrome Box and stream Spotify from it.

 

[leo-tech]

The argument for doing things like soldering RAM is to eliminate user issues and socket failures. But what it really means is that Apple gets people to either overpay for upgrades up front or to dispose of their system and buy a new one when they outgrow it. So much for being eco-friendly too.

Unfortunately, the reality is even worse than that.

Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

To lesser extent, this important universal law of human nature is also applicable to businesses of any kind.

More competition usually results in competing businesses trying to please their customers, to meet their needs, to satisfy their desires and all that.

Less competition usually means that monopolists are free to do as they please without much fear of undesired consequences, and no matter how benevolent or well-meaning they pretend to be, this situation usually results in lack of customers choices, inflated prices, stagnation, rot, various abuses of monopolistic position on the market, disrespect and disdain to loyal customers, ever increasing arrogance, introducing various soft and hard chains, under whatever guise or rationale and to the extent possible transforming natural human freedoms and liberties into commodity and then acting as wise and benevolent dispensers of it etc.

There are men, in all ages, who mean to exercise power usefully; but they mean to exercise it. They mean to govern well; but they mean to govern. They promise to be kind masters; but they mean to be masters. They think there need be but little restraint upon themselves. Their notion of the public interest is apt to be quite closely connected with their own exercise of authority. They may not, indeed, always understand their own motives. The love of power may sink too deep in their own hearts even for their own scrutiny, and may pass with themselves for mere patriotism and benevolence. —Daniel Webster, 1837

Also check this book: Franklin Foer - World Without Mind: The Existential Threat of Big Tech (2017)

 

[Trusteft]

Ever wondered why exactly Apple want to deny/prevent/forbid as much as they can users access to typically accessible components (in a normal universe, anyway), such as CPUs, HDDs, RAM modules, instead of making that procedure as easy and simple as possible? You so eloquently re-defined "users replacing or upgrading components" as "users messing with components", so in that respect it seems you and Apple are on the same wavelength.

It's not just Apple doing this, they are not even the first in trying this, at least in modern times. But it sure is easier to blast on them for doing it as they are already one of the richer companies out there and it is much easier to troll against them than other companies.

 

[Boyd01]

They mean to govern well; but they mean to govern. They promise to be kind masters; but they mean to be masters.

Apple doesn't "govern", it's a company that makes computers and phones. If you don't like their policies, don't buy their products. If enough people agree, Apple will fail. That is quite different from someone holding a government office who can directly affect your life whether you like it or not. If Apple is your "master", then it's nobody's fault but yours.

 

[leo-tech]

Apple doesn't "govern", it's a company that makes computers and phones.

In a political sense, of course not—but it surely does govern within their own Mac hardware/macOS realm. And their "governing" in that particular area under the circumstances produces ever more "abuses and usurpations", IMHO directly related to their unchecked power monopolist position (in many ways resembling unchecked power in politics).

If you don't like their policies, don't buy their products.

In my case, I guess that is destined to happen more or less automatically, as Apple seem no longer interested in manufacturing and selling decent Mac minis, and I am not interested in buying any other Mac hardware.

If enough people agree, Apple will fail. That is quite different from someone holding a government office who can directly affect your life whether you like it or not. If Apple is your "master", then it's nobody's fault but yours.

I believe I made a distinction between power related to political office, and power related to a business monopoly. But even more important are the similarities between the former and the latter, what naturally happens to all sorts of unchecked power, be it a political power, or the power of business decision making in monopolies.
[doublepost=1508967823][/doublepost]

It's not just Apple doing this, they are not even the first in trying this, at least in modern times. But it sure is easier to blast on them for doing it as they are already one of the richer companies out there and it is much easier to troll against them than other companies.

I have literally zero interest in "blasting" or "trolling" Apple, because they are "richer", or because it is "easier", or for any other conceivable reason.

I am only interested in buying an updated Mac mini, based on 7th/8th generation Intel processor—or, failing that, in building a decent Mac mini alternative, using non-Apple hardware (I write more on that in another thread).

And on the way, I cannot help but notice certain extremely troubling similarities between abuses and usurpations of unchecked political power, and the same of decision making in business monopolies.

 

[Neodym]

In a political sense, of course not—but it surely does govern within their own Mac hardware/macOS realm. And their "governing" in that particular area under the circumstances produces ever more "abuses and usurpations" related to their unchecked power.

Now that line of argumentation is becoming bizarre. Is Microsoft also governing with unchecked power? Is every appliance maker with a proprietary system governing with unchecked power? Every car maker?

Apple takes business decisions for their own products and they have all rights in the world to do so, because there is no monopoly in the market, no lives are threatened or negatively impacted by those decisions. They are not even the cheapest vendor in the market by far, so one can't even argue they would have any ethic or morale driven responsibility for the poor people as "only option for being able to participate in Internet and social media" or something along those lines.

Whoever decides to buy an Apple product, does this out of free will. And everyone can just leave at will, it is no sect, despite what people claim.

Finally, even though Apple products are quite on the expensive side, one doesn't buy any entitlement to have Apple considering his or her individual needs when taking business decisions.

That whole "Apple is ruling with unchecked power within their realm" is one of the most absurd claim I've ever read on the internet.

 

[leo-tech]

Neodym, if you read what I wrote more carefully, you will see that there is "unchecked power" in politics, and also there is "business decision making" in monopolies. There are certain similarities, that's for sure, but nowhere I used the term "unchecked power" in relation to Apple (in their case, "lack of competition" or "absence of competition" would be closer to home).

UPDATE: you are right, I said that in relation to Appe (without meaning to), my mistake, sorry, now corrected.

Apple takes business decisions for their own products and they have all rights in the world to do so, because there is no monopoly in the market, no lives are threatened or negatively impacted by those decisions.

Speaking of monopolies, Apple have an undisputed monopoly on Mac hardware and macOS, there is no other company but Apple, who owns certain patents or rights or whatever, and operates in that area alone. Needless to say, operates with all those well known negative effects, typically attributed to monopolies (lack of sensible choices and insanely inflated prices, to begin with).

Surely, in this case "no lives are threatened". But regarding "nobody is negatively impacted", I would not go that far. First, by creating Mac mini Apple also created practically a whole new class of computer users, and then later they arbitrarily decided to "phase them out of existence", for lack of a better term. Well, some of us may not like it very much, or take it easy and pretend that nothing out of the ordinary happened.

 

[cmcconkey]

I would love to have a new Mini come out. My 2012 mini is beginning to show its age.

 

[Neodym]

Apple have an undisputed monopoly on Mac hardware and macOS, there is no other company but Apple, who owns certain patents or rights or whatever, and operates in that area alone. Needless to say, operates with all those well known negative effects, typically attributed to monopolies (lack of sensible choices and insanely inflated prices, to begin with).

By that line of argumentation you could also say that every company that has an individual product has a monopoly within the area of that very product. Every individual on earth has a (at least partial) monopoly in the area of private life (e.g. own flat/house). Being more precise, individuals have even more freedom to decide at will, because Apple as a stock company has to render an account about its business decisions to its many stakeholders.

Surely, in this case "no lives are threatened". But regarding "nobody is negatively impacted", I would not go that far. First, by creating Mac mini Apple also created practically a whole new class of computer users, and then later they arbitrarily decided to "phase them out of existence", for lack of a better term. Well, some of us may not like it very much, or take it easy and pretend that nothing out of the ordinary happened.

I beg to disagree. The Mac mini was/is Apple's contribution to the class of compact $500 computers. As said before, there are lots of other options available on the market, even at smaller sizes, lower prices and/or with more power for the price.

Existing owners of a Mac mini continue to get support, bug fixes and even new and improved versions of the OS - the latter completely free of charge!

I fail to see where Apple is "phasing them out of existence", even less intentionally so. The mini is still available, you can buy one new with guarantee. But even if Apple decided to cease sales of the mini, that would be a perfectly fine business decision. Companies have to take such decisions all of the time.

One may wish for an update now, but there is no entitlement to it. Even the best lawyer could not win this case, and rightfully so!
[doublepost=1508996298][/doublepost]

I would love to have a new Mini come out. My 2012 mini is beginning to show its age.

Interesting. In what way does a 2.3-i7 quad show its age? Performance-wise it should easily deal with everything you throw at it. If you did not already do so, consider adding a SSD. It will make your mini feel like a completely new computer!

 

[leo-tech]

By that line of argumentation you could also say that every company that has an individual product has a monopoly within the area of that very product. Every individual on earth has a (at least partial) monopoly in the area of private life (e.g. own flat/house).

My line of argumentation was focused entirely on Apple and its distinct monopolist-abuser practices (not on "every company", let alone "individuals").

Being more precise, individuals have even more freedom to decide at will, because Apple as a stock company has to render an account about its business decisions to its many stakeholders.

I fail to grasp he connection between "individuals have even more freedom to decide at will" and "Apple stockholders"—and pretty grim situation when it comes to replacing my old Mac mini with a new updated one. Surely there must be a mistake somewhere, as I no longer perceive myself as any part of what Apple is doing these days (meaning of course "repeat Apple customer").

I beg to disagree. The Mac mini was/is Apple's contribution to the class of compact $500 computers. As said before, there are lots of other options available on the market, even at smaller sizes, lower prices and/or with more power for the price.

When it comes to computers of that class capable of running macOS, there is ZERO of other options on the market—only the crippled, outdated and overpriced Mac mini 2014 (which I personally would refuse to accept as a free gift, let alone to buy it in the shop).

Existing owners of a Mac mini continue to get support, bug fixes and even new and improved versions of the OS - the latter completely free of charge!

It's very nice and generous of them, to offer something "completely free of charge" by one hand, and generously compensating themselves by another—by inflating Mac hardware prices, on which that "completely free" macOS can only run.

I fail to see where Apple is "phasing them out of existence", even less intentionally so.

Well, many other Mac mini users beg to differ.

The mini is still available, you can buy one new with guarantee. But even if Apple decided to cease sales of the mini, that would be a perfectly fine business decision. Companies have to take such decisions all of the time.

More precisely, it would be perfectly LEGAL business decision, that's for sure.

One may wish for an update now, but there is no entitlement to it. Even the best lawyer could not win this case, and rightfully so!

I never disputed the LEGALITY of what Apple is doing, let alone claiming any "entitlement".

However, there is an important difference between LEGALITY and LEGITIMACY.

The fact that something is LEGAL does not automatically make it LEGITIMATE.

But it it interesting and telling that you felt the need to bring that part up to strengthen your argument.

 

[Chatran]

The role of mac mini has been changed some time ago. Its main purpose to eliminate the dead inventory of macbook parts. I doubt you would see the new CPUs in this product line soon.

 

[MarkJames68]

The role of mac mini has been changed some time ago. Its main purpose to eliminate the dead inventory of macbook parts. I doubt you would see the new CPUs in this product line soon.

I hope you’re not implying that Apple uses the same logic boards in both products. I’m sure there is processor similarity (and BTW would be similar to the Air, NOT the MacBook which uses “Y” ULV CPUs) but I would have to believe Apple doesn’t carry such inventory that they have to make other products to ship them.

 

[Boyd01]

In what way does a 2.3-i7 quad show its age?

I have a 2012 2.6ghz quad that is dedicated to video editng (also audio with Logic X). In terms of CPU, it is still the king of the Mini's. But the graphics chip is showing its age I get skipped frames playing back unrendered FCPX timelines with lots of layers and effects. Have not used a newer/more powerful machine, but assume that a better GPU would help with this. There are some video/effects software packages I've looked at that won't run with the HD4000 and others that won't run with any integrated video chips.

I need the thunderbolt port for a Blackmagic video device that drives a Sony production monitor. So that limits me to the HDMI port for a regular screen, and the 2012 mini only supports 1920x1200 over HDMI. There are some other limitations, like the speed of the internal SSD which is significantly faster on the 2014 mini and more than twice as fast on even the lowly 2016 MacBook Air. Not much of a big deal for me since I used a 1tb external SSD for my video projects.

And the 2012 Mini has the slow old wifi where they upgraded to the much faster ac wifi in 2014. That is a non issue for me however since I'm using gigabit ethernet anyway.

 

[ActionableMango]

others that won't run with any integrated video chips

I would be surprised if the new Mini comes with dedicated video. Such a thing was rare in the model line.

The trend for Apple across its entire Mac lineup seems to be smaller, thinner, and more power efficient, so I don't see them going back to dedicated GPU.

 

[Neodym]

My line of argumentation was focused entirely on Apple and its distinct monopolist-abuser practices (not on "every company", let alone "individuals").

And I tried to demonstrate that your line of argumentation is inherently flawed. You couldn't even argue against that.

I fail to grasp he connection between "individuals have even more freedom to decide at will" and "Apple stockholders"—and pretty grim situation when it comes to replacing my old Mac mini with a new updated one. Surely there must be a mistake somewhere, as I no longer perceive myself as any part of what Apple is doing these days (meaning of course "repeat Apple customer").

You argue that Apple would act high-handedly out of a monopolist position, which you arbitrarily define. In fact there is no monopoly by common understanding of that word. And I showed you that Apple is not as free to decide as you are in your own sphere of influence, which - by your definition - would be called a monopoly as well, as there is no competition (wife aside ).

If you feel no longer part of Apple's target group - well, fact of life. But no basis for a strange definition of "monopoly" and accusing Apple of abusing practices.

When it comes to computers of that class capable of running macOS, there is ZERO of other options on the market—only the crippled, outdated and overpriced Mac mini 2014 (which I personally would refuse to accept as a free gift, let alone to buy it in the shop).

Actually the mini is one of the lowest classes available to run macOS. There are lots of better classes available directly from Apple. Not even that much more expensive. Granted - the mini has evolved into a price category where the cost/benefit ratio has become questionable due to the strange development policy Apple applies to the mini.

But despite some design decisions Apple took on the mini, even the 2014 isn't as bad as you try to make it seem. In some aspects (and depending on use case) it's even superior to the glorified 2012 mini, for example single clock speed, dual Thunderbolt ports or faster SSD.

Yes, it is dual-core only, but lots of people are still working fine with dual cores, even on Apple machines. And the lack of upgrade options for the end user is effectively a hidden price increase and not some deliberate evil act to torture poor, innocent users. Apple never has been famous for offering cheap products.

It's very nice and generous of them, to offer something "completely free of charge" by one hand, and generously compensating themselves by another—by inflating Mac hardware prices, on which that "completely free" macOS can only run.

You make the impression that you are angry at Apple because the mini has become too expensive for you to afford. Nothing wrong with that and nothing to be ashamed of. There are still second hand machines available or the Hackintosh route, which probably offers the best price/performance ratio. For some use cases other platforms may be suited even better, if you're open-minded for that.

I never disputed the LEGALITY of what Apple is doing, let alone claiming any "entitlement".

You did not use the word, but your argumentation goes exactly into that direction.

However, there is an important difference between LEGALITY and LEGITIMACY.

The fact that something is LEGAL does not automatically make it LEGITIMATE.

Could you please tell me about your understanding of "legitimate" (no need to shout, btw)? I fail to see how a business decision monitored by stakeholders could be illegitimate in this case.

But it it interesting and telling that you felt the need to bring that part up to strengthen your argument.

What does it tell you then? I'm interested to learn more!
[doublepost=1509051980][/doublepost]

The trend for Apple across its entire Mac lineup seems to be smaller, thinner, and more power efficient, so I don't see them going back to dedicated GPU.

I expect (or better: hope for) Apple making a bold move and indeed using a redesigned mini as basis for expansion modules that eventually form a highly customizable MacPro. In that case (pun not intended) there could be a dedicated GPU in the mini's future.

Not an easy project to pull off, as quality is key (e.g. for the connectors and special system software required), but I'd count Apple to the small number of companies that have the money, knowledge and atypical market view (for a mainstream company) that are all required for such a product. I'd really like to be wow'ed again with a Mac product during a keynote ...

 

[Boyd01]

I would be surprised if the new Mini comes with dedicated video. Such a thing was rare in the model line.

I agree, and have pretty much accepted that I'll need an iMac if I want better performance for video.

 

[MarkJames68]

I have a 2012 2.6ghz quad that is dedicated to video editng (also audio with Logic X). In terms of CPU, it is still the king of the Mini's. But the graphics chip is showing its age I get skipped frames playing back unrendered FCPX timelines with lots of layers and effects. Have not used a newer/more powerful machine, but assume that a better GPU would help with this. There are some video/effects software packages I've looked at that won't run with the HD4000 and others that won't run with any integrated video chips.

I need the thunderbolt port for a Blackmagic video device that drives a Sony production monitor. So that limits me to the HDMI port for a regular screen, and the 2012 mini only supports 1920x1200 over HDMI. There are some other limitations, like the speed of the internal SSD which is significantly faster on the 2014 mini and more than twice as fast on even the lowly 2016 MacBook Air. Not much of a big deal for me since I used a 1tb external SSD for my video projects.

And the 2012 Mini has the slow old wifi where they upgraded to the much faster ac wifi in 2014. That is a non issue for me however since I'm using gigabit ethernet anyway.

Agree, the HD 4000 Ivy Bridge video is the stumbling block. Have you considered a well-priced Mac Pro? I keep on wondering how long B&H are going to offer the quad core new for $2K.

 

[jpietrzak8]

a well-priced Mac Pro?

Wait, isn't that an oxymoron?

 

[Boyd01]

Have you considered a well-priced Mac Pro?

I am fine with the 2012 quad mini for at least another year, maybe more unless my needs change. Will just wait and see what is available when the time comes to upgrade.

 

[jpietrzak8]

I would be surprised if the new Mini comes with dedicated video. Such a thing was rare in the model line.

Not so rare in the beginning. The PowerPC Minis had ATI GPUs, and the 2011 had one as an option. Also, the 2009 and 2010 models had some very nice Nvidia integrated GPUs; I was always surprised just how much performance I could squeeze out of my GeForce 320m. It was at least as powerful as the HD4000 on the 2012 models.

 

[MarkJames68]

Wait, isn't that an oxymoron?

Perhaps “less ridiculously priced Mac Pro” then.