Return of Quad Core Mac Mini's likely?

[Miat]

I accept that I want to run OSX and that means not having the perfect machine for me. I've changed my habits to fit the machines available from Apple.....

I have no desire to switch OS either, but there is a limit to how far that compromise works. Getting to the point where my only option will be to set up a cheap Linux box just for video processing, and running either a dual core Mini or a clamshell mode Macbook of some kind for everything else. I don't think I am alone in that kind of dilemma. (I prefer the Mini form, because it is much easier to dust filter the airflow into it.)

I don't have a problem with the Mini being an entry level machine, it certainly works well as that. I have a problem with there being no mid-level model between that and the Pro, and I think Apple will be making a big long-term mistake if they abandon that segment of the market in the belief that the iMac (or cloud computing) can cover it. They have to cover the full range to, directly and indirectly, maximise market share and loyalty.

Miat the Frustrated

 

[Count Blah]

If Apple can steer the sale of ONE Mac Mini, to a Mac Pro/iMAC/MBP, by keeping the mini at dual only, then Apple will continue down this despicable path.

Or you can just go with the "richest company in the world, cannot efficiently make the mini with two different motherboards" excuse.

It's up to you.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Unfortunately Apple would have to use two different logic boards for the Mac mini because the Skylake U-series BGA1356 package will be used in the MBA with a 15W TDP and for the 13" MBP with a 28W TDP.

The H-series BGA1440 package 45W TDP will be used for the 15" MBP.

Only Sandybridge and Ivybridge used the same BGA package for the dual and quad core models.

Unfortunately, even Apple is not immune to Intel's marketing decisions. The only way it could escape that would be to go ARM64 all the way. It could happen. Eventually.

Apple could take advantage of the Mini computer market with the addition of quad core processors and the upcoming Iris Pro IGPUs but the iMac is their flagship Prosumer desktop and will likely stay that way.

As the desktop computer market shrinks Apple has chosen to concentrate on the mobile market that has substantially higher profits due to the volume of sales.

With what you want to do your choices are limited to an iMac or Mac Pro which is way to much over kill. Unfortunately Apple will not build a in-between headless desktop. The market for Appleis not their for it in this mobile age.

Apple clearly believes that most machines in the future will rely on the cloud for their high-end computing. Heavy graphics users benefit from the direct connection of GPU and screen. But, if all you want are cpu cycles, get them from the cloud. Most machines are going to be clients.

But, the other factor in not worrying about a mid-level mini right now is that Apple really wanted to push the Retina 5K iMac. The iMac form factor is kind of irritating, but, for once, it let Apple do something that couldn't easily be done right now for a reasonable price any other way. Try to go build yourself and iMac 5K hackintosh and see how much it costs.

Fine. But where's the mid-level headless machine between the Mini and the Pro?

I do a bit of video editing and processing at home (mostly stuff recorded from TV, plus the occasional DVD/Blu-ray rip). Really do need the quad core to handle that. Even the quad is straining at times with 1080 res. No way a dual core will cut it for me.

It doesn't exist, but, could I interest you in a Retina 5K? Seriously, the price gap from what a maxed-out quad-core mini would be and the Retina 5K is not that great.

Bottom line: I could see Apple doing a quad-core mini again next year, if Intel doesn't get in the way.

 

[Partron22]

Doubt the resources are there for a quad core mini.
OS X is now the tail of the iOS dog; what's needed to write code for the devices that make real profits.
With watches now, and a car a few years down the road, why bother with with a niche product like a Turbocharged Electronic Fuel Injected Mac Mini? They'd probably only sell a couple million anyway, hardly worth the effort.