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.
The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming
- Thread starter GabrieleR
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mac mini new mac mini
- Sort by reaction score
I have to agree with you. There is a hole in the Mac Desktop line up that could be filled with a headless Mac Mini Pro. I believe it would sell very well.
I could see a Broadwell Core M entry level Mac Mini at $499 and a customizable Mac Mini Pro with Haswell or Broadwell desktop CPU and Discrete Graphics.
Would be great, but a Mac mini Pro would kill the iMac unfortunately, the are plenty of reasonably nice looking screens at the fraction of the price of an Apple display. Desktops are also a shrinking technology segment as it is.
The only way it wouldn't cannibalise the iMac market is if it was uncompetitively priced, then it would just be another (beautiful) G4 cube.
I don't think that many people buy an iMac because they consider the mini to be under-specced, they do so because they like the all-in-one form factor. Surely the Mac mini MAXI if done properly would be more likely to cannibalise Mac Pro sales.
The only way a mac mini pro would kill the iMac is if people don't really want all-in-ones, I know I don't.
So by your reasoning, Apple is deliberately refusing to release a product people want so they can sell something people don't want. I'm not saying you're wrong, Apple may well be that vile a company.
I didn't mean to offend either of you, My thinking was simply that if the Mac mini was a similar spec to the mid-range iMac but a say $300 cheaper, the price concious would invariably buy the mini. People have been clamouring for the fabled xMac since the death of the G4 cube, so it's not like Apple would be blind to consumer demand.
Of course, Mojo makes a good point, that if the mini closed in on the performance of the Mac Pro for half the price, the Pro would be DOA.
Also, apologies Oracle, did you mean that you do want an all-in-one? Wasn't sure if that was a double negative.
The Mac Mini Pro or Maxie May well take some sales from Mac Pros and IMacs but what should Apple care. Those people are still buying Apple products and may be much more satisfied than spending 3-4k on an computer they don't need or 2-3k for a screen they do not want. The point is that I'm sure Apple will still have that profit margin built in and people will be much happier.
They don't sell enough desktops anyway that it's going to effect their bottom line.
----------
I'm going to give Cook and Ive the benefit of doubt on this one and see if they are really committed to the PC line up and plug the hole. Don't have a lot on confidence but just maybe.
Broadwell M is built for tablets and convertible laptops. Benchmarks have shown that they are on par with Haswell I5 chips with turbo to 2.6ghz instantly and require no throttling and require no fan. I believe 8GB of RAM is the limit and have full 4k capabilities.
So yes, it will preform as well as an MacBook Air and we will probably see them in the new 12" Air.
Last edited:
Normally I'm not a pedant but I can make an exception to boost the post count in this fine thread:
That's GB, not MB. But yes, 8 is indeed the limit. For 16 GB we need to wait for Broadwell-U.
Your right, too early in the morning. Thanks.
I agree most of us prefer U series chips but I think Apple could capitalize on an Mini Nano with Core M for those who just want a Mac that can utilize OS X with their iPhone and iPad.The problem with the prospects of a Core M series processor in a new mac mini is that the graphics performance will be mediocre at best: Iris Pro 5200 (Haswell) >>> Intel HD 5300 (Core M).
One of the main reasons I want to upgrade from my current mac set-up is to migrate to a (hopeful) mini with Iris Pro capabilities, so thoughts of a Core M processor make it a no-go for me.
One of the main reasons I want to upgrade from my current mac set-up is to migrate to a (hopeful) mini with Iris Pro capabilities, so thoughts of a Core M processor make it a no-go for me.
I'm not sure that's really possible; the Mac Pro is a specialist three processor machine, using twin GPUs for massive compute/graphical power plus a high end CPU to make it all work (or for the computation that the GPUs can't do). I'm not sure there's much danger of the Mac Mini creeping in on the Mac Pro's territory as I very much doubt we'll see a Mac Mini with more than four cores any time soon! There are also other factors such as the Mac Pro's ECC support, more I/O etc. that makes it the only option if you really need a workstation/professional type computer.
At the same time I agree that the Mac Mini and iMac aren't directly opposed either; the Mac Mini is still very much about people that already have a monitor, or don't mind having a separate monitor, while the iMac is an all-in-one. I fully expect over time that the iMac will lose its discrete GPU, as integrated GPUs are just getting too competitive, and the iMac has never really been a gaming machine (even if Apple sometimes mentions its gaming performance).
I'd like to see the Mac Mini and iMac be made directly comparable; i.e - the Mac Mini would simply become a headless iMac, ideally updated at the same time as well, and perhaps missing the high-end (with discrete graphics) option, for as long as the iMac retains that model. It would make a lot of sense for Apple to do a MacBook Air level Mac Mini for tempting budget switchers and just generally anyone looking for a modest desktop, as the savings would be a bigger portion of a Mac Mini's price, compared to an iMac which ends up only slightly (proportionately) cheaper for a significant drop in performance.
Surely the better comparison would be HD5000 (from current Haswell Macbook Air) vs the HD5300 (which is the Broadwell base GPU in the Core M processor).
I'm wasn't expecting too much from a 4.5W chip - Notebookcheck seems to rate them as broadly similar. I think Broadwell is supposed to have significantly better integrated graphics anyway (the Iris Pro chips for Broadwell will be called Iris Pro 6200).
I disagree. What is desperately needed in my opinion is a thunderbolt GPU enclosure. CPU, RAM, and Disk IO performance are all pretty good in the mac mini. The only deficiency, especially when cared to the iMac is the GPU. If they sold a gpu add on that would allow people to add to their mini's without going the full step to the mac pro.
Granted there is the OWC Mercury Helios enclosure but the price and features make it prohibitive.
And really this isn't that new of an idea. I really liked the expresscard slots on the older macbook pro's. Thunderbolt is just combining display port with PCI express. But considering how expensive and rare thunderbolt devices are i'd much rather have the two ports be separate. I've used expresscard to add an external GPU (for an openGL project) on my 06 macbook pro. Everything after that was a step backwards, and thunderbolt in my opinion has not yet made them even with their 2006 model (though it COULD get there)
That would be excellent. If they had the same PCIe SSD/SATA 6Gb/s combination but in a smaller form-factor allowing for 2.5" drives, it would be the best of both worlds without any compromises. I still don't understand why Fusion isn't the standard option on iMacs at present. They offer PCIe SSDs as the only means of storage on all laptop and desktop models apart from the iMac (which has the option) and the Mac Mini. They should up the standard RAM to 8Gb and either lower prices or keep them the same while eliminating the dual core altogether.
The market for such things is extremely limited.
I'd even go as far as saying it's nonexistent beyond a few thousand customers - at most.
The Mini is ok-ish in it's current form.
Yes, it would be nice for it to be 4k capable.
But I don't really need it - and neither does a large part of its user base.
Of course, it is perceived as too expensive - but if you look at what it does, how silent it is and how little energy it uses and then compare what similar offers from other manufacturers cost, you will realize it's not even that expensive.
My office-PC from HP was probably about as expensive as a MacMini - but came in a much, much larger case. Will I by stuffing it with HDs and GPUs?
Certainly not, neither will anybody else. It does drive two 1920x1200 displays - but the MacMini can do that, two.
If the Mini was too cheap, people would buy less iMacs ;-)
Sorry that wasn't clear. I would never buy an all-in-one.
----------
Well then Apple is only crippling their own market share by not giving people what they want. Some people will buy an iMac, some will build a hackintosh or switch to windows.
and that's the lesson learned from the iPhone.
I guess I should of said should be learned. Give the customer what they want.
Last edited:
True. There is no current-tech Mac mini, no enthusiasts', user-upgradeable Mac often referred to as XMac, no ultra-pro-level tower to compete with those from Dell and HP, no made for business (steel & plastic) Mac, no 17" laptop as well as no current-tech 21.5" or 27" monitors.
I am still of the belief that if Apple plugged all the holes in the Mac line sales numbers would might approach the point where governments would begin to examine Apple under the same microscope that was used to target Microsoft.
Should that happen Apple is way more monopolistic that Microsoft ever was. MSFT had to bully companies into using its software over other competing brands. Much of a standard OSX installation consists of really great software that precludes the use of other brands.
The walled garden that is iOS and the walled garden that Apple would like OSX to be could be at risk if Macs grabbed a significant market share. Apple might well rather make a lot of money off of fewer products and avoid the day when authorities ask Apple not to include Safari, iWork and iLife on new computers.
Yes. Because the iPhone has been wildly unsuccessful and hasn't driven a substantial percentage of Apple's profits for the last 7 years.
Although successful, customers left for larger screens and now that Apple has bent (no pun intended) to customer wishes, greater sales are being seen.