Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Well, 4,000 came up 7 hours into October where I am, but with 6 September hours left in Cupertino.

Now, Yosemite is likely to be set free within the next few weeks. Will a new Mac Mini be released at the same time? Signs are beginning to suggest so.
 
Good luck to you, if huge power and performance is what you crave, and mucking around with computers is your thing, and you are prepared to put in the time.

Being just an ordinary average Joe, something that just works is fine by me. It would not be worth the hassle.

I've had two Hackintosh builds already. They have been great machines and very stable. I didn't run system updates much, funny thing is I don't bother with system updates on my Macs as well...

I want to give Apple my money but I hate the iMac.
I have a 2012 Mac Mini but want something with just a little more pep.
A mini with a I7-4770HQ would be great!
 
I think I will hate it too. Back to Win 7, I guess. THAT was a slick looking OS.

I hated it at first but in the past 2 months of using it I've grown to like it. Safari is much faster and the overall performance seems really good. The memory compression is much better and slicker the way it works.

Once you get use to the flat icons it's still the same solid OS.
 
Yes, that is very true about holding value and another plus in the Apple column.

If you can't take advantage of cheap commodity ram and SSDs on a mac that's a few years old, it is seriously going to cripple the resale value. I guess we'll see in a couple more years once the all-soldered 2013 mac's get a bit stale.

----------

I think the issue of non-upgradable machines is an interesting and predictable move by most manufacturers.

With PC's you can buy standardized hardware. $350 at newegg gets you an Asus Z97 Deluxe motherboard. It has built in wifi AC, NFC, Bluetooth. Dual Gigabit LAN, and a very impressive list of features. And it's all easily upgradable. For what Apple gives you in a $2000 iMac that is not very upgradable, it is just embarrassing for Apple.
 
How many times in this thread was the new mac mini "almost certainly" coming?

-December 2013
-I remember some talk about the end of February
-June (WWDC)
-End of August (mid-2014 deadline)/Sept iPhone event
-October 21st

and perhaps every Tuesday.
 
I hated it at first but in the past 2 months of using it I've grown to like it. Safari is much faster and the overall performance seems really good. The memory compression is much better and slicker the way it works.

Once you get use to the flat icons it's still the same solid OS.

The memory compression is one reason why I'm still on Mountain Lion. Once you get the Apple kool-aid out of your system, memory is cheap, cheap cheap. My 2011 MPB has 16 gigs in it ($80 and 5 minutes work for the upgrade back in 2011). Why would anyone want to burn *any* CPU cycle on memory compression when ram is dirt cheap? Especially when Apple specializes in underpowered CPUs to begin with.

That's also why I'm still on the 2011 machine. Soldered RAM = deal breaker for me. Then again, since Yosemite is so ugly, switching back to windows and having 20 times the computer performance for the same money is looking to be a win-win move.
 
The memory compression is one reason why I'm still on Mountain Lion. Once you get the Apple kool-aid out of your system, memory is cheap, cheap cheap. My 2011 MPB has 16 gigs in it ($80 and 5 minutes work for the upgrade back in 2011). Why would anyone want to burn *any* CPU cycle on memory compression when ram is dirt cheap? Especially when Apple specializes in underpowered CPUs to begin with.

That's also why I'm still on the 2011 machine. Soldered RAM = deal breaker for me. Then again, since Yosemite is so ugly, switching back to windows and having 20 times the computer performance for the same money is looking to be a win-win move.

My mini does not have soldered ram. I have a whole 8gb and it's plenty for me. I have an I5 2012 that works great for anything I throw at. With CAD running in windows parallel and handbrake running at the same time while using MKV for blue ray decoding I still had plenty of RAM left to surf Safari.
I would say memory compression works very well.

I a firm believer in upgradeability especially for Windows because if your running CAD and CAM Programing software you need a lot of horsepower to do calculation and rendering. For gaming you can't beat a PC.
I'm looking also next year for a Broadwell machine for 4K HTPC and Steam which will be a PC because I don't think the Mini is going to get there for a long time.

But I still prefer OS X as an operating system after 25 years of DOS and windows.
 
The memory compression is one reason why I'm still on Mountain Lion. Once you get the Apple kool-aid out of your system, memory is cheap, cheap cheap. My 2011 MPB has 16 gigs in it ($80 and 5 minutes work for the upgrade back in 2011). Why would anyone want to burn *any* CPU cycle on memory compression when ram is dirt cheap? Especially when Apple specializes in underpowered CPUs to begin with.

That's also why I'm still on the 2011 machine. Soldered RAM = deal breaker for me. Then again, since Yosemite is so ugly, switching back to windows and having 20 times the computer performance for the same money is looking to be a win-win move.

The fastest 6 core K series i7 desktop CPUs are at best 20% or so faster than the fastest quad i7s in Macs, once you start using multiple Xeon CPUs, you're in the same price range as the Mac Pro and even then, you're getting maybe 3 or 4 x the performance at most and that relies of software being heavily multi-threaded.

20 X faster? Yeah right! :rolleyes:
 
The thing is, if my 9.5-year-old powerwaster desktop tower dies today or soon, i will not going wait for a new Mac mini. Tiny price cuts are the worst excuse for a product with 2-years in the market.

I love iOS with my routine apps, but Mac os is not essential for me.

I'm a gamer (play some indie and old-school games) and i prefer having only a OS in my computer.
I know there are more and more compatible games with Mac and Linux, but some Windows-only games i prefer run natively with its own OS.

I like ASUS VIVO PC. Not so well-designed as Mini, but cheaper and pratical for me. And beautiful too.
 
With PC's you can buy standardized hardware. $350 at newegg gets you an Asus Z97 Deluxe motherboard. It has built in wifi AC, NFC, Bluetooth. Dual Gigabit LAN, and a very impressive list of features. And it's all easily upgradable. For what Apple gives you in a $2000 iMac that is not very upgradable, it is just embarrassing for Apple.

So that Asus Z97 has soldered Wifi AC, NFC, Bluetooth, Dual Gigabit LAN, and more? Doesn't sound as upgradable as they used to come.

I remember when a motherboard had only soldered northbridge and southbridge, and every other component was modular and upgradeable through sockets and PCI cards and oh so many wires - none of this soldered nonesense.

My dad remembers when a motherboard was just a PCB, with no components built-in at all, where you had to order components from teh Tandy catalog. That was true upgradability!
 
Last edited:
The fastest 6 core K series i7 desktop CPUs are at best 20% or so faster than the fastest quad i7s in Macs, once you start using multiple Xeon CPUs, you're in the same price range as the Mac Pro and even then, you're getting maybe 3 or 4 x the performance at most and that relies of software being heavily multi-threaded.

20 X faster? Yeah right! :rolleyes:

Well, aside from the fact that the i7-4960X is quite a bit faster than you seem to think...

The benchmark on the i7 CPU in the mac mini isn't that much slower than something like an ancient i7-3770k. But you're not factoring in Apple's piss-poor form over function engineering. My desktop can chug along at 100% CPU load all day without a problem, and it's whisper-quiet. As soon as I even think about running something on the mac mini, the little jet-engine of a fan inside spins up and the CPU speed throttles back. So yes, it's 80% as fast as long as I don't actually use the CPU power. The instant I do, it slows way, way down.

Aside from that my cheap pc RAM is way beyond the over-priced, budget-grade SO-DIMMS Apple uses.

When I'm actually doing something non-trial, the tiny SSD for the OS just don't come close to enough capacity. My 3.5" 10k RPM HDD sure is a lot faster than 2.5" 5400 RPM drive.

So yes, because of Apple's obsession with tiny at the expense of performance, my PC is easily 20 times the performance of a comparable mac. It's also about 30 times the volume of a mac mini. But only double the footprint, so who cares?
 
Well, aside from the fact that the i7-4960X is quite a bit faster than you seem to think...

The benchmark on the i7 CPU in the mac mini isn't that much slower than something like an ancient i7-3770k. But you're not factoring in Apple's piss-poor form over function engineering. My desktop can chug along at 100% CPU load all day without a problem, and it's whisper-quiet. As soon as I even think about running something on the mac mini, the little jet-engine of a fan inside spins up and the CPU speed throttles back. So yes, it's 80% as fast as long as I don't actually use the CPU power. The instant I do, it slows way, way down.

Aside from that my cheap pc RAM is way beyond the over-priced, budget-grade SO-DIMMS Apple uses.

When I'm actually doing something non-trial, the tiny SSD for the OS just don't come close to enough capacity. My 3.5" 10k RPM HDD sure is a lot faster than 2.5" 5400 RPM drive.

So yes, because of Apple's obsession with tiny at the expense of performance, my PC is easily 20 times the performance of a comparable mac. It's also about 30 times the volume of a mac mini. But only double the footprint, so who cares?

You're still delusional.

5200 vs 7200 rpm drive? SO-DIMMs vs desktop RAM? A desktop CPU vs a laptop one?

None of those factors account for a 20 x speed difference, not in a million years :rolleyes:

Also, the Mac Mini has always (till the 2 year hiatus) being based on the CPU and chipset specs of the Macbook Pro of the time, it's never going to be a big power-hungry tower with 7200rpm drives and desktop CPUs, but it is very power-efficient and small.

The i7-4960X is £780+ just for the CPU too so I don't know where your fantasy land prices are from either.
 
Once you get the Apple kool-aid out of your system, memory is cheap, cheap cheap. [...] Why would anyone want to burn *any* CPU cycle on memory compression when ram is dirt cheap? Especially when Apple specializes in underpowered CPUs to begin with.
Processor cycles available are plenty, plenty, plenty. Why would anyone want to bother having excess memory when the CPU is idling most of the time anyway? Especially when Apple specializes in optimizing resource usage to begin with.

That's also why I'm still on the 2011 machine. Soldered RAM = deal breaker for me.
That's what people said when IDE controllers started to become soldered. Or USB controllers. Or graphic chips. Or CPU's. Or ...

Take good care of your current machine - you may have to stick to it for a long time to come.

Then again, since Yosemite is so ugly, switching back to windows and having 20 times the computer performance for the same money is looking to be a win-win move.
kkthxbye.
 
Given the rumors, I'm convinced we will see a new Mac Mini this month. (Thank God.)

Is a redesign that features an SSD (no HDD) realistic? Will SSD be yet another upgrade? I'm hoping for a $600 Mini that comes with an SSD.
 
To funny. This thread, ostensibly about the next mini, was massively entertaining when there was no hope of a new mini. Jokes pranks, gags, light drama all making fun of the lack of progress. Supporting each other through the shared dark period with little hope for the future. But the second we get real news, real hope, it devolves into serious. Bickering over what the new mini should and shouldn't be. Competing for the best idea of what the future will look like.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.