Sidebar Sidebar
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

Larry-K said:
I think the new title of this thread should be: "Abandon hope, all ye who enter here!"
Click to expand...

All long term readers of this thread will surely agree with you, myself included. But there is a sliver of hope for the future...

1) there was no reason for Apple to choose to wait this long to release this configuration. They could've done it before this thread was even created.

2) they accepted that Intel would provide what they promised and gambled a design radical enough to only be possible with the new chip. Lets call this plan A.

3) they spent the last year and a half counting on Intel to deliver that chip. Delay after delay they kept their exciting designs in a box ready to go.

4) only after repeated delays did they finally throw in the towel and punt with these refreshed configurations. Lets call this plan B.

5) doing things as a plan B, they get less resources/investment, say in a processor with extra cores that doesn't work in other models and won't be needed that long into next year.

6) if 2 and 3 are correct, those new designs are still ready to go, when Intel eventually comes through. In which case, plan A is back on.
 
MarkusL said:
Sure it does. Here's one, it's a slightly different CPU but the same TDP as the one in the 2014 mini:
http://www.logicsupply.eu/systems/nuc-computers/core-ml320/

The issue is that Apple does not want it to be fanless. A fan accumulates dust and causes noise and performance problems over time. Yes, it can be cleaned, but Apple knows that a lot of people will just attribute these issues to the age of the computer and get a new one.
Click to expand...

I hate to say it but that has the ring of truth to it :)

----------
ElectronGuru said:
All long term readers of this thread will surely agree with you, myself included. But there is a sliver of hope for the future...

1) there was no reason for Apple to choose to wait this long to release this configuration. They could've done it before this thread was even created.

2) they accepted that Intel would provide what they promised and gambled a design radical enough to only be possible with the new chip. Lets call this plan A.

3) they spent the last year and a half counting on Intel to deliver that chip. Delay after delay they kept their exciting designs in a box ready to go.

4) only after repeated delays did they finally throw in the towel and punt with these refreshed configurations. Lets call this plan B.

5) doing things as a plan B, they get less resources/investment, say in a processor with extra cores that doesn't work in other models and won't be needed that long into next year.

6) if 2 and 3 are correct, those new designs are still ready to go, when Intel eventually comes through. In which case, plan A is back on.
Click to expand...

And, it will have ITS OWN announcement conference!
 
Something else...

7) these new minis are a mashup of disparate parts. 1.4 on the low end, 2 kinds if iGPU, 3 kinds of drives (HD,SSD,PCI), and usual price tiers. An unnecessary level of logistical complexity for a low priority product. Like they dug up what was lying around (depreciating on the shelf) and slapped it together.
 
So, I went ahead and bought the new, high-end Mac Mini. I got it with 16GB RAM and the 512GB SSD.

Like everyone else, I hoped that Iris Pro would be an option, but I guess not. That's okay, though...it's a LOT better than the old PowerMac G5 Dual 2.0 that I've been using for 8 years (talk about PAIN...lol).

I believe that the new Mac Mini uses the Intel i5-4278U processor which, according to the Intel website, is only capable of addressing a maximum of 16GB of RAM. Although I haven't seen confirmation on whether or not the RAM is soldered, upgrading to 16GB of RAM didn't seem to be that much more expensive than going with 3rd party aftermarket RAM (assuming that the RAM is user-upgradeable). OWC sells a 16GB Mac Mini upgrade kit for round $160. For $200, I get Apple warranty-backed memory. I'm not going to quibble about the $40 difference.

The SSD wasn't much more, either. OWC sells a 480GB SSD for around $260. For $300, I get the 512GB Apple SSD and I don't have to risk damaging the machine or voiding my warranty...all for only around $40 more.

I might be doing some transcoding/conversion of existing AVCHD home movies, so the conversions won't be as fast as if I had a quad-core processor. But, once that project is complete (several weeks to months), I won't really need the raw power of additional cores.

For those folks who are mad about Apple eliminating the quad-cores (e.g. folks who need power, but not fast graphics), I say find a refurb or a used 2012 machine on eBay. Problem solved. If you're looking to do more graphics-intense things, go with this machine. And, if you're looking to do both (a "power user"), you'll probably want to look to an iMac or a Mac Pro.

As was reiterated at today's presentation, the Mac Mini is an "entry-level" Mac. They're not going to make these headless iMacs (with discrete graphics), since they don't want to start cannibalizing sales of iMacs. They want to keep the price low.

The 2012 Mac Mini had crappy Intel 4000 graphics. If I went with a MacBook Pro, the same specs would have cost me $450 more. An iMac did not interest me, since I already have a pretty nice 24" (1920x1200) display. And, a Mac Pro was totally out of the question, due to its price.

So, all in all, this should work out pretty well. :D
 
ElectronGuru said:
these new minis are a mashup of disparate parts. 1.4 on the low end, 2 kinds if iGPU, 3 kinds of drives (HD,SSD,PCI), and usual price tiers. An unnecessary level of logistical complexity for a low priority product. Like they dug up what was lying around (depreciating on the shelf) and slapped it together.
Click to expand...
There's definitely the smell of parts bin to them, aye. Hopefully it's just Apple trying to show that the mini has a future, having got bored waiting for the availability of Broadwell for a proper redesigned mini.

goatghost said:
So, I went ahead and bought the new, high-end Mac Mini. I got it with 16GB RAM and the 512GB SSD.
Click to expand...
I'm sure it'll be a great purchase and a faithful servant for many years, but so it should be for $1499!

I see where you're coming from re the cost of optional upgrades, but the Apple prices are still pretty grotesque when you consider that they're basically pocketing 8GB of RAM and a 1TB Fusion drive at your expense.
 
Free iWork office suite!
Free OS upgrades!

....~2200€ for i7 mobile dualcore 3Ghz 16gb ram 1TB ssd (admittedly pcie, still 99% would be better off with a crucial m550, samsung 840 evo or 850 pro in terms of performance_for_the_price).

----------
MarkusL said:
Sure it does. Here's one, it's a slightly different CPU but the same TDP as the one in the 2014 mini:
http://www.logicsupply.eu/systems/nuc-computers/core-ml320/

The issue is that Apple does not want it to be fanless. A fan accumulates dust and causes noise and performance problems over time. Yes, it can be cleaned, but Apple knows that a lot of people will just attribute these issues to the age of the computer and get a new one.
Click to expand...

I like these case-as-the-heatsink NUC solutions but I can't stand the external power brick.
Managing to squeeze the psu inside was the best thing about the 2010 Mini redesign. Let's hope this won't be lost in the next redesign for the sake of making it smaller.
 
We wait 2 years for a Mini downgrade - only Apple could turn that into a positive - besides some of their deluded consumers of course. :eek:
 
ElectronGuru said:
All long term readers of this thread will surely agree with you, myself included. But there is a sliver of hope for the future...

1) there was no reason for Apple to choose to wait this long to release this configuration. They could've done it before this thread was even created.

2) they accepted that Intel would provide what they promised and gambled a design radical enough to only be possible with the new chip. Lets call this plan A.

3) they spent the last year and a half counting on Intel to deliver that chip. Delay after delay they kept their exciting designs in a box ready to go.

4) only after repeated delays did they finally throw in the towel and punt with these refreshed configurations. Lets call this plan B.

5) doing things as a plan B, they get less resources/investment, say in a processor with extra cores that doesn't work in other models and won't be needed that long into next year.

6) if 2 and 3 are correct, those new designs are still ready to go, when Intel eventually comes through. In which case, plan A is back on.
Click to expand...
Well, Phil certainly wasn't hanging around for inquiries, that was even shorter than "one more thing". I guess he was off to "innovate his posterior".

I'm just glad I bought a quad while I could, they come in handy. My only gripe was I missed a great price on a refurb 2.6 and had to settle for a 2.3.

All right, let's title it: "Here there be slivers".
 
DCLB4X4 said:
Geekbench shows the 2012 Mini i7-3820QM at 3300 single core and 13000 multi core.

An i7-4578U is around 3500 single core and 7500 multi core on a MBP.

45W v. 28W power. No surprise. At least the single core performance is a tad bit higher.

Edit: Passmark GPU is 455 for HD 4000 v. 756 for Iris 5100. 3DMark is 600 v. 1140.
Click to expand...

One thing to note is that the 2012 was speced at 12db idle and 15 db for the i7 quad. Now Apple lists the entire 2014 Mini lineup at 12db, after slashing the quad core option.
 
I don't know why I was so excited about the new mini. I mean, I already broke down and bought a 2012 this summer. But I thought maybe, if the new mini is really great, I can get another one because we need two computers in the house ...

But now I don't know. I already put 16 MB and a Mercury Electra SSD in quad-core i7, and it's pretty fast. Do I need to worry that Apple will push out an OS in a couple years that it won't be able to handle? Is there any reason for me to think of picking up a new mini and selling this one, or should I just keep it?

Actually, maybe getting excited about a new mini was just the price of belonging to this thread for a short time. It really has been fun. It hasn't been simply a discussion of "I heard it's coming on Tuesday" or "No, it's definitely coming on Thursday" (and Cape Dave was RIGHT about that!). It's been discussions of memory, hard drives, graphics, processors, form factors along with design ideas, hackintosh talk - a wide array of topics packed into one thread, along with poems, jokes, and friendly exchanges. This one little thread has been a kind of Mac concentrate for everyday mac users.

And it's been helpful. I got advice on going ahead and getting a computer I needed now instead of waiting, and I do use the FireWire port all the time. And advice about upgrading it myself. It's been a real Swiss Army Thread.

It's really, really been fun. I wish there had been a real mini instead of this "ScrapBook" version. As much as I hate not getting a better Mini, I hate losing this entertaining thread. Can we keep it going until 5000 with purely entertaining posts, and then kick off the next one?
 
Lankyman said:
We wait 2 years for a Mini downgrade - only Apple could turn that into a positive - besides some of their deluded consumers of course. :eek:
Click to expand...

That sums it up about right. This is even worse than the 2014 1.4 Ghz iMac, at least Apple did not downgrade the entire iMac line.
 
cypriot said:
Apple store down
Click to expand...

For IPad Preorders.

I have to say that I not 100% pissed off about the 2014 Mini, only 90% because I get to replace my old iPad2 with a new one.

I'll be watching what happens with Broadwell next year and maybe pick up something I can run steam on.


In the mean time my 2012 Mini will hold me until the next Mini.
 
First time I quote myself :cool:

PhatHo said:
Man, I look forward to the 16th! Not only because of the possible release of a refreshed Mini but also because of all comments in this thread when people realize Apple didn't give them what they wanted. Better than TV! :cool:
Click to expand...

Ahem, guess I will hang on to my 2012 MM's for a while longer :)
 
If Mac OS was licensed...

If Mac OS was licensed... A company lets call it MacX would make a Quad core Mac computer twice as tall - so 2x the volume of the Mac Mini, big enough for some proper cooling. It would have expandable ram, quad core, an extra drive bay or two. It would take away all Apple Mac Mini sales, half the iMac and Mac Pro sales, because it would be powerful, cheap, upgradable and reliable. Instead we have to get super slim, expensive, non upgradable, unreliable (see MBP 17" 2010 thread) low powered (MacMini 2014) Apple product. Still we keep coming back...
 
I cannot bring myself to buy one of these. :(<sigh> As another poster said, it seems like Apple just threw together whatever they could at this point.

I'm sure these will be terrific little machines they just do not feel like they are worth the money to me. Oh well. Back to the drawing board.
 
Oracle1729 said:
But I don't see the point anymore. Comparing windows 10 to Yosemite, I think my Mac OS days are done. I hope a lot of the people here who are fuming will give windows a good and open minded glance.
Click to expand...

Well I'm on PC about 20 years (from 1993) and also parallel working on/using Macs (since 1995), so it is not a big problem for me, to switch between the platforms. I don't have a "fetish" for the chomped Apple logo brand so it doesn't really matter to me, what I do have on my desk.

I have no problems with Windows and have some apps, that I use almost every day, that works only on this OS.
 
Crosscreek said:
It won't be upgradeable.
Click to expand...

Yeah, guess i was getting hopeful. Tried to see if there was any SoDIMM format LPDDR3 on the net and it doesn't seem like it...

So unless Apple made their own dimms out of LPDDR3 (obviously not) then I guess they just didn't bother to put in the warning about it not being upgradable after purchase like on the iMac and Macbook Pro pages... :/

Pitty, I could live with non-upgradable SSDs, Apple's prices for them are not too far from retail.. but their ram prices are still crazy...

Although that $300 tax for the dual-core i7 is just stupid...

guess i'll e keeping my 2012 after all...
 
kazmac said:
I cannot bring myself to buy one of these. :(<sigh> As another poster said, it seems like Apple just threw together whatever they could at this point.

I'm sure these will be terrific little machines they just do not feel like they are worth the money to me. Oh well. Back to the drawing board.
Click to expand...

I think they are just using up leftover parts. We may see redesigned Broadwell Mini next year Or If sales are not good since the server is gone as an option, it may be the end of the line for the Mini.
 
wiredup72 said:
Why would they be laughing? They got what they want and needed. I did not. Some others, it seems, also did not.
Are those people you refer to smug a$$holes? Are they laughing at me? Or are they laughing out of joy because they are relieved they didn't have to wait to be disappointed and have been joyfully using their machines?

Or are they nervously laughing because they either: a. were smart or informed enough to tell the update wouldn't be worth it for them; b. got lucky; or c. they think they weren't gamed by bad ole' Apple?
:confused:
I kid, I kid... oops, I mean I troll... no, I kid...
Click to expand...

Don't take things so personally...
This latest spec Mac Mini isn't that great.

No-one is laughing at you personally... :\
 
The disgust over the new mini here is expected but not reasonable. Let's consider what it means to Apple's target customers for this box. (Note that if you were hoping for the elusive "mini tower/MacPro" it was never going to happen. You are not a target customer.)

  1. The entry level customer gets a Mac for $100 less that happens to have basically the same performance as the 2012 entry machine, the same disk capacity, and probably lower power consumption making it more economical to run as well.
  2. The mid-range model costs $100 less. While it doesn't have four cores, most people don't need 4 cores. It does offer much faster graphics so most people will feel this as a faster machine even though it is much slower at multi-core CPU benchmarks.
  3. The high end model is the same price. Again no quad core, but it has much faster graphics and the Fusion™ drive that will give SSD-like performance with HDD capacity.
  4. Customers specifically for the "server mini" lose since the important features are disk capacity (no 2TB anymore), cores (2 from 4), and RAM (unchanged.) However the server version hadn't been a good deal since Snow Leopard Server was $500, making the hardware upgrades from base effectively free. So perhaps it doesn't matter. Note that the new model is not sold as a server anymore. I'm not sure how the Fusion™ drive would work for a server -- it might actually be a problem.

I see the new models as a customer win
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back