The new Macs are almost certainly coming, albeit at a less frequent rate of updates than in the past.
Meanwhile the new MacOS (10.13) has already broken cover.
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/03/07/macos-10-13-catalogurl/
Last edited:
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
The new Macs are almost certainly coming, albeit at a less frequent rate of updates than in the past.
Meanwhile the new MacOS (10.13) has already broken cover.
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/03/07/macos-10-13-catalogurl/
I don't think it can get more depressing than that picture...
On second thought, yes it can. The rest of the tabs are almost as sad as well.
So when is XX due?
We went from 1 thru nine, Now we seem interminably stuck on X?
Where's the next quantum leap?
I don't need a cigarette lighter on my Caps-lock key, I need a solid, modern OS.
When do we get a proper Twenty-teens rebuild from the metal up?
-P.S. Where is Bumpass Hell on the list of possible new names?
We went from 1 thru nine, Now we seem interminably stuck on X?
Where's the next quantum leap?
I don't need a cigarette lighter on my Caps-lock key, I need a solid, modern OS.
When do we get a proper Twenty-teens rebuild from the metal up?
-P.S. Where is Bumpass Hell on the list of possible new names?
OSX has gone….. MacOS is here.
Quantum leaps are rare. Updates tend to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary…. to the disappointment of many who frequent this forum….. but they are almost certainly coming.
Even the much derided 2014 Mac Minis were an improvement in some respects over previous generation equivalents. The exception the lusted after 2014 quad-core….. which didn't come.
Last edited:
Evolutionary is fine if you're starting on a firm base, which (at first) OS X was. The evolution from 10.0 Cheetah to 10.6 Snow Leopard was fine. Since then it's be more of a "devolution" process. That's what most of us on this forum are unhappy about.
Care to clarify a bit more? I used Macs back in the earlier days before I knew the difference and then came back to Mountain Lion so I haven't notice too much devolution, or at least IMO. Actually many of the features since then I use on a daily basis and I feel are great. I see this quite a bit and I'm just curious.
Statement:
Reply:
If you have to ask that question, you don't want to know. The answer will only make you bitter, resentful, and depressed like the rest of us. Ignorance is bliss when it comes to Apple products lately.
Reply:
If you have to ask that question, you don't want to know. The answer will only make you bitter, resentful, and depressed like the rest of us. Ignorance is bliss when it comes to Apple products lately.
Last edited:
I'll go ahead and take the side of the "minority" on this forum, I guess -- I'm very happy about the moves OS X has made post 10.6. Memory compression in particular has been a godsend to me, providing significant performance improvements in situations where I'm running low on RAM. It has allowed me to continue to use a machine with 8 GB of RAM for certain applications, which under another OS would probably have required an upgrade to continue to be usable.
On the other hand, there have been very few significant UI modifications, which to my mind has also been of great benefit. The incredible lurching back-and-forth of the Windows UI over the last few versions has been just crazy; Microsoft seemed to believe that just throwing bunches of cell-phone-like touch-screen gimmicks on top of their OS would make people happy. But what I most want is a UI that is (a) well-thought-out and (b) stable, so you don't have to relearn everything again every few years.
I do believe that Apple has allowed feature-creep to seep into macOS, and thus caused it to have some bloat. But performance-wise, I have no issues with the OS. When running apps, it does a great job of maintaining the system and otherwise staying out of my way. Which is exactly what I want in an OS.
Try me. My user name is cynics which is a gd autocorrect error of cynicx so it'll be tough to find someone more bitter, resentful and depressed then I already am.
If I were to be critical of MacOS I would say it stagnated for many people, allowed Windows to catch up, maybe even lacked a certain level of innovation which I'm not creative enough to define. Them bailing out of Vulkcan was very frustrating too. And while they don't exactly push it in my face I don't like the direction they are heading with services they offer, on MacOS this would be iCloud.
TV app on iOS/tvOS is a good example, its a one stop shop for all your streaming apps! However if you really pay attention you see they are just putting you into the iTunes store. I find its subtly to be somewhat sketchy. You don't HAVE to buy anything but you will certainly be exposed to things you can buy. Meh, minor gripe I suppose.
However for me the creature comforts they implemented with integration for iOS have been great. Added phone support (although I feel they should update the FaceTime app to reflect that a bit more), SMS in the message app, handoff, continuity, etc. But I even enjoy Siri (even though its terrible at certain task like playing music...wtf). Touching on the above lack of innovation though makes me think of APFS, which implementing a new file system is a pretty impressive thing for such a well established OS. So I don't feel they have given up nor do I want to see a massive overhaul to the GUI that many would define as innovation.
Would you not still prefer MacOS over windows?
[doublepost=1488997792][/doublepost]
We should just stand in the corner and high five each other repeatedly until everyone else leaves.
EDIT : Loved Log Horizon btw, 2nd season not so much but 1st was great.
Way, way off topic, but -- thank you!
I agree completely; the 2nd season got a bit into the weeds, but this show gets so much right that Sword Art Online got wrong. And I think it's the first time I've ever seen a medieval fantasy hero utilize techniques like fast-food franchising and buying real estate on leverage to beat the bad guys...Way, way off topic, but -- thank you!
The dying thing bothered me or lack there of. I feel they can operate with little to no consequence unlike SAO. Ever see Gate? Different take on a similar subject but like the premise of the two worlds combining, also didn't like the 2nd season as much either. They try to hard or something.
Ah, I hated the dying thing in SAO. "You've gotta continue playing this game because there's a bomb wired up to the back of your head." Honestly, that's gotta suck all the enjoyment out of a game; not only is it now something you are playing because you are forced to do so, you've got the fear of death hanging over you at all times, which makes the constant fighting involved in a modern computer game completely insane. Where is the fun in coming up with novel strategies for success, when the penalty for experimentation is your actual death? That, combined with the fact that the writer doesn't seem to appreciate the entire point of a "role playing" game (the characters actually comment that high-level abilities are "unfair" in that they give you a significant advantage over lower-level characters, where the whole point is to reward you for playing your role -- i.e., you could become the world's greatest swordsman in the game, even if in real life you couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with a sword), makes the show almost unwatchable for me...
I did also watch GATE, and I love it as well, but it's a very different beast -- rather than turning a computer game into reality, it follows the more classic storyline of a door into another world. I appreciated both seasons of the show; they were clearly trying to combine the modern world with the classic medieval fantasy story, and the second season spent a lot of its time getting into the good old "form a balanced party to assault the monster" concept. (And really, I think seeing Lelei finally get angry and really let loose was probably the high point for me; I really wasn't expecting that.) Anyway, great stuff.
Ah, I hated the dying thing in SAO. "You've gotta continue playing this game because there's a bomb wired up to the back of your head." Honestly, that's gotta suck all the enjoyment out of a game; not only is it now something you are playing because you are forced to do so, you've got the fear of death hanging over you at all times, which makes the constant fighting involved in a modern computer game completely insane. Where is the fun in coming up with novel strategies for success, when the penalty for experimentation is your actual death? That, combined with the fact that the writer doesn't seem to appreciate the entire point of a "role playing" game (the characters actually comment that high-level abilities are "unfair" in that they give you a significant advantage over lower-level characters, where the whole point is to reward you for playing your role -- i.e., you could become the world's greatest swordsman in the game, even if in real life you couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with a sword), makes the show almost unwatchable for me...
I did also watch GATE, and I love it as well, but it's a very different beast -- rather than turning a computer game into reality, it follows the more classic storyline of a door into another world. I appreciated both seasons of the show; they were clearly trying to combine the modern world with the classic medieval fantasy story, and the second season spent a lot of its time getting into the good old "form a balanced party to assault the monster" concept. (And really, I think seeing Leilei finally get angry and really let loose was probably the high point for me; I really wasn't expecting that.) Anyway, great stuff.
Interesting perspective. Never thought of SAO it that way in comparison to LH. Glad to see people appreciate LH's approach on the matter.
Last edited:
Wow. That's the SFF we all want (HP Z2). Thanks for posting that link. HP isn't worried about it cannibalizing their line up. Man, there's something just wrong with Apple.
Execs at HP Inc have been saying that after the split from HP (HPE), they were freed from having to fit into a top-down corporate strategy. For the most part, they're saying they are now allowed to build what they think will sell, instead of any other reason butting in
Nice. Designed for a Xeon processor, not a laptop.
More proof Apple is asleep or busy ignoring us.
Meehhhh....First thing I notice is a DC port in, so there is an external power brick somewhere.
Its offers more but when comparing prices.....
The 699 models because they can be easier compared.
HP's CPU is a bit faster, but a 2 core i3 granted a newer generation (last years 6th generation) with faster iGPU.
Apple has a 4gb more RAM.
HP has a faster HDD 7200rpm but still a HDD
HP has a little room for expansion with m.2 slot, 3 display ports (no HDMI) and although it says USB C according to the pics online the entry model doesn't but lets assume it does (not TB3 though).
899 model HP makes things better vs 999 Mini (I didnt compare to the 1001 HP because its on sale and the specs are convoluted)
HP has a better CPU hands down, 4 core with better iGPU.
Apple has faster storage Fusion vs HP's 7200rpm HDD
And again with a bit more expansion on the HP.
Step up to HP's higher end models and get dGPU which is nice but its a Quaddro M620 which is....well admittedly better then what the Mini has to offer I guess not something I would be willing to pay for. However has a quad core i7 option (spec sheet says you can get a Xeon E3 in it lol), PCIe SSD, faster RAM, USB C.
Subjectively the HP is better then the Mini. I only say subjectively because they don't offer a 1tb SSD model and it doesn't have HDMI. However it does have USB C but its not TB3.
If Apple offered something similar I would consider it. Be nice to have a better GPU, but with those options I would just go for iGPU and save some money.
That is a workstation...not a toy. Quadro are excellent for CAD and graphics intensive tasks with little failure as are Xeon processors.
I'm sticking with the context of the thread and a consumer grade Mac Mini vs HP H2 which if in the market for a SFF seems reasonable enough to at least compare. Price isn't unreasonable either. I disagree with you though and here is why....
A m620 is excellent for CAD when compared to the nothing Apple offers I'll certainly give you that. But compared to even Apples current dedicated GPU's it falls far behind aside from maybe a very specific task that requires Quadro driver support. Even then I would like to see how it could do in those task vs even a Radeon Pro 455 (from the new MBP) based on its brute force alone assuming the drivers weren't an issue.
And its best Xeon is a E3-1245 v5. They offer the similar performing i7-6700 which is a cooler running CPU with near identical iGPU. The only benefit of the Xeon has here is supporting ECC memory, everything else is a wash.
The combination of that Quadro and Xeon definitely would classify it as a workstation however I feel like that was HP's point to get people to buy it. It is the absolute lowest level you can get for ECC support and Quadro driver support. If you were actually doing CAD that machine would be considered a toy.
Now in lieu of sounding like a apologist the HP H2 is definitely better then a Mac Mini but not cause of Xeon and Quadro. But because you can get an i7-6700, 32gb RAM, better i/o although I'd like to see TB3, and a dedicated GPU which IMO would be nice to see a Radeon Pro in place of the Quadro for those that want a dGPU. However the 6th gen CPU line should support higher refresh rates at higher resolutions across the board.
What, the 460 Radon. I had one in my hack and took it out cause it sucked.
Apple has no clue about GPUs except to throttle them and make lousy drivers for them.
Apple has no clue about GPUs except to throttle them and make lousy drivers for them.
Last edited:
WTF?
I posted a duplicate, removed it, and now the original has gone.
It was something something, external power supplies are not all bad, certainly not a deal breaker for me, something something.
I posted a duplicate, removed it, and now the original has gone.
It was something something, external power supplies are not all bad, certainly not a deal breaker for me, something something.