The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming

[Fishrrman]

bopa wrote:
"I DID NOT EXPECT THE COMPUTER TO BE SOO SLOW.... Of course an SSD would be faster, but again I thought I could live with a spinner and the specs the way it was."

If you've been a reader of the Mini forums for any length of time, YOU WERE PROPERLY WARNED that the Mini with the 5400rpm HDD is as slow as molasses.

And yes, it IS "your" mistake for trying. But that's all over now.

You now have 3 possible solutions in front of you:
Solution 1: return the Mini you have, and get the version with a 1tb fusion drive (at least)
Solution 2: return the Mini and get something else
Solution 3: get an external USB3 SSD, plug it in, and set it up to be an "external booter".

Solution 3 is cheap and easy. I've been running my late-2012 Mini for going on FIVE YEARS this way, and it runs as well today as back in January 2013 when I first turned it on.

With an external SSD connected via USB3, you should see read speeds in the 430mbps range, and writes in the 250-330mbps range (depending on the drive size and manufacturer).

So… take that $100 you saved on the Mini and get a 480gb USB3 SSD.
Adding the external booter will transform the Mini you have from a slow boat into a smooth and usable machine.

 

[jasnw]

A big problem with the Mini, at least from Apple’s perspective, is that it became more than it was meant to be, which was an entry-level “bait” to bring people into the real Apple computer line-up of iMacs and (then) Mac Pros. Letting PC users ease into the Mac world by keeping their monitors. Now that the flow is in the other direction (largely Apple’s fault), the Mini users can jettison the Mini for a PC and keep their monitors. This is, in marketing parlance, bad juju.

Apple clearly wants to keep the iMac as the mass-market desktop computer, throwing a token Mac Pro line at developers and power-users to sorta-kinda keep them happy. A decent Mac Mini, particularly one with good video performance, would be a threat to both of those markets (doesn’t matter how big a threat, any threat is bad from a marketing viewpoint). Apple’s view of their computer offerings is that if you want to be able to add or change things inside the box, get a Mac Pro (the new modular approach, whatever that turns out to be, plays into that), otherwise get the iMac that is closest to your perceived needs. The Mini is a definite odd man out.

So, you have a product that doesn’t fit your view of your product line, a product that could eat into sales of other items that you want in your product line, a product that eases escape from the Mac world back to the PC world, and a product that brings nothing but pissing and moaning from MacRumors. Good-bye, Mini. (Although I hope I’m wrong.)

 

[Cape Dave]

Seriously..? Can't believe you'd happily accept such mediocrity.

The wealthiest tech company can't spare the tiniest bit of cash from their billions to put in a token amount of flash in every Mac as standard?

The mini makes up such a small fraction of their sales that doing so would be tinier than a rounding error... but make a tangible difference to their customers' experience.

Micky Don't.

Truth. Spinners are SLOW. Is that so hard to understand???

 

[saulinpa]

There is a major difference in performance and that is why Apple is offering the Fusion drive to get the best of both worlds. Speed and capacity. In the latest iMacs the SSD portion is now 24GB so this shows they are looking how to make it cheaper. Hopefully standard in the next generation.
[doublepost=1495726997][/doublepost]

A big problem with the Mini, at least from Apple’s perspective, is that it became more than it was meant to be, which was an entry-level “bait” to bring people into the real Apple computer line-up of iMacs and (then) Mac Pros. Letting PC users ease into the Mac world by keeping their monitors. Now that the flow is in the other direction (largely Apple’s fault), the Mini users can jettison the Mini for a PC and keep their monitors. This is, in marketing parlance, bad juju.

The mini was introduced with the marketing that you would provide your own keyboard, mouse, and monitor. In reality Apple made money upselling $999 monitors to people that bought $499 minis which took the pressure off sales. Since there are no current Apple monitors for sale the mini has a harder time showing that it adds to the bottom line.

 

[DesertSurfer]

A big problem with the Mini, at least from Apple’s perspective, is that it became more than it was meant to be, which was an entry-level “bait” to bring people into the real Apple computer line-up of iMacs and (then) Mac Pros. Letting PC users ease into the Mac world by keeping their monitors. Now that the flow is in the other direction (largely Apple’s fault), the Mini users can jettison the Mini for a PC and keep their monitors. This is, in marketing parlance, bad juju.

Apple clearly wants to keep the iMac as the mass-market desktop computer, throwing a token Mac Pro line at developers and power-users to sorta-kinda keep them happy. A decent Mac Mini, particularly one with good video performance, would be a threat to both of those markets (doesn’t matter how big a threat, any threat is bad from a marketing viewpoint). Apple’s view of their computer offerings is that if you want to be able to add or change things inside the box, get a Mac Pro (the new modular approach, whatever that turns out to be, plays into that), otherwise get the iMac that is closest to your perceived needs. The Mini is a definite odd man out.

So, you have a product that doesn’t fit your view of your product line, a product that could eat into sales of other items that you want in your product line, a product that eases escape from the Mac world back to the PC world, and a product that brings nothing but pissing and moaning from MacRumors. Good-bye, Mini. (Although I hope I’m wrong.)

What you say makes a lot of sense, but saying it, in The New Mac Mini is Almost Certainly Coming parlance, is bad ju-ju.

 

[Miat]

bad juju

I love it when MacRumors talks dirty.

 

[Crosscreek]

bad juju

I love it when MacRumors talks dirty.

Leaves a terrible ugly picture in my mind.......Bad!!!

 

[Kebabselector]

From the latest video.....

Mac Mini reincarnated from old iPhones!!

 

[robotica]

From the latest video.....View attachment 701017
Mac Mini reincarnated from old iPhones!!

At this point I am willing to believe that they put that in this video on purpose as a way of letting us know we are getting a new mini soon. Right guys......right?

 

[DesertSurfer]

At this point I am willing to believe that they put that in this video on purpose as a way of letting us know we are getting a new mini soon. Right guys......right?

Almost certainly!

 

[saulinpa]

From the latest video.....View attachment 701017
Mac Mini reincarnated from old iPhones!!

I definitely put that in the fake news category. A Mac mini made from iPhone parts would be illegal in 23 countries and immoral in 14.

 

[Boyd01]

With an external SSD connected via USB3, you should see read speeds in the 430mbps range, and writes in the 250-330mbps range (depending on the drive size and manufacturer).

I am getting a little better write speeds with a Samsung 500gb T3 USB 3.0 SSD on a 2012 base mini.

 

[adam9c1]

Apple needs entry level machine for Mac Server running Caching Service and file sharing. Not sure what other future there is for Server App and the Mini itself, so I don't expect them to make many if any changes at all from current specs... other than lower the price.
Make it a turd as a desktop, but fast enough for cache service.

 

[Micky Do]

Seriously..? Can't believe you'd happily accept such mediocrity.

The wealthiest tech company can't spare the tiniest bit of cash from their billions to put in a token amount of flash in every Mac as standard?

The mini makes up such a small fraction of their sales that doing so would be tinier than a rounding error... but make a tangible difference to their customers' experience.

Micky Don't.

Seriously…… With a HDD a computer is slower to boot, and apps are slower to open….. Not difficult to live with if a computer is seldom shut down, and the apps usually used are usually open. The it depends on the computer having adequate RAM and what one is doing with a computer.

For users who mainly use basic Mac apps (Pages, Numbers, Safari, iTunes and plus Dictionary and the like for me) and the odd non demanding non Mac app, and are not given frequently opening and closing files and apps such mediocrity is fine.

For more demanding uses the options are there.

Truth. Spinners are SLOW. Is that so hard to understand???

But adequate for basic use by folks who for whom cost effective storage is more important than snappy performance. There are options to suit different needs and budgets…. Is that so hard to understand?

 

[SpacemanSpiffed]

The thing that we notice about spinning HDDs is not the transfer rate, which is slower, but all the time spent seeking - moving the heads and waiting for the platters to spin into position. That is exponentially slower, and the single biggest component of the speedup that end users perceive.

 

[Cape Dave]

Seriously…… With a HDD a computer is slower to boot, and apps are slower to open….. Not difficult to live with if a computer is seldom shut down, and the apps usually used are usually open. The it depends on the computer having adequate RAM and what one is doing with a computer.

For users who mainly use basic Mac apps (Pages, Numbers, Safari, iTunes and plus Dictionary and the like for me) and the odd non demanding non Mac app, and are not given frequently opening and closing files and apps such mediocrity is fine.

For more demanding uses the options are there.


But adequate for basic use by folks who for whom cost effective storage is more important than snappy performance. There are options to suit different needs and budgets…. Is that so hard to understand?

And someone somewhere is still selling buggy whips

 

[cynics]

I am getting a little better write speeds with a Samsung 500gb T3 USB 3.0 SSD on a 2012 base mini.

Those T3's are very impressive. Would you mind letting the test run its course and taking a screenshot of the entire thing. To me the rest of the information is more important....If possible thanks in advance
[doublepost=1495827117][/doublepost]

The thing that we notice about spinning HDDs is not the transfer rate, which is slower, but all the time spent seeking - moving the heads and waiting for the platters to spin into position. That is exponentially slower, and the single biggest component of the speedup that end users perceive.

Random read are what we deal with the majority of the time in everyday use. Opening programs, booting the OS, etc etc. And this is where HDD have their mechanical bottleneck. Most of the benchmarks we see aren't an accurate representation of the speeds we are dealing with just the max sequential read and write. Even then that is a very sketchy way of comparison because many large files we move/copy to see those speeds in real world use are incompressible because they are already compressed (media) so its much slower. However that is true across the board so its not an unfair advantage given to SSDs which is why we can still feel such a large difference in performance.

People around here are way to hard on HDDs though. There is still a very important place in the world for HDDs. They still have quite a few benefits over SSD's for specific task even if you completely negate cost. They are much more reliable for constant write environments. They can be pretty fast in RAID making much higher capacity fast storage solutions available that SSDs can't offer. Conversely, higher capacities in redundant RAID solutions are available.

For the foreseeable future I'll keep my various OS's and programs on SSDs. Meanwhile back ups and surveillance will remain on HDD's. Both are better at doing their given task vs their respective counterpart.

 

[Micky Do]

And someone somewhere is still selling buggy whips

True, because buggies are still appropriate tech for some folk.

I still get around on a 20 year old motorcycle with a carburettor and cable operated drum brakes…...

…. Which sooner or later I might to replace with one of these, relatively new on the market, also equipped with a carb and cable operated drum brakes..

Nothing cutting edge about the tech, but still functional and cost effective transport.

The new Mac Mini lower order model will almost certainly have a HDD, but you will not be compelled to buy one. Fusion Drive (still a HDD in there) and SSD will almost certainly be be standard or available as an option further up the range.

 

[Cape Dave]

True, because buggies are still appropriate tech for some folk.

I still get around on a 20 year old motorcycle with a carburettor and cable operated drum brakes…...
View attachment 701136

…. Which sooner or later I might to replace with one of these, relatively new on the market, also equipped with a carb and cable operated drum brakes..
View attachment 701137

Nothing cutting edge about the tech, but still functional and cost effective transport.

The new Mac Mini lower order model will almost certainly have a HDD, but you will not be compelled to buy one. Fusion Drive (still a HDD in there) and SSD will almost certainly be be standard or available as an option further up the range.

Of course there is always an exception to prove the rule. But what I am really trying to explain is that no one who has ever tried a SSD ever goes back to a spinner because they say "My computer is too fast, I am enjoying using it so much that I must go backwards. Similar to the way NO ONE EVER has gone back to their 33k modem after trying broadband. Ever! Sure, there are places that still can only get 33k, but that is just not my point. Apple, the richest tech company in the world, can certainly afford SSD in every damn computer they sell so that the people, us, who have made them so rich can have a better experience with the modern computer. Spinners are fine in a T3 external drive for storage. Although I had a nice 512GB SSD for external storage and that works a whole lot faster.

The above point is simply unarguable.

 

[Micky Do]

Apple, the richest tech company in the world, can certainly afford SSD in every damn computer they sell so that the people, us, who have made them so rich can have a better experience with the modern computer.

Wow, a cute bit of marketing talk fantasy there….. Computers as some kind of existential experience.

I simply use computers, and prefer use OS X / MacOS to the alternatives.

Sure Apple could install SSD in every damn computer they sell, but not every buyer needs, desires, or finds it cost effective. Thus, Apple will almost certainly continue to provide HDD, Fusion Drive and SSD options.

 

[DesertSurfer]

For a limited time only, I am willing to solve the HDD vs SSD argument, all for one low, low price. And, if you act now, I will throw in completely for free the solution to another vexing question of our time, how much RAM is enough? And, to the first 2000 lucky customers, I will in addition provide at no cost (other than shipping and handling fees) a Ronco Splatter Screen! So tough, you can't even cut it with a Ginsu knife....ok, a Ginsu knife is also included. Just send me your credit card information along with your mother's maiden name and your social security number and her social security number, and start checking that mailbox!

 

[Miat]

how much RAM is enough?

That is a trick question. There is no such thing as enough RAM.

 

[Partron22]

I am willing to solve the HDD vs SSD argument

Run on fast SSD, USB3 or internal.
Back up on and stream from far cheaper HD.
Forget the evolutionary freak which is the "fusion" drive. It's days are numbered. (Except at Apple, which will be selling a 1TB 5krpm spinner, with a 128 GB fused SSD in 2028, on its new Mac Mini, which is almost certainly coming).

 

[navaira]

The question here is – can Apple find SLOWER HDDs for the new Mac Mini, which is almost certainly coming when Liam is done disassembling all iPhone 3Gs?

 

[cynics]

The question here is – can Apple find SLOWER HDDs for the new Mac Mini, which is almost certainly coming when Liam is done disassembling all iPhone 3Gs?

Unlikely. Honestly I can't source 2.5" 5400RPM HDDs more then a couple bucks cheaper then 2.5" 7200RPM HDDs. And if I stick to name brand I can't do it at all. I'm sure Apple did but what could the saving possibly have been?

If you think its bad in a Mini? Apple also sells the 5400RPM HDD in the 21" 4k iMac lol. Not that the rest of the base hardware is much better but you can run into trouble combining that slow of storage with that high res of a display.

Considering its the most noticeable aspect of a machine performance its a mind boggling place for them to skimp.