The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming

[theluggage]

Considering the old Intel i5, 8 GB, 512 GB, Mini spec is currently $1,099.00 the same price the i5, 8 GB, 256 GB did in 2019 (got to love internet archive) you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

So, between 2018 and 2022 the old-tech $1099 Mini got a minor storage bump? And it's now got the same storage as the $899 M1 Mini? Not exactly a game changer.

in 1998 and hotel that used a UNIX system because the program was too old to run on DOS...in 2008.

We're not necessarily talking about hardware/software that ancient - the point is that until maybe ~2010 even a 5 year-old computer would have been a museum piece, whereas today a ~2012 Mac is perfectly usable for modern office productivity tasks - the only real issue being the security risk if the OS is no longer getting updates... and that can be mitigated by the same sort of basic precautions that you should be taking anyway.

N.B., a Mac Studio running Monterrey is a UNIX system - and just because the software is old doesn't mean that it's no good. A pre-DOS UNIX system was a lot more powerful than DOS. You don't want to believe everything you read in reports on tech industry surveys and your BS meter should be twitching as soon as you see a figure like "a record 1,579 data breaches" without any discussion of what proportion of those were actually down to old tech. New tech won't save you from weak/stolen credentials, social engineering or inside jobs. )

More over at $1,298 at launch an Apple II was far cheaper than the 128 Mac US$2,495 at launch.

By the time you added a disc drive (thick end of $500 at the time) and a display (probably $200) to make the Apple II even remotely comparable you'd be looking at $2000. How close do you want to be to prove the point when the Mac had 32x as much RAM, and several times the CPU power? The point is, after ~6-7 years what you could get for $2-3k had changed to the point that they weren't really comparable.

...even through the 90s and early 00s a 5-6 year old computer was a door stop, hopelessly out classed and lacking game-changing tech. Today, however, we're seriously worrying about whether a 10-year-old computer is still getting security updates...

 

[theluggage]

Apple policy for some time now is if a new product comes out at a higher price, then the older product sticks around at the old price until it is either End of Lifed and/or the new product drops to the same price due to Economies of Scale.

True - but until the M2 MacBook Air came along that has mainly been with iDevices (which are on a much more frequent and predictable update cycle). Where it has happened with Macs in the past it seems to have been more about supporting "legacy" users than providing an entry-level machine (e.g. apart from a price hike, the first Retina MBPs dropped optical drives, firewire, mechanical hard drives and made larger storage capacities hugely expensive - so it made sense to keep the old models around for a while).

I think the M2 Air is the first time that a relatively incremental Mac update has done this, and that might have been to ensure that there would be discounted M1 Airs in the shops for "Back To School" - we'll see how long the M1 hangs around for.

 

[CWallace]

Where it has happened with Macs in the past it seems to have been more about supporting "legacy" users than providing an entry-level machine.

One big example I can think of is Apple kept the non-Retina MacBook Air 13" around for years after releasing the Retina model at $1199 to maintain a $999 price point for the cheapest Mac laptop. Eventually, the Retina model dropped to $999 and when it did, the non-Retina model went End of Life.

 

[Boyd01]

More over at $1,298 at launch an Apple II was far cheaper than the 128 Mac

By the time you added a disc drive (thick end of $500 at the time) and a display (probably $200) to make the Apple II even remotely comparable you'd be looking at $2000.

FWIW, I got my Apple ][ on June 22, 1978 from The Computer Workshop in Pittsburgh (which was - literally - in a guy's suburban basement). Cost was $1,225 (less tax) and I got the most expensive model with 16kb of RAM. Most people were buying the cheaper 4kb version, which was quite a bit cheaper IIRC. But the problem was, 4kb was not enough memory to load floating point BASIC so you could only use the integer BASIC that was burned into ROM. But you could still play StarWars and StarTrek on the 4kb model.

There was no charge for a disk drive because none existed yet, they had announced the Disk ][ but it wasn't shipping. I got one when it came out, but that was months later. The computer had an audio modem port that you connected to your own cassette tape recorder to load/save programs.

I think very few people bought monitors with the Apple ][ at launch. Their whole advertising push was color graphics on your home TV. There was an RF modulator inside the case that you could connect to your TV antenna port if it didn't have composite video input.

Anyway, I think people were getting what (at the time) they considered a full home computer with a 4kb Apple ][ for less than $1200.

 

[sublunar]

One big example I can think of is Apple kept the non-Retina MacBook Air 13" around for years after releasing the Retina model at $1199 to maintain a $999 price point for the cheapest Mac laptop. Eventually, the Retina model dropped to $999 and when it did, the non-Retina model went End of Life.

That's an example of keeping a portable device to meet a specific price point. Same thing happened with the MacBook Pro 13" non retina 2012 (Ivy Bridge) model staying in the lineup with discounts until 2016.

The MBA M2 vs M1 comparison is the reason why I am banking on Apple keeping an M1 Mini SKU around to see a $699 price point for the Mini.

If Apple completely upgrade the whole Mini line with M2 like they did with the M1 MacBook Pro 13" there's every likelihood that overseas prices will increase. This might see the 8/10/256 Mini costing £799 in the UK.

Not a great look when the otherwise unchanged M2 MBP13 now costs £1349 - an increase of £100 for the 8/10 configuration with 256Gb (slow single chip) SSD.

For me, the only way to keep the entry prices the same across the world is to keep an M1 mini on the books just like the M1 Air. That way Apple don't have to institute a price increase - same plan as with M1 Air.

Any BTO 'upgrade' to an M2 CPU could then include a choice of 8/8 or 8/10 configurations which Apple could price accordingly with Q3 prices with access to 24Gb RAM obviously only available with M2 CPU.

The price range of the Mini would then stretch upwards to fill the gap to the Mac Studio even more closely and we can then expect comparison articles to start recommending refurb/discount Studios more heartily.

In effect, Apple could therefore introduce an 8/8 M2 with 8/512 configuration as the $899 (£999) SKU and potentially sell a 8/10 M2 16/512 range topper for $1299 (£1399). *

This then makes an upgrade to Mac Studio a no brainer for anyone who values 32Gb RAM or more ports etc.

* Note - I am anticipating effective UK and Euro price increases when the M2 Mini comes out. The Mac Studio would remain an increasingly good pre-inflation deal until M2 Max is released although there's nothing stopping Apple from simply re-aligning prices around the world without launching a new product but during a press event for other products.

 

[EugW]

In effect, Apple could therefore introduce an 8/8 M2 with 8/512 configuration as the $899 (£999) SKU and potentially sell a 8/10 M2 16/512 range topper for $1299 (£1399). *

This then makes an upgrade to Mac Studio a no brainer for anyone who values 32Gb RAM or more ports etc.

$700 more just get more ports would be a pretty hard pill to swallow. Even if factor in the 24 GB model at $1499, that's still $500 more just for more ports.

For me, the only way to keep the entry prices the same across the world is to keep an M1 mini on the books just like the M1 Air. That way Apple don't have to institute a price increase - same plan as with M1 Air.

Difference with the M2 Air is that it gets a sheetload of new upgrades. M2 Mac mini would get likely get nothing else new... unless you're suggesting it will have a new form factor.

 

[Maximara]

N.B., a Mac Studio running Monterrey is a UNIX system - and just because the software is old doesn't mean that it's no good. A pre-DOS UNIX system was a lot more powerful than DOS. You don't want to believe everything you read in reports on tech industry surveys and your BS meter should be twitching as soon as you see a figure like "a record 1,579 data breaches" without any discussion of what proportion of those were actually down to old tech. New tech won't save you from weak/stolen credentials, social engineering or inside jobs. )

Except the audit took an agonizing 3 hours to run on that old pre-DOS version of Unix but when corporate forced us to an updated version on Windows it took 30 minutes. It was exactly what Outdated technology costs businesses more than it saves warns about. Also MacOS X has been Unix since it first came out in 2001 and was certified with Leopard in 2007.

Nevermind back before the M1 when any software developer went 'we can't develop for Mac because we don't have one' I'd go "You do realize Darwin, the guts of the MacOS, is Unix and is open source, right?" Yet these developers will take the effort to write for Linux with its 1% marketshare and yet leave Darwin (MacOS) on the table even though it has over 5x the marketshare.

 

[theluggage]

Except the audit took an agonizing 3 hours to run on that old pre-DOS version of Unix but when corporate forced us to an updated version on Windows it took 30 minutes. It was exactly what Outdated technology costs businesses more than it saves warns about.

Well, first, that depends on how often you had to do the audit and whether that 3 hours required constant nursemaiding. If it ran overnight then so what? If a 3-hour job required constant interaction and couldn't run as a batch then it was broken 30 years ago and age has nothing to do with it. It only costs money if it was actually causing delays.

...and it's nothing to do with Unix vs. Windows - in fact you're lucky it was Unix not DOS, because that probably meant the software was written in portable, high-level code that could be updated for modern Windows.

In any case, you're talking about using tech that was 20-30 years old in 2008 while I was just referring to people using 5-10 year old Macs in 2022 & contrasting that to what it would be like to run a 5-10 year old machine in previous decades.

Nevermind back before the M1 when any software developer went 'we can't develop for Mac because we don't have one' I'd go "You do realize Darwin, the guts of the MacOS, is Unix and is open source, right?" Yet these developers will take the effort to write for Linux with its 1% marketshare and yet leave Darwin (MacOS) on the table even though it has over 5x the marketshare.

No, Darwin is not some sort of open-source version MacOS that you could reasonably use to develop native MacOS apps. Darwin was* an open source BSD Unix-like OS that used the MacOS XNU kernel and some other open source parts of MacOS but lacked many of the proprietary Apple frameworks, libraries and tools - including the entire graphics and GUI system - that make MacOS what it is.

What you could develop, test and support with open-source Darwin would a Unix-style command line tool or an X Windows app that could be run on MacOS but wouldn't work like a proper Mac app. Reality is - even if you used some sort of cross-platform system like Java or Electron - you're going to need a Mac to properly test the app and develop some sort of wrapper to make it usable by typical Mac users.

The "market" of Mac power users who'd be happy with unwrapped CLI or X apps is likely even smaller than the Linux market, so going for Linux (where all the popular distros you might want to test on are either totally free or have a close-enough free variant) makes sense.

Anyway, the effort in patching Linux code to build and run on MacOS as a command line/X app is often very minor. The only reason that Linux isn't Unix/Posix is that registering and certifying it as such doesn;t play well with the whole Free Software thing. The majority of well-known open source Linux/Unix projects have long since been patched to build on MacOS, and are already available through tools like Homebrew and MacPorts - often because the Homebrew/MacPorts maintainers have done the patching & wrapping.

(* OpenDarwin has been defunct since 2006, the PureDarwin site doesn't look as if it's been touched for 5 years. It's dead, J)

 

[sublunar]

$700 more just get more ports would be a pretty hard pill to swallow. Even if factor in the 24 GB model at $1499, that's still $500 more just for more ports.

You kind of forgot the much more powerful processor and other bits - regardless of whether or not you may or may not use it that's included in the M1 Max Mac Studio. Plus, you can bet that Apple are pigeonholing your needs as niche based on their own market research.

Difference with the M2 Air is that it gets a sheetload of new upgrades. M2 Mac mini would get likely get nothing else new... unless you're suggesting it will have a new form factor.

Not suggested a new form factor at all. I don't need to rewrite my points - read them again if you like in the other posts. If you're American you will have simply missed the international point - Apple can leave the dollar price alone but an M2 spec bump like the MacBook Pro 13 got will mean price increases in many other places in the world. And that could be a bad look for the cheapest Mac you can buy.

If you think that's not fair on US residents then you're completely missing the fact that I believe that Apple will lose a lot more sales to people who balk at a straight price increase then those who cry because they might have to get a USB-C dongle or Thunderbolt dock or (shock, horror) refuse to pay more for an M1 Max Mac Studio.

$200-300 can buy you a very nice Thunderbolt dock with a selection of I/O as you see fit. It might have the added benefit of keeping USB3 devices away from the main chassis (something which I suspect might be a factor in Wifi/Bluetooth issues on the classic Mini chassis).

In addition - for people with USB-C 10gb/s SSDs a few of these docks might offer full speed USB interfaces thanks to native non-Apple Thunderbolt controllers whereas I read that native Thunderbolt 4 ports don't actually support full speed on Samsung T7 10Gb/s or Sandisk Extreme Pro 20Gb/s USB drives thanks to quirks in the USB support offered by Apple's Thunderbolt implementation across all of their first and second generation ARM products.

 

[EugW]

You kind of forgot the much more powerful processor and other bits - regardless of whether or not you may or may not use it that's included in the M1 Max Mac Studio. Plus, you can bet that Apple are pigeonholing your needs as niche based on their own market research.

As mentioned by many here, the performance benefit of Mac Studio is pointless for them, so that’s not a meaningful benefit in that context. I am included in that group.

BTW, wanting more ports on Macs is a very common refrain. It is most definitely not niche. However, most people would just get a hub, despite the drawbacks of doing so. I would too, if it meant spending $700 just to get more native ports.

 

[sublunar]

As mentioned by many here, the performance benefit of Mac Studio is pointless for them, so that’s not a meaningful benefit in that context. I am included in that group.

BTW, wanting more ports on Macs is a very common refrain. It is most definitely not niche. However, most people would just get a hub, despite the drawbacks of doing so. I would too, if it meant spending $700 just to get more native ports.

Easy for you to say so but neither of us are Apple’s market research team.

Let’s not forget that Apple have patently left a hole for an affordable headless desktop between the mini and the pro for years.

And they know the mini has relatively few sales.

Would you have complained had there been four half speed thunderbolt ports on the back of a replacement for the last remaining Intel SKU? What the marketing team have to contend with now is the fact that IO is limited on the M1 and M2.

The time is coming when they will have to decide what replaces the upper SKU mini - I’m not holding out much hope for Apple somehow finding an extra 2 usb-c ports unless they decide to put a third party usb-c controller on the motherboard which might address issues brought up by @EugW

 

[JCRW]

"High-end" Mac mini:

• M2 Pro SoC (5NP)
• 12-core CPU (8P/4E)
• 20-core GPU
• 16GB RAM
• 512GB SSD
• $1399

If RAM can be upgraded to 32GB and SSD has a 4TB option I will buy into this and finally replace my Late 2012 27" iMac.

 

[GDF]

If RAM can be upgraded to 32GB and SSD has a 4TB option I will buy into this and finally replace my Late 2012 27" iMac.

Replacing my late 2012 27 iMac too. Tried a M1 24 iMac briefly, but did not like the smaller screen. Waffling between the base studio with 1tb SSD, but studio seems overkill for my needs. Sure got my money’s worth on the 2012 27 iMac, as still going strong with upgraded SSD, but just can’t update the software anymore.

 

[EugW]

Would you have complained had there been four half speed thunderbolt ports on the back of a replacement for the last remaining Intel SKU?

The current real-world Intel SKU has the appropriate amount of ports, so most people don't complain about its ports.

 

[sublunar]

The current real-world Intel SKU has the appropriate amount of ports, so most people don't complain about its ports.

View attachment 2046664

I wasn’t disputing that, it’s what I was alluding to. I think given the M1 and M2 CPUs weakness in USB-C 10Gb/s standards I’d be a bit concerned without an additional dock myself.

Having said that, the intel mini has only 2 thunderbolt controllers between those 4 ports. Whereas each usb4 port on an m1 mini has ‘full’ bandwidth available unless you get into the USB-C standards morass. Do you have 4 usb-c peripherals that you need to permanently connect to a Mac without using a dongle?

But given the marketing department have to sell what they have been given i don’t envy their task.

 

[gusping]

the intel mini has only 2 thunderbolt controllers between those 4 ports. Whereas each usb4 port on an m1 mini has ‘full’ bandwidth available

Just so I understand this correctly, Apple could in theory add four TB4 ports to the M2 mini and it would be akin to the internal thunderbolt layout of the 2018/2020 Intel mini, i.e. the bandwidth of each TB controller is shared between two ports?

 

[CWallace]

Just so I understand this correctly, Apple could in theory add four TB4 ports to the M2 mini and it would be akin to the internal thunderbolt layout of the 2018/2020 Intel mini, i.e. the bandwidth of each TB controller is shared between two ports?

Apple Thunderbolt controllers are designed to drive one port (unlike Intel's, which can drive two ports).

The M1 and M2 have two TB4 controllers, so they can drive two TB4 ports. The Pro and Max models have four controllers, so they can drive four and Ultra has (I presume) eight so it can drive up to eight ports.

 

[EugW]

Apple Thunderbolt controllers are designed to drive one port (unlike Intel's, which can drive with two ports).

The M1 and M2 have two TB4 controllers, so they can drive two TB4 ports. The Pro and Max models have four controllers, so they can drive four and Ultra has (I presume) eight so it can drive up to eight ports.

I think two TB ports is fine for a Mac mini. I am just saying it'd be nice to have more than 4 total USB ports built-in though, for a high end Mac mini. Something like:

2 Thunderbolt ports
2 additional USB-C ports
2 additional USB-A ports

Or else:

2 Thunderbolt ports
4 additional USB-C ports

However, I expect the M2 Mac mini to scrap the USB-A ports, and they won't give us 6 ports. So, I foresee it getting:

2 Thunderbolt ports
2 additional USB-C ports

 

[reallynotnick]

T

The current real-world Intel SKU has the appropriate amount of ports, so most people don't complain about its ports.

View attachment 2046664

Throw on an SD card reader like previous models and it's basically perfect minus maybe a front facing USB port could be nice.

 

[Boil]

Throw on an SD card reader like previous models and it's basically perfect minus maybe a front facing USB port could be nice.

I would think the number of folks who actually use a SD reader is smaller than the number of folks who don't...?

 

[saulinpa]

Throw on an SD card reader like previous models and it's basically perfect minus maybe a front facing USB port could be nice.

You are describing the Studio. Someone in Apple recognizes the need. Maybe that is the differentiator for being a "Pro" device as they brought the SD slot back for the MacBook Pro.

 

[sublunar]

I think two TB ports is fine for a Mac mini. I am just saying it'd be nice to have more than 4 total USB ports built-in though, for a high end Mac mini. Something like:

2 Thunderbolt ports
2 additional USB-C ports
2 additional USB-A ports

Or else:

2 Thunderbolt ports
4 additional USB-C ports

However, I expect the M2 Mac mini to scrap the USB-A ports, and they won't give us 6 ports. So, I foresee it getting:

2 Thunderbolt ports
2 additional USB-C ports

i don’t think Apple can scrap the USB A ports because they don’t ship the mini with a keyboard or mouse. Your USB-c setup suggestion works on the middle and top sku imac because it comes with a wireless keyboard and mouse.

giving it some thought, Apple could add value to the M2 Mini by somehow adding extra USB-C controllers to it and giving it the 4 ports from the upper sku in a similar way to the front of the mac studio base model getting usb c ports.

this could be a way for Apple to partly justify a price increase Later this year.

there’s increasing evidence now that Apple in uk and Europe will be raising prices sooner rather than later. it’s been reported that the Sony PS5 is the latest consumer product to get a flat out price increase and their report cites the strength of the dollar.

basically, if people haven’t heard me say otherwise yet consider getting your Apple products sooner rather than later as price increases may occur as soon as the iPhone launch a week on Wednesday.

the iPhone 14 pro is largely believed to get a price increase, the aforementioned Mini upper SKUs might be worth having if they add 2 extra USB-C ports to the back (although I won’t be surprised if they don’t add any ports and stick with the 8 and 10 core GPU arrangements that I have already suggested) and keep the unchanged M1 mini around as an entry level SKU.

Ive already seen forum posting from Europe saying that a base MacBook Pro 14 is actually cheaper than a 16/512 M2 air. I would say that Apple will be correcting this by raising prices of the 14 and 16 pro, maybe even the Studio.

sadly it seems that Europe and the uk (and probably other world regions) will see price rises for Apple gear as it gets refreshed, possibly even before.

 

[EugW]

Ive already seen forum posting from Europe saying that a base MacBook Pro 14 is actually cheaper than a 16/512 M2 air. I would say that Apple will be correcting this by raising prices of the 14 and 16 pro, maybe even the Studio.

sadly it seems that Europe and the uk (and probably other world regions) will see price rises for Apple gear as it gets refreshed, possibly even before.

A price increase for the M2 series Mac mini in Europe seems pretty much guaranteed, considering that €1 < $1 now. On November 1, 2020, €1 = $1.164. That means $1 is 17% more expensive now in Euros than it was in November 2020. IOW, expect somewhere between a 10-20% price increase on the Mac mini in Europe if it comes out this year.

OTOH, for those of us in Canada, the prices should remain about the same at the same price tiers, since US$1 is actually worth a bit less in CA$ now than it was on November 1, 2020. (I acknowledge they could increase the price tiers though.)

If these exchange rates persist, I think we may take our family vacation in Europe next year.

 

[sublunar]

A price increase for the M2 series Mac mini in Europe seems pretty much guaranteed, considering that €1 < $1 now. On November 1, 2020, €1 = $1.164. That means $1 is 17% more expensive now in Euros than it was in November 2020. IOW, expect somewhere between a 10-20% price increase on the Mac mini in Europe if it comes out this year.

OTOH, for those of us in Canada, the prices should remain about the same at the same price tiers, since US$1 is actually worth a bit less in CA$ now than it was on November 1, 2020. (I acknowledge they could increase the price tiers though.)

If these exchange rates persist, I think we may take our family vacation in Europe next year.

In roughly the same time the £ to $ is 8% worse off. But that’s just the headline rate, apple will hedge differently but by coincidence 8% is roughly the difference between the unchanged MacBook Pro 13 M2 (£1349) and the original MacBook Pro 13 from the same release date as the mini and MacBook Air m1 (£1249).

This plus the usual Apple rounding for me means that if Apple replaced the entire M1 range now a base 8/256 M2 with 10 graphics cores (to match the M1 variant) might cost £759 rather than £699.

And that’s the best case scenario where Apple generously bump the spec like with the M2 MacBook Pro 13” this year.

They could justify going with 8 core graphics model in the base model to keep the price down but the BTO price for the 10 core graphics would have to be £100 just like in the M2 MacBook Air.

I think Apple might instead find those extra two USB-C by adding controllers to allow 4 USB-C ports on the back for an ‘upper sku’ but that may increase the dollar price which will have a knock on effect for all the other prices.

But this is where apple in my opinion adopt the MacBook Air thinking and keep the M1 mini around as a base sku 8/256 because they then don’t need to raise the prices for that model around the world as that’s not been discontinued in their eyes - just like the m1 7 graphics core MBA.

In that way they introduce the M2 mini in upper sku variants above the base model M1 sku - but they’ll have to introduce a price increase for Europe and U.K.

Again with the basic 8% increase in the U.K. we are looking at an $899 sku costing £979 rounded up, and then a $1099 sku costing £1189.

Remember those are the raw price points - who knows what Apple choose to do with the M2 mini spec at those price points.

It should be 8/512 and in my opinion 16/512 with 10 core graphics.

It really wouldn’t surprise me if Apple rounded U.K. prices up to £999 and £1199 but with 10 core gpu.

At worst that’s with no amendments at all but at best apple budget some engineering to add usb-c controller with 2 extra ports to ape the old Intel SKUs but potentially bump the price due to ‘added value’.

This leaves the conundrum of the base model. If they let the 8 core m1 continue the original price stays the same world wide.

If they add the m2 they will have to bump the price of the cheapest mac for Europe and U.K. at least as it’s a new product.

There’s still a little room for manoeuvre with with 8 core version of the M2 costing £100 less than the 10 core.

That might encourage them to cut costs and introduce the binned m2 to the mini line.

For instance, mid sku $899 with 8/512 but with 8 graphics cores and only 2 thunderbolt ports alongside the usb a ports.

$1199 with 8/512 but with 10 graphics cores and 2 extra usb-c ports (apple in stingy mode).

 

[gusping]

It should be 8/512 and in my opinion 16/512 with 10 core graphics.

It really wouldn’t surprise me if Apple rounded U.K. prices up to £999 and £1199 but with 10 core gpu.

I could see this pricing tbh. Suppose if you add an M2 Pro it'd be what, another £200 at least? So creeping up.... I wonder if they'll do an M2 Mac Studio, because that's an option I suppose if my dream M2 Pro mini never turns up