The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming

[Boyd01]

...but a PC running an AMD Threadripper or suchlike - that can run x86-64 code natively - almost certainly will. Right tool for the job etc...

True, but here's the thing. I went from a 2012 quad Mini and an HP Windows 7 PC to a single top spec 2018 Mini. This gave me a very nice Mac and also a Windows 10 PC for about $2500 (refurb). If I went with separate computers, the PC would have cost at least $1500, so I would either have to settle for much less Mac or spend more money. Then there's the Parallels integration between Windows and MacOS which I find to be a big productivity increase.

Of course, this is all specific to my own needs and probably not an issue for most people. Unless it dies or there's some unexpected change in my needs, I'll stick with my 2018 Mini for as long as it's supported (another two years?). I'm retired and can't afford to replace computers unless there's a clear justification.

If I thought it could run my Windows software, would defintitely go with the studio instead of an Apple TV sized Mini with only 3 USB ports. But who knows what options I might have when I'm ready to upgrade in 2026? We shall see.

Why do we need 64gb RAM? To run BackBlaze, of course. 🤣 It devours all the free RAM that I have.

 

[Peter_M]

I guess you haven’t bothered to price out the Mac mini. The problem with Mx Pro Mac mini Is that at higher memory amounts, it’s not cost effective vs the Mac Studio. The only scenario where the Mx Pro Mac mini actually makes any sense is if you have comparatively low memory requirements. Mac Studio is the machine of choice for Logic Pro if you need more RAM.

Of course you could argue Apple needs to price memory upgrades better, but that’s a different argument.

In any case, your scenario of Mac mini Mx Pro plus 64 GB is ultra niche. The market for that is extremely small. You shouldn’t be surprised that few are sympathetic to your niche wishes.

Wow, some people just have to argue for the sake of arguing. Of course, I have priced out the Mac Mini when fully specced, vs. the Mac Studio.

 

[EugW]

Wow, some people just have to argue for the sake of arguing. Of course, I have priced out the Mac Mini when fully specced, vs. the Mac Studio.

Geez. I guess I should have added the /s tag.

The point is, unless you're going to argue about memory pricing, which is a different argument, the Mac mini Mx Pro makes little sense at high memory capacities. The 32 GB Mac mini Mx Pro doesn't make much sense in Apple's pricing model vs the Mac Studio, so a hypothetical 64 GB model would make even less sense.

BTW, since we're talking about memory options for the Mac mini Mx Pro, elsewhere in this thread I mentioned a reasonable additional option or the Mac mini Mx Pro would actually be a 24 GB model. That would sell to a far, far, far bigger group than a 64 GB model ever would, and it would actually be priced differently enough from the 32 GB Mac Studio to actually make some sense.

 

[theluggage]

True, but here's the thing. I went from a 2012 quad Mini and an HP Windows 7 PC to a single top spec 2018 Mini. This gave me a very nice Mac and also a Windows 10 PC for about $2500 (refurb).

Sure, it gave you a very nice mac ...and a rather mediocre Windows 10 PC, spec and performance wise. Getting enough RAM and SSD on a Mac to allocate adequate space to a windows VM to run alongside MacOS is really expensive c.f. PC hardware. If you need an extra 16GB of RAM and 1TB of SSD to run Windows... you can buy a PC for that!

The option to run x86 Windows and Linux natively on a Mac was certainly nice - while it lasted. It was certainly a big selling point for me in 2006, and always had Parallels+Windows (and usually a couple of Linux VMs)... but in recent years I've found the ability to run Windows less and less important - a mixture of better software from Mac, more software going crossplatform/webapp/electron, the general assumption that everybody had a Windows PC being replaced by the assumption that everybody had an Android or iOS phone, the demise of Internet Explorer (hallelujah!) - the turning point was when I wasted hours chasing a bug in a web app on Windows which turned out to be a bug in Parallels - and it's getting rather more important to test for weard mobile browser issues on iOS and Android now that Windows is running basically the same browser engines as MacOS. Since switching to a studio I've gone without parallels and can count the number of times I've had to fire up my old Intel iMac for Windows in the last couple of years on the fingers of one hand.

I think Apple faced a fork in the road:

1. Switch to Apple Silicon and make something distinctive, with bespoce CPUs that have significant advantages for Apple's laptops and small-form-factor systems, but lose x86 compatibility and big-box'o'slots workstations.
2. continue with Intel for the sake of a minority of users who need x86 and big-box workstations, and be held back by having to use whatever chips Intel deigns to release (or maybe take a punt on AMD if they're making the best x86 CPUs this quarter).

I'd say they made the right choice. Plus - Windows on ARM finally seems to be maturing, and Parallels seems to run that quite adequately.

 

[Boyd01]

Sure, it gave you a very nice mac ...and a rather mediocre Windows 10 PC, spec and performance wise.

The point is... performance is "good enough" for what I do in Parallels and would be better in bootcamp but then I'd miss the integration. There simply aren't any Mac GIS programs to do what I need (making maps) and even if there were, I've spent too much time developing techniques and writing my own supporting software to switch. Simple case of "it ain't broke, so I ain't fixin' it".

 

[frou]

Mac Mini getting a lot smaller (as the recent news claims) would do absolutely nothing for me. If even 1 capability is compromised compared to the current form-factor then it's a bad move IMO.

 

[MBAir2010]

i have a 2012 mini near a 2022 mini an did not for that small minuscule mark by the light
i cant' tell them apart.

and the speeds (copy, paste... files swapping, such a non  recommended task in this decade)
are not that much difference between the 2 minis as the early Intel processor is still brilliant!

i just don't see a pompous company such as 
redesigning anything to appease these computer users anymore.

 

[EugW]

i have a 2012 mini near a 2022 mini an did not for that small minuscule mark by the light
i cant' tell them apart.

and the speeds (copy, paste... files swapping, such a non  recommended task in this decade)
are not that much difference between the 2 minis as the early Intel processor is still brilliant!

The speed difference between my 2020 M1 and my 2014 2.6 GHz i5 with NVMe SSD is obvious. The 2014 is usable but it’s just not in the same league.

 

[bandits1]

Hope they keep it silver because that Space Gray is tough to closely match with a lot of 3rd party accessories. The shade of gray Apple uses is SUPER dark, and for whatever reason other companies have a hard time getting their "Space Gray" to be as dark. Or they introduce a strong blue component to the gray, almost like a battleship gray, which is gross.

If they want to add a new color, make the pro versions straight up black.

 

[MBAir2010]

The speed difference between my 2020 M1 and my 2014 2.6 GHz i5 with NVMe SSD is obvious. The 2014 is usable but it’s just not in the same league.

im getting similar results, the operation is faster with the M1 but not by much, which im surprised by.

I also had copy problems were the size was too big in to finish the task in Monterey
while Mountain Lion had no problem moving these files, which could be the disks fault but weird anyways.

oh, BTW- they cant sell these commemorative Stanley Cup wine and champagne here in S, Florida.
as they would out in Edmonton in a week!
team without snow should not be allowed to skate!

take care, EugW!

 

[Chuckeee]

Mac Mini getting a lot smaller (as the recent news claims) would do absolutely nothing for me. If even 1 capability is compromised compared to the current form-factor then it's a bad move IMO.

For technically savvy users it seems like a tradeoff. Does the benefits of an upgraded processor out weight compromises associated with a new miniaturized chassis? For Apple, this wasn’t a technical/engineering motivated change, it was a PR/marketing decision.

 

[sublunar]

For technically savvy users it seems like a tradeoff. Does the benefits of an upgraded processor out weight compromises associated with a new miniaturized chassis? For Apple, this wasn’t a technical/engineering motivated change, it was a PR/marketing decision.

Well, to be fair it’s been said already, smaller packaging = reduced shipping costs and switching even partially back to polycarbonate will help with radio transparency. That’s before we start reusing iMac power supply to simplify the supply chain and equalise the number and position of ports on the chassis.

i think the mini sells itself, can’t see Apple spending that much on marketing dollars for a low volume line unless they have something else up their sleeve. I’m thinking tvOS mode for people who might want an Apple TV pro In effect.

 

[EugW]

For technically savvy users it seems like a tradeoff. Does the benefits of an upgraded processor out weight compromises associated with a new miniaturized chassis? For Apple, this wasn’t a technical/engineering motivated change, it was a PR/marketing decision.

Some of us had been saying for years that the existing Mac mini was oversized for the lower end M series chips, because if you open them up, you’ll see a lot of empty space. Thus, most predictions were that when it was redesigned, it’d get a lot smaller. And if it got an external power supply, it could be even smaller.

However, we had also guessed the redesign should have happened years ago, so who knows what Apple will really do?

 

[Crazyblox]

Hi,

i work in an Apple Reseller and like many of you i'm waiting for the mini 2013 refresh.

From monday the two major Apple suppliers in Italy are suddenly and completely out of stock of minis. I know that this happen from time to time, but the timing is no coincidence.

Trust me, a new mini is coming next week, or at least we have solid evidence to believe it.

I hope the 2013 refresh comes out soon, it's generating such a buzz even 11 years into the future.

 

[Boil]

• Mac mini Cube
• 3.66" x 3.66" x 3.66"

 

[theluggage]

Mac Mini getting a lot smaller (as the recent news claims) would do absolutely nothing for me. If even 1 capability is compromised compared to the current form-factor then it's a bad move IMO.

(Disclosure - I've got a Studio, not a Mini, but if the Mx Pro Mini had come out first I might well have gone with that - I do have a G4 Mini in my cupboard, though!)

Yup. Smaller isn't always better - and all that fresh air in the Mini case means more airflow for cooling.

I've got a hub and a SSD sitting on top of my Studio (same footprint as a Mini for this purpose) - replacing the Studio with an Apple TV-sized puck would kick those off onto the desk, increasing the overall footprint. As would making space for a power brick. If I was really tight with desk space I'd stand my display on top of the Mac (the Studio is a bit tall for that - the Mini would be fine).

...lets be clear about that power brick: yes, the Apple TV has an internal PSU, which is nice. Maybe the M4 will run happily with the same, or less, power. - but the real catch is that every downstream TB4 port on a host needs to be able to provide 15W. Plain old USB-C ports get by with 5W but it still adds up. So, maybe they's be able to build in a nice 60W GaN power supply, but the suspicion is that a Mini Mac Mini would mean fewer ports, an external power brick or both.

Personally, I even prefer the larger Studio design to the current Mac Mini, partly because of the extra ports and partly because, looking at the repair manual, it is potentially more repairable, with a replaceable SSD (even if Apple won't let you upgrade) and many of the wear-prone connectors on daughterboards.

An Apple TV sized Mac (or MacOS running in an Apple TV) would be fun, though - if it also came at an Apple TV sized price! ...but that would be more of a Raspberry Pi replacement (of which I have several, dedicated to various jobs and experimentation) - and very definitely an "as well as" rather than a replacement for a Mini or Studio as a main machine. Not gonna happen, of course!

 

[streetfunk]

I've got a hub and a SSD sitting on top of my Studio (same footprint as a Mini for this purpose) - replacing the Studio with an Apple TV-sized puck would kick those off onto the desk, increasing the overall footprint. As would making space for a power brick. If I was really tight with desk space I'd stand my display on top of the Mac (the Studio is a bit tall for that - the Mini would be fine).

you have there a point !

 

[Fishrrman]

Up until yesterday, I had considered myself to be "on track" to replace my 2018 Mini with the upcoming 2024 Mini.

UNTIL... I read about the "reduced size".

That threw a wrench into my plans.

"Reduced size" will mean FAR fewer ports on the m4PRO model. I'm thinking it will lose the USBa ports, perhaps the ethernet port, maybe even the HDMI port.

That doesn't do it for me -- my 2018 has only one "open" port (a single USBc).
Everything else is "full up".

So... now it looks like I'll hold out until the m4 Studio gets released. But that means waiting at least 7-8 more months...

 

[Schnitzel1979]

mh, i need the hdmi and three usbc ports, hope the m4 mini pro will have it

 

[Boyd01]

I have something plugged into every port of my 2018 Mini. That article only mentioned 3 USB ports, HDMI and power. Unless they made an omission, I guess that means it has an external power brick which would also contain an ethernet port? Maybe they will go really cheap, like the AppleTV, and not include ethernet at all on the base model?

 

[DesertSurfer]

I like the idea of a mini mini, but not at the expense of ports. All of my 2018 ports are taken at the moment. I hope Apple doesn't do something like reducing the ports on the base model, forcing you to go with the M4 Pro to get a decent number of ports (but I wouldn't be surprised if that is what happens).

 

[Fishrrman]

A Fishrrman "belly flop"™ prediction:

Based on my reply 19,518 above, and the replies immediately following, I'm going to go WAY out on a small limb and predict:

If Apple "cripples up" the new Mini by making it tiny with only a few ports, it's going to become a flop for them.

Those who liked the Mini "as it was" (with many ports), will grit their teeth, throw in a little more $$$, and buy a low-end Studio.

 

[Corefile]

So they're talking about a proprietary power cable and increasing the price due to the memory bump to 12GB. Not liking what I'm hearing.

 

[MayaUser]

I hope if Apple really wants to shrink it down almost to apple tv size..they will put some weight to it for not to slide so easily all over the place with cables connected to the TB4 ports and so on

 

[EugW]

"Reduced size" will mean FAR fewer ports on the m4PRO model.

Not necessarily. It all depends on the type of ports and the layout, as well as the fan (presence or absence, and if present, the size and location).

I'm thinking it will lose the USBa ports

I think this is likely.

perhaps the ethernet port

I'm guessing not.

maybe even the HDMI port.

Unlikely. In fact, I think it may even get an improved version of HDMI.

That doesn't do it for me -- my 2018 has only one "open" port (a single USBc).
Everything else is "full up".

So... now it looks like I'll hold out until the m4 Studio gets released. But that means waiting at least 7-8 more months...

I'm guessing the M4 Pro Mac mini might come with something like this:

Gigabit ethernet, with option to upgrade to 10 GigE.
5 x USB-C, oriented vertically (like on the iMac). No USB-A.
1 HDMI (with upgraded specs).
Headphone jack