Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What a bunch of blather. What's it to you which model someone buys? Your statement about the memory prices and upgrades is not rooted in reality. Period.

The price you quoted on the model going from 8 to 16 is still ridiculous. You say 200.00 (it costs me 230.00) to upgrade where crucial has it for 83.00 (this is the price on crucial's website, it will be cheaper elsewhere). Do you really not see the hosing for paying 200.00 or 230.00 for memory that cost the same to install?

Carping? Acting like a fish? What does fish have to do with it? Maybe you mean harping? Harping about paying 230.00 for a memory upgrade that could be done on the last model for 83.00?

Again, crucial is better than anything apple is buying in bulk unless some of it is from crucial. I started building and working on computers in the 80's and there is no way you are going to convince me crucial is not top notch memory. Apple does not use one brand of memory, they have different suppliers and can be different on 2 of the same model. You also talk like you have to be a rocket scientist to change memory, it's extremely easy. Unless it's soldered in of course.

I get it. You point your prayer rug toward cupertino several times a day. I like apple products a lot but they are doing this to get richer. As long as they have bots that defend this type of thing at all costs it will continue to happen. Not all consumers are ignorant drones, get over it. I don't see how anyone can with a straight face say this good especially since the last version was not this way. There's a small percentage of the population that have problems opening a can of beans....with a pull top. I can understand "those" people not caring at all, those of us that are not clumsy fool's see it as shutting us down.

Again, not everyone smokes cupertino crack. Your example of upgrading from 8 to 16 gb is an EVEN bigger cost percentage wise, even triple paying 230.00 instead of 83. Wise up, you are lost on this and burying yourself even deeper. The lowest model was an example, but the one you mentioned is even a higher percentage in cost. Not to mention you are not getting those 8gb free, you are paying apple's cost. The more you can upgrade yourself the cheaper.

No, you are not right, there is more of a cost difference on the higher model than the lower one. You get "hosed" even more on the higher model and shows your point of view is based on lack of actual knowledge.

No point in taking this any further then, I suggest you putting me on ignore as I am you. Maybe you can put everyone on ignore that have rosy, backside kissing things to say bout everything apple does.


OK, I'm guilty...

Someone either upthread, or on another thread said that the difference to double the memory was $100. So that sounds reasonable to me. To go from 8g to 16g is only $200.00 on the fastest model. Who here would ever buy the 'Entry Model' of anything? I wouldn't. If you are carping about the cost of memory on the lowest performing system they make in that model, you really shouldn't be allowed here to carp about performance. Am I Right?

I kid...

I have had systems crash from 'bad' memory. It was a brand that I respect and have used for decades and aside from an HP Laserjet, has never let me down.

For me, the cost of going to the Apple Store to diagnose/replace a system, or the cost involved in diagnosing it myself, and living with a hobbled system waiting for the 'Lifetime Warranty Replacement Memory' to arrive is time I could be using my system and getting things done. I consider the price, if it is remotely reasonable, to be a good investment in a machine that I hope to have for at least 4 years.

I rarely upgrade my systems, once installed, except for my Sun server which got a major step up in processor speed, a doubling of the memory, and a SAS drive upgrade. But it's a server. I start all my MBP's with the max memory because at the time I last bought one, I needed the memory. Now I'd probably get by with the standard amount.

So 'reasonable' is an elastic concept, and if you are going to be buying a 'base Model' anything, expect to get hosed for major upgrades. So I'm not "wrong", from my point of view... :D

Just sayin'...

----------



Again, the key words here are 'base mini'.:rolleyes:

And from a different point of view, Apple's price IS reasonable, because you can't upgrade on your own.

And for both of you: You can't even upgrade the processor on the 'base mini'! Do you really want to start that far behind? And you are complaining about the cost of memory upgrades? Really?
 
Last edited:
I switched from PCs to Macs also years ago, in large part because I was no longer willing to feed the evil, greedy giant. But Apple is now the evil, greedy giant. I need to run Windows for my business, and also need to frequently access the internet for information, and I’m not willing to go anywhere near the internet in Windows.

I completely agree.
I was really excited for the new mac mini, like many of you, only to be totally underwhelmed by the lack of quad core, soldered ram and the hassle with trim and yosemite on non-apple SSDs.

I really need a low power htpc and, with my apple peripherals and many terabytes of hfs+ formatted content, the mac mini always seemed perfect for my needs. Most of all, I need a xbmc box and the ability to stream non-youtube internet flash videos. I don't even need quad-core to be perfectly honest. But like a previous commenter stated: you can't go backwards. Thats not how **** works.

I still like apple, but I refuse to pay a premium for something that is so obviously not worth the cost. The new MBPs are the only product I still consider a decent deal if you have the money. No hd audio support is also unfortunate.
 
Last edited:
And for both of you: You can't even upgrade the processor on the 'base mini'! Do you really want to start that far behind? And you are complaining about the cost of memory upgrades? Really?

Nice deflection attempt... The point is there is no reason to have non-upgradable ram in a DESKTOP computer.

Answer just this one question: What does the consumer gain by having soldered on ram?
 
Last edited:
Agree - Apple Rip Off

The New "OLD" Mac Mini is as many are proclaiming a rip-off, particularly with regards the soldered memory rubbish Apple insults us with.

I have a 2010 C2D Mini that's now showing its age and could do with updating, but will not update to this insult of a machine. I'd expect a minimum 4 core i7 with Iris and user upgradable RAM to have any interest in this, essentially will now look at building my own system running OSX, which is not what I'd wish to do if the latest Mac Mini was decent.

Lets just say Apple have been losing their magic for a long time as a producer of computers, they are only interested in massive profits and iToys. We were promised new products this year, where are they - the iMac Retina not being a new product, it's an upgrade of an existing line and an expensive one.

So, as a computer user the only new product of late was the Mac Pro last year, which is too much for my DTP requirements.

So Apple, either sell the computer division off to people who care about it, or invest some R&D into innovative products that work well and fulfil "user" expectations - the Mac Mini is now an insult to those of us who have invested in them since they were originally launched - great media machines and highly productive too boot - now its just a bloody Apple TV with some memory and a HDD, all of which comes at a shocking price!
 
The 'tinkerer' is a HUGE minority of the computer buying public. (...)
The mini is now aimed at the people that it should be aimed at: low experience, low intelligence, low expectations users who will never upgrade the box. Ever.

Then which Mac would you suggest in a typical office situation with N desks? And you don't need to be a tinkerer to install an SSD in the old Mac Mini, my authorised reseller did that for me.
 
Ditch your Apple desktop

I hate to tell you so, but I told you so.

I was dead nuts on when I predicted months ago that Apple would use the base MacBook Air components for the base Mini and drop the price. What they didn't do was make the Mini smaller (a la Intel NUC), but I suspect that's coming.

I still believe OS X is destined to run on Apple's own silicon. The two are going to converge at some point, and the new sub-$500 Mini is a step toward that direction, IMO.

That said, the desktop is all about the GPU and +120Hz displays for me and this is where Apple fails miserably. So much so that I sold my Mac, kept my iPad, and built my own PC.

Lian Li PC-Q36 aluminum case
ASUS Maximus Impact VII motherboard
Intel i7-4790K
MSI GTX 980 Gaming
G.SKILL Trident X 8GB DDR3 2400MHz CAS 9 memory
Intel 520 240GB SSD
SeaSonic X Series X650 Gold power supply

I already had the SSD, keyboard, and mouse leftover from my Mac Mini, and the power supply I got from a friend, so I saved a little. I needed a few extra items like CPU cooler, thermal paste, and what not, but my total cost was still less than $1500.

I can play BF4 on Ultra settings averaging 150 fps, I can encode miles of video, run BOINC and F@H projects, or whatever I want and I didn't have to pay an arm and a leg to Apple.
 
Answer just this one question: What does the consumer gain by having soldered on ram?

I don't think anyone 'wins' with soldered in RAM.

Apple eventually has to stock more specific models, once the demand and supply equalize, and users that do not realize that there are no upgrades post purchase are stuck with what they have.

I do find it odd that Apple does that, especially with their notebook lines, but they are doing what they feel they can get away with, and people, by and large, seem to either agree, or are unaware.

Apple has always had a penchant for 'closed systems'. That they are reverting to that now would seem to drive a stake in the hart of the idea that it was all Steve Jobs doing.

I never said that I agreed with it, I was trying to give the impression that I didn't mind it, because what are you going to do? Really throw yourself at the mercy of Microsoft again, and their wandering ideals of what the 'Next Great Operating System' will look like? I'm not comfortable doing that.

Thinking this through farther, what does Apple gain by doing this... They gain a lot of 'real estate' on the motherboard by not taking up space for the connector, the traces for the connector, the wide open prairie under the memory cards needed in order to stay in the socket(s) and they can keep things slimmer too because the chips are no higher than the other ones. They also gain a bunch of astute users that will always buy their system with the maximum amount of memory, whether they need it or not.

What does the user gain by Apple doing this? Well, after having an iMac go in for service and having a technician AT AN APPLE REPAIR FACILITY apparently cut one of the temperature sensor wires trying to 'fix' it, gains me the ability to keep the box closed so I (they) don't end up doing the same damn thing. BTW: the mini that I upgraded the memory on had a runaway fan after I closed it up. Apparently the fan connector wasn't making a solid connection in the socket on the motherboard.

Keeping people's fingers out of the 'guts' of the system saves a lot of cracked connectors, torn ribbon cables, pissed off users, unnecessary warranty claims, or warranty denials, etc...

Ever replaced a hard drive in a MacBook Pro? Peeling off that temperature sensor on the drive is risky, one tear in the cable and you are done. You have a machine ready for interplanetary space travel because it will sound like it's full speed and ready for takeoff.

PeeCee's are mostly empty space, although they are getting a lot denser. The iMac, and mini are packed in there. They scream for better cooling in the brute force way that PeeCee's do it, so Apple compensates with more sensors and more adaptive cooling. There are tradeoffs...

I can imagine the black market for people doing memory upgrades on those motherboards too, or the trade in boards with more memory...

But anyway...

----------

That said, the desktop is all about the GPU and +120Hz displays for me and this is where Apple fails miserably. So much so that I sold my Mac, kept my iPad, and built my own PC.

Back when I had my business, I cringed if anyone asked what brand of computer I used in-house. I built all of the systems we used. At a loss. It was only in the end when I couldn't justify the cost that I ended up with an HP micro tower system.

I used Intel boards, Antec cases, Kingston memory, Western Digital HUGE hard drives, great video cards, and had a system that rocked for years, and I could upgrade at will. Clients wouldn't pay that kind of cash for a system, so we sold HP, Dell, etc. But there are tradeoffs building systems yourself too, but it made the most sense, and every one of those systems is still running. Well, except the servers... I was never happy with how long those lasted, or didn't...:(
 
I don't think anyone 'wins' with soldered in RAM....:(

My wife won!!!!! All this talk made me upgrade my 8GB 2012 to 16 so her 2012 went from 4 to 8 with my old sticks ...... took about 2 minutes ..... mostly spent unplugging both machines :cool: .
 
So Apple, either sell the computer division off to people who care about it, or invest some R&D into innovative products that work well and fulfil "user" expectations - the Mac Mini is now an insult to those of us who have invested in them since they were originally launched - great media machines and highly productive too boot - now its just a bloody Apple TV with some memory and a HDD, all of which comes at a shocking price!

This is a very good post.

I wonder what the Mac Mini engineers are feeling at this point being ordered to destroy the mini like this. They are probably reading this forum with tears in their eyes.

Tim Crook has destroyed this Mac. The 2012 is the last mac worth buying, everyone knows it. Anyone saying different are just trying to get a rise out of forum members. I have talked to several mac resellers and they have flat out said "We can't understand why apple has done this, its terrible".

Why won't they make a nice mac gaming capable, upgradeable computer? Every other PC company makes that system. We have been begging for one for YEARS and they ignore us. We are forced to us XEON workstations for that and its stupid. If they had a computer with upgradeble ram, graphics and a regular intel CPU, was smaller than the old mac pro and could take any graphics card, supported bluray and was reasonably priced it would be the only computer they would be selling. And that is not a bad thing. They just won't do it.

I stocked up on a bunch of 2012 models. That is the last mac I'm buying. I already gave up on the iphone. Apple does not care anymore. I give them a few more years of being at the top but the iphone will eventually fall from grace as there will be nowhere left to go for it and they will sit in there space ship campus and point fingers and wonder why their stock has fallen and try to figure out how to get it back.

I want to see them fail miserably, I want that stock to drop out of the sky because maybe then they will get serious and start making hardware we want to buy, not hardware we have to settle for because they are the only company with computers that work with OS X. The iphone and ipad, in reality destroyed Apple Computer forever. Its really too bad. Perhaps, apple should split off its computer division from the iphone, call it Apple Computer again and get serious.
 
Nope! I am a Windows 7 & OS X/iOS user and waited for the new Mac Mini to fully convert to Mac as I am currently only using a Mac Mini as HTPC. However, I scrapped this plan as the new Mac Mini is in my opinion poor value. I am not hooked to any brand and won't buy products that are not worth the money. The new Mac Mini falls into this category. No buy! :p

I would not bet on one brand or platform.. Also run both android and ios. Windows and mac os. Im going to use mac mini as htpc/torrent server snd nothing else
 
I wonder what the Mac Mini engineers are feeling at this point being ordered to destroy the mini like this. They are probably reading this forum with tears in their eyes.

The 2014 Mac mini is a well engineered peace of hardware. It is clearly a intermediate step to a version with a slightly smaller case, but without support for 2.5" HDD or SSD drives. They could have still supported user replaceable RAM for the 2014 Mac mini. But for business reasons non replaceable RAM (and SSDs) is better for Apple.

I wouldn't expect any new Mac mini with a quad-core processor ever. Whoever wants more power will be pushed to the Mac Pro. Again this makes sense for Apple if you consider the business aspect.

Another downside of the 2014 Mac mini is the lacking support for Mavericks. But Yosemite will be improved over time, so this is a temporary issue.
 
Again this makes sense for Apple if you consider the business aspect.

Apple is in the business of selling products to people. People want nice things. The 2014 Mac Mini isn't a nice thing. People will tell other people to stay away from this not-so-nice thing. Again, this makes sense for people if you consider the emperor's-not-wearing-any-clothes aspect.
 
My wife won!!!!! All this talk made me upgrade my 8GB 2012 to 16 so her 2012 went from 4 to 8 with my old sticks ...... took about 2 minutes ..... mostly spent unplugging both machines :cool: .

The name of the game is cannibalization. I've scarfed memory out of dead MacBooks and used them in mini's, and saved a wireless NIC for my Mac Pro.

Reduce, reuse, recycle.

But for those spreading gloom and doom (and engineers eyes filled with tears? Come on now) you have to realize that the mini was probably never supposed to be a 'power desktop'. It is probably in direct result of people using them as power desktops that may have driven Apple to do this. Did you think about that?

No, gnash teeth, predict the end of the company, switch to Windows (really?).

It's time to get a grip. The mini is still a viable computer, it's just not a Ferrari in a shoebox anymore.

So, pull your pants up, wipe your noses, horde all of the 2012 mini's you can find, and carry on. Really, life will continue... Trust me... :rolleyes:
 
Oh by the way, Apple does not include the HDMI to DVI adapter anymore so add an additional $29 ridiculous dollars to the already high cost of the 2014 mini.

A mac mini 2014

3ghz DUAL core
16gb Ram
1tb SSD
HDMI to DVI adapter
-----------------------
$2228 BEFORE TAX

LMFAO!!!
 
I think that’s the road I’ll be taking the next time around (my 2014 Mini will be arriving in a few days), although I will buy instead of build. I used Linux years ago for a specific programme package, and it was a bit of a chore. From what I’ve heard, though, Linux has since become much more user friendly. I just can’t afford the time right now to dick around with a new OS.

I switched from PCs to Macs also years ago, in large part because I was no longer willing to feed the evil, greedy giant. But Apple is now the evil, greedy giant. I need to run Windows for my business, and also need to frequently access the internet for information, and I’m not willing to go anywhere near the internet in Windows.

I’m on a five-year hardware cycle, but I think a reliable PC running Linux with Windows in a virtualisation programme will likely replace my last Mac, unless Apple revisits its pricing policy.

Don't get me wrong, I love my 27" iMac and 13" MBA, but I have a Win7 gaming rig and friends and family w/ Win8 machines, both of which are a constant reminder as to why I don't use Windows for anything that matters.

I'm less concerned about Apple's trajectory in the laptop segment, since the benefits (so far) continue to easily outweigh any compromises (for me). However I'm not nearly so confident with regards to the future of Apple's desktop products.
 
Apple is in the business of selling products to people. People want nice things. The 2014 Mac Mini isn't a nice thing. People will tell other people to stay away from this not-so-nice thing. Again, this makes sense for people if you consider the emperor's-not-wearing-any-clothes aspect.

Just because you cannot upgrade the ram (which most people do not) or you cannot get a quad core processor (which most people do not need), it is not a nice computer? That is ridiculous.

Do you realize how many people I talk to that say they are going to go out and get a $299 laptop from Dell?

Get real, "nice things" is a relative term. I guarantee you most people do not care about these limitations on the Mac Mini. Just being on this site shows that you are more interested in computers/tech than most people.

I have looked at a lot of computers from family friends, to people from work (their personal systems). A lot of them keep their system AS IT IS until it completely dies. They leave it filled with malware and dozens of IE toolbars. Their systems are so slow, I always ask them how they deal with it. "I turn it on and make dinner while I wait" is a common answer I get.

I have seen a lot of people STILL using their Windows XP Dell desktop with 512MB of RAM. They are using it JUST FINE.

If you need upgradability, GET A DIFFERENT SYSTEM. Even when I built my own PCs, I never upgraded after it was built.

Like I said before, it is much better to get a brand new Mac Mini in 2016+ when you NEED more than the ram it came with. Not only will you get more ram, but you will get a MUCH BETTER processor, SSD, video card, and more.

Macs are VERY GOOD about giving you a lot of money when you sell them compared to a Windows PC like Dell or HP.
 
Wow, you convinced me. My maxed out $2100 2014 Mac Mini should be here by Friday. Those two cores combined with that bug-free Yosemite should last me a good five years. Or maybe I can sell it for just about what I payed for it in two years. I'm really, really excited! Thanks for setting me straight.
 
Just because you cannot upgrade the ram (which most people do not) or you cannot get a quad core processor (which most people do not need), it is not a nice computer? That is ridiculous....

No, it is not a nice computer because it is little or no improvement on it's very dated predecessor in a competitive market. When any update makes it's previous model desirable that is what is ridiculous :eek:.
 
Wow, you convinced me. My maxed out $2100 2014 Mac Mini should be here by Friday. Those two cores combined with that bug-free Yosemite should last me a good five years. Or maybe I can sell it for just about what I payed for it in two years. I'm really, really excited! Thanks for setting me straight.

Geez, like I said, if you NEED...NEED....NEED upgradability, get a different system. I got a base model 2008 iMac that we just retired because of a hard drive failure. It got about 5 years of very heavy use (played games on it, did photoshop/pixelmator work on it).

What exactly do you get for having more hardware? It finishes tasks faster. Most people are JUST FINE waiting for the Photoshop Gaussian Blur to finish a few seconds slower. Most people (NOT movie studios) are just fine having their video project render a few minutes slower.

The Mac Mini was never....NEVER designed for this kind of thing. The iMac and Mac Pro are designed for these heavy uses.

No, it is not a nice computer because it is little or no improvement on it's very dated predecessor in a competitive market. When any update makes it's previous model desirable that is what is ridiculous :eek:.

Guess, what. We are at a point where we will not see INCREDIBLE performance boosts. How much does the much anticipated Skylake line give? 10% or so? That is in what, 2016?

Do you honestly believe that general consumers can tell the difference between the first generation i7 and the current generation i7? No. The Hard Drive is the most noticeable performance issue these days.

My 2010 Mac Pro had a VERY VERY BAD hard drive in it (it was a hard drive I already owned, and it was several years old at the time back when SATA was just becoming the standard). I put Windows on it and it took 2 minutes to start because the hard drive was way too slow. It didn't matter that I had 6 cores, or 8GB of RAM (at the time was really good).

Other than benchmarks and having my After Effects videos finish a few minutes faster, I do not see the difference between an i5 and my 6 core Xeon or similarly my i7 Dell.

So my question to you is, why do you think this is Apple's fault? I thought it was widely known that Haswell only provided a VERY SLIGHT performance boost? They seem to be focusing more on power and graphics instead of raw CPU performance.
 
Uh, because it's Apple's product, and Apple's decisions. My decision was to pass on the product, yours is to defend :apple:.

:D:D:D

Apple does not make desktop processors - Intel and AMD do. Therefore, they can ONLY do what Intel and AMD provide. Complaining about lack of performance improvements are based on Intel NOT Apple.

So no, it is not Apple's fault that these new Intel chips are not 200% performance boost.
 
Apple had good Intel options but Apple chose bad Intel options. Apple is to blame for everything, but I can't wait to hear what your next apology is going to be. I'm just plain giddy.
 
Apple does not make desktop processors - Intel and AMD do. Therefore, they can ONLY do what Intel and AMD provide. Complaining about lack of performance improvements are based on Intel NOT Apple.

So no, it is not Apple's fault that these new Intel chips are not 200% performance boost.

Apple designs, drives their component providers, assembles, and sells the computers ......Circular discussion are pointless .....:rolleyes:

You are giving me an Apple whiplash :D!
 
Apple had good Intel options but Apple chose bad Intel options. Apple is to blame for everything, but I can't wait to hear what your next apology is going to be. I'm just plain giddy.

Please show me what options they have available with the same thermal and power requirements.

I think somebody mentioned that they would need to build two logic boards just to have a quad core option in there BECAUSE OF LIMITATIONS ON THE PROCESSOR.

So you are saying all processors have the same heat requirements and same wattage requirements? They can easily fit in an intel i7 extreme edition and overclocked like crazy?

If Intel released a quad core that had the same requirements as before, I bet you would have seen a quad core option. But Apple didn't feel like they needed to change the Mac Mini with multiple logic boards just so only a few percentage of their customers can get quad cores. We do not know the sales stats.
 
Thank you. That was an excellent apology. You've outdone yourself. You should ask Apple for a raise.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.