What I think Apple will do to the Mac Mini in 2016

[DesertSurfer]

I can see Intel Kaby Lake, Cannon Lake processors still shipping in a Mac Mini in 2016, and 2017 but still with 4Gb soldered ram and a 5400rpm spinning disk.

But in my dreams, it would be interesting is if they made the Mac Mini into a flash based, graphics capable VR platform, given that with a Rift style headset there is less need for an integrated screen (imac).

It is interesting to think about what effect VR might have on Apple's offerings. The mini would be great for something like the Rift, but only if it had far more graphics power. And Apple wants to sell screens, so they may go the iPhone route with their VR, if they actually ever do VR. As many people have said many times. it would be nice if Apple had a screen-free desktop in between the Mini and the Pro. With a new Thunderbolt monitor, Apple could still sell screens with their needless desktops. But, they almost certainly won't do it.

Since I put an SSD in my early 2011 MacBook Pro, and went to a gaming PC for games, I can feel comfortable waiting for the right mini, which probably will not come in 2016 (something might, but I doubt I will be tempted). Tempt me Apple!

 

[Santabean2000]

Do your machines normally get under memory pressure? Is there a reason why you don't think you should add enough memory to your computer to avoid being under memory pressure? (I guess you might be one of those folks who has a machine with soldered RAM...)

Yes, an SSD is much, much better than a magnetic drive if you are suffering from swapping. But avoiding swapping is even better, as RAM is much, much faster than an SSD!

So long as you have enough RAM,

Some Macs ship with 4GB as default, not enough for what you're describing.

And this is my point, the customers with the least technical knowledge typically buy the base/cheapest. In the past the Apple base experience was excellent.

Apple base experience now is poor, exemplified by slow spinners and/or insufficient RAM and/or aging screens and/or limited graphics.

And the more knowledgeable customers either have to pay (a lot) more upfront or live with an inferior experience.

It sucks. Apple could/should be treating their customers more respectfully.

Play the Long Game , please...

 

[Toltepeceno]

I agree. I had major problems with yosemite and while the ssd fixed the majority I was still having services force close. I checked memory use and it was right at the 4gb I had and that was just normal web surfing, etc. I maxed out the memory and no more force closing, it never runs below 4. I would not get a 4gb computer for a mac. Just now I checked it doing nothing and with safari open, it's running 6.30. I have 16 installed. I know there are people screaming that 4 is still enough, but not in my experience.

Windows, surprisingly, uses a lot less than osx. I still wouldn't go 4 on a windows box either.

Some Macs ship with 4GB as default, not enough for what you're describing.

And this is my point, the customers with the least technical knowledge typically buy the base/cheapest. In the past the Apple base experience was excellent.

Apple base experience now is poor, exemplified by slow spinners and/or insufficient RAM and/or aging screens and/or limited graphics.

And the more knowledgeable customers either have to pay (a lot) more upfront or live with an inferior experience.

It sucks. Apple could/should be treating their customers more respectfully.

Play the Long Game , please...

 

[jpietrzak8]

Some Macs ship with 4GB as default, not enough for what you're describing.

And this is my point, the customers with the least technical knowledge typically buy the base/cheapest. In the past the Apple base experience was excellent.

Apple base experience now is poor, exemplified by slow spinners and/or insufficient RAM and/or aging screens and/or limited graphics.

This.

In general, I don't really mind manufacturers marketing low-end devices with obsolete or inadequate equipment; it allows them to get rid of old inventory, provide hardware at rock-bottom prices, and can be sufficient for certain types of use. But, I have one caveat -- at least in the past, desktop computers with inadequate components could be upgraded to use better components at a relatively inexpensive price. But now, with Apple moving to a mostly all-in-one lineup, with soldered RAM and hard-to-replace drives in more and more of their devices, their machines can no longer be upgraded in almost any manner.

And it isn't just about Apple producing some low-end machines that are already obsolete they day they are purchased; even relatively high-end machines can now not be upgraded in any manner, meaning if RAM needs increase, or new and better drive technology comes out, you'd need to buy a whole new machine rather than add those components to your existing machine, no matter what you've got.

I have to admit, I expect my next computer to be a Linux box that I piece together myself. I've been an Apple user for almost ten years now, but I have no interest in purchasing "disposable" hardware...

 

[Crosscreek]

I'm guessing will see new Mac's introduced in June and no latter then the end of August with Skylake. I doubt if the Mini will see anything revolutionary with just a processor bump.

For 95% of Mini buyers this will be fine but I fall in the 5% and will struggle with moving on from OS X and back to my PC roots. Although Linux takes some of the sting out and Windows 10 has turned into a decent OS aside from privacy issues I will not pay the Apple tax of $180 here and $180+ there for over priced BTO and lack of quad core choice.

A sealed box is not my idea of a desktop computer. I'm just to old school and don't have the money to waste on a "pretty" shinny Apple. Still love my 2012 though but the graphics have grown long in the tooth and I've toped the processor out at 100% for to many hours of video compression over 3.5 years.

 

[throAU]

I suspect 8 GB will be the baseline on all new macs next refresh. The MBA will go away, the MB will come down in price.

 

[Micky Do]

I'm guessing will see new Mac's introduced in June and no latter then the end of August with Skylake. I doubt if the Mini will see anything revolutionary with just a processor bump.

For 95% of Mini buyers this will be fine but I fall in the 5% and will struggle with moving on from OS X and back to my PC roots. Although Linux takes some of the sting out and Windows 10 has turned into a decent OS aside from privacy issues I will not pay the Apple tax of $180 here and $180+ there for over priced BTO and lack of quad core choice.

A sealed box is not my idea of a desktop computer. I'm just to old school and don't have the money to waste on a "pretty" shinny Apple. Still love my 2012 though but the graphics have grown long in the tooth and I've toped the processor out at 100% for to many hours of video compression over 3.5 years.

This is where it's at.

The Mac Mini concept and form was revolutionary when it arrived back in 2005, but there was nothing special about the contents of the box. There has been little or nothing revolutionary about the updates over the years. It has generally followed the trend of other Macs, not been at the cutting edge. Anybody who expects something revolutionary is bound to be disappointed.

The quad core and the server were probably aberrations that appealed to the 5% who really do have a need for high performance, and dilettantes who fancy bragging rights to the same……

 

[Crosscreek]

The quad core and the server were probably aberrations that appealed to the 5% who really do have a need for high performance, and dilettantes who fancy bragging rights to the same……

I wouldn't call it high performance but more in line with desktop performance. the 2012 quads were still mobile chips.

 

[Smeaton1724]

Liquid metal Silver cube enclosure, Macbook processor specs e.g 1.3 ghz processor, 8GB RAM, 128GB/256GB SSD options, 1 USB-C port, 2 USB 3, 1 hdmi port, footprint 9x9cm inc power unit.

 

[mountain]

Minimal incremental such as CPU and USB-C. I don't think they will change much.

 

[opeter]

Minimal incremental such as CPU and USB-C. I don't think they will change much.

That is all, we (I) need.

 

[addictive]

Minimal incremental such as CPU and USB-C. I don't think they will change much.

I agree. If we've learnt anything over the last few years it is the Mac Mini is not a priority for Apple. They have decided to "improve" the product by not allowing user upgrades. I imagine this is here to stay. Unlikely to get Quad core, unlikely to get RAM upgrades by user, unlikely to get SSD upgrades by user.

Still a 2016 Mac Mini with Skylake processors, PCI-e flash and USB type C with Thunderbolt 3 would be a machine I would consider purchasing as it would last close to a decade. Any disagreements on that?

 

[opeter]

I agree. If we've learnt anything over the last few years it is the Mac Mini is not a priority for Apple. They have decided to "improve" the product by not allowing user upgrades. I imagine this is here to stay. Unlikely to get Quad core, unlikely to get RAM upgrades by user, unlikely to get SSD upgrades by user.

Still a 2016 Mac Mini with Skylake processors, PCI-e flash and USB type C with Thunderbolt 3 would be a machine I would consider purchasing as it would last close to a decade. Any disagreements on that?

Not at all. I fully agree.

 

[Crosscreek]

Still a 2016 Mac Mini with Skylake processors, PCI-e flash and USB type C with Thunderbolt 3 would be a machine I would consider purchasing as it would last close to a decade. Any disagreements on that?

I have to agree also. As long as the solid state drive is included in the purchase the only other part that would fail would be the psu and that is highly unlikely with low voltage processors. USB Type C/TB3 will be the standard with unlimited connections to what ever comes along.

With Moore's Law dead the IGU and die shrinks will be the only focus of improvement as far as I can see.

 

[Count Blah]

People complain about iMacs no longer being user upgradeable. This is fair and annoying for those of us who wish to upgrade, but remember that people on this forum are not representative of Apple users as a whole, and most people will never upgrade their computer. The vast majority of Apple users will happily trade-off upgradeability for a prettier or thinner computer.

They just get their tech savvy relatives to upgrade for them. 2 iMacs, 2 minis, 1 macbook, 4 MBPs - All upgraded by me for myself and family. The LAST mac anyone in my family purchased was a 2012 mini, at the announced release of the 2014 mini. I am advising all family members to hold onto their macs as long as they can. Since none play games, it's not that big of an ask. Several more macs would have been purchase by the family, had Apple NOT soldered in and locked out their users.

Apple is losing sales from myself and my extended family. Not that Apple cares - More $$$ from forced upgrades upfront, customers like me, be damned.

We'll see what the new mini brings.