I have a 2012 QC mini, which works just fine for me. I am looking at the 2018 Minis and wonder what is so good about them being miniature. It's like the Mini is a solution in search of a problem. It's not as if my desk is so limited in size that I can't fit a slightly larger Mini on it. I don't take my Mini to work or to cafes. I don't really take it anywhere. My Mini is the size of a small Belgian Waffle: I don't really get any value from it being that size and would bet that most people are in my shoes. If the new Mini were big enough to put in a video card, it would probably be the size of a loaf of Wonder Bread, and that would be just fine for me. Not only just fine – it would better. There would be enough room for better air circulation. There would be enough room to put in additional drives. It would be possible to build it in such a way that it would be way easier to manufacture and to upgrade by consumers.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What if the Mini wasn't so tiny, but the size of a loaf of bread?
- Thread starter elasticmedia
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Valid observations, and I don't think Apple is oblivious.
For one thing: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208544
And for another: https://daringfireball.net/2017/04/the_mac_pro_lives
For one thing: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208544
And for another: https://daringfireball.net/2017/04/the_mac_pro_lives
I agree with all that.
Apple has this "Obsession" with Thin and Light-They have gone overboard as far as I'm concerned. It's just the way it is.
And I own a 2018 Mac Mini along with PC's that I built.
Last edited:
A lot of Minis get rack-mounted, so size is important. In fact, Apple kept the exact same dimensions with the 2018 Mini, I suspect to allow rack mount housings to continue to work. It's simple to use an external GPU if that's going to benefit your use case, many people don't need it. Or the new Mac Pro will come out in 2019, see what it offers.
I like it the way it is really. I don't care for more internal storage, I love Thunderbolt3.
if anything it would be better if it used 4 controller chips instead of two.
it's perfect for smaller recording studios, since it's relatively quiet and you don't need a separate machine room for it - an isolation closet is enough.
This thing looks like it was built for the now common smaller recording studio really. (not the big houses with separate machine rooms).
And despite the fact that you guys think we don't exists, we do
if anything it would be better if it used 4 controller chips instead of two.
it's perfect for smaller recording studios, since it's relatively quiet and you don't need a separate machine room for it - an isolation closet is enough.
This thing looks like it was built for the now common smaller recording studio really. (not the big houses with separate machine rooms).
And despite the fact that you guys think we don't exists, we do
What you're describing is a machine that is larger than the mini, more user-configurable than the mini and has more features than the mini. I don't think you're in the demographic that the Mac mini was designed to target, rather you fit better into the demographic of the Mac Pro.
exactly. What he described is a 2013 trashcan
aside upgradability, which is something apple doesn't want you to do it.
Because I paid 250€ for 32GB of RAM not 720€ for the Mini, which is 500€ less profit for apple.
I don't need a better videocard in the Mini for audio, it would just be another heat source and better cooling wouldn't help at all if used for audio, since it would be taken by the GPU, it would also be louder, forcing it out of control room to the machine room (granted you have one), etc...
I'd rather have a mini with another CPU and the same crappy video card, and it would just be double the size.
Reading the replies, it is obvious that there are really different types of users: some really want the Mini to be the size of a waffle and others that don't care if it is the size of a fruitcake. It would be interesting to know the distribution of Mini owners. For instance what % of buyers put them in rack mounted configurations?
I have very mixed views about the new Mini. For me Apple has destroyed it's heritage i.e. a cheap way to get into a Mac. Now Apple may argue that it's still the cheapest way to get into a Mac and this is true, plus it's the only Mac you can still buy for a three figure sum of money.
However, that does not make it cheap. The brief for the new Mini has been to make it appealing for the pro-consumer and in so doing they have probably kissed goodbye to a percentage of their loyal user base. The other thing of course is that whilst it undoubtedly looks the part on its own, by the time you have started adding all the extra peripherals you end up with a rats nest of wires and cables and are back to a lot of clutter.
If you do want to start adding external storage (which is a must) and possibly a GPU plus a decent monitor, then this turns the Mini into a pretty expensive option and the prospective purchaser has to ask themselves if they may be better off simply buying the iMac.
However, that does not make it cheap. The brief for the new Mini has been to make it appealing for the pro-consumer and in so doing they have probably kissed goodbye to a percentage of their loyal user base. The other thing of course is that whilst it undoubtedly looks the part on its own, by the time you have started adding all the extra peripherals you end up with a rats nest of wires and cables and are back to a lot of clutter.
If you do want to start adding external storage (which is a must) and possibly a GPU plus a decent monitor, then this turns the Mini into a pretty expensive option and the prospective purchaser has to ask themselves if they may be better off simply buying the iMac.
They completely overhauled the Mini yeah.
I think this is an audio Mac, if there ever was one.
- drive/cable clutter doesn't matter when it's hidden in a rack closet/drawer/machine room (which you can't for an iMac)
- it has enough GPU for audio
the 1,099$ iMac is probably the entry level mac.
The mini has no peripherals included, and you'd be hard-pressed to get anything the quality iMac ships with for 100$.
I know rack-mounting minis is a thing ...but its rather surprising that its a big enough thing to justify a whole product line when Apple otherwise seems to be focussing on the mainstream. I mean, mini-towers with PCIE slots are a thing too..
...but when the Mac Mini was first designed, Apple actually made a Mac Pro for people who needed it (well, actually, it was called PowerMac G5 at the time, but same principle).
That's the problem at the moment - if the Mini works for you, that's great, but if it doesn't there's nothing else up-to-date.
Going from a mid tower PC with 6 spinning drives to the mini was appreciated. It is rather small but does what I need. I've been asking for this updated mini for years with upgradable ram and internal SSD and I got most of what I wanted. I also wanted it affordable. It isn't but it does what I need. I just swallowed the cost. Hopefully won't upgrade for at least 5 more years. If that is the case, then it was well worth every penny ($2300 with 20tb storage, 1 tb internal, 32 gb ram (soon to upgrade myself for $244 included the $2300), 3 year apple care (never purchased before but nowadays ...), FCP and other stuff.) Lots of money but I got lots of stuff with it.
Well, I actually moved from the Mac mini to a MacBook Pro - which was a huge improvement even though the MBP is a refurb 2017 base model. Apple still sells a Mac Pro, and an iMac Pro, and the specs look better than what I currently have. People really need to get rid of this 'up-to-date' mentality and replace it with 'the-tool-that-does-the-job'. You're always going to be sad if you're always looking to tomorrow instead of being happy with today.
Just my $0.02.
I agree with the overall theme here...
I'd really like something between a Mini and MacPro (that is just the machine - not an iMac) for my office.
I'm happy they updated the Mini, but it really doesn't do much for me now that they've totally gimped the ability to upgrade it on my own -- and I really would like to have a real GPU built in (and upgradeable).
Apple just frustrates me more than anything these days.
I'd really like something between a Mini and MacPro (that is just the machine - not an iMac) for my office.
I'm happy they updated the Mini, but it really doesn't do much for me now that they've totally gimped the ability to upgrade it on my own -- and I really would like to have a real GPU built in (and upgradeable).
Apple just frustrates me more than anything these days.
When you're paying the sort of premium prices that Apple are currently charging, you're entitled to expect "up-to-date". That doesn't mean the latest gimmicks - just the best currently-available CPUs, GPUs etc. and enough expandability to upgrade (at least) RAM and storage affordably, so it will keep 'doing the job' for as long as possible. If I'm going to economise on spec, then I expect to economise on price, too. I'd apply the same to other "premium" models - such as MS Surface Book/Studio etc, except that if you're prepared to give up Mac OS there are lots of far more cost-effective ways to run Windows or Linux.
Anyway, I think this whole discussion misses the point about the Mac Mini's size: the Mini form-factor was designed to accommodate an optical drive and a 2.5" mechanical hard drive (or just 2 2.5" HDs) - it should be swimming in space now those are no longer needed, but instead Apple decided to switch from mobile processors to desktop processors, which meant that space which could have been used for internal expansion had to be sacrificed for a larger PSU and more cooling. That decision also limits it to a lowest-common-denominator iGPU only intended for "business graphics" (since any other desktop would have space for at least an entry-level PCIe GPU) meaning that you need to start thinking about eGPUs even if you just want to run a couple of 4k displays for 2D work at scaled resolution.
Seriously - I can see the role of eGPUs in supplementing laptops, but the idea of desktop systems relying on them is just plain potty when you could have everything in one box not much larger than the eGPU or the option of a Mini with a decent mobile processor and high-end iGPU (or maybe the hybrid Intel i7 chips with discrete AMD GPUs in the same package) that had a better balance between CPU and GPU power.
Hey, why not have a box with just a PCIe-like bus and power supply, into which you could slot separate CPU, storage and graphics cards to build a system that suited your needs without a tangle of separate boxes, cables and power bricks? You could call it, I dunno, the "S-100 bus" or something...
Ok, I agree.. the Mac mini isn't for everyone. We can take this further and say that none of the current Apple offerings will suite everyone - pleasing everyone just isn't possible, no company is that rich in resources. So, what are your options? Trust me, there is one more option available if you're willing to consider it. Have you ever thought about building your own computer? It's much easier than people think and it's quite educational. I spent years building my own computers when I was running Linux and BSD, and many people have built some amazing Hackintoshes.When you're paying the sort of premium prices that Apple are currently charging, you're entitled to expect "up-to-date". That doesn't mean the latest gimmicks - just the best currently-available CPUs, GPUs etc. and enough expandability to upgrade (at least) RAM and storage affordably, so it will keep 'doing the job' for as long as possible. If I'm going to economise on spec, then I expect to economise on price, too. I'd apply the same to other "premium" models - such as MS Surface Book/Studio etc, except that if you're prepared to give up Mac OS there are lots of far more cost-effective ways to run Windows or Linux.
Anyway, I think this whole discussion misses the point about the Mac Mini's size: the Mini form-factor was designed to accommodate an optical drive and a 2.5" mechanical hard drive (or just 2 2.5" HDs) - it should be swimming in space now those are no longer needed, but instead Apple decided to switch from mobile processors to desktop processors, which meant that space which could have been used for internal expansion had to be sacrificed for a larger PSU and more cooling. That decision also limits it to a lowest-common-denominator iGPU only intended for "business graphics" (since any other desktop would have space for at least an entry-level PCIe GPU) meaning that you need to start thinking about eGPUs even if you just want to run a couple of 4k displays for 2D work at scaled resolution.
Seriously - I can see the role of eGPUs in supplementing laptops, but the idea of desktop systems relying on them is just plain potty when you could have everything in one box not much larger than the eGPU or the option of a Mini with a decent mobile processor and high-end iGPU (or maybe the hybrid Intel i7 chips with discrete AMD GPUs in the same package) that had a better balance between CPU and GPU power.
Hey, why not have a box with just a PCIe-like bus and power supply, into which you could slot separate CPU, storage and graphics cards to build a system that suited your needs without a tangle of separate boxes, cables and power bricks? You could call it, I dunno, the "S-100 bus" or something...
It's a great way to spend an afternoon. I am typing on one I built right now and I've built a few for family and friends too.
[doublepost=1547565312][/doublepost]
Wow really? You've moved from what sounds like a high spec Windows PC with lots of storage to the Mini? Why this surprises me so much is after reading an article on the Mini by a well know Mac reviewer.
What this article highlighted was the fact that over the last five years or so Apple has lavished money and attention on its favourite child i.e. iOS but has largely ignored MacOS. The improvements it has made to MacOS hasn't really offered much benefit to the end user. Microsoft on the other hand has continued to pump investment into Windows, with the result that any perceived benefit that MacOS may have had has been eclipsed by Windows which is now feature rich and rather slick.
I thought the review was a pretty fair assessment.
I agree that Windows 10 is probably great. I used it briefly and loved it. Until it broke my security system and then found out first hand about forced updates. I can’t afford to break stuff, even if MS allows you to delay the update. I need to do updates at my own pace, when I have time to reboot and roll back. My Win 7 machine is becoming dog slow after 5 years and needed new hard drives (spinners were over 5) and a reformat and OS reinstall (I do that every 3-5 years and have been doing so for over 25 years). With cheap 10tb external drives I was able to get the mac mini small form factor. The OS is amazing. It’s like I find all these hidden treasures. The unix base is amazing. I can rename files with a simple script. Copy and paste in terminal works out of the box. The various views in Finder I find much more useful. Software that comes with the OS is useful and free! I use Preview now all the time to manipulate pdf files and used hubby’s imovie years ago to archive hundreds of home movies. Maybe I needed a change after decades with Windows but macOS is wonderful. I realize it is buggy, difficult (3 keys to print screen??), and can drive me up a wall (Photos and date sorting). But I always end up figuring out how it needs to be used (exiftool to change original creation date) or how to make it do what I need (rekey Cmd -> Ctrl, rekey print screen to Shft-PrntScr). The Magic Trackpad 2 (1 was junk) is amazing. And I can still use my 40” 4k monitor. You can read other people’s opinion about hardware and software all day but it really comes down to - does it work for you. The Mac mini and macOS works for me. The only drawback is lack of top notch scanner support (Cannon DR9080) for ABBYY. So I keep the security machine to do occasional scanning about 4x a year.
IMO there's nothing wrong with the Mini. The problem is that Apple doesn't offer any current, headless system thus forcing people who want such a system to fit the Mini to their requirements instead of allowing the user to buy the system that meets their requirements.
Yes, a manufacturer can't meet everyone's needs but they can offer more than what Apple is offering. A great way to work towards that goal is to provide a system which can be customized (either during or post sale) by the user. The "xMac" that people have been requesting for over a decade. Apples current options are AIO, mobile, and the Mini. Not sure I want to even consider the Mac Pro an option given how dated it is. Apple can easily do this. HP has a myriad of different product offerings from SFF systems to high end workstations with any number of options in between. Apple has no excuse other than they don't want to.