The online etymology dictionary attests that the literal sense dates to the 1610s, but the figurative sense dates to the 1550s. (One can assume that prior to that 17th century, english animals were not "castrated", but instead "gelded")
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.
Will 2016 Mini be quad core only?
- Thread starter dogslobber
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The online etymology dictionary attests that the literal sense dates to the 1610s, but the figurative sense dates to the 1550s. (One can assume that prior to that 17th century, english animals were not "castrated", but instead "gelded")
We can certainly agree the Minis don't have a pair and that is the problem figuratively speaking. Go check on the internet the use of the word castrated as an adjective. Also look up the words neutered and emasculated. Take your choice as they all describe exactly what Apple did to the Mini line with respect to CPU.
Also be aware that there are many threads here and elsewhere where people have voiced their disdain for the direction the Mini has gone and the absence of a quad core which were in previous Mini line ups.
As for Macbook Pro, I have one of those too and used to have a cMP. I won't bother with the new Mac (mini) Pro due to its pricing and limited ability to be upgraded (which was one of the real perks of the Mac Pro series).
As for being a farm boy, I find that has little to do with anything nor would my mention I assisted on spaying and neutering of cats and dogs long ago when I was a practicing certified vet tech. Let's just say that you went all out balls to the walls but failed to make a decent argument. Enjoy your Mini or whatever you have and glad you know how to use the word castrated when it comes to animals but your statements smack of lacking and perhaps cryptorchid out the door.
Last edited:
Your incisive insight into my linguistic and intellectual prowess is amazing. Thanks for that.
Many folks, both here on MacRumors and those I know personally, seem happy enough with their recent Mac Minis, which they have found fit for the purpose they bought them for.
On the other hand, more demanding dilettantes on a budget, many of whom seem attracted to this forum (if not always the actual Mac Mini), appear somewhat finicky by comparison.
Last edited:
The rMB uses a HD515 gpu.
The 2014 Mac Mini uses an Iris 5100 HD. The logical successor would be the Iris 540-- much faster than the HD515. (2-3 times as fast, judging by some of the benchmarks)
The A9 chip uses a PowerVR 7XT gpu.
Last edited:
Wow, almost a complete rewrite of the original post, which I have already quoted and replied to. It did border on being insulting. The new version sports linguistic skills that are a little more cunning.
Yes, I am aware that there are many threads where disdain about the direction Apple is going with the Mac Mini is expressed, sometimes by those who would not deign to own one.
On the other hand there are those who have posted in the is thread and others, who have found even the base model 2014 Mac Mini has been adequate for their humble needs.
Not everybody wants to muck around with computer hardware and software, and have bragging rights to the hottest machine on the block. Many an average Joe or Jill just wants to use OS X to do stuff, and can find what they want off the shelf or custom built, to suit a range of requirements and budgets.
Last edited:
While this is indeed true, I'm sure you can appreciate the fact that there is a huge, gaping hole in Apple's lineup, one being filled by their competitors. Apple has a beautiful, minimalist entry-level PC: the Mini. It has a beautiful, simple-to-setup-and-use desktop PC that performs well for lightweight office or home work, the iMac. It has a beautiful, minimalist high-end workstation, which is quiet and uses a relatively small amount of power, while still remaining capable enough to perform tasks requiring significant CPU power. (Although, at this point, it is far behind the competition.)
What Apple lacks is a machine that takes any advantage of modern CPU and GPU power. The Mini, of course, isn't intended to fill this space. The Pro is not upgradeable, far far out of date, and unbelievably expensive for what it does have. The iMac has been updated somewhat, but with its ever-shrinking design and low power requirements, has no support for the high-end chips either.
As such, the desktop market is running away from Apple. Competitors have devices that, in terms of raw power, are so far ahead of any of Apple's devices that even the advantage of OS X is starting to come into question (particularly given how good Windows 10 now is).
In the end, this is why so many complaints are appearing here. Apple's hardware, while beautiful, is technologically inferior -- there is no question on this point. Apple's operating system, while incredibly easy to use, is no longer as superior to the alternatives as it once was -- the average Joe or Jill can, in fact, easily just use Windows 10 to do stuff. Apple really should try to address this situation, or it will start to lose market share...
And yet the Mac market share is increasing in a decreasing market…….
With the relatively long wait between updates across most of the range, we can be fairly sure that Apple is working on something, which will appear when it is good and ready.
Apple has often been less than cutting edge on the hardware front, but still what has been on offer has been adequate for the current generation of OS X. Complaints tend to appear here because it is where enthusiastic geeks, who feel their opinions count, are inclined to use forums like these vent their spleen.
As to Windows 10 and the average Joe; not everyone is enamoured with it. Here's one posting on another forum:
Goodbye Windows 10.
Switching back to Windows 7. Bored of all the blue screens and despite asking many people can't find the cause. Never had any issues with 7 so will go with that again.
The guy is not alone; I know others in the same boat. OS X still seems more instinctive in use and hassle free.
Some of the computers in my office on campus have W10, some have W7, and I think there is one with XP. I find none particularly easy to use. There is often a wait while updates are being installed on the W10 machines. The office geek and the IT department frequently have to sort problems out. It is one of the reasons I got a Mac in the first place, and started doing most of my work at home.
Apple has, indeed, chosen well in their niches -- the classic desktop tower running Windows has not been ideal for casual users. I'm sure Apple will continue to do well with the customers they pursue.
The question is, though -- is the classic desktop tower obsolete? I'm sure Apple thinks so (e.g., Tim Cain's belief that the iPad Pro could "replace" the PC). Lots of folks are making do with much less powerful computing hardware today. Right now, pretty much everything a casual user wants to do with a computer can be done with low-power CPUs.
I wonder, though, will that remain forever? Certainly, there are folks today who demand significant CPU & GPU power: developers, artists, gamers. I expect, also, that there will come a time when new applications that can take advantage of the greater power available in modern processors start to appear -- VR is one obvious current example.
Yes, Apple is doing well in a declining market. But they've studiously avoided the center of that market; and, if a new product shows up to make powerful PCs popular again (which I believe is likely to happen), Apple will find itself poorly positioned to take advantage of the situation.
I agree. You are exactly right, all the enthusiasm has been draining away from Apple, and back towards Windows machines.
Oh, I'm sure folks are not enamored with it. I'm sure it is inferior to OS X. But it is vastly superior to Windows 8, and much more of a competitor to OS X. The average Joe can, indeed, get along with Windows 10 a lot better than with previous iterations of Windows...
Last edited:
It really isn't you may want to read this interesting article, about why this is just marketing guff.
http://www.engadget.com/2015/11/14/ipad-pro-a9x-chip/
I see a redesigned fanless Mac Mini with Core M, 8GB of Ram and 128GB SSD. Options will be for larger SSD and Core M CPUs. Might have 2 Type C USB and no TB but HDMI plus Ethernet.
Larger file storage will be iCloud or external drives.
iMacs will be required for larger Intel CPUs that require fans and on-board storage.
Mac Pro will be updated to latest Intel Xeon processors and new DGPUs.
Larger file storage will be iCloud or external drives.
iMacs will be required for larger Intel CPUs that require fans and on-board storage.
Mac Pro will be updated to latest Intel Xeon processors and new DGPUs.
If Apple can cram the forthcoming 2016 Mini into a matchbox then I think they'll be okay with optimized realignment of the GPU performance.
Maybe the Mini is EOL'd? Mac Air anyone?
As for no fans in a desktop, this is Apple so normal rules don't apply
That's kind of the weird thing; the Mac Pro has been more-or-less abandoned (if the 2013 design had been intended to be the start of a new lineup, I would have expected some more versions of it by now), and the Mini pretty much covers the niche Apple has selected for it; there's really no need to update it at all if Apple only intends for it to be a low-end entry point for Mac users. Only the iMac is still getting updates, and given how little space and power exist in that form factor, I don't see it really going anywhere either.
It's hard to tell if Apple has any desire to do anything more in the desktop market in the forseeable future...
Apple killed the 2012 design and the 2014 is still using that big aluminum case they could save money on.
Core M would be a step down but saving on case size and eliminating components like a fan, etc is right up Apples power alley.
After all it's an entry level machine. lol And by the way...it will cost $100 more.
Last edited:
Oh, I forgot to add that back in the year 2013 I also purchased a Refurbished MM(Late 2012), 2.5GHz,4GB Ram, 500 GB HD which has also served me well as a "Casual User". I am still on OS "Mountain Lion" on this MM and I have since upgraded the Ram to 16GB and will add a SSD in the near future which should make this machine comparable to my MM(Late 2014) which is on OS "Yosemite" and starts-up in a few seconds and has a smooth interaction with the Internet and streaming movies.
Once the SSD is installed in my MM(Late 2012) I plan on installing OS "El Capitan".
Oh on the Horizon; if updated I will purchase another MM next year and I plan on updating my iPad Mini2 to a iPad Mini4 later this year.
Unless I am struck by what we call here in Costa Rica a "Raya Electrica", I will keep using OS X and IOS as I join the bandwagon of the other "Apple Fan Boys" on this great Forum !
My Costa Rican wife's Dell Desktop PC which is on Windows10(Spanish Edition) in the other room operates Sometimes A-OK, however, every so often I hear a scream for PC Help coming from this other room wanting some PC Help!
I am now trying to convince her she needs to buy a new IMac which I can use every so often
Last edited:
Given that the Mini uses laptop parts and that the G5 couldn't go into a PowerBook (or iBook), I'd doubt very much Apple will ever release a G5 Mini. I could be wrong.
Just the opposite here, OSX no problems. Windows 10 is good but, runs much slower, and needs to be reinstalled every other year to run well.
[doublepost=1474766574][/doublepost]
They will make a ipad with OSX long before we see a mini with Arm chip. Arm in mini would=less sales.
[doublepost=1474767168][/doublepost]
The mini is not a hobby, that is the Apple TV. Apple has sold lots of mini's ,and when it's updated with a new sexy outer case all will be well.
Yes I like how you think, I think Apple will do more with AR and skip the VR. A new Apple system in a MacPro case or a little larger, with intel 6700, nvidia 1070. $1400. Would sell like crazy!
Actually, I think AR only makes sense for portable devices; what's the point of augmented reality while sitting at your desk?
Yup, which is exactly why Apple won't do it. Such a machine would make a lot more sense to most consumers than an iMac, given that it'd be less expensive and more flexible. And therefore, Apple would sell less iMacs...
I always get a chuckle from the Apple mac mini sales page, which shows the mini paired with a thunderbolt display. Oops. If they ever do upgrade the mini this page may also change. Wonder what monitor they will use, something from Dell?