2013 Mac mini Wishlist/iMac wishlist - Page 13

I suggested before that last minute delays would not be surprising. The author there doesn't give a lot of indication why he thinks they would skip over Ivy Bridge E variants, or if he just means the i7 monicker versions as opposed to EN,EP,EX, which I find unlikely. EX/E7s which have nothing to do with the mac pro or single user workstations haven't been updated since Westmere. Those updates hit late 2010. It reads like more tech site kool-aid. If they pushed for Haswell E versions, it might not be as dramatic of an impact, and they still could be a year or more out. Intel also lacks a lot of competition in that market segment. If anything why wouldn't they scrap a version that is further out and has less time invested at this point? In that sub-group it would seem as though Haswell would make a better target if bringing mainstream and server/workstation lines back into architectural parity is a real priority.

It would be quite bad if they launched a new iMac in June when some people only got their brand new ones this month and they tend to avoid releasing the Mini before the iMac. I could see June being the 15" Macbook Pro for definite, possibly Macbook Air if the ULV chips are available but pretty much iMac, Mini, iPad, iPhone for a September event. The Mac Pro might fall into the latter too but it depends on how they decide to launch it. The audience for it will be watching WWDC with the vaseline on standby.

Intel has so many chip models now, it's hard to figure out what's going to be coming when. I don't know if that's on purpose but I can't imagine it would be good for them to have so many models with overlapping price points. Worst case, it should be low/mid/high with fast or slow IGP in each category of ULV, laptop, desktop so 18 models maximum. They are going to have 33 desktop models:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/intel-cpu-haswell,news-42007.html

I've never understood this half assed attitude. What would be bad is Apple NOT upgrading the iMac for six months after the suitable Intel hardware comes out. The last thing Apple needs to do is sit on its behind for months again with nothing to sell. That is stupid I agree! However I'm not sure I see the link here, Mini should be quad core across the board. That is far too much product to push off till September. Just from the standpoint of manageability product releases need to be spread out. The new Mac Pro is a complete mystery, I don't know if they will try for the mainstream or go the high performance route. However I'm not sure what Vaseline has to do with it, the real demanding customers have already left th e platform. Actually I have to agree here, intel has lost its way. It isn't so much the specific number of chips as it is the overlap and senseless partitioning of the lineup.

June-September is just 4 months.

They'd still have the current model to sell, unlike last year.

Possibly but the dual-core i5 will always allow them to hit a lower entry point. I don't think Intel will be dropping the prices on the i7s.

The laptops are the high volume products, the desktop line is much less. This is what they did last year. They shouldn't have the same supply issues with the iMacs, it's just a drop-in upgrade and they've only recently cleared their iMac backlog. They can put out a new Cinema display along with the MBP in June.

There are a number of high resource users with iMacs/MBPs that supplement them with server hardware. Apple still sells a powerful Mac Pro too in the US. It might have outdated hardware but it's still a powerful machine. If anything it works out better because Apple will be able to advertise the new one being up to twice as fast for the same price.

Since they do plan to update it, I think they should give it a mention even if it's not going to get the update for a few months after. It was ok to do with the iMac, announcing in September and shipping in December. They can announce in June and ship as late as September.

I'm talking about last years long long Long LONG wait after intel released suitable hardware to ship the iMac. That was a huge unchracteristic blunder on Apples part. By the time iMac shipped in quantity it was six months. Shareholders and customers alike should have been up in arms over that nonsense. If they drag out upgrades to new Intel hardware it still sucks. Apple needs to have ship able hardware within a few weeks of an Inel release of suitable hardware not months later. Which is why I wish that AMD would get on the ball. Further it is why I wold like to see Apple release hardware not based on Intels hardware. Sometimes you just have to play hardball with suppliers and at this point Intel is vulnerable. Apple should be demanding across the board price cuts from Intel. A new reasonably priced Cinema Display would be very nice. Honestly though it is hard to resist some of the newer low cost screens out there, some are very nice for the price. Advertising does not span a burnt out bridge. They do need to do something. Frankly I was expecting a new Mac Pro by now. I'm not currently a customer for the machine but it would do the world a lot of good if Apple where to show some intention to innovate and modernize the desktop lineup. As such a refactored Mini would do wonders.
No not really, the markets are different here. Professionals usually don't enjoy being jerked around. Apple has pretty much lost any credibility they once had on the desktop, debuting a Mac Pro and not having it ready to ship would be suicide.

I understand the reference, I just don't think there are enough people in the audience anymore that cares. Apple has pretty much burnt a lot of bridges with their lack of effort on the desktop. As such they need to be concerned with bringing those users back into the fold.

To put it another way, there won't be a room full of people, at WWDC, the least bit concerned about the Mac Pro unless Apple makes a point to stuff the room with a few clowns. To breath new life into the machine they would have to debut something radically different. I'm not even sure they are up to it.
Possibly. However the reaction could also be a yawn followed by the thought expressed: too little too late! I don't even think Apple realizes just how badly they have damaged the customer base for this product. A year after this new Mac Pro is released they could kill it claiming no interest. That is just a reflection of how badly damaged Apples relationship with demanding users is, they are very likely to just say "screw you". Apple has had many occasions over the last few years to significantly redefine the Mac Pro and has refused to do so while letting the current Pro stagnate, they don't have much of a future in the Pro market if they come out with a slightly redesigned machine. It would be like telling the pro users that they don't deserve the same engineering efforts everyone else gets when it comes to Apple products.

 

Went? Been there for a while now. I don't see any dedicated GPU in the Mac Mini.

They used one in the 2011 revision.

GPU or not I'd rather see them go back to the power brick solution. Why? Well it makes it easy to implement the Mini for non traditional use. One example being use in RVs or boats with simple DC to DC converters. Also many embedded uses can benefit from alternative power supplies.

As it is I don't see them going back to a model with a discrete GPU. Yes I would like such a model but that is today, in two years or so I'm not expecting to have that need. In a nut shell I expect performance to get "good enough" for the average user. Further I still have this belief that the Mini cold be headed to the trash heap and as such when the Mac Pro comes we will get a new consumer desktop to go with it.

The power brick was huge. Look at the old Mac Mini Colo setup that sandwiched the brick between them:



For non-standard use, people can use a cheap, simple DC/AC converter:

http://www.amazon.com/BESTEK-inverter-adapter-charger-notebook/dp/B003Q54V88

It has 100W max.

Yeah, IGPs should be fine from this point on:

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2259001/intel-releases-opencl-sdk-for-upcoming-haswell-chips

"Intel launched an updated graphics driver yesterday, touting OpenCL 1.2 support for its present generation Ivy Bridge processors, and last week during a press conference it claimed that was actually designed for Haswell.
Now it seems that Intel is perfectly happy to help developers make use of the GPU for computing purposes in addition to its CPU cores.
Intel talked up its collaboration with video encoding project Handbrake, claiming that its Quicksync video codec could dramatically improve encoding times.
Intel said that the GPU in Haswell chips will not only support OpenCL 1.2 but will be able to access main system memory, which opens up interesting computing possibilities if memory access is truly unbound."

If it's double the performance, that will put it at 640M class, which is fine for the vast majority of gaming and should at least accelerate computation to the same level as the 640M:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-640M.71579.0.html

The 640M is 70% of the 650M. The 650M is roughly equivalent to the 5770 in the Mac Pro. The next Mini should be like getting an entry Mac Pro for $800.

But think of the RVs and boats. It needs to stay mini or:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8gciFoEbOA8#t=16s

The Mini design right now is pretty good IMO. They could flatten it out to be like a MBP but they'd have to make it sit vertically to prevent it using up a lot of desk space. Because it would have a flat side, it could have a latch and just slide on and off so they don't need to use screws.

Such inverters work at the expense of efficiency. For non traditional use, for example in an RV, efficiency an be very important. This is all well and good but Apple, through its drivers, has yet to support OpenCL on Intel GPUs. If you are an OpenCL user Intel GPUs simply aren't ready yet under Mac OS. This is exactly why I see OpenCL support as being very important. It has already been proven out on Intel hardware on other operating systems, I'm just wondering when and if Apple will support OpenCL on Intel hardware. Yep, Haswell is very exciting in this respect. Frankly we have AMD to thank for this as they push GPU integration forward. I don't see the Mini changing radically in size, however a slight change in focus aligned with a Mac Pro refresh could have a very positive impact on sales It certainly isn't bad!
Number one revision ought to be an easy open case. It perplexes me that they can market a Mini successfully as a server even though disk access on the machine is a joke. Beyond that the case and power supply need to support a wider array of processors so that there is a more solid differential in performance between the base model and the top of the line model. Neither of these changes demands a massively larger case.

A larger power supply would also allow for another TB port.

The above would be minimal changes to the Mini which may or may not impact it's overall foot print. The dreamer in me would love to see more radical changes though. For one a move to solid state storage as a first class implementation on the platform. That is design the machine to support flash memory from the ground up implementing storage models on dedicated PCI-Express based cards. If Apple had any sense at all, the cards would be designed to be implemented on all of their desktops and maybe even a laptop or two. A decent format would allow for standard sized cards in the majority of the machines while Apple's Mac Pro could support 2 or 3X sized cards. The reality is there are a lot of card standards out there for solid state storage that are basically crap, this gives Apple the perfect opportunity to innovate.

Interestingly an all flash Mini type machine might end up even smaller. The limiting factor then becomes affordable heat removal for the main processor. Affordable cooling is why I suspect we won't be seeing a significantly thinner Mini anytime soon. Further, if you look at it on a volume basis, the Mini current is less than optimal for heat removal as it is. Denser electronics could allow for a refactoring of the Mini into something very different in appearance. Imagine a box 3 to 4 inches square on the face and maybe 8 inches deep. The struggle then becomes where do you put all of the I/O, this might seem radical to Apple but a couple of USB ports on the front of the machine would be nice with the rest on the backside. Such a box would sit very nicely on a shelf, the desktop or even a rack. For unconventional uses such as RVs it could be bolted almost anywhere with minimal waste of space.

I look at it as A timing thing. The Mac Pro refresh should be huge (it better be) so it might be worthwhile from the marketing standpoint to absorb some of that flash with a new Mini. For Apple it is an opportunity that doesn't come around often and could address lagging sales of both machines.
Mind you I don't think anything they would do would lessen the machine as a consumer product unless they completely delete it from the lineup. Frankly I think that dropping the Mini is still in the cards so to speak. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize desktop sales suck, walk into any store selling electronics and you end up searching for the desktop hardware. So yeah I see a danger in the Mini going XServe with a public suicide.

The reality is desktop hardware demand is so low these days that Apple may simply go with a two product line up. That is an iMac line and a "desktop" platform to replace the Mac Pro. That Mac Pro replacement would come in two flavors, one in the sub $1000 range with consumer hardware and another in the sub $2000 range with a bunch of high performance processors. In effect the desktop range gets trimmed to two hardware platforms.

I think the Mac Pro will get smaller no matter what. Today's and especially tomorrows Technology, simply doesn't demand a huge case. For the sake of simplicity it would make sense to put a consumer Mac in the same chassis as the Mac Pro. It really is a question of just how serious Apple is about the post PC era. If they really think the market is evaporating then there is little sense to market a bunch of different machines and to further spend a bunch of time and effort supporting different hardware.

In a nut shell I think this year will likely forecast Apples approach to the desktop for years to come.

100% wrong . MM is a popular little PC and it will around for quite a while.
 

It is a unit suffering from declining sales just like the Mac Pro. The decline might not be as step as the Mac Pro but a decline is a decline.

By the way I believe a low end solution will be around for awhile, I'm just not convinced that it will be in the form of the Mini.

The way Apple is going now they have a lot of good competition out there which I am happy for. Their attitude is to mighty now.What ever happens to the MM it still is a good little computer.
 

I'm curious what data suggested that. I haven't seen anything that strongly suggested one way or the other.

Apple has as much said so in one of their quarterly earnings reports. I can't remember which one but it is consistent with industry trends, indicating Mini sales down significantly in the USA. The other way to look at this is the reported splits between laptop and desktop sales. Laptop sales hover around 80% of all Mac sales now and for some quarters may exceed 80% by a considerable amount. With whatever is left over the iMac sucks up the greatest percentage of the remaining sales.

If you watch quarterly reports and also focus on the attention that the iMac gets I think it becomes obvious what is happening to the desktop market. Without the iMac, Mac sales lag coniderably.

Apple produces all the information you need to make the deduction. They report the desktop/laptop split every quarter. The desktop split has become smaller just about every quarter. The vast majority of desktop sales are iMacs.
The iMac in fact reinforces the point, when it wasn't available Mac sales tanked. I suppose a math wiz could deduce just how big of a percentage iMacs are of the desktop line up but it is considerable.
No it isn't a poor seller, that is the whole point, it effectively soaks up the great majority of Apples desktop sales. I'm a bit confused actually about where the confusion comes from here, walk into any Apple store and it becomes obvious what the hot sellers are. In some cases you are lucky to find a Mini even on display.

Wishful thinking.
 

In terms of a stationary machine with a full sized keyboard and larger display, you can walk in and walk out of the store with something that works as it is. The mini lacks a keyboard and mouse by default. It also lacks a display in a price range that makes sense with that model. I suspect sales are still highly skewed in favor of the 21" model.

 

Hmm.  I never thought of 'begrudging' when Apple launched the iMac that basically kickstarted the revolution of their dramatic and unprecedented business comeback.

 

I had Power Mac clone.  It cost £2k.  Before the extras.  I was very excited by the iMac.  It was an excellent consumer machine that put Apple and 'Mac' back on the map.  It truly was the computer for the 'rest of us' as it finally delivered a Mac under 1k (despite the plethora of comments on here back in '97 that Apple should never do 'cheap'/will never do a sub 1k Mac etc, 'didn't need...etc.  (Sound familiar?)  Ironic that these days that Apple don't have a sub k iMac.  Most of that era's excitement and sales for desktops was all about the iMac.  I remember it well.

 

These days?  My how the iMac has grown in power and style.  And doubled in sales too.  As a million+ seller, the iMac is doing as well as any single desktop model might by Apple or any other company.

 

You could think of the 21 inch iMac as the 'Air' and the 27 inch version as the Pro.  Having now played with both and seen them apply to two different types of buyers...I can see how it covers the desktop consumer and the desktop pro.

 

The mini is for those who have no budget.  The 'Pro' is for those who have no budget.  If you know what I mean. ;)

 

I used to think I needed a tower over an iMac.  The classic x-mac.  But 16 years later, it doesn't look like it's going to happen. :P  The blue and white value tower became a 2k poor value tower...all these years later.  And one rarely updated at that...and one out of touch with it's original market I think.  At least in value, accessibility and power as well as relevance.  In that respect, I think a top end or loaded iMac has assumed the mantle.

 

In short, I wanted a tower but have found the iMac would crush the carcass of many towers.  Astonishing design and power with value and the best GPU yet in an iMac with 8 gigs of ram and plug in more or less what you would like externally to give you all the SSD or RAID you want.

 

Who knows.  It may have 6  or 8 core cpus in it one day... :)

 

It will only make it more compelling.  CPUs will evolve.  So will the iMac.

 

That said, I think we'll see a new 'Pro' this year.  I hope to see it radically redesigned to give people the access they wish for.  In price.  In performance.  In upgradeability.  But the next model looks very vulnerable to being the last.

 

Going to the Oxford Street Apple store in London...and a Premium reseller elsewhere...I noticed no Mac Pros anywhere to be seen.

 

Laptops, iPads, iPhones and iMacs.  In that order I think...

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

IMac helped pull them out of the whole they where in. However the greatest come back in corporate history was driven by other products. I don't buy that, I could make the argument that Linux all by itself was similarly exciting. Effectively it is Apple only full desktop model thus it does well by default. Only if you can accept the built in monitor and its hard to service nature. For many business a computer is a trivial expense. Here is where I have a slight problem with Apples marketing, slapping the word Pro onto the side of a computer doesn't make it a "Pro" machine. Rather it is the computers ability to perform the task at hand that makes it a Pro computer.

Back in the day when the Commodore 64 was brand new I knew a guy that did die-cast die design work with one. That effectively made it a pro computer in my mind. Sure many will laugh at this concept today but the machine represented a lot of power for the price in its day. Similarly any Apple machine can be a "Pro" computer as even the AIRs are being used by professionals.

The problem with the iMacs is mostly one of accessibility which is a big problem for some pro users. A secondary problem is the screen. There is a significant portion of Pro users that won't go for an iMac because of those issues. Believe it or not most of Apples laptops are easier to service than the iMac. Compare accessing the hard drive on a Unibody to access of the same drive on an iMac. A tower can be anything from a hollow box to a machine crammed full with the latest tech. Crushing the iMac is a simple job of configuring the machine correctly. I have no doubt about that. That just means an XMac or Mac Pro can become more powerful. If you take a look at some of the new XEON information leaked yesterday you will see that a Mac Pro could be a very very powerful machine if Apple really wanted to make it so. If it follows the current mold of the Mac Pro it won't last three years. The Mac Pro is a waste of a machine as it is now, with barely enough sales to keep it in the catalog. The concept needs to be refactored into a more viable and salable platform. The Mac Pro can no longer be sold in Europe. It is another one of those crazy European safety regs that will save no one. That right there ought to be an indication that the Mac Pros replacement is not far away.

Those feature do mean that the Mini is very handy for a collection of interesting uses. Like it or not the IMacs built in monitor is a liability for many applications.

Windows sucks period. To many problems and updates.
 

That issue has been receiving excessive press. I linked it in the original thread, although I don't have the link anymore It didn't specifically mention fans. This is just one of those things that happens to fall under whatever rule. The regulation wasn't directly aimed at machines like the mac pro. Anyway they amended it in 2009. The only reason it even came up is due to how long the mac pro has gone without an update. It's not like adding a couple of these to the design is a big deal anyway.

I don't know about excessive press but this is certainly a case of excessive regulation. As I understand it they are required to guard access to FANS INSIDE THE CASE! That to me is hilarious.

As to the removal from the European market, this is what has been offered up as an explanation, I don't think the press is excessive if it is true. Obviously if someone doesn't know about this issue than the press hasn't been excessive.