or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › 2014 Mac mini Wishlist
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2014 Mac mini Wishlist - Page 32

post #1241 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Two questions.

1. Is there any upcoming Mac keynotes coming up where a mini could possibly be announced or be updated quietly with other products?

2. Can a mod change the title to 2014 Mac mini Wishlist (take out the iMac part)
post #1242 of 1394
Originally Posted by Winter View Post
1. Is there any upcoming Mac keynotes coming up where a mini could possibly be announced or be updated quietly with other products?

 

The next thing we know about is the iOS 8 preview, and of course it won’t be then. Then WWDC, and they’ve moved away from introducing hardware then.

 

Could be a spring event for a new Apple TV box if that exists. Mac Mini wouldn’t even get a mention, of course, and would be updated silently. 

 

The way I see it, at this point they’ll probably just wait until Broadwell.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone exists], it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #1243 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Two questions.

1. Is there any upcoming Mac keynotes coming up where a mini could possibly be announced or be updated quietly with other products?
I really doubt that the Mini would get a media event if it is a simple bump! Honestly I sometimes think they are ashamed of the machine and try to not acknowledge it in public. That is too bad really because the form factor is becoming very popular even if it isn't Apple hardware.

If the Mini does get a major overhaul or significantly refactored then I can see a media event of some sort.

The problem right now is that Apple has so effectively clamped down on leaks nobody knows what is going on, what is coming next or when anything will be released. This is really a case of Apple going overboard in my mind as a few leaks here and there actually increase interest in coming products.
Quote:
2. Can a mod change the title to 2014 Mac mini Wishlist (take out the iMac part)

Sorry not a Mod, looks like somebody I'd the dirty though and changed the year for you. The fact that we had to do this is frustrating. I would much rather have seen Apple do a quick Haswell based Mini launch last year even if they have something big planned for this year. The Haswell GPU is just too good to pass up at the prices Apple charges. Thus the idea that the current Mini is obsolete in its current form.
post #1244 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The next thing we know about is the iOS 8 preview, and of course it won’t be then. Then WWDC, and they’ve moved away from introducing hardware then.
They still debut or prerelease hardware around WWDC. After all that is where the first glimpse of the new Mac Pro happened.

I'm actually thinking that the next big Apple release will be an AppleTV device, where AppleTV becomes a family of products. This could happen anytime. The interesting thing here is claims of A8 already being in production. It is unlikely that the iPad will get revved already so the only machine I could see them going into is an uber AppleTV. On the other hand it wouldn't hurt Apple one bit to lap the competition and ship an A8 based iPad.
Quote:
Could be a spring event for a new Apple TV box if that exists. Mac Mini wouldn’t even get a mention, of course, and would be updated silently. 
A silent update could come at anytime. If the AppleTV is what I think it is, I could see that getting a big media event. What imagining is a high performance version of the current AppleTV that supports gaming, a video library and has a built in video projector.
Quote:
The way I see it, at this point they’ll probably just wait until Broadwell.

This is very possible. Sadly depending upon which rumor you believe this could be close to next year. The other possibility is Haswell refresh which should come soon. Haswell refresh might be worth waiting for if Intel can significantly lower thermals thus allowing Apple to cram more performance into the box. I'm just not hearing about great strides in thermal performance with Haswell refresh. Knowing Apple they may see Haswell refresh as a way to get today's Haswells at a lower price.
post #1245 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Thank you to whomever did that. I will make one more iMac note though. I didn't think much about the first three months of this year probably because of all the snow we've had in NJ. I just remembered last night that nVidia was supposed to release their Maxwell series of cards around this time. Eagerly checking nVidia's website, I saw that they did indeed have information on Maxwell as well as upcoming notebooks with the graphics in them. It would appear that the 880M (which is the only one that matters to me) has a max of 8 GB of GDDR5 memory. So I wonder if Apple will include this on the 2014 iMac as an option. I hope they do.

When is the Haswell refresh planned for? June? This might be a factor for a quiet release. In October, my mini will be three years old, and I would like to replace it.
post #1246 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Thank you to whomever did that. I will make one more iMac note though. I didn't think much about the first three months of this year probably because of all the snow we've had in NJ. I just remembered last night that nVidia was supposed to release their Maxwell series of cards around this time. Eagerly checking nVidia's website, I saw that they did indeed have information on Maxwell as well as upcoming notebooks with the graphics in them. It would appear that the 880M (which is the only one that matters to me) has a max of 8 GB of GDDR5 memory. So I wonder if Apple will include this on the 2014 iMac as an option. I hope they do.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple go AMD in the new iMac. You get better compute performance in many cases and more importantly they can share code with the Mac Pro. That and the fact hat I don't especially like NVidia has me hoping for this change.

Interestingly I've yet to see a really bad report on GPU driver behavior in the new Mac Pros. I take this as a good sign that the extended development of this machine was worth the wait.
Quote:
When is the Haswell refresh planned for? June?
Depends upon whom you believe but May / June seems to be the common time frames. Sadly there is nothing about the refresh that inspires. In fact the refresh from a technical standpoint is hardly worth waiting for. It really appears to be a stop gap measure due to the delay with Broadwell that was suppose to launch this year.

We can hope for new functionality or power points to better fit the Mini, but it is doubtful that the chips will be revved to that extent. At this point it looks like the same chips with 100 MHz faster clocks. 100 MHz is nothing in a 4GHz chip.
Quote:
This might be a factor for a quiet release. In October, my mini will be three years old, and I would like to replace it.

What is the rush? My MBP is now five years old. And yes it needs to be replaced. In any event I think you need to be prepared for the Mini going away at least in its current form. As time goes on it just seems like the future of the machine is more and more questionable.
post #1247 of 1394

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple go AMD in the new iMac. You get better compute performance in many cases and more importantly they can share code with the Mac Pro. That and the fact hat I don't especially like NVidia has me hoping for this change.
 

They go back and forth depending on the offering. I'm really not surprised either way. In the case of the mac pro, AMD may have been more favorable in licensing terms. NVidia has a much more defined brand with their Quadros than AMD with the firepro name. It was also probably meant to be highly aligned with FCPX, as that alignment can be used to help maintain the required numbers over the longer term. It wouldn't a new strategy for Apple. They make their money off hardware, so they sink the cost of software wherever possible. It has worked out quite well for them.

post #1248 of 1394
I don't follow GPUs like I use to, mainly because most of the discrete chips out there now are good enough for my needs. Integrated GPUs are right on the edge of being good enough also. Well at least until 4 K displays become affordable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

They go back and forth depending on the offering. I'm really not surprised either way. In the case of the mac pro, AMD may have been more favorable in licensing terms. NVidia has a much more defined brand with their Quadros than AMD with the firepro name.
It would have been most interesting to be a fly on the wall when Apple started discussions about their new Mac Pro concept with AMD and NVidia. I suspect AMD was more willing due to the need to extend credibility to their GPU line up. That and they need to make up for lackluster CPU advancements.

Beyond that it really looks like AMD have a shared vision with respect to GPU compute and how it will work in systems going forward. Im certain AMD learned much with this partnership.
Quote:
It was also probably meant to be highly aligned with FCPX, as that alignment can be used to help maintain the required numbers over the longer term. It wouldn't a new strategy for Apple. They make their money off hardware, so they sink the cost of software wherever possible. It has worked out quite well for them.

That may be part of their strategy but Apple needs to broaden the Mac Pros horizons. If need be they ought to buy up a CAD house or two this to expand more into the different engineering fields.

Apple has a great platform in the Mac Pro but they really need to get more software vendors on board with native apps. Otherwise the platform remains a niche solution.
post #1249 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I don't follow GPUs like I use to, mainly because most of the discrete chips out there now are good enough for my needs. Integrated GPUs are right on the edge of being good enough also. Well at least until 4 K displays become affordable.
It would have been most interesting to be a fly on the wall when Apple started discussions about their new Mac Pro concept with AMD and NVidia. I suspect AMD was more willing due to the need to extend credibility to their GPU line up. That and they need to make up for lackluster CPU advancements.

4K should be fine at least by the next models. The 15" rmbp is advertised to support 4K, and its base model uses integrated graphics.  It's just that there is a significant divide in terms of where diminishing returns kick in when comparing the majority of users to those who do things that really stress the gpu. Unfortunately I come across a lot of people spreading bad information as to what benefits what. I clear up what I can. It's annoying to see others suggest people strain their budgets on things that will will not be really meaningful or noticeable in their regular use, such as not budgeting for what should be essential peripherals due to their not being as exciting. I know you dislike NVidia, and that's fine. I would point out that they have historically spent a lot more on value added additions. Much like Apple they write software with little to no licensing fees to sell their hardware. That is part of how they're able to charge those markups. They did gimp the double precision math on some of their gaming gpus, which is annoying. It's a way of ensuring a certain minimum sale. I suspect AMD has less to lose when it comes to licensing their firepro brand. Quadro and Tesla cards account account for a huge percentage of NVidia's profits relative to their volume, which is fairly low. Marvin linked it once, but I can't find the link.

 

Quote:

 

Beyond that it really looks like AMD have a shared vision with respect to GPU compute and how it will work in systems going forward. Im certain AMD learned much with this partnership.

That is entirely possible.

 

Quote:

That may be part of their strategy but Apple needs to broaden the Mac Pros horizons. If need be they ought to buy up a CAD house or two this to expand more into the different engineering fields.

Apple has a great platform in the Mac Pro but they really need to get more software vendors on board with native apps. Otherwise the platform remains a niche solution.

I am not the one to provide informed opinions about catia or autocad. I have some basic familiarity, just not enough to provide any meaningful insight. For example is it just

post #1250 of 1394
Thread Starter 
What's the rush? Because newer is better! 1mad.gif

I'm guessing if they use nVidia on the rMBP, it'll be the 850M. I take it that should be powerful enough to handle 4K.
post #1251 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

4K should be fine at least by the next models. The 15" rmbp is advertised to support 4K, and its base model uses integrated graphics.  It's just that there is a significant divide in terms of where diminishing returns kick in when comparing the majority of users to those who do things that really stress the gpu.
I look at 4K as new technology that the community hasn't gotten a good grasp on yet. Thus I'm conservative when it comes to suggesting that today's integrated GPUs are able to deliver a good user experience. I'd feel much better being able to actually use a 4K screen for a bit.
Quote:
Unfortunately I come across a lot of people spreading bad information as to what benefits what. I clear up what I can. It's annoying to see others suggest people strain their budgets on things that will will not be really meaningful or noticeable in their regular use, such as not budgeting for what should be essential peripherals due to their not being as exciting.
Backup solutions being one thing people neglect.

On the other hand my big problem with GPUs is that performance here is discounted even though Apple and developers continue to leverage the GPUs more and more. If you are someone like me, that is a person that keeps his PC investments for a long while, it really pays to pay attention to GPU performance as it keeps hardware viable for as long as possible.
Quote:
I know you dislike NVidia, and that's fine. I would point out that they have historically spent a lot more on value added additions.
Part of the dislike comes from their attitude to driver support in Linux, something that has nothing to do with Apple. The bigger issue is that I'd don't see much of a future for NVidia if they can't get their act together with integrated processors SoC. Let's face it with the arrival of Haswell and even better AMD integrated chips, the need for discrete GPUs are quickly going away for mainstream users. You then have the likes of NVidia relying up in gamers and technical users which isn't much to sustain NVidia.
Quote:
Much like Apple they write software with little to no licensing fees to sell their hardware. That is part of how they're able to charge those markups. They did gimp the double precision math on some of their gaming gpus, which is annoying. It's a way of ensuring a certain minimum sale.
It is also at odd with the way Apple wants to be able to leverage GPUs.
Quote:
I suspect AMD has less to lose when it comes to licensing their firepro brand. Quadro and Tesla cards account account for a huge percentage of NVidia's profits relative to their volume, which is fairly low. Marvin linked it once, but I can't find the link.
I rather see AMD having much to gain. AMDs GPUs really are pretty good and stack up well against NVidia chips. If their team up with Apple delivers solid drivers and reliable performance I see a big win for AMD.
Quote:
I am not the one to provide informed opinions about catia or autocad. I have some basic familiarity, just not enough to provide any meaningful insight. For example is it just
2D isn't a problem these days for things of moderate complexity. It is more advance modeling that burns up horsepower.
post #1252 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

What's the rush? Because newer is better! 1mad.gif
I use to believe that! Well when it came to computers, now I want to spend that money in different ways.
Quote:
I'm guessing if they use nVidia on the rMBP, it'll be the 850M. I take it that should be powerful enough to handle 4K.
It would be a worthwhile addition if Apple has only Haswell refresh this year from Intel.
post #1253 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

I'm guessing if they use nVidia on the rMBP, it'll be the 850M. I take it that should be powerful enough to handle 4K.

4K at this point relates to two things, drivers and outputs. The current rMBP supports 4K at 60hz, which is the typical concern. Some things only support it at 30hz. Choice of gpus might have a greater effect on whether you can effectively game on a screen of that resolution or work with applications that make extensive use of non-trivial OpenGL functions.  By fine I was referring to non-trivial.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


I look at 4K as new technology that the community hasn't gotten a good grasp on yet. Thus I'm conservative when it comes to suggesting that today's integrated GPUs are able to deliver a good user experience. I'd feel much better being able to actually use a 4K screen for a bit.

It is fragmented. The Airs, imacs, and minis lack thunderbolt 2, so they don't have displayport 1.2 and MST. It also matters that the combination works. There isn't a clear specification on how to implement MST. One of your /s favorite sites /end s  had an article about that a few months ago.

 

Quote:
Backup solutions being one thing people neglect.

That is an extremely common one. I see the issue as being that people are susceptible to marketing. There isn't any coolness factor in backups, unless you're really nerdy like me.

 

Quote:

On the other hand my big problem with GPUs is that performance here is discounted even though Apple and developers continue to leverage the GPUs more and more. If you are someone like me, that is a person that keeps his PC investments for a long while, it really pays to pay attention to GPU performance as it keeps hardware viable for as long as possible.

It then becomes an issue of what matters within that application and whether one option provides a  meaningful difference over another. There are many people who believe that gpu is of the highest priority when they use software that makes use of it in a very limited way. There's also the matter of in the future what version of what will be required. Does something require OpenCL 1.2 with its inception? Then there are many things that will not work. Given the slow adoption in some critical code areas with aging code bases, I wouldn't focus too heavily on it. Then there are some things where it doesn't really matter what gpu if you're buying a recent machine. In some cases the code runs through OpenCL calls or compute shaders simply because it's well suited to the gpu. Given some of the speed multipliers, it doesn't take much to be viable. This comes up frequently with creative cloud users.

 

Quote:
Part of the dislike comes from their attitude to driver support in Linux, something that has nothing to do with Apple. The bigger issue is that I'd don't see much of a future for NVidia if they can't get their act together with integrated processors SoC. Let's face it with the arrival of Haswell and even better AMD integrated chips, the need for discrete GPUs are quickly going away for mainstream users. You then have the likes of NVidia relying up in gamers and technical users which isn't much to sustain NVidia.

The predicted problem is that gamers and those building compute clusters won't provide enough volume to overcome development costs. I can't comment on SoCs because I haven't kept up with their Tegras.

 

Quote:


It is also at odd with the way Apple wants to be able to leverage GPUs.
I rather see AMD having much to gain. AMDs GPUs really are pretty good and stack up well against NVidia chips. If their team up with Apple delivers solid drivers and reliable performance I see a big win for AMD.

Well they do have a guaranteed sale of 2 gpus with each system. I think discrete graphics will disappear from the notebooks in 2-3 cycles if intel keeps making improvements. The imacs may retain them, but at their high end, the 780m is considerably faster than a 750m.
 

Quote:

2D isn't a problem these days for things of moderate complexity. It is more advance modeling that burns up horsepower.

 

I was thinking of more than just CAD. That's why I said OpenGL.

post #1254 of 1394
Thread Starter 
So apparently the 880M isn't all that impressive although it is somewhat more power efficient. I thought the wait to Maxwell was going to be fairly decent but I guess I was wrong.
post #1255 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

So apparently the 880M isn't all that impressive although it is somewhat more power efficient. I thought the wait to Maxwell was going to be fairly decent but I guess I was wrong.

The 880M is still Kepler. It looks like the ones for laptops will be Maxwell though:

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/178351-nvidias-gtx-800m-brings-improved-kepler-and-maxwell-cores-to-mobile-new-battery-boost-driver-to-double-gaming-battery-life

The chart there says only 15% improvement for the 880M vs 780M but 60% for the 850M vs 750M. They always claim more than it turns out but even taking a chunk out of the 60% would be a decent improvement over last year. If Intel hasn't bumped Iris Pro up higher with the Haswell Refresh, the 850M will push further ahead and make the higher-end MBPs more compelling.
post #1256 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

The 880M is still Kepler. It looks like the ones for laptops will be Maxwell though:

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/178351-nvidias-gtx-800m-brings-improved-kepler-and-maxwell-cores-to-mobile-new-battery-boost-driver-to-double-gaming-battery-life

The chart there says only 15% improvement for the 880M vs 780M but 60% for the 850M vs 750M. They always claim more than it turns out but even taking a chunk out of the 60% would be a decent improvement over last year. If Intel hasn't bumped Iris Pro up higher with the Haswell Refresh, the 850M will push further ahead and make the higher-end MBPs more compelling.

So wait... I thought the 800M series was Maxwell, no? Anyway it looks like as you go up, the performance percentage decreases from last year though having said that, it is a good thing for the lower models.
post #1257 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

So wait... I thought the 800M series was Maxwell, no? Anyway it looks like as you go up, the performance percentage decreases from last year though having said that, it is a good thing for the lower models.

That link says NVidia has made the mobile chips a mix of both Kepler and Maxwell and some models even have variants of both so you can get an 860M in either architecture but they are configured to perform the same. It doesn't really matter as long as the performance is higher and the power usage and heat output low.
post #1258 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



The chart there says only 15% improvement for the 880M vs 780M but 60% for the 850M vs 750M. They always claim more than it turns out but even taking a chunk out of the 60% would be a decent improvement over last year. If Intel hasn't bumped Iris Pro up higher with the Haswell Refresh, the 850M will push further ahead and make the higher-end MBPs more compelling.

 

It would surprise me if Apple changed to the 850m on the same cpu generation. The 2011 version of that was nearly identical. It was a higher clocked 6750m, and obviously the 6490m went away. The 850M is suggested as being Maxwell in the article. I don't think Apple would make that big of a bump without a change in cpu generation. It goes against their past patterns. You may be waiting until fall or next year to see Maxwell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post


So wait... I thought the 800M series was Maxwell, no? Anyway it looks like as you go up, the performance percentage decreases from last year though having said that, it is a good thing for the lower models.


It's never defined by series. Kepler initially shipped alongside some rebranded Fermi cards.

post #1259 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

You may be waiting until fall or next year to see Maxwell.

I'd say Haswell Refresh with Iris Pro still at the entry level and 850M in the higher models. Iris Pro may or may not be improved. This would be in the April-June timeframe.
post #1260 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


I'd say Haswell Refresh with Iris Pro still at the entry level and 850M in the higher models. Iris Pro may or may not be improved. This would be in the April-June timeframe.


You've been right on the last few. We'll see who is right this time.:D  It's just on the $2500 model. They probably sell far fewer there compared to the base model due to its price. That it dropped to $2000 means they were trying to get closer to the old starting price on the 15" models. I don't personally think they would bother with it for the high end only. If discrete graphics remained on all 15" models, I would be in agreement.


Edited by hmm - 3/17/14 at 4:17pm
post #1261 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

It would surprise me if Apple changed to the 850m on the same cpu generation. The 2011 version of that was nearly identical. It was a higher clocked 6750m, and obviously the 6490m went away. The 850M is suggested as being Maxwell in the article. I don't think Apple would make that big of a bump without a change in cpu generation. It goes against their past patterns. You may be waiting until fall or next year to see Maxwell.
That may be true, that is past history has shown us modest GPU interest by Apple. But what if the haswell refresh is as lame as some have indicated, Apple would need something to stimulate and draw interests for the back to school sales push that happens over the summer. A significantly faster GPU would be something to crow about.
Quote:

It's never defined by series. Kepler initially shipped alongside some rebranded Fermi cards.
Honestly I think the marketing of GPU's should be investigated due to obviously deceptive practices. You can't tell anymore what you are getting by model number. At the very least confusing the customer is never a old policy and this thread highlights a bit of confusion.
post #1262 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


That may be true, that is past history has shown us modest GPU interest by Apple. But what if the haswell refresh is as lame as some have indicated, Apple would need something to stimulate and draw interests for the back to school sales push that happens over the summer. A significantly faster GPU would be something to crow about.

In 2011 they bumped it to a higher clocked version of the same thing, but the bump from intel wasn't out until the back to school season was already over. I'm skeptical regarding what portion of back to school shoppers opts for the $2500 model. Kids often grossly over-estimate what they'll need for a college computer. I typically tell them that if their program requires anything heavy, it will be in the upper division, at which point computer lab workstations, which they pay a fee to use anyway, will be faster than any notebook they purchased 2 year prior. They have been fairly consistent about keeping significant changes aligned with cpu changes. This is probably to align them with changes in the overall logic board assembly.

 

Quote:
Honestly I think the marketing of GPU's should be investigated due to obviously deceptive practices. You can't tell anymore what you are getting by model number. At the very least confusing the customer is never a old policy and this thread highlights a bit of confusion.

 

I'm not sure what to say there. Their naming conventions aren't really regulated. it's just fuzzy branding, although I find it irritating. If it was something like a food product, they would be under some sort of investigation.

post #1263 of 1394

The Mini's still untouched and the iMac still lacks Thunderbolt 2, but today we got....the iPad 4. Again.

 

It's always been hard to tell what's going on inside Apple. But the company has become much harder to figure out since the Jobs era.

 

We had silence for more than half of 2013, and then a whole bunch of product updates late in the year.

Perhaps Jobs' fiery temper really did bring stuff out faster than otherwise.

 

We know 4K is being rolled out in the OS, so it's likely that Apple's waiting on 4K to upgrade the iMacs with TB2.

Could that be the holdup with the Mini as well?

 

Does the Mini's target market care about 4K?

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #1264 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

The Mini's still untouched and the iMac still lacks Thunderbolt 2, but today we got....the iPad 4. Again.
I'm not sure why people are so obsessed about Apples upgrading their base full size iPad to the iPad4. for people in that market segment it is a huge update. I personally have no interest but that isn't a reason to damn the relaunch.

As for the iMacs, Mini and TB2; I suspect that the TB2 hardware is one of the things that delayed the Mac Pro for so long. You would think that by this time though production would be ramped up. Given that the iMac and Mini could relaunch anytime.
Quote:
It's always been hard to tell what's going on inside Apple. But the company has become much harder to figure out since the Jobs era.
Honestly I don't see a huge change here. Just look at the history of the Mini and iMacs. The wait for the new Mini has been long but it isn't the longest one on record.
Quote:
We had silence for more than half of 2013, and then a whole bunch of product updates late in the year.
Perhaps Jobs' fiery temper really did bring stuff out faster than otherwise.
That is unadulterated BS. Jobs was very clear about how long it took them to get the iPhone out the door. More so he publicly stated that he was very pleased with products that have not launched. Apparently he was trying to address dissatisfaction within the company over the retargeting the group that developed iOS towards the iPhone instead of a tablet. It literally took them years after the iPhone launch to put the iPad on the market. If you look at the overall time from before the iPhone switch until the iPad launch it was over a half a decade.

Im not sure where all this crap about Apple needing to crap out innovative products every year like clock work comes from. it is worthless nonsense as it was never done when Steve was running things. However with Steve gone Apple is expected to accomplish things it never accomplished under Steve's leadership. Frankly it is even more astonishing to hear this malarky when Apple has been delivering solid products and updates ever since Steve's death.
Quote:
We know 4K is being rolled out in the OS, so it's likely that Apple's waiting on 4K to upgrade the iMacs with TB2.
Could that be the holdup with the Mini as well?
The primary reason to support TB2 on the iMac or even the Mini for that matter, is to provide fast access to storage devices.
Quote:

Does the Mini's target market care about 4K?
Probably not. Then again you have to assume that the target market is representative via one prototype. in a nut shell 4K on the Mini isn't a big deal for me.
post #1265 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post
Im not sure where all this crap about Apple needing to crap out innovative products every year like clock work comes from. it is worthless nonsense as it was never done when Steve was running things. However with Steve gone Apple is expected to accomplish things it never accomplished under Steve's leadership. Frankly it is even more astonishing to hear this malarky when Apple has been delivering solid products and updates ever since Steve's death.

 

Personally, I've always thought the iWatch and iTV leaks were simply Columbus-level distractions from whatever else Apple is planning to debut.

I agree that it takes several years between "home-run" products and expectations for the Next Big Thing are a little out of hand.

 

That said, I'm only asking about Mac updates. The Mini doesn't seem to be a big deal to update, and Apple certainly isn't going to debut new tech on the Mac model they love to hate. So where's my new Mini already?

 

Also, I had thought with Cook supposedly being the channel genius, the iMac would be far ahead of the curve.

Instead, we've got Dell debuting 4K screens first. :err:

 

Sure, when they come Apple's will probably be more refined and better supported, but I'm still stunned that they introduced the Pro without a 4K screen to go with it. Like I said, the moves are just a bit hard to figure out.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #1266 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

The primary reason to support TB2 on the iMac or even the Mini for that matter, is to provide fast access to storage devices.

 

I don't dispute that. I'm just saying I expect both upgrades (4K and TB2) to happen on the iMac at the same time.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #1267 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post
 

 

Also, I had thought with Cook supposedly being the channel genius, the iMac would be far ahead of the curve.

Instead, we've got Dell debuting 4K screens first. :err:

 

Sure, when they come Apple's will probably be more refined and better supported, but I'm still stunned that they introduced the Pro without a 4K screen to go with it. Like I said, the moves are just a bit hard to figure out.

 

When I look at Apple's displays I see the captive displays built into the imac and notebooks along with the thunderbolt display, which is really designed as a display + dock. Its design may change with the mac pro also taking on thunderbolt, but the purpose of the prior one was pretty clear. They maintained the prior Cinema display for some time to ensure some compliant option for the older mac pro. When it comes to 4K, Dell's 24" IPS display started around $1400. It dropped to $1200. They have one under $1000 that uses a TN panel. In Apple's case they have already inched up the starting prices on imacs without even transitioning to ssds as standard features. I don't see 4K coming until they can absorb the cost within their desired margins at existing price points. Beyond that I don't know whether they're set on maintaining the existing sizes. They could go to 23" and 28". I don't expect them to go down on screen real estate due to the size of some components like the top gpus used in the 27" model. It isn't likely to go to integrated graphics over the next few cycles given the relative performance gap between a 780M and iris pro regardless of how you spin it. Even in the case of the 650M, it only looks comparable if benchmarks are cherry picked. It was considered good enough to sell at $2000.

post #1268 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Personally, I've always thought the iWatch and iTV leaks were simply Columbus-level distractions from whatever else Apple is planning to debut.
I agree that it takes several years between "home-run" products and expectations for the Next Big Thing are a little out of hand.
Yes out of hand is a good way to say that.
Quote:
That said, I'm only asking about Mac updates. The Mini doesn't seem to be a big deal to update, and Apple certainly isn't going to debut new tech on the Mac model they love to hate. So where's my new Mini already?
Where's the Mini, that is what this thread is all about. Unfortunately all we have is speculation. I'd. Like to think we are headed for a major overhaul.
Quote:
Also, I had thought with Cook supposedly being the channel genius, the iMac would be far ahead of the curve.
Instead, we've got Dell debuting 4K screens first. 1bugeye.gif
One only needs to look at the Mac Pro to realize that Apple hasn't gotten 4K to the point that shipping on an iMac is possible.
Quote:
Sure, when they come Apple's will probably be more refined and better supported, but I'm still stunned that they introduced the Pro without a 4K screen to go with it. Like I said, the moves are just a bit hard to figure out.

I'm not convinced it is that hard to figure out. It is pretty obvious that the Mac operating system is not ready for 4K. At best they are delivering hardware and software suitable for early adopters. As for the Mac Pro they had to ship at some point as the market was getting a bit restless.

So in a nut shell the on,y thing I don't understand is the huge delay for the Mini. I have all sorts of explanations that have no basis in reality, I just focus on the big update because it keeps me in a positive frame of mind.
post #1269 of 1394

Perhaps Apple is deciding to drop the Mini from it's line.

post #1270 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

Perhaps Apple is deciding to drop the Mini from it's line.

The dead silence, the lack of rumors and the radical decline in desktop sales seem to indicate something is up. Poor desktop sales isn't just an Apple problem, the whole industry is suffering in that regard. I suspect Mini sales have declined as badly as Mac Pro sales have in the previous years. Like the Pro a refresh would help sales short term but long term the Mini doesn't have the niche that the Pro has. I can see Apple trying to refactor the machine one more time to try to shore up sales but if that doesn't work it will be history.
post #1271 of 1394
I'd love to see Apple take the "mini" part a bit further and make a Mac mini small enough to fit in your pocket (maybe half the current size). Then a person could take their home computer anywhere and plug into a TV or keyboard and monitor wherever they are.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #1272 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Like the Pro a refresh would help sales short term but long term the Mini doesn't have the niche that the Pro has.

It doesn't have the price point either. The Mac Pro entry point is 5x higher than the Mini so even if it sells the same unit volume, the revenue is much higher with the Pro as well as the margins.

If the Mini is to get another update, they'd be best holding off for Haswell refresh in April. It probably won't be a huge update but it make sense to use the latest chips if the rest of the lineup will. If it's going to be killed off, they'll just keep selling it until the demand tails right off and it'll disappear.

If it does disappear, OS X server might not last very long but I could see them making an iOS Server product like the Apple TV but with an SSD in it and possibly room for an HDD. This would have a lower entry price than the Mini. To manage it would be like using a virtual machine.

The downside to not having a Mini is the possibility of losing switchers but most of their buyers are interested in laptops anyway. Owning a $599 Mini is hardly going to persuade them to buy a $999 Macbook Air, they'd just get the laptop in the first place.

If the Mini doesn't get a refresh by WWDC in June, it'll be a lot clearer that it's on the way out because they have no reason to hold it back beyond that point.
post #1273 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I'd love to see Apple take the "mini" part a bit further and make a Mac mini small enough to fit in your pocket (maybe half the current size). Then a person could take their home computer anywhere and plug into a TV or keyboard and monitor wherever they are.

 

Home on iPod without the iPod. Interesting. This would flip the Mini into the mobile category.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

If the Mini is to get another update, they'd be best holding off for Haswell refresh in April.

 

Thing is, Apple usually gets the chips a bit early, don't they? The refresh would be announced before the PC world had it.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #1274 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Not if it's a quiet refresh.
post #1275 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

It doesn't have the price point either. The Mac Pro entry point is 5x higher than the Mini so even if it sells the same unit volume, the revenue is much higher with the Pro as well as the margins.
That isn't a concern. Apple needs the right product line up high revenues or not.
Quote:
If the Mini is to get another update, they'd be best holding off for Haswell refresh in April. It probably won't be a huge update but it make sense to use the latest chips if the rest of the lineup will. If it's going to be killed off, they'll just keep selling it until the demand tails right off and it'll disappear.
I could see them holding off until Broadwell to deliver a more radical machine update. They may or may not bump the machine between now and then.
Quote:
If it does disappear, OS X server might not last very long but I could see them making an iOS Server product like the Apple TV but with an SSD in it and possibly room for an HDD. This would have a lower entry price than the Mini. To manage it would be like using a virtual machine.
Apple needs something passable as a server. It isn't just for traditional customers, Apples developer tools work well with a server.
Quote:
The downside to not having a Mini is the possibility of losing switchers but most of their buyers are interested in laptops anyway. Owning a $599 Mini is hardly going to persuade them to buy a $999 Macbook Air, they'd just get the laptop in the first place.
Honestly I never saw the Mini as a machine that at tracks switchers. In any event you are right most people these days buy laptops. The only gotcha here of any sort is that the industry is actually adopting the small form factor machine in many offices. The Lenovo knock off is surprising popular in the corporate world right now.
Quote:

If the Mini doesn't get a refresh by WWDC in June, it'll be a lot clearer that it's on the way out because they have no reason to hold it back beyond that point.

Well yeah in a sense that is correct but you still have the potential for a long shot Broadwell refactoring. If you think about it Broadwell was suppose to launch in quarter 2, so a new Mini replacement could have been scheduled for Q2. It appears that Intel screwed that up for Apple and everybody else. I'm just not sure how accurately the Intel delay is being reported in the trade press.

It is probably wishful thinking at this point but the idea that a major redesign is in the works seems plausible to me.
post #1276 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I'd love to see Apple take the "mini" part a bit further and make a Mac mini small enough to fit in your pocket (maybe half the current size). Then a person could take their home computer anywhere and plug into a TV or keyboard and monitor wherever they are.

I like the idea of building the Mini replacement right into a keyboard. It would be a bit retro but with today's chips it wouldn't suffer to badly performance wise.

Given that Apple still needs a desktop machine that can handle server type duties and professional use. Professional being that class of pros that don't really need the Mac Pro but could use something better than the current Mini.
post #1277 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Just give us god damn something. Stop with all iCrap for just five seconds and put some focus into something else. Haswell came out last year so the minis should have gotten an update. Simple as that, no excuses. Instead we get the iPad Air and the iPhone 5C.
post #1278 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Just give us god damn something. Stop with all iCrap for just five seconds and put some focus into something else. Haswell came out last year so the minis should have gotten an update. Simple as that, no excuses. Instead we get the iPad Air and the iPhone 5C.

The fact that an update to Haswell would have been simple kinda indicates to me that Apple has something else in the works It is certainly well past time for a normal update.
post #1279 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

The fact that an update to Haswell would have been simple kinda indicates to me that Apple has something else in the works It is certainly well past time for a normal update.

I don't need bells or whistles you know although maybe Apple considers a PCIe SSD for the mini to be one of those two things. I am happy that the Mac Pro got an update.
post #1280 of 1394
The mini, IMHO, deserves T2, 4K ability (well, maybe not 3 screens worth) and, of course, faster dual and quad cores.

The current i5 is a bit lame for the money, if you ask me.

What is missing is the yawning headless gap between it and the Pro. I have a great monitor, and I don't like the idea of buying a new one, only to find in a few years that it is now shackled to a corpse of a motherboard.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › 2014 Mac mini Wishlist