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

2014 Mac mini Wishlist - Page 33

post #1281 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron Munchausen View Post

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.

That's why I feel it's Iris or nothing as far as dual cores go.
post #1282 of 1394

Iris is still significantly slower than the Iris pro in the quad chips. I'm curious what they'll do, as they moved to more costly cpu options in the macbook pros. For the last couple generations the mini has tracked the cpu choices of the 13 and 15" macbook pros fairly closely. It probably means less hardware to validate. I suspect that for their lower cost machines, they like to reuse engineering work wherever possible.

post #1283 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Iris is still significantly slower than the Iris pro in the quad chips. I'm curious what they'll do, as they moved to more costly cpu options in the macbook pros. For the last couple generations the mini has tracked the cpu choices of the 13 and 15" macbook pros fairly closely. It probably means less hardware to validate. I suspect that for their lower cost machines, they like to reuse engineering work wherever possible.

Oh no doubt but I don't want the HD 4600 in the machine I buy to replace my current mini. I asked this before but how much of an upgrade is there between the HD 3000 and the HD 4600, the 3000 and Iris 5100, and the HD 4600 and Iris 5100. Isn't there a decent difference between the 4600 and 5100?
post #1284 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

That's why I feel it's Iris or nothing as far as dual cores go.

How do you feel about an ARM based Mini? It is becoming fairly clear that Apples ARM chips are highly capable and that Cyclone has far more potential than can be demonstrated in a cell phone. Given that Apple will likely have an A8 out this year with even better performance, it makes the idea plausible.
post #1285 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Iris is still significantly slower than the Iris pro in the quad chips.
Somewhat slower but a considerable step forward from previous years.
Quote:
I'm curious what they'll do, as they moved to more costly cpu options in the macbook pros.
The smart move would be to wait for Intel chips that support DDR 4 RAM. If Haswell refresh brings us DDR4 RAM that would make for a nice Mini. The sad reality of all of these chips with integrated GPUs is that they are bandwidth limited, significantly faster RAM makes for better utilization of the hardware in the processor SoC.
Quote:
For the last couple generations the mini has tracked the cpu choices of the 13 and 15" macbook pros fairly closely. It probably means less hardware to validate. I suspect that for their lower cost machines, they like to reuse engineering work wherever possible.
I suspect they where tired of customers complaining about the Minis high price an low performance. Unfortunately the Mini earned itself a bad reputation and many don't understand that it is a much better machine with the latest processors.

I could be wrong but I still think it is the end of the line for the Mini as we know it. Desktop sales in general have really tanked and the Mini has suffered along. I can see them offering an AppleTV like machine as an alternative for home users. That is a machine similar in concept to the Apple TV as we know it, that is a low cost platform, but with the ability to run apps along with a mix of Mini and AppleTV like functionality. I could see Apple offering a machine with 8GB of RAM, a high performance A8 and say 128GB of flash for $250.

Impossible you say. Well maybe not, if the machine is tied to ITunes and the App Store like ATV Apple can break even on the hardware and generate income from movies, apps and games. Frankly it would suck for those of us accustomed to unfettered access to their machines but for a generation of iPad users they might go all in. Hardware wise it is becoming very clear that Apples A7 is fully capable of driving such a machine and it only can be improved with A8. Imagine either chip running at say 2.5GHz instead of the current 1.6 GHz.

Of course in doing so Apple would turn the home computer market upside down. Income wouldn't be tied to hardware but rather software and services. Low end PC hardware wouldn't be able to compete.

In any event it is just an idea that floats through my head. I can see Apple possibly moving in many different directions, this is just one possibility. It is also a very home focused approach and shouldn't be confused with how they approach the professional markets.
post #1286 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Oh no doubt but I don't want the HD 4600 in the machine I buy to replace my current mini. I asked this before but how much of an upgrade is there between the HD 3000 and the HD 4600, the 3000 and Iris 5100, and the HD 4600 and Iris 5100. Isn't there a decent difference between the 4600 and 5100?

To that question your only recourse is the benchmarking sights! Even then you have to take numbers with a grain of salt. The problem with benchmarking is that the benchmarks don't often reflect real world use but rather raw performance. This is especially a problem with hardware supporting integrated graphics because of bandwidth limitations.
post #1287 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

How do you feel about an ARM based Mini? It is becoming fairly clear that Apples ARM chips are highly capable and that Cyclone has far more potential than can be demonstrated in a cell phone. Given that Apple will likely have an A8 out this year with even better performance, it makes the idea plausible.

Not really too thrilled but if that's what they release and it's a fair price, I'll go for it.
post #1288 of 1394

Good thinking on your part.

post #1289 of 1394

Well we're in April and still have yet to see a Mac hardware release for the year.

Is everything going to be shoehorned into the last few months of the year, like in 2013?

 

If Apple had silently updated the Mini last fall with the other Macs, how would that have interfered with this (apparent) coming redesign?

 

At this point, I think Apple is just starving the market so when the new machine comes out they can claim impressive first-day sale numbers.

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 #1290 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Well we're in April and still have yet to see a Mac hardware release for the year.
Is everything going to be shoehorned into the last few months of the year, like in 2013?
I really hope not! Much depends upon Intel and the hope that they have worthwhile hardware in the next few weeks. There are indications that Intel might have DDR4 RAM interfaces on some of the Haswell refresh chips. If so that could have considerable impact on performance, they won't be Broadwell chips but bandwidth is a big issue on all chips with integrated GPUs.
Quote:

If Apple had silently updated the Mini last fall with the other Macs, how would that have interfered with this (apparent) coming redesign?
This is a thing I don't understand either. Maybe Apple isn't selling enough to see an upgrade as worthwhile. Maybe they already have refresh samples and are so impressed they think the wait is worthwhile. Lots of maybes but no one really knows.
Quote:
At this point, I think Apple is just starving the market so when the new machine comes out they can claim impressive first-day sale numbers.

That would be exceedingly poor management. We will eventually see what Apple has up its sleeves. Given that Intels 4460t would make for a nice Mini entry level. Depending upon whom you beleive though Haswell refresh might not hit until June. So we could be waiting a couple of more months. That is if Apple is waiting for Haswell refresh.
post #1291 of 1394
Thread Starter 
They're not selling because they don't promote the damn thing. They can show a 15 second ad of the mini connected to an Apple display on a cool looking desk and it'll sell tomorrow.
post #1292 of 1394

They are selling.  Refurbed Mini's sell out quickly so somebody is buying them.

post #1293 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Holley View Post

They are selling.  Refurbed Mini's sell out quickly so somebody is buying them.

That isn't what I've heard. Further it doesn't reflect what Apple managements has said. Management has characterized the market as difficult.
post #1294 of 1394

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


That isn't what I've heard. Further it doesn't reflect what Apple managements has said. Management has characterized the market as difficult.

 

Actually it doesn't say much at all. If volume is low, there won't be many refurbished minis. Further highly budget conscious buyers are likely to watch for refurbished units so as to drive the total cost as low as possible.

post #1295 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Douglas Holley View Post

They are selling.  Refurbed Mini's sell out quickly so somebody is buying them.

Not enough to make it a core focus as with the Macbook Pro. Promote the damn thing. There is no reasonable excuse to not make a damn ad. It just annoys me to no end.

I'd take one tomorrow with at least 8 GB of RAM though preferably 16 GB, a PCIe SSD (256 GB minimum), and Iris graphics. But since they are dragging their asses on it, whenever someone talks to me about Apple these days (like a co-worker who told me he got a MacBook Air or iPad) I lose interest immediately.

I have moved onto clothes to be honest. I got my Carhartt jacket which I love and was great on really cold days, and I'm looking now into selvage denim and nice button down dress shirts.
post #1296 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post


Not enough to make it a core focus as with the Macbook Pro. Promote the damn thing.

 

It's very simple. Which do you think makes more money? Corporations like to push whatever will make the most money. If the mini was accompanied by extremely high volume potential or extremely low manufacturing costs, they would push it as you suggest. The one thing I dislike how far back they push its refreshes. Something big isn't really a good excuse for that. There will be future points where they can slip in a bigger update alongside refreshed hardware.

post #1297 of 1394

I think the mac mini will be discontinued soon. It is not a money maker you are right.

post #1298 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

I think the mac mini will be discontinued soon. It is not a money maker you are right.

I think there's still the possibility they are moving production back to their US factory. They sell roughly the same unit volume as the Mac Pro so what they can do is stagger the release of both models 6 months apart. When Mac Pro demand dies down, they ramp up the Mini units and vice versa. The Mac Pro is still at 4-6 week turnaround though so they can't ramp up the Mini until that gets cleared.

I also think it would be a good idea to consolidate into a single Mini model with a quad-i7. The unit volume isn't high enough anyway so they may as well try to push the entry buyers up to the ~$799 price point. This means they don't have to wait for Intel to ship lower-end chips and they have more freedom with what sockets they use.
post #1299 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

I think there's still the possibility they are moving production back to their US factory. They sell roughly the same unit volume as the Mac Pro so what they can do is stagger the release of both models 6 months apart.
At best the pro is an assembly operation in the US. Many components still come from outside the US. It would be very helpful if Apple where to itemize where all the parts come from.

In any event I'm not one of those people expecting an entirely produced in the USA machine. I really see much of the whining about where things are produced as modern but socially acceptable racism. It is racism made please ant by the perfum of supporting jobs in America.
Quote:
When Mac Pro demand dies down, they ramp up the Mini units and vice versa. The Mac Pro is still at 4-6 week turnaround though so they can't ramp up the Mini until that gets cleared.
That is always possible and may be a way to introduce a dramatically different Mini. I can see the thermal core concept shrink down to enable a much smaller Mini with a very compact design.
Quote:
I also think it would be a good idea to consolidate into a single Mini model with a quad-i7. The unit volume isn't high enough anyway so they may as well try to push the entry buyers up to the ~$799 price point.
I see that as a way to truly kill off the Mini though I can see a two model line up making more sense. The future Mini I'm imagining wouldn't have room for internal SSDs so the "server" model would be dropped. A Mini could easily support two TB2 ports in this configuration easily supporting a performance disk array for server duty.
Quote:
This means they don't have to wait for Intel to ship lower-end chips and they have more freedom with what sockets they use.
Interesting that you bring that up because desktop chips are in the thermal range where they will work in a Mini. The problem for the Mini isn't the socket so much as the integrated GPU. At least one variant of the Mini needs Iris graphics and preferably Iris Pro, which at the moment means laptop CPUs. I could see new Intel hardware supporting DDR 4 though, reducing that need for Iris Pro.

By the way I have to agree with others, Mini suffers from a lot of neglect on Apples part. There appears to be no attempts at advertising tie ins and no attempt on the part of management to promote the machine. I realize that the desktop market is dying and has been for some time but there is still a large community of users that needs, wants or otherwise prefers a desktop machine. It is a market that will never go completely away and really isn't something Apple should ignore.
post #1300 of 1394
I always thought the mini was basically a laptop mobo inside a different box. In the case of the i7, you are getting the power of a MacBook Pro for 1/3 the price.

As another said, it is not well (at all?) marketed.

If the Macbook pros get a boost, watch the Mini get a similar shunt.
post #1301 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Baron Munchausen View Post

I always thought the mini was basically a laptop mobo inside a different box. In the case of the i7, you are getting the power of a MacBook Pro for 1/3 the price.
The Mini is a product made up of laptop parts, that is what allows for its size but it is also what blows out the cost of the Mini. The laptop parts aren't cheap by any measure so the Mini kinda ends up missing the mark as a machine that offers high performance at an entry level price.
Quote:
As another said, it is not well (at all?) marketed.
Just try finding one in any Apple store! It is a joke really. I honestly believe the Mini was developed to give third part sales channels something to sell. This is probably why many of the online retailers hawk the product front and center. Or I should say use too, much of that positioning is now taken up by iPads.
Quote:
If the Macbook pros get a boost, watch the Mini get a similar shunt.

This is the whole point of the discussion the Mac Book Pros got a boost ages ago to a processor with a much better GPU. We have been waiting almost a year to see the Mini get the same bump. If the mini ever does ship with Haswell it will be with a chip that was released over a year ago at the rate we are going. Think about it how long has the AIR been on Haswell, the MBP came a bit later but it has also moved to Haswell. What is it 7-8 months now since the MBPs updated. This is why Mini users are so worked up, it has been way to long and frankly Haswell was or is the exact type of update Mini needed. Haswell would have addressed the machines anemic GPU performance making it slightly easier to accept the price.
post #1302 of 1394

The Mac Mini has good quality control.They use excellent parts also.

post #1303 of 1394
Thread Starter 
If Apple wants me to use their Mavericks OS, they have to give me a new mini. I'm happy with Lion right now though.
post #1304 of 1394

I agree with you also. Lion is good enough for me.

post #1305 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


I think there's still the possibility they are moving production back to their US factory. They sell roughly the same unit volume as the Mac Pro so what they can do is stagger the release of both models 6 months apart. When Mac Pro demand dies down, they ramp up the Mini units and vice versa. The Mac Pro is still at 4-6 week turnaround though so they can't ramp up the Mini until that gets cleared.

I also think it would be a good idea to consolidate into a single Mini model with a quad-i7. The unit volume isn't high enough anyway so they may as well try to push the entry buyers up to the ~$799 price point. This means they don't have to wait for Intel to ship lower-end chips and they have more freedom with what sockets they use.

That's so sad. I need newer Macs and faster chips and I can't keep laying out $1500 to $2500 every year or two. The Mac mini serves my purposes so well.

 

Please Apple, please keep this machine alive, and relevant. Please make a new quad core model with Iris Pro graphics. At least one more. That machine will last me a while.

post #1306 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

I agree with you also. Lion is good enough for me.

Actually once you try Mavericks you won't go back, it is a highly recommended update. Especially for anybody interested in better video performance. I'm running a rather old MBP and have been very happy with the update.
post #1307 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post

That's so sad. I need newer Macs and faster chips and I can't keep laying out $1500 to $2500 every year or two. The Mac mini serves my purposes so well.
Why would you even do that (layout that much cash every year for a computer)? Honestly if you have a compelling need to upgrade every year you are buying the wrong machine.
Quote:
Please Apple, please keep this machine alive, and relevant. Please make a new quad core model with Iris Pro graphics. At least one more. That machine will last me a while.

Well obviously something is up here as we would have seem a Mini update by now. I'm of two opinions either we get a radical update or we get nothing. I can easily see Apple replacing the Mini with a high performance Apple TV. After all it is often used in the context of a HTPC.
post #1308 of 1394
Thread Starter 
I'm only looking to buy a computer once every few years and not spend a ton. Sandy Bridge is adequate but it's getting old. I have a Samsung 470 in this thing.
post #1309 of 1394

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz View Post
 

That's so sad. I need newer Macs and faster chips and I can't keep laying out $1500 to $2500 every year or two. The Mac mini serves my purposes so well.

 

Please Apple, please keep this machine alive, and relevant. Please make a new quad core model with Iris Pro graphics. At least one more. That machine will last me a while.

The statement puzzles me a bit, because quad core + iris isn't exactly bleeding edge. You could have had performance roughly on par with that as far back as 2010 or so in a mac pro. Even the base gpu would still be significantly faster than iris pro. CPU wise it would have obviously been at the upper end of that price range. I just don't see what you're really getting from a 1-2 year cycle when I look back at the past 5-6 years.

post #1310 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

The statement puzzles me a bit, because quad core + iris isn't exactly bleeding edge.
Well for an integrated solution it isn't bad and frankly the best we could expect out of the Mini these days. Further it is a sizable upgrade over the current Mini and its GPU. You are right though even when comparing to other integrated GPUs, Iris is not the bleeding edge. The only thing about Iris that really counts is that it is an improvement over the current GPUs. Not a little improvement either.
Quote:
You could have had performance roughly on par with that as far back as 2010 or so in a mac pro. Even the base gpu would still be significantly faster than iris pro. CPU wise it would have obviously been at the upper end of that price range. I just don't see what you're really getting from a 1-2 year cycle when I look back at the past 5-6 years.

I'm with you on this, I don't understand people professing to be on a 1-2 year upgrade cycle. It is like they are still living in the 1990's or something. There was a time when you could really double performance every year but that is long gone. It looks like Haswell Refresh will give us 100MHz on most of the new processors, a performance boost alone that is hardly worth it. It is actually pretty amazing that Apple has been able to continuously boost the performance of iOS devices the way they have but even here it is hardly worth an update every single year.

So maybe a little insight here as to why anybody would put themselves on a 1 year update cycle is in order.
post #1311 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



I'm with you on this, I don't understand people professing to be on a 1-2 year upgrade cycle. It is like they are still living in the 1990's or something. There was a time when you could really double performance every year but that is long gone. It looks like Haswell Refresh will give us 100MHz on most of the new processors, a performance boost alone that is hardly worth it. It is actually pretty amazing that Apple has been able to continuously boost the performance of iOS devices the way they have but even here it is hardly worth an update every single year.

  I just haven't seen enough growth in performance to justify that under any circumstances. There is one area where I kind of understand the behavior. Some people buy a conservative model without applecare and trade up within a year, figuring that it's cheaper than opting for cto options and applecare. If it allows them to structure their expenses and avoid the majority of repair issues, I can understand it. I don't really see it for performance reasons. The big changes in performance have been much more sporadic in recent years. The iOS devices are interesting to me. I just wish they supported something like OpenCL. It's not perfect, but it provides a more elegant solution than things like compute shaders.

post #1312 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

  I just haven't seen enough growth in performance to justify that under any circumstances. There is one area where I kind of understand the behavior. Some people buy a conservative model without applecare and trade up within a year, figuring that it's cheaper than opting for cto options and applecare.
That is an angle I haven't seen before, or maybe I just dismissed it. I still see AppleCare like warranties on desktop hardware as a bit of a ripoff. The primary reason for going desktop (for me at the moment) is the low cost and self serviceability. Of course such a desktop needs to support the performance I want which is where the wait for Haswell in the Mini comes from.
Quote:
If it allows them to structure their expenses and avoid the majority of repair issues, I can understand it. I don't really see it for performance reasons.
They only way to get more performance these days is to buy more cores and that only works for people that have an applications profile that can use those cores.
Quote:
The big changes in performance have been much more sporadic in recent years. The iOS devices are interesting to me. I just wish they supported something like OpenCL. It's not perfect, but it provides a more elegant solution than things like compute shaders.

I'm beginning to believe that OpenCL doesn't work all that well on Imaginations GPUs. Yeah they support it and the hardware was revved some time ago to be compliant but I'm not convinced that the end result is all that good. Of course information in this respect is very hard to come by due to Imaginations tight controller on documentation, but I'm left with the impression that Imaginations ALU's don't handle larger data types well including 32 bit floats. It would be nice though to get the real scope and find a platform that actually runs OpenCL code on an Imagination GPU. It would be very interesting to say the least to see how it performs.

Or maybe Apple is just slow like in the way it took forever to bring OpenCL code to Intels GPUs. Or maybe they are just waiting for all of those AMD engineers they hired to make a GPU that is worth targeting.
post #1313 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



That is an angle I haven't seen before, or maybe I just dismissed it. I still see AppleCare like warranties on desktop hardware as a bit of a ripoff. The primary reason for going desktop (for me at the moment) is the low cost and self serviceability. Of course such a desktop needs to support the performance I want which is where the wait for Haswell in the Mini comes from.
They only way to get more performance these days is to buy more cores and that only works for people that have an applications profile that can use those cores.

That is in line with my typical suggestions. I don't see a lot of value in a minor bump in ghz, yet people still ask about performance differences between one Air and another.


 

Quote:

I'm beginning to believe that OpenCL doesn't work all that well on Imaginations GPUs. Yeah they support it and the hardware was revved some time ago to be compliant but I'm not convinced that the end result is all that good. Of course information in this respect is very hard to come by due to Imaginations tight controller on documentation, but I'm left with the impression that Imaginations ALU's don't handle larger data types well including 32 bit floats. It would be nice though to get the real scope and find a platform that actually runs OpenCL code on an Imagination GPU. It would be very interesting to say the least to see how it performs.

Or maybe Apple is just slow like in the way it took forever to bring OpenCL code to Intels GPUs. Or maybe they are just waiting for all of those AMD engineers they hired to make a GPU that is worth targeting.

 

Well Apple okay'd the use of OpenGL computation some time ago in iOS. It just could in many cases be accomplished more elegantly via OpenCL. I would find it odd if they couldn't properly handle 32 bit floats, given that graphics pipelines often use linear color mappings in rendering calculations.

post #1314 of 1394

I have Sandy Bridge and no problem at all I have after 2 1/2 years with the MM.

post #1315 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

That is in line with my typical suggestions. I don't see a lot of value in a minor bump in ghz, yet people still ask about performance differences between one Air and another.
Yeah I've seen such issues also. Or I will have issues trying to explain to someone why an Apple Air is worth a bit more than the Sony at staples that only has 24 GB of flash. People still look at processor clock rates as the only value worth considering when buying a machine. Frankly a larger internal cache is often of more value than a 100MHz here or there.

As for giving advice to people that ask about it I've pretty much have given up and have a rather sour attitude about it anymore.
Quote:

 
Well Apple okay'd the use of OpenGL computation some time ago in iOS. It just could in many cases be accomplished more elegantly via OpenCL. I would find it odd if they couldn't properly handle 32 bit floats, given that graphics pipelines often use linear color mappings in rendering calculations.

I'm not sure if it is a case of not handling 32 bit floats but rather being poorly optimized for 32 bit floats. Again finding information on the Imagination Processors is like finding a needle in a hay stack, but apparently they have some sort of optimization that uses less that 32 bit floats that the GPUs are built around. I really don't know it would kinda make sense in a mobile processor to sacrifice some quality for fewer transistors and less power. In any event I'm just as much in the dark as most people about the lack of OpenCL on iOS devices.

I just realized that we pulled this thread far off the tracks with this Imagination discussion. In an attempt to put the engine back on the track: maybe this (no OpenCL on Imaginations GPU Apple wise) will keep ARM out of Mac OS devices for awhile longer. That is the GPU isn't suitable for all the goodies built into Mac OS.
post #1316 of 1394

Upgrade strategies:

 

Upgrade every year:

 

2009 2.26 Ghz Core 2 Duo GeForce 9400M $599

2010 2.4 Ghz Core 2 Duo GeForce 320M $699

2011 2.3 Ghz Core i5 (dual Sandy Bridge) HD3000 $599

2012 2.5 Ghz Core i5 (dual Ivy Bridge) HD4000 $599 

 

$2496 Total

 

Upgrade every three years

 

2009 2.66 Ghz Core 2GeForce 9400M $849

2012 2.6 Ghz Core i7 (quad Ivy Bridge) HD4000 $899

 

$1748 Total

 

It's a lot more expensive unless you're selling last years model every time.  Then the cost would be comparable.  Assume 50% of original value:

 

$2496 - $948 = $1547

$1748 - $425 = $1323

 

But it's a reasonable strategy.  You get thunderbolt earlier.  You get to the Core series faster.  2009 you're slower.  2010 it's kinda a wash (better GPU but slightly slower CPU). 2011 you're ahead in terms of CPU.  2012 you're behind again after the 3 year refresh happens but ahead until then.

 

For the mini it's somewhat risky as Apple has had years in the distant past where no refresh occurred.  In 2013 the refresh every year person gets screwed.

post #1317 of 1394

The Macbook Air got a boost and $100 knocked off.

Can't Apple at least knock $100 of the current mini while we wait for an update?

post #1318 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTac View Post

The Macbook Air got a boost and $100 knocked off.
Can't Apple at least knock $100 of the current mini while we wait for an update?

They also have knocked $200 off the 2013 Airs so yeah the Mini looks pretty pathetic. If they don't have a replacement ready and debuted at WWDC I will be fully perplexed. Effectively the Airs have lapped the Mini technology wise.

What is even more interesting is the total lack of rumors about the Mini. Not even a leak that is an obvious wild ass guess.
post #1319 of 1394

Again I repeat Mini will be dropped from the Apple line soon.

post #1320 of 1394

I've never posted to the incorrect thread before. There's a first. I disagree about the mini being dropped though. People have claimed that many times over in past years. It's still there.


Edited by hmm - 5/1/14 at 11:30am
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