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

2014 Mac mini Wishlist - Page 16

post #601 of 1394

Buy what you want to make you happy. Apple changes models like I change my under wear.
 

post #602 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


Not from the Mac desktop line up. It is pretty silly to equate Apples current success with success of the desktop line up. Sales are flat for the iMac and receding for the Mac Pro and Mini. We can argue about why but immcertainthe big issue is that nobody wants to pay good money for the configurations Apple offers.
No argument there.  Obvious.

Which has effectively locked Apple out of many use cases for years now. It is one reason businesses resist using Mac hardware for the run of the mill business needs.
Apple and their secrecy.  It helps and hurts them.  But Apple are doing better in small business and indirectly due to iPhone and iPad  and workers being allowed to use their own computing kit...they're doing better in business than they used to.

Well I'm not sure the Mac Pro has been as overpriced as it has been in the last couple of years.
Last couple of years?  Seriously?  'Couple'?  Two?  Four?  Six?  Since it was introduced? :P  or the mind warping 'old spec' on offer now?  There hasn't been a decently priced tower since Jobs did his 'Power and Value' keynote for the Blue and White G3 tower.  The last great tower in my view.
The problem is it really seems like nobody at Apple grasps why the machine isn't selling well. Being perceived as overpriced and underpowered is death in the workstation market.
Apple grasp over priced?  I guess not.  Especially when you raise prices in a recession.  The growth of retail stores and accessibility to Apple kit certainly helped Apple computers.  iPod halo.  iPhone probably to a degree.  Quality line up of computers helped.  The move to laptops.  Compelling OS X.  And malaise over Vista.  They've out grown the PC industry for years.  They couldn't have done that with crap computers.  But now their computer growth is flattening.  Price hikes on iMac (or lack of availability, heh...) in 2008 from £675 to £999 and now in 2012 to £1099 for an entry model don't help.  Removing the affordable Macbook option for £695-£799 doesn't help price conscious users.  The Mini didn't escape the price hiking either on the way over to Intel.  Sure, tablets are doing to computer sales what laptops did to desktops.  But as we enter a triple dip recession and Apple sits on 140 billion...how about helping out customers?  Fusion drive could be standard.  Entry model could be cheaper. For desktops and laptops.  And for people like Wizard who'd like a more 'flexible' option.  

In a nut shell you really have to wonder about a management team that would let a product like the Mac Pro slip as much as it has. It use to be a product worth buying, now it is an outdated machine that hasn't had a decent update in years and sadly doesn't support some of the most important technologies Apple has.
I lament the treatment of the Mac Pro like any on these boards or in the pro community who've been crying out.

Exactly! So who's fault is that?
Apple's.

The hope for something else is related to the idea that Apple might just recognize that they could actually move a desktop machine in quantity if they got the price and configuration right.
Price would solve the 'X-Mac' equation for many.  Simple.  Redesign the overly big 'pro' and lop the price for the entry tower with a mainstream i7.  Easy.  Steve Jobs said money wasn't everything.  *Looks at the mac pro price.

You seem to have a very negative attitude with respect to integrated graphics.
That's ironic considering the blasting you give Intel. :P  Integrated crappics have been historically that.  They've sucked for years.  The quality that's began to be seen in AMD's apu?  A relatively recent thing.  So that leaves Intel.  And the 4000 is crap.  It is.  The Haswell GT3 will be the 1st integrated cpu/gpu that begins to get serious from Intel.  But..as you've said.  Long time coming from Intel (and their crap gpu drivers?) and they're still behind AMD?  Me?  Negative?  You're the most negative poster on here.  :P  (but I still enjoy your posts.)
Remember that a process shrink will allow them to double the GPU size if they really want too. So even if Haswell doesn't live up to expectations the Mini will become a far better graphics / compute platform than it has been with the follow on to Haswell.
Well, yes.  Apple will get an affordable computer by default due to Haswell.  But not so much by the time you add a monitor, k/b and mouse.
That is if Apple can pull head from ass and get to work on the GPU drivers.
Apple's focus is iPhone/iPad.  Laptops.  That order.  Their dance with desktops had it's rennaissance upon Job's return.  The iMac ;) and the G3 mini tower.  Only the iMac has evolved in bang per buck and power.  It doesn't suit you.  But Apple's priority for desktops isn't what it was.  iMac covers most bases.  Yawning chasms between updates for the mini...and the ongoing epic that is the mac pro...tells us something.  Even the iMac update took it's bloody time. ;)
No they haven't always been this bad.
...no.  And those days aren't coming back.  But the mini lives.  The iMac lives.  The pro yet lives.  Just.  The hope is that Haswell makes the mini sing.  And for those that want something 'flexible' in terms of 'access' that the pro gets the 'modular' desktop approach covering the gaming mini tower to workstation crowd who want to get in and tinker.  The iMac will continue to evolve.  The current top end is the best iMac yet.  It's never been ultra accessible.  It didn't debut as ultra accessible.  The original Mac didn't.
They did have at one time desktop computers at reasonable prices.
Tell me about it.  iMac.  Entry.  £595 (or was it lower) inc Vat.  UK Prices!!!  It's now double that for entry.  *looks skyward.
The expensive Mac Pro kick is a recent marketing strategy that obviously has fallen flat on its face.
*B*ll*cks about it being recent.  Ten years.  I'll give you props for the 1st few when they made the line value added with dual processors in the entry models.  But with the G4 and G5 and move to Intel they kept pushing the 'pro' into land of insanity price wise.  Then you have to add, gpu, ram, monitor...  'Hello Apple.  Here's my kidney...'

The average user has left the Mini and Pro on the shelf.
Sales don't lie.  I gave the mini and pro a look and left them on the shelf.  Many others have.  Though the iMac has done very well for the 'average' consumer.  And taken Pro sales with it. ...and by the time you spec up the mini with Apple kit...you may as well pay for the iMac.
The IMac is flat sales wise.
But it gives value all told.  The 2nd up base model is pretty darn good.  But good luck getting into it.  But do you need to?  I'd argue not.  But not rubbish like pro sales.  Or 'so-so' like the mini.  How come the 'mini' Mac didn't sell so well?  Integrated crappics...price hike...add k/b and mouse...monitor...and???  You're way over a rationally priced PC.
I'm not sure how you see this as a successful marketing program.
Take it up with Apple.
I already run a number of Linux machines for special purposes.
And you'll get your 'Cube' if you're happy with Linux.  Haven't they got the interface sorted on it yet?  It's been how long now?
Linux isn't what I'd want as my primary desktop machine though.
Why not? :P
It is very likely that Apples hardware lineup will force me onto a laptop to get a machine that is a decent performer and value.
Get the Haswell Air.  Don't let me 'hassel' you into that though! :P

You got me all wrong here,
No,  I haven't. :D  
I want to see Apple revitalize the desktop before they cancel the whole lineup.
You can want it, Wizard.  Sure.  I'd like to see Apple do that to give people the choice.  I don't see it happening.  It's not on their store is it?  Why not? ;)
That affects us all.
No.  Just you and a minority of others.  
The form factor of the machine doesn't matter, what you get for your money does.
There you go then.  The form factor of the machine doesn't matter.  Agreed. :P  And yes.  What you get for your money.  *looks the sadly lacking mini and pro.  And I'd score the iMac down a point for having to pay extra for a DVD player (£60) and an extra £200 for a 128 gig SSD.  Ass rapingly poor and then you have to get past the higher price of entry for the iMac at £1099.
Hell I'd buy a Mac Pro if it was priced right for the expected performance level.
Most people would agree with that for the Pro, iMac and Mini.
I'd even consider a Mini if it was properly supported and at the right performance level.
Well, if you're real lucky, the Haswell GT3 mini may tickle your funny bone.


Apples desktop line up is a perfect example of what happens when you put way to much effort into an artificial product line up.
Apple have really gone over the top with their 'upsell'.  It's really O.T.T.  Obvious.  And.  A rip off.  And whoop de doo...they offer more SSD options on the iMac after I buy one.  So tell me about it.
That is the tiering that Apple applies to models that alienates the people most likely to buy a desktop machine in the first place.
Alienates.  I found that after the 2008 price hikes.  I don't view Apple as a friend.  They're not my church.  They offer OS X and the best designed hardware on the planet.  But it's far from perfect.  'Most people' on the desktop aren't most people anymore, though?  Go look in Apple's stores.  What do you notice?

Cheers.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #603 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


It might as well be made out of Balsa if the machine doesn't fit your needs.
Things have been moved on since the Apple I, Wizard.

For some appearance can be everything.
Who?  Me?  Apple?  Johnny Ives?  Steve Jobs revamping Apple in 1997?  Implication is slapped down.  Because mere looks wouldn't see Apple's computer renaissance come this far if not for it's under pinnings.  'Some.'  Try another generalisation. It may work.

Which only means something if that is the screen you expect or want to use.
What?  Like the one in the iPad?  or iPhone?  Or the majority of laptop users, like yourself? :P
One of the big reasons to avoid the iMac is in fact the screen you are so in love with.
Or the laptop you actually use? :P  (Ofc I'm love with the iMac.  There'd be something wrong if I wasn't.  It's brand new.  Powerful.  Great gpu.  Loads of ram.  Fusion HD.  Better than ever screen.  I just need Apple to write my promotion copy for me. :P  

Actually it is plenty for your use and buying schedule, others may have significant issues with 8GB of RAM.
It won't be the majority of users though, Wiz'.  Just you and a minority of others.  Ram's cheap.  Cheaper than it's ever been.  So add some.

Again highly debatable. The real problem is the lack of an easy way to upgrade that disk.
Well, they've added more internal SSD options.  There's plenty of external options too and the Thunderbolt Raid type stuff.  All far more powerful than the laptop you're using, Wizard.
Even the Mini has gotten easier in that regard.
Integrated crappics.

Which pretty much applies to any computer made with modern Intel hardware.
?

And suffer all the reliability issues associated with keeping those cables plugged in. It is interesting that you promote plugging in in one paragraph after previously champion the lack of cables.
I haven't had any reliability issues with the iMac.

I'm sure it does work like a dream. Some of us dream of that sort of performance in a more flexible platform.
Keep dreaming.

Err no, a new Mini should arrive with Haswell.
Should.  Be patient, Wizard.  Not much longer to wait.  (Well...if you're on Apple's timetable...)
Given of course that Intel gets all the bugs out and starts to ship silicon acceptable to Apple.
Patience.  It will come by default.  If that's what you're looking for.

It is only a good value if the platform fits your needs.
OS X is a good platform.  It you want a specification that meets Wizard Computers...go out and make one...and throw Linux Unbunny on it.  Or Buy Apple.  Or set up your own computer company...or build a Hackeetosh.
I know you have an inherent need to champion this machine,
Says Mr. X-Mac. :P
but in doing so you have fallen death to what other people are saying
No.  I haven't.  But I don't suffer from memory loss due to old age either.  Keep taking the rage pills, Wizard.  Or the primose for your PMT.
The entire desktop sales picture isn't all that rosy,
It isn't perfect.  It isn't terrible.  If you bought something now...you'd get something powerful, more so than your laptop.  Get another laptop.  Get an Air with SSD.  Get a mini with 4000 crappics if you like them so much.  Get an iMac and get Apple care if you're so worried.  I still think buying out Apple in a hostile :P takeover would suit you better.  Just buy a linux box.
and that includes the iMac.
Well, they glued it.  Charged a higher price of entry.  ...and charge you extra for the DVD they dropped and the Fusion drives 128 gig SSD.  £200 extra for an 80 quid drive.  Stiff you on upgrades.  But that's Apple, isn't it?  Not unique to the iMac line, old son.
We might see good numbers for this quarter but that could very well be a blip due to Apple not having iMacs for sale for months and the general backlog afterwards.
Good numbers.  They're out.  Take a look.
The overall trend in desktop sales has been looking pretty bleak for a while now.
I don't rate an X-Mac's chance of turning that around.  Computers are moving to sealed units.    Tablets.  Phones.  AIOs.  You can still buy towers.  Mini cubes.  Just not from Apple...in terms of what you want.  But you can go Linux and make one...so why don't you?
New products, indeed new concepts would do a lot to turn that around.
Turn around what?  How many sales do you think that will bring?  Did the Cube?  Did the blue and white G3 in Apple's desktop 'hello' day?  When they were far cheaper overall and more rational?  Is the Mini any better than the Cube by the time you add all the extras?  And no gpu either.  Yeah.  I see what you're saying.  But I don't think 200k extra sales (if they got that...) is worthy the R&D on the desktop line...if they can't be arsed to upraged the pro or mini half the time.
Right now Apple has a lot
They do?  Where?  How many is 'a lot'? :P
of bitter
Just you.  Let go of your anger.  yeah, you're old.  But just keeping waiting...you've got plenty of time left...
desktop customers that are really wondering if Apple is about to punt.
Mind reader you, eh?  You know what they're wondering?  Did they tell you?  Did you take a survey or something?

Lemon Bon Bon. :)

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #604 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


Don't allow yourself to be harassed into buying an iMac.
Who's harrassing? :P  I did think about using red kryptonite on him and you but thought no...they should be allowed to wait...and wait...and wait...for what they want.  It's all part of the fun.  Plus it's your democratic right. ;)
You may change your mind but do so because you believe it is the right course of action. In the past I found the iMac to be so offensive that I ended up buying a MBP instead.  
And got an even more offensive machine, a crap top? :P  Seriously.  I saw someone with the SSD retina Macbook.  Top end.  A work of art.  A real beauty.  He was running league of legends on it with the 650GT no probs.  


Lemon has his point of view
Well, I guess I do.  I won't complain of being harrassed by X-Mac advocates.  ;)   I'd like to see Apple do one and sort out the mac pro into rational land.  But hey.  We can keep wishing, eh?
but honestly it sounds like somebody that has been brain washed by one of those fake religious cults.
Rofl.  Like the millions of Mac users that bent over with their wallet to run OS X?  Would they have done so to run windows?  I guess it aint just about the looks then...
The iMac is at once a great accomplishment
It is.  If you don't want to add Raid arrays and sli gpus inside...etc.  GIves good all around bang for buck.  It's design masterpiece.  An example of where computing is going.  At least as mandated by Apple.  See iPad, iphones for hints.  (All at your local Apple store...)
but also a terrible solution for many users.
No.  Just for the 'rump' of pro users in denial...or the secret cult of people praying that the X-Mac mothership will return to take them to Klu-Art-Tuu...
Lemon can't seem to grasp such a concept.
Of the X-Mac religious cult?  Or the Apple religious cult of ass reaming your wallet?  Or the cult prophesizing the return of the desktop?  (what's a laptop when it's on your desk?)

If I remember correctly your issue with the Mini is graphics capability for gaming.
Bzzt.  Not quite.  My issue with the gpu is the one you appear to have.  The lack of decent graphics.   But if you're memory was so sharp...you'd know that.  But yeah.  Guess it would make a nice gaming rig if you stuck a 650GT in it...and upped the power budget.  (The 650GT driving the HD 21 inch iMac?  Works a treat for games and...ur...other stuff. ;)
As much as I'm with you on the need for massive improvements here, I can see Apple once again castrating the Mini even with Haswell.
Well, from the company that ass reams you on upgrades...and forced upsell?  Hey, don't blame my cult like worship for Apple.  I'm just the messenger...repeating Apple's sales patter... :P
I really don't think they get it, people don't want a half assed Mini.
Like the one with the value laiden 4000 int' crappics in it?
As I have said before the entry level Mini isn't the problem, the problem is the lack of real upgrades that give you a suitable uptick in GPU performance.
Yeah.  But when could you say that about the mac pro even?  And it's their (lol) flagship?!  At least the iMac got it's 680 MX.  And the imac is a machien with a history of underwhelming graphics choices.  But...er...hasn't that been true of mini, iMac and Pro since...well, the last ten years?
The 2011 Mini with a GPU was a joke of an implementation and sadly Apples solution to the problem was to can the model. That is really stupid on their part and is in part a factor in the decline of Apples desktop line up
A very tiny part.  (See tide of laptops crushing desktops for details...and see tablets flattening PC growth for other details...and well, Apple's obscene pricing for base and upsell models...)

Yes you do, so don't rush. In a nut shell July is only three (really closer to two)months away, supposedly the new hardware will be out around that time from Intel. If Apple is on the ball this year we will see new Minis shortly there after. More so we should start to see new platforms from Apple which hopefully will lead to a readjustment of the pricing structure. Yes I'm hoping for a new Mac Pro by July and a restructuring of Apples hardware line up. Dreaming yes but I think they need to do something soon. They obviously blew it when it came to pricing the laptops, thus leading to the mid course correction, so maybe they have learned their lesson about gouging people.
For what you and 'many' :P (see rump for details...) desktop users can hold out for is a SSD as standard mini with Haswell GT3.  I may have bought such a machine myself.  But I'm more than happy with this top end iMac.  But like all Apple kit.  You'll pay for it.  At least with the Gt3 mini if it comes you'll be able to option an SD (probably not on the base model...so sue Apple... :o ) and you'll get a 'decent' 'quad core' with 'decent' 'gpu' with 'decent' SSD for under a grand...just about.  If the wind travels with you.  And then you'll add your own monitor and kb/mouse etc....  Guess we'll see.  If real lucky?  A shrunk 'rational' 'pro' for around £1495...but I doubt it.


Yeah dreaming but it has gotten to the point that Apple is so full of themselves that it is starting to hurt sales.

😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰😰
I'll agree that they've got a bit full of themselves drunk on their iOS success.  2008's price hikes were the beginning of the end of my 'love affair' with Apple.

 

Lemon Bon Bon. :)

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #605 of 1394

Did Wizard really use the word 'flexible' in the same sentence as Apple?

 

Hmm...

 

He did use the word 'dreaming' too...

 

Lemon Bon Bon. ;)

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #606 of 1394
I really enjoy using the Mac Mini, they make the perfect media computer. Does anyone have any experience with the server version? I've been eyeing one lately and I wonder how they perform, any feed back would be appreciated.

Mostly interested as to how many computers can be connected to it before the system is bogged down.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #607 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

I really enjoy using the Mac Mini, they make the perfect media computer. Does anyone have any experience with the server version? I've been eyeing one lately and I wonder how they perform, any feed back would be appreciated.

Mostly interested as to how many computers can be connected to it before the system is bogged down.

The server version is unnecessary as it has the same processor as the quad core $799 one. I mean you can configure it with two SSDs instead of one though that doesn't make it worth it.
post #608 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

I really enjoy using the Mac Mini, they make the perfect media computer. Does anyone have any experience with the server version? I've been eyeing one lately and I wonder how they perform, any feed back would be appreciated.
Server for what? Unless you need an Apple specific feature you probably should be considering a Linux box that is designed to be a server.
Quote:
Mostly interested as to how many computers can be connected to it before the system is bogged down.

Do you realize how silly and impossible that question is? There is no context at all here for even a wild assed guess. Again a server for what comes to mind.
post #609 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

I really enjoy using the Mac Mini, they make the perfect media computer. Does anyone have any experience with the server version? I've been eyeing one lately and I wonder how they perform, any feed back would be appreciated.

Mostly interested as to how many computers can be connected to it before the system is bogged down.


That isn't enough information. It could be used as a lighter duty server for other Macs, and it's not an entirely uncommon use assuming gigabit ethernet --> gigabit switch or more likely to airport router provides enough bandwidth. I wouldn't try to edit video content from it, but you should be able to serve files of reasonable size. It would be IO bottlenecked before anything else. Keep in mind it doesn't matter whether you buy the one labeled server or install OSX server on one of the others. It doesn't even require the quad cpu model. They market it that way to upsell you on hardware. I don't know what OSX server really supports. It's not designed to run big iron servers with multiple NICs.

post #610 of 1394

You can use 10 MM as I have a friend who has this server system now. Never had a problem.
 

post #611 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post


That isn't enough information. It could be used as a lighter duty server for other Macs, and it's not an entirely uncommon use assuming gigabit ethernet --> gigabit switch or more likely to airport router provides enough bandwidth. I wouldn't try to edit video content from it, but you should be able to serve files of reasonable size. It would be IO bottlenecked before anything else. Keep in mind it doesn't matter whether you buy the one labeled server or install OSX server on one of the others. It doesn't even require the quad cpu model. They market it that way to upsell you on hardware. I don't know what OSX server really supports. It's not designed to run big iron servers with multiple NICs.

The Mini can certainly pass for a light duty server that doesn't need a lot of secondary storage. Even then I still think it might be advantageous to install Linux or BSD on it. Put the Mini in a situation where it needs to access lots of data, expand over time or need servicing then a more traditional server makes more sense.

In a nut shell, you are right, not enough information.
post #612 of 1394

What do you want a written guarantee it works!
 

post #613 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Come on i7-4850HQ or i7-4950HQ standard in one model or worse case scenario a BTO option.
post #614 of 1394
So how many are expecting a new Mini to debut at WWDC? For me it is still a toss up as to which machine (the Pro or the Mini) gets the made in the USA label. I've leaned towards the Mac Pro but I'm not sure the economics of that machine would support a manufacturing plant running all year.

So maybe a Mini with some Long Horns on it? Mini could be far more interesting with a little refactoring which a modest redesign for made in America could do for that machine.
post #615 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Would love to see it at WWDC however according to Wikipedia, Intel isn't releasing the processors with the GT3e graphics until the third quarter of this year.
post #616 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Server for what? Unless you need an Apple specific feature you probably should be considering a Linux box that is designed to be a server.
Do you realize how silly and impossible that question is? There is no context at all here for even a wild assed guess. Again a server for what comes to mind.

I really just wanted to know if the Mac Mini server was worth the extra money and it seems my question was answered, no. I went ahead and bought a used SUN SunFire X4170 (2)Intel Xeon 5570 16 core's, 48gb ram, 4X 72GB HD's for less than 700 dollars off of eBay. I was just playing with the notion of buying a 1U or 2U server but after looking at how cheap a used Oracle-Sun machine could be had for I just couldn't resist, especially for such a powerful one. The thing is extremely noisy so I had to put it in the bomb shelter, yes I said bomb shelter, in Switzerland by law every building has to have own, weird huh, gosh we're paranoid. Most of us just use them as wine cellars or in my case a server room.

I host a server for my family and friends, I provide email, storage and some web apps . My previous server was a Linux box but I have over 30 people using it and it's age started to show, hence the question about the Mac Mini. However if you have the room and a place where you can't hear the blasted thing, a used Sun server is a really fantastic thing to own. Especially for the power you get for such little money, I'm sure it will cost more in power consumption in the long run but I'm a hopeless geek and couldn't resist.
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #617 of 1394

The Mac Mini is the product that is going to be made in America.Watch for it soon.
 

post #618 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Would love to see it at WWDC however according to Wikipedia, Intel isn't releasing the processors with the GT3e graphics until the third quarter of this year.

They tend to only mention redesigns at events. I reckon the only model that will get a redesign (even if it's minor) will be the Mac Pro.

HP has a list of notebooks they are bringing out next month, some with the HD5000 graphics:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/HP-introduces-latest-mainstream-ProBook-400-series.91990.0.html

I notice they've gone with the AMD 8750M. If Apple went all 8750M in the 15" MBP (hopefully 1GB minimum memory), they wouldn't need GT3 at all, they'd just use GT2 (4200/4400/4600).

With the Air, the GT3 (5100 = Iris) part (i7-4558U) still gives double the performance:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6926/intel-iris-iris-pro-graphics-haswell-gt3gt3e-gets-a-brand

The Mini would really need Iris Pro, which is only in the quad-core parts, which would suggest a later update e.g October for Mini, iMac and Pro. I imagine the dual-core 13" rMBP will get double performance using Iris like the Air. We'll probably find out a week tomorrow when Intel shows what options are available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic 
I really just wanted to know if the Mac Mini server was worth the extra money and it seems my question was answered, no. I went ahead and bought a used SUN SunFire X4170 (2)Intel Xeon 5570 16 core's, 48gb ram, 4X 72GB HD's for less than 700 dollars off of eBay.

It's 8-core, 16-thread if it has 2x X5570s. It's the same as a 2009 8-core Mac Pro. It's a bit faster than the Mini and you have the extra RAM but you wouldn't have to keep the Mini in a bomb shelter. If you got the $799 Mini, put in a 250GB SSD ($170), 16GB RAM ($150), you'd get a better machine with a warranty for $1119.
post #619 of 1394
Thread Starter 
If I come to find out that the $799 mini has the Intel HD 4600, I might pass until next year or just wait until my current Mac breaks. I know I said I am tempted to get an iMac, though next year will mean a lot more with the 20nm Maxwell GPUs from nVidia.
post #620 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

If I come to find out that the $799 mini has the Intel HD 4600, I might pass until next year or just wait until my current Mac breaks. I know I said I am tempted to get an iMac, though next year will mean a lot more with the 20nm Maxwell GPUs from nVidia.

I'm not sure what I will do. My old MBP has really developed a few quirks and other issues so I can't hold out forever. I could eve see an AIR as a potential replacement if they can significantly beef up the secondary storage and do a few other things to make the machine more useful. Having a couple of VM images installed really eats up the "disk" space. As such the lack of a sizable and affordable SSD option still puts the AIRs on the back burner.

There is just so much happening in the industry right now that I can see many possibilities for this years hardware.
post #621 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post


I really just wanted to know if the Mac Mini server was worth the extra money and it seems my question was answered, no. I went ahead and bought a used SUN SunFire X4170 (2)Intel Xeon 5570 16 core's, 48gb ram, 4X 72GB HD's for less than 700 dollars off of eBay. I was just playing with the notion of buying a 1U or 2U server but after looking at how cheap a used Oracle-Sun machine could be had for I just couldn't resist, especially for such a powerful one. The thing is extremely noisy so I had to put it in the bomb shelter, yes I said bomb shelter, in Switzerland by law every building has to have own, weird huh, gosh we're paranoid. Most of us just use them as wine cellars or in my case a server room.

I host a server for my family and friends, I provide email, storage and some web apps . My previous server was a Linux box but I have over 30 people using it and it's age started to show, hence the question about the Mac Mini. However if you have the room and a place where you can't hear the blasted thing, a used Sun server is a really fantastic thing to own. Especially for the power you get for such little money, I'm sure it will cost more in power consumption in the long run but I'm a hopeless geek and couldn't resist.

Yeah my initial question there was a matter of bandwidth required more than anything else. I wasn't sure how this was being set up. The way you worded it here, it sounds more like ISP bandwidth rates would bottleneck it long before ethernet limits. Something like the server you described would provide much more bandwidth assuming an installed OS that supports any kind of traffic management.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


They tend to only mention redesigns at events. I reckon the only model that will get a redesign (even if it's minor) will be the Mac Pro.

 

I don't think there's any chance of seeing one at WWDC. If they're using Ivy Bridge E, which would be the most direct step, I wouldn't expect anything to actually ship before Q4.

Quote:

It's 8-core, 16-thread if it has 2x X5570s. It's the same as a 2009 8-core Mac Pro. It's a bit faster than the Mini and you have the extra RAM but you wouldn't have to keep the Mini in a bomb shelter. If you got the $799 Mini, put in a 250GB SSD ($170), 16GB RAM ($150), you'd get a better machine with a warranty for $1119.

Better is subjective. It would be quieter, but this one looks cooler1smoking.gif. I'm assuming you quoted the $799 mini to match the thread count of mini to the used server (8 with hyperthreading to 8 physical)? I've kept old servers around before to test hypervisor configurations, so I'm familiar with the noise level. They're designed to be in a different room with whatever other hardware. The used server would have more options in terms of higher bandwidth use cases. That was what I mentioned about the mini before. I didn't know if the access would be local as in several people in the same office or the file sizes that would be transferred concurrently. The specs on that server are quite impressive. Even today that ram alone is pretty expensive.

post #622 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Better is subjective. It would be quieter, but this one looks cooler:smokey: .

'Looks cooler' is also subjective:




Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

I'm assuming you quoted the $799 mini to match the thread count of mini to the used server (8 with hyperthreading to 8 physical)?

Just to get comparable performance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

The used server would have more options in terms of higher bandwidth use cases.

Gigabit ethernet is plenty and Thunderbolt can add a second one or fibre channel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

I didn't know if the access would be local as in several people in the same office or the file sizes that would be transferred concurrently.

Wouldn't really matter, the Mini can handle external IO faster than the SATA connection to the drive. Although the Sunfire has more drives, they're only HDDs.
post #623 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


'Looks cooler' is also subjective:
 

You know I was just having fun with that one.

 

 

 

Quote:
Just to get comparable performance.

It's unlikely that it was an issue of cpu bottleneck there unless it was actually being used to crunch numbers or run multiple VMs. That's why I figured you were going by threads.

 

 

Quote:

Gigabit ethernet is plenty and Thunderbolt can add a second one or fibre channel.
Wouldn't really matter, the Mini can handle external IO faster than the SATA connection to the drive. Although the Sunfire has more drives, they're only HDDs.

 

It depends on the use case as I mentioned, but thunderbolt isn't a viable option there at all . I didn't bother mentioning it as I didn't think it would come up. You aren't going to find a thunderbolt connection to any kind of switch. You could add a DAS solution via thunderbolt, but you would still be limited by gigabit ethernet. Regarding gigabit ethernet, I wasn't sure if it might be a corner case of supporting a number of users where large files are being either transferred or accessed directly. For someone hosting a site and some files from their basement, their upload bandwidth isn't going to saturate gigabit ethernet anyway. On the topic of SATA, it's still faster than gigabit ethernet, which has a theoretical maximum bandwidth of roughly 120MB/s. I'm not sure of your point here. The Mini's fastest connection isn't the one that would be used as a networking protocol.

post #624 of 1394
Thread Starter 
Would a price drop be possible maybe by $100 across the board or does anyone think it'll just stay the same $600/$800/$1,000?
post #625 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Would a price drop be possible maybe by $100 across the board or does anyone think it'll just stay the same $600/$800/$1,000?

A price drop isn't impossible though $100 might be rich for Apple.

The big problem with Apples machines is that $200 differential between machines doesn't buy you a lot. It would be very interesting to see how sales spread across the line up. By the time you get to the server model you are left with the unpleasant taste of the word "ripoff" in your mouth. Apple really needs to throw people a bone here when it comes to desirable features in the 200 dollar increments. Disk space and fusion drive comes to mind here.
post #626 of 1394

MM is coming out with the Haswell chip and it will be the same price.
 

post #627 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

MM is coming out with the Haswell chip and it will be the same price.
 


Yep, and with the "improved" Intel graphics, a discrete graphics card is off the table, probably permanently.

 

21 inch iMac will probably move to integrated-only graphics as well.

 

WWDC announcements will be software only.  A separate announcement towards the end of the month will highlight speedbumped iMacs with the Mini as a footnote.  If the Texas factory will be making Mac Pros, don't look for anything before November.

post #628 of 1394
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post
Yep, and with the "improved" Intel graphics, a discrete graphics card is off the table, probably permanently.


Desktop Haswell gets worse iGPUs than laptop Haswell. Desktop gets 4600, laptop gets 5x00. Not that I ever see the Mac Mini having a dedicated chip in the first place, but the reason for that won't be how good the iGPU is. At least, not this revision. lol.gif


21 inch iMac will probably move to integrated-only graphics as well.

 

I seriously doubt that.


WWDC announcements will be software only.

 

And that.


A separate announcement towards the end of the month…

 

Why does that make any sense? Rent out Moscone West and then waste MORE money later in the month for less press?


…don't look for anything before November.

 

Also nonsense. They may as well not make a new Mac Pro at all. Do you understand how long it has been since an actual update? They've had THAT time to build them here.

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 #629 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


 

Also nonsense. They may as well not make a new Mac Pro at all. Do you understand how long it has been since an actual update? They've had THAT time to build them here.

Actually that part has less to do with quibbling over what factory might be making them and more to do with what parts will be used. If they're sticking with E/EP, they won't be out for a bit. Sandy Bridge E officially launched roughly 3 months prior to any oems shipping units, and the official launch date hasn't even hit yet on Ivy. Rumors still say Q3. I thought intel had confirmed that, but I can't find it now. They could always go with Haswell E3s, but the chips would be equivalent in performance to those represented by the imac. You have 4 more PCI lanes and no integrated graphics when comped against the options used in the imacs.

 

It's still not saying that this is all somehow intel's fault for not releasing anything. They released chips, and Apple obviously didn't use them. I also can't seee intel returning to an annual update on this line. I wonder if their tick/tock cycle will even hold up in consumer lines. I certainly don't see them releasing a machine based on Sandy Bridge E at this point. In terms of events, they could always announce a Mac Pro, but it would be pretty far out. I don't just mean a month out either. If they wanted to tie it to an event, it would probably be one in the Fall along with whatever else hasn't been refreshed. Otherwise I'm quite sure a new mac pro announcement would get significant press anyway. It wouldn't be due to its potential sales. It would just be due to Apple finally updating a machine after 3 years.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


Desktop Haswell gets worse iGPUs than laptop Haswell. Desktop gets 4600, laptop gets 5x00. Not that I ever see the Mac Mini having a dedicated chip in the first place, but the reason for that won't be how good the iGPU is. At least, not this revision. lol.gif

Desktop chips are also quite often cheaper. If they did that, I expect it would be to offset a price drop. I don't expect it with Haswell.

post #630 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Desktop Haswell gets worse iGPUs than laptop Haswell. Desktop gets 4600, laptop gets 5x00.

All of the chips will have options for the 4xxx graphics or Iris/Iris Pro. The desktop with Iris Pro is faster than all of them:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/05/02/intel-outlines-upcoming-core-i7-haswell-integrated-graphics-touts-up-to-triple-performance

The i7-4770R IGP should be as fast as the 650M so suitable for all the 21" models assuming it's also available in an i5 variety. Iris would be fine at that level too though. This is no match for the 680MX, which is a further 3x faster so I don't expect they'd get rid of the dedicated GPU in the 27". It does mean better use of the space and easier cooling for the 21.5" though.

Integrated graphics still understandably has a bad reputation but with OpenGL 4 support, OpenCL 1.2, DX11 and performance to rival at least a 640M, it's not warranted any more (assuming it lives up to the description).
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm 
Sandy Bridge E officially launched roughly 3 months prior to any oems shipping units

It was delayed though, you can't expect every release to follow the same pattern. Intel is launching Haswell at Computex on June 3rd. They have an IDF in San Francisco on September 10th-12th. It's likely that they'll release Ivy Bridge E/EP at that point, which gives Apple the opportunity to mention it alongside their iOS updates at an event in September or October. I don't think there's enough reason to have a separate Mac event as the MP would be the only update.
post #631 of 1394
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
Integrated graphics still understandably has a bad reputation but with OpenGL 4 support, OpenCL 1.2, DX11 and performance to rival at least a 640M, it's not warranted any more (assuming it lives up to the description).

 

… Not having their own RAM still warrants it, yeah.

 

And isn't OS X still dragging its digital feet on modern OpenGL support?

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 #632 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


All of the chips will have options for the 4xxx graphics or Iris/Iris Pro. The desktop with Iris Pro is faster than all of them:

http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/05/02/intel-outlines-upcoming-core-i7-haswell-integrated-graphics-touts-up-to-triple-performance

The i7-4770R IGP should be as fast as the 650M so suitable for all the 21" models assuming it's also available in an i5 variety. Iris would be fine at that level too though. This is no match for the 680MX, which is a further 3x faster so I don't expect they'd get rid of the dedicated GPU in the 27". It does mean better use of the space and easier cooling for the 21.5" though.

Integrated graphics still understandably has a bad reputation but with OpenGL 4 support, OpenCL 1.2, DX11 and performance to rival at least a 640M, it's not warranted any more (assuming it lives up to the description).

 

Part of that reputation is due to driver stability more than just raw performance. The same hardware with really good drivers would satisfy an even wider range of individuals than it does today. Here's one example from the mini. They seem to have a lot of launch bugs, and really driver performance could be better tuned in OSX across the board. The updated OpenGL/CL support is a big step up.

 

Quote:

It was delayed though, you can't expect every release to follow the same pattern. Intel is launching Haswell at Computex on June 3rd. They have an IDF in San Francisco on September 10th-12th. It's likely that they'll release Ivy Bridge E/EP at that point, which gives Apple the opportunity to mention it alongside their iOS updates at an event in September or October. I don't think there's enough reason to have a separate Mac event as the MP would be the only update.

 

That is a good point. I could see something coming up at an event in the September of October timeframe, just not WWDC.

post #633 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Integrated graphics still understandably has a bad reputation but with OpenGL 4 support, OpenCL 1.2, DX11 and performance to rival at least a 640M, it's not warranted any more (assuming it lives up to the description).

… Not having their own RAM still warrants it, yeah.

You would lose up to 512MB of the 8GB but I don't think it's that big of a problem for the entry machines. If it makes the machines cheaper and use less power, it's a small trade-off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

And isn't OS X still dragging its digital feet on modern OpenGL support?

Yes, hopefully they'll fix this in 10.9.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm 
They seem to have a lot of launch bugs

How does your single example that had nothing to do with the IGP (hence EFI update not driver update) translate into 'a lot'? I haven't read about widespread driver issues from any manufacturer, just the occasional incompatibility.
post #634 of 1394
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post
You would lose up to 512MB of the 8GB but I don't think it's that big of a problem for the entry machines. If it makes the machines cheaper and use less power, it's a small trade-off.

 

Problem is, maybe I want more than 512 MB of RAM dedicated to video. I mean, my 4870 has 512, and by next year it finally won't fit minimum requirements for much of anything new, but it's also four years old.

 

I don't understand why Apple doesn't just beef up vRAM on all their products. It doesn't have to be the most powerful card in existence at time of launch, but having twice the vRAM of all the competitors and getting special chips made to have 2, 3, 4GB of it sounds like a thoroughly "Apple" idea.

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 #635 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

You would lose up to 512MB of the 8GB but I don't think it's that big of a problem for the entry machines. If it makes the machines cheaper and use less power, it's a small trade-off.
The problem isn't the RAM used but the lack of bandwidth. It is an issue both AMD and Intel have with their integrated GPUs. If Apple really wanted to be progressive they would introduce new RAM technologies to deal with the bandwidth problem.
Quote:

Yes, hopefully they'll fix this in 10.9.
They better! It is really pathetic when you find out that even Linux is more up to date supporting OpenGL or even OpenCL.
Quote:
How does your single example that had nothing to do with the IGP (hence EFI update not driver update) translate into 'a lot'? I haven't read about widespread driver issues from any manufacturer, just the occasional incompatibility.

The drivers and hardware for the Intel GPUs suck and if you had been following the various forums you would know of multiple short comings. Of ourse all drivers have bugs, they are software after all, but Intels drivers under Mac OS take the cake. Try writing a program that takes advantage of the iGPU as a compute device for example. There is a range if functionality that isn't supported on Mac OS een though the functionality is supported else where. So yeah Intel drivers suck.
post #636 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Problem is, maybe I want more than 512 MB of RAM dedicated to video. I mean, my 4870 has 512, and by next year it finally won't fit minimum requirements for much of anything new, but it's also four years old.
Once we have heterogeneous computing supported in Mac OS the issues with the amount of RAM will dissolve. The GPU will then be able to access RAM just as the CPU would. So looking for more RAM dedicated to the GPU is kinda old thinking. What we really want to see is Apple moving forward supporting heterogeneous computing. Doing so will only make things like OpenCL more versatile and it should enhance the performance of many functions that can run on a GPU.
Quote:
I don't understand why Apple doesn't just beef up vRAM on all their products. It doesn't have to be the most powerful card in existence at time of launch, but having twice the vRAM of all the competitors and getting special chips made to have 2, 3, 4GB of it sounds like a thoroughly "Apple" idea.

For discrete GPUs I've never really understood Apples stupidity here. This is especially the case if you are paying extra for an enhanced model. After all if you buy the up sell model often GPU performance is a big factor in that purchase. Over the years it has had a tendency to make Apple look stingy. Often we are only talking about a few dollars worth of RAM chips.

For integrated GPUs it is quickly getting to the point where the real answer will be uniform memory access. This by the way should encourage even more RAM as standard in the base machines.
post #637 of 1394

Mac mini:

 

1. Haswell

2. Haswell

3. Haswell

 

iMac 27":

 

1. User-accessible HDD/SSD bay

2. User-accessible HDD/SSD bay

3. User-accessible HDD/SSD bay

 

Mac Pro:

 

1. A real Mac Pro

2. Really a Mac Pro

3. I can buy'em in Europe....


Edited by smalM - 5/27/13 at 3:17pm
post #638 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

… I don't think there's enough reason to have a separate Mac event as the MP would be the only update.

Do you really believe that? After all the talk from Apple about a real Mac Pro revision do you really think it will come to us this year as a minor update?

Honestly I'm expecting something big for the Mac Pro at WWDC. I don't know exactly what that will be but I would expect that the GPU will be built onto the motherboard and that it will have strong OpenCL support. The exact nature of the CPU's is hard to gage at this point but I wouldn't be surprised to find out they have a deal with Intel on a new solution.

In any event if the MP is another minor update of the kind we have seen in the last five years or so I will officially consider Apple to be brain dead. There is no rational reason to deliver the same hardware configuration to the market again. The market has proven that they don't want the Mac Pro as it is currently shipped. As such another "only update" effort will be rejected by the user populace.

I skipped over this post initially but that quoted bit above struck a nerve! I'm just not sure how you can rationally expect only an update when the Mac Pro is in such a sales quagmire.
post #639 of 1394
Quote:
Originally Posted by smalM View Post

Mac mini:

1. Haswell
2. Haswell
3. Haswell
That is pretty much a given. However Haswell is about the broadest spread of processor technology ever from Intel. As such we really have to hope for those Haswell Chips that would make the Mini really purr.
Quote:
iMac 27":

1. User-accessible HDD/SSD bay
2. User-accessible HDD/SSD bay
3. User-accessible HDD/SSD bay
I've totally given up on the iMac. I suppose they could correct some of their design issues but at this point I don't care. Apple would need to rethink its attitude with respect to serviceability before I'd even look at an iMac.
post #640 of 1394
Originally Posted by smalM View Post

1. User-accessible HDD/SSD bay

 

A bay will never happen. Accessibility, however, could.


Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post
I suppose they could correct some of their design issues but at this point I don't care.

 

Your implication that it's an issue is misplaced.

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
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