Future of the Mac mini for 2015 and beyond

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited November 2015
Yep it's Winter with yet another Mac mini thread. Let me first say that I am planning to buy a 2014 Mac mini towards the end of the year if they do not release a Broadwell version. After four years, it is time to move on from Sandy Bridge and Mac OS X Lion which has served me well. Now here's the thing, I wonder if Apple will even release a Broadwell version, wait until Skylake, or possibly move on altogether.

Here's my situation. I [B][U]need[/U][/B] 16 GB of RAM and (at least) a 256 GB PCIe SSD. A quad-core processor would be nice however it is not a deal breaker for my usage. On the flip side, I am not completely against going back to Windows as well and am looking at the Brix Pro. Does anyone have experience with those and how are they? Thanks in advance.

Edit: By the way, the mini has only two PCI lanes and the rMBP has four right?
«134567

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 139
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Hey Winter glad to see the interest hasn't died yet!

    As for me my MBP died several weeks ago. Ended up waiting for the recent release of new Mac Books. In that regard I went with the new 13" MBP and frankly I'm pretty happy with it so far. I've had it about two weeks now. Frankly this was an unplanned purchase due to the old machine giving up the ghost, this will likely put any Mini purchase on hold.


    winter wrote: »
    Yep it's Winter with yet another Mac mini thread. Let me first say that I am planning to buy a 2014 Mac mini towards the end of the year if they do not release a Broadwell version. After four years, it is time to move on from Sandy Bridge and Mac OS X Lion which has served me well. Now here's the thing, I wonder if Apple will even release a Broadwell version, wait until Skylake, or possibly move on altogether.

    Here's my situation. I need 16 GB of RAM and (at least) a 256 GB PCIe SSD. A quad-core processor would be nice however it is not a deal breaker for my usage. On the flip side, I am not completely against going back to Windows as well and am looking at the Brix Pro. Does anyone have experience with those and how are they? Thanks in advance.

    Edit: By the way, the mini has only two PCI lanes and the rMBP has four right?

    I can't say much about a machine I've never seen but at work they are using Lonovo compact computers now that are similar in size to a Mini. They work pretty good but are no where as near as snappy as my MBP.

    As to wat Apple will do with the Mini who knows. If you go to most stores ( of any type) selling computers there is hardly a desktop machine in sight. The vast majority of sales are now laptops. So there is a real question of the Mini staying around. Apple has a big problem with the current Minis anyways in that you don't get much for your extra dollars when you buy above the base model. I still believe they need an XMac in two variants, one a cheap introductory machine and another running desktop hardware with reasonably agressive ( quad core i7 at the least) performance. It is unfortunate but the current Mini line up just rubs everybody as being low end and a minimal effort on Apples part.
  • Reply 2 of 139
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    Once Apple announced a new Mac mini last October, it sort of satisfied my hunger temporarily. Of course my interest peaked up once again when the new 13" rMBP came out because you have faster memory, faster PCIe SSDs, and faster integrated graphics.
  • Reply 3 of 139
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    winter wrote: »
    Once Apple announced a new Mac mini last October, it sort of satisfied my hunger temporarily. Of course my interest peaked up once again when the new 13" rMBP came out because you have faster memory, faster PCIe SSDs, and faster integrated graphics.

    All I can say is that I'm pleased with my purchase so far. There is some desire to have a 15" screen (I like screen real estate) however the retina screen is simply gorgeous. Text is stunningly clear and if you turn down the backlight a bit it does look like printed text on paper. Oh and that track pad is amazing.

    Would I have been better off waiting for a 15" MBP? Obviously I can't say right now, when ones computer breaks down it forces you to make decisions! The only good thing is that my iPad gave me a bit of cushion so that I could hold off a bit until the refresh hit. Relative to the 2008 MBP it is much harder to slow this machine down but it can happen if you are doing many things at once. It can happen though.

    Interestingly even on this machine I still see beach balling for no rational reason. I really believe it isn't a hardware problem anymore and that Apple must have something screwed up pretty bad in Mac OS.
  • Reply 4 of 139
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    Did you get 16 GB of RAM? If you didn't, you should have.
  • Reply 5 of 139
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    winter wrote: »
    Did you get 16 GB of RAM? If you didn't, you should have.

    Nope. I thought about that long and hard too, trying to project my expect usage into the next five years. It is obvious that 4 GB wouldn't be enough RAM, however 8GB should get me by. There is also the reality that in a couple of years I would expect computer systems to have advanced significantly to the point I might want an upgrade.

    The problem is Intel has put the CPU on the back burner while bringing its GPUs up to speed. Nothing wrong with that as it allows me to buy a machine with an integrated GPU for my usage that doesn't suck. However with another pricess shrink to 10 nm Intel will have a tremendous amount of realestate available to them agian which they can dedicate to improved CPU facilities. Quad cores should become common even in Mac Book Airs and I could see a 15" MBP with 5-10 CPU cores. That will be enhanced with much faster DDR-4 chips after that technology stabilizes. So in maybe three years laptops could be transformed into much more capable machines as Intel refocuses on the CPU.

    This is also why I kinda look at the new Mac Book with its slow processor as a sort of proof of concept. I suspect that even SkyLake will be a big improvement for this machine. If they get the power savings at 10 nm that everybody is hoping for then that new Mac book will be good enough performance wise for low end usage.

    To put it another way, I suspect there will be lots of reasons to upgrade in a few years anyways. I was actually trying to hold off for SkyLake, but it gets a little rough when your only computer is a LINUX box probably 11 years old. A dead Mac can dash your best laid plans.
  • Reply 6 of 139
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    I'd get 32 GB if it was allowed but right now I can only have that on the 27" iMac.
  • Reply 7 of 139
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    winter wrote: »
    I'd get 32 GB if it was allowed but right now I can only have that on the 27" iMac.

    That is because Intels chips have different cutoffs as far as the amount of RAM supported by the chip set. Most of the mobile line only allows for 16 GB at this moment in time. For many users that isn't a big limitation today and probably won't be for the next couple of years. More importantly we are at a major transition point in the industry and frankly by 2016 today hardware will look rather old and outmoded due to the advent of high performance memories, Skylake and beyond and other tech.

    I can see this coming and frankly it can be a bit frustrating. I see a bigger change coming than what we saw when Core 2 Duo was supplanted with the i series. As Marvin pointed out the jump was rather large and after a bit we sort of hit a plateau with very modest system gains year after year. I can see by late 2017 a MBP 13" that is twice as fast as my current machine bought a couple of weeks ago.

    in a nut shell this year leaves me with the feeling that it will be like 2008 when I bought the early MBP only to see a much more interesting and refined machine delivered in the later half of the year. Sucks really.
  • Reply 8 of 139
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    I just hope the mini stays that long and they do not shrink it to the point where it just gets a Core M in it. To me a dual core processor with Iris graphics is low enough and while I wish Iris Pro were in there, it's not a deal breaker obviously. If there's no plans for a Broadwell mini than bring on a Skylake mini with DDR4.
  • Reply 9 of 139
    copelandcopeland Posts: 298member

    I would hope that Apple holds out now (as they haven't done anything interesting with the mini for the last few years) for Skylake and DDR4.

     

    I bought my last mini in 2009, the last one with the nvidea integrated gpu.

    Although I upgraded the RAM to the max of 4GB and replaced the DVD drive with a SSD to build my own Fusion drive my mini is showing its age.

     

    I am waiting for the next upgrade but would hate if it is a Broadwell as Skylake is looming on the horizont. But looking at the history my hopes are very low.

  • Reply 10 of 139
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    copeland wrote: »
    I would hope that Apple holds out now (as they haven't done anything interesting with the mini for the last few years) for Skylake and DDR4.
    If they have any sense at all they would go SkyLake for the next Mini rev. I'm actually hoping for a new form factor modeled after the Mac Pro. A Mini Pro if you will.
    I bought my last mini in 2009, the last one with the nvidea integrated gpu.
    Although I upgraded the RAM to the max of 4GB and replaced the DVD drive with a SSD to build my own Fusion drive my mini is showing its age.
    You will be shocked at how snappy the new hardware is. I had to replace my 2008 MBP, due to it dying and went with the just released 13" MBP. It is a big upgrade with the SSD, RAM and Broadwell.

    I am waiting for the next upgrade but would hate if it is a Broadwell as Skylake is looming on the horizont. But looking at the history my hopes are very low.

    I understand your concerns.
  • Reply 11 of 139
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    I hope Apple gets rid of the entry level Mac mini at $499. I know many of us discussed that Apple should lower the price of the mini to $499 since that's what it was when it first debuted but not with 4 GB of RAM and 500 GB 5,400 rpm HDD. Come on. The $699 mini should be the base mini at 8 GB of RAM and a 1 TB HDD. At least next year though, the graphics will include the Intel HD 6000 vs. the Intel HD 5000 if they keep the current ones.

    I agree with you wizard about the mini Pro although they need to figure out how to not cut into the 21.5" iMac if that is selling well which I assume it is. Also your mini Pro has to include an SSD by default like the Mac Pro itself does or else it's a no go for me.
  • Reply 12 of 139
    marvfoxmarvfox Posts: 2,275member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Winter View Post



    I hope Apple gets rid of the entry level Mac mini at $499. I know many of us discussed that Apple should lower the price of the mini to $499 since that's what it was when it first debuted but not with 4 GB of RAM and 500 GB 5,400 rpm HDD. Come on. The $699 mini should be the base mini at 8 GB of RAM and a 1 TB HDD. At least next year though, the graphics will include the Intel HD 6000 vs. the Intel HD 5000 if they keep the current ones.



    I agree with you wizard about the mini Pro although they need to figure out how to not cut into the 21.5" iMac if that is selling well which I assume it is. Also your mini Pro has to include an SSD by default like the Mac Pro itself does or else it's a no go for me.



    Your opinion is worth about the size of a deflated balloon.The entry level is a great concept for people just starting out in the Mac field and cannot afford the more expensive products in their line.

  • Reply 13 of 139
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    Let them be disappointed then Marv. : )
  • Reply 14 of 139
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    winter wrote: »
    Let them be disappointed then Marv. : )

    You can't run a business that way. The attitude certianly wouldn't fly with customers.

    I'm not sure why you are so down on the entry level Mini, it is a good option for many different users. It can function as a media PC, net access device, students PC and a number of other uses where performance is already good enough. Priorities differ and sometimes cheap is the best solution for a problem.

    My big issue with the Mini is that there isn't enough additional value in the up sell models to really justify the more expensive models. They should have kept a quad core in the line up even if that would have meant a different motherboard. As you go up in the price range you really want to see a bigger I,prive meant in CPU performance, the current line up more or less fails in that regard.
  • Reply 15 of 139
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    wizard69 wrote: »
    You can't run a business that way. The attitude certianly wouldn't fly with customers.

    I'm not sure why you are so down on the entry level Mini, it is a good option for many different users. It can function as a media PC, net access device, students PC and a number of other uses where performance is already good enough. Priorities differ and sometimes cheap is the best solution for a problem.

    My big issue with the Mini is that there isn't enough additional value in the up sell models to really justify the more expensive models. They should have kept a quad core in the line up even if that would have meant a different motherboard. As you go up in the price range you really want to see a bigger I,prive meant in CPU performance, the current line up more or less fails in that regard.

    You're absolutely right. Two things make me automatically discount the $499 mini. 4 GB of RAM and the 500 GB 5,400 rpm HDD. You want more people to use your product yet you are giving them the absolute minimum to do so. I don't know why Apple is so greedy on RAM. Even the MacBook Airs have 4 GB by default. It should be 8 GB by default with a 16 GB option no excuses.

    As for the quad core deal, my only thought is Intel's numbering system with graphics and how there were two Haswell 37 W processors but with HD 4600 graphics. How are sales of the Brix Pro? Maybe Apple can make their own Brix Pro if they feel it can garner $$$.
  • Reply 16 of 139
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    http://www.fudzilla.com/news/notebooks/37472-skylake-15w-mobile-skus-getting-iris-graphics <--- Here's some awesome news if they have a Skylake mini in 2016. :smokey:

    I know marv will try and burst my bubble though and say they're getting rid of the mini or some garbage. The thing is as great as that news is, they still will need to offer a PCIe SSD in the base model. I do not want a Fusion Drive.
  • Reply 17 of 139
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    winter wrote: »
    http://www.fudzilla.com/news/notebooks/37472-skylake-15w-mobile-skus-getting-iris-graphics <--- Here's some awesome news if they have a Skylake mini in 2016. :smokey:
    That would be an excellent processor for the Mac Book Air. The Mini needs a 35-40 watt processor. At the top end a quad core is mandatory.
    I know marv will try and burst my bubble though and say they're getting rid of the mini or some garbage. The thing is as great as that news is, they still will need to offer a PCIe SSD in the base model. I do not want a Fusion Drive.

    Moving to an SSD would be ideal. The performance benefits are outstanding. Frankly I'd prefer an SSD to a high end SoC.
  • Reply 18 of 139
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    Well the base mini won't be so bad now with Iris graphics. Unfortunately I don't see Apple giving the mini a quad-core processor unless there's something less than 35 W.
  • Reply 19 of 139
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member

    What is the point anymore? The Mini's magic is gone and the desktop computer world has changed.

     

    Apple should scrap the Mini entirely and lower the base iMac to $799.

  • Reply 20 of 139
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    frank777 wrote: »
    What is the point anymore? The Mini's magic is gone and the desktop computer world has changed.

    Apple should scrap the Mini entirely and lower the base iMac to $799.

    Yeah no... I agree on lowering the price of the base iMac but not scrapping the mini. Sorry.
Sign In or Register to comment.