Apple's Mac mini now inexcusably getting trounced by cheap Intel hardware

16781012

Comments

  • Reply 181 of 240
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 357member
    Isn't the only problem for Mac mini is the lack of update...
  • Reply 182 of 240
    djames4242djames4242 Posts: 493member
    cgWerks said:
    Mike Wuerthele said:
    I'm not certain I'd bother with the TB1 in the 2012 and an eGPU. It's doable, but man, the performance hit is rough.
    Yeah, it's just more of a... what's the alternative (if not going Hackintosh)? I need to buy something in the next month or so here, and it seems my options are 2012 quad-core Mini, Hackintosh, or 2013 Mac Pro. They all have potential downsides. The Mac Pro looks best for me, but I'm concerned about spending that much money if OS support drops off before, say, 4 years or so.

    I'm really hoping we'll see something at WWDC. But, I fear I'm just going to get disappointed.
    I faced this same dilemma last month and finally decided that I didn't want to spend nearly $1000 on a six-year-old quad-core Mac Mini because of the same concern over future support as you have. Since I tend to keep my machines for roughly seven years, I decided that it was worth spending $3000 on an almost fully-loaded iMac (4.2ghz, 1TB SSD, and 24gb RAM) because I wanted the option of adding more than 16gb or RAM down the road.

    My guess is that this is as much of a reason why the Mini isn't being updated. If those looking for a brand new Mac went for a fully-loaded Mac Mini for $2000, spending another $1000 to gain quad core (and a much faster CPU), much better graphics, memory upgradable past 16gb, and it comes with a gorgeous display - for most people that's a new brainer.

    That said, I'd personally still have opted for a $2000 Mini had a modern processor with a quad-core option been available.
  • Reply 183 of 240
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,827member
    djames4242 said:
    I faced this same dilemma last month and finally decided that I didn't want to spend nearly $1000 on a six-year-old quad-core Mac Mini because of the same concern over future support as you have. Since I tend to keep my machines for roughly seven years, I decided that it was worth spending $3000 on an almost fully-loaded iMac (4.2ghz, 1TB SSD, and 24gb RAM) because I wanted the option of adding more than 16gb or RAM down the road.

    My guess is that this is as much of a reason why the Mini isn't being updated. If those looking for a brand new Mac went for a fully-loaded Mac Mini for $2000, spending another $1000 to gain quad core (and a much faster CPU), much better graphics, memory upgradable past 16gb, and it comes with a gorgeous display - for most people that's a new brainer.

    That said, I'd personally still have opted for a $2000 Mini had a modern processor with a quad-core option been available.
    Yeah, my problem with the iMac, is that I want inputs on my display for other PCs/devices, and already have a monitor. I wouldn't mind the nice display on the iMac (which is better than what I have), but I don't want an all-in-one if I can avoid it. Also, at least in my past experience, the Mini was a bit more reliable under extended load and also more quiet (or at least a tolerable type of noise). But, I don't know about current iMacs, I've just heard they can get kind of loud.

    That would be the sticking point for a modern Mini potentially; the noise. So, I'd be better off with a Mac Pro (2013) in that regard. It just costs a lot more. You do certainly get more for your money with an iMac. It just isn't a great fit for me.
  • Reply 184 of 240
    lorin schultzlorin schultz Posts: 2,454member
    macxpress said:
    macxpress said:
    Even if Apple updated them today with modern specs...how many are gonna actually go buy one?
    I will. All Apple has to do is offer a recent quad-core i7 and I'm in.
    How about maybe an 8-core Apple designed CPU? Would you be interested in that? Just a general question out of curiosity...
    If a mini with an Apple CPU could mainstream software efficiently and be comparable to Intel-based products in terms of how long it takes to complete various tasks, I would buy it. If it means giving up compatibility with the software I use most, or adding a layer of hassle to make it play nice with the rest of the Apple gear in the house, probably not.

    There's also the issue of an Apple CPU supporting Thunderbolt. I haven't yet decided whether or not that would be a deal-breaker for me. Maybe not.
  • Reply 185 of 240
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,681member
    macxpress said:
    macxpress said:
    Even if Apple updated them today with modern specs...how many are gonna actually go buy one?
    I will. All Apple has to do is offer a recent quad-core i7 and I'm in.
    How about maybe an 8-core Apple designed CPU? Would you be interested in that? Just a general question out of curiosity...
    If a mini with an Apple CPU could mainstream software efficiently and be comparable to Intel-based products in terms of how long it takes to complete various tasks, I would buy it. If it means giving up compatibility with the software I use most, or adding a layer of hassle to make it play nice with the rest of the Apple gear in the house, probably not.

    There's also the issue of an Apple CPU supporting Thunderbolt. I haven't yet decided whether or not that would be a deal-breaker for me. Maybe not.
    Perhaps Apple could figure out a way to implement Thunderbolt. Isn't it supposed to be released without a license? Maybe this has already happened?
  • Reply 186 of 240
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,399member
    macxpress said:
    Perhaps Apple could figure out a way to implement Thunderbolt. Isn't it supposed to be released without a license? Maybe this has already happened?
    Given the fact that they co-developed it with Intel, you’d think there would be some leeway.
  • Reply 187 of 240
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,433member
    macxpress said:
    macxpress said:
    macxpress said:
    Even if Apple updated them today with modern specs...how many are gonna actually go buy one?
    I will. All Apple has to do is offer a recent quad-core i7 and I'm in.
    How about maybe an 8-core Apple designed CPU? Would you be interested in that? Just a general question out of curiosity...
    If a mini with an Apple CPU could mainstream software efficiently and be comparable to Intel-based products in terms of how long it takes to complete various tasks, I would buy it. If it means giving up compatibility with the software I use most, or adding a layer of hassle to make it play nice with the rest of the Apple gear in the house, probably not.

    There's also the issue of an Apple CPU supporting Thunderbolt. I haven't yet decided whether or not that would be a deal-breaker for me. Maybe not.
    Perhaps Apple could figure out a way to implement Thunderbolt. Isn't it supposed to be released without a license? Maybe this has already happened?
    If anyone can get Intel to license it to other architectures I'd say it's Apple, but I also don't think it's completely necessary with how far USB has advanced since TB1. Especially if we're taking about a low-end Macs.
  • Reply 188 of 240
    mattinozmattinoz Posts: 956member
    macxpress said:
    macxpress said:
    Even if Apple updated them today with modern specs...how many are gonna actually go buy one?
    I will. All Apple has to do is offer a recent quad-core i7 and I'm in.
    How about maybe an 8-core Apple designed CPU? Would you be interested in that? Just a general question out of curiosity...
    If a mini with an Apple CPU could mainstream software efficiently and be comparable to Intel-based products in terms of how long it takes to complete various tasks, I would buy it. If it means giving up compatibility with the software I use most, or adding a layer of hassle to make it play nice with the rest of the Apple gear in the house, probably not.

    There's also the issue of an Apple CPU supporting Thunderbolt. I haven't yet decided whether or not that would be a deal-breaker for me. Maybe not.
    Apple's CPU already have PCIe bus in them for storage and USBc just need to up the bandwidth to attach the Thunderbolt chip instead of a pure USBc chip.
  • Reply 189 of 240
    I have been selling Mac's since the original. My first Mac was a 128K single floppy drive unit. It went through a number of upgrades before I replaced it. It seems like ages ago but that was 1984, Oh I guess that was ages ago. Anyway it now seems like ages ago since we have seen creativity in hardware from Apple. The Mac Mini is the best example of a loss of creativity and sensitivity to the market of small business computing. I work in a market where we replace Windows PC computers and do not need the full iMac in order to achieve the benefits of Apple's OS for these offices. I often migrate the PC to a Parallels or Fusion installation on the Mac so that they can still access the old PC apps and data if needed. This usually only lasts for a short period before they never use the Windows apps or refer back to the virtual Windows computer. The last rendition of the Mac Mini was a downgrade from previous versions and the 2012 i7 with two hard drives for $999 gave us the most bang for the buck. The performance was good enough to run both environments and with the 16 GB of RAM we could allot enough RAM to each OS. What really helped in convincing the offices we worked with was the fact that they did not have to buy new monitors or keyboards or mice. That saved them money and made the transition cost much lower (sometimes as many as 25 Mac Minis at a time were implemented) and there was less resistance to upgrading to a complete Mac office. Now the current crop of Mac Mini computers is a bit of a stretch especially if you want 16 GB of RAM (which you cannot upgrade yourself - sounds a lot like the closed architecture of my original Mac) and the hard drives are slow unless you upgrade to an SSD drive. The Processor is a dual-core i7 with fairly decent performance but not really current or satisfactory in performance for these offices. For a 3.0GHZ Dual-Core Intel i7 with 16 GB of RAM and a 512GB Flash Storage drive the cost is $1599 (way the heck out of reasonableness). The iMac equivalent is $2199. The i5 version is almost useless in most of these offices unless they only run a few apps and replace the slow 5400 rpm drive with a SSD drive and upgrade the RAM. The cost then becomes really not a comfortable fit for these offices when replacing 5 to 10 computers. So for many small businesses the cost to move to the Mac platform becomes a hinderance and generally we need to convince them to buy the iMac and upgrade them so they are generally spending a lot more. So you can imagine the resistance and negativity that occurs. In my humble opinion Apple has really missed the boat in this market. We need a small footprint Mac with respectable and flexible configurations. Many corporations and small businesses would be much happier and willing to buy these units and supply their own monitors, keyboards, mice and various selections of hard drives and ram configurations. If I was designing this it would have a neat SSD HD slot that could easily allow for a slide in upgraded drive and a simple memory door that would make it really easy to upgrade the RAM to at least 32 GB. Maybe this would be a drive empty case that you simply plugged an external drive on to and obviously connect other drives to as well. Some drives are so small that you could easily have a half inch thick Mac Mini and a small drive and take it too and from work almost like a portable and then plug in your monitor (of preference at home and work) and keyboards or mice as needed. Anyway, I hope Apple starts thinking outside the box again. I miss Steve in many ways and it seems that the creative visionary is missing at Apple currently. Only regarding hardware. Love the OS and progress at this years WWDC.
    maltz
  • Reply 190 of 240
    Thanks for this article. It was a refreshing, well-balanced article.
    I'm one of those people who is looking to jump ship from Windows 10, so I'm keeping an eye out for a Mac Mini refresh.

    Here's hoping we see something soon.
  • Reply 191 of 240
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,518member
    What's this story doing back at the top?

    Is it on some sort of carousel?

    Anyway, my tuppence worth:

    I don't think they're going to do anything with it until the new Mac Pro form factor is ready. I reckon they're going to roll all the headless Macs into a single line.

    edited October 2018
  • Reply 192 of 240
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,835member
    Rayz2016 said:
    What's this story doing back at the top?

    Is it on some sort of carousel?

    Anyway, my tuppence worth:

    I don't think they're going to do anything with it until the new Mac Pro form factor is ready. I reckon they're going to roll all the headless Macs into a single line.

    That's an interesting take.

    Since this article came around again I bought a wee toy for just Steam, nothing else.  It's a mid-sized tower Dell with 32 GB RAM and an 8th generation i7 with a Nvidia GTX 1080 which was not even the highest GPU I could have added in the BTO.  Wasn't expensive at all.  Reading the specs after the fact I discover the GPU trounces the iMac Pro which is $5K!  I love my Macs but boy does Apple need to get with better GPUs or what?  Even the AMD liquid-cooled 64 scores lower and costs $1,700.

    https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1080-vs-AMD-RX-Vega-64/3603vs3933


    edited October 2018
  • Reply 193 of 240
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 3,893administrator
    Rayz2016 said:
    What's this story doing back at the top?

    Is it on some sort of carousel?

    Anyway, my tuppence worth:

    I don't think they're going to do anything with it until the new Mac Pro form factor is ready. I reckon they're going to roll all the headless Macs into a single line.

    FTA: "Editor's note: We first ran this on May 11, hoping that we'd see a Mac mini update at the WWDC. Given that Oct. 17 is the four-year anniversary of the last Mac mini refresh, it seemed timely to bring it up again."
    gatorguy
  • Reply 194 of 240
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,835member
    Rayz2016 said:
    What's this story doing back at the top?

    Is it on some sort of carousel?

    Anyway, my tuppence worth:

    I don't think they're going to do anything with it until the new Mac Pro form factor is ready. I reckon they're going to roll all the headless Macs into a single line.

    FTA: "Editor's note: We first ran this on May 11, hoping that we'd see a Mac mini update at the WWDC. Given that Oct. 17 is the four-year anniversary of the last Mac mini refresh, it seemed timely to bring it up again."
    Seems reasonable although it's a shame the comments from first 'go around' can't be included in some kind of sub set and the new ones rise to the top?
  • Reply 195 of 240
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 3,893administrator
    MacPro said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    What's this story doing back at the top?

    Is it on some sort of carousel?

    Anyway, my tuppence worth:

    I don't think they're going to do anything with it until the new Mac Pro form factor is ready. I reckon they're going to roll all the headless Macs into a single line.

    FTA: "Editor's note: We first ran this on May 11, hoping that we'd see a Mac mini update at the WWDC. Given that Oct. 17 is the four-year anniversary of the last Mac mini refresh, it seemed timely to bring it up again."
    Seems reasonable although it's a shame the comments from first 'go around' can't be included in some kind of sub set and the new ones rise to the top?
    I don't believe our forum software allows for that, but I'll mention it to the web guys.
  • Reply 196 of 240
    The only explanation I can see for not doing a redesign this year (2018) is that it is on hold for the new display — if you look at the manuals and other materials for it, the Mac mini has always been pictured with an Apple display.

    In short: no Apple display = no Mac mini.

    I’d bet Apple has data supporting this equation — the mini doesn’t make them worthwhile money unless a percentage of buyers are also buying an Apple display, or already own one...
  • Reply 197 of 240
    The latest Mac mini is 4 yrs old, the iPad mini 4 is over 3 yrs old. What is it about anything mini that Apple hates? Lol. Seriously. To go that long without at least a minor update to specs is embarrassing. 
  • Reply 198 of 240
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,835member
    The only explanation I can see for not doing a redesign this year (2018) is that it is on hold for the new display — if you look at the manuals and other materials for it, the Mac mini has always been pictured with an Apple display.

    In short: no Apple display = no Mac mini.

    I’d bet Apple has data supporting this equation — the mini doesn’t make them worthwhile money unless a percentage of buyers are also buying an Apple display, or already own one...
    I've never used any display with a Mac mini, always used them headlessly.
  • Reply 199 of 240
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,518member
    Rayz2016 said:
    What's this story doing back at the top?

    Is it on some sort of carousel?

    Anyway, my tuppence worth:

    I don't think they're going to do anything with it until the new Mac Pro form factor is ready. I reckon they're going to roll all the headless Macs into a single line.

    FTA: "Editor's note: We first ran this on May 11, hoping that we'd see a Mac mini update at the WWDC. Given that Oct. 17 is the four-year anniversary of the last Mac mini refresh, it seemed timely to bring it up again."

    Might've been better to put the note underneath the heading, before the date, rather than after the first picture where it might get missed if the browser window is quite small.

    Just a thought.
  • Reply 200 of 240
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,518member

    MacPro said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    What's this story doing back at the top?

    Is it on some sort of carousel?

    Anyway, my tuppence worth:

    I don't think they're going to do anything with it until the new Mac Pro form factor is ready. I reckon they're going to roll all the headless Macs into a single line.

    FTA: "Editor's note: We first ran this on May 11, hoping that we'd see a Mac mini update at the WWDC. Given that Oct. 17 is the four-year anniversary of the last Mac mini refresh, it seemed timely to bring it up again."
    Seems reasonable although it's a shame the comments from first 'go around' can't be included in some kind of sub set and the new ones rise to the top?
    That's a very good idea. 
Sign In or Register to comment.