How to upgrade the RAM on the new 2018 Mac mini

1234568

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 162
    MacPro said:
    rob53 said:
    Just checked MacSales/OWC and their RAM for this model costs $169.99 vs the $200 upgrade price Apple charges ($188 if you qualify for their EPP and (possibly) educational discounts). I use MacSales all the time but regardless of the warranty, the price difference doesn't make sense to me considering the lack of ease in replacing it. Using cheaper RAM is not something I do or recommend so for those who just have to be able to change or upgrade RAM, good luck.

    disclaimer: OWC charges $1079.99 for a full 64GB of RAM vs Apple's $1316 (EPP price) so it might be worth it if you really want to spend that much money on a Mac mini.

    from https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT205041 Couldn't quickly find actual warranty but when Apple says something like this, it sounds to me like they aren't allowing it.

    Applicable models

    • Mac mini (2018)

    To upgrade the memory in your Mac mini (2018), go to an Apple Store or Apple Authorized Service Provider.

    We asked. We're also very clear in our warning about the procedure.
    The fact you have to put back Apple's RAM if you need to go in for a repair should ring alarm bells here!  That's also called deception in my book.  What is the 'guidance' here on what to say if the Apple tech asks if you have replaced the RAM and put the Apple RAM back ...  lie?

    I always have upgraded my RAM (and internal storage) on any Mac I own (I keep them all a long time)  where it is feasible even if difficult.  However, never until my extended warranty is out.  In my case, I make sure I purchase a Mac with the correct configuration for my needs for the two years under coverage.  If you figure out what it costs to take out Apple's RAM and replace within those two years you have to add the two sets of RAM together to get the true cost unless you can get a trade in.  I don't see how that can ever make mathematical sense otherwise.  Two or three years later the cost of RAM has usually fallen enough to make that upgrade cost effective but even then you have to do the math.  For my 2013 Mac Pro, it was nearly four years before that RAM was worth the cost and only then thanks to a trade in.  It obviously varies but Apple never use cheap RAM so the calculations have to take that into account.  On several Mac Mini 2012 models I have, it was a no-brainer to upgrade RAM and HDD to SSD at four years old, same with a 2010 MBP i7 15".  

    So the bottom line is this is a great article to file away for reference in two to three years.
    They fixed my MacBook Pro many times with 3rd party RAM in it, and it always came back with 4GB of their memory and my 16GB wrapped up in the package. However they would not service it when I had removed by optical drive and put the hard drive in that bay and an ssd in the main bay, so I had to install macOS on my iTunes drive and put that back in the main slot, and reinstall my optical drive and drive it back before they’d take it in. I don’t know about “alarm bells”, they literally didn’t care that I had reconfigured my MBP. The safe option is just keep your old RAM around in case you do need to swap it.
    cgWerks
  • Reply 142 of 162


    This is such a dick move from Apple
    Previous version: soldered RAM, people complain.
    New version: slotted RAM, people complain. 

    Look man, if you're not comfortable using screwdrivers, you're not even a real DIY tinkerer, so why even both complaining since this is something only DIY folks do?
    I am an avid tinkerer and maker, thank you. But upgrading RAM shouldn't be this risky for the average user. Apple could've made the RAM easier to access, but they decided otherwise. Which is a dick move.
    The average user is NOT messing with this stuff...
    Dunno why people are backing Apple on this one, it's a lazy implementation of a premium product and a crappy user experience. They managed to block more tinkerers from attempting to upgrade their own RAM. Fewer people will buy it and Apple will end-up discontinuing it.
    It’s much easier than the 2014 (impossible) and the 2012 and earlier models. Have you even ever opened a Mac mini? Sure sounds like you haven’t. They didn’t “block” shit.
  • Reply 143 of 162
    Soli said:
    MacPro said:
    Soli said:
    nht said:
    auxio said:

    This is such a dick move from Apple
    Previous version: soldered RAM, people complain.
    New version: slotted RAM, people complain. 

    Look man, if you're not comfortable using screwdrivers, you're not even a real DIY tinkerer, so why even both complaining since this is something only DIY folks do?
    I am an avid tinkerer and maker, thank you. But upgrading RAM shouldn't be this risky for the average user. Apple could've made the RAM easier to access, but they decided otherwise. Which is a dick move.
    The average user is NOT messing with this stuff...
    Dunno why people are backing Apple on this one, it's a lazy implementation of a premium product and a crappy user experience. They managed to block more tinkerers from attempting to upgrade their own RAM. Fewer people will buy it and Apple will end-up discontinuing it.
    Look, I'm someone who has done very difficult tinkering with computers in the past.  For example, to get more performance out of an old G4 TiBook, I moved one of the resistors on the motherboard which controlled the CPU speed (the hardware equivalent of BIOS overclocking on PCs).

    However, I also am open minded enough to see that I'm in a very small group of people who knows how to do this, cares about it, and/or is willing to spend my time doing it.  And I also understand that it requires extra product design, engineering, and assembly line complexity to include a RAM access panel or similarly easy access.  If this was an Arduino or Raspberry Pi type of device targeted at tinkerers, then I'd definitely question the decision.  But because it's a device targeted at the mass market, I completely understand why it was made.
    So you're saying that for a device to be user upgradable it must to fall in the category of an Arduino. Gotcha!
    Apple could've easily made the bottom twistable, or require a standard screwdriver, or even better, no screws at all, no hidden access points. Any combination of these efforts, which Apple has done beautifully in the past, would've kept the same circuitry yet made the RAM accessible.
    Quit whining...the video doesn't look hard and you only need to do this maybe once.
    While I don't understand Apple's reasoning for milling a hollow aluminum shell when they could cut costs and make it easier to design, assemble, and repair, this is probably one of the easiest Mac minis with this styling to work on.

    I think the earliest ones had RAM bays fully accessible from the bottom without removing the logic board, but as iFixit notes it's easy to remove and doesn't require specialized parts. Access to the RAM is step 5 on their teardown.
    I have several 2012 Mac minis and RAM was a 2-minute job.  Now the HDD swapping to an SSD was a bitch!
    I have a 2014 Mac mini that could use my old 2.5" SSD but I don't want to go through the effort of digging down to that HDD.
    I just did one at my office, took 20 mins or so. Really not that difficult.
  • Reply 144 of 162
    taddtadd Posts: 93member
    I'm really confused by the positions you all are taking.  Apple has always had the right to tell somebody about the damage they did to the computer received for repair.  Sometimes they didn't pursue that right.  Sometimes they did. 

    There is a great reason to restore a computer to spec before servicing it.  For one thing, all of the test-cases and procedures the techs want to use are appropriate.  If something not-normal is present, they have to have the expertise to know what that means.  If everything is "normal", then they don't need expertise, just procedure.  There is a place for techs having full knowledge of the art they are working in.  Generally speaking I would think a repair shop that services 1000s of units a day is not such a place.  It would be either boring (for the talent to have to follow the procedures), or it would be expensive and/or transient, because people who are better than the procedures will not want to be bored and so they will leave.  You want procedures because if the techs don't follow the procedures, the documentation becomes way more difficult to manage.  Good documentation and good procedures makes things less expensive and you need things to be less expensive to cut costs, and make other things possible in the business. 


    philboogie
  • Reply 145 of 162
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,027member
    bkkcanuck said:
    Apple's memory tends to be just rebranded memory available retail through other chains.  When I upgraded my 2009 Mac Minis Apple was basically just using Micron/Crucial memory - so to stay using the same brand I just ordered my upgrades from Crucial.  This time I would have to order some brand through NewEgg since they seem to have rather cheap shipping (it is actually cheaper for me to order small components from NewEgg even though they tend to be manufactured a stones throw away here in Asia).  
    Yeah, my point was that OWC RAM is as good or better, and almost certainly easier in terms of service if something happens (they ship you new RAM and you return the old), well, if you're in the USA.

    But, I'm international from them too (Canada), so the costs go up with exchange rate and shipping, and I wouldn't have the 'advanced replacement' w/o some hoop jumping... making the via Apple option more attractive.

    The problem with Apple is that you'd probably have to return the unit and/or go through a bunch of layers of tech support or visits to the Apple store to (hopefully) get a RAM issue resolved. With OWC (at least in the USA), you just open a support ticket and swap it with almost no loss of use. I've had to do it both ways over the years (when I lived in the US), and loved OWC for the service aspect.

    Why would I upgrade the RAM on the new mac mini?  It's new.  Follow up question would be why does Apple sell a device that needs a RAM upgrade?
    Huh? Different people have different needs in terms of how much RAM they need in their machine. I'm not understanding your questions... they don't make much sense.

    MacPro said:
    The fact you have to put back Apple's RAM if you need to go in for a repair should ring alarm bells here!  That's also called deception in my book.  What is the 'guidance' here on what to say if the Apple tech asks if you have replaced the RAM and put the Apple RAM back ...  lie?
    No, they don't care if you change the RAM or not. But they don't want to try and service the machine with 3rd party RAM in it. If it is the RAM that is the issue, then they shouldn't have to deal with it. So, it's a good idea (see above) to get the RAM from a place that makes it easy to swap for new, so you can rule the RAM out. Then, just put Apple's RAM back in and let them deal with it from there, but you know it isn't the RAM (and since it's then their RAM, they have to deal with the thing as a whole).

    bloggerblog said:
    Dunno why people are backing Apple on this one, it's a lazy implementation of a premium product and a crappy user experience. They managed to block more tinkerers from attempting to upgrade their own RAM. Fewer people will buy it and Apple will end-up discontinuing it.
    I don't think tinkerers make up enough of the market for it for Apple to care. I'm going to guess that the new mini will sell quite well, and the majority of purchases won't be tinkerers. IMO, it's Apple's best cost/performance computer right now.
  • Reply 146 of 162
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 31,471member
    macxpress said:
    wreighven said:
    Melgross that is incorrect. Read the article. It explicitly states this process does NOT void the warranty. Only if you break something do you have a problem...

    Your last sentence (question) is a good one though. Seeing how involved this is, I'd consider just biting the bullet and getting "more" RAM at time of purchase.
    melgross said:
    Since Apple isn’t advocating doing this, it voids the warrantee if you screw up. Don’t forget that. Is it worth it for cheaper RAM?

    It only voids the warranty if you break something in the process of swapping out the RAM which is no different from any other Mac with something that was user serviceable with any part. 
    I’ve already said that numerous times. It’s the difficulty that some people have with this that’s the problem. I’ve had people replace memory, and break the socket because they put the memory in backwards, and pushed too hard.

    you know, it’s not really difficult to understand what I’m saying. We’ve always had the problem of removing third party memory when bringing a Mac in that had a problem - even if it had nothing to do with the memory. That’s on machines that Apple expressly stated that memory could be user replaced, and gave instructions on how to do so. But if you break something, the warranty is usually voided.

    obviously, if you replace the memory successfully, then everything is fine, and if later, something else fails, you put the original memory back (hopefully also successfully) before you bring it in for repair, you should be ok.
    edited November 2018 cgWerks
  • Reply 147 of 162
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,027member
    lorin schultz said:
    That approach would have me struggling with insufficient RAM for two or three years. By the time you get around to increasing the RAM capacity, you're at the point where it's probably time to be thinking about whether other component developments have advanced enough to justify replacing the whole machine.

    I'd rather get all the RAM I'm likely to need on Day One, and enjoy the full potential of the machine while the other components are still current.
    Well, also, one might not need as much RAM today as they do in a few years. App requirements often need more and more over the years, including OS. But, sometimes the apps and/or projects one works on need more RAM down the road.

    StrangeDays said:
    Yes, they are mutually exclusive design criteria. Older PCs and notebooks were much easier to work on because of laxer thermal constraints and generally simpler hardware designs based on lower capabilities. It's exactly the same as with cars (and software actually). Our new machines do more, and are much more complicated, and are harder to service. It's not coincidence, it's a direct result.

    As a former PC tech and current software dev, this just strikes me as common sense but so many seem to struggle with it.
    So, you're saying if Apple designed it with accessible RAM, it would be slow and have low battery life? You'll have to walk me through that one.

    auxio said:
    Try to name any other mass market electronic device or appliance which is designed to have the hardware components within it be user upgradeable (TV, stereo, microwave oven, dishwasher, refrigerator, etc).  Like it or not, mass market computers are appliances for the vast majority of people (users).
    I don't think a fair comparison of a Mac is with a microwave, though... how about comparing with computers by other makers? I don't much care if it's upgradable or not, so I don't have a horse in the race. But, I think Apple could do a better job of it on most of their models, if they actually wanted to.

    auxio said:
    And how much is your time worth?  You expect to get paid well enough to live decently for whatever you do for a living, so why can't others demand the same?  I don't know about the cost of setting up and maintaining that assembly line relative to the number of people who will choose to buy a Mac Mini which isn't the standard configuration.  However, the hourly wage of a service technician (plus training, benefits, the cost of providing the space where they work, tools, etc) certainly isn't negligible.
    Fair point, but I'm not sure what it has to do with Apple's exaggerated cost of RAM. It doesn't cost any more to install two 8 GB DIMMs as it does to install two 64 GB DIMMs. And, if it adds a bit to track it and such, it certainly doesn't equate to those kind of prices. The explanation is up-sell profit margins. That's Apple's decision, but let's be honest about it. (i.e.: There isn't someone on the assembly line tearing down the 8GB model and swapping in 64GB... and if there is, Tim needs to be fired.)
  • Reply 148 of 162
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,027member
    lorin schultz said:
    Apple is not using exotic RAM components. They buy from the same sources as everyone else. They may be selective about QC levels, but there's no magic fairy dust.
    That’s your uneducated guess.
    Well, my educated observational experience (at least from machines I've owned and/or upgraded), is that Apple doesn't always even use as good of RAM as the top end 3rd party stuff, which is less money than Apple charges. :)

    mdriftmeyer said:
    Three days ago it wasn't yet available, but it is exactly the memory I was alluding to being over $1100 for the upgrade. So just buy the system with the 64GB from Apple and be done with it. Any failures will be on their end.
    Yeah, I guess for $300, one would have to consider that kind of carefully. It isn't like it's $thousands or something. But, for someone who knows what they are doing, they are probably saving like $200 even if their time is taken into consideration. Even I would have expected the difference to be more than that... so Apple's prices aren't exaggerated as much as they have been in the past.
  • Reply 149 of 162
    auxio said:
    auxio said:

    auxio said:
    auxio said:
    [...] Turned out that the RAM I bought didn't have error correction/ECC and the heat sinks on it were much smaller, one of which was the cause of my crashes.  This was the reason that the RAM Apple used was a lot more expensive.  The devil is in the details.
    Good point.

    Of course the comparisons in this thread ARE for identical RAM. Apple is charging almost twice as much as Crucial et al for exactly the same component.
    And so you're either paying for the extra assembly line needed to build the machine, or you're paying for a service technician's time to install it.  You do understand that, when you get someone else to do something for you, it's always going to cost a fair bit more than if you do it yourself right?  People don't seem to have a problem paying extra for home renos/repairs, car repairs, etc.  But they'll scream from the rooftops if it's for their computer.
    Yes, I understand the points you've made. Your philosophical view ignores the very obvious practical reality. The issue is not that it costs more, but how MUCH more.
    And how much is your time worth?  You expect to get paid well enough to live decently for whatever you do for a living, so why can't others demand the same?  I don't know about the cost of setting up and maintaining that assembly line relative to the number of people who will choose to buy a Mac Mini which isn't the standard configuration.  However, the hourly wage of a service technician (plus training, benefits, the cost of providing the space where they work, tools, etc) certainly isn't negligible.
    Yet HP manages to offer its quite excellent Z-series workstations at prices roughly equivalent to Apple's pro line, AND offer upgrades at prices close to "going rate."

    I mention this not to suggest that Apple and HP are equivalent, but simply to refute the argument that Apple's upgrade prices are extremely high because cost recovery makes them so. I can't imagine other suppliers are realizing lower assembly costs than Apple, yet they don't impose such premiums on custom configurations.
    It would truly be interesting to see if Apple's assembly lines are more expensive due to their concern about things like environmental impact (use of recycled materials, where power comes from, where waste goes, etc) and labour conditions (no child labour, maximum number of hours per week, etc).  I'm not trying to make excuses for the higher costs, but it's so easy to just dismiss everything Apple does as being driven by profit motive alone.
    Hmm, I hadn't thought about that. You may be on to something.
  • Reply 150 of 162

    auxio said:

    auxio said:
    auxio said:
    [...] Turned out that the RAM I bought didn't have error correction/ECC and the heat sinks on it were much smaller, one of which was the cause of my crashes.  This was the reason that the RAM Apple used was a lot more expensive.  The devil is in the details.
    Good point.

    Of course the comparisons in this thread ARE for identical RAM. Apple is charging almost twice as much as Crucial et al for exactly the same component.
    And so you're either paying for the extra assembly line needed to build the machine, or you're paying for a service technician's time to install it.  You do understand that, when you get someone else to do something for you, it's always going to cost a fair bit more than if you do it yourself right?  People don't seem to have a problem paying extra for home renos/repairs, car repairs, etc.  But they'll scream from the rooftops if it's for their computer.
    Yes, I understand the points you've made. Your philosophical view ignores the very obvious practical reality. The issue is not that it costs more, but how MUCH more.
    In order to question how MUCH more, one should put the photos of both original Apple RAM and OEM's RAM side by side, matching all the specifics as can be read on the photos along with OEM RAM's street price, then ask "why?" also taking into account labor costs.

    I forgot how many times I heard in my Mac life since 1984 "those are not suited to Macs, Apple uses those ones, which are more expensive..."
    Apple is not using exotic RAM components. They buy from the same sources as everyone else. They may be selective about QC levels, but there's no magic fairy dust.
    I really should dig out my old Mac Pro and take pictures of the difference in the size of the heat sinks on the cheaper RAM modules I bought vs the ones on the modules Apple used.  I remember I tried to find the exact model of RAM which came with the machine, but none of the generic RAM sales websites carried it (only OWC).  It's not magic fairy dust, but they appear to sometimes get specialized models (for whatever reason) which aren't sold via the mass market.
    Don't bother. You're right about that case. Up until around ~2008-ish there were issues specifically with people having trouble with RAM for the Mac Pro cheesgrater. I'm not aware of (or at least can't recall) any similar cases with other models or since then. Of course, I could be wrong. Its been known to happen from time to all the time.
    cgWerks
  • Reply 151 of 162


    auxio said:
    auxio said:
    [...] Turned out that the RAM I bought didn't have error correction/ECC and the heat sinks on it were much smaller, one of which was the cause of my crashes.  This was the reason that the RAM Apple used was a lot more expensive.  The devil is in the details.
    Good point.

    Of course the comparisons in this thread ARE for identical RAM. Apple is charging almost twice as much as Crucial et al for exactly the same component.
    And so you're either paying for the extra assembly line needed to build the machine, or you're paying for a service technician's time to install it.  You do understand that, when you get someone else to do something for you, it's always going to cost a fair bit more than if you do it yourself right?  People don't seem to have a problem paying extra for home renos/repairs, car repairs, etc.  But they'll scream from the rooftops if it's for their computer.
    Yes, I understand the points you've made. Your philosophical view ignores the very obvious practical reality. The issue is not that it costs more, but how MUCH more.
    In order to question how MUCH more, one should put the photos of both original Apple RAM and OEM's RAM side by side, matching all the specifics as can be read on the photos along with OEM RAM's street price, then ask "why?" also taking into account labor costs.

    I forgot how many times I heard in my Mac life since 1984 "those are not suited to Macs, Apple uses those ones, which are more expensive..."
    Apple is not using exotic RAM components. They buy from the same sources as everyone else. They may be selective about QC levels, but there's no magic fairy dust.
    That’s your uneducated guess.
    Fair enough, but a guess based on years of reading as much as I can about the tools that affect my work. I can't cite any specific examples now, but over the years there have been many pages written evaluating Apple's components, and all concluded the same way -- Apple sometimes has special relationships with vendors, Apple sometimes throws money at vendors to get what they want, Apple sometimes corners the market on certain parts, but not once has a dig found any indication that Apple's RAM is anything other than off-the-shelf stock. Same with hard drives.
  • Reply 152 of 162

    MacPro said:
    auxio said:

    auxio said:
    auxio said:
    [...] Turned out that the RAM I bought didn't have error correction/ECC and the heat sinks on it were much smaller, one of which was the cause of my crashes.  This was the reason that the RAM Apple used was a lot more expensive.  The devil is in the details.
    Good point.

    Of course the comparisons in this thread ARE for identical RAM. Apple is charging almost twice as much as Crucial et al for exactly the same component.
    And so you're either paying for the extra assembly line needed to build the machine, or you're paying for a service technician's time to install it.  You do understand that, when you get someone else to do something for you, it's always going to cost a fair bit more than if you do it yourself right?  People don't seem to have a problem paying extra for home renos/repairs, car repairs, etc.  But they'll scream from the rooftops if it's for their computer.
    Yes, I understand the points you've made. Your philosophical view ignores the very obvious practical reality. The issue is not that it costs more, but how MUCH more.
    In order to question how MUCH more, one should put the photos of both original Apple RAM and OEM's RAM side by side, matching all the specifics as can be read on the photos along with OEM RAM's street price, then ask "why?" also taking into account labor costs.

    I forgot how many times I heard in my Mac life since 1984 "those are not suited to Macs, Apple uses those ones, which are more expensive..."
    Apple is not using exotic RAM components. They buy from the same sources as everyone else. They may be selective about QC levels, but there's no magic fairy dust.
    I really should dig out my old Mac Pro and take pictures of the difference in the size of the heat sinks on the cheaper RAM modules I bought vs the ones on the modules Apple used.  I remember I tried to find the exact model of RAM which came with the machine, but none of the generic RAM sales websites carried it (only OWC).  It's not magic fairy dust, but they appear to sometimes get specialized models (for whatever reason) which aren't sold via the mass market.
    You think that's bad.  The new post late 2013 Mac Pros have everything esoteric and only years after release even had OWC parts available.  That said the specs are outstanding on all parts.  I already upgraded my late 2013 Mac Pro, however, I won't again as I hope the new model will be with us next year and I so want USB-C / TB3 like my MBP and MBA have!

    When I write late 2013 it seems like yesterday but wow what a hell of a long time to wait for a new model Mac Pro!
    OWC had RAM almost immediately after the Mac Pro was released, because it was a standard configuration. It was only the storage blade that took a long time to materialize.
  • Reply 153 of 162

    Soli said:
    Soli said:
    MacPro said:
    Soli said:
    MacPro said:
    Soli said:
    MacPro said:
    Soli said:
    nht said:
    auxio said:

    This is such a dick move from Apple
    Previous version: soldered RAM, people complain.
    New version: slotted RAM, people complain. 

    Look man, if you're not comfortable using screwdrivers, you're not even a real DIY tinkerer, so why even both complaining since this is something only DIY folks do?
    I am an avid tinkerer and maker, thank you. But upgrading RAM shouldn't be this risky for the average user. Apple could've made the RAM easier to access, but they decided otherwise. Which is a dick move.
    The average user is NOT messing with this stuff...
    Dunno why people are backing Apple on this one, it's a lazy implementation of a premium product and a crappy user experience. They managed to block more tinkerers from attempting to upgrade their own RAM. Fewer people will buy it and Apple will end-up discontinuing it.
    Look, I'm someone who has done very difficult tinkering with computers in the past.  For example, to get more performance out of an old G4 TiBook, I moved one of the resistors on the motherboard which controlled the CPU speed (the hardware equivalent of BIOS overclocking on PCs).

    However, I also am open minded enough to see that I'm in a very small group of people who knows how to do this, cares about it, and/or is willing to spend my time doing it.  And I also understand that it requires extra product design, engineering, and assembly line complexity to include a RAM access panel or similarly easy access.  If this was an Arduino or Raspberry Pi type of device targeted at tinkerers, then I'd definitely question the decision.  But because it's a device targeted at the mass market, I completely understand why it was made.
    So you're saying that for a device to be user upgradable it must to fall in the category of an Arduino. Gotcha!
    Apple could've easily made the bottom twistable, or require a standard screwdriver, or even better, no screws at all, no hidden access points. Any combination of these efforts, which Apple has done beautifully in the past, would've kept the same circuitry yet made the RAM accessible.
    Quit whining...the video doesn't look hard and you only need to do this maybe once.
    While I don't understand Apple's reasoning for milling a hollow aluminum shell when they could cut costs and make it easier to design, assemble, and repair, this is probably one of the easiest Mac minis with this styling to work on.

    I think the earliest ones had RAM bays fully accessible from the bottom without removing the logic board, but as iFixit notes it's easy to remove and doesn't require specialized parts. Access to the RAM is step 5 on their teardown.
    I have several 2012 Mac minis and RAM was a 2-minute job.  Now the HDD swapping to an SSD was a bitch!
    I have a 2014 Mac mini that could use my old 2.5" SSD but I don't want to go through the effort of digging down to that HDD.
    I am not 100% but I think the 2014 model is even more of a bitch to change the HHD out.  I kick myself that when I had my 2012's open I didn't just add a SATA extender and take the connection outside.  I could then so easily have swapped out and upsized the SSDs over time.  
    As I recall, that was only an option if you also got that SSD for a Fusion Drive setup.
    I don't follow?  Maybe you misunderstood me or I phrased it badly.  If I extend the internal bus SATA interface on any Mac or PC  and stick an SSD on the end the computer doesn't know the SSD isn't inside, what difference does it make where the actual physical drive is?  In fact, I am looking at several Dell Server towers with cables trapped in the side door and SSDs on the ends they are booted into.  It makes changing out boot drives so easy, although with a PC you do have to mess with EFI/BIOS not so with a Mac.
    It seems like it doesn't have the PCIe-like port built-into the board, like with other Macs of its time. You have to buy a separate cable that will work from the designated port to convert to the PCIe-like setup for Apple's SSDs, but I don't think those were available when I bought it which is why I didn't think it was possible.

    If I understand correctly what that adapter does, it's only required if you want to use the "blade" type SSD. If all he's connecting is a "standard" 2.5" SATA SSD, that could be done with a simple extender, couldn't it?
    Yes, because they'd be both be SATA drives, but as stated it's a bitch to get to, especially in those 2014 models.

    Knowing the adapter exists, if it requires considerably less teardown (even without factoring in how much faster a PCIe-based connector and SSD stick would be) I'd heavily consider the cost of the adapter and a SSD stick.
    The stick in the 2014 isn't much faster than a SATA SSD. Mine has the Apple-supplied PCIe SSD, and it measures around 650-ish r/w.
  • Reply 154 of 162

    MacPro said:

    auxio said:
    auxio said:
    [...] Turned out that the RAM I bought didn't have error correction/ECC and the heat sinks on it were much smaller, one of which was the cause of my crashes.  This was the reason that the RAM Apple used was a lot more expensive.  The devil is in the details.
    Good point.

    Of course the comparisons in this thread ARE for identical RAM. Apple is charging almost twice as much as Crucial et al for exactly the same component.
    And so you're either paying for the extra assembly line needed to build the machine, or you're paying for a service technician's time to install it.  You do understand that, when you get someone else to do something for you, it's always going to cost a fair bit more than if you do it yourself right?  People don't seem to have a problem paying extra for home renos/repairs, car repairs, etc.  But they'll scream from the rooftops if it's for their computer.
    Yes, I understand the points you've made. Your philosophical view ignores the very obvious practical reality. The issue is not that it costs more, but how MUCH more.
    In order to question how MUCH more, one should put the photos of both original Apple RAM and OEM's RAM side by side, matching all the specifics as can be read on the photos along with OEM RAM's street price, then ask "why?" also taking into account labor costs.

    I forgot how many times I heard in my Mac life since 1984 "those are not suited to Macs, Apple uses those ones, which are more expensive..."
    Apple is not using exotic RAM components. They buy from the same sources as everyone else. They may be selective about QC levels, but there's no magic fairy dust.
    That's certainly not true for the new Mac Pro.  Check the specs out for yourself.  Apple used very specialized RAM and SSDs.  When I updated the fairy dust fell all over the invoice too!  ;)
    Storage yes, RAM no. It was expensive, but it wasn't unique or special. It cost that much from ANY supplier (which was a drag).

    The graphics cards on the other hand... :)
  • Reply 155 of 162

    tadd said:
    The Mac Mini 2014 made it so if we didn't buy enough RAM, at time-of-computer-purchase, for 4 or 8 years in the future, we were screwed.
    With a capacity of only 16GB, there wasn't a lot of room for later improvement so it didn't really matter much.

    That the new one can be upgraded is reason to celebrate, that the system ALLOWS for more is even more exciting!
    cgWerks
  • Reply 156 of 162
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,141member

    MacPro said:

    auxio said:
    auxio said:
    [...] Turned out that the RAM I bought didn't have error correction/ECC and the heat sinks on it were much smaller, one of which was the cause of my crashes.  This was the reason that the RAM Apple used was a lot more expensive.  The devil is in the details.
    Good point.

    Of course the comparisons in this thread ARE for identical RAM. Apple is charging almost twice as much as Crucial et al for exactly the same component.
    And so you're either paying for the extra assembly line needed to build the machine, or you're paying for a service technician's time to install it.  You do understand that, when you get someone else to do something for you, it's always going to cost a fair bit more than if you do it yourself right?  People don't seem to have a problem paying extra for home renos/repairs, car repairs, etc.  But they'll scream from the rooftops if it's for their computer.
    Yes, I understand the points you've made. Your philosophical view ignores the very obvious practical reality. The issue is not that it costs more, but how MUCH more.
    In order to question how MUCH more, one should put the photos of both original Apple RAM and OEM's RAM side by side, matching all the specifics as can be read on the photos along with OEM RAM's street price, then ask "why?" also taking into account labor costs.

    I forgot how many times I heard in my Mac life since 1984 "those are not suited to Macs, Apple uses those ones, which are more expensive..."
    Apple is not using exotic RAM components. They buy from the same sources as everyone else. They may be selective about QC levels, but there's no magic fairy dust.
    That's certainly not true for the new Mac Pro.  Check the specs out for yourself.  Apple used very specialized RAM and SSDs.  When I updated the fairy dust fell all over the invoice too!  ;)
    Storage yes, RAM no. It was expensive, but it wasn't unique or special. It cost that much from ANY supplier (which was a drag).

    The graphics cards on the other hand... :)
    It's a while ago so I believe you, I probably waited for both RAM and storage to be available. 
  • Reply 157 of 162
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,141member
    cgWerks said:
    bkkcanuck said:
    Apple's memory tends to be just rebranded memory available retail through other chains.  When I upgraded my 2009 Mac Minis Apple was basically just using Micron/Crucial memory - so to stay using the same brand I just ordered my upgrades from Crucial.  This time I would have to order some brand through NewEgg since they seem to have rather cheap shipping (it is actually cheaper for me to order small components from NewEgg even though they tend to be manufactured a stones throw away here in Asia).  
    Yeah, my point was that OWC RAM is as good or better, and almost certainly easier in terms of service if something happens (they ship you new RAM and you return the old), well, if you're in the USA.

    But, I'm international from them too (Canada), so the costs go up with exchange rate and shipping, and I wouldn't have the 'advanced replacement' w/o some hoop jumping... making the via Apple option more attractive.

    The problem with Apple is that you'd probably have to return the unit and/or go through a bunch of layers of tech support or visits to the Apple store to (hopefully) get a RAM issue resolved. With OWC (at least in the USA), you just open a support ticket and swap it with almost no loss of use. I've had to do it both ways over the years (when I lived in the US), and loved OWC for the service aspect.

    Why would I upgrade the RAM on the new mac mini?  It's new.  Follow up question would be why does Apple sell a device that needs a RAM upgrade?
    Huh? Different people have different needs in terms of how much RAM they need in their machine. I'm not understanding your questions... they don't make much sense.

    MacPro said:
    The fact you have to put back Apple's RAM if you need to go in for a repair should ring alarm bells here!  That's also called deception in my book.  What is the 'guidance' here on what to say if the Apple tech asks if you have replaced the RAM and put the Apple RAM back ...  lie?
    No, they don't care if you change the RAM or not. But they don't want to try and service the machine with 3rd party RAM in it. If it is the RAM that is the issue, then they shouldn't have to deal with it. So, it's a good idea (see above) to get the RAM from a place that makes it easy to swap for new, so you can rule the RAM out. Then, just put Apple's RAM back in and let them deal with it from there, but you know it isn't the RAM (and since it's then their RAM, they have to deal with the thing as a whole).

    bloggerblog said:
    Dunno why people are backing Apple on this one, it's a lazy implementation of a premium product and a crappy user experience. They managed to block more tinkerers from attempting to upgrade their own RAM. Fewer people will buy it and Apple will end-up discontinuing it.
    I don't think tinkerers make up enough of the market for it for Apple to care. I'm going to guess that the new mini will sell quite well, and the majority of purchases won't be tinkerers. IMO, it's Apple's best cost/performance computer right now.
    Hey what do I know, I just ran a load of Apple Dealerships for years.  You did too I assume?
  • Reply 158 of 162
    MacPro said:

    MacPro said:

    auxio said:
    auxio said:
    [...] Turned out that the RAM I bought didn't have error correction/ECC and the heat sinks on it were much smaller, one of which was the cause of my crashes.  This was the reason that the RAM Apple used was a lot more expensive.  The devil is in the details.
    Good point.

    Of course the comparisons in this thread ARE for identical RAM. Apple is charging almost twice as much as Crucial et al for exactly the same component.
    And so you're either paying for the extra assembly line needed to build the machine, or you're paying for a service technician's time to install it.  You do understand that, when you get someone else to do something for you, it's always going to cost a fair bit more than if you do it yourself right?  People don't seem to have a problem paying extra for home renos/repairs, car repairs, etc.  But they'll scream from the rooftops if it's for their computer.
    Yes, I understand the points you've made. Your philosophical view ignores the very obvious practical reality. The issue is not that it costs more, but how MUCH more.
    In order to question how MUCH more, one should put the photos of both original Apple RAM and OEM's RAM side by side, matching all the specifics as can be read on the photos along with OEM RAM's street price, then ask "why?" also taking into account labor costs.

    I forgot how many times I heard in my Mac life since 1984 "those are not suited to Macs, Apple uses those ones, which are more expensive..."
    Apple is not using exotic RAM components. They buy from the same sources as everyone else. They may be selective about QC levels, but there's no magic fairy dust.
    That's certainly not true for the new Mac Pro.  Check the specs out for yourself.  Apple used very specialized RAM and SSDs.  When I updated the fairy dust fell all over the invoice too!  ;)
    Storage yes, RAM no. It was expensive, but it wasn't unique or special. It cost that much from ANY supplier (which was a drag).

    The graphics cards on the other hand... :)
    It's a while ago so I believe you, I probably waited for both RAM and storage to be available. 
    When you said it was a while ago, it reminded me that we didn't get ours right away. We got ours around October or November of 2014, so almost a year after launch. That means I don't actually know what was available for RAM when it first came out, only that it was readily available from all the majors by the time we got ours.
  • Reply 159 of 162
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,027member
    MacPro said:
    Hey what do I know, I just ran a load of Apple Dealerships for years.  You did too I assume?
    So, you ran several Apple Stores? I could care less what the policies of some 3rd party stores selling/supporting Apple stuff were.
    I always (up until recently) bought machines with base RAM and put 3rd party RAM in. I've taken my machines in for service on several occasions (and machines the company I worked for, purchased). Never had an issue.

    (Or, maybe the San Francisco and Palo Alto stores are different than the rest? Or, maybe they noticed I met Steve there once, and said.... 'hey, you'd better fix that guy's computer even if he swapped the RAM... he knows Steve. :)  Or, maybe that was back when Apple Stores had real geniuses and real service? But, I assume you ran the stores years ago too, the way you're talking.)

    If they asked if I had used 3rd party RAM, why would I lie? I'd just tell them I did, but put back the original RAM to aid in their testing. I'd have (if it seemed like a RAM issue) already swapped out the 3rd party RAM by then, having ruled RAM out anyway.
  • Reply 160 of 162
    I just went through the process and took my 2018 Mac mini from 8GB RAM to 32GB RAM.  This is so easy.  Can you watch a video?  Can you use a screwdriver?  Can you follow basic instructions?  If you answer yes to theses three things, then do this on your own.  Anyone thinking it is too hard, or too complicated probably has a hard time putting a car in reverse, or scrambling eggs.  Yes there are people like that and if you're one of them, then certainly buy the amount of RAM you need up front.  But for the 99 percent of humanity that has most of their marbles, do this yourself.
    edited March 29
Sign In or Register to comment.