2014 Mac mini Wishlist

2456777

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 1528
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    Edited posted to change instead to PM. Please delete.
  • Reply 22 of 1528
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    I am back. I was out of commission due to Hurricane Sandy but am back online. SemiAccurate reported something called the Small Business Advantage that they were building into the Haswell processors. This I think will only be best with Windows and not Mac though.
  • Reply 23 of 1528
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    winter wrote: »
    I am back. I was out of commission due to Hurricane Sandy but am back online. SemiAccurate reported something called the Small Business Advantage that they were building into the Haswell processors. This I think will only be best with Windows and not Mac though.

    I don't see SBA being an advantage for anybody. It has more negatives for users than positives.

    By the way I hope things are going well with the Hurricane recovery in your area. All we got was a bit of wind and lots of rain.
  • Reply 24 of 1528
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    Thanks for the kind words wizard. Yeah damage wasn't too bad where I am (Neptune, NJ), and I only lost power for four days. The worst part was not so much not having a TV or computer, that's nothing. It was not being able to wash and dry clothes or get gas. A friend got me some on Wednesday (2.5 hour wait standing in line with cans) and then I filled my tank on Friday (only a 45 minute wait and I was able to sit in my car and listen to the radio).

    Getting back to the topic at hand, yeah I agree SBA won't help anyone and who knows why they are implementing it. Still I think we are a bit away from Apple implementing their own processors in the Mini. Might take until Skylake/Skymont.
  • Reply 25 of 1528
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    winter wrote: »
    Thanks for the kind words wizard. Yeah damage wasn't too bad where I am (Neptune, NJ), and I only lost power for four days. The worst part was not so much not having a TV or computer, that's nothing. It was not being able to wash and dry clothes or get gas. A friend got me some on Wednesday (2.5 hour wait standing in line with cans) and then I filled my tank on Friday (only a 45 minute wait and I was able to sit in my car and listen to the radio).
    Getting back to the topic at hand, yeah I agree SBA won't help anyone and who knows why they are implementing it. Still I think we are a bit away from Apple implementing their own processors in the Mini. Might take until Skylake/Skymont.

    This idea of Apple implementing their own processors in the Mini is interesting but has more than a few negatives associated with it. Right now you can boot the Mini up into any OS you want from Windows to Linux to BSD. That is a huge advantage and I'm actually seeing Minis embedded into machines and instrumentation now as it has the right combination of power and size. It is almost like the Mini has become a standardized component.

    On the other hand if Apple can deliver a Mini with six to twelve ARM 64 processors next year, with the whole platform running on ten watts or less it will be an incredible advance forward. For use at home I wouldn't have any problem at all with such a machine given that it is just as fast as today's hardware. For Apple though it would be a big gamble, mainly due to the lost of even more of the professional crowd.

    The big unknown here is how aggressive Intel will be competing here. They really need to loose some of the legacy functionality in i86 so that the design can be streamlined as much as possible but I don't think they have the balls to do it. ARM 64 on sub 28nm processes will be very interesting indeed.
  • Reply 26 of 1528
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    I think Intel will start to be aggressive since they cannot just sit on their hands with ARM in the processor field. AMD right now is lacking with CPUs but not with GPUs. ARM will get bigger if Intel does not do something.
  • Reply 27 of 1528
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    winter wrote: »
    I think Intel will start to be aggressive since they cannot just sit on their hands with ARM in the processor field. AMD right now is lacking with CPUs but not with GPUs. ARM will get bigger if Intel does not do something.

    ARM is the first real processor to impact Intel in a significant way in years. It is a bit shocking that Intel is missing sales numbers for the first time in years. If one just looks at iPad, over the last couple of years it has taken 100 million in potential Intel sales. Combine that with the impact of smart phones and AMD offer really good value at the low end and you have a hurting giant.
  • Reply 28 of 1528
    rbrrbr Posts: 631member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    What makes you think that the Mac Mini is anywhere near being discontinued? Of course there will be a Haswell model.





    What I'd really like to see is a Goldilocks model  (Pro is too big, Mini is too small, this one is just right). I'll call it a Mac Midi. It would have a discreet GPU, 32 GB RAM capability, at least one, and preferably more than one PCIe slots, perhaps for a graphics card, but so you could put a bootable PCIe SSD in it to get some real speed. It would also use a 3 1/2 inch hard drive with space for two which would allow you to choose a wide variety of drives to install. I really don't care if Apple drops the optical drive. If you need one, a full size external one is readily available that is better than the ones Apple supplies and usually costs less too.


     


    Haswell is supposed to have a much reduced power profile which should help keep the cooling requirements modest.


     


    It should have two Thunderbolt ports, preferably TB II, as well as a bunch of USB 3 ports and one FW800 port for legacy devices.


     


    Such a unit, I believe, would suit the needs of a great many current Apple users who are constrained by the iMac and don't really need a full blown workstation.


     


    Frankly, it would not be very hard for Apple to produce such a model. Most of the heavy lifting on motherboard design has been/will be done by Intel (one of the benefits of using their products) in their reference design motherboards and support chip sets. About all Apple really needs to do is come up with a suitable motherboard, wrap some sort of case around it, ship a bunch of them and listen to all the "thank you" posts online.


     


    One size does not fit all. It never has and never will.


     


    Although Tim has said that there will be a Mac Pro in 2013, a great many people are still wondering whether it will be worthwhile and whether it may be an end-of-life release. The delays in updating the Mac Pro certainly indicate a wavering commitment to the platform. If it goes, I suspect a good many people who might have been interested in the Mac Midi would move along with the former Mac Pro users. As it is, the real professional video editing crowd has already been leaving the Mac platform because of performance issues.


     


    There are a lot more people who like Apple computers because of the OS than care about Jony Ive wrapping some overheating container around the hardware. Memo to Tim: Functionality still matters.

  • Reply 29 of 1528
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    rbr wrote: »

    What I'd really like to see is a Goldilocks model  (Pro is too big, Mini is too small, this one is just right). I'll call it a Mac Midi. It would have a discreet GPU, 32 GB RAM capability, at least one, and preferably more than one PCIe slots, perhaps for a graphics card, but so you could put a bootable PCIe SSD in it to get some real speed. It would also use a 3 1/2 inch hard drive with space for two which would allow you to choose a wide variety of drives to install. I really don't care if Apple drops the optical drive. If you need one, a full size external one is readily available that is better than the ones Apple supplies and usually costs less too.
    Sounds like an XMac! ????????????????

    While I agree a discrete GPU is still needed, I'd rather see the PCI Express slots focused on other needs. Thus a GPU built right on the motherboard wold be a better solution.

    Haswell is supposed to have a much reduced power profile which should help keep the cooling requirements modest.
    Haswell is expected to be better but frankly Ivy Bridge is nothing to sneeze at. We are getting a lot of performance for our watts these days. There is also the question of just how hot the chip will be running flat out.
    It should have two Thunderbolt ports, preferably TB II, as well as a bunch of USB 3 ports and one FW800 port for legacy devices.
    Time to kiss FW good bye. However a PCI Express slots goes a very long way to supporting any sort of legacy port.
    Such a unit, I believe, would suit the needs of a great many current Apple users who are constrained by the iMac and don't really need a full blown workstation.
    Yep! This is my greatest frustration right now with Apple. The only midrange machines they have are the laptops.
    Frankly, it would not be very hard for Apple to produce such a model. Most of the heavy lifting on motherboard design has been/will be done by Intel (one of the benefits of using their products) in their reference design motherboards and support chip sets. About all Apple really needs to do is come up with a suitable motherboard, wrap some sort of case around it, ship a bunch of them and listen to all the "thank you" posts online.
    Not really. I mean sure they could use a reference board design and gain nothing. What they really need to do is to innovate on the desktop like they do with the laptops.
    One size does not fit all. It never has and never will.
    Which is why I still have machines running Linux.
    Although Tim has said that there will be a Mac Pro in 2013, a great many people are still wondering whether it will be worthwhile and whether it may be an end-of-life release. The delays in updating the Mac Pro certainly indicate a wavering commitment to the platform. If it goes, I suspect a good many people who might have been interested in the Mac Midi would move along with the former Mac Pro users. As it is, the real professional video editing crowd has already been leaving the Mac platform because of performance issues.
    If the new Mac Pro isn't a massive step forward then Apple might as well sink the remaining cases in the ocean someplace. The Mac Pro is simply an ancient design from the standpoint of a professional computer.

    As to the desktops future at Apple I think Apple is at a cross roads of sorts. It is pretty obvious from the pathetic releases last month that they simply don't care about the desktop anymore. Maybe the management shake up will address that. Or maybe not, I just don't think they realize how much of the market they have given up due to the lack of suitable hardware to sell into it.
    There are a lot more people who like Apple computers because of the OS than care about Jony Ive wrapping some overheating container around the hardware. Memo to Tim: Functionality still matters.

    It would be nice to see Apple offer two things on the desktop that they don't currently. That is the midrange machine (XMac) and a decent shot at a professionals machine in a Mac Pro replacement. In each case the idea with these machines is to address functionality.
  • Reply 30 of 1528
    rbrrbr Posts: 631member


    wizard69,


     


    The biggest reason to keep a FW port is to support the large number of video cameras which still use it. Who knows how long that will be the case? Otherwise FW is an evolutionary dead end.


     


    I certainly agree that Ivy Bridge offers good performance. Haswell is supposed to offer comparable performance, but with substantially reduced power requirements. In the mobile arena this should improve battery life or allow the use of smaller/lighter batteries and contribute to smaller, lighter and cooler laptops. One figure I have heard tossed about is a 17 watt Ivy Bridge equivalent processor is targeted to be in the 10 to 12 watt range. That's a big difference.


     


    You may have noticed that I hedged the bet on GPUs. Some sort of discreet GPU is called for. If it is not in a PCIe slot, it is still needed. I believe a PCIe slot one is preferable, but not if it takes up the only PCIe slot. If there are multiple slots, one should have a graphics card in it. :-)


     


    About your Linux machine, if Adobe were to release Lightroom, Photoshop and the rest of their product line for Linux, I can only image the impact on Apple.


     


    Cheers

  • Reply 31 of 1528
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    We are focusing quite a bit on the mini so I thought I would mention the iMac as well. I forget if I sent feedback to Apple or not, though I would like to at least have user replaceable RAM back even if it's only two slots instead of four. I also hope they start making 1 GB of RAM standard for video cards and stop with the 512 MB. Go for 1 GB minimum across the board and then on the ultimate, 2 GB with a BTO of 4 GB if it's available.
  • Reply 32 of 1528
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    rbr wrote: »
    wizard69,

    The biggest reason to keep a FW port is to support the large number of video cameras which still use it. Who knows how long that will be the case? Otherwise FW is an evolutionary dead end.
    Yep, evolutionary dead end.

    However one of the reasons I prefer to see an XMac with a couple of slots is that it allows users to adapt the machine to their specific needs. Thus is FireWire is really needed they can just plug in a card for that. I'm still not a fan of dongles and would much prefer in the box slots. Even here though I'm flexible, put four or six TB ports in an XMac and I might change my mind. The big problem though is that some hardware will never be adopted for TB.
    I certainly agree that Ivy Bridge offers good performance. Haswell is supposed to offer comparable performance, but with substantially reduced power requirements. In the mobile arena this should improve battery life or allow the use of smaller/lighter batteries and contribute to smaller, lighter and cooler laptops. One figure I have heard tossed about is a 17 watt Ivy Bridge equivalent processor is targeted to be in the 10 to 12 watt range. That's a big difference.
    This is fairly consistent with what I'm reading but there is one big qualifier here, Intel apparently has three different GPU implementations planned one with significant performance. We really don't know what type of GPU performance those lower power units will have.

    You may have noticed that I hedged the bet on GPUs. Some sort of discreet GPU is called for. If it is not in a PCIe slot, it is still needed. I believe a PCIe slot one is preferable, but not if it takes up the only PCIe slot. If there are multiple slots, one should have a graphics card in it. :-)
    For a midrange machine I don't see the need for a discrete GPU going away anytime soon either. On the Mini Haswell might do the trick if Apple would actually implement at least one machine with a performance chip.

    The other thing here is TB and integration with that port. My understanding is that the GPU has to be on the motherboard unless Apple implements some sort of extended PCI Express port. Because of this and the desire to control cost I beleive Apple would have little choice but to glue the GPU to the motherboard.
    About your Linux machine, if Adobe were to release Lightroom, Photoshop and the rest of their product line for Linux, I can only image the impact on Apple.
    That sounds good on the surface but Linux has significant issues with respect to the desktop environment. ADOBE would basically have to have their own distro. Even then GNOME, KDE and a bunch of other desktop environments leave a lot to be desired. Even Linus has been vocal about this lately.

    As a side note one of the reasons I purchased a Mac Book Pro in 2008 was to have a far more stable desktop environment. For the mot part this has worked out really wel for me. Add in Apples integration with iPhone or iOS and you have a very pleasing platform. I wouldn't go back to using Linux as a primary desktop machine anytime soon but it is fantastic for servers and things that don't run on the Mac at all (LinuxCNC).
    Cheers

    My biggest fear or concern is the freedom Mac OS provides me. I can get by with a locked down platform on my iOS devices but not on my Mac. The ability to dip into the supplied utilities, Python and other tools is invaluable to me. On the other hand an ARM based AIR, with twelve threads of performance (cores if your will) burning maybe 17 watts of power total, is very appealing to me. On top of that an AIR selling for much less due to not having to pay Intels margins is even nicer.
  • Reply 33 of 1528
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    One thing to watch out for is that a coming DRAM spec eliminates sockets for a new generation of memory. So eventually all high performance computers will have soldered in DRAM. This doesn't even include the 3D memory that Intel and Micron are working on which I believe also requires soldered in RAM. In a nutshell the days of soldered in RAM are quickly coming to an end.
    winter wrote: »
    We are focusing quite a bit on the mini so I thought I would mention the iMac as well. I forget if I sent feedback to Apple or not, though I would like to at least have user replaceable RAM back even if it's only two slots instead of four. I also hope they start making 1 GB of RAM standard for video cards and stop with the 512 MB. Go for 1 GB minimum across the board and then on the ultimate, 2 GB with a BTO of 4 GB if it's available.
  • Reply 34 of 1528
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    On the other hand an ARM based AIR, with twelve threads of performance (cores if your will) burning maybe 17 watts of power total, is very appealing to me. On top of that an AIR selling for much less due to not having to pay Intels margins is even nicer.


     


    Somehow I think Apple is reasonably satisfied on price points. My guess was that such a thing would lead more to a split between increased features and higher margins. They may increase storage and migrate to higher resolution displays across the line while boosting margins. In terms of raw number crunching specs, Apple tends to aim for good enough. Most of their defining features are in other areas.

  • Reply 35 of 1528

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post


    Does anybody make a decent monitor that matches the Mini? Haven't seen one, and will be looking to purchase one by Christmas.



     


    By "matches", I'm assuming goes along with the appearance. I would say the only option there is Apple's own Thunderbolt Display. I don't expect there to be a significant market for 3rd-party Mini-specific displays. Mac Mini buyers seem to fall into several categories:


    1) Replacing a computer and they already have a monitor.


    2) Incorporating into a home theater, so using a TV as a display.


    3) Very cost-sensitive and intend to skimp on the diplay.


    4) Using as a low-cost server, either without any display, or where the display itself doesn't matter.


     


    A Mac Mini and a Thuderbolt Display costs about the same as an iMac; with the benefit that the computer can be replaced (upgraded) independently of the display. However, recent iMacs have had the capability to be used as a display. I'm assuming the just-announced (late 2012) models can as well. If that is a concern, you can buy an iMac now, and then buy a Mini (or a PC with Thunderbolt/DisplayPort) when it's time to upgrade.

  • Reply 36 of 1528
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    wizard69 wrote: »
    One thing to watch out for is that a coming DRAM spec eliminates sockets for a new generation of memory. In a nutshell the days of soldered in RAM are quickly coming to an end.

    I may have misread this though are you saying there will be no soldered RAM or there will be?
  • Reply 37 of 1528
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mbmcavoy View Post


     


    By "matches", I'm assuming goes along with the appearance. I would say the only option there is Apple's own Thunderbolt Display. I don't expect there to be a significant market for 3rd-party Mini-specific displays. Mac Mini buyers seem to fall into several categories:


    1) Replacing a computer and they already have a monitor.


    2) Incorporating into a home theater, so using a TV as a display.


    3) Very cost-sensitive and intend to skimp on the diplay.


    4) Using as a low-cost server, either without any display, or where the display itself doesn't matter.



     


    It just seems weird to me that the lowest cost Mac option doesn't have a corresponding monitor.


    Even if the 21" iMac is a cheaper option, Apple would probably make enough sales to justify selling the same 21" by itself.

  • Reply 38 of 1528
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    winter wrote: »
    wizard69 wrote: »
    One thing to watch out for is that a coming DRAM spec eliminates sockets for a new generation of memory. In a nutshell the days of soldered in RAM are quickly coming to an end.

    I may have misread this though are you saying there will be no soldered RAM or there will be?

    YIKES!

    Pardon my conflagration above.

    What I meant to say that DRAM in sockets will soon come to an end. At least in sockets as we know them today. The reason being that engineers can better control the electrical characteristics of the circuitry and thus communicate much faster. Plus as speeds increase wire distance becomes very significant.

    So expect in the future to see high end machines that only support RAM soldered onto the motherboard.

    Sorry for twisting up the logic in the previous post. Sometimes it is better to hit the sack then to try to do anything constructive online.
  • Reply 39 of 1528
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    frank777 wrote: »
    It just seems weird to me that the lowest cost Mac option doesn't have a corresponding monitor.
    Even if the 21" iMac is a cheaper option, Apple would probably make enough sales to justify selling the same 21" by itself.

    If you look at the channels that the Mini sells in they are most likely being paired with economical LCD screens from a number of off shore manufactures. I suspect that the vast majority of Mini sales either happen in Apples online store or via third party retailers. Most Apple stores I've walked into have very few if any Minis in display.
  • Reply 40 of 1528
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    Do you think that will happen sooner rather than later or not for at least say five years?
Sign In or Register to comment.