People seem to really like it. The common thread seems to be “a bit pricey but it does the job”.
Imagine the general design with the centrally located airflow, but stubbier and/or a smaller diameter. I don't see that happening, I'm just noting how you could take that concept and miniaturize it.
edit: That first pic has some outdated I/O.Probably even USB-C for power with an external PSU at this point. If not, at least use a two-prong power cable and reduce the USB-A and TB/mini-DP to USB-C.
I still use a mid 2011 model, mostly as a media server, for which it does the job just right. It also has 2 x 2Tb SSDs and 16Gb ram in it and holds some long term backup data.
What impressed me about it most was that little Radeon graphics chip they used. It made the 27 inch cinema displays a pleasure to use, unlike the intel HD graphics of the time.
And those sandybridge chips are cool runners too for the most part.
For a huge and talented company like Apple is, what is so difficult for them to design a decent MacMini after nearly three years? One would hardly think it takes that much effort when they've already been building them for years. All they basically need to do is to update them as newer components come along. Because it's Apple's low-end desktop, it doesn't have to be some fancy-looking computer. My main hope is that Apple won't solder everything internally so users can do at least some upgrades. At least have a new MacMini support 60fps 4K TVs. Apple's idea of a MacMini is basically a copy of some closed Android streaming box at ten times the price. My 2012 i7 quad-core has been running 24/7 for years as my media computer and it's really fine except for the fact that it can't do 4K. I'd rather have a MacMini than an AppleTV in order to be able to run desktop applications when I need them.
People seem to really like it. The common thread seems to be “a bit pricey but it does the job”.
Imagine the general design with the centrally located airflow, but stubbier and/or a smaller diameter. I don't see that happening, I'm just noting how you could take that concept and miniaturize it.
edit: That first pic has some outdated I/O.Probably even USB-C for power with an external PSU at this point. If not, at least use a two-prong power cable and reduce the USB-A and TB/mini-DP to USB-C.
Bloody hell.
That’s not half bad. 👍🏾
Uhhh...thats an ash tray.
I was thinking more of a robot vacuum cleaner, but I like it all the same.
You don't care for a design so you hope someone you don't know flunks out of a class? Jesus Christ, dude! And who the fuck are these sociopaths who are Liking your comment?
I liked being able to add more RAM to the mid-2012 Mini, so the 2014 model was a downgrade as far as I'm concerned. I don't have a mid-2011 but I imagine it's upgradeable too. So I suspect most owners will hold on to those for as long as they can keep running the current OS.
If I was Apple, I'd take that Mac Pro trash can design and reuse it for the new Mac mini.
Depending what you do. Try serious publishing like we do or professional video editing and you will see huge diifference between Mac Mini and MacPro.
I think you might be misunderstanding... I'd buy this in a heartbeat! If they took what is in a mini (or iMac) and put it inside a design like the 'trash can' Mac Pro, they could even bump the GPU up (or provide more options), include a quad-care, and have a totally silent machine that wouldn't cost a fortune.
That doesn't mean they don't also need a real Mac Pro... but the 'trash can' design is better suited to the prosumer market than the true pro market (or, at least the end of it screaming for expandability).
Otherwise, what's the hold-up? All the current Mini needs is some new ports, SSD, and a refresh of CPU/GPU. That should be taking them all of a week!
For a huge and talented company like Apple is, what is so difficult for them to design a decent MacMini after nearly three years? One would hardly think it takes that much effort when they've already been building them for years. All they basically need to do is to update them as newer components come along.
Remember that recent "What's a computer?" ad? I think that's the problem. There is no other good excuse.
Soli said: You don't care for a design so you hope someone you don't know flunks out of a class?
To be fair, a lot of industrial design student stuff I've seen is horrifically bad. But, I think they are more learning tools (CAD, rendering), concepts, and how to present and stuff like that instead of physics and marketing/manufacturing reality (though you would think they'd learn that).
It’s probably been said before: higher powered Mac Mini will be subcomponent of Mac Pro, parallel architecture ...
That would be kind of cool (I've actually done that in the past in a way). But, I think cloud-computing would make it hard to compete or gain traction. That ship sailed a decade or so ago. I guess if you had to have it in-house for security reasons or something.
Soli said: You don't care for a design so you hope someone you don't know flunks out of a class?
To be fair, a lot of industrial design student stuff I've seen is horrifically bad. But, I think they are more learning tools (CAD, rendering), concepts, and how to present and stuff like that instead of physics and marketing/manufacturing reality (though you would think they'd learn that).
Sure. I don't care for most of the mockups I see as I look at from an engineering PoV and they typically seem to fail there, but that doesn't mean their skill at creating renders is poor. I bet Jobs couldn't use those tool but he'd tell others what he wanted and where it was wrong, not to mention making many, many mockups, as we saw during the Samsung trial.
But I digress. It's a different pathology to evaluate the work from an engineering or even an aesthetic PoV and saying someone should flunk. Who does that?
There was an unknown painter named Adolf that probably could've used a little more encouragement to keep working at what once loved. /s
You don't care for a design so you hope someone you don't know flunks out of a class? Jesus Christ, dude! And who the fuck are these sociopaths who are Liking your comment?
Soli said: Sure. I don't care for most of the mockups I see as I look at from an engineering PoV and they typically seem to fail there, but that doesn't mean their skill at creating renders is poor. I bet Jobs couldn't use those tool but he'd tell others what he wanted and where it was wrong, not to mention making many, many mockups, as we saw during the Samsung trial.
But I digress. It's a different pathology to evaluate the work from an engineering or even an aesthetic PoV and saying someone should flunk. Who does that?
I worked at/with an industrial design firm for most of the 90s, and the owner (an accomplished industrial designer w/ Bauhaus training) used to go ape-*^%& over this kind of stuff. In his opinion (and mine, I suppose as it rubbed off), since an industrial designer is a blend of artist and engineer, they *SHOULD* have enough training in both to make things that look good, are functional, and realistic. So, he'd probably have said something like that too. Heck, I'm no industrial designer, but I could have easily rendered (and modeled) something like that.
That said, everyone has their talents, I suppose. While I have little to no formal engineering/mechanical training, I could often look at something he designed and just 'see' the problem points. On more than one occasion, we had to build the prototype to prove there was a problem... and he seldom admitted I was right. On the other hand, he designed a form of manufactured housing that I doubt will be matched even a decade or two from now (but, never got off the ground due to, IMO, business/financial reasons).
If I was Apple, I'd take that Mac Pro trash can design and reuse it for the new Mac mini.
Depending what you do. Try serious publishing like we do or professional video editing and you will see huge diifference between Mac Mini and MacPro.
I think you might be misunderstanding... I'd buy this in a heartbeat! If they took what is in a mini (or iMac) and put it inside a design like the 'trash can' Mac Pro, they could even bump the GPU up (or provide more options), include a quad-care, and have a totally silent machine that wouldn't cost a fortune.
That doesn't mean they don't also need a real Mac Pro... but the 'trash can' design is better suited to the prosumer market than the true pro market (or, at least the end of it screaming for expandability).
Otherwise, what's the hold-up? All the current Mini needs is some new ports, SSD, and a refresh of CPU/GPU. That should be taking them all of a week!
For a huge and talented company like Apple is, what is so difficult for them to design a decent MacMini after nearly three years? One would hardly think it takes that much effort when they've already been building them for years. All they basically need to do is to update them as newer components come along.
Remember that recent "What's a computer?" ad? I think that's the problem. There is no other good excuse.
Soli said: You don't care for a design so you hope someone you don't know flunks out of a class?
To be fair, a lot of industrial design student stuff I've seen is horrifically bad. But, I think they are more learning tools (CAD, rendering), concepts, and how to present and stuff like that instead of physics and marketing/manufacturing reality (though you would think they'd learn that).
It’s probably been said before: higher powered Mac Mini will be subcomponent of Mac Pro, parallel architecture ...
That would be kind of cool (I've actually done that in the past in a way). But, I think cloud-computing would make it hard to compete or gain traction. That ship sailed a decade or so ago. I guess if you had to have it in-house for security reasons or something.
The holdup is the big round building. I expect to see quicker refreshments of all models after a year they have occupied the saucer.
It’s probably been said before: higher powered Mac Mini will be subcomponent of Mac Pro, parallel architecture ...
That would be kind of cool (I've actually done that in the past in a way). But, I think cloud-computing would make it hard to compete or gain traction. That ship sailed a decade or so ago. I guess if you had to have it in-house for security reasons or something.
The holdup is the big round building. I expect to see quicker refreshments of all models after a year they have occupied the saucer.
Is this more facetiousness that doesn't include notion of humour? If not, why do you think product designers and programmers are being pulled off their jobs because of "the big round building"? It would seem they still have the same office spaces before the project started over 6.5 years ago, so do you think that the same person engineering a computer circuit board is also an architect for a industrial building? I can assure you they do have contractors for that. I think that leaves Apple employees as simply being lazy so is suggesting poor management? Is there an implication that Cook should be fired? Appleinsider infamously kept writing articles about how the Mac mini finally had its final coffin nail for what seemed like several years, so what was the reason for the Mac mini languishing for so long under Jobs if there was no Apple Park project at the time? I guess that could be the iPhone or iPod, but at least those are CE so I can see how you may need those HW and SW engineers to work on those new projects, but for Apple Park I don't see how that's possible.
I don't know why this has to be so complicated. I mean, look what HP put together a year ago with the Z2 Mini G3.
Simple, small and relatively powerful.
Apple's next Mac mini doesn't need any gimmicks or fancy design. Just make it small, competitively priced and useful.
Margins and Price.
I dont think Apple has ever shipped a loss leader or low margin products. Their Margin, or Margin over time when included R&D are fairly consistent. And apart from the Windows OEM Price of about $50 Apple earned more compared to other vendor, it will be hard to make Apple's standard profits and this low cost segment.
It’s probably been said before: higher powered Mac Mini will be subcomponent of Mac Pro, parallel architecture ...
That would be kind of cool (I've actually done that in the past in a way). But, I think cloud-computing would make it hard to compete or gain traction. That ship sailed a decade or so ago. I guess if you had to have it in-house for security reasons or something.
The holdup is the big round building. I expect to see quicker refreshments of all models after a year they have occupied the saucer.
Is this more facetiousness that doesn't include notion of humour? If not, why do you think product designers and programmers are being pulled off their jobs because of "the big round building"? It would seem they still have the same office spaces before the project started over 6.5 years ago, so do you think that the same person engineering a computer circuit board is also an architect for a industrial building? I can assure you they do have contractors for that. I think that leaves Apple employees as simply being lazy so is suggesting poor management? Is there an implication that Cook should be fired? Appleinsider infamously kept writing articles about how the Mac mini finally had its final coffin nail for what seemed like several years, so what was the reason for the Mac mini languishing for so long under Jobs if there was no Apple Park project at the time? I guess that could be the iPhone or iPod, but at least those are CE so I can see how you may need those HW and SW engineers to work on those new projects, but for Apple Park I don't see how that's possible.
I read, years ago, a research paper that whenever a business would build a humongous headquarter it would reflect negatively on the results. There was a direct relationship. I don’t understand why Apple is not continuing with regular updates the way it did years ago. Every year, maybe even faster, without much fuss, suddenly the whole range of iMacs or Mini’s or whatever would get faster memory, faster CPU’s etc. These last years are different in that respect and I have yet to read a good explanation.
It’s probably been said before: higher powered Mac Mini will be subcomponent of Mac Pro, parallel architecture ...
That would be kind of cool (I've actually done that in the past in a way). But, I think cloud-computing would make it hard to compete or gain traction. That ship sailed a decade or so ago. I guess if you had to have it in-house for security reasons or something.
The holdup is the big round building. I expect to see quicker refreshments of all models after a year they have occupied the saucer.
Is this more facetiousness that doesn't include notion of humour? If not, why do you think product designers and programmers are being pulled off their jobs because of "the big round building"? It would seem they still have the same office spaces before the project started over 6.5 years ago, so do you think that the same person engineering a computer circuit board is also an architect for a industrial building? I can assure you they do have contractors for that. I think that leaves Apple employees as simply being lazy so is suggesting poor management? Is there an implication that Cook should be fired? Appleinsider infamously kept writing articles about how the Mac mini finally had its final coffin nail for what seemed like several years, so what was the reason for the Mac mini languishing for so long under Jobs if there was no Apple Park project at the time? I guess that could be the iPhone or iPod, but at least those are CE so I can see how you may need those HW and SW engineers to work on those new projects, but for Apple Park I don't see how that's possible.
I read, years ago, a research paper that whenever a business would build a humongous headquarter it would reflect negatively on the results. There was a direct relationship. I don’t understand why Apple is not continuing with regular updates the way it did years ago. Every year, maybe even faster, without much fuss, suddenly the whole range of iMacs or Mini’s or whatever would get faster memory, faster CPU’s etc. These last years are different in that respect and I have yet to read a good explanation.
1) I think we saw a drop when there was heavy iPhone development. Could this be due to Apple's engineers working on another major innovation, like a self-driving system and/or AR and/or VR products?
2) As noted with the Mac mini's sordid past, we've seen Apple do this often with low-volume products. How often does the iPod Touch get updated and that would be comparatively simple to do since they've already done it all for that year's iPhone.
3) Intel keeps pushing back release dates, doesn't seem to ramp up volume as fast (or maybe the sales are more saturated out of the gate because of backed up demand from their longer release times), the iterations aren't as dramatic, processing speed seems to more than necessary for the majority of users today, and the focus for the whole PC market is likely to have another year of decline ending 2017 (which I think would make the 6th year in a row). One part of that equation is Apple clearly putting more focus on the iPhone, but the bigger picture is the whole market isn't as focused on people buying PCs which reduces inertia.
4) Many here have said the PC will go away but I can't see that happening; however, I do see this trend with the Mac continuing long after Apple Park is filled up—save for the usual blips in product launches—unless they finally come out with a lower price point which will dramatically increase the potential market, but that seems only possible with ARM-based Macs.
Comments
Uhhh...thats an ash tray.
What impressed me about it most was that little Radeon graphics chip they used. It made the 27 inch cinema displays a pleasure to use, unlike the intel HD graphics of the time.
And those sandybridge chips are cool runners too for the most part.
I suspect he’ll do very well
Simple, small and relatively powerful.
Apple's next Mac mini doesn't need any gimmicks or fancy design. Just make it small, competitively priced and useful.
That doesn't mean they don't also need a real Mac Pro... but the 'trash can' design is better suited to the prosumer market than the true pro market (or, at least the end of it screaming for expandability).
Otherwise, what's the hold-up? All the current Mini needs is some new ports, SSD, and a refresh of CPU/GPU. That should be taking them all of a week!
Remember that recent "What's a computer?" ad? I think that's the problem. There is no other good excuse.
To be fair, a lot of industrial design student stuff I've seen is horrifically bad. But, I think they are more learning tools (CAD, rendering), concepts, and how to present and stuff like that instead of physics and marketing/manufacturing reality (though you would think they'd learn that).
That would be kind of cool (I've actually done that in the past in a way). But, I think cloud-computing would make it hard to compete or gain traction. That ship sailed a decade or so ago. I guess if you had to have it in-house for security reasons or something.
But I digress. It's a different pathology to evaluate the work from an engineering or even an aesthetic PoV and saying someone should flunk. Who does that?
There was an unknown painter named Adolf that probably could've used a little more encouragement to keep working at what once loved. /s
I think he was being facetious.
That said, everyone has their talents, I suppose. While I have little to no formal engineering/mechanical training, I could often look at something he designed and just 'see' the problem points. On more than one occasion, we had to build the prototype to prove there was a problem... and he seldom admitted I was right.
I dont think Apple has ever shipped a loss leader or low margin products. Their Margin, or Margin over time when included R&D are fairly consistent. And apart from the Windows OEM Price of about $50 Apple earned more compared to other vendor, it will be hard to make Apple's standard profits and this low cost segment.
2) As noted with the Mac mini's sordid past, we've seen Apple do this often with low-volume products. How often does the iPod Touch get updated and that would be comparatively simple to do since they've already done it all for that year's iPhone.
3) Intel keeps pushing back release dates, doesn't seem to ramp up volume as fast (or maybe the sales are more saturated out of the gate because of backed up demand from their longer release times), the iterations aren't as dramatic, processing speed seems to more than necessary for the majority of users today, and the focus for the whole PC market is likely to have another year of decline ending 2017 (which I think would make the 6th year in a row). One part of that equation is Apple clearly putting more focus on the iPhone, but the bigger picture is the whole market isn't as focused on people buying PCs which reduces inertia.
4) Many here have said the PC will go away but I can't see that happening; however, I do see this trend with the Mac continuing long after Apple Park is filled up—save for the usual blips in product launches—unless they finally come out with a lower price point which will dramatically increase the potential market, but that seems only possible with ARM-based Macs.
ram and drives adjustable by the paying customer being served...
HP Elite Slice Review & Rating | PCMag.com
Polywell B150L2-i7 Review & Rating | PCMag.com