Hasn't every inexpensive WinPC been eating the Mac mini's lunch since its inception? The Mac mini starts at where most WinPCs are sold, regardless of form factor.
I've not seen a compelling reason for me to own a mini. That said, and not straying too far from topic, I can't help but look around and see all of my various devices (iPhones, iPads, laptops, AppleTV's etc, etc) and wonder why I really need so many independent devices. With the dramatic speed improvements in wifi/mesh networks ( and soon 5G) coupled with the huge increases in processing capabilities it just seems to me that if someone could come up with a way to share computing power between existing devices we would all end up with more efficiency and less duplicative hardware. If each of the processors (many of which are already multi-core) could be arranged for parallel shared computing and that could also be shared with cloud computing power we could have small, highly efficient devices with limitless computing capabilities.
Back in the day when the mini first came out I thought that was the way personal computing was going to go (smaller form factor with increased computational sharing via then early versions of wifi).
Oh boy...here we go! Continuous bitching about the Mac mini. I doubt most here are gonna buy one anyways.
Of course not. To be frank, you would have to be a brainless idiot to buy the current insult of a Mac mini.
I get that most of the money comes from the iPhone, so it’s the priority. But the most stupid thing about the neglect and/or gimping of pretty all Mac lines over an extended period is that it is mistreating Mac buyers, who are the most loyal long term buyers of all things Apple, and have always been the greatest evangelists for its platforms and ecosystems. Neglecting and deliberately crippling functionality and utility of macs by design, and then failing to at the least keep them up to date is beyond the pale.
Divorce is ugly. And just like a neglected and spourned spouse, lovers can be turned into passionate haters.
Oh boy...here we go! Continuous bitching about the Mac mini. I doubt most here are gonna buy one anyways.
You really think that only the "most here" types read AppleInsider?
I still think Apple is planning on releasing a Mac mini with an Apple based CPU inside it, but I guess Apple could give it a "speedbump" with more modern Intel CPU's but I seriously doubt its gonna do much for sales. People seem to think Apple should make the Mac mini into this Mac Pro mini machine with interchangeable RAM and storage and I just don't ever see that happening. By the time you buy a screen to go with it along with a keyboard and mouse you might as well just get an iMac. I bet this is what Apple see's in the end.
I think it could, in fact I reckon Apple could add expandability to most of their line (MacBook Pro, iMac & Mini) that’s ‘modular’ in the form of m.2(m.3/NGSFF?)cards. Storage is already covered, they could produce their own GPU cards and A/T-series processor cards with 16/32/48/64GB HBM2 RAM options. MBPs could ship with two slots, minis & a new Cinema Display (which could be a dumb monitor/GPU accelerated monitor or iMac) with three.
Oh boy...here we go! Continuous bitching about the Mac mini. I doubt most here are gonna buy one anyways.
I really wanted to. In 2016 I seriously concidered it. I had a monitor that I could use. I wanted to keep the cost low. But the MM was just too long in the tooth, even then. I seriously looked at a Z2 or something like that running Linux. In the end though I got an iMac. I really like the iMac, but I would have prefered to have built a system around a MM.
I completely agree with this. I've been using a 2011 Mac Mini as my primary desktop, but I made the mistake then of opting for a dual core which just doesn't cut it when I need to run virtual machines (which I do 99.9% of the time). I even thought about upgrading to a used 2012 quad i7, but realized that would be just silly and (reluctantly) moved to an iMac two weeks ago.
The machine is great, and I decked it out (since I keep my machines for a long time), but I would have preferred to replace the Mini with another Mini. I seriously looked at a Hackintosh, but much of why I use Macs is because I don't want to have to maintain them. I also considered switching to Linux as a full-time OS (a good part of my day is spent in a Unix shell anyway) but rely on too many Mac-only applications (OmniGraffle and OmniFocus are a big part of my workflow). If Apple keeps moving toward appliance computers, I may consider moving that direction next time.
The Mac mini (like the Mac Pro) is a low volume niche machine, but that's no excuse for not updating it.
If Apple doesn't want clones, if they want to control the ecosystem, then they themselves are on the hook to offer a complete ecosystem.
I certainly don't want clones, and I certainly do want Apple to control the ecosystem.
So that means I certainly do want them to offer a complete ecosystem.
A company whose resurgence began with an appeal to the people who "think different" ought to understand the importance of a niche. Healthy ecosystems are full of niches. Take away the niches and the ecosystem dies.
Oh boy...here we go! Continuous bitching about the Mac mini. I doubt most here are gonna buy one anyways.
Of course not. To be frank, you would have to be a brainless idiot to buy the current insult of a Mac mini.
I get that most of the money comes from the iPhone, so it’s the priority. But the most stupid thing about the neglect and/or gimping of pretty all Mac lines over an extended period is that it is mistreating Mac buyers, who are the most loyal long term buyers of all things Apple, and have always been the greatest evangelists for its platforms and ecosystems. Neglecting and deliberately crippling functionality and utility of macs by design, and then failing to at the least keep them up to date is beyond the pale.
Divorce is ugly. And just like a neglected and spourned spouse, lovers can be turned into passionate haters.
Oh boy...here we go! Continuous bitching about the Mac mini. I doubt most here are gonna buy one anyways.
I've owned three of them. I had the original G4 Mini, then one of the early Intel machines, and finally a 2011 Unibody. I maxed out the RAM and added a second drive (both SSD) which kept the machine running plenty fast. For the desktop computing and development work I do, they're extremely capable machines. My biggest complaint is the lack of quad-core, and that the new models are (like most of the new Macs) not upgradable.
Apple certainly lost their focus on the mac line, letting the Pro and mac mini go way too long between updates. Now I wonder if they are trying to be too ambitious with their redesign? Apple put themselves in a corner in that after all this time they feel they can't just get by with a simple hardware refresh, but on the other hand a significant redesign takes time. It appears that they have decided that they are going to wait until they have something significant and new they can be proud of.
Personally I have been waiting for a mac mini refresh for well over a year now. My son has a lower end 2014 that he is now primarily using for video editing. This isn't for work so he doesn't want to spend significant money, but the iMac is way under powered for what he is using it for. He's happy and familiar with his editing tools and is invested in the Apple ecosystem with an iPhone and Ipad Pro so a refreshed Mac Mini would be the preferred option. We want to do something before the end of summer so if there isn't any mini update announced soon, we will make a decision on either an iMac or Linux desktop as a replacement. A WWDC announcement would be nice. BTW - Not going with Windows under my watch.
I think you've answered your own question by buying a NUC that is centered around PC gaming. That's their primary reason for existing, and the prices that include RAM etc. end up very similar to MacBooks and iMacs at the low-end. So why not just buy a MacBook or iMac?
Which MacBook or iMac gives you 2.6Ghz quad-core i7, Thunderbolt 3, 512GB NVMe M.2 SSD, and 16GB of RAM for around $800? I realize the NUC doesn't come with a monitor, but iMac or MacBook-quality monitors can be had for well under $300.
The iMac with 2.3GHz i5, 16 GB RAM, and 256 GB SSD is $1499.
Apple does not have anything that competes with this at this price point.
Bahahahahaha! Yeah right!
So...uh...would you care to elaborate on your comment? I can tell you I just priced out iMacs and MacBooks with comparable (somewhat) specs. The NUC still has much better specs. A comparably equipped MacBook is nearly $2000.
So, tell me, which Apple offering has reasonably close specs at a reasonably close price.
I believe he knows you're right which is why all he had to offer was a bitter laugh and no factual retort... So don't sweat it.
I've not seen a compelling reason for me to own a mini. That said, and not straying too far from topic, I can't help but look around and see all of my various devices (iPhones, iPads, laptops, AppleTV's etc, etc) and wonder why I really need so many independent devices. With the dramatic speed improvements in wifi/mesh networks ( and soon 5G) coupled with the huge increases in processing capabilities it just seems to me that if someone could come up with a way to share computing power between existing devices we would all end up with more efficiency and less duplicative hardware. If each of the processors (many of which are already multi-core) could be arranged for parallel shared computing and that could also be shared with cloud computing power we could have small, highly efficient devices with limitless computing capabilities.
Back in the day when the mini first came out I thought that was the way personal computing was going to go (smaller form factor with increased computational sharing via then early versions of wifi).
I think it was JLG in his Monday Note that looked at the amount of $$ being spent internally; something like $26 billion. I don't who or what you are, that's an enormous pile of cash. He said that always translates to a new product. What that product or service is is not known yet. But, I seriously am intrigued w/ the above. Fact is, the processing power for conventional laptops & desktops is pure overkill for 90% of users who are reading email, looking at webpages, or writing a simple document. Is there a unifying device or topology that can pull together all the iDevices and maybe cast the output to a video screen like a TV? Seems like a the Mini was being touted at one time as a parallel processing workhouse--using Netboot off an Xserv but that was primarily scientific in nature. But it doesn't seem a stretch to combine the processing of all iDevices.
Here at AppleInsider we all like diving into machines elbow-deep and bending them to our will. We're also realists, and understand that Apple has decided to not cater to that audience, and any nods in that direction beyond a RAM door are purely unintentional. So, angling for a machine like the NUC with an easily removable top panel for RAM and storage is tilting at windmills, no matter how much we wish it were otherwise.
Mike, great article..... and then this?
Why constantly conflate two separate issues (i.e.: in your articles, on podcasts, etc.)? I totally agree that Apple doesn't care much about the tinkerer/hobbyist who wants to get inside the computer and upgrade, hot-rod, or replace parts. But, I don't think this is a justification for not keeping models like the Mini up to date, or having reasonable low to mid-range models.
If Apple put the hardware of that last (or even the previous) NUCs you mention in the article, into some case that Apple seals up so it can't possibly be modified, I'd (and I think many others) still be incredibly happy. I don't need a computer I can tinker with... I just need a reasonably good prosumer Mac, as I'm in the Apple eco-system (so can't just easily move to Windows).
Unless Apple is trying to kill off the Mac, or incompetent/struggling to stay relevant with Macs, they are screwing up. It's that plain and simple. Don't try to defend them with the whole 'hobbyists aren't their target market' thing, please. Two separate issues.
Here at AppleInsider we all like diving into machines elbow-deep and bending them to our will. We're also realists, and understand that Apple has decided to not cater to that audience, and any nods in that direction beyond a RAM door are purely unintentional. So, angling for a machine like the NUC with an easily removable top panel for RAM and storage is tilting at windmills, no matter how much we wish it were otherwise.
Mike, great article..... and then this?
Why constantly conflate two separate issues (i.e.: in your articles, on podcasts, etc.)? I totally agree that Apple doesn't care much about the tinkerer/hobbyist who wants to get inside the computer and upgrade, hot-rod, or replace parts. But, I don't think this is a justification for not keeping models like the Mini up to date, or having reasonable low to mid-range models.
If Apple put the hardware of that last (or even the previous) NUCs you mention in the article, into some case that Apple seals up so it can't possibly be modified, I'd (and I think many others) still be incredibly happy. I don't need a computer I can tinker with... I just need a reasonably good prosumer Mac, as I'm in the Apple eco-system (so can't just easily move to Windows).
Unless Apple is trying to kill off the Mac, or incompetent/struggling to stay relevant with Macs, they are screwing up. It's that plain and simple. Don't try to defend them with the whole 'hobbyists aren't their target market' thing, please. Two separate issues.
There's no defense here, more resignation to a fate.
Hasn't every inexpensive WinPC been eating the Mac mini's lunch since its inception? The Mac mini starts at where most WinPCs are sold, regardless of form factor.
I don’t think so. If by simply being cheaper, then you are right. But the Mac mini was smaller, interesting and performed better, more reliably than those alternatives. At the time of its release, it’s sum was greater than that of windows products at the same price point.
In 2014 Apple stuffed a great thing up, and then slunk off in shame pretending it didn’t know it.
I think you've answered your own question by buying a NUC that is centered around PC gaming. That's their primary reason for existing, and the prices that include RAM etc. end up very similar to MacBooks and iMacs at the low-end. So why not just buy a MacBook or iMac?
Which MacBook or iMac gives you 2.6Ghz quad-core i7, Thunderbolt 3, 512GB NVMe M.2 SSD, and 16GB of RAM for around $800? I realize the NUC doesn't come with a monitor, but iMac or MacBook-quality monitors can be had for well under $300.
The iMac with 2.3GHz i5, 16 GB RAM, and 256 GB SSD is $1499.
Apple does not have anything that competes with this at this price point.
Bahahahahaha! Yeah right!
So...uh...would you care to elaborate on your comment? I can tell you I just priced out iMacs and MacBooks with comparable (somewhat) specs. The NUC still has much better specs. A comparably equipped MacBook is nearly $2000.
So, tell me, which Apple offering has reasonably close specs at a reasonably close price.
I think you've answered your own question by buying a NUC that is centered around PC gaming. That's their primary reason for existing, and the prices that include RAM etc. end up very similar to MacBooks and iMacs at the low-end. So why not just buy a MacBook or iMac?
Which MacBook or iMac gives you 2.6Ghz quad-core i7, Thunderbolt 3, 512GB NVMe M.2 SSD, and 16GB of RAM for around $800? I realize the NUC doesn't come with a monitor, but iMac or MacBook-quality monitors can be had for well under $300.
The iMac with 2.3GHz i5, 16 GB RAM, and 256 GB SSD is $1499.
Apple does not have anything that competes with this at this price point.
Bahahahahaha! Yeah right!
So...uh...would you care to elaborate on your comment? I can tell you I just priced out iMacs and MacBooks with comparable (somewhat) specs. The NUC still has much better specs. A comparably equipped MacBook is nearly $2000.
So, tell me, which Apple offering has reasonably close specs at a reasonably close price.
I believe he knows you're right which is why all he had to offer was a bitter laugh and no factual retort... So don't sweat it.
My comment was that you can find the same quality displays that are on the iMac/MacBook for under $300 which is why that part of the quote was bold. Show me!
Oh boy...here we go! Continuous bitching about the Mac mini. I doubt most here are gonna buy one anyways.
Of course not. To be frank, you would have to be a brainless idiot to buy the current insult of a Mac mini.
I get that most of the money comes from the iPhone, so it’s the priority. But the most stupid thing about the neglect and/or gimping of pretty all Mac lines over an extended period is that it is mistreating Mac buyers, who are the most loyal long term buyers of all things Apple, and have always been the greatest evangelists for its platforms and ecosystems. Neglecting and deliberately crippling functionality and utility of macs by design, and then failing to at the least keep them up to date is beyond the pale.
Divorce is ugly. And just like a neglected and spourned spouse, lovers can be turned into passionate haters.
Even if Apple updated them today with modern specs...how many are gonna actually go buy one? Its just like the Mac Pro. Everyone wants to complain about it, but very little here are actually gonna go buy one.
Comments
If Apple does anything here, it shouldn't be a new Mac Mini, but a new paradigm for home computer.
Back in the day when the mini first came out I thought that was the way personal computing was going to go (smaller form factor with increased computational sharing via then early versions of wifi).
I get that most of the money comes from the iPhone, so it’s the priority. But the most stupid thing about the neglect and/or gimping of pretty all Mac lines over an extended period is that it is mistreating Mac buyers, who are the most loyal long term buyers of all things Apple, and have always been the greatest evangelists for its platforms and ecosystems. Neglecting and deliberately crippling functionality and utility of macs by design, and then failing to at the least keep them up to date is beyond the pale.
Divorce is ugly. And just like a neglected and spourned spouse, lovers can be turned into passionate haters.
The machine is great, and I decked it out (since I keep my machines for a long time), but I would have preferred to replace the Mini with another Mini. I seriously looked at a Hackintosh, but much of why I use Macs is because I don't want to have to maintain them. I also considered switching to Linux as a full-time OS (a good part of my day is spent in a Unix shell anyway) but rely on too many Mac-only applications (OmniGraffle and OmniFocus are a big part of my workflow). If Apple keeps moving toward appliance computers, I may consider moving that direction next time.
If Apple doesn't want clones, if they want to control the ecosystem, then they themselves are on the hook to offer a complete ecosystem.
I certainly don't want clones, and I certainly do want Apple to control the ecosystem.
So that means I certainly do want them to offer a complete ecosystem.
A company whose resurgence began with an appeal to the people who "think different" ought to understand the importance of a niche. Healthy ecosystems are full of niches. Take away the niches and the ecosystem dies.
Personally I have been waiting for a mac mini refresh for well over a year now. My son has a lower end 2014 that he is now primarily using for video editing. This isn't for work so he doesn't want to spend significant money, but the iMac is way under powered for what he is using it for. He's happy and familiar with his editing tools and is invested in the Apple ecosystem with an iPhone and Ipad Pro so a refreshed Mac Mini would be the preferred option. We want to do something before the end of summer so if there isn't any mini update announced soon, we will make a decision on either an iMac or Linux desktop as a replacement. A WWDC announcement would be nice. BTW - Not going with Windows under my watch.
So don't sweat it.
Why constantly conflate two separate issues (i.e.: in your articles, on podcasts, etc.)? I totally agree that Apple doesn't care much about the tinkerer/hobbyist who wants to get inside the computer and upgrade, hot-rod, or replace parts. But, I don't think this is a justification for not keeping models like the Mini up to date, or having reasonable low to mid-range models.
If Apple put the hardware of that last (or even the previous) NUCs you mention in the article, into some case that Apple seals up so it can't possibly be modified, I'd (and I think many others) still be incredibly happy. I don't need a computer I can tinker with... I just need a reasonably good prosumer Mac, as I'm in the Apple eco-system (so can't just easily move to Windows).
Unless Apple is trying to kill off the Mac, or incompetent/struggling to stay relevant with Macs, they are screwing up. It's that plain and simple. Don't try to defend them with the whole 'hobbyists aren't their target market' thing, please. Two separate issues.
Like I said, we're realists.
In 2014 Apple stuffed a great thing up, and then slunk off in shame pretending it didn’t know it.
My comment was that you can find the same quality displays that are on the iMac/MacBook for under $300 which is why that part of the quote was bold. Show me!