Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac mini

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Feb 15, 2013, 09:00 AM   #1
Count Blah
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sterling, Va
Question How will Apple gimp the mini with Haswell?

You know it will happen. We all know it will happen. The next mini refresh that will contain Haswell can NOT take sales away from the iMac. Keeping the graphics and/or CPU a generation or two behind the iMac has always the easy play for Apple.

But with Haswell, the present model potentially gets put on it's ear. I"m REALLY excited about the possibility, and would but a mini the day it's announced, if Apple releases what I want. But as we've all seen with the mini, it's not what WE want, it's what Apple can release so as not to cut into iMac/MBA/MBP sales.

Given all that, my prediction is that only the highest model gets Haswell, and even in that, they do NOT release GT3 on the 1st go-round. The lower models will contain i7's with slightly faster clock speeds. MAYBE, and only maybe, an increase in memory or disk space on the lower models.

It would fit right in line with what they have historically done, and would not eat into sales of other products. I hope I am wrong.

What do you think the Haswell mini will look like?
__________________
I tell you this, no eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.

Last edited by Count Blah; Feb 15, 2013 at 09:32 AM.
Count Blah is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 09:03 AM   #2
balamw
Moderator
 
balamw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New England, USA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Blah View Post
***** Someone please fix the title *******
MOD NOTE: I went ahead and did it for you, but you should be able to do it yourself. Edit -> Go Advanced.

B
__________________
MBA (13" 1.7 GHz 128GB), UMBP (15" SD 2.8 GHz), UMB (13" 2.4 GHz), iMac (17" Yonah), 32GB iPad 3 WiFi+LTE, 64 GB iPad WiFi, 32 GB iPhone 5, Airport Extreme
balamw is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 09:30 AM   #3
Count Blah
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sterling, Va
Thanks, noted for future screw-ups on my part
__________________
I tell you this, no eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.
Count Blah is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 09:42 AM   #4
gregorsamsa
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: (Metamorphosing near) Staffs, 51st State.
Agree they won't risk cannibalizing iMac sales under any circumstances. How might they "gimp" Haswell Minis? Good question.

Little is 100% certain re Apple's future roadmap, but that increasing focus on iOS & mobile devices seems likely. That's where the greatest market share & profit margins will be. Conceivably, Macs may play a much less important role for Apple in future.

By the time Haswell is released, Apple may have moved way ahead towards integrating OS X & iOS. By then, Apple might also have considerably advanced development of their own custom-designed ARM processors, with more cores. ARM already announced their 64-bit core CPU last October.

Though I hope the following doesn't happen, by the time of Haswell, the Mini could be made even thinner & run on advanced ARM processors. The iMac seeing ARM-based CPUs with more cores. More powerful graphics may be sacrificed to hasten the overall transition

I don't necessarily believe it'll play out like this. I honestly don't know. This view could turn out to be complete BS. But I doubt that such a scenario won't be feasible for Apple at some point in the not so distant future.

Apple will likely follow the most profitable markets. In future, this seems less likely to be focused on improving the specs of their consumer Mac range (ditto for other proper computers), & more so on improving their mobile devices.
gregorsamsa is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 10:04 AM   #5
CausticPuppy
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: May 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Blah View Post
Keeping the graphics and/or CPU a generation or two behind the iMac has always the easy play for Apple.
This isn't true - in fact, the Mac Mini got the Ivy Bridge CPU's months before the iMac did.

The only difference is that the Mini uses laptop CPU's while iMac uses desktop CPU's (with discrete graphics, albeit mobile GPU's).
__________________
2011 Mac Mini Server, 16 GB RAM, 256GB Crucial M4 SSD, 500GB HDD + 3TB NAS
Haswell rMBP 13" - i7/512GB
Mac Mini 1.83GHz Core2Duo, 3GB RAM, 60GB SSD
iPad Air/iPhone5S
CausticPuppy is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 10:21 AM   #6
Woyzeck
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
I'm afraid that there's a good chance that they'll drop the Mini at all. It's original purpose was to provide a low-cost and thus low-barrier-entry into OSX for people coming over from PCs. The objective was that once they're in they'll probably purchase something more expensive (iMac, MBA, MBP) later.

As the desktop seems to be of lower importance now for Apple I doubt that the Mini can still provide what Apple is looking for. By 2013 it's much more likely that switchers will buy a low-cost notebook than a low-cost desktop.

So somehow the MBA could be the new Mini.
Woyzeck is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 10:35 AM   #7
Count Blah
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sterling, Va
Quote:
Originally Posted by CausticPuppy View Post
This isn't true - in fact, the Mac Mini got the Ivy Bridge CPU's months before the iMac did.

The only difference is that the Mini uses laptop CPU's while iMac uses desktop CPU's (with discrete graphics, albeit mobile GPU's).
That's why I said "CPU and/or GPU" The mini got the IB CPU, but lost integrated graphics so as NOT to cannibalize iMac sales too much. This is precisely why I think GT3 in the mini is a pipe dream on the initial haswell upgrade. The mini would simply be too compelling, when compared to the iMac.
__________________
I tell you this, no eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.
Count Blah is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 10:49 AM   #8
Futurix
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: London
All they need to do is update iMacs 6-8 months before the mini.
Futurix is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 11:01 AM   #9
blueroom
macrumors 603
 
blueroom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto, Canada
Because of the Mini's small size it'll never get any CPU / GPU with a high TDP. Of course you should be able to buy a not gimped at all Pro this fall.
__________________
My iOS devices are not jailbroken.
Bill
My Blog
blueroom is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 11:27 AM   #10
philipma1957
macrumors 603
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Blah View Post
That's why I said "CPU and/or GPU" The mini got the IB CPU, but lost integrated graphics so as NOT to cannibalize iMac sales too much. This is precisely why I think GT3 in the mini is a pipe dream on the initial haswell upgrade. The mini would simply be too compelling, when compared to the iMac.
well if they want to have 2 desktop lines.


a fusion of the mini and the pro.

you could have 5 or 6 models.

then to make the iMac compete you could allow hdd access.


it could work.


but most likely they will keep the 3 lines with the mini getting welded ram.

the mini is very close to being converted into a non mod-able piece of gear.

intel is developing mini computers

http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/i...-400-20120611/

I think these will pressure apple into a black box mini. I hope that I am wrong.
philipma1957 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 11:42 AM   #11
ToomeyND
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
I swear I already posted in this thread, but I'll repost.

I'm due for an upgrade, but I plan on waiting until the refresh at the end of this year. I'm also scared of what they will do with the update. My biggest fear is removing the ability to do user upgrades. For example, soldering the ram and ssd or just closing off the unit at much as possible. If they do this, I will have waited a 8-11 months just to settle for this year's model...
ToomeyND is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 11:44 AM   #12
Acorn
macrumors 68020
 
Acorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Fangorn Forest
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipma1957 View Post
well if they want to have 2 desktop lines.


a fusion of the mini and the pro.

you could have 5 or 6 models.

then to make the iMac compete you could allow hdd access.


it could work.


but most likely they will keep the 3 lines with the mini getting welded ram.

the mini is very close to being converted into a non mod-able piece of gear.

intel is developing mini computers

http://www.geek.com/articles/chips/i...-400-20120611/

I think these will pressure apple into a black box mini. I hope that I am wrong.
intel is beginning to figure out heat wise why apple uses laptop cpu and not desktop cpu in the mini. intel boasts a desktop board inside yet heat proves its not a viable option yet.
Acorn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 11:47 AM   #13
spatlese44
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Milwaukee
Quote:
Originally Posted by philipma1957 View Post
but most likely they will keep the 3 lines with the mini getting welded ram.
Wouldn't ram soldered to the board be more appropriate where space is truely at a premium as in laptops? I could see Apple creating such a device for kiosk use and such, but I think the for consumer use the Mini is already small enough.
spatlese44 is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 12:04 PM   #14
ToomeyND
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by spatlese44 View Post
Wouldn't ram soldered to the board be more appropriate where space is truely at a premium as in laptops? I could see Apple creating such a device for kiosk use and such, but I think the for consumer use the Mini is already small enough.
People said that about the iMac too. Then apple trimmed it down, requiring users to purchase an external ODD to compliment their Most-in-One machine.
ToomeyND is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 12:21 PM   #15
Count Blah
Thread Starter
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Sterling, Va
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToomeyND View Post
People said that about the iMac too. Then apple trimmed it down, requiring users to purchase an external ODD to compliment their Most-in-One machine.
Never underestimate Apple's desire to make things thinner. Thinner to the point of reduced functionality for the end user, as ToomeyND points out.
__________________
I tell you this, no eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.
Count Blah is offline   5 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 12:29 PM   #16
ToomeyND
macrumors 6502
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Blah View Post
Never underestimate Apple's desire to make things thinner. Thinner to the point of reduced functionality for the end user, as ToomeyND points out.
Think of just taking the innards of the rMBP and put all the ports on the back of a square enclosure instead of both sides of a laptop. That is what I'm afraid they are going to do. It'd be amazingly thin for amazingly no reason.
ToomeyND is offline   7 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 12:51 PM   #17
paulrbeers
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToomeyND View Post
Think of just taking the innards of the rMBP and put all the ports on the back of a square enclosure instead of both sides of a laptop. That is what I'm afraid they are going to do. It'd be amazingly thin for amazingly no reason.
This is my guess for the 2013 Haswell Mac Mini (might even slip to early 2014 since they generally run about a 15 month update cycle). Generally speaking Apple has been building the Base Mini's around whatever the 13" MBP has for CPU. The High end Mini ($800 model) has been a moving target so it's hard to say. 2010 and 2012 it was what the Base 15" MBP had for CPU, but the 2011 used the upper 13" (probably because they paired it with the AMD 6630).

My guess is you are right that the Base Mini will be the 13" rMBP processor + soldered memory, but will throw in the small SSD from the 13" as their way of saying "sorry for the soldered memory" and the High end mini will probably be whatever the base 15" rMBP has (but not discrete GPU). Just my guess. All in a super thin package that is about half the height of the current Mini....
__________________
rMBP 11,2 15" 2.0Ghz w/ 256GB SSD
MBA 6,2 13" 1.7Ghz w/ 256GB SSD
Mac Mini 6,2 2.3ghz w/ 240GB SSD + 1TB
Mac Pro 1,1 w/ 8 cores @ 2.66 w/ 240GB SSD
paulrbeers is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 12:57 PM   #18
Che Castro
macrumors 601
 
Join Date: May 2009
how big of a difference will this haswell be be compared to the new model out now

i just got the base mini 2012 last week and put 16gb of ram in it

are you guys going to sell yours when this haswell drops?
Che Castro is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 01:00 PM   #19
paulrbeers
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Che Castro View Post
how big of a difference will this haswell be be compared to the new model out now

i just got the base mini 2012 last week and put 16gb of ram in it

are you guys going to sell yours when this haswell drops?
I'll be retiring my 2006 MacPro as my "server" and putting my 2012 in it's place. And then putting the Haswell Mini as my "main" desktop. I know I have "special" circumstances...
__________________
rMBP 11,2 15" 2.0Ghz w/ 256GB SSD
MBA 6,2 13" 1.7Ghz w/ 256GB SSD
Mac Mini 6,2 2.3ghz w/ 240GB SSD + 1TB
Mac Pro 1,1 w/ 8 cores @ 2.66 w/ 240GB SSD
paulrbeers is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 01:27 PM   #20
gregorsamsa
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: (Metamorphosing near) Staffs, 51st State.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Che Castro View Post
how big of a difference will this haswell be be compared to the new model out now

i just got the base mini 2012 last week and put 16gb of ram in it

are you guys going to sell yours when this haswell drops?
Haswell will be about 3 times faster than Ivy Bridge for onboard 3D graphics:

http://www.wccftech.com/haswell-time...er-ivy-bridge/

I'm buying, bar one proviso. If the next Mini's RAM is non-upgradable, my next Mac will be 2nd user & so on. No more new Macs for me &, in time, I'll switch more work over to PC. That's for sure.

I've upgraded RAM on all 3 of my previous Macs, saving loads on Apple's exorbitant prices. It's not so much the cost though, more so the principle.
gregorsamsa is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 02:55 PM   #21
rbrian
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Apple aren't afraid to cannibalise their own products. The mini Server killed the X-Serve, the MacBook Air and classic MacBook Pro killed the plain MacBook. That being said, there's no reason to gimp the mini to avoid canibalising the iMac - they could be identical but for the screen and still be different enough.

The Haswell mini will probably be made 12mm thinner by removing one of the drive bays, leaving no room for a discrete graphics card. This will be less important with Haswell, which has much better standard graphics. The missing second drive will be replaced with a blade type SSD and standard HDD Fusion drive. They've made the RAM so easy to change with a simple twist that I doubt they'd solder it... But I've been wrong before.

The lineup will be two models, with the internals of the low-end 13" MBP, and the high-end 15". The iMac will have some desktop components, making it faster despite similar numbers - and it comes with a screen, which will be cheaper than the equivalent mini + Thunderbolt Display. The Mac Pro will be supercomputer.
rbrian is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 03:11 PM   #22
Rapscallion
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
I'm surprised they haven't put a blade style SSD in the mini yet, of course those are more expensive then the standard HDD and then that would eat into the profit margins, maybe I shouldn't be so surprised.

I bet that this is where we are headed though, soldered ram and Blade SSD's would make more room in the body or would allow apple to make the mini tiny.
Hmmm a Mac Tiny!
Rapscallion is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 03:37 PM   #23
paulrbeers
macrumors 68040
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rapscallion View Post
Mac Tiny!

Mac Nano!
__________________
rMBP 11,2 15" 2.0Ghz w/ 256GB SSD
MBA 6,2 13" 1.7Ghz w/ 256GB SSD
Mac Mini 6,2 2.3ghz w/ 240GB SSD + 1TB
Mac Pro 1,1 w/ 8 cores @ 2.66 w/ 240GB SSD
paulrbeers is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 04:40 PM   #24
mslide
macrumors 6502a
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Blah View Post
What do you think the Haswell mini will look like?
Exactly like the minis now except it will have Haswell. Not putting discrete graphics in them is enough of a gimp.
mslide is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Feb 15, 2013, 05:18 PM   #25
thekev
macrumors 603
 
thekev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by CausticPuppy View Post
This isn't true - in fact, the Mac Mini got the Ivy Bridge CPU's months before the iMac did.

The only difference is that the Mini uses laptop CPU's while iMac uses desktop CPU's (with discrete graphics, albeit mobile GPU's).
You know the big advantage to a Mini is you can either buy a better and less mirror like display than Apple offers or save money on a less expensive one. Not everyone will do this either way. Some people buy the mini and a thunderbolt display. I'll never understand the point of a stationary machine with a display that is marketed based on its functionality as a docking station.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Blah View Post
That's why I said "CPU and/or GPU" The mini got the IB CPU, but lost integrated graphics so as NOT to cannibalize iMac sales too much. This is precisely why I think GT3 in the mini is a pipe dream on the initial haswell upgrade. The mini would simply be too compelling, when compared to the iMac.
Your assumptions are really silly and merely suggest that you haven't paid attention to what actually trickles out. The 2011 had a very poor gpu implementation. They used a sort of lower mid range notebook gpu and starved it on memory. It outperforms the HD 4000 when the memory isn't an issue. When it is, the gap closes pretty fast. Instead this year they went to a more expensive cpu on the mid range model and dropped the "discrete" gpu. Integrated means it's part of the cpu package, which is what it has now, not what it lost. GT3 just depends on the available matrix of cpu and gpu configurations in terms of tdp, price, and core count.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Count Blah View Post
Never underestimate Apple's desire to make things thinner. Thinner to the point of reduced functionality for the end user, as ToomeyND points out.
It still puzzles me at times. It's like they try to gauge what percentage of users will be affected and out of those what percentage will put up with it. They could at least do better than extortionate prices for poorly made dongles. One of the old mini displayport to dvi dongles I used a long time ago had misaligned seams like it wasn't assembled properly. The things frequently die or don't maintain solid connections, which is why I hate anything that forces the use of dongles. Anyone who doesn't believe me can check Apple Store comments.
__________________
world's largest manufacturer of tin foil hats, none of that aluminum foil crap.
thekev is online now   1 Reply With Quote

Reply
MacRumors Forums > Apple Hardware > Desktops > Mac mini

Tags
gt3, haswell

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Haswell Mini: Same RAM specifications as Late 2012 Mini? apfelmann Mac mini 19 Jan 28, 2014 09:10 AM
When is the new Mac mini Haswell coming out? MacHaris Mac mini 288 Jan 8, 2014 05:16 PM
Haswell --> Haswell-E or Broadwell for apple psik MacBook Pro 9 Aug 31, 2013 05:51 AM
Haswell graphics and what could go in the mini Ice Dragon Mac mini 44 Mar 22, 2013 12:09 AM
Haswell Mini visim91 Mac mini 39 Dec 12, 2012 01:28 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:49 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC