2014 Mac Mini Teardown Highlights Increased Difficulty For User Upgradability

[AlecZ]

The 13 inch MacBook Pro has the same specs as the new Mac mini. Soldered on RAM and no quad-core option. Have fun with your "Pro" machine....

It's a laptop. There's a legitimate cause for non-serviceability on it. Also, power consumption matters, and it's not expected to be as fast. Some people actually buy rMBPs to run Windows (e.g. one guy on my floor), but I've never heard of anyone buying a Mac mini for Windows.

 

[HyperZboy]

Not slower. There's just no 4-core version. I'm pretty sure you'll find the 2014 faster than the comparable 2012.

Unless you're just looking for a reason to complain, in which case please excuse the interruption...

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how this update is "insanely great!"

Last I checked tech people analyzing an update don't deal in "pretty sures."

 

[H2SO4]

The original Mac mini (core solo) (yes core solo, not duo, not core 2 duo) was the first (modern) Mac that I had. We went through countless upgrades including hard drive, RAM, and even a processor swap. I went from the core solo all the way up to the core 2 duo. I learned a lot from those experiences, and now electronics repair is my job.

If I ever wanted to cry, it would be now

Unfortunately it’s the way things are going. I don’t agree with it either by the way. My engineers these days are taught how to replace modules and configure that new module with a laptop, they don’t actually need to know how the box itself works. Shouldn’t be that way but that’s how companies are producing goods today;
Reduces downtime for the customer, less money lost.
Increase cost for the customer, more money lost here but less than the downtime would have cost you.
Increase profit for the manufacturer.
Reduce training costs for the manufacturer.
Increase the number of repairs possible in a given time for the manufacturer.

Thing is we all buy into it, how - we keep buying Apple products, and yep - guilty of it too.

 

[MacLC]

For one thing these are a step down from the mini's of 2 years ago with no way to make them even as good. Here it costs about 325. us dollars to max out the memory through apple. The mac mini is no longer worthwhile, not to mention no more quad core processor.

I don't see why even the most hard core apple worshipers don't get that.

I agree 100%. For here the prices at current exchange rates are:
$832 for the new 2.6ghz, or
$561 USD for the new 1.4ghz, or
$557 for the old 2.5ghz model w/8GB RAM

After waiting for 2 years the best value is in the old model.
A good 1080P screen+mouse+keyboard = $245 more.
The 2.7ghz QUAD CORE iMac w/Iris Pro GPU is $1043. $40 less than the Mac Mini but with better GPU, CPU, and technically upgradable RAM.

I wouldn't say that the new Mac Mini was an afterthought. No, they just weren't thinking at all when they released it.

 

[Jess13]

I was going to buy a Mac mini;
I waited.
The new Mac mini arrived;
I hated.

The End.

*buys rMBP*

Apple wins.

 

[Analog Kid]

I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how this update is "insanely great!"

Last I checked tech people analyzing an update don't deal in "pretty sures."

You might be waiting for a while on the first, and I'll rephrase my claim:

You'll find 2014s faster than the comparable 2012's.

http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks

 

[Vavatch]

The original Mac mini (core solo) (yes core solo, not duo, not core 2 duo)

Actually, the ORIGINAL Mac mini, introduced in January 2005, did NOT have a Core Solo, nor was it even an Intel based Mac. It had a single core, IBM PowerPC G4 CPU, running at 1.25 or 1.42Ghz. Later, in September '05, a 1.5Ghz model was added.

All three G4 Mac minis were discontinued in February '06 when the 1.5Ghz Intel Core Solo, 1.66Ghz Core Duo and the 1.83Ghz Core Duo Mac mini models were introduced.

 

[flyinmac]

Not slower. There's just no 4-core version. I'm pretty sure you'll find the 2014 faster than the comparable 2012.

Unless you're just looking for a reason to complain, in which case please excuse the interruption...

I tried to compare it to the last model... but unfortunately they didn't have one that slow in 2012. So, I was unable to compare it to a comparable model from 2012.

Looks back through the years and tries to find another 1.4 GHz Mini... closest I can get is 2005ish.

Hmm... you're right, it is faster than the last 1.4 GHz Mini... oh, wait, there wasn't another 1.4 GHz mini in recent history. Tries to decide whether you want to compare it to the 1.33 GHz G4 or the 1.42 GHz G4 or the 2006 CoreDuo of about the same speed range.

 

[AlecZ]

I tried to compare it to the last model... but unfortunately they didn't have one that slow in 2012. So, I was unable to compare it to a comparable model from 2012.

Looks back through the years and tries to find another 1.4 GHz Mini... closest I can get is 2005ish.

Hmm... you're right, it is faster than the last 1.4 GHz Mini... oh, wait, there wasn't another 1.4 GHz mini in recent history. Tries to decide whether you want to compare it to the 1.33 GHz G4 or the 1.42 GHz G4 or the 2006 CoreDuo of about the same speed range.

You can't compare the CPUs in any meaningful way based on clock speeds alone. I'm sure the 1.4GHz i5 is faster than the 2009 mini's 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo.

 

[flyinmac]

You can't compare the CPUs in any meaningful way based on clock speeds alone.

Illustrative point... There was no 1.4 GHz Mini in the immediate history. Therefore, nothing to compare it against except machines which were superior to the current machine.

 

[HyperZboy]

I know a lot of people are criticizing Apple's lack of "green" effort, but while I think that's important, I'm not an environmentalist activist myself.

I simply feel like the new Mac Mini lacks as much future value, longevity or performance as the previous outside of the $100 price drop.

I just can't see people running to stores for this product.

A $99-$199 appliance I do not expect a single upgrade possibility.
$500 or more, I do expect some or basic expandability.

I guess that's a very basic disagreement with a lot of people here.

Since I've been an Apple user for so long, I thought about something else that Apple used to do, which in hindsight was a bit dumb, but anyone remember when you could upgrade your entire logic board to a PowerPC logic board? It was a dumb idea, but it sent a message that Apple wasn't abandoning you.

Soldering RAM sends the message... Buy it, use it, then toss it.

 

[x5tuu]

Sorry the rest of the world dares to be poor, and yet tries to keep some form of technology available for their family and children to use.

You're right, they should either suck it up, and starve their family for a year to buy some extreme piece of hardware that they don't need, or just destine their children and family to be unfamiliar with the technology so that they can never better their situation.

How dare they ever think about buying something with what little money they can spare and try to get it to last as long as possible by seeking something that can be upgraded incrementally as needed.

You're right, if you're not rich, you should just disappear and die. You do realize that you cannot even interact with the very agencies which help you find work, get food for your family, further your education to get a better job, etc. without a computer in my area.... If you don't have a computer at home, you're screwed if you need help to lift yourself out of poverty.

And, you're attitude that people should just throw stuff away and replace it frequently is short sighted, ignorant, and denies people the right to do their best to survive in a technology based world on an often very tight budget.

I can't tell you how many people I know who are in unfortunate situations because of circumstances beyond their control, and would be flat destitute right now if they didn't have a computer to interact with the agencies who can help them...

Get out of your billionaire mindset for a moment and consider that not everyone can throw things away and replace them frequently. Some need to make choices that will get them what they need, and enable them to stay current with incremental upgrades over the years. Not everyone can live the life of luxurious waste that you seem to think we should all submit to.

How about you step off your high horse for a moment and open your eyes and realise that individuals that are in that sort of situation would be far better off with a windows based machine (rather than the perceived luxury of a Mac that serves naught other than a faux status symbol) that they could have brand new for a fraction of the cost of the new mini, or used for next nothing at all and can then upgrade to their hearts content.

Talk about drama queen

 

[cfedu]

Illustrative point... There was no 1.4 GHz Mini in the immediate history. Therefore, nothing to compare it against except machines which were superior to the current machine.

You have to stop as they will not understand!! The have their glasses on!

 

[snorkelman]

Apple has been documented time and time again forcing obsolescence on us.

They recently just arbitrarily removed Handoff from mid-2011 MBA. An enterprising person in one of the subforums here figured out how to re-enable it with a 2 minute software hack. I suspect a future OS X update will do away with that hack, also known as the "evil bastard maneuver."

I don't know if I can blame them though. Unless something unforseen happens to make people want more horsepower under the hood, the entire PC industry, including Apple, is in deep deep trouble.

Yep have to agree took the best part of 25 years but OS and general apps no longer balloon in size on each release. For past few years they've stayed relatively static whilst processor performance and base RAM configs have continued to increase. On consumer side at least, the "one more push and we'll be ahead of the game" has finally come true.

Way things are going now the pro end is going to keep advancing over the hill in terms of ram and processor requirements, whilst consumer end is going to be largely content with what its got.

Sure there's still scope for improvements at consumer end to tempt folks into new kit but its shifting from 'bigger, faster, more' to 'doing more for the same' - maintain existing acceptable performance whilst extending time between charges, reducing heat and bringing fanless designs.

Use generic technology in proprietary solutions like handoff, to reintroduce the inbuilt obsolescence that OS and app upgrades used to provide, and you can spin out the consumer market for another decade or so.

Problem is mainly for mid end users with pro level aspirations. The more the performance gap between the two ends of the market widens the more they're going to have to spend to keep within touching distance of the end that interests them.

Leveraging high end consumer kit for low end pro uses isn't going to be an option any more, at least in the mac market.

If last years pro performance levels aren't trickling down into next years high end consumer kit, then the only way to get it at an affordable price in the future may well be to snag last years entry-level pro machine when it becomes next years second hand device.

 

[lsquare]

So I have to remove almost everything before I can get to the hard drive? From looking at the pictures, this seems harder than what's being written. I have plenty of experience building and troubleshooting PCs. I don't have any experience disassembling and reassembling Mac Minis. Will I have to buy a special screwdriver through iFixit to do all this work?

 

[subsonix]

Illustrative point... There was no 1.4 GHz Mini in the immediate history. Therefore, nothing to compare it against except machines which were superior to the current machine.

You could compare it against a current Air, all these CPUs has a variable clock speed, but in this particular one the span is larger, 1.4 - 2.7 Ghz. It's not a bad chip at all for an entry level model at $499.

 

[raybo]

Omg this guy ticked me off so much I had to make an account just to comment, who do you think you are mr keyboard warrior? Seriously, you speak for everyone in "poverty"? I doubt that. Actually the biggest annoyance about your holier than thou comment was that if people are in poverty they should not be owning a Mac mini in the first place. Macs are more expensive and a luxury item, if you knew real people who were poor you would know there is no way they would own an apple product, instead they would have some cheap no name brand computer and use the money for something more important.

Seriously, that's like complaining BMW car tires can only be changed by BMW but yet if people are that worse off they don't need a BMW, get off your high horse and think before you talk. Also by looking at your products in your tag line it looks like you are far from poor mr . 3 apple tvs. Don't try to speak for people and just come off as a POS. Rant over

So a mini costs too much for "poor" people? Even the new $499 version isn't a lot when most folks already have a serviceable keyboard, mouse, and monitor left over from their old PC. And who's to say who'll lose their job after buying their "extravagant" mini... and not be able to later upgrade or easily fix if necessary?

 

[cfedu]

Yep have to agree took the best part of 25 years but OS and general apps no longer balloon in size on each release. For past few years they've stayed relatively static whilst processor performance and base RAM configs have continued to increase. On consumer side at least, the "one more push and we'll be ahead of the game" has finally come true.

Way things are going now the pro end is going to keep advancing over the hill in terms of ram and processor requirements, whilst consumer end is going to be largely content with what its got.

Sure there's still scope for improvements at consumer end to tempt folks into new kit but its shifting from 'bigger, faster, more' to 'doing more for the same' - maintain existing acceptable performance whilst extending time between charges, reducing heat and bringing fanless designs.

Use generic technology in proprietary solutions like handoff, to reintroduce the inbuilt obsolescence that OS and app upgrades used to provide, and you can spin out the consumer market for another decade or so.

Problem is mainly for mid end users with pro level aspirations. The more the performance gap between the two ends of the market widens the more they're going to have to spend to keep within touching distance of the end that interests them.

Leveraging high end consumer kit for low end pro uses isn't going to be an option any more, at least in the mac market.

If last years pro performance levels aren't trickling down into next years high end consumer kit, then the only way to get it at an affordable price in the future may well be to snag last years entry-level pro machine when it becomes next years second hand device.

Are you trying to say that Moore's Law is reversed now and each year we will get less performance? Or I will be able to pick up a base Mac Pro for cheap next year? I would love to pick up a Late 2013 Mac Pro for for $1000, let me know when there is one available.

 

[Alphabetize]

Well, at least it still LOOKS nice . . . amazed they didn't try to thin it down.

In the redesign, they will get rid of the bottom twist-off that allows easy access to the internals and just use a T5 Torx screws all around.

 

[raybo]

How about you step off your high horse for a moment and open your eyes and realise that individuals that are in that sort of situation would be far better off with a windows based machine (rather than the perceived luxury of a Mac that serves naught other than a faux status symbol) that they could have brand new for a fraction of the cost of the new mini, or used for next nothing at all and can then upgrade to their hearts content.

Talk about drama queen

How do you know how/when a person became "poor". Perhaps when they lose their job after their "expensive" $499 mini is out of warranty and it can't be easily repaired or upgraded? Windows???? really...

 

[ItWasNotMe]

Well, after all the reviews and tear-downs I'm hoping my ageing mini lasts until after the next generation.

You'll know the one, it will be powered by an abacus with the beads soldered in place

 

[MyopicPaideia]

Wow. I was wrong in the other thread, fully own it!

This looks more and more like retaining this form factor was a late decision. Seems like they wanted to put these internals in a new casing.

Sadness...

 

[flyinmac]

How about you step off your high horse for a moment and open your eyes and realise that individuals that are in that sort of situation would be far better off with a windows based machine (rather than the perceived luxury of a Mac that serves naught other than a faux status symbol) that they could have brand new for a fraction of the cost of the new mini, or used for next nothing at all and can then upgrade to their hearts content.

Talk about drama queen

Alright then... Mr. Money Bags...

A poor person would obviously be better off spending $499 on a PC than on a mini... that's so obvious... Whatever.

You know what will keep Apple's "affordable machine" from reaching it's target audience? The new redesign.

How ridiculous that you would come out and claim that a $499 machine was targeted at people who have more money.

Compared to what?

I didn't realize that Apple strategically priced the $499 Mac Mini for those who make $200,000 a year. I'm sorry, I missed something in the math.

 

[wikiverse]

All old tech ends up in (hopefully) a recycling plant, soldered ram or not. Even repairable stuff like cars eventually end up thrown away.

1) Reduce.
2) Reuse.
3) ...

In that order.

 

[Michael Scrip]

You can't compare the CPUs in any meaningful way based on clock speeds alone.

I'm sure the 1.4GHz i5 is faster than the 2009 mini's 2.53GHz Core 2 Duo.

It appears that the newer processor is indeed faster.

PassMark reports the following:

Core2Duo P8700 @ 2.53GHz scores 1674

Core i5-4260U @ 1.40GHz scores 3651