Apple Likely Planning to Skip M3 Mac Mini for M4 Refresh in Late 2024

[HobeSoundDarryl]

If we "think different," there's probably another choice than only increasing the price at the price Apple charges for that upgrade now. For example, what if Apple just ate the probably $8-$15 added cost to make 16GB base and spun it as "we heard you" value add in the rollout pitch? How well would that go over with pretty much EVERYONE? Then this entire whine goes away (this is called spending a little money to grow customer goodwill). Perhaps overall Apple margin slides from north of 47% to perhaps 46.X% if they can't find $8-$15 per unit somewhere else... but traditional Apple margin was already relatively sky high back when the target was 38%-40%. And there's plenty of marketing punch in 'leading' the industry to 16GB base.

Apple's cost is not $200... not even close. That's just the price they demand from buyers. To get a sense of Apple's approx. cost, shop 16GB RAM on Amazon and then estimate some profit to Amazon and some profit to the manufacturer to shave off of retail pricing... AND consider this is quantity ONE unit pricing instead of buying in Apple volume. I'll save anyone interested the trouble (and this is not even the cheapest option)...

Since a few people seem confused about the idea here, I am NOT suggesting slotted RAM... but that Apple RAM doesn't have to be priced at $200 vs. what RAM costs from RAM-makers at substantially below $200. The point is that 16GB of RAM can cost consumers considerably LESS THAN $50. It does not need to be $200 for 8 more GBs of it in the upgrade.

 

[darngooddesign]

I hope it has a higher limit for RAM. 16 GB is just not enough anymore,

The M2 Mini can have 24GB, and the M2-Pro Mini can have 32GB.

 

[Biro]

Skipping the M3 in Apple desktops is good news and makes sense. But I just bought my M2 Max Studio last Christmas. So I’ll still be keeping it a few years.

 

[citysnaps]

Fine. 16GB RAM minimum, please.

No worries. Just select the M2 Pro option which starts at 16GB RAM.

 

[azentropy]

Fine. 16GB RAM minimum, please.

I think the M4 will be 12GB, but also thought that M3 was going to be too.

 

[Populus]

Yep, I’ve been thinking about this for a long time. Mac mini and Studio are jumping directly to the M4 generation. Apparently the M3 generation has been some kind of stopgap gen, using a low yield process to win some time until the N3E process was running at full steam, to launch the M4 generation.

I’m still not sure of getting a new Mac mini if the upcoming M4 iPad Pro plus iPadOS 18 can really replace the few uses I have for my Mac. But if that’s not the case and I stick with the 11” M2 iPad Pro, my next purchase will likely be an M4 Mac mini with 24/32GB of RAM, and use Sidecar to connect to it from my iPad Pro.

 

[AlmightyKang]

It's my time to shine again against the 16Gb faction!

I spent 2 months on a base M2 Mac Mini

The project is over. About 2 months ago now, a friend of mine sold me a base 8/256 Mac Mini M2 for a stupid low price which I couldn't turn down. It was his first ARM Mac after his old 16" Intel lap burner gave up. He bought an M3 iMac to replace the mini with so wanted to dump it off. I...

forums.macrumors.com

Hint: I'm still using it now.

Back on topic, at least I'm not going to be as broke if they aren't doing an M3 one!

 

[darngooddesign]

It's my time to shine again against the 16Gb faction!

I spent 2 months on a base M2 Mac Mini

The project is over. About 2 months ago now, a friend of mine sold me a base 8/256 Mac Mini M2 for a stupid low price which I couldn't turn down. It was his first ARM Mac after his old 16" Intel lap burner gave up. He bought an M3 iMac to replace the mini with so wanted to dump it off. I...

forums.macrumors.com

Hint: I'm still using it now.

Back on topic, at least I'm not going to be as broke if they aren't doing an M3 one!

Even Dan said in the MR review of the M3 Air that he was completely surprised how capable it was with only 8GB RAM.

 

[AlmightyKang]

Even Dan said in the MR review of the M3 Air that he was completely surprised how capable it was with only 8GB RAM.

Yeah I can't break the damn thing if I try. It just sucks up all the workload, spits it out and calls me a *****.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Good for you. Many buy a new Mac with an eye towards using it for 7-10 years instead of only a few months. Your project shows 8GB can certainly work NOW. Will it be enough in 2027, 2029, 2031? Mac buyers can't know that with any certainty up front and Silicon offers no upgrade options later if any such needs pops up... thus the angst to buy for well beyond "today" and facing Apple sky high "company store" pricing for upgrades.

I suspect if there was a 4GB RAM option, someone could conduct a similar experiment with a similar outcome and argue that 4GB is "enough"... even imply that it is enough for just about everyone. Furthermore, since there is iCloud, one could assume in abundant iCloud storage (while ignoring the forever rent of it) to imply 64GB of storage is enough... or 32GB or 16GB or 8GB.

There's always counterpoint in favor of whatever Apple is selling now... but you don't see too many arguments arguing for Apple to step it down when that is technically possible too... only how what Apple offers now is "perfect"... until Apple opts to shift to a new "perfect." Then Apple is not called out as wrong for adopting the overkill. Instead, it simply becomes the new "perfect." Whatever Apple chooses to offer is ideal.

See YEARS of passionate defense of 3.5" and 4" iPhones as "perfect" and how phablet sizes were "abominations" that would drive developer "fragmentation" and require pants with bigger pockets & man purses... and destroy the all-important benefit of one-handed use. Then Apple went phablet and I'm still looking for pants with bigger pockets and man purses. And WOW, how those one hands must have magically grown!!!

Too old a reference? See USB-C "forced" into iPhone by EU laws, certainly leading to countless disasters of wobbly port, broken tongues and lint extinction. Many months later, I still find lint... and I haven't seen ONE USB-C repair kiosk pop up anywhere to deal with that massive volume of certain repairs. Has there been ONE story of a broken tongue in nearly a year now?

Nevertheless, if 16GB RAM is overkill, to err to some extra RAM is much better than squeaking by on the bare minimum. Even the "light use" crowd can't ever be sure that they'll never need that Mac to do something more RAM demanding at some point in its life. Having the RAM makes it possible to cover that scenario. Not having it means the Mac may fail in that situation. Else, owner may have to toss a perfectly good Mac and replace it with another because their needs evolved over the 7-10 years they own it.

 

[darngooddesign]

Too old a reference? See USB-C "forced" into iPhone by EU laws, certainly leading to countless disasters of wobbly, broken tongues and lint extinction. Many months later, I still find lint... and I haven't seen ONE USB-C repair kiosk pop up anywhere to deal with that massive volume of certain repairs. Has there been ONE story of a broken tongue in nearly a year now?

I have never seen dedicated Lightning or USB-C repair kiosks. Pretty sure port repairs are handled by kiosks which repair other things like cracked screens.

 

[Darren.h]

yep. that's why I will never buy a Mac mini. 8GB Is totally laughable. I use to work IT Helpdesk for many years.

Whether it is a Mac or PC Memory is memory. And 8GB and even 16GB is crazy to invest in.

Phones are coming with 16GB of memory.

I always found 32GB to be the sweet spot. 64GB is totally perfect.

Thats why I will own a future Mac Studio because 32 GB is included.

An Apple rips people off on memory upgrades.

 

[DavidSchaub]

The Mac mini failing to be updated was normal for Intel Macs and could be just as normal with ARM Macs. No surprise here.

Unsaid is: whether the Mac Studio and Mac Pro also skip M3.

Half the desktops skipping every second chip generation would be perfectly reasonable.

 

[DavidSchaub]

yep. that's why I will never buy a Mac mini. 8GB Is totally laughable. I use to work IT Helpdesk for many years.
...
An Apple rips people off on memory upgrades.

Alternatively: 8GB might be fine for some users... but the upgrade cost to 16GB should be $50

 

[darngooddesign]

yep. that's why I will never buy a Mac mini. 8GB Is totally laughable. I use to work IT Helpdesk for many years.

Whether it is a Mac or PC Memory is memory. And 8GB and even 16GB is crazy to invest in.

Phones are coming with 16GB of memory.

I always found 32GB to be the sweet spot. 64GB is totally perfect.

Thats why I will own a future Mac Studio because 32 GB is included.

An Apple rips people off on memory upgrades.

If you want the RAM but don't need the Max chip, you can get an 32GB M2-Pro Mini for $300 less than the 32GB Studio.

 

[madmin]

Back on topic, at least I'm not going to be as broke if they aren't doing an M3 one!

You'll just spend more on beer and floozies

 

[DownUnderDan]

I believe they have a model with the M2 Pro chip which comes with just that?

They do. That should become the 24GB model.

 

[reyesmac]

If Apple ups the minimum specs of their lowest computers it means they can release an OS that has things in it that wont run on older systems. If you need an M4 to run the basic OS with new features, the M1's are going to be forced obsoleted sooner than expected.

 

[DownUnderDan]

you mean delete 8GB option for those who need it, increase base price to next tier just...because?

Other companies have managed to expand the base spec without it being a huge cost issue to consumers. I'm old enough to remember 640kb as the base memory on a PC. Its moved on since then and so can Apple.

 

[DownUnderDan]

Its at a point now that if Apple doesn't up the base RAM configuration for M4 and M4 pro, they deserve to lose sales.

 

[Realityck]

Apple is likely to skip an M3 version of the Mac mini in favor of a bigger update with M4 chips toward the end of the year, according to Bloomberg's Mark Gurman.

I'm waiting for Mark Gurman's whole rumor creation of how 2024 is going to play out to fail. People need desktop updates in spite of this M4 is going to be so much better, just like how the M3 was suppose to be so much better.

 

[DavidSchaub]

If Apple ups the minimum specs of their lowest computers it means they can release an OS that has things in it that wont run on older systems. If you need an M4 to run the basic OS with new features, the M1's are going to be forced obsoleted sooner than expected.

Apple hasn't even dumped Intel yet. M1 will probably be supported for 3+ more years?

 

[Guenter]

Let us hope apple starts with the macs wich did not get the m3.

 

[jkmoses]

I seriously love how Apple tried to get us away from looking at a computer based on the silicon that was inside. Now it has totally flip-flopped and that's all people talk about! I'd love to go back to the days that they actually improved the design and features of the computer itself and it wasn't just a silicon update. I remember being excited about what the next iMac or MacBook was going to look like.

 

[theluggage]

Apple's cost is not $200... not even close. That's just the price they demand from buyers. To get a sense of Apple's approx. cost, shop 16GB RAM on Amazon and then estimate some profit to Amazon and some profit to the manufacturer to shave off of retail pricing...

...and bear in mind that Apple have been charging $200 for an 8 to 16 GB upgrade since *at least* 2017 when the Mac Mini and iMac were using bog-standard DDR4 SODDIMs - actually the exact same Micron sticks you could buy from Crucial . When I got my 2017 iMac I paid £140 for a 16GB kit (2 x 8GB) from Crucial which went in *in addition to* the stock 2x4GB to give me 24GB - whereas paying Apple £200 just got you 2x8GB *instead* of 2x4GB. So, even then, Apple were charging £200 for a £70 retail cost difference in parts... probably ~£35 or lower to Apple... and, yeah, that includes me paying a bit over the odds to get a "guaranteed compatible" kit from Crucial.

Also, Apple upping the base RAM/SSD spec would mean Apple no longer needed to make 8GB Mx processors or build logic boards with 8/256 16/256 or 8/512 permutations any more. That simplifies manufacture, inventory control etc. and improves economies of scale. Making 8GB chips at all probably only makes financial sense in a world where you can charge 5x cost for an upgrade to 16.

Apple's upgrade prices and base configurations have pretty much nothing to do with technical issues or component costs - it's all about Apple's pricing structure, which is baked in to their current price list. You might expect going to the next stock model would offer better value than lots of BTO options - actually giving you an added incentive to go to the next model - but, no... of course, there's really no such thing as "BTO" when everything is soldered in, if not part of the CPU package. Maybe some of the more exotic/expensive configurations are ordered on demand but mostly I suspect they just project how many of each configuration they're likely to sell.

It's my time to shine again against the 16Gb faction!

Which is great for you if, from your perspective you've saved $200 by making do with 8GB.

The problem is that, in 2024, RAM just isn't that expensive and, whether it's because your application actually needs it, for future proofing or just to avoid RAM anxiety on a non-upgradeable machine, having 16GB shouldn't add 33% to the cost of an already premium-priced computer.

I think it comes down to whether or not you acknowledge the existence of any sort of usable personal computer that isn't a Mac. If Apples are the only fruit to you, you'll get by with an 'entry level Mac' and be happy. If you're prepared to consider an alternative, you'll see that the Mac's 'entry level' price already carries a significant premium and may not be so prepared to "get by" with below par RAM/SSD capacity. Relying on die-hard Apple fans to stay loyal and turning away potential switchers is not a good long-term plan - especially as Intel/AMD/Microsoft play catch up and start to erode on Apple Silicon's power/performance advantage.