Mac Mini 2014: Which Model to Buy

[dannys1]

For movies, sure, 30Hz is no problem. For getting work done where you have to mouse/trackpad around moving windows, etc... it is severely gimped.

----------



iFanboy/apologist spotted.

Sure, but we were talking about using it as an Entertainment centre and the guy said "you must enjoy your 4k video at 30hz" well, I prefer it at the native FPS which is 24fps or 24hz, so its perfect.

I would set the Mac mini to be 1080p on desktop anyway, Plex would switch to 4k as the source material required.

 

[magbarn]

Sure, but we were talking about using it as an Entertainment centre and the guy said "you must enjoy your 4k video at 30hz" well, I prefer it at the native FPS which is 24fps or 24hz, so its perfect.

I would set the Mac mini to be 1080p on desktop anyway, Plex would switch to 4k as the source material required.

Oh heck no, as the mini is the affordable ambassador of the 'headless mac' it should be able to support 4k60p out of the box. Why are you satisfied running your brand new 4k60p monitor/TV at 1080P on desktop? Some of us would be glad to show our clients their photos at 4k resolution. Short of a hackintosh there no other less than $1700 OSX devices that can output 4k60p thanks to Apple being cheap.

 

[crazzapple]

For me 4k is far more useful on the desktop with productivity apps than watching the tiny selection of 4k videos. I'm not sure why the industry went this way... for one thing how can you tell the difference between 1080p and 4k on a television from 10ft away? Unless it's enormous?

 

[aront]

The 2014 is a step back from the 2012 model. This is what happens when you have a bean counter running a company. How long do you think customers will put up with you screwing them? Eventually, the backlash will come.

I'm sort of the tech consultant for the family and you've already lost at least 7 iMac and Macbook sales in the past few years due to this bean counting nonsense (soldered RAM was the start of it). The Mini (and maybe Air) was the only one I would recommend for typical home use. I will no longer recommend the Mac Mini. Years ago, I went from XP to Apple, but looks like 2015 will be from Apple to Windows 10.

Give customers what they want and profits will follow; and you don't even need to lower prices (although, Apple isn't really lowering prices; it's more of a shell game and manipulation of options). Customers are willing to pay a modest price premium over the competition, if you just treat them well and give them what they want!

----------

Jobs gave us the easily removable bottom plate for the Mini and Cook takes it away. Why? Is this what your customers want? Did you factor in the number of potential lost sales with this bean counting move.

 

[magbarn]

The 2014 is a step back from the 2012 model. This is what happens when you have a bean counter running a company. How long do you think customers will put up with you screwing them? Eventually, the backlash will come.

I'm sort of the tech consultant for the family and you've already lost at least 7 iMac and Macbook sales in the past few years due to this bean counting nonsense (soldered RAM was the start of it). The Mini (and maybe Air) was the only one I would recommend for typical home use. I will no longer recommend the Mac Mini. Years ago, I went from XP to Apple, but looks like 2015 will be from Apple to Windows 10.

Give customers what they want and profits will follow; and you don't even need to lower prices (although, Apple isn't really lowering prices; it's more of a shell game and manipulation of options). Customers are willing to pay a modest price premium over the competition, if you just treat them well and give them what they want!

----------

Jobs gave us the easily removable bottom plate for the Mini and Cook takes it away. Why? Is this what your customers want? Did you factor in the number of potential lost sales with this bean counting move.

These moves remind me of dell 10 years ago. Back then they were king of the hill and they were even offering 1900x1200 resolution on their 15 inch laptops. Fast forward a few years and they started decontenting their laptops and the first cut was the resolution options in their screens and they started only offering 1366x768 as joe blow six pack only wanted the lowest option. Now you see where they are today....

 

[Mal67]

Well I can see how people would be disappointed in the lack of a quad core i7 version. I am however happy that Apple decided at least for the next few months to keep the mini in the line-up. But why limit the lowest cost mini to only 4gig of memory? At the very least they could've got it up to 8 like the other models and still kept the price reasonable. Which is one reason why when recommending the mini to others I suggest the middle one especially when cost is a factor.

 

[magbarn]

Well I can see how people would be disappointed in the lack of a quad core i7 version. I am however happy that Apple decided at least for the next few months to keep the mini in the line-up. But why limit the lowest cost mini to only 4gig of memory? At the very least they could've got it up to 8 like the other models and still kept the price reasonable. Which is one reason why when recommending the mini to others I suggest the middle one especially when cost is a factor.

Lol, the $499 mac mini exists for the same reason the iPad Air 2 16gb model exists...

 

[haruhiko]

Yet more proof that Apple is no longer run by visionaries, nor even engineers, who used to strive to incrementally improve the experience of the end user. Nope, today's Apple is run by profit seeking businessmen. How else can one explain such a huge step backwards for the Mac Mini?

Sometimes it feels like the end game is for the Mac to evolve into a form factor like the Apple TV. It will have a display port and a power button (oh wait, that costs money...ok, always on) and that's it. All your Apps/Data will be "in the cloud" and Macs will just be used as a go-between between the user and the cloud. No more local drives and no more "ownership" of content.

You're talking about Chromebooks. Local storage won't go away in the Mac, otherwise how would Apple charge you for upgrading storage?

 

[DEFabio]

Sadly the Mac mini is not targeted towards anyone who keeps up with technology and each incremental change apple makes to their product line (everyone on this site). I am also saddened by the addition of soldered ram and the loss of a quad core processor option, but the majority of people that buy them don't even know what a quad core is (and definitely won't be swapping ram in their lifetime). I also serve as the tech geek for my family which account for tens of thousands of dollars worth of apple products. Though I would not buy a 2014 Mac mini for myself, I am however going to purchase one for my parents. They are retired and use their pc for playing solitaire, checking email, and going on eBay; so this is more than sufficient as they are apple's targeted consumer base.

It seems to me that this is however part of something bigger to come. Soldered components bring the potential for improved efficiency (though not noticeable) and better usage of space (smaller devices or more components being crammed into the same space). If I were to gues, I would say that a major design update is in the near future.

 

[Kebabselector]

Jobs gave us the easily removable bottom plate for the Mini and Cook takes it away. Why? Is this what your customers want? Did you factor in the number of potential lost sales with this bean counting move.

Jobs gave you the none upgradable MacBook Air so may he was just as bad.

 

[aront]

Sadly the Mac mini is not targeted towards anyone who keeps up with technology and each incremental change apple makes to their product line (everyone on this site). I am also saddened by the addition of soldered ram and the loss of a quad core processor option, but the majority of people that buy them don't even know what a quad core is (and definitely won't be swapping ram in their lifetime). I also serve as the tech geek for my family which account for tens of thousands of dollars worth of apple products. Though I would not buy a 2014 Mac mini for myself, I am however going to purchase one for my parents. They are retired and use their pc for playing solitaire, checking email, and going on eBay; so this is more than sufficient as they are apple's targeted consumer base.

It seems to me that this is however part of something bigger to come. Soldered components bring the potential for improved efficiency (though not noticeable) and better usage of space (smaller devices or more components being crammed into the same space). If I were to gues, I would say that a major design update is in the near future.

Please don't make excuses for the bean counting agenda. The only reason Apple/Cook does it, is to increase margins, and some Apple apologists are all too willing to bend over and take it.

This tired argument that the majority of buyers don't upgrade RAM, don't understand specs, etc. is nonsense. The majority of buyers rely on a knowledgable family member for recommendations and assistance (which even your own post illustrates), and all they need to know is that they have a machine that can be worked with if/when needed. What this argument (i.e, the buyer is ignorant) does suggest, is that Apple is taking advantage of it's less tech competent customers.

Offering lower spec options that provide"sufficient" performance for the base consumer is fine, but there is absolutely no reason to solder RAM in the Macbook, iMac, or Mini. Any claim of improved efficiency, etc., in what are already ultra thin products is absurd. I suspect Apple is purposely making things ridiculously thin, so it can be used as an excuse for soldered RAM. How many asked for a 1mm thinner iMac at the expense of upgradeable RAM?

Yes, the next Mini will be a major design update; it will be thinner for absolutely no reason at all, have soldered RAM, and not be as good as it could/should be. Actually, I suspected the delay with this new Mini was due to the difficulty in finding a design excuse to solder RAM. It took some major nerve to go ahead with soldering RAM in the existing enclosure. No shame!

This recent Mac Mini update is just a tactic to force buyers into the much more expensive Mac Pro.

 

[aront]

Jobs gave you the none upgradable MacBook Air so may he was just as bad.

The primary purpose for the Macbook Air is ultra thin, lightweight, portability, so it appears to be a legitimate reason to solder RAM. Then again, perhaps it is possible to design with accessible RAM?

 

[Kebabselector]

Then again, perhaps it is possible to design with accessible RAM?

It was possible, but with Apple the design is often more important than the upgradability. The Ram on the new Mac Mini is annoying to me (more so than the i7 Quad - as I never required one) - at least the mid range one (former entry level) has 8gb on board so I'd probably not need to upgrade it.

 

[satchmo]

As others have alluded, the new Mac mini's might simply be a stop gap measure until Broadwell chips are in full supply. Perhaps a 2015 summer update?

In the meantime, those who recently just bought an iPhone, will be lured into the Apple ecosystem by a $499 Mac mini...just in time for the holidays.

 

[Seppentoni]

Why not put some pressure on apple and put out a recommendation to not buy the 2014 model at all?

 

[SeattleMoose]

Why not put some pressure on apple and put out a recommendation to not buy the 2014 model at all?

I would agree except that I think Apple is looking for an excuse to dump the mini. But since it has been so popular, Apple couldn't claim nobody was buying it. So they decided the best way to kill it off was by crippling it. You know, "grandma" won't need power or expandability. Either way, the writing is on the wall.

Sadly, this is exactly what one would expect from a company whose only goal appears to be short term profits and where "innovation" is just incremental refinement (or worse...device devolution). Seems financial sharks are now running the show. When the parasites are done with Apple, it will be a shadow company like MS.

 

[Glasgreat]

Offering lower spec options that provide"sufficient" performance for the base consumer is fine, but there is absolutely no reason to solder RAM in the Macbook, iMac, or Mini. Any claim of improved efficiency, etc., in what are already ultra thin products is absurd.

This recent Mac Mini update is just a tactic to force buyers into the much more expensive Mac Pro.

I completely agree


----------

 

[DEFabio]

Please don't make excuses for the bean counting agenda. The only reason Apple/Cook does it, is to increase margins, and some Apple apologists are all too willing to bend over and take it.

This tired argument that the majority of buyers don't upgrade RAM, don't understand specs, etc. is nonsense. The majority of buyers rely on a knowledgable family member for recommendations and assistance (which even your own post illustrates), and all they need to know is that they have a machine that can be worked with if/when needed. What this argument (i.e, the buyer is ignorant) does suggest, is that Apple is taking advantage of it's less tech competent customers.

Offering lower spec options that provide"sufficient" performance for the base consumer is fine, but there is absolutely no reason to solder RAM in the Macbook, iMac, or Mini. Any claim of improved efficiency, etc., in what are already ultra thin products is absurd. I suspect Apple is purposely making things ridiculously thin, so it can be used as an excuse for soldered RAM. How many asked for a 1mm thinner iMac at the expense of upgradeable RAM?

Yes, the next Mini will be a major design update; it will be thinner for absolutely no reason at all, have soldered RAM, and not be as good as it could/should be. Actually, I suspected the delay with this new Mini was due to the difficulty in finding a design excuse to solder RAM. It took some major nerve to go ahead with soldering RAM in the existing enclosure. No shame!

This recent Mac Mini update is just a tactic to force buyers into the much more expensive Mac Pro.

Make excuses, yep, because I am getting so much money and incentives from Apple. Honestly I can care less, I buy and recommend products that fit my/whoever's needs and budget (whether it be iOS, android, windows, Mac os). I'm also not happy about the changes that came out of the update, but it is what it is. I won't buy it because it does not fit into my needs, but I can guarantee that ME not buying a single Mac mini will hurt them. If a future update is feasible to me then I would reconsider.

Next, the last time I checked Apple is a business and profit is expected to keep successful. And I I don't think this "tactic" will influence anyone to spend an extra $2500 for the sake of swapping out components themselves. If I were to hold maximizing profit as a primary goal, I wouldn't drop the price of the entry level Mac mini by $100.

The size is a huge aspect that influenced many more technical individuals to purchase a Mac mini, so I do see benefits in reducing the size (even if it's just 1mm)... It's called innovation. For example, 5 years ago it was not possible to get 2 Macs or even PCs in a 1u form factor that the average person could/would buy. Or even a Mac that could be placed next to a TV set to serve as the center of a home theater. now it is possible due to smaller size and others are also making smaller machines.

You can be as upset as you want, but that's not going to change anything. The 2014 Mac mini is already part of the Mac mini lineage. If it is a machine that doesn't fit your need, simply don't buy or recommend it. Farewell and hope you like windows 10

As a side note, Steve did know about Tim's management style long before he recruited him to apple, and definitely before HE appointed Tim to his current position. With Steve being the visionary that he was, it is hard to believe he didn't see the company/product-line going in this direction. All I/we can do right now stay tuned to see how everything will play.

 

[AnalyzeThis]

Lol, the $499 mac mini exists for the same reason the iPad Air 2 16gb model exists...

Yeah, they also use it as demo units.

----------

For me 4k is far more useful on the desktop with productivity apps than watching the tiny selection of 4k videos. I'm not sure why the industry went this way... for one thing how can you tell the difference between 1080p and 4k on a television from 10ft away? Unless it's enormous?

Perhaps, buying 4K capable media player for a few hundreds is not enough for some folks to watch a few 4K movies, they need to unload close to a thousand on mac mini to be able to watch half rate 4K without any HD audio off the computer that was never designed for this very purpose. Figures...

By the time 4K becomes popular, even Raspberry Pi will support 4K hardware acceleration.

The real issue with soldered RAM is retailers - they will have a hard time to move base models as RAM is not upgradable. It is not going to be as easy as base models with upgradable RAM.

Possibly, Apple folks might be miscalculating the audience of the mac mini - it is a bit mode capable crowd knowing how to connect monitors and make memory upgrades. Others would buy iMac or Laptop and usually do not complain about those things as they do not care or know much about computers.

 

[OneMike]

Apple is sort of going the route that says. If you want a mac, spent a little and get an undesirable machine or spend a ton and very something you don't need.

The middle ground is kind of done. Has been that way for a while.

 

[dannys1]

For me 4k is far more useful on the desktop with productivity apps than watching the tiny selection of 4k videos. I'm not sure why the industry went this way... for one thing how can you tell the difference between 1080p and 4k on a television from 10ft away? Unless it's enormous?

From 10ft? You can quite easily, unless you consider 55" to be enormous? Its quite a lot better looking, more like looking out of the window rather than at a pretty good TV which is what 1080p is like.

 

[PVguy]

"This recent Mac Mini update is just a tactic to force buyers into the much more expensive Mac Pro."

Most likely. Going by the GeekBench numbers, the best build of the 2012 mini managed about 90% of the low end Mac Pro for about 1/3 of the money. (11,300 to 12,700) The Geekbench top end of the 2014 mini collection is 6446. If you are Marketing, this is a much more appropriate performance gap.

The low end 2014 mini is only twice as fast as my 2009 Mini, and that is not counting Intel's built in graphics vs the separate Nvidea graphics, which is going to narrow the difference.

Over on the Dark Side, a Dell 7020 with an i5-4590, 8 GB, and a discrete graphics card is $808. Geek bench number about 10750. The small form factor desktop is pretty decent, we have them at work. They still have optical drives too.

 

[aront]

I'm also not happy about the changes that came out of the update, but it is what it is.

So you're the bend over and take it type? I much rather voice concerns and offer constructive criticism when a company follows a path that makes me an unhappy customer. It's much more beneficial for both company and customers. If Apple doesn't care what it's customers want, then more people will stop buying, and, eventually, that single lost purchase turns to many, and it will hurt them.

Next, the last time I checked Apple is a business and profit is expected to keep successful.

Who said Apple is not supposed to make a profit? I criticized the bean counting. These are not the same concepts.

If I were to hold maximizing profit as a primary goal, I wouldn't drop the price of the entry level Mac mini by $100.

This is not entirely accurate. Apple/Cook installed a lower price processor and soldered the RAM (only 4GB), which accounts for the lower price point. One could argue that this is a crippled Mini, which will have to be replaced sooner than usual, negating any supposed savings. And, actually, the price of the equivalent prior entry level Mini went up $100 with 8GB RAM (soldered) and larger HD.

The size is a huge aspect that influenced many more technical individuals to purchase a Mac mini, so I do see benefits in reducing the size (even if it's just 1mm)... It's called innovation.

Any argument for a more compact current Mini, iMac, or Macbook at the expense of performance and/or accessible RAM is absurd.

You can be as upset as you want, but that's not going to change anything. The 2014 Mac mini is already part of the Mac mini lineage. If it is a machine that doesn't fit your need, simply don't buy or recommend it. Farewell and hope you like windows 10.

Hopefully, Apple doesn't share your view, because they may be in for a surprise. If they upset enough people, things will change. Microsoft will not make another Windows 8 mistake, so switching will be easier for any fed-up Apple users. Don't piss off your customers.

As a side note, Steve did know about Tim's management style long before he recruited him to apple, and definitely before HE appointed Tim to his current position. With Steve being the visionary that he was, it is hard to believe he didn't see the company/product-line going in this direction. All I/we can do right now stay tuned to see how everything will play.

When I first learned of Cook as the replacement, my initial thought was that Jobs, being the controlling type that he apparently was, maybe wanted Apple to fail in his absence. If he can't have it, no one can. Maybe! So he chose Cook, the worst guy he could possibly find to run Apple: a stiff, artificial, illogical, confused, contradictory, numbers guy. Apple is still doing well thanks to management philosophy and products that were developed under Jobs, but, eventually, Cook may ruin it.

 

[milo]

I think you misspelled Mac Pro.

Nope, the 2014 mini quad was a perfect fit for many pro users who found that it hit a sweet spot of performance versus cost. The quad MP is triple the price of the old quad mini and barely outperformed it. Terrible bang for the buck especially for anyone running apps that couldn't use the GPU.

And the whole discussion is which is the best mac mini to buy, it doesn't even make sense to bring the $3k Mac Pro into the discussion.

This isn't going to be a popular option, but I picked up one of the new minis. I am an audio engineer and I'm loving the performance so far. I upgraded to an SSD and more memory. It's really running just fine.

Nobody disputes that the new minis are fine for people with modest needs. But there are plenty of people who loved the 2012 quad versions that couldn't use any of the 2014s. And that includes plenty of people doing audio. Of course you can do smaller sessions on a less powerful computer but many audio folks need at least a quad.

This reminds me of when Apple "upgraded" the Mac Pro ahead of their full redesign.

At least that one wasn't a downgrade. I'm not convinced this is a stopgap machine as opposed to Apple actually intending for the quad to go away for good. Even though it does't look like it, this is a bit of a redesign as opposed to the Mac Pro which changed the CPU options but kept the exact same motherboard for years. Next update to the mini will probably just be whatever new CPU fits in this same slot. Next time around will that include quads? Or even if it does, would the power and heat be too much for this machine?

 

[G4er?]

I remember the movie Brewster's Millions.
His campaign slogan was "None of the Above"

Today we have Apple's Billions.
Same slogan for the new mini. "None of the Above."