Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
these days, unless you're committed to something like FCPX, Logic or XCode, Windows or Linux is a viable option for you

The amount of time I've spent supporting just two 'colleagues' (as in, other people who are also working for one of my clients) on a single project in the last year, with both Linux and Windows, says otherwise.

I prefer MacOS
I prefer when people don't tell me what is viable for me.

becomes more productive than having a slightly nicer GUI.

If thats what macOS to you, then I'm sure windows or linux will work for you. I wish you well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brendu and Detnator
You missed the part where “this thing” is aimed a different segment of the market than you think it is.

You insist in missing the part that this magical thing (clearly to you) is costing 300 US$ more just because. I mentioned the dGPU as a form to justify that increase in price.

lso, adding a discrete gpu would add more cost, so it’d be $500 or $600 more, but those of us who’ve been begging for a pro-ish machine without a crazy gpu would be stuck buying stuff we don’t need, again.

Now that's more like the typical egocentric and selfish member of our society.

"Only what I want its what matters."

But before I give you ammunition there, you said it yourself, it can be an option.


There are plenty of macs with discrete/dedicated GPUs, if that’s what you want.

You mean iMacs and already overpriced MBP's?

Yeah, those form factors only are useful to some, but like you, there are others that would love a Mini with a better dGPU, especially to justify that US$ 300 increase on all models.

But no, we get it, Apple must release magical things that are only perfect to you.


The best part is, people like you love to blindly defend apple actions just because.

Especially if the other person can see beyond the cult teachings and even dare asking more for their hard earned money.
 
Good point and it may be worth looking at the 2017 iMac when deciding. I was considering getting a mini and a wide screen display, but if I am essentially getting the 5K screen for a couple hundred bucks, it might be worth going that route and sticking with 27 inches

I think the USP of the Mini is (a) that it lets you choose your own display(s) and (b) at the moment, the i5/i7 processors are better than the ones on offer in the iMac - especially if you're running multicore enabled stuff.

On the other hand, if the 5k 16:9 display in the 27" iMac floats your boat, well, that's a $1200 display so it makes the iMac a bit of a no-brainer. Also, if you need more than 16GB of RAM, the iMac will be cheaper because you can definitely expand that yourself very easily and without warranty problems (plus, you can upgrade to 24GB first and see if thats enough). For graphics work, any of the iMacs GPUs will beat the Mini.

I think there are a couple of questions over the Mini that may need to wait for the more in-depth reviews and teardowns:

1. How does that iGPU handle 2D on multiple and/or 5k displays, or 4k in scaled mode? We know its not going to be a 3D or OpenCL star, but being able to render the Mojave UI smoothly at better than 1080p is kinda essential.
2. Is the RAM actually, practically user upgradeable without voiding the warrany?
3. What are the noise levels when all 6 cores are earning their keep - the top i7 iMac has come in for a bit of stick when its under load (I don't think its bad, but it ain't silent).
 
is costing 300 US$ more just because.

If by "Just because" you mean, a very-low-spec mini computer was essentially replaced by a machine with a completely different target market that happens to share the same name and case. Then sure. "just because".

Now that's more like the typical egocentric and selfish member of our society.

So.. your definition of 'selfish' is "We've been begging for, and are glad they finally offer a single desktop computer that isn't over-specced with graphics for what we need"... Now that's irony. You're not happy with the three existing desktop or the laptop options for a Mac with a dedicated GPU, but it's me that's "selfish". Ok. Sure.

You mean iMacs and already overpriced MBP's?

iMacs, iMac Pros, MacBook Pros, Mac Pros - take your pick.

people like you

This should be good. Define 'people like me'.

beyond the cult teachings

Wat.
[doublepost=1541619125][/doublepost]
being able to render the Mojave UI smoothly at better than 1080p is kinda essential

I'd like to think if it wouldn't run it smoothly, they wouldn't claim to support three 4K's. But time will tell, I guess.

without voiding the warrany

Haven't they categorically said, it's only supported at authorised service centres (which is the same for the iMac Pro, right?)

What are the noise levels when all 6 cores are earning their keep

I believe someone posted a quote (or paraphrased maybe) saying it's comparable to a 2018 MBP at full-fan.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Detnator
Nearly everyone here complaining about this new Mac Mini (and same with Apple's other new stuff) keeps forgetting the most important thing: One of the biggest differences between Apple and most, if not all the other companies, is: Those companies build computers with specifications that meet the drooling needs of nerds. Apple builds tools to solve business and personal problems.

Apple engineers solutions to problems, and people buy them because they are the best, (or if nothing else they're the least sucky) solutions to the problems. That's why we're all here arguing about this Apple stuff in the first place. To the people whining about how expensive and/or wrong Apple's products are, and how greedy Apple is for asking the prices they ask: Why are you even here? Why do you even want Apple stuff in the first place? I've said a few times now, why don't you just go buy those PCs for half the price, be happy and leave us Apple "fanboys" alone?

The reason you're here arguing about it is either because you're a troll and just like picking a fight, or because you genuinely appreciate the difference that Apple brings to the table. That difference has value because it does solve a problem you want solved. So if that's the case, let's at least argue about how well it does or doesn't solve the problem, not about the specs and the dollars.

When it comes to the dollars, Apple is a company, owned by shareholders, in a capitalist country. Apple exists primarily to make money for its shareholders. Sure, Steve always used to go on about how he didn't care about the money and it was all about making the best products, but that was partly BS. I say "partly" because, yes, I believe he did want to make the best products (and so does Tim), but he didn't give them away did he? Apple has always charged a premium. Nothing has changed there. Apple is no more "greedy" now than it has ever been. Either way, Apple still makes the best products - that's why we're here arguing about them.

All this crap about Apple is greedy because they charge too much for their SSDs or whatever else... Two things.

1. Apple can charge whatever the hell they want. That's the way it's always been and nothing has changed. If people buy it, then it's priced right for the market. That's capitalism. And let's face it, people are buying this stuff. If you can't see that you're blind. Apple, and capitalism both have plenty of issues, but the biggest thing that's good about capitalism, is it fosters competition which pushes the world forward. If you don't like the price, don't buy it. If enough people agree with you then Apple will be forced to reduce their prices. If that doesn't happen, it's because not enough people agree with you, and therefore your opinion (that it's priced too high) isn't sufficiently valid. It's not greed. It's the market. And at this point, people are buying this stuff, and so it seems to me this stuff is priced right for the market.

And to the question of why is everyone else buying it despite you thinking it's too expensive of whatever else? No. People aren't buying Apple stuff because they're sheep. Sure, some people are, but no, the vast majority of people are buying Apple stuff because it solves their problems better than the alternatives. Which by the way is the same reason you're here investing energy in arguing about it (unless you're a troll).

2. As I've said elsewhere, Apple charges more for the parts because they're not charging just for the parts. They're charging for all the R&D that went into figuring out how those parts go together to create the package and the experience that solve the business problem better than anyone else's collection of parts do. And that's not new. Apple has always charged more for RAM, storage, whatever else, and the reason is still the same. Nothing has changed.

Those complaining about Apple soldering everything in instead of cobbling together other people's parts? It's not some conspiracy to make you pay the Apple tax. There are very good engineering reasons for all that.

1. They solder and glue everything into the laptops partly because it results in the smallest, lightest and most reliable package in the space available. Contrary to all you whiners saying you wouldn't mind it a bit bigger with upgradeable parts, some us love how much smaller and lighter everything is with all that power jammed into it. So it's a valid decision on Apple's part, that provides value to customers. And there are a lot more people out there who don't care about being able to do their own ram and SSD replacements, than who do. The market wins.

2. In the desktops, they don't solder and glue everything in but the stuff they do solder and glue in, they do so because it creates less points of failure. I really think this point doesn't need explanation. If you can't see how a chip soldered on a board is more reliable than one screwed in, then I don't know what I can say to explain it. Go do an electrical engineering degree and come back and we'll talk.

3. Notice how RAM is not soldered in on the desktops like it is on the laptops? That's because these don't have the same space or heat constraints. Also desktops aren't moved around anywhere near as much as laptops so there is much less chance of something getting jolted out of its seat. So no need to solder RAM in, and so they don't. And in desktops, they're not soldering the SSDs in either, although you still can't swap them out for a third party alternative. Why? Because Apple's SSDs are entirely proprietary now - and that's not greed forcing you to pay the Apple tax. It's engineering put in place to solve real problems. The SSDs are now all controlled by the T2 chip, and all of that is for improved data security and privacy among other things. It has nothing to do with trying to force you not to be able to upgrade it.

Apple gives you upgradeability options when it doesn't interfere with the other features and functionality they want to provide. When it does interfere, they choose the other features and functionality over upgradeability. That's what they've always done. Nothing has changed, other than the fact that more and more features and functionality (eg. the security etc behind the T2) are incompatible with upgradeability, so more upgradeability is sacrificed now than ever before for those features and functionality. That's it. Take your conspiracy theories back to your UFO landing spots.


Call me an Apple fanboy if you want, I don't care. I'm not writing all this to defend Apple. I'm writing it in what is sadly, likely to be a vain attempt (but still trying) to improve these forums. That is, to try to address at least some of the points so many here whine about, when they have no idea what they're talking about, and in doing so, maybe have some hope of reducing some of the incessant whining. I'll probably fail, but hey it's worth a try.

I see a few possibilities here:
  • If you're just a troll and you're whining and arguing for the sake of picking a fight, just get lost.
  • If you're here whining and arguing because you genuinely think Apple's solutions solve the problems correctly - you want it, but you're whining that it costs too much and think it's all about Apple's greed? Sorry but tough. Your case is moot. You want it for a reason: presumably because it's better. It solves some personal or business problem better than the alternatives. Therefore it's worth a price. And if it does that, then contrary to what you think about Apple's greed, the price, ultimately, is not set by Apple, and it's certainly not set by how many people whine about it. The price is set by the market. It's worth whatever the market says it's worth. You're wasting yours and everyone's time and energy. Either accept it's worth that price to you, and buy it, or acknowledge it isn't and instead buy the alternative, quit ****-ing whining about it, and leave the rest of us the hell alone.
  • If you're here arguing because you don't think Apple's solutions solve the problem correctly? Fine. Again don't buy it, buy the alternative, quit ****-ing whining and leave the rest of us the hell alone.
  • If you're here arguing about features and functionality because you see that Apple's solution is better than everyone else's, and you want it, but you just want it a bit better or different somehow, then ok. That's about the only reasonable position anyone can take here in my opinion. But in that case, let's argue about how it solves real problems - or could do so better - not about specific specs or the price. Don't sit here saying statements like "Well for that extra $300 they could have at least put a decent GPU in it." No. I mean seriously? That $300 covers all the other stuff they already put in it (and is a price set by the market). If you want a decent GPU in it then it costs more again. And some of us don't want to pay for a GPU when we don't need it. So really, what problem does said GPU solve (that isn't solved some other way now)? Let's discuss solutions to problems, not specs and features. There's a difference.
Either way, whatever you're here for, for god's sake, stop ****-ing whining!
[doublepost=1541620123][/doublepost]
Oh please stop it, that's just a bunch of BS. I have a full understanding of the situation, it's you who doesn't understand and is just making excuses for Apple. Here's the full understanding of the gibberish you wrote. It's called get ready for this: "designed for maximum profit".

No.

Designed
for maximum functionality.

Priced
for maximum profit? Sure. What the hell is wrong with that? That's capitalism. If the market says it's worth it, then it's worth it. Get over it.

Still why aren't you complaining about how Samsung's X5 is $1400 for 2TB when the most expensive 2TB SSD (component) they sell that could possibly be in it (970 EVO) is $600? Is that empty Thunderbolt enclosure alone really worth $800??

Or even if they've put some unique 2TB version of the 970 Pro in it (except they haven't because the EVO more than maxes out the Thunderbolt bus, but still for arguments sake...), the 1TB version of that is $400 so 2TB should be $800. That makes that empty enclosure $600. Really?

I'm not making excuses for anyone. You really don't have a full understanding of the situation. You certainly don't have any understanding of business. Companies provide business solutions to personal and business problems, and they should be compensated for that according to what the market says those solutions are worth. Get over it and stop ****-ing whining.
[doublepost=1541620964][/doublepost]
Does Apple own its own manufacturing facilities and manufacture SSDs or do they buy them from a third party supplier?

What do you think?

What's in the MBP's now? What's in this new Mac Mini? What's in the iMac Pro? Surely you don't believe they're standard Samsung 970 Pros or something? So what are they?

What's an SSD anyway? It's a bunch of memory chips, a controller, and perhaps a couple of other things, right? So how are those items arranged in those machines?

Answer that for me and I'll answer your question. No, actually, answer that for me and you've already answered your question.
 
Last edited:
Still why aren't you complaining about how Samsung's X5 is $1400 for 2TB when the most expensive 2TB SSD (component) they sell that could possibly be in it (970 EVO) is $600? Is that empty Thunderbolt enclosure alone really worth $800??

Or even if they've put some unique 2TB version of the 970 Pro in it (except they haven't because the EVO more than maxes out the Thunderbolt bus, but still for arguments sake...), the 1TB version of that is $400 so 2TB should be $800. That makes that empty enclosure $600. Really?

The 960 Pro is About $1400
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIAAEE7FM4266
Or
$1200
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIAADF8AW3172

But the rest is spot on.

I know Apple is making a killing on the SSD, especially given how prices have dropped recently. I am not complaining, just observing. Ok, maybe I am hoping the recent SSD price drops will eventually translate into BTO option price drops by the time I take the plunge.
 
The 960 Pro is About $1400
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIAAEE7FM4266
Or
$1200
https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=9SIAADF8AW3172

But the rest is spot on.

I know Apple is making a killing on the SSD, especially given how prices have dropped recently. I am not complaining, just observing. Ok, maybe I am hoping the recent SSD price drops will eventually translate into BTO option price drops by the time I take the plunge.


For the record, as I understand it, the 960 Pro is older and inferior to the 970.

Samsung are weird in this way (although not entirely unlike Apple to some degree). The older drives are priced more or less what they were when they were first released. Then newer and better stuff comes along, at cheaper prices, but they don't replace the older stuff, they add to it. They keep the older stuff at the older more expensive prices, and add the newer stuff at the newer cheaper prices. I don't get why.

I can't see how anyone in their right mind is going to buy a slower 960 for near on twice the price. So why is it even available any more?

Needless to say, I think it's a pretty safe bet that the drive in the X5 is a 970, not a 960. It makes no sense at all otherwise, surely?
 
All that is true, but you missed the part of this thing costing 300 bucks more just because.

Those 300 more wouldn’t hurt as much if a more powerful GPU was also included.

No, not $300 more “just because”. That’s a specious statement more in line with someone who thinks Apple prices it’s computers out of spite and not based on market conditions, including what they invest developing the hardware, macOS and the other applications that ship with macOS.

The 2014 base 1.4GHz version at 4/500 was $499, upgrading that to 8GB would have been another $100 on BTO and moving from the 500GB to a 256GB SSD or the 1TB Fusion Drive was $200, which puts us at the self-same $799 just a week ago...it seems to me that you believe that Apple should have done the upgrades for free. Does that sound about right?

The Intel-based Mac mini has never had a dGPU (except the mid-2011 w/Radeon 6630M), relying on integrated GPUs to keep costs low.

Adding a discrete GPU would have added cost to overall package while providing very little value for the end user, especially given the overall disappointment from users over the Radeon Pro GPUs that Apple has put in the 15” MacBook Pro.

Instead, the end user does not pay the cost for a dGPU that they may or may not really want and can decide whether investing additional money in an eGPU is worth it to them and when it is worth it to them. Many, many users on the Windows side of the fence use their PCs day in and day out with an integrated GPU and never know or care what they are “missing”.

If you are asking/wanting/desiring Apple to build a tower Mac with an easily accessible x16 PCIe slot letting you put whatever GPU you desire in that slot, you are going to be forever, disappointed and frustrated.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Detnator and brendu
I think the USP of the Mini is (a) that it lets you choose your own display(s) and (b) at the moment, the i5/i7 processors are better than the ones on offer in the iMac - especially if you're running multicore enabled stuff.

On the other hand, if the 5k 16:9 display in the 27" iMac floats your boat, well, that's a $1200 display so it makes the iMac a bit of a no-brainer. Also, if you need more than 16GB of RAM, the iMac will be cheaper because you can definitely expand that yourself very easily and without warranty problems (plus, you can upgrade to 24GB first and see if thats enough). For graphics work, any of the iMacs GPUs will beat the Mini.

I think there are a couple of questions over the Mini that may need to wait for the more in-depth reviews and teardowns:

1. How does that iGPU handle 2D on multiple and/or 5k displays, or 4k in scaled mode? We know its not going to be a 3D or OpenCL star, but being able to render the Mojave UI smoothly at better than 1080p is kinda essential.
2. Is the RAM actually, practically user upgradeable without voiding the warrany?
3. What are the noise levels when all 6 cores are earning their keep - the top i7 iMac has come in for a bit of stick when its under load (I don't think its bad, but it ain't silent).
The one thing that concerns me is the lack of the T2 chip in the 2017 iMac. I just wonder if it will be on the "obsolete" list earlier than normal because of it?
 
The one thing that concerns me is the lack of the T2 chip in the 2017 iMac. I just wonder if it will be on the "obsolete" list earlier than normal because of it?
They would have to obsolete the Mac Pro quickly as well wouldn't they?
 
Are you saying they wouldn't after the new one is introduced? Just curious, because I don't know.
Apple's policy is 5 years after the halt of manufacture.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201624

Vintage and obsolete products
Owners of iPhone, iPad, iPod, or Mac products may obtain service and parts from Apple or Apple service providers for 5 years after the product is no longer manufactured—or longer where required by law. Apple has discontinued support for certain technologically obsolete and vintage products.

Vintage products are those that have not been manufactured for more than 5 and less than 7 years ago. Apple has discontinued hardware service for vintage products with the following exceptions:

  • Mac products purchased in the country of Turkey. Owners of vintage Mac products may obtain service and parts from Apple service providers within the country of Turkey.
  • Products purchased in the state of California, United States, as required by statute.
    • Owners of vintage Mac products may obtain service and parts from Apple service providers within the state of California, United States.
    • Owners of vintage iPod products in the state of California may obtain service from Apple Retail Stores or by contacting AppleCare at 1-800-APL-CARE.
    • Owners of vintage iPhone products in the state of California may obtain service from Apple Retail Stores or by contacting AppleCare at 1-800-APL-CARE.
For products purchased in France, see Statutory Warranties of Seller and Spare Parts.​


I suspect another motivation for using the T2 is to also greatly hinder those who pirate macOS for use on non-Apple hardware.
 
Two Words: AIR CONDITIONING.
[Insert Meme:] We don’t do that here (Central Europe).
Don’t ask me why, but air conditioning (cooling) is just not common around here, at least not in private appartments. It would also be only „necessary“ in the period of ~June/July/August, typically around 6 weeks each year where temps go beyond comfortable.
The CPU in these new Mac Mini’s are 65W not 35W. Also Apple has always prioritized staying quiet over staying cool. I would suggest a program like Temperature Gauge Pro and setting up boundaries to keep it under say 75-80C. I don’t even notice the sound until the fan speed gets to about 80% on my iMac.
65W... didn’t expect that. Yes, I know.. the tools for manual fan control can mitigate the problem a little, but imho it’s not a replacement for a decent heatsink. At 65W it certainly needs a decent one. Looking forward to the iFixit Teardown.
 
Haven't they categorically said, it's only supported at authorised service centres (which is the same for the iMac Pro, right?)

I think that much is clear - perhaps I should have phrased it as whether you might, in practice, be able to get away with upgrading it without voiding the warranty - which depends on how much glue, heat-sink compound and "do not remove this label" labels might be standing in your way and whether you'd want the task of undoing it should you want to return the unit for repair. iFixit will tell us soon, I'm sure.

Priced for maximum profit? Sure. What the hell is wrong with that? That's capitalism. If the market says it's worth it, then it's worth it. Get over it.

...and if people think they're charging too much, they're entitled to say so - that's freedom of expression. Preferably with reasoned arguments and comparisons. Please note that "reasoned arguments" does not mean "arguments you happen to agree with" and "troll" does not mean "anybody who disagrees with me".

This thread is actually doing quite well as far as trolls go - haven't noticed that many "sack Tim Cook" or "this would never have happened under Jobs" posts and nobody has mentioned (...whups, neither will I :)). What I do see is a depressing number of "arguments" that amount to "stop whining", "if you don't like it don't buy it" or (if not in so many words) "it works for me so I don't care if it doesn't work for you".

In short, the only trolls I see here are the ones telling other people that they're not entitled to post their opinions.
 
I’m curious do people store their photos on the drive? I have a large and growing collection but don’t know what to do if I get a mini (never owned one)

Thankfully I have iCloud as a backup and didn’t lose my collection when the 2011 iMac graphics card died. Just a boat anchor still sitting on the desk as I was hoping for a new Mac.

I don’t use a lot of apps but photo editing is a hobby - any help or suggestions are welcomed!
 
Apple's policy is 5 years after the halt of manufacture.

I'm sure they'll stick to that.

The practical question is if/when a forthcoming version of MacOS will require a T2 chip. That's a slightly different question - it might be unpopular, and maybe unlikely, but they could get away with doing that more or less whenever they liked as long as they didn't actually "end-of-life" the previous OS version - so they were still "supporting" non-obsolete machines.

I think it comes down to a "nobody knows" - it really depends how desperately they want to introduce this (if at all). If they're planning to switch to ARM and/or allow iOS Apps on MacOS in the longer term then I guess that would be when it would happen.
 
I'm sure they'll stick to that.

The practical question is if/when a forthcoming version of MacOS will require a T2 chip. That's a slightly different question - it might be unpopular, and maybe unlikely, but they could get away with doing that more or less whenever they liked as long as they didn't actually "end-of-life" the previous OS version - so they were still "supporting" non-obsolete machines.

I think it comes down to a "nobody knows" - it really depends how desperately they want to introduce this (if at all). If they're planning to switch to ARM and/or allow iOS Apps on MacOS in the longer term then I guess that would be when it would happen.

I think between the T2 and their growing chip expertise means that the Hackintosh community will be in for a rude shock in a few years. It's still years away though.

What I would be less surprised by is an Axx family chip as a discrete GPU in Macs. That could probably happen much sooner than a transition to an all ARM architecture.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brendu
Once again, more excuse for Apple. Companies usually go proprietary for basically two reasons.

1) Design is mandatory
2) Profit, you have to buy the part from them if they use replaceable parts.

Sony did something similar with their PS Vita. They decided to use proprietary memory cards instead of using Micro SD cards. Why? Because you could buy a Micro SD card for 85-90% of the cost of Sony's memory cards for the PS Vita. And consumers caught on and even the Sony faithful said, hell no to the money grubbing greed.

Even if Apple uses soldered chips for their SSD's when they could have used standard PCI-e SSD storage just makes Apple look bad as money grubbers. Because you have to buy the storage from them. I'm sure there's the other excuse, just buy an external TB3 SSD and shut up. My answer is why? Why do you have to add to the cost if Apple after raised the price but instead allowed the consumer to have the choice to replace their 128GB SSD storage with a higher capacity in the future. But i'm sure the Apple excuses will continue. That's just par for the course.

If Apple chooses to use raw NAND, design the controller themselves so that they can ensure wire speed whole drive data encryption and use that as a market differentiator from PC OEMs, then that is their prerogative.

Everyone wants Apple to be innovative and then cries about it when it might cost them more money than simply slapping together a bunch of parts like Dell, HP, Lenovo, et al. and continue selling the same tired old crap no one wants.

The PC market has been in a perpetual race to the bottom for the last 25 years and has done nothing to move the PC along past the same tired old beige mini-tower. Apple is not going to do that. You can talk consumer choice all you want, which is just sour grapes since Apple refuses to play that tired game, as it has ZERO upside for them. The PC OEMs have not done themselves any favors and continue to scrape by with single digit profit margins and zero innovation because they are terrified to get rid of a VGA port or USB Type-A for fear it will cost them a single sale.

Given the slowdown in the PC market and the rise of iOS devices and mobile devices in general, Apple is going to continue looking for and adding differentiators to their products. They are selling a product they wholly design and manufacture themselves, not being glorified assemblers of a box of parts, who determine their success by how much they can cut costs to the bone and still stay in business.
 
Last edited:
I’m curious do people store their photos on the drive? I have a large and growing collection but don’t know what to do if I get a mini (never owned one)

Thankfully I have iCloud as a backup and didn’t lose my collection when the 2011 iMac graphics card died. Just a boat anchor still sitting on the desk as I was hoping for a new Mac.

I don’t use a lot of apps but photo editing is a hobby - any help or suggestions are welcomed!

You're photo's will sync to the local machine into "<UserHome>\Pictures\Photos Library.photoslibrary" and will take up quite a bit of space. This is one of the reasons many of us are disappointed in having 128GB as the low-end drive. It's too easy to fill up with content taken from your iPhone. The only 2 solutions are (1) buying more high-priced space from Apple, or (2) moving your <UserHome> folder to an external device. Neither option is ideal but either will work.

As an example of comparative sizing, my iPhone 8+ (configured to "Optimize iPhone Storage") is currently using approximately 60GB of space. Those same photos on my MacBook are taking 70GB. Both contain 17,221 photos and 364 videos.

When purchasing a Mini (or any Mac system) you'll need to consider the size of your Photos library, iMessages, Mail, Notes, iCloud Drive, and other similar content. All of this can be approximated from you iPhone (Settings \ AppleID \ iCloud \ Manage Storage). Note that you do not have to be concerned with Music, Movies/TV, books and other media as they are managed on a per-device basis.

Combined content on my iPhone is approximately 106GB, and about 85GB of that will be sync'd to OSX... likely consuming up even more space.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TVreporter
Once again, more excuse for Apple. Companies usually go proprietary for basically two reasons.

1) Design is mandatory
2) Profit, you have to buy the part from them if they use replaceable parts.

You "forgot" the real reason:

3) Superior performance and better security with Apple's proprietary design. Apple's internal SSD transfer rates are always class-leading.


The fact that Apple also makes a better profit is welcome and icing on the cake. Hat-tip to Apple!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Detnator
Apple builds tools to solve business and personal problems.

Looks like you have really bad memory, who did Apple build this iMac G3 for? Just to solve business and personal problems? Give me a break.

2012-12-13-bondi-blue.jpeg




Apple builds products a wide range of users, not just business or personal issues. And there is 100% a drooling factor involved in all product decisions, it's part of Apple's DNA. Apple's main product line which accounts for 60% of their business is the iPhone, like it or not, it's built for emojis, animojis and all sorts of silly things. Heck, not long ago most people were criticizing Apple for focusing too much on consumer things and too little on pro things.
[doublepost=1541637103][/doublepost]
3. Notice how RAM is not soldered in on the desktops like it is on the laptops? That's because these don't have the same space or heat constraints. Also desktops aren't moved around anywhere near as much as laptops so there is much less chance of something getting jolted out of its seat. So no need to solder RAM in, and so they don't.

Why did Apple solder ram in 2014 mac mini, but not in 2018? I asked this and no one could answer. The only explanation or excuse I heard was "more reliability". Oh really? So the 2018 mac mini will be horribly unreliable for having socketed RAM? BS. Of course the real reason Apple soldered ram in the 2014 mac mini was because of greed, to force people to BTO RAM at the time of purchase.

Just because we like Apple doesn't mean we need to justify every single thing they do and try to figure how perfect every single thing is. Companies can make mistakes too.
 
Last edited:
For the record, as I understand it, the 960 Pro is older and inferior to the 970.

Samsung are weird in this way (although not entirely unlike Apple to some degree). The older drives are priced more or less what they were when they were first released. Then newer and better stuff comes along, at cheaper prices, but they don't replace the older stuff, they add to it. They keep the older stuff at the older more expensive prices, and add the newer stuff at the newer cheaper prices. I don't get why.

I can't see how anyone in their right mind is going to buy a slower 960 for near on twice the price. So why is it even available any more?

Needless to say, I think it's a pretty safe bet that the drive in the X5 is a 970, not a 960. It makes no sense at all otherwise, surely?

It’s a variant of the 970 EVO - https://www.anandtech.com/show/13276/the-samsung-portable-ssd-x5-review-thunderbolt-3-and-nvme-
 
  • Like
Reactions: imageWIS
Apple's policy is 5 years after the halt of manufacture.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201624

Vintage and obsolete products
Owners of iPhone, iPad, iPod, or Mac products may obtain service and parts from Apple or Apple service providers for 5 years after the product is no longer manufactured—or longer where required by law. Apple has discontinued support for certain technologically obsolete and vintage products.

Vintage products are those that have not been manufactured for more than 5 and less than 7 years ago. Apple has discontinued hardware service for vintage products with the following exceptions:

  • Mac products purchased in the country of Turkey. Owners of vintage Mac products may obtain service and parts from Apple service providers within the country of Turkey.
  • Products purchased in the state of California, United States, as required by statute.
    • Owners of vintage Mac products may obtain service and parts from Apple service providers within the state of California, United States.
    • Owners of vintage iPod products in the state of California may obtain service from Apple Retail Stores or by contacting AppleCare at 1-800-APL-CARE.
    • Owners of vintage iPhone products in the state of California may obtain service from Apple Retail Stores or by contacting AppleCare at 1-800-APL-CARE.
For products purchased in France, see Statutory Warranties of Seller and Spare Parts.​


I suspect another motivation for using the T2 is to also greatly hinder those who pirate macOS for use on non-Apple hardware.

Someone will find a workaround that too... at the end of the day, it's all software.
[doublepost=1541640279][/doublepost]
Looks like you have really bad memory, who did Apple build this iMac G3 for? Just to solve business and personal problems? Give me a break.

2012-12-13-bondi-blue.jpeg




Apple builds products a wide range of users, not just business or personal issues. And there is 100% a drooling factor involved in all product decisions, it's part of Apple's DNA. Apple's main product line which accounts for 60% of their business is the iPhone, like it or not, it's built for emojis, animojis and all sorts of silly things. Heck, not long ago most people were criticizing Apple for focusing too much on consumer things and too little on pro things.
[doublepost=1541637103][/doublepost]

Why did Apple solder ram in 2014 mac mini, but not in 2018? I asked this and no one could answer. The only explanation or excuse I heard was "more reliability". Oh really? So the 2018 mac mini will be horribly unreliable for having socketed RAM? BS. Of course the real reason Apple soldered ram in the 2014 mac mini was because of greed, to force people to BTO RAM at the time of purchase.

Just because we like Apple doesn't mean we need to justify every single thing they do and try to figure how perfect every single thing is. Companies can make mistakes too.

Why do you think I've stopped answering him / her? Just loves to read what s/he wrote, and demonstrable facts be damned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: trifid
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.