Mac Mini to Lose Its USB-A Ports Later This Year

[drrich2]

A Hackintosh like that would probably not have enthused me, and maybe even dissuaded me from buying Apple products, because really, what's the point if it's just identical to every other desktop PC on the market? Same size, same ports, same specs, what's the key differentiator here?

It would appeal to many. For a lot of people, the 'look' of the Mac, functionally speaking, is the front view of the monitor plus the keyboard and mouse. To many, Mac OS is the key differentiator. Having the computer in a different looking chassis isn't as important.

I don't just want macOS in a box.

Many do.

I want macOS in a form factor that isn't really feasible anywhere else, either because of the power efficiencies afforded by Apple Silicon, the integration of the Apple ecosystem, anything.

The MacBooks were as you describe for years, though the Microsoft Copilot systems with Snapdragon processors are entering that feature area on low power usage and high battery life.

For notebooks that makes sense; for a desktop, much less.

Can't sideload or install third party app stores?

They can in the European Union.

Apple's ecosystem is designed around people that easily spend money.

It does look that way, but not everybody using a Mac matches that description. Yes, it's been many years since I recall hearing the Mac describes as the computer for the rest of us; more like the rich of us.

The whole selling point of Apple products is their integration, which is only possible when you have one company making and controlling every aspect from the hardware to the OS to the services themselves. They use this control to offer a unique user experience that users are willing to pay a premium for.

True. Unfortunately it insulates them from competition enough to inflict their vision on us rather than serve us.

The problem with an expandable Mac clone is that there is no money to be made for Apple. They tried it once upon a time. It ended in disaster. You buy it once, you can upgrade it indefinitely, Apple won't see a cent of money spent on parts, what incentive is there for them to support this?

I had a Power Computing Power Center Pro 210, IIRC...nice tower unit, fast internal hard drive, felt like when I loaded Microsoft Word it was ripping off the hard drive! Loved that system.

On the other hand, user-expandable systems have worked well for Dell and a number of other computer vendors. Oddly enough, at least back when I used PCs more, they seemed to get old and slow down faster, so I felt the need to upgrade pretty often.

While I would be quite happy if Apple added an affordable, expandable desktop, I don't think that the few of us that actually do upgrade computers ourselves are their market anymore, though.

True, but I don't think that's what's stopping them. Here's an example. Given Apple's resources, I would think it'd be really easy for them to make a Studio+ Mac, just like the current Mac Studio lineup, same motherboard, everything the same, but a few inches taller with 2 internal SSD drive bays. Otherwise, no change. That shouldn't require a big expenditure of design resources and machining, etc... 2 Internal bays, a little taller, technology that's been around for years, they could charge an extra $75 bucks for it, even $100, so it didn't cost them anything. Then add it to the current Mac lineup.

I don't think this would compromise their ability to innovate MacBooks, iPhones, iPads, shrink Mac Minis, etc... It shouldn't hurt Apple. But I think those things would sell. Not at the levels of the MacBook Air, no, but they'd sell.

So I get your point that the average Mac user isn't big into DIY, but then the DIY crowd tends to run Windows PC and use Android phones. Apple doesn't want DIY.

 

[woocintosh]

Finally, I hated USB-A !!!

 

[bgillander]

True, but I don't think that's what's stopping them. Here's an example. Given Apples resources, I would think it'd be really easy for them to make a Studio+ Mac, just like the current Mac Studio lineup, same motherboard, everything the same, but a few inches taller with 2 internal SSD drive bays. Otherwise, no change. That shouldn't require a big expenditure of design resources and machining, etc... 2 Internal bays, a little taller, technology that's been around for years, they could charge an extra $75 bucks for it, even $100, so it didn't cost them anything. Then add it to the current Mac lineup.

I don't think this would compromise their ability to innovate MacBooks, iPhones, iPads, think Mac Minis, etc... It shouldn't hurt Apple. But I think those things would sell. Not at the levels of the MacBook Air, no, but they'd sell.

So I get your point that the average Mac user isn't big into DIY, but then the DIY crowd tends to run Windows PC and use Android phones. Apple doesn't want DIY.

Sure, and I would buy one for that price with the minimum SSD onboard and just use the M2 slots to expand my storage. And it would work great for me because I have a spare SN850X, but would cost Apple the internal SSD upgrade profit... not really, as I usually just buy minimum and use external, even now, but you see why it might not appeal to them. And that isn't even counting the people that have issues when they add components, which is another support nightmare. Apple gets grief when things they have complete control over don't work perfectly, which is fair, but they also get grief when people complain online when things don't work because the user picked the wrong part. I believe that M2 slots would also use more of the PCI channels and bandwidth, so that is a potential issue and would increase some of the engineering effort. They could just use SATA, but that would be much slower and potentially a fair bit lower speed than a TB external drive. I see people complain about the speed of the 256 GB M2 Air SSD, and this would be much lower. I assume if Apple pays any attention to the internet clickbait, they would just think "Who needs the extra hassle, we get enough complaining when we can actually control the components."

I would love to be able to upgrade my Macs again, but I get why Apple wouldn't want to let me. I didn't buy a new Mac from 2012 to 2019 because they started soldering on RAM around the time I would have normally upgraded. At least with AS it is basically part of the CPU assembly, so it doesn't bother me much now, as it actually makes sense, but it has taken me years to get to the point where I just accept/treat Macs like iPhones and buy base and upgrade earlier instead of paying more to "future proof" an unproofable future.

 

[Abazigal]

It would appeal to many. For a lot of people, the 'look' of the Mac, functionally speaking, is the front view of the monitor plus the keyboard and mouse. To many, Mac OS is the key differentiator. Having the computer in a different looking chassis isn't as important.

The 27" iMac was my first Apple computer in 2011, when I was in the market for a new PC after years of being frustrated with windows. What drew me to the iMac initially wasn't macOS (because I had zero knowledge of its capabilities), but that gorgeous 27" display. I bought one, I am typing this reply on a 2017 5k iMac, and I haven't looked back since. I appreciate the clean, integrated design, the lack of wires, its compact form factor that just modernises any table it's placed on, and yes, macOS also comes with a fair bit of functionality out of the box (more than Windows, at any rate).

Perhaps in an alternate universe where Macs went the direction you envisioned, you may be a happy (happier?) Mac user, and perhaps I would have remained on Windows because nothing about Macs particularly stood out to me, design-wise.

We want very different things, and Apple can't (and won't) please everybody. Life is all about choices, and in this reality at least, I am glad that Apple so happens to design their products in a manner that does appeal to me, it's maybe a shame that it couldn't appeal to more users, and maybe they are just mutually exclusive in this regard.

True. Unfortunately it insulates them from competition enough to inflict their vision on us rather than serve us.

That's the beauty of the free market. The consumer decides, and unlike a democracy, it's not 1 vote per person, but 1 vote per dollar spent. Apple products are a minority in the world (meaning most don't choose them), but enough do (in absolute numbers), and enough are willing to pay Apple's asking prices to make them one of the most successful companies in the world.

If Apple's vision was that out of touch with the rest of the world, people wouldn't be buying their products. Rather, what I feel it showed is that design does matter in the mass market. The issue I have with the Windows market more than a decade ago was that they were just .... functional. Yes, there's this race to the bottom which arguably helped drive down the cost of components, but it also meant razor thin margins that didn't really leave much incentive to focus in design, and the consequence was that computers remained these dull, uninspiring beige boxes with lacklustre software.

Apple's success totally upended that notion of value, by demonstrating that outstanding design and integration (as opposed to modularity) can drive demand, but the customer has to be willing to pay for it, and part of that value is captured in the form of margins that consumers "have" to pay in part because they cannot readily upgrade Apple devices on their own.

But I still appreciate having the option to pay for nice things.

Here's an example. Given Apple's resources, I would think it'd be really easy for them to make a Studio+ Mac, just like the current Mac Studio lineup, same motherboard, everything the same, but a few inches taller with 2 internal SSD drive bays. Otherwise, no change. That shouldn't require a big expenditure of design resources and machining, etc... 2 Internal bays, a little taller, technology that's been around for years, they could charge an extra $75 bucks for it, even $100, so it didn't cost them anything. Then add it to the current Mac lineup.

There's also a little annoying concept called "opportunity cost". Yes, maybe designing and building the Mac you describe may not cost them much today, but what might it cost them years down the road if said product leads to users upgrading less frequently?

You may want to multiply that $100 by another 20 or 30 times. Which is basically the price of the Mac Pro when it was launched in 2019, and a clear indicator that Apple is determined to earn their margins from the customer by any means necessary. If they can't get it from spec upgrades, then they will simply tack it on to the starting price of said product.

 

[GraXXoR]

Oh my, shades of the rage when Apple first removed the SCSI port,the floppy disk and then the CD/DVD drives. The peanut gallery went berserk when Apple held out adding USB-C to the iPhone. Now it’s objecting to USB-C only devices.

Who is objecting? The vast majority of posts are supporting the move or just saying use a dongle.

Oh wait, this is manufactured outrage.

Nearly had me there.

 

[bgillander]

You may want to multiply that $100 by another 20 or 30 times. Which is basically the price of the Mac Pro when it was launched in 2019, and a clear indicator that Apple is determined to earn their margins from the customer by any means necessary. If they can't get it from spec upgrades, then they will simply tack it on to the starting price of said product.

In the Mac Pro's defence, "all" those people that were calling for a Mac Pro upgrade likely constitute a small fraction of a percent of the entire Mac market. The engineering is a sunk cost and the Mac Pro market is small enough (and fixed enough) that the price likely did not change the number sold appreciably, so Apple priced it high to make back as much of the development cost as they could per unit.

It would be interesting to see if it sold to a much larger market if they dropped the price, but I doubt they could drop it enough to make back that difference in volume. It would be a fascinating marketing study, but Apple seem to have a pretty good idea what they are doing in the "what will the market pay" department.

 

[bgillander]

Who is objecting? The vast majority of posts are supporting the move or just saying use a dongle.

Oh wait, this is manufactured outrage.

Nearly had me there.

It isn't manufactured... we are MacRumors forum members! 😀

 

[Heat_Fan89]

I just accept/treat Macs like iPhones and buy base and upgrade earlier instead of paying more to "future proof" an unproofable future.

That's the best advice as I live by that rule as well. That's why I always buy base model Macs and when I can get a discount.

 

[breenmask]

If it seems incredible, I think that's because you're omitting a key difference. Lightning was used for iPhones and iPads, devices with one connector only (other than older models with headphone jacks). So, it was 'either/or.'

that's an arbitrary distinction with no valid reason to apply a different standard. the same logic applies: you're still causing more environmental damage by continuing to support USB-A and you're keeping USB-A alive longer despite USB-C being the future.

 

[ric22]

In this case you could just swap your USB A to B cable for a USB C to B cable. Easy!

You're ignoring the fact there will be fewer ports available to connect such items...

 

[NewOldStock]

Stop making engineers mad next version you might only get one UsbC port and supply your own Dock!.lol
Lot of people on here sure hate Apple to make anything new.
3Trillion $$$ company just can't get things right can they!!!!! weeeeee...lol
This is the new never ending of MR. keep alive

 

[CraigJDuffy]

Wrong. Given the fact that there is only room for a limited number of ports, USB-A should be deprecated. Folks who need dinosaur USB-A can dongle from USB-C, two for $10.

Room where??? There is literally so much space on a Mac mini to have ports people actually use.

 

[Poisednoise]

Which Mac had a parallel port? Did you mean a SCSI port. In their day, parallel port printer were common on PC but they were not common on Mac. Most old time Apple printers used a serial port (that you can get to work with USB). There were a few SCSI port printers but that was uncommon. There was a common complaint when people would try to hook up a parallel port printer from a PC to a Mac SCSI port and then did not understand why it didn’t work. There was also a common complaint why McIntosh computers didn’t ship with parallel ports. There were a few parallel port adapters available, but this was also fairly uncommon adapter. Although, if you go even further back, there was a parallel port card you could add to an Apple ][, ][+ or //e so it attached to a parallel port printer

You’re quite right of course. I meant that the typical purchaser of an iMac had to buy a new printer because the HP deskjet/Canon bubblejet they already had had a parallel port: most iMac buyers were not coming from the Apple ecosystem. However the basic point remains, even those migrating from a Performa or Powerbook would have needed a new printer: I don’t think there were connectors to change a printer serial port to usb?

 

[CraigJDuffy]

How many Centronics and SCSI ports?

It’s nothing even like that, nobody is arguing for a VGA port. We are arguing for ports people use because my current Mac mini (M1) currently has 4 USB A devices plugged in (keyboard, mouse, webcam, external hard drive).

USB C ports are taken up by a monitor and a USB A Hub. HDMI is connected to another monitor.

I love USB C only on a MacBook but it’s dumb to do the same on a desktop.

 

[chucker23n1]

We want very different things, and Apple can't (and won't) please everybody. Life is all about choices, and in this reality at least, I am glad that Apple so happens to design their products in a manner that does appeal to me, it's maybe a shame that it couldn't appeal to more users, and maybe they are just mutually exclusive in this regard.

[..]

There's also a little annoying concept called "opportunity cost". Yes, maybe designing and building the Mac you describe may not cost them much today, but what might it cost them years down the road if said product leads to users upgrading less frequently?

I think Apple is still once bitten, twice shy about offering too broad a product range. No, they don’t do a tower for $2,000, or a Mac Studio with a built-in optical drive, or a fanless MacBook Pro, or an iPad that runs macOS, or a foldable iPhone. But they did do exactly that sort of stuff in the 1990s, and those weren’t successful years. They were years of “uh, so which one should I get?”

 

[chucker23n1]

It’s nothing even like that, nobody is arguing for a VGA port.

Well…

 

[altaic]

FFS it’s not 1976 or 1996, get over yourselves or get a room. Blargh. Stop drinking grog and start using the grog to melt the prison bars.

 

[bgillander]

You’re quite right of course. I meant that the typical purchaser of an iMac had to buy a new printer because the HP deskjet/Canon bubblejet they already had had a parallel port: most iMac buyers were not coming from the Apple ecosystem. However the basic point remains, even those migrating from a Performa or Powerbook would have needed a new printer: I don’t think there were connectors to change a printer serial port to usb?

I'm pretty sure you can still get USB-to-Serial and USB-to-Parallel adapters/cables on Amazon.

(Firewire-to-SCSI adapters apparently seem to no longer be made and are going for hundreds of dollars on eBay, in case anyone has one lying around and wants to test the market, though!)

 

[bgillander]

Well…

Well... now you are sure to get a !

😃

 

[tennisproha]

Oh my, shades of the rage when Apple first removed the SCSI port,the floppy disk and then the CD/DVD drives. The peanut gallery went berserk when Apple held out adding USB-C to the iPhone. Now it’s objecting to USB-C only devices.

the healthcare industry still runs on CDs and fax machines. apple didn’t change anything tangibly as people were just inconvenienced into buying an external CD drive.

 

[bgillander]

Finally, I hated USB-A !!!

Oh, wow. I saw USB-A over in the corner sobbing that it was just trying to do its job and be useful. That's a pretty cruel thing to say when something does its job well for decades! You really know how to bum out a retirement party. The poor guy was hoping for a gold watch and is now just crushed. He hasn't even left, yet. That's just cold.

 

[CraigJDuffy]

Well…

I think on Pro Machines / servers VGA makes sense because it is very much still the standard in server racks. Not for home use.

 

[Cervisia]

Usb-c to Usb-a adapters and hubs are a thing

Using dongles with a desktop, dream come true. /s

 

[Cervisia]

Nice. In a way, I kinda missed the Apple of old who was not afraid to make controversial design decisions like going all in on usb c with their Macs.

Not that hard to work around this. One usb-c for a dock or adaptor, Bluetooth everything else, 5 is actually a luxury.

Having a dock/adapter defeats the purpose of a mini computer.

 

[Cervisia]

I cannot believe people are still whining about no usb-a ports. The adapters are only a few bucks. Perhaps we’ll bring back the parallel port; see how well that fits in.

This would be a valid argument, but seeing this from the folks who went berserk about wanting an sd card reader and magsafe charger on their macbooks... the two combined are less valid than the case for usb-a.