New 2014 Mac Mini Has Soldered RAM, Not User Replaceable

[stewy]

This is a very disappointing trend.

I have a 2008 MacBook and I'll continue to use it as long as I can. But when it does finally die there's no way I'll be buying something that I can't easily open up and service/upgrade. For a while I thought that maybe I'd get a mini but looks like that won't be happening now.

It's a shame. This is a great computer.

I'll take a slightly thicker computer that is serviceable over a thin one that is not any day.

 

[KPOM]

Also for those thinking of using the Mini as a high level machine, well, for a quad i7, you're better off visiting the refurbished store. The mini no longer appeals to you.

Note to Intel: why make a dual core variant of the i7? Don't see the differentiating point between that and the dual core i5.

i5 and i7 is all about marketing for Intel. They are deliberately confusing in their processor designations. All i7 has ever meant for Intel's mobile processor line (which is all that has ever gone into the Mac Mini) are a bigger cache and higher clock speeds relative to the otherwise identical i5 model.

 

[Steve121178]

And those enthusiasts have promoted Apple to friends and family.

Exactly! I'm responsible for dozens upon dozens of sales based on friends/colleagues/family seeing what I use or coming to me for advice.

Obviously this has a knock-on effect as their friends/colleagues/family members see what they are using and may want to buy Apple computers as a result of their recommendation and so on.

 

[prowlmedia]

its really pathetic watching people on this forum blindly defend apple on this issue.

apple told us the soldered-in ram in the rMBP was for reducing the overall thickness of the device.

there is no excuse or justification WHATSOEVER to have soldered-in RAM on the latest mini.

and to top off the ridiculousness of the latest mini, they removed the quad core option.

then there's people on here talking like this is a good thing! "well if you dont like it just spend another $2000 to get what you want"

what the hell is wrong with you people?

steve jobs wanted to make things thin. tim cook wants to....make money. i'm done with apple now. i sold my rMBP and ipad air a month ago. replaced it with a surface pro 3.

i had to laugh at the latest ipad announcement.

this modern skeleton of apple cant even give us a touch screen on a laptop, and wont give us OSX on a hybrid tablet.

the innovation is not happening at apple anymore.

if you think a higher res screen is innovation, no wonder you are cheerleading for apple without thinking critically.

if you think soldered-in ram on a non-portable device is a good thing, just stop pretending to be a computer enthusiast for any meaning of the term.

But you have to use windows and why on earth would you do that!

The surface 3 pro is nice. But windows 8.1 is really not very good. The Doubling up of apps is insane for the UI and Metro side - 2x words 2xInternet explorers etc... oh and guess what they have binned metro in 9 - well integrated it.

The normal UI side is unusable with a finger. You have to use a pen, which is fine but it's it's too slow to use for a direct interface - even on the included paint application it lags massively

What's to laugh at the iPad, very thin and light - very fast it seems. Lots of touch apps that work unlike windows or Android. And certainly more that are actually updated often / supported.

The 5K screen is innovation. Will be a boon for video editing, photographers and artist. No one else has done it and windows support on 4k screens is woeful at best. Most apps have teeny tiny interfaces.

The irony of your little rant is you bought a surface... with soldered ram and has an iFixit score of 1/10.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

Entry level specs are reasonable IF only the machine was US $400.
The upgrade costs are a little extreme - why not just make 8GB the default to ease the process for the majority of users. Yosemite would certainly benefit from 8GB RAM.
Also for those thinking of using the Mini as a high level machine, well, for a quad i7, you're better off visiting the refurbished store. The mini no longer appeals to you.

Note to Intel: why make a dual core variant of the i7? Don't see the differentiating point between that and the dual core i5.

Two i7 cores as opposed to two i5 cores? Whatever that means...Aren't these dual core processors the mobile versions? They aren't the desktops variants are they?

 

[Steve121178]

i5 and i7 is all about marketing for Intel. They are deliberately confusing in their processor designations. All i7 has ever meant for Intel's mobile processor line (which is all that has ever gone into the Mac Mini) are a bigger cache and higher clock speeds relative to the otherwise identical i5 model.

There's never been a real valid reason to pay extra for the i7 chips. Real world difference is absolutely minimal, despite what all silly benchmarks and utilities tell you.

With Desktop class processors it's not quite as straight forward as some i7 chips can have a significant leap over i5 CPU's, but again it's nothing that will be noticed in the real world. But for mobile computers, people should ignore the marketing nonsense and only buy i5.

 

[subsonix]

i5 and i7 is all about marketing for Intel. They are deliberately confusing in their processor designations. All i7 has ever meant for Intel's mobile processor line (which is all that has ever gone into the Mac Mini) are a bigger cache and higher clock speeds relative to the otherwise identical i5 model.

Hyper threading used to be reserved for the i7 previously if I recall correctly, doesn't seem to be the case with the Haswells though.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

But you have to use windows and why on earth would you do that!

The surface 3 pro is nice. But windows 8.1 is really not very good. The Doubling up of apps is insane for the UI and Metro side - 2x words 2xInternet explorers etc... oh and guess what they have binned metro in 9 - well integrated it.

The normal UI side is unusable with a finger. You have to use a pen, which is fine but it's it's too slow to use for a direct interface - even on the included paint application it lags massively

What's to laugh at the iPad, very thin and light - very fast it seems. Lots of touch apps that work unlike windows or Android. And certainly more that are actually updated often / supported.

The 5K screen is innovation. Will be a boon for video editing, photographers and artist. No one else has done it and windows support on 4k screens is woeful at best. Most apps have teeny tiny interfaces.

The irony of your little rant is you bought a surface... with soldered ram and has an iFixit score of 1/10.

And it is really hard to objectively find fault with anything you've said either!! Two sides to every coin it seems.

 

[bennibeef]

My head is really crawling here.. I wanted a new cheap Mini maybe to just make a small stationary web programming station. I will stick a SSD in there myself but I'm thinking and thinking if the 1,4Ghz prozessor is enough (well web programming is not taxing it at all) But I dont know if this thing then is constantly running at 50% CPU... I dont know how OSX runs on DualCores anymore especially on <2Ghz ones.

Anyone with a Air or cheapest iMac with 1,4Ghz processor any thought on that? I dont really to pay a couple hundred bucks for the better i5

 

[Palliser]

If you NEED 16gb of RAM, you shouldn't be looking at this machine anyways.

 

[Quu]

Exactly! I'm responsible for dozens upon dozens of sales based on friends/colleagues/family seeing what I use or coming to me for advice.

Obviously this has a knock-on effect as their friends/colleagues/family members see what they are using and may want to buy Apple computers as a result of their recommendation and so on.

Same. Many of my friends ask me what computer to buy when the time comes. It's hard to recommend products that have a well planned obsolescence life cycle.

 

[KPOM]

its really pathetic watching people on this forum blindly defend apple on this issue.

apple told us the soldered-in ram in the rMBP was for reducing the overall of the device.

there is no excuse or justification WHATSOEVER to have soldered-in RAM on the latest mini.

and to top off the ridiculousness of the latest mini, they removed the quad core option.

then there's people on here talking like this is a good thing! "well if you dont like it just spend another $2000 to get what you want"

what the hell is wrong with you people?

steve jobs wanted to make things thin. tim cook wants to....make money. i'm done with apple now. i sold my rMBP and ipad air a month ago. replaced it with a surface pro 3.

So what, exactly, is serviceable on a Surface Pro 3?

 

[prowlmedia]

This is a very disappointing trend.

I have a 2008 MacBook and I'll continue to use it as long as I can. But when it does finally die there's no way I'll be buying something that I can't easily open up and service/upgrade. For a while I thought that maybe I'd get a mini but looks like that won't be happening now.

It's a shame. This is a great computer.

I'll take a slightly thicker computer that is serviceable over a thin one that is not any day.

I can only understand this thinking if you buy a computer for personal use only... If you do any work with it, you want the most efficient fastest possible, surely. The current air is 6x faster thant the macbook.

And it's tax deductible for business use so technically free...

 

[MrGuder]

Glad I Didn't Wait For 2014 Mini

I was one of the many who waited and waited for the the next "Tuesday" finally I gave up and bought a late 2012 Mac Mini (my first Mac) I upgraded the ram to 16GB and put in an 500 GB SSD I've had it almost a yr and it's been perfect and I saved a ton of money.

I am really glad I did not wait for this 2014 model, that is pretty bad they soldered the ram. The late 2012 model is looking better and better and my predictions is it will be harder and harder to find a late 2012 model. There are none in the refurb apple store.

 

[3282868]

I never understood why apple changed this. The 23" inch cinema displays were overpriced in 2003-2006--but they were attractively designed at a time other displays were hideously cheap looking. Now I have a 23" display that I bought for 1/4 of the what I paid for an apple display back then and it is well designed and a great display.

I can only assume margins are so thin apple decided not to bother

At the time, they were pricey little suckers yet worth every penny. Many pro's loved 'em since they worked so well with OS X (no need for calibration), even on other platforms. I remember visiting a friend working on an Annie Leibovitz shoot, saw nothing but 8 30" CCFL LCD's with PowerMac G5's all lined up.

With the move to LED LCD's in the 2007 24" iMac, Apple axed their CCFL line and chose to use the LED LCD panel from their larger iMac as their sole display; lower production costs for 1 display body with the same panels already in use, easy money while appearing to appease some customers. Jobs was obsessed with the yet to be released iPhone and iOS. Although Apple's displays sold well to a wide market, from 20" displays for Mac Mini users to the coveted 30" display for pro's, apparently it wasn't enough for Jobs, who also wanted to axe the Mac Pro. In 2007 the 24" iMac was followed by the 27" around 2009 with a 27" display in 2010.

LED LCD panels are fine, but they're also [still] a divisive issue amongst photographers, graphic designers, film, etc. CCFL LCD's had more accurate color (LED LCD's tend to oversaturate which appeals to consumers - the "wow" factor - but are often unrealistic). By nature, panels can differ, so two of the same displays could have different colors and brightness levels. When one of my 2 23" CCFL LCD's had burn-in around 2009, I decided to replace both with 24" LED LCD's. The 2nd display was fine, gave it to a friend. Working on two very different displays side by side would have been daunting. Over the course of 3 years I went through ~7 displays (bad panels, many suffered from power supply issues, dead pixels, google Apple 24" LED LCD repairs and you'll be there for days).

Apple replaced them with new 27" LED LCD's and free AppleCare. I actually asked if the 23" CCFL LCD's were still available lol. It's been roughly a year and I'm noticing a defect on my left display's bottom right corner, dead pixels or such. This display is also significantly more yellow and dimmer then its right counter part.

I've been tempted to bring it in, but it's such a PITA I've just lived with it. I never had one issue with the CCFL LCD's, and although they were pricey (later came down, think I paid $1799 in 2004), I'd gladly fork it over for the quality and longevity. Since those days, Apple seems more focused on a display with short cables for their portable's. Even if a 4K or 5K display came out, based on past experience, I would hesitate buying. If Apple released a new display line such as they had, I might dive in, shows they're focused again on good displays.

 

[fa8362]

Yes I know, but you can't say that all of those application take advantage of a multi core CPU per se, but you also said that people who write code are the same people who do this media processing. I know that there are applications that take advantage of multi core CPUs.

I didn't say any of it, but all professional applications that I'm aware of (of the type I described) take advantage of multiple cores. Plenty of non-professionals use professional software that they buy, lease or steal. This is not a non-issue.

I'm a graphics professional and the quad i7 Mac Mini suits me nearly perfectly. I have no interest in spending double, triple, or more to do my work very slightly faster, so I won't buy an iMac or a Mac Pro.

 

[KPOM]

My head is really crawling here.. I wanted a new cheap Mini maybe to just make a small stationary web programming station. I will stick a SSD in there myself but I'm thinking and thinking if the 1,4Ghz prozessor is enough (well web programming is not taxing it at all) But I dont know if this thing then is constantly running at 50% CPU... I dont know how OSX runs on DualCores anymore especially on <2Ghz ones.

Anyone with a Air or cheapest iMac with 1,4Ghz processor any thought on that? I dont really to pay a couple hundred bucks for the better i5

I've used the MacBook Air in the past and moved up to the 13" RMBP that also uses a dual core processor, albeit at clock speeds above 2GHz. For what you are describing the base model sounds fine.

 

[Rizzm]

I'm interested to see if Apple's strategy will change the rest of the PC market, or if Apple will adapt back to an upgradeable system because of lost sales.

Unfortunately, I assume people are just reacting to first day news and like the Retina MacBooks, people will get over it, suck it up, and adapt to the Apple overlords.

Personally, I hate this company more and more every year.

 

[fa8362]

If you do any work with it, you want the most efficient fastest possible, surely.

No. If you are sensible, you want the fastest you need, not what you want. New and shiny, or more than what you need, can bankrupt or cash strap you.

 

[Mr. McMac]

its really pathetic watching people on this forum blindly defend apple on this issue.

apple told us the soldered-in ram in the rMBP was for reducing the overall thickness of the device.

there is no excuse or justification WHATSOEVER to have soldered-in RAM on the latest mini.

and to top off the ridiculousness of the latest mini, they removed the quad core option.

then there's people on here talking like this is a good thing! "well if you dont like it just spend another $2000 to get what you want"

what the hell is wrong with you people?

steve jobs wanted to make things thin. tim cook wants to....make money. i'm done with apple now. i sold my rMBP and ipad air a month ago. replaced it with a surface pro 3.

i had to laugh at the latest ipad announcement.

this modern skeleton of apple cant even give us a touch screen on a laptop, and wont give us OSX on a hybrid tablet.

the innovation is not happening at apple anymore.

if you think a higher res screen is innovation, no wonder you are cheerleading for apple without thinking critically.

if you think soldered-in ram on a non-portable device is a good thing, just stop pretending to be a computer enthusiast for any meaning of the term.

I totally agree with you 100%!

 

[KPOM]

Hyper threading used to be reserved for the i7 previously if I recall correctly, doesn't seem to be the case with the Haswells though.

It was never the case for the dual core mobile processors. The i5 and i7 both have long supported hyper threading.

 

[subsonix]

I didn't say any of it, but all professional applications that I'm aware of (of the type I described) take advantage of multiple cores. Plenty of non-professionals use professional software that they buy, lease or steal. This is not a non-issue.

I know, I edited my post quickly after to say "he", because he did make a very vague reference. I know that there is software that make use of multi core CPUs, but it's not something that is true automatically by any means just by referring to media.

 

[Steve121178]

My head is really crawling here.. I wanted a new cheap Mini maybe to just make a small stationary web programming station. I will stick a SSD in there myself but I'm thinking and thinking if the 1,4Ghz prozessor is enough (well web programming is not taxing it at all) But I dont know if this thing then is constantly running at 50% CPU... I dont know how OSX runs on DualCores anymore especially on <2Ghz ones.

Anyone with a Air or cheapest iMac with 1,4Ghz processor any thought on that? I dont really to pay a couple hundred bucks for the better i5

The base Mac Mini should be more than good enough for what you want to do.

Despite all the complaints about RAM and CPU options, the Mini is still a very capable machine. I personally wouldn't want a mechanical drive in any machine I am purchasing in 2014 but for development work it's more than good enough.

 

[KPOM]

I'm interested to see if Apple's strategy will change the rest of the PC market, or if Apple will adapt back to an upgradeable system because of lost sales.

Unfortunately, I assume people are just reacting to first day news and like the Retina MacBooks, people will get over it, suck it up, and adapt to the Apple overlords.

Personally, I hate this company more and more every year.

The rest of the market is gradually moving in Apple's direction as far as user-serviceability. There is nothing serviceable or upgradable on the Surface Pro 3 or on most Ultrabooks now. The desktop PC is different, but it's also in decline and it doesn't seem like it's a market that Apple is actively pursuing outside of the all-in-one market, which generally has similar limitations as the iMac line.

 

[DEMinSoCAL]

If you NEED 16gb of RAM, you shouldn't be looking at this machine anyways.

What is so bad about a quad core i7 with 16GB RAM in a mini-sized OS X box?

Why does the size of the box have anything to do with the need for more memory (or at least the ability to future-proof yourself by adding more RAM in the future)?